Pub Date : 2023-11-08DOI: 10.1080/00908320.2023.2273288
Apostolos Tsiouvalas, Jan Jakub Solski
In the legal conceptualization of space, cartography has always been a fundamental tool narrating, representing, generating, or even (re)claiming territory. In this article, we examine the relationship between cartography and international law by looking at different cartographic representations of the area covering the disputed “Northwest Passage” (NWP). In an attempt to discuss how mapping may spring from different ontological assumptions of space among sovereign states and Indigenous communities, this article is devoted to investigations concerning different forms of law–space entanglements drawn from 12 different maps pertinent to the NWP, aiming to critically reconsider the very essence of law applicable to the region. The article supports the argument that approaching the juridical architecture of the Arctic from a pluralistic perspective that also accounts for non-Western visions of space may help as a valuable conceptual lens to rethink “territory” and revisit existing legal realities.
{"title":"‘One Map to Rule Them All’? Revisiting Legalities Through Cartographic Representations of the Northwest Passage","authors":"Apostolos Tsiouvalas, Jan Jakub Solski","doi":"10.1080/00908320.2023.2273288","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2023.2273288","url":null,"abstract":"In the legal conceptualization of space, cartography has always been a fundamental tool narrating, representing, generating, or even (re)claiming territory. In this article, we examine the relationship between cartography and international law by looking at different cartographic representations of the area covering the disputed “Northwest Passage” (NWP). In an attempt to discuss how mapping may spring from different ontological assumptions of space among sovereign states and Indigenous communities, this article is devoted to investigations concerning different forms of law–space entanglements drawn from 12 different maps pertinent to the NWP, aiming to critically reconsider the very essence of law applicable to the region. The article supports the argument that approaching the juridical architecture of the Arctic from a pluralistic perspective that also accounts for non-Western visions of space may help as a valuable conceptual lens to rethink “territory” and revisit existing legal realities.","PeriodicalId":45771,"journal":{"name":"Ocean Development and International Law","volume":"122 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135341741","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-03DOI: 10.1080/00908320.2023.2213451
Mohit Gupta, S. Shanthakumar
Abstract Abandonment is a significant challenge that seafarers face today. The number of seafarer abandonment instances has increased between 2020 and 2021, and dealing with this issue has become a major concern for policymakers. In 2021, in total, 1,399 seafarers on 94 vessels were abandoned. The 2006 Maritime Labour Convention (MLC) was amended in 2014 to include provisions for protecting abandoned seafarers. Newly inserted provisions established a financial security system for assisting seafarers in a seafarer abandonment situation. Although today the MLC incorporates this mechanism to protect abandoned seafarers, the issue of abandonment of seafarers continues to persist, and the time consumed in resolving these cases is sometimes very long. This article assesses the effectiveness of the financial security system under the MLC in granting protection to abandoned seafarers. It highlights the current regime's flaws and how the regime can be improved.
{"title":"Assessment of the Legal Regime for Protecting Abandoned Seafarers: A Study in Light of the 2006 Maritime Labour Convention","authors":"Mohit Gupta, S. Shanthakumar","doi":"10.1080/00908320.2023.2213451","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2023.2213451","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Abandonment is a significant challenge that seafarers face today. The number of seafarer abandonment instances has increased between 2020 and 2021, and dealing with this issue has become a major concern for policymakers. In 2021, in total, 1,399 seafarers on 94 vessels were abandoned. The 2006 Maritime Labour Convention (MLC) was amended in 2014 to include provisions for protecting abandoned seafarers. Newly inserted provisions established a financial security system for assisting seafarers in a seafarer abandonment situation. Although today the MLC incorporates this mechanism to protect abandoned seafarers, the issue of abandonment of seafarers continues to persist, and the time consumed in resolving these cases is sometimes very long. This article assesses the effectiveness of the financial security system under the MLC in granting protection to abandoned seafarers. It highlights the current regime's flaws and how the regime can be improved.","PeriodicalId":45771,"journal":{"name":"Ocean Development and International Law","volume":"18 1","pages":"181 - 199"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87915591","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-03DOI: 10.1080/00908320.2023.2190940
J. Solski
Abstract Owing to a shift from the culture of compliance to the culture of benchmarking, the Polar Code process of ensuring safe operation and environmental protection in Polar waters is still ongoing. The risk and goal-based approaches embedded in significant parts of the Polar Code invite different stakeholders to participate in the development of Arctic shipping governance. The methodology used in the process, such as POLARIS, may serve as a common baseline, but its utility relies on further updates and validation. The reliability of decision-support systems depends largely on whether different stakeholders embrace the system and share their experiences to facilitate systematic updates. This article compares the approaches of the two major coastal states, Canada and Russia, to POLARIS as reflected in their coastal state systems of shipping control in the Canadian Arctic Waters and the Russian Northern Sea Route (NSR). Considering that much Arctic shipping occurs within the Canadian Arctic and the NSR, their regulatory approaches may affect POLARIS’s popularity, acceptance, and, eventually, success in providing a common regulatory baseline.
