![Sample our Law journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5942/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Law.jpg"})
Abstract
An emergency marine protected area (EMPA) refers to a type of area-based management tool (ABMT) designated on an interim basis with immediate effect, pending the establishment of formal marine protected areas (MPAs). The marine environment is currently under an increasing threat of abrupt extreme events. However, formal MPAs are not an ideal tool to render an emergency response owing to their time-consuming procedures for adoption and hindrance from competing interests. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and other international agreements cannot provide a comprehensive solution to combat various unforeseeable extreme events. Facing this situation, the development of an EMPA is proposed. The BBNJ Agreement includes an article providing for emergency measures in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ). It concludes that establishing EMPAs could be an effective solution to marine environmental emergencies. The new Agreement offers hope for implementing EMPAs in ABNJ. In addition, EMPAs are expected to play an important role in ecosystem recovery after climatic extreme events in a timely and flexible manner in the context of climate change.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the National Social Science Foundation of China under grant 23&ZD166.
Notes
1 The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, Section 77. A recent case of urgent designation is the Loch Carron MPA in 2017. The Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 (which applies to England and Wales) and the Marine Act (Northern Ireland) 2013 also have similar stipulations but they are rarely applied.
2 Oceans Act (S.C. 1996, c. 31) (last amended, 2019), Section 35.
3 Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999, Volume 2, Chapter 5, Part 15, Division 5—Conservation Zones.
4 CCAMLR, Conservation Measure 24-04-2017.
5 The text of the 2023 Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) is available at: https://treaties.un.org/doc/Publication/CTC/Ch_XXI_10.pdf (accessed 4 January 2024).
6 See R. Blasiak, J. Pittman, N. Yagi et al., “Negotiating the Use of Biodiversity in Marine Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction” (2016) 3 Frontier in Marine Science Article 24; R. Blasiak and N. Yagi, “Shaping an International Agreement on Marine Biodiversity Beyond Areas of National Jurisdiction: Lessons From High Seas Fisheries” (2016) 71 Marine Policy 210; N. A. Clark, “Institutional Arrangements for the New BBNJ Agreement: Moving Beyond Global, Regional, and Hybrid” (2020) 122 Marine Policy Article 104143; E. M. De Santo, “Implementation Challenges of Area-Based Management Tools (ABMTs) for Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ)” (2018) 97 Marine Policy 34; K. M. Gjerde, L. L. N. Reeve and H. Harden-Davies, “Protecting Earth’s Last Conservation Frontier: Scientific, Management and Legal Priorities for MPAs Beyond National Boundaries” (2016) 26 Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems 45; B. C. O’Leary, G. Hoppit, A. Townley et al., “Options for Managing Human Threats to High Seas Biodiversity” (2020) 187 Ocean & Coastal Management 1.
7 Duncan Currie, “Governance Principles In Practice at High Seas Alliance PrepCom1 Side Event” 2 April 2016, High Seas Alliance at: https://www.highseasalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/currie-principles-side-event.pdf (accessed 31 March 2023); De Santo, note 6, 40; K. Cremers, G. Wright, J. Rochette et al., “A Preliminary Analysis of the Draft High Seas Biodiversity Treaty” 1 January 2020, Sustainable Development & International Relations at: https://www.iddri.org/sites/default/files/PDF/Publications/Catalogue%20Iddri/Etude/202001-ST0120-high%20seas.pdf (accessed 31 March 2023); C.R. Payne, “New Law for the High Seas” (2019) 46 Ecology Law Quarterly 191, 203; E. Mendenhall, R. Tiller and E. Nyman, “The Ship Has Reached the Shore: The Final Session of the ‘Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction’ Negotiations” (2023) 155 Marine Policy article 105686, 6.
8 Governing Council of United Nations Environmental Programme, Further Improvement of Environmental Emergency Prevention, Preparedness, Assessment, Response and Mitigation: Note by the Executive Director, UN Doc UNEP/GC.22/INF/5 (2002).
9 C. Bruch, R. Nijenhuis and S. N. McClain, “International Frameworks Governing Environmental Emergency Preparedness and Response: An Assessment of Approaches” in Jacqueline Peel and David Fisher (eds), The Role of International Environmental Law in Disaster Risk Reduction (Brill | Nijhoff, 2016), 356, 378.
10 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in A Changing Climate (Cambridge University Press, 2019), 607.
11 T. L. Frölicher and C. Laufkötter, “Emerging Risks From Marine Heat Waves” (2018) 9 Nature Communications 1, 2.
12 IPCC, note 10, 610.
13 D. A. Smale, T. Wernberg, E. C. J. Oliver et al., “Marine Heatwaves Threaten Global Biodiversity and the Provision of Ecosystem Services” (2019) 9 Nature Climate Change 306, 306, 311.
14 Ibid.
15 IPCC, note 10, 624.
16 Source: https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/critical-issues-marine-habitat-destruction (accessed 1 April 2023).
17 See Third UN World Conference on Disaster Risk Reduction Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015-2030 (18 March 2015), Priority 2: Strengthening disaster risk governance to manage disaster risk, paragraph 28(b).
18 IPCC, note 10, 629.
19 D. Farber, “Navigating the Intersection of Environmental Law and Disaster Law” (2011) 2011 Brigham Young University Law Review 1783, 1794.
20 IPCC, note 10, 631.
21 See, e.g., T. Lauck, C. W. Clark, M. Mangel et al., “Implementing the Precautionary Principle in Fisheries Management Through Marine Reserves” (1998) 8 Ecological Applications S72; M. Mangel, “On the Fraction of Habitat Allocated to Marine Reserves” (2000) 3 Ecology Letters 15; G. W. Allison, S. D. Gaines, J. Lubchenco et al., “Ensuring Persistence of Marine Reserves: Catastrophes Require Adopting an Insurance Factor” (2003) 13 Ecological Applications 8; J. M. West and R. V. Salm, “Resistance and Resilience to Coral Bleaching: Implications for Coral Reef Conservation and Management” (2003) 17 Conservation Biology 956; E. T. Game, M. E. Watts, S. Wooldridge