Accreditation as a regulatory option for Antarctic bioprospecting

Polar Record ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 42 (4) ◽  
pp. 349-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Melissa Weber
Keyword(s):  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Recent Discussion ◽  
Policy Regime ◽  
Marine Stewardship Council ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

The current lack of a specific policy regime for Antarctic biological prospecting (bioprospecting) has emerged as a focus of recent discussion. Consideration has been given to the interface of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the Antarctic Treaty System (ATS). This paper aims to introduce the potential for industry accreditation to address existing regulatory uncertainty. The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) accreditation for sustainable fisheries and the accreditation scheme being developed for Antarctic tour operators provide examples of industry accreditation that interplay with the Antarctic Treaty System. Accreditation may provide an avenue for industry to promote legitimate activities, demonstrate willingness to comply with existing principles and established regulations while the perception of being over-regulated is potentially reduced. Accreditation may also serve as an interim solution while more binding measures are developed. While Antarctic bioprospecting accreditation is not without its limitations, it does provide an avenue for the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties (ATCPs) to engage industry stakeholders, clarify existing obligations and promote a regulatory initiative in conformity with the principles of the Antarctic Treaty System.

scholarly journals The Continental Shelf of Antarctica: Implications of the Requirement to Make a Submission to the CLCS under Article 76 of the LOS Convention

2002 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 485-520 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alex G. Oude Elferink
Keyword(s):  
United Nations ◽  
Continental Shelf ◽  
Legal Status ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Outer Limit ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
United Nations Convention ◽  
The United Nations ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Antarctic

AbstractThis article looks at the question of how the obligation of states parties to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to submit information on the outer limit of their continental shelf to the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf and the regime established by the Antarctic Treaty can be reconciled. Under the latter Treaty states have 'agreed to disagree' about the legal status of Antarctica. The establishment of an outer limit of the continental shelf on the basis of the recommendations of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf would pose a threat to this agreement to disagree as it would recognise the existence of coastal states and maritime zones. The article sets out the options of the states involved to deal with this issue. It is concluded that there are a number of approaches which safeguard the rights of coastal states under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and the agreement to disagree of the Antarctic Treaty.

The Antarctic Treaty and the law of the sea: fifty years on

Polar Record ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 46 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher C. Joyner
Keyword(s):  
Decision Makers ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
New Strategies ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

Since the Antarctic Treaty was negotiated in 1959, it has undergone major substantive legal transformations as it grew into a multifaceted regime known as the Antarctic Treaty system. Many of those transformations stemmed from actions by the principal decision makers, the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Parties (ATCPs), as they adopted new strategies and values alongside binding legal agreements for managing their activities in circumpolar southern waters. This essay examines the evolution of the modern law of the sea and seeks to explain how it embellished (has it at times challenged?) the character, significance and purposes of the Antarctic Treaty.

Marine Genetic Resources, Including Sharing of Benefits

2017 ◽  
Vol 111 ◽  
pp. 245-247
Author(s):  
Angel Horna
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Resources ◽  
International Law ◽  
Biological Diversity ◽  
Environmental Law ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Convention On Biological Diversity ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Progressive Development ◽  
Equitable Sharing ◽  
United Nations Convention

If we look at the development of international law of the sea, an evolution that can be traced back to the emergence of the traditional law of the sea and its transition into its modern version (enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea—UNCLOS), I would argue that we are now in the midst of another major moment in the codification and progressive development of international law of the sea, which—on this occasion—also includes the interrelationship between that legal regime and international environmental law, in particular the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the CBD.

Legal Issues concerning DROMLAN under the Antarctic Treaty System

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-74
Author(s):  
Osamu Inagaki
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Impact ◽  
Legal Issues ◽  
Recent Discussion ◽  
Good Communication ◽  
State Practice ◽  
Dronning Maud Land ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
Private Actors ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

The purpose of this paper is to explore possible legal issues concerning the Dronning Maud Land Air Network (DROMLAN) under the Antarctic Treaty system. By examining the recent discussion concerning DROMLAN within the Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting (ATCM) and relevant State practice, this paper argues that States parties have difficulty in fully complying with the obligations of advanced notice under Article VII (5) of the Antarctic Treaty and Environmental Impact Assessment under Article VIII (2) of the Madrid Protocol for DROMLAN’s operation. Finally, this paper suggests that good communication among relevant States parties and private actors is important for enhancing compliance with these obligations.

Do the Continental Shelf Developments Challenge the Polar Regimes?

2009 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 477-497
Author(s):  
Timo Koivurova
Keyword(s):  
Continental Shelf ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Law Of The Sea ◽  
Polar Regions ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
Antarctic Treaty ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Antarctic ◽  
Made In ◽  
Antarctic Treaty System

Abstract The article will provide a study of the continental shelf submissions that have been made in the polar regions and an evaluation as to whether these pose a challenge to the two polar regimes: the Arctic Council and the Antarctic Treaty System. This will be done by comparing these regimes, examining the development of the law of the sea as regards seabed rights and studying what sort of challenge the polar regimes face from the continental shelf activity in both polar regions and how serious that challenge is. Conclusions are finally drawn as to what types of effects may ensue for the polar regimes from the continental shelf submissions by various states.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document