as concrete as it is now, a situation which has awaken the interest of practically every
broad-margin state worldwide to delineate its outer limits. The extension of the
continental shelf does not come without responsibilities for coastal states, especially
in light of the overall precarious condition of the marine environment worldwide. So,
this work also highlights the need to assess the precise implications of the extension
of the continental shelf in terms of environmental duties and obligations for the
coastal states, so as to, subsequently, map out the environmental jurisdiction of
coastal states on that zone. Finally, this work offers a detailed insight into the
domestic legal and policy framework of a particular state with respect to the
management of the continental shelf, namely Brazil.
The continental shelf, especially beyond 200 nm, is one of the maritime zones
where major challenges to the sustainable governance of the oceans are expected to
occur, namely the need to accommodate economic activities therein with the protection of the marine environment and the conservation of its biodiversity. Practical
examples include illegal fishing for crustaceans and sedentary species; illegal marine
scientific research on the continental shelf; illegal sampling of marine genetic
resources; marine pollution from oil and gas exploitation activities and deep-se
mining, among others. Scientific reports have recently concluded that “the marine
environment is not improving”,
32 and the United Nations Environmental
Programme (UNEP) has warned that “the outlook is poor and alarming for the
continuing wellbeing of marine biodiversity”.
33 Those concerns are not purely
hypothetical or academic, as exploration activities are already taking place in
continental shelves beyond 200 nm around the world, the two most prominent
examples in this regard being Canada and Norway.
34 In short, exploitation of the
ocean seabed seems inevitable.
35
In this context, it is undeniable that UNCLOS has permanently influenced the
behavior of states and shaped the landscape of international relations regarding the
oceans for better. The Convention’s significance in regulating oceanic uses lies,
among others, on the fact that “it provides a comprehensive regulatory regime for all
maritime matters, without being the typical framework convention so frequently
encountered in other branches of international law.”
36 In fact, the much-praised
32 Dimento and Hickman (2012), p. 80.
33 UNEP (2010), p. 5.
34 Canada is expected to bid areas for exploitation as late as early 2019, while Norway has stepped
domestic debate on how to best implement the country’s obligation to make financial contributions
to the International Seabed Authority (ISA), in line with Art. 82 UNCLOS. Information on this
regard has been obtained with Wylie Spicer and Rodrigo More, lawyers that have been engaging for
a long time in continental shelf matters.
35 On a rather sensational and tabloid tone, yet informative, see Klare (2012), pp. 20–22. According
to the magazine “Maritime Executive”, there is a growing demand for the exploitation of nonliving
resources in the continental shelf. See “Global deepwater expenditure expected to increase by
69 percent between until 2019, to reach a total of US$ 210 billion”, Maritime Executive,
April, 2015.
36 Gavouneli (2006), p. 205.
1.3 Problemfelder
9
broad-margin state worldwide to delineate its outer limits. The extension of the
continental shelf does not come without responsibilities for coastal states, especially
in light of the overall precarious condition of the marine environment worldwide. So,
this work also highlights the need to assess the precise implications of the extension
of the continental shelf in terms of environmental duties and obligations for the
coastal states, so as to, subsequently, map out the environmental jurisdiction of
coastal states on that zone. Finally, this work offers a detailed insight into the
domestic legal and policy framework of a particular state with respect to the
management of the continental shelf, namely Brazil.
The continental shelf, especially beyond 200 nm, is one of the maritime zones
where major challenges to the sustainable governance of the oceans are expected to
occur, namely the need to accommodate economic activities therein with the protection of the marine environment and the conservation of its biodiversity. Practical
examples include illegal fishing for crustaceans and sedentary species; illegal marine
scientific research on the continental shelf; illegal sampling of marine genetic
resources; marine pollution from oil and gas exploitation activities and deep-se
mining, among others. Scientific reports have recently concluded that “the marine
environment is not improving”,
32 and the United Nations Environmental
Programme (UNEP) has warned that “the outlook is poor and alarming for the
continuing wellbeing of marine biodiversity”.
33 Those concerns are not purely
hypothetical or academic, as exploration activities are already taking place in
continental shelves beyond 200 nm around the world, the two most prominent
examples in this regard being Canada and Norway.
34 In short, exploitation of the
ocean seabed seems inevitable.
35
In this context, it is undeniable that UNCLOS has permanently influenced the
behavior of states and shaped the landscape of international relations regarding the
oceans for better. The Convention’s significance in regulating oceanic uses lies,
among others, on the fact that “it provides a comprehensive regulatory regime for all
maritime matters, without being the typical framework convention so frequently
encountered in other branches of international law.”
36 In fact, the much-praised
32 Dimento and Hickman (2012), p. 80.
33 UNEP (2010), p. 5.
34 Canada is expected to bid areas for exploitation as late as early 2019, while Norway has stepped
domestic debate on how to best implement the country’s obligation to make financial contributions
to the International Seabed Authority (ISA), in line with Art. 82 UNCLOS. Information on this
regard has been obtained with Wylie Spicer and Rodrigo More, lawyers that have been engaging for
a long time in continental shelf matters.
35 On a rather sensational and tabloid tone, yet informative, see Klare (2012), pp. 20–22. According
to the magazine “Maritime Executive”, there is a growing demand for the exploitation of nonliving
resources in the continental shelf. See “Global deepwater expenditure expected to increase by
69 percent between until 2019, to reach a total of US$ 210 billion”, Maritime Executive,
April, 2015.
36 Gavouneli (2006), p. 205.
1.3 Problemfelder
9