Search Results (8)

As global advancements accelerate, modernisation and technological developments are transforming the ocean sector, bringing new opportunities while also posing significant challenges. Nevertheless, these developments have exposed gaps in the existing legal framework of ocean governance—the law of the sea—which has yet to fully address many emerging complexities and new frontiers. Addressing these gaps requires rigorous gap analyses and collaborative discourse. To this end, the 11th Ocean Law and Governance International Symposium, themed “New Frontiers and the Law of the Sea”, was held in Dalian, China, on 27–28 September 2024, in a hybrid format—online and offline. The event was co-hosted by the School of Law and the National Institute of Ocean Governance at Dalian Maritime University, with support from Zhejiang University and the Chinese Society of the Law of the Sea. The symposium brought together 22 experts and scholars from around the world to discuss critical topics, including high seas and seabed governance, climate litigation, digitalisation, law enforcement, and pressing issues, such as BBNJ and MPP. The symposium provided essential interdisciplinary legal insights, laying a robust foundation for fostering new discourse in the academic arena, which, in turn, advances future research while informing the development of marine policies aimed at achieving sustainable ocean governance. This study critically evaluates whether the symposium successfully bridged gaps in the existing academic landscape and explores whether it offers a way forward for addressing the challenges associated with new frontiers and the law of the sea. Through empirical legal analysis, this study aims to assess the impact of the symposium in promoting further discussions and policy innovations necessary to meet evolving ocean governance needs. Full article

The conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity have recently received attention, and Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) have become key management tools that are gradually being applied to the high seas. However, the sustainable management of MPAs in the high seas requires legal regimes to support them, though relevant regimes are still immature. This paper summarizes the existing regional treaties governing high seas MPAs, and the agreement on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement). After reviewing and comparing their law-making histories, it is argued that regional treaties have issues of legitimacy, democracy, and science and are not conducive to sustainable management. It is concluded that the BBNJ Agreement is better suited to the comprehensive and sustainable management of high seas MPAs and can overcome the limitations of regional treaties. As the BBNJ Agreement does not undermine existing instruments and frameworks, the management of high seas MPAs will face the co-existence of different legal regimes. In the context of “not undermining”, the Agreement should be applied preferentially, ensuring the universal participation of stakeholders in decision-making and the role of soft law for non-contracting parties. Full article

Due to the several undiscovered and valuable gene and mineral resources, marine biodiversity is considered a strategic asset for socio-economic development. However, marine biodiversity is facing grave threats, particularly in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ), where sustainable management and effective implementation of governance is yet lacking. Here existing international legal regimes with the protection of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction are briefly summarized, focusing on potential factors influencing China’s policymaking on the construction of marine protected areas on the high seas. It is concluded that China should actively participate in international negotiations and seriously assess the impacts of establishing these protected areas before making its own decision in order to achieve the sustainable conservation and management of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. In addition, the policy’s future research directions will be the practical challenges for China to establish and manage the marine protected areas on the high seas, especially in the selection of locations and the model of management. Full article

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) has been widely recognized as a crucial instrument for sound decision-making that will promote environmental conservation and sustainable development. International jurisprudence has clarified the obligation of EIA under customary international law, especially concerning its legal status, threshold standards, and procedural requirements, as well as the issue of State responsibility. As suggested by this article, international tribunals tend to adopt a procedural-oriented and State-based approach regarding the obligation of EIA, leaving more discretion to the States pursuing the proposed activities. This approach is insufficient to realize the role of EIA in fostering sound decision-making. As for the BBNJ negotiations, in light of the legal status of the Area in international law and the established rules governing the issues of EIA, especially the three Regulations and Recommendations adopted by ISA, the future implementation agreement should reinforce international regulations regarding the substance and implementation of EIA obligations. Full article

The issue of high-seas fisheries is the main threat to biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction. The BBNJ Agreement, which focuses on biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, is under vigorous discussion. Subject to the “not undermine” requirement and considerations of practical interests, it is highly possible that the BBNJ Agreement may not address the issue of fisheries on the high seas. The objective of this paper is to analyze the relationship between the high-seas fisheries issue and the BBNJ Agreement for the purposes of the conservation of marine biodiversity, the unity of the marine ecosystem, and the consistency of regulations. It maintains that from the perspective of protecting the oceans, enacting legislation in areas beyond national jurisdiction, and transforming marine management mode, the issue of high-seas fisheries should be included in the BBNJ Agreement. In the future, the BBNJ agreement needs to clarify its scope of application, resolve overlapping issues through general regulations and conflict rules, clarify the methods and contents of international cooperation, and establish international law obligations for integrated ocean management. Full article

After years of negotiation, in 2018, five Arctic coastal states and five other members, including China, reached the Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean (CAOF Agreement). Meanwhile, at the sessions of the BBNJ negotiation, which were mandated by the UN General Assembly Resolution 72/249, expectations for a legally binding BBNJ Agreement in the future also increased. This paper outlines the convergence and potential conflict between the CAOF Agreement and the envisioned BBNJ Agreement. Moreover, owing to its important role in international ocean governance, China’s treaty obligations to the CAOF Agreement and its position on the four major issues of the BBNJ Agreement need to be carefully observed. More importantly, this paper provides an analysis of China’s views regarding the interplay between the two agreements to offer a reference for BBNJ governance. Full article

Marine protected areas (MPAs) can provide a range of ecological benefits. Frameworks—including the IUCN protected area categories and The MPA Guide—offer tools towards evaluating an MPA’s objectives, types, Level of Protection, and potential effectiveness. However, the majority of MPAs exist in national waters, raising the question of how these frameworks apply in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ). We evaluated the existing ABNJ MPAs in the Antarctic designated through the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) using the two above mentioned frameworks. The newly released The MPA Guide, which complements guidance from the IUCN protected area categories, provides perhaps the most exhaustive framework as it seeks to evaluate implementation, enabling conditions, and outcomes. The CCAMLR MPAs ranged from Category 1A (for IUCN)/Highly Protected (for The MPA Guide) to Category IV (for IUCN)/Lightly Protected (for The MPA Guide) due to differences in management objectives and activities occurring within the zones of the MPAs. Given ongoing negotiations for a new international, legally binding treaty for high seas biodiversity, evaluating an MPA using these existing frameworks will prove useful to allow for a full comprehensive picture of an MPA and what it can expect to achieve. Full article

The question of how to define the legal status of marine genetic resources (hereinafter MGRs) in areas beyond national jurisdiction (hereinafter ABNJ) is one of the important issues in the negotiation of the International Legally Binding Instrument under United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biodiversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction. According to the theory of the order and justice value of the law, in combining the experiences of the international community in handling global ocean problems and characteristics of MGRs in ABNJ, it can be said that MGRs in ABNJ have the legal attribute of being the common heritage of mankind (hereinafter CHM). From the perspective of the principle of CHM, in applying the subject, object and content elements of legal relations as the research approach, the legal status of MGRs in ABNJ should be defined as follows: Firstly, an international management body should be established and the scope of actual resource developers should be defined in terms of subject elements. Secondly, the temporal scope, geographical scope and material scope of MGRs in ABNJ should be clarified in terms of object elements. Thirdly, the disposition of rights and obligations in the process of development and utilization of MGRs in ABNJ should be defined in terms of content elements. Full article