Search results

This paper is focused on a narrow matter, namely, the nature of the standard of judicial review adopted by the Kansas Supreme Court in Hodes & Nauser v. Schmidt. 2 The most important (and decisive) point to emphasize is that the standard of judicial review adopted by the court in Hodes is so rigorous that it is likely to unsettle existing abortion law in Kansas and result in a legal landscape for abortion in this state that is more permissive of abortion than either the current federal standard or the original federal standard established by Roe v. Wade. In order to appreciate the expansiveness of the court's holding, one needs to understand Roe v. Wade and the 1992 case which altered its impact, Planned Parenthood v. Casey. This paper provides a brief sketch of the key, relevant aspects of those two cases, background which demonstrates the astonishing breadth of the Hodes decision.

That the need for a holistic approach to ocean governance has gained widespread acceptance warrants little debate. Though concerns may continue to exist as to the practicality of a holistic approach (for example, that it might make decision-making too slow and cumbersome), there are examples of it being put into practice such as the EU's Marine Strategy Framework Directive which requires the EU's member States to consider those parts of the oceans under their jurisdiction as an integral unit. But there is a significant gap in our understanding of holistic ocean governance and that is as to the content of such an approach. While numerous treaties and statutes may be assumed to incorporate the concept, or to be relevant to holistic ocean governance, each may present a slightly different interpretation of how to apply the holistic approach. These variations in content reflect the fact that the objectives of each of these treaties and statutes are also many and varied. There is, therefore, still a need to develop a clear understanding of what is meant by the concept of a holistic approach. A good starting point may be to agree the content and a common objective, or common objectives for the approach. To provide such content and objective(s) for law as a whole would be a daunting and perhaps impossible task. Instead the focus of this paper is on considering the possibility of a principal objective or objectives for holistic ocean governance and possible content for that approach. It is suggested that the ecosystem approach may be used to set objectives for holistic ocean governance and to provide some content to that concept. The degree to which the ecosystem approach is already present in ocean governance instruments is, therefore, assessed to determine the feasibility of relying on this approach to provide the principal objective(s) and content for holistic ocean governance.

The risks dealt with are set in the context of current radioactive contamination issues in the Arctic, the operation and infrastructure of the Russian Nuclear fleet, and the world-wide decommissioning of nuclear submarines. The risks involve those of spent nuclear fuel, and low and intermediate level liquid and solid wastes. Risk assessment and monitoring techniques are also dealt with

The European Union is showing increasing interest in the Arctic marine environment, including in the protection of marine biodiversity in the Arctic. Its participation in the 1992 Biodiversity Convention gives it grounds for action. How the EU might actually protect Arctic marine biodiversity is not, however, clear. Climate change is the primary threat to the unique and fragile Arctic ecosystem. It is also already leading to increased human activities, which may bring threats to Arctic marine biodiversity. Threats may arise as a result of, for example, oil pollution, noise pollution and litter from shipping and extractive industries; or fishing interfering with the precise mix of species within the Arctic system, whether through overfishing or otherwise. Increasing human activities on land arising from the need to service the new Arctic industries may also affect the marine environment through, for example land-based pollution. These threats potentially provide the EU with fertile ground for action, but some of the international regimes that the EU could influence are likely to provide more fruitful locations for its efforts than others. For example, while the main focus of action vis à vis climate change will be the global climate change regime, the likelihood of success in influencing the development of aspects of the climate change regime to specifically protect marine biodiversity in the Arctic is quite slim. More fruitful opportunities may lie in the global biodiversity regime, shipping, fisheries and offshore oil and gas operations. This article therefore provides a roadmap for possible EU action in these areas.

Introduction / Nengye Liu, Elizbeth A. Kirk and Tore Henriksen -- Formulating a cross-cutting policy : challenges and opportunities for effective EU Arctic policy-making / Adam Stepien and Timo Koivurova -- The EU crossing Arctic frontiers : the Barents Euro-Arctic Council, Northern dimension, and EU-West Nordic relations / Alyson J.K. Bailes and Kristmundur Olafsson -- Strengthening the European Union : Greenland's relationship for enhanced governance of the Arctic / Mar Campins Eritja -- Partners or rivals' Norway and the European Union in the High North / Andreas Osthagen and Andreas Raspotnik -- Searching for common ground in evolving Canadian and EU Arctic strategies / P. Whitney Lackenbauer and Suzanne Lalonde -- Russian Arctic policy, petroleum resources development, and the EU : cooperation or coming confrontation? / Tina Hunter -- Gauging US and EU seal regimes in the Arctic against Inuit sovereignty / Michael Fakhri -- The European Union and Arctic shipping / Henrik Ringbom -- The European Union's potential contribution to the governance of high sea fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean / Nengye Liu -- On thin Ice, Arctic indigenous communities, the European Union, and the sustainable use of marine mammals / Martin Hennig and Richard Caddell -- Joint approaches and best practices : an integrated and coherent EU Arctic policy in support of Articles 208 and 214 UNCLOS / Henning Jessen -- Conclusion / Nengye Liu, Elizabeth A. Kirk and Tore Henriksen