Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-42gr6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T12:42:42.225Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Arctic shipping guidelines: towards a legal regime for navigation safety and environmental protection?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2008

Øystein Jensen
Øystein Jensen*
Affiliation:
The Fridtjof Nansen Institute, P. O. Box 326, Fridtjof Nansen vei 17, 1326 Lysaker, Norway
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

With the International Polar Year (IPY) having commenced in March 2007, key issues relating to the polar regions are again in focus. This article reviews one central legal issue re-emerging in the Arctic: global regulation of safety standards for international shipping. The ‘Guidelines for ships operating in Arctic ice-covered waters’ are examined, with a view to the probable expansion of shipping in the Arctic in near future. Following an introduction to navigational issues within the Arctic context, the article describes how the guidelines came into being, and then analyses key elements and structure of the regulations and shortfalls of today's arrangements. The possible relevance of the guidelines to the Antarctic is also discussed briefly. Finally, the article inquires into the key repercussions of introducing binding regulations.

Type
Research Article
Information
Polar Record , Volume 44 , Issue 2 , April 2008 , pp. 107 - 114
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

ATCM (Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting). 1998. Final report of the 22nd ATCM in Tromsø, 25 May–5 June 1998 paras. 85–95.Google Scholar
ATCM (Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting). 2004. Final report of the 27th ATCM in Cape Town, 23 May–4 June 2004 Decision 4.Google Scholar
Brigham, L. 2000. The emerging international polar navigation code: bi-polar relevance? In: Vidas, D. (editor). Protecting the polar marine environment law and policy for pollution prevention. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 244–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Canada. 1978. Canadian Arctic shipping pollution prevention regulations. Consolidated Acts and Regulations of Canada. Chapter 356.Google Scholar
Gorman, B. 2004. Presentation by Enfotec Technical Services Inc. at the Arctic Marine Transport Workshop, 28–30 September 2004. Cambridge: Scott Polar Research Institute. (Final report published at URL: www.arctic.gov/files/AMTW_book.pdf (Editors Brigham, L. and Ellis, B.)).Google Scholar
IACS (International Association of Classification Societies). 2006. IACS Unified requirements for polar ships. URL: www.iacs.org.uk/.Google Scholar
IMO (International Maritime Organization). 1991. Document Marine Safety Committee 59/30/32. IMO 12 April 1991.Google Scholar
IMO (International Maritime Organization). 1994. Guide-lines for vessels with dynamic positioning systems. Marine Safety Committee Circular 645: 6 June 1994.Google Scholar
IMO (International Maritime Organization). 1997. Report of the Maritime Safety Committee on the 68th Session. IMO: Marine Safety Committee 68/23: 12 June 1997.Google Scholar
IMO (International Maritime Organization). 1998. International code of safety for ships in polar waters. IMO: DE 41/10, Annex 1: 3.Google Scholar
IMO (International Maritime Organization). 2002. Guidelines for ships operating in Arctic ice-covered waters. IMO Marine Safety Committee Circular 1056 and Marine Environmental Protection Committee Circular 399: 22 December 2002.Google Scholar
IMO (International Maritime Organization). 2007. Report of the Subcommittee on Ships Design and Equipment to the Marine Safety Committee on the 50th Session. IMO Document DE 50/27: 16 April 2007.Google Scholar
Kunig, P. 1992. Arctic. In: Bernhardt, R. (editor). Encyclopedia of public international law. Vol. I: 244–247.Google Scholar
Magelssen, W. 2007. Presentation by Det Norske Veritas. Lysaker: Fridtjof Nansen Institute. (Presentation at the seminar ‘Future (Trans)Arctic shipping: legal, regulatory and administrative white spots’, 10 April 2007).Google Scholar
MARPOL (International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships). 1978. Text in International Legal Materials 1973, 12: 1319ff (Convention) and International Legal Materials 1978, 17: 546ff (Protocol).Google Scholar
Memorandum of Understanding (Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control). 1982. Paris: 26 January 1982 (Reprinted in International Legal Materials 21: 1–30).Google Scholar
Molenaar, E. 2007. Port state jurisdiction: toward comprehensive, mandatory and global coverage. Ocean Development and International Law 31: 225–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scoresby, W. 1969. An account of the Arctic regions with a history and description of the northern whale-fishery. 2 vols. Newton Abbot, Devon: David and Charles (Reprint of 1820 edition).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
SOLAS (International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea). 1974. London: 1 November 1974 (Published in United Nations Treaty Series1184: 2).Google Scholar
STCW (International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers). 1978. London: 1 December 1978 (Published in British Command Papers, Cmnd. 9266, Treaty Series, No. 50, 1984).Google Scholar
Svenning, S. 2005. The international shipping community and oil transportation in the north. In: Arctic Operational Platform (ARCOP), Report of Workshop 7: 31–32. Seminar held 28–29 September 2005 in Oslo, Norway. URL: http://www.arcop.fi/workshops/ws7_presentations.htm.Google Scholar
UNCLOS (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea). 1982. UN document A/CONF, 62/122. (Reprinted in International Legal Materials 21: 1,26 l ff).Google Scholar
Valenzuela, M. 1999. Enforcing rules against vessel–source degradation of the marine environment: coastal, flag and port state jurisdiction. In: Vidas, D., and Østreng, W. (editors). Order for the oceans at the turn of the century. The Hague/London/Boston: Kluwer Law International: 485–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vidas, D. 2000. Emerging law of the sea issues in the Antarctic maritime area: a heritage for the new century? Ocean Development and International Law 31: 197–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar