Suchergebnisse

Vraalsen discusses the history of conflict resolution in the case of the Sudanese civil war. While parties internal to the conflict demonstrate their own difficulties in establishing a feasible approach to conflict resolution, so, too, do external powers experience a series of tensions & complexities when attempting to establish a forum for problem recognition & solution. This article describes Norway's early attempts to facilitate resolution meetings between Sudan's leaders, the shift in positions assumed by the United States before the Sudan problem, & the various organizations & forums which have endeavored to gain precedence in the conflict resolution procedure. Non-productive competition between forums & other complications emerging from the engagement of Western powers in the Sudan affair are critiqued here in order to present some of the lessons on necessary conditions which have become clear throughout the process. Some of the positive results which have come about in Sudan today are also discussed in conclusion. 28 References. C. Brunski

Russia was the first Arctic coastal state to make an official submission to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf (CLCS) in 2001. The purpose of Russia's submission was the delineation of the outer limits of the continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles in the Arctic Ocean in accordance with UNCLOS Article 76. The area claimed by Russia is a large portion of the seabed extending even to the exclusive economic zones of Denmark and Canada. However, Russia's actions regarding delineation in the Arctic Ocean have led to criticism from several Russian experts in the field of international law. This paper is a response to a series of articles by Ivan Zhudro and Alexander Vylegzhanin. It argues against their assertion that Russia and the other Arctic states could have established the outer limits of their continental shelf in the absence of CLCS recommendations through the delimitation procedure in accordance with UNCLOS Article 83. The article rejects the argument that during the delimitation the Arctic states could have used meridian lines (sectors) to exclude the existence of an international seabed area in the Central Arctic Ocean. The author challenges the position that the result of delineation under UNCLOS Article 76 would not be fair since the US has not ratified UNCLOS.

It is a long known fact that climate change will result in sea level rise and dramatically changed coastlines for a number of coastal States, and the physical consequences of sea level rise are most likely unavoidable for several coastal States due to their geographical location, size and topography. It is highly debatable whether the Law of the Sea Convention is equipped for dealing with the current challenges of sea level rise and maritime limits, and it may be argued that its rule of ambulatory baselines may contribute to loss of territory, relocation of maritime zones, uncertainty and instability.
This article investigates the current status of the law regulating maritime limits which may be affected by sea level rise, and argues that the best solution is to adapt the law within the current legal framework of the Law of the Sea, by undertaking a liberal interpretation of the already existing provisions of the LOSC, instead of invoking the amendment procedures of the LOSC, a new supplementary agreement or creating new customary law. In particular, the article explores the option of re-interpreting the law of baselines in Article 7, offering an adapting measure that mitigates the climate change effects on sea level rise. It is argued that a liberal interpretation of the LOSC can contribute to increased stability and juridical protection of the maritime entitlements for some of the States suffering the consequences of sea level rise.

The Arctic is one of the largest regions on the globe, and is regarded as a vast storehouse of potential resources, including minerals. Both mining and tourism are rapidly growing economic sectors in the region. While the variety of tourism activities supported and offered is extensive, all of these activities are essentially forms of nature-based tourism.
Land-use conflicts between mining and tourism are likely to emerge when a new mine is opened close to a tourist area, because mining activities may dramatically change the landscape, which is essential for tourism. The impact greatly depends on the location of mining facilities, the physical size of the mining project, the mining processes used, logistics and how well the image of the mine and its end product fits in with the image of the tourist destination. While tourism and the mining industry may benefit from each other, the relationship between a mine and tourism is often asymmetrically counterproductive; where such a relationship exists, a need for regulation arises.
In this article, we assess the legal means available for resolving conflicts between the mining and tourism industries and discuss possibilities to improve these means. The two key regulatory instruments for governing such conflicts are land-use planning and mining permit processes. We illustrate the nature of conflicts and various decision-making procedures with reference to the Finnish legal framework and a case study on an ongoing mining project in the town of Kolari.

