Suchergebnisse

The distribution of legal authority to protect biodiversity in marine areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) between the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the UN Law of the Sea Convention (LOSC) has been a contentious issue. In practice, main responsibility has been allocated to LOSC, under which a new implementing agreement on conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) is currently being negotiated. CBD was allocated responsibility for providing scientific information and advice on marine biodiversity, which has resulted in the identification and description of 321 Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs) worldwide, within and beyond national jurisdiction. These could provide important scientific backing for a coming BBNJ instrument under LOSC, especially as regards the designation of marine protected areas and the conduct of environmental impact assessments in ABNJ. However, the process of modifying EBSAs and identifying new ones has recently been challenged by the CBD Conference of the Parties, harking back to previous disputes over the legal mandate and thereby threatening the entire mechanism that has been established. In the context of international environmental law and law of the sea, this article discusses the potential importance of EBSAs for the expected BBNJ instrument, using the Central Arctic Ocean EBSA as an example.

The ethical merits of three major strategies to confront global warming -- prevention, adaptation, & geoengineering -- are considered. From the point of view of consequentialist ethics, the choice between prevention & adaptation depends on the exact set of consequences taken into consideration. Adaptation is likely to be the preferable option if only consequences for humans here & now are emphasized. By contrast, if one also takes into account effects for humans in other parts of the world, for future generations, or for other species, the case for prevention is strengthened. However, it is probably too late to avoid global warming altogether. The question is therefore if we should try to recreate the "original" climate through geoengineering. A number of ethical objections to this strategy are being discussed. The general conclusion is that, for now at least, we ought to prevent global warming as far as possible, & otherwise adapt as best we can to the climatic changes that nevertheless arise. 1 Table, 30 References. Adapted from the source document.

The Kyoto Protocol is likely to give only minor environmental benefits. One important reason is that the industrial economies in transition to market economies have assigned amounts (national emission quotas) that do not reflect that these countries have experienced large emission reductions after the collapse of the communist regimes. These countries consequently have assigned amounts that probably will be considerably larger than their business-as-usual emissions in the commitment period. Hence, these countries will probably be able to sell emission permits on a large scale without carrying out abatement domestically. There are signs that Russia will ratify the Kyoto Protocol. Nevertheless, after the US withdrawal the Protocol is likely to give rise only to small emission reductions. The article sheds light on the consequences of implementation, & discusses what should be the next step forward in the international climate negotiations. The article concludes that an increased degree of realism is necessary with respect to the limitations & potentials of the Kyoto Protocol. Increased attention should be given to other proposed concepts for climate agreements. 3 Tables, 1 Figure, 37 References. Adapted from the source document.

This comparative article reveals how the general focus of Canadian and Russian threat perceptions in the Arctic have shifted from a Cold War fixation on hard defence to accommodate soft security issues over the last three decades. Both countries now pay greater attention to threats and challenges stemming from climate change, security, and safety risks associated with resource development and increasingly accessible sea routes. Although concern about military conflict arising from Arctic disputes continues to frame some media discussions in both countries, most strategic analysts and academics have moved away from this line of argument. Instead, military functions now include assertion of Canadian and Russian sovereignty over their respective internal waters, as well as protection of resources in their exclusive economic zones and on and in extended continental shelves; protection of economic interests in the North, including mineral and bio-resources; prevention of potential terrorist attacks against critical industrial and state infrastructure; and dual-use functions, such as search and rescue operations, surveillance of air and maritime spaces, support to safe navigation, and mitigation of natural and human-made catastrophes.
The authors argue that analysts should parse two forms of military modernization in the Arctic: one of capability development related to the global strategic balance, where the Arctic serves as a bastion or a thoroughfare; and a second intended to address emerging non-traditional security challenges. They contend that these modernization programs do not inherently upset the Arctic military balance and need not provoke a regional arms race.

A hundred years ago on 9 February 2020, the Svalbard Treaty was adopted in Paris, granting Norway her long-standing ambition: full and absolute sovereignty over the Svalbard archipelago. After a brief review of the negotiations that preceded the Paris decision, this article examines the main elements of the Treaty: Norwegian sovereignty, the principle of non-discrimination and the terra nullius rights of other states, peaceful utilization, scientific research and environmental protection. Focus then shifts to Norway's policy towards Svalbard and the implementation of the Treaty's provisions: what have been the main lines of Norwegian Svalbard politics; what administrative structures have evolved; to what extent has Norwegian legislation been made applicable to Svalbard? Importantly, the article also addresses how widespread changes in international law that have taken place since 1920, particularly developments concerning the law of the sea, have brought to the forefront controversial issues concerning the geographic scope of the Treaty's application.