{"title":"The Polar Code Process and Sovereignty Bargains: Comparing the Approaches of Canada and Russia to POLARIS","authors":"J. Solski","doi":"10.1080/00908320.2023.2190940","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2023.2190940","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Owing to a shift from the culture of compliance to the culture of benchmarking, the Polar Code process of ensuring safe operation and environmental protection in Polar waters is still ongoing. The risk and goal-based approaches embedded in significant parts of the Polar Code invite different stakeholders to participate in the development of Arctic shipping governance. The methodology used in the process, such as POLARIS, may serve as a common baseline, but its utility relies on further updates and validation. The reliability of decision-support systems depends largely on whether different stakeholders embrace the system and share their experiences to facilitate systematic updates. This article compares the approaches of the two major coastal states, Canada and Russia, to POLARIS as reflected in their coastal state systems of shipping control in the Canadian Arctic Waters and the Russian Northern Sea Route (NSR). Considering that much Arctic shipping occurs within the Canadian Arctic and the NSR, their regulatory approaches may affect POLARIS’s popularity, acceptance, and, eventually, success in providing a common regulatory baseline.","PeriodicalId":45771,"journal":{"name":"Ocean Development and International Law","volume":"14 1","pages":"111 - 134"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72698879","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-03DOI: 10.1080/00908320.2023.2211781
Iva Parlov
Abstract The recent maiden voyage of the Yara Birkeland witnessed yet another development in autonomy that is transforming the maritime sector. Marine autonomous surface ships (MASS) are claimed to bring many opportunities to society at large, not least in terms of operational efficiency and safety of the crew, fewer emissions, and greener shipping. On the assumption that MASS will prove safe enough to ply our seas and oceans, this article investigates the flexibility and ability of the existing International Maritime Organization (IMO) regulations on ships’ routing, ship reporting, and vessel traffic service (VTS) to respond to the technological developments, allowing for the operation of both remotely controlled ships without seafarers on board and fully autonomous ships. It argues that the regulations in question are largely supportive of autonomy. Challenges, however, exist when it comes to the employment of fully autonomous ships and the effective use of VTS.
{"title":"Can the International Regulatory Framework on Ships’ Routing, Ship Reporting, and Vessel Traffic Service (VTS) Accommodate Marine Autonomous Surface Ships (MASS)?","authors":"Iva Parlov","doi":"10.1080/00908320.2023.2211781","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2023.2211781","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The recent maiden voyage of the Yara Birkeland witnessed yet another development in autonomy that is transforming the maritime sector. Marine autonomous surface ships (MASS) are claimed to bring many opportunities to society at large, not least in terms of operational efficiency and safety of the crew, fewer emissions, and greener shipping. On the assumption that MASS will prove safe enough to ply our seas and oceans, this article investigates the flexibility and ability of the existing International Maritime Organization (IMO) regulations on ships’ routing, ship reporting, and vessel traffic service (VTS) to respond to the technological developments, allowing for the operation of both remotely controlled ships without seafarers on board and fully autonomous ships. It argues that the regulations in question are largely supportive of autonomy. Challenges, however, exist when it comes to the employment of fully autonomous ships and the effective use of VTS.","PeriodicalId":45771,"journal":{"name":"Ocean Development and International Law","volume":"23 1","pages":"163 - 180"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74616182","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-03DOI: 10.1080/00908320.2023.2200218
Apostolos Tsiouvalas, J. Evans
Abstract Although exclusive common pool resource management regimes have locally been applied since time immemorial in many coastal and fjord areas, in the legal conceptualization of space, the oceans and their living resources were traditionally treated as a “global commons.” The idea of restricting access to coastal oceanic resources and delegating their governance to state instruments has become increasingly popular since the middle of the previous century when political economy models predicted the eventual overexploitation or degradation of all resources used in common. While state jurisdictions overall continue to preserve the idea of common access to marine living resources for a state’s people, the rapid privatization of marine living resources and the subsequent development of aquaculture over the last few decades, often confront this understanding, leading to enclosure of a delineated maritime area that was initially intended to be accessible to the public. Enclosing the sea for the purpose of aquaculture development leads to a semantic change in property institutions that govern coastal areas and provides for a form of enclosure of the commons in key locations designated for marine aquaculture development. This article explores the concept of “ocean commons” and debates how the enclosure of common areas for the purposes of aquaculture development may collide with Indigenous and local conceptions of common pool resource management. The article applies this theoretical investigation on two examples from Canada and Norway, and suggests that rethinking aquaculture development in coastal waters through the lens of “ocean commons” may provide a guiding ethos for revisiting current approaches of access to the sea and ensuring the harmonious coexistence between aquaculture development and local/Indigenous traditional activities.