The Arctic is saturated with nuclear facilities bringing both benefits for regional economic and social development and risks of nuclear and radiological accidents and concerns about radioactive wastes. There is every reason to expect the Arctic will remain a nuclearized region during the foreseeable future. This makes it important to direct attention to issues of nuclear safety and security in the region. We identify several clusters of these issues in the Arctic, including the challenges of potential nuclear accidents, the handling of spent nuclear fuel and radioactive waste, the cleanup of radiological contaminants, and concerns about nuclear security. An analysis of international conventions and voluntary codes of conduct shows that they are applicable to Arctic nuclear safety and security, but only in general terms. This suggests a need for an Arctic-specific agreement on nuclear and radiological safety, emergency preparedness and response, and cleanup of radiological contaminants. The outbreak of military hostilities in Ukraine in February 2022 has disrupted normal procedures for addressing issues of common concern in the Arctic. But the need for co-operation regarding matters like nuclear safety and security will not go away. Assuming it is possible to devise "necessary modalities" for restarting the work of the Arctic Council following the acute phase of the Ukraine crisis, an Arctic-specific agreement on nuclear safety and security could be developed under the auspices of the Arctic Council, which already has taken an interest in nuclear safety through the activities of its Working Group on Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response. Once such an agreement is in place, it will become important to consider the infrastructure needed to ensure that its provisions are implemented effectively.

Society's use and management of water relies on professional expertise spanning diverse fields: from biology and technology to economics and law. This book examines current issues related to regulating water through chapters summarizing various sets of regulation as well as chapters that take a scientific deep dive into selected themes. The diversity of professional expertise is also reflected in the law aspect. We explore such subjects as surface runoff, natural disasters, drinking water, groundwater, salmon, hydropower, and human rights, as well as general impact assessment requirements and duty of knowledge in environmental law administration. A key objective of the book has been to provide an interdisciplinary understanding of the legal circumstances associated with water, and in addition, deliberate the pros and cons of some of the current regulations.

This book will be particularly useful for those who in various ways support and facilitate procedures within the public sector at both the national and municipal levels. It will also be useful for private sector actors seeking familiarity with legal questions that can arise in relation to public administration and other private actors. From a broader perspective, we hope the book can help to throw light on conflicts between different interests and groups within society that occur, for example, when introducing fees, special injunctions against private actors, and requirements for knowledge basis.

This book project is the result of legal research conducted at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences (NMBU) and is supplemented by national expertise in several areas. It has been edited by Steinar Taubøll, a professor at NMBU's Department of Property and Law. Taubøll has a background in both law and the natural sciences, and extensive experience with interdisciplinary work. - Håndtering og bruk av vann i samfunnet krever et faglig mangfold fra biologi og teknikk til økonomi og juss. Denne boken drøfter aktuelle temaer knyttet til rettslig regulering av vann, både i form av oversiktskapitler om ulike regelsett og gjennom vitenskapelige dypdykk i utvalgte temaer. Den faglige spennvidden gjenspeiler seg også innen det juridiske. I boken finner man stoff om overvannshåndtering, naturfare, drikkevann, grunnvann, villaks, kraftutbygging, menneskerettigheter, samt om generelle utredningskrav og kunnskapsplikter i miljørettsforvaltning. Et sentralt siktemål er å bygge opp tverrfaglig forståelse av gjeldende juridiske forhold knyttet til vann, og dessuten sette noen av dagens reguleringer under debatt.

Boken retter seg særlig til de ressurspersonene som på ulike måter støtter saksbehandlingen i stat og kommune. Boken antas også å være nyttig for private aktører som vil gjøre seg mer kjent med rettsspørsmål som kan oppstå i forhold til forvaltningen og til andre private aktører. I et bredere perspektiv er det dessuten ønskelig at boken kan bidra til å belyse konflikter mellom ulike hensyn og grupper i samfunnet, for eksempel ved innføring av gebyrer, pålegg rettet mot private, innføring av tyngende vilkår og krav til kunnskap og faktagrunnlag.

Bokprosjektet springer ut av den juridiske forskningen ved Norges miljø- og biovitenskapelige universitet, og har i tillegg knyttet til seg nasjonal spisskompetanse på mange temaer.

Bokas redaktør er dosent Steinar Taubøll ved Institutt for eiendom og juss ved NMBU, som har naturfaglig og juridisk utdannelse, samt lang erfaring med tverrfaglig arbeid.