Do We Need a New Legal Regime for the Arctic Ocean?

2009 ◽  
Vol 24 (2) ◽  
pp. 443-456 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alf Håkon Hoel
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
International Treaties ◽  
Economic Activities ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Marine Environmental Protection ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
Key Factor ◽  
Marine Environmental ◽  
Common Understanding

AbstractThis paper surveys matters related to the need for a new legal regime for the Arctic Ocean. It reviews the legal system based on the UN Convention for the Law of the Sea, and the regional and international treaties dealing with resource management, (marine) environmental protection and economic activities applicable to the Arctic. It suggests that implementation of existing legal instruments at the domestic level is a key factor needed to tackle the consequences of climate change and governance of fisheries and marine ecosystems in the Arctic. It is also considered to be the Arctic Council's responsibility to build a common understanding among the stakeholders, thereby enhancing the potential for further international cooperation.

Positions of the non-Arctic States on the legal regime of the Arctic Ocean

2018 ◽  
pp. 124-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Vylegzhanin ◽  
◽  
V. Salygin ◽  
I. Dudykina ◽  
E. Kienko ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
The Arctic Ocean

scholarly journals The Role of the Arctic Economic Council in the International Legal Framework of the Arctic Ocean Environmental Governing

2020 ◽  
pp. 6-26
Author(s):  
A. N. Vylegzhanin ◽  
N. V. Korchunov ◽  
A. R. Tevatrosyan
Keyword(s):  
Sustainable Development ◽  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
International Forum ◽  
Economic Activities ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
The Sustainable Development ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
Economic Council

INTRODUCTION. The article covers the legal aspects of the establishment of a new international forum – the Arctic Economic Council – and its role in the existing international legal framework for governing the Arctic Ocean, including the Arctic seas. The status and the functioning of the said international forum, particularly with regard to the activities within its Working Groups, have been examined based on the analysis of the documents adopted by the forum since its establishment. Special attention has been paid to the legal analysis of the coordination of the newly established forum with the Arctic Council and the prospects of such institutional cooperation.MATERIALS AND METHODS. The research done by the authors on the relevant documents released by the Artic Council, in the context of legal and scientific sources on the topic of the Arctic Ocean and its seas, as well as on the Reports of the Arctic Economic Council submitted to the Senior Officials of the Arctic Council, underlies this article. The article also takes into consideration political and legal research of the Arctic Council’s work, aimed at the sustainable development of the economic activities in the region, as well as respective archive documents from the electronic database of the Arctic Council, including relevant press releases.RESEARCH RESULTS. The Arctic Economic Council (AEC), established upon the initiative of the Arctic Council in 2014, is a new circumpolar business-forum, which aims at fostering the sustainable development of the Arctic region by substantive cooperation with the entrepreneurs, carrying out economic activities in the region or planning to do so. The new international organization has the potential to become an effective international legal mechanism to promote greener economies in the Arctic; meanwhile, the organization is yet to become a constructive platform for dialogue on fostering the economic activities in the region.DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS. The AEC foundational documents determine the structure and the course of action of the organization. The article, nevertheless, suggests that the executives and the Secretary of this newly established international forum ensure that the business representatives, committed to conduct activities in the Arctic, seek to comply with the international environmental standards, applicable to the Arctic; particularly that, subject to the unique vulnerability of the Arctic environment, an exchange of best practices takes place. Moreover, in view of the increased shipping and growth of other marine activities in the region, the Arctic business standards not only need to be more environmentally oriented, but also take into account the possibility of diversifying the Arctic economy. The AEC could focus its efforts on enhancing the quality of the regional regulation of the economic activities in the Arctic, paying particular attention to the coordinated self-regulative measures of the legal entities in different countries. In this case, its activities may prove to be more relevant and effective.

scholarly journals Consultative meetings of non-Arctic states on the status of the Arctic

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 296-318
Author(s):  
Alexander N. Vylegzhanin ◽  
◽  
Elena V. Kienko ◽  
Keyword(s):  
South Korea ◽  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Arctic Council ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Arctic Policy ◽  
New Instruments