{"title":"From “Common Pools” to “Fish Pools”: Shifting Property Institutions in Traditional Waters of Norway and Canada","authors":"Apostolos Tsiouvalas, J. Evans","doi":"10.1080/00908320.2023.2200218","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2023.2200218","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Although exclusive common pool resource management regimes have locally been applied since time immemorial in many coastal and fjord areas, in the legal conceptualization of space, the oceans and their living resources were traditionally treated as a “global commons.” The idea of restricting access to coastal oceanic resources and delegating their governance to state instruments has become increasingly popular since the middle of the previous century when political economy models predicted the eventual overexploitation or degradation of all resources used in common. While state jurisdictions overall continue to preserve the idea of common access to marine living resources for a state’s people, the rapid privatization of marine living resources and the subsequent development of aquaculture over the last few decades, often confront this understanding, leading to enclosure of a delineated maritime area that was initially intended to be accessible to the public. Enclosing the sea for the purpose of aquaculture development leads to a semantic change in property institutions that govern coastal areas and provides for a form of enclosure of the commons in key locations designated for marine aquaculture development. This article explores the concept of “ocean commons” and debates how the enclosure of common areas for the purposes of aquaculture development may collide with Indigenous and local conceptions of common pool resource management. The article applies this theoretical investigation on two examples from Canada and Norway, and suggests that rethinking aquaculture development in coastal waters through the lens of “ocean commons” may provide a guiding ethos for revisiting current approaches of access to the sea and ensuring the harmonious coexistence between aquaculture development and local/Indigenous traditional activities.","PeriodicalId":45771,"journal":{"name":"Ocean Development and International Law","volume":"47 1","pages":"135 - 162"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82595892","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-04-03DOI: 10.1080/00908320.2023.2224116
Elizabeth Macpherson, E. Jorgensen, A. Paul, H. Rennie, K. Fisher, Julia Talbot-Jones, J. Hewitt, Andrew E. F. Allison, Jill Banwell, Alexandra Parkinson
Abstract Ecosystem-based approaches to marine management, which integrate marine law and policy across sectors, communities, and scales, are increasingly advocated for in international policy debates and scholarly literature. We highlight critical and timely opportunities in Aotearoa New Zealand’s evolving legal context to support an ecosystem-based approach across fisheries regulation, biodiversity conservation, environmental effects management, and Indigenous or customary rights. Given the scale of proposed law reform affecting the ocean in Aotearoa New Zealand, there are important global lessons to be elucidated from (and for) the Aotearoa New Zealand experience, revealing the potential for law to center the health of ocean ecosystems and related people in integrated marine decision making.
