pedagogical and systematic, allowing an enhanced academic analysis and understanding of the topic.
On the regime of the continental shelf, it has been there for approximately
60 years, since a legal theory on the continental shelf began. Prior to the 1958
CSC, there was only international practice. Since then, expected wealth has been the
main motor behind the rush for the ocean floor and for enlarged jurisdiction over
natural resources thereof. The continental shelf regime has experimented a monumental development and evolution, with few areas of the law of the sea having
developed or evolved as much as part VI UNCLOS. Other fields that have greatly
developed are the Area (Part XI) and Protection and Preservation of the Marine
Environment (Part XII). It is in the interaction between the continental shelf regime
and the regime for marine environmental protection that lies the core of this work:
the assessment of the coastal state’s environmental jurisdiction over the continental
shelf within and beyond 200 nm.
Within the very definition of continental shelf embraced at the Convention, it is
possible to observe some of the legal principles governing that maritime space.
“Sovereign rights” impersonated a tempered form of jurisdiction over the EEZ and
continental shelf, where the coastal state exercised a set of limited powers, not to
compare with the powers comprised by the attribute of sovereignty. The aim was,
thus, to uphold the overriding principle of freedom of the seas in the water column
above the continental shelf.
References
Barrett J, Barnes R (eds) (2016) Law of the sea: UNCLOS as a living treaty. British Institute of
International and Comparative Law, London
Birnie P, Boyle A, Redgwell C (2009) International law and the environment. Oxford University
Press, Oxford
Cavalcanti P (2015) Fatos do meu tempo: memórias políticas. CEPE, Recife
Crawford J (2012) Brownlie’s principles of Public International Law. Oxford University Press,
Oxford
Fischer-Lescano A, Teubner G (2004) Regime-collisions: the vain search for legal unity in the
fragmentation of global law. Mich J Int Law 25(4):999
Fraser HS (1925) Extent and delimitation of territorial waters. Cornell Law Q 11:455–480
Grotius H (2004) The free sea. Liberty Fund, Indianapolis
Harrison J (2011) Making the law of the sea: a study on the development of international law.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Jayakumar S (2013) The continental shelf regime under UNCLOS. In: The regulation of continental
shelf development: rethinking international standards. Nijhoff, Leiden, pp 1–12
Jia BB (2013) The notion of natural prolongation in the current regime of the continental shelf: an
afterlife? Chin J Int Law 12(1):79–103
Kim HJ (2014) Natural prolongation: a living myth in the regime of the continental shelf? Ocean
Dev Int Law 45(4):374–388
Kiss A (2005) Réflexions sur l’interêt general de l’humanité. In: Liber Amicorum Judge Cançado
Trindade. Sérgio Antônio Fabris Editor, Porto Alegre
44
2 The General International Legal Regime of the Continental Shelf
On the regime of the continental shelf, it has been there for approximately
60 years, since a legal theory on the continental shelf began. Prior to the 1958
CSC, there was only international practice. Since then, expected wealth has been the
main motor behind the rush for the ocean floor and for enlarged jurisdiction over
natural resources thereof. The continental shelf regime has experimented a monumental development and evolution, with few areas of the law of the sea having
developed or evolved as much as part VI UNCLOS. Other fields that have greatly
developed are the Area (Part XI) and Protection and Preservation of the Marine
Environment (Part XII). It is in the interaction between the continental shelf regime
and the regime for marine environmental protection that lies the core of this work:
the assessment of the coastal state’s environmental jurisdiction over the continental
shelf within and beyond 200 nm.
Within the very definition of continental shelf embraced at the Convention, it is
possible to observe some of the legal principles governing that maritime space.
“Sovereign rights” impersonated a tempered form of jurisdiction over the EEZ and
continental shelf, where the coastal state exercised a set of limited powers, not to
compare with the powers comprised by the attribute of sovereignty. The aim was,
thus, to uphold the overriding principle of freedom of the seas in the water column
above the continental shelf.
References
Barrett J, Barnes R (eds) (2016) Law of the sea: UNCLOS as a living treaty. British Institute of
International and Comparative Law, London
Birnie P, Boyle A, Redgwell C (2009) International law and the environment. Oxford University
Press, Oxford
Cavalcanti P (2015) Fatos do meu tempo: memórias políticas. CEPE, Recife
Crawford J (2012) Brownlie’s principles of Public International Law. Oxford University Press,
Oxford
Fischer-Lescano A, Teubner G (2004) Regime-collisions: the vain search for legal unity in the
fragmentation of global law. Mich J Int Law 25(4):999
Fraser HS (1925) Extent and delimitation of territorial waters. Cornell Law Q 11:455–480
Grotius H (2004) The free sea. Liberty Fund, Indianapolis
Harrison J (2011) Making the law of the sea: a study on the development of international law.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Jayakumar S (2013) The continental shelf regime under UNCLOS. In: The regulation of continental
shelf development: rethinking international standards. Nijhoff, Leiden, pp 1–12
Jia BB (2013) The notion of natural prolongation in the current regime of the continental shelf: an
afterlife? Chin J Int Law 12(1):79–103
Kim HJ (2014) Natural prolongation: a living myth in the regime of the continental shelf? Ocean
Dev Int Law 45(4):374–388
Kiss A (2005) Réflexions sur l’interêt general de l’humanité. In: Liber Amicorum Judge Cançado
Trindade. Sérgio Antônio Fabris Editor, Porto Alegre
44
2 The General International Legal Regime of the Continental Shelf