The article, in the context of the contemporary status of the Arctic, examines the legal and political documents adopted by China, Japan and South Korea in regard to their arctic policy, including those agreed upon by these three States. The alarming reaction to such documents in the Arctic coastal states, firstly, in the USA and Canada, is also considered in the article. Relevant western scholars’ arguments are scrutinized, such as the increase of “China’s military power”; China’s “insatiable appetite” for access to natural resources in the Arctic; the argument that “China seeks to dominate” the Arctic and the situation when “the Arctic Council is split”; the notion that China makes other non-Arctic States create separate legal documents concerning the regime of the Arctic Ocean. The article concludes that the western interpretation of such documents is alarming only in relation to China. The research shows that up till now there are no grounds for such estimations of China’s negative role. However, statements by Chinese officials as cited in the article and some provisions stipulated in “China’s Arctic policy” contradict the common will of the Arctic coastal states in regard to the legal regime of the Arctic Ocean as reflected in the Ilulissat Declaration of 2008. In such a dynamic legal environment, new instruments of collaboration are in demand, which might involve China and other non-Arctic states in maintaining the established legal regime of the Arctic. Thus, the new instruments would deter the creation (with unpredictable consequences) by China, Japan and South Korea of new trilateral acts relating to the status of the Arctic.

Warm Waters and Cold Shoulders: Jostling for Jurisdiction in Polar Oceans

2009 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 465-476 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosemary Rayfuse
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
International Community ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Central Arctic Ocean ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
Polar Oceans ◽  
Ocean Ecosystem ◽  
High Seas

Abstract In May 2008 the five Arctic coastal states adopted the Ilullisat Declaration in which they asserted their role as stewards, for the international community, of the Arctic Ocean ecosystem. This paper discusses the legal basis for their claim to stewardship with particular reference to the high seas portion of the central Arctic Ocean, and their assertion that no need exists for a new comprehensive legal regime in respect of those high seas waters. It is argued that while the high seas regime of the Arctic may be extensive, it is not comprehensive. Thus, the legitimacy of the claim to stewardship rests on the willingness and ability of the Arctic coastal states to work to fill the lacunae and address the shortcomings in the legal regime for the high seas of the central Arctic Ocean.

scholarly journals The article, in the context of the contemporary status of the Arctic, examines the legal and political documents adopted by China, Japan and South Korea in regard to their arctic policy, including those agreed upon by these three States. The alarming reaction to such documents in the Arctic coastal states, firstly, in the USA and Canada, is also considered in the article. Relevant western scholars’ arguments are scrutinized, such as the increase of “China’s military power”; China’s “insatiable appetite” for access to natural resources in the Arctic; the argument that “China seeks to dominate” the Arctic and the situation when “the Arctic Council is split”; the notion that China makes other non-Arctic States create separate legal documents concerning the regime of the Arctic Ocean. The article concludes that the western interpretation of such documents is alarming only in relation to China. The research shows that up till now there are no grounds for such estimations of China’s negative role. However, statements by Chinese officials as cited in the article and some provisions stipulated in “China’s Arctic policy” contradict the common will of the Arctic coastal states in regard to the legal regime of the Arctic Ocean as reflected in the Ilulissat Declaration of 2008. In such a dynamic legal environment, new instruments of collaboration are in demand, which might involve China and other non-Arctic states in maintaining the established legal regime of the Arctic. Thus, the new instruments would deter the creation (with unpredictable consequences) by China, Japan and South Korea of new trilateral acts relating to the status of the Arctic.

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 319-333
Author(s):  
Maria A. Aleksandrova ◽  
◽  
Olga A. Fedorova ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Arctic Ocean ◽  
Russian Federation ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Legal Regime ◽  
Personal Property ◽  
The Arctic Ocean ◽  
The Russian Federation ◽  
Arctic Policy ◽  
Personal Assets ◽  
New Instruments

The article analyzes the current state of doctrine and law enforcement practice on one of the most pressing problems of modern family law — the regime of spouses’ personal property. Currently, there are no serious doctrinal studies on this issue. A uniform practice of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation on some problems has not been established, on others it raises more questions than answers. The authors of the article propose to start from the understanding of marriage as a kind of economic union of a man and a woman and make an attempt to develop an approach to determining the fate of income from the use of personal property of each spouse, as well as the proceeds from the sale of such property, that is understandable and convenient both for the spouses themselves and for third parties entering into property legal relations with the spouses. It seems that the registration of a marriage should lead to the consolidation of any property acquired during the marriage, with the exception of that which is directly listed in the Family Code of the Russian Federation. The authors insist that the exceptions to the general rule are not subject to broad interpretation in this case. Thus, both the income received from the use of the personal assets of each of the spouses, and the proceeds from the sale of such assets, should enter into common joint ownership. This approach does not diminish, however, the right of any of the spouses to demand from the court, when dividing the property, deviations from the principle of equality of the spouses’ shares in the acquired property. This takes into account the contribution of each of them to the creation and augmentation of common property, including through the investment of income received from the use and sale of personal assets.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document