{"title":"Designing Law and Policy for the Health and Resilience of Marine and Coastal Ecosystems—Lessons From (and for) Aotearoa New Zealand","authors":"Elizabeth Macpherson, E. Jorgensen, A. Paul, H. Rennie, K. Fisher, Julia Talbot-Jones, J. Hewitt, Andrew E. F. Allison, Jill Banwell, Alexandra Parkinson","doi":"10.1080/00908320.2023.2224116","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2023.2224116","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Ecosystem-based approaches to marine management, which integrate marine law and policy across sectors, communities, and scales, are increasingly advocated for in international policy debates and scholarly literature. We highlight critical and timely opportunities in Aotearoa New Zealand’s evolving legal context to support an ecosystem-based approach across fisheries regulation, biodiversity conservation, environmental effects management, and Indigenous or customary rights. Given the scale of proposed law reform affecting the ocean in Aotearoa New Zealand, there are important global lessons to be elucidated from (and for) the Aotearoa New Zealand experience, revealing the potential for law to center the health of ocean ecosystems and related people in integrated marine decision making.","PeriodicalId":45771,"journal":{"name":"Ocean Development and International Law","volume":"41 1","pages":"200 - 252"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84692169","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/00908320.2023.2182388
Huaigao Qi
Abstract China and South Korea resumed negotiations on delimiting their maritime boundary in 2015. The overlapping maritime area of China and South Korea requiring delimitation lie mainly in the South Yellow Sea (SYS). This article proceeds on the basis that the two states probably reached a preliminary agreement on the limits of the first-stage maritime delimitation area, in which there are no third-party interests involved. This article selects 37°N and 32°N as the northern and southern limits of the first-stage maritime delimitation area on the basis of public information available. This article proposes that China and South Korea can delimit a single maritime boundary for their exclusive economic zones (EEZs) and continental shelves by applying the equidistance/relevant circumstances method, and then following the three-stage approach. After applying the three-stage approach to this case, this author concludes that the adjusted equidistance line/potential delimitation line will probably move toward South Korea, departing from the provisional equidistance line. The potential delimitation line of EEZ/continental shelf between the two states probably extends generally south-southwest-southeast. This author calculates that the coastal length ratio between the two states is approximately 1:2.14 in favor of China and the ratio of the relevant baselines length is approximately 1:1.47 in favor of China. This author deduces that the ratio of the allocated relevant areas is approximately 1:1.17 in favor of China and the ratio of the allocated provisional measure zone (PMZ) of the 2000 China–ROK Fishery Agreement is approximately 1:1.44 in favor of China, both under the adjusted equidistance line scenario, measured by the WGS 1984 Web Mercator.
2015年，中韩两国恢复了海洋划界谈判。中韩两国需要划界的重叠海域主要在南黄海。本文基于两国可能就第一阶段海域划界范围达成了初步协议，其中不涉及第三方利益。本文在现有公开资料的基础上，选取北纬37°和北纬32°作为第一阶段海洋划界区的南北界限。本文提出，中韩两国可以采用等距/相关情况法划定专属经济区和大陆架的单一海洋边界，然后按照三阶段法进行划定。通过对该案例的三阶段分析，笔者认为调整后的等距线/潜在分界线可能会偏离暂定等距线，向韩国方向移动。两国专属经济区/大陆架的潜在分界线可能大致向南-西南-东南方向延伸。根据笔者的计算，两国的海岸线长度之比约为1:2.14，有利于中国;相关基线长度之比约为1:1.47，有利于中国。根据WGS 1984 Web Mercator的测算，在调整后的等距线情景下，分配给中国的相关区域的比例约为1:1.17,2000中韩渔业协定临时措施区(PMZ)的比例约为1:1.44。
{"title":"Maritime Delimitation Between China and South Korea in the South Yellow Sea","authors":"Huaigao Qi","doi":"10.1080/00908320.2023.2182388","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2023.2182388","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract China and South Korea resumed negotiations on delimiting their maritime boundary in 2015. The overlapping maritime area of China and South Korea requiring delimitation lie mainly in the South Yellow Sea (SYS). This article proceeds on the basis that the two states probably reached a preliminary agreement on the limits of the first-stage maritime delimitation area, in which there are no third-party interests involved. This article selects 37°N and 32°N as the northern and southern limits of the first-stage maritime delimitation area on the basis of public information available. This article proposes that China and South Korea can delimit a single maritime boundary for their exclusive economic zones (EEZs) and continental shelves by applying the equidistance/relevant circumstances method, and then following the three-stage approach. After applying the three-stage approach to this case, this author concludes that the adjusted equidistance line/potential delimitation line will probably move toward South Korea, departing from the provisional equidistance line. The potential delimitation line of EEZ/continental shelf between the two states probably extends generally south-southwest-southeast. This author calculates that the coastal length ratio between the two states is approximately 1:2.14 in favor of China and the ratio of the relevant baselines length is approximately 1:1.47 in favor of China. This author deduces that the ratio of the allocated relevant areas is approximately 1:1.17 in favor of China and the ratio of the allocated provisional measure zone (PMZ) of the 2000 China–ROK Fishery Agreement is approximately 1:1.44 in favor of China, both under the adjusted equidistance line scenario, measured by the WGS 1984 Web Mercator.","PeriodicalId":45771,"journal":{"name":"Ocean Development and International Law","volume":"54 1","pages":"26 - 62"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87286462","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-01-02DOI: 10.1080/00908320.2023.2185712
