The Environmental North Sea Regime: A Successful Regional Approach?

in Ocean Yearbook Online
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?

Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.


Have Institutional Access?

Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?


The Environmental North Sea Regime: A Successful Regional Approach?

in Ocean Yearbook Online


1. Peter Hayward, "Environmental Protection: Regional Approaches," Marine Policy, 8, no. 2 (April 1984): 107. 2. See The Law of the Sea: Official Text of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea with Annexes and Index (New York: United Nations, 1983), Sales No. E.83.v.5 (and hereinafter cited as the 1982 Convention, or simply the Convention). This ques- tion is discussed by Jan Schneider, "Protection and Preservation of the Marine Envi- ronment: What Is New about the Law of the Sea Convention?" in The 1982 Convention on the Law of the Sea, ed. A. Koers and B. Oxman, Proceedings of the Law of the Sea Institute, seventeenth annual conference (Honolulu: University of Hawaii at Manoa, Law of the Sea Institute, 1984), pp. 567-74. 3. 1982 Convention, preamble.

4. World Commission on Environment and Development, Our Common Future (New York: United Nations, 1987). 5. Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area (Helsinki Convention; signed March 24, 1974, and entered into force May 1980); and Gerhard Peet, "Sea Use Management for the North Sea," in The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea: Impact and Implementation, ed. E. Brown and R. Churchill, Proceed- ings of The Law of the Sea Institute, nineteenth annual conference (Honolulu: Uni- versity of Hawaii at Manoa, Law of the Sea Institute, 1987), p. 430. 6. Editors' note.-See Adalberto Vallega, "A Human Approach to Semienclosed Seas: The Mediterranean Case," Ocean Yearbook 7, ed. Elisabeth Mann Borgese, Nor- ton Ginsburg, and Joseph R. Morgan (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988), pp. 372-93, and see nn. 8, 13, and 15 for references to the UNEP and other programs that have been instigated to better integrate development and management of the Mediter- ranean Basin. See also "Symposium on Marine Co-operation in the Mediterranean Sea, Third Tunis Declaration, 28 November 1986," Ocean Yearbook 7, pp. 534-36.

7. Sunneva Saetevik, Environmental Cooperation between the North Sea States (Lon- don: Belhaven Press, 1988), p. 9. 8. Second International Conference on the Protection of the North Sea, Scientific and Technical Working Group, Quality Status of the North Sea, Summary (London: De- partment of the Environment, September 1987), p. 5. 9. Brit Fløistad, Conflicting Usage of the North Sea (Lysaker, Norway: Fridtjof Nan- sen Institute, 1988), pp. 2-5.

10. Hayward (n. 1 above), p. 106. 11. Editors' note.-For more information about the Oslo Convention, see "Ex- cerpts from the ACOPS Annual Report 1982," Ocean Yearbook 5, ed. Elisabeth Mann Borgese and Norton Ginsburg (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985), pp. 294- 304, esp. at pp. 296-97. 12. Hayward, pp. 110-11. 13. Editors' note.-For more information about the Paris Convention, see "Ex- cerpts from the ACOPS Annual Report 1982," pp. 297-98.

14. For a list of when the different countries ratified, see Saetevik, p. 32. 15. Annex I to the Convention list the substances on the "grey" list while the "black"-listed substances can be found in Annex II. 16. The Oslo Commission has a Standing Advisory Committee for Scientific Advice (SACSA), and the Paris Commission has a Technical Working Group (TWG). A Joint Monitoring Group ( JMG) provides information to both Commissions. 17. The secretariat is small-one secretary, two deputy secretaries, and three clerks-and yet it is considered very efficient, especially taking into account its limited resources. See Saetevik (n. 7 above), p. 117.

18. Sonia Boehmer-Christiansen, "Marine Pollution Control in Europe: Regional Approaches, 1972-80," Marine Policy 8, no. 1 (January 1984): 45-52. 19. The background for the First North Sea Conference is discussed by Gerhard Peet, "The North Sea Conference: A Preview," Marine Policy 8, no. 3 (July 1984): 259- 71. 20. Peet, "Sea Use Management for the North Sea" (n. 5 above), p. 432.

21. An extensive study of the Paris Commission has been done by Saetevik. Boehmer-Christiansen has done a comparative analysis of marine pollution control in Europe in the 1970s. More studies have been made of the legal obligations following from the different conventions applying to the North Sea. See, e.g., P. Fotheringham and P. W. Birnie, "Regulation of North Sea Marine Pollution," in The Effective Manage- ment of Resources, ed. C. Mason (London, 1979), pp. 168-223. 22. Oran Young, Resources Regimes: Natural Resources and Social Institutions (Los Angeles and Berkeley: University of California Press, 1982), p. 136. 23. Quality Status of the North Sea, Summary (n. 8 above), p. 7.

24. Boehmer-Christiansen, p. 45. 25. Oslo and Paris Commissions, The First Decade: International Co-operation in Protecting Our Marine Environment (London: Oslo and Paris Commissions, 1984), p. 36. 26. The difficulties of using "failure" and "success" as measurement criteria dur- ing international negotiations is discussed by Arild Underdal, "Causes of Negotiating Failure," Internasjonal politikk (1984): 81-97. 27. Boehmer-Christiansen, p. 46.

28. K. Sperling, "Protection of the North Sea: Balance and Prospects," Marine Pollution Bulletin 17, no. 6 (June 1986): 242. 29. Oslo and the Paris Commissions, p. 372. 30. Ibid., p. 39. 31. The assumptions vary, but most pollutants entering the sea-as much as 80%-originate from land or from the atmosphere; both are covered by the Paris Commission. 32. Saetevik (n. 7 above), p. 43.

33. Boehmer-Christiansen (n. 18 above), p. 49. 34. Saetevik, pp. 42-52. 35. For an elaboration of this point, see Arild Underdal, The Politics of Interna- tional Fisheries Management: The Cause of the North East Atlantic (Oslo: Universitetsfor- laget, 1980). 36. "Tough North Sea Deal, but Sewage Slips Through," New Scientist (December 3, 1987), p. 3.

37. Environmental Data Services, Ltd. (ENDS), UK's Defensive Efforts Pay Off at North Sea Conference, Report 118 (November 1984). Author's note.-Environmental Data Services, Ltd. (ENDS), Unit 24, Finsbury Business Centre, 40 Bowling Green Lane, London, England. Their publications are printed by Southwell Press, Camberly, Surrey, England. 38. Environmental Data Services Ltd, Opening Skirmishes on Health of North Sea, Report 141 (October 1986). 39. Steinar Andresen, "A Comprehensive North Sea Convention: New Ap- proach-Old Policy?" in The Status of the North Sea Environment: Reasons for Concern, ed. Gerhard Peet, Proceedings of the 2d North Sea Seminar 1986 (Amsterdam: Werkgroep Nordzee, 1987). 40. Peet, "The North Sea Conference" (n. 19 above), p. 262. 41. Konrad von Moltke, "International Commissions and Implementation of In- ternational Environmental Law," International Environmental Diplomacy, ed. John E. Carroll (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), pp. 87-95.

42. This question is discussed by Folkert de Jung, "The Second Ministerial Con- ference on the Protection of the North Sea: An Historic Event? North Sea Monitor (January 1988), pp. 2-4. 43. Ministerial Declaration (London, November 1987), Art. 16, No. 2. 44. Ibid., Art. 16, No. 11. 45. Ibid., Art. 16, No. 21. 46. Ibid., Art. 16, No. 22(a). 47. Ibid., Art. 16, No. 24(b) and (c). 48. Ibid., Art. 16, No. 22(b) and (c).

49. Quality Status of the North Sea, Summary (n. 8 above), p. 6. 50. Ibid. 51. Ibid., p. 7.

52. The "free-rider" problem has been clearly illustrated in connection with the role of Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) and non-OPEC mem- bers concerning the prices of oil. The strong increase of oil prices in the 1970s was, at least in part, a result of the dominant role played by OPEC. However, countries like the United Kingdom and Norway have also benefited from the price hike without being OPEC members; they were "free-riders."

53. The analysis by de Jung (n. 42 above) points to several "loopholes" in the Declaration. 54. Ibid., p. 2. 55. Britain Calls for Task Force to Model North Sea Pollution," New Scientist (November 26, 1987), p. 26.

56. Ministerial Declaration, Art. 7. 57. New Scientist (December 3, 1987), p. 3. 58. Ibid. 59. Ministerial Declaration, Art. 16, no. 38 (n. 44 above). 60. De Jung, in his analysis of the London Conference, claims that it will have no effect. Norwegian officials, however, appear to believe that the "sharpening" in the text may have an impact. 61. Quality Status of the North Sea, Summary (n. 8 above), p. 5.

62. Saetevik (n. 7 above), pp. 52-67, discusses the perceptions of the North Sea countries as to which countries are exporters and which are importers of land-based pollution. 63. This view on the role of the EEC, Belgium, and France has been expressed by Norwegian and Dutch officials involved in the North Sea environmental regime. To a large extent it is supported by the studies made by Boehmer-Christiansen and Saetevik. See, e.g., Saetevik, pp. 68-74. 64. Quality Status of the North Sea, Summary, p. 1. 65. Ibid.

66. jorgen Wettestad, "The Outcome of the 1987 North Sea Conference. Science Counts, but Politics Decides?" International Challenges 8, no. 2 (1988): 33. 67. Ibid., p. 34. 68. jorgen Wettestad, "Science, Politics and Ocean Pollution: Explaining the Outcome of the 1987 North Sea Conference," International Challenges 8, no. 3 (1988): 26-32. 69. Ibid. 70. Ibid.

Index Card

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 12 12 2
Full Text Views 3 3 3
PDF Downloads 0 0 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0