Chapter 11
Conclusions
Researches on the international law of the sea undertake a variety of problems and
legal issues of relevance to academics, practitioners, activists and governmental
authorities alike. Current hot topics include controversies on the negotiation of a
legally binding instrument on the protection of biodiversity beyond areas of national
jurisdiction; the reshaping of port state jurisdiction to tackle illegal, unreported and
unregulated fishing; the development of multilateral and national strategies for an
effective implementation of marine spatial planning; the drafting of an environmental management of the Area and deep-sea mining; the assessment of climate change
effects in the functioning of ocean services; the study of ocean acidification and its
consequences for populations of the globe from a legal perspective and the role of
law in tackling that phenomenon, among others. A common place in those questions
is the concern with the overall health of the marine environment and its resources.
Such a concern is at the very core of this book, the idea being to combine a
research on marine environmental law and the performance of a particular state in
that regard, Brazil. Hence, following the above-mentioned concern, this work has
grappled with two main questions that navigate at the intersection between the law of
the sea and international environmental law. Firstly, what is the material extent of
coastal states’ environmental jurisdiction—to legislate and to enforce—on the continental shelf within and beyond 200 nm? Secondly, are the Brazilian marine
environmental policies and legislation for the Blue Amazon consistent with general
international law and the law of the sea? A few key-words stand out from those two
questions, namely “coastal states”, “environmental jurisdiction”, “continental shelf”,
and “Brazil”. Such emphasis reflects an attempt to delineate the object under scrutiny
and streamline both the researching and writing, without drifting away from original
concerns.
Chapters 2 to 8 entertained the first research question, in a journey marked by the
logical progression between the above-mentioned key-words: from the international
regime applicable to the continental shelf, passing by the study of sovereignty and
jurisdiction in the law of the sea with respect to the continental shelf, then the
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to
Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
V. Alencar Mayer Feitosa Ventura, Environmental Jurisdiction in the Law of the Sea,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50543-1_11
353
Conclusions
Researches on the international law of the sea undertake a variety of problems and
legal issues of relevance to academics, practitioners, activists and governmental
authorities alike. Current hot topics include controversies on the negotiation of a
legally binding instrument on the protection of biodiversity beyond areas of national
jurisdiction; the reshaping of port state jurisdiction to tackle illegal, unreported and
unregulated fishing; the development of multilateral and national strategies for an
effective implementation of marine spatial planning; the drafting of an environmental management of the Area and deep-sea mining; the assessment of climate change
effects in the functioning of ocean services; the study of ocean acidification and its
consequences for populations of the globe from a legal perspective and the role of
law in tackling that phenomenon, among others. A common place in those questions
is the concern with the overall health of the marine environment and its resources.
Such a concern is at the very core of this book, the idea being to combine a
research on marine environmental law and the performance of a particular state in
that regard, Brazil. Hence, following the above-mentioned concern, this work has
grappled with two main questions that navigate at the intersection between the law of
the sea and international environmental law. Firstly, what is the material extent of
coastal states’ environmental jurisdiction—to legislate and to enforce—on the continental shelf within and beyond 200 nm? Secondly, are the Brazilian marine
environmental policies and legislation for the Blue Amazon consistent with general
international law and the law of the sea? A few key-words stand out from those two
questions, namely “coastal states”, “environmental jurisdiction”, “continental shelf”,
and “Brazil”. Such emphasis reflects an attempt to delineate the object under scrutiny
and streamline both the researching and writing, without drifting away from original
concerns.
Chapters 2 to 8 entertained the first research question, in a journey marked by the
logical progression between the above-mentioned key-words: from the international
regime applicable to the continental shelf, passing by the study of sovereignty and
jurisdiction in the law of the sea with respect to the continental shelf, then the
© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to
Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020
V. Alencar Mayer Feitosa Ventura, Environmental Jurisdiction in the Law of the Sea,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-50543-1_11
353