D. Jung
Abstract This article examines how flag states, port states, and the shipping industry have attempted to fulfill their obligations to carry out mandatory ship surveys and certification in response to challenges arising from the COVID-19 pandemic and provides guidance for future pandemics. Although the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Conventions do not have procedures to deal with the impacts of global pandemics on ship surveys and certification, the IMO has provided guidance via circular letters, taking a pragmatic and practical approach. Several flag states extended the validity of certificates by taking either a case-by-case or a blanket approach within the statutory maximum of three months. With regard to the extension beyond the statutory period of three months, flag states should consider requests using an evidence-based assessment on a case-by-case basis. Classification societies play an important role in the extension of the validity of certificates by providing their technical expertise and recommendations. Port state control serves as a safety net in the event that flag states do not comply with their obligations. In this regard, cooperation between flag states, port states, and classification societies is key to managing survey and certification during a pandemic. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated an accelerated need for the development of remote surveys. It has also illustrated a need to develop guidance on remote surveys under exceptional circumstances in order to respond to future pandemics.
{"title":"Ship Surveys and Certification During Global Health Pandemics; Challenges and Opportunities Presented by COVID-19","authors":"D. Jung","doi":"10.1080/00908320.2023.2185712","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2023.2185712","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article examines how flag states, port states, and the shipping industry have attempted to fulfill their obligations to carry out mandatory ship surveys and certification in response to challenges arising from the COVID-19 pandemic and provides guidance for future pandemics. Although the International Maritime Organization (IMO) Conventions do not have procedures to deal with the impacts of global pandemics on ship surveys and certification, the IMO has provided guidance via circular letters, taking a pragmatic and practical approach. Several flag states extended the validity of certificates by taking either a case-by-case or a blanket approach within the statutory maximum of three months. With regard to the extension beyond the statutory period of three months, flag states should consider requests using an evidence-based assessment on a case-by-case basis. Classification societies play an important role in the extension of the validity of certificates by providing their technical expertise and recommendations. Port state control serves as a safety net in the event that flag states do not comply with their obligations. In this regard, cooperation between flag states, port states, and classification societies is key to managing survey and certification during a pandemic. Moreover, the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated an accelerated need for the development of remote surveys. It has also illustrated a need to develop guidance on remote surveys under exceptional circumstances in order to respond to future pandemics.","PeriodicalId":45771,"journal":{"name":"Ocean Development and International Law","volume":"110 1","pages":"92 - 110"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2023-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85201757","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00908320.2022.2156414
Hu Zhang, Qiuwen Wang
Abstract Recent legal theories and state practice have tended to expand the conceptualization of maritime security beyond the traditional security field to encompass nontraditional security issues such as economic growth, environmental protection, and the optimal use of ocean resources. In this context, the conceptualization of maritime security in China has also undergone profound changes that have significantly influenced China’s revision of maritime traffic safety legislation. The objectives of this article are to examine the specific institutional changes in China’s new regulatory framework for maritime traffic safety, and to explore their potential implications. This article uses normative analysis to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the institutional developments in China’s new maritime traffic safety legislation, discusses how the evolution of the concept of maritime security has theoretically affected these institutional developments, and explores the potential implications of the new legislation for China’s navigational safety governance, maritime law enforcement, and cross-border maritime security cooperation.
{"title":"New Developments in China’s Maritime Traffic Safety Legislation: Theoretical Background, Institutional Changes, and Potential Implications","authors":"Hu Zhang, Qiuwen Wang","doi":"10.1080/00908320.2022.2156414","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2022.2156414","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Recent legal theories and state practice have tended to expand the conceptualization of maritime security beyond the traditional security field to encompass nontraditional security issues such as economic growth, environmental protection, and the optimal use of ocean resources. In this context, the conceptualization of maritime security in China has also undergone profound changes that have significantly influenced China’s revision of maritime traffic safety legislation. The objectives of this article are to examine the specific institutional changes in China’s new regulatory framework for maritime traffic safety, and to explore their potential implications. This article uses normative analysis to conduct a comprehensive analysis of the institutional developments in China’s new maritime traffic safety legislation, discusses how the evolution of the concept of maritime security has theoretically affected these institutional developments, and explores the potential implications of the new legislation for China’s navigational safety governance, maritime law enforcement, and cross-border maritime security cooperation.","PeriodicalId":45771,"journal":{"name":"Ocean Development and International Law","volume":"99 1","pages":"346 - 376"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81373715","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/00908320.2022.2148793
Zhong-hua Li, M. Seta
Abstract Private actors and their roles in conserving the marine environment have attracted increasing attention. Although classification societies were originally designed as industrial organizations developing internal standards on hull and machinery, their contributions to the marine environmental protection should not go ignored. As exemplified by the Ballast Water Management (BWM) Convention, an international shipping instrument on ballast discharge for which the implementation process was subject to technological uncertainties, their contributions can be described in three ways: verification on behalf of states as “recognized organizations”; participation in International Maritime Organization (IMO) sessions; and establishment of their own standards. It is argued that these multiple functions reveal the competence of classification societies to tackle vessel-source pollution, and further, that their technical know-how and firsthand experience accumulated from shipping practice demonstrate their potential to address other complicated marine environmental issues where experience and compliance technologies are essential. However, the expanding focus of classification societies to marine environmental issues should proceed with caution. A much under-discussed point is the impact of classification rules and standards developed by the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS) on international shipping conventions as agreed by states. Though it cannot be said that classification societies are making their own vessel-source discharge standards independent from the IMO lawmaking process, the Unified Requirements on BWM system installation illustrate that obligations under international instruments could be de facto complemented by industrial standards, despite the fact that no provisions incorporating the latter are explicitly spelled out in the former. Given the noticeable lack of state consent throughout the private standard-setting process and the near-universal applicability of IACS standards, legitimacy concerns arise as to whether it is justified for classification societies to wield such an impact on the development of vessel-source pollution requirements, affecting both states and other maritime stakeholders. In this respect, a global administrative law perspective is taken to examine in what ways their legitimacy could be challenged.
{"title":"The Expanding Role of Classification Societies in Conserving the Marine Environment: The Case of the 2004 BWM Convention","authors":"Zhong-hua Li, M. Seta","doi":"10.1080/00908320.2022.2148793","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2022.2148793","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Private actors and their roles in conserving the marine environment have attracted increasing attention. Although classification societies were originally designed as industrial organizations developing internal standards on hull and machinery, their contributions to the marine environmental protection should not go ignored. As exemplified by the Ballast Water Management (BWM) Convention, an international shipping instrument on ballast discharge for which the implementation process was subject to technological uncertainties, their contributions can be described in three ways: verification on behalf of states as “recognized organizations”; participation in International Maritime Organization (IMO) sessions; and establishment of their own standards. It is argued that these multiple functions reveal the competence of classification societies to tackle vessel-source pollution, and further, that their technical know-how and firsthand experience accumulated from shipping practice demonstrate their potential to address other complicated marine environmental issues where experience and compliance technologies are essential. However, the expanding focus of classification societies to marine environmental issues should proceed with caution. A much under-discussed point is the impact of classification rules and standards developed by the International Association of Classification Societies (IACS) on international shipping conventions as agreed by states. Though it cannot be said that classification societies are making their own vessel-source discharge standards independent from the IMO lawmaking process, the Unified Requirements on BWM system installation illustrate that obligations under international instruments could be de facto complemented by industrial standards, despite the fact that no provisions incorporating the latter are explicitly spelled out in the former. Given the noticeable lack of state consent throughout the private standard-setting process and the near-universal applicability of IACS standards, legitimacy concerns arise as to whether it is justified for classification societies to wield such an impact on the development of vessel-source pollution requirements, affecting both states and other maritime stakeholders. In this respect, a global administrative law perspective is taken to examine in what ways their legitimacy could be challenged.","PeriodicalId":45771,"journal":{"name":"Ocean Development and International Law","volume":"35 1","pages":"318 - 345"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76912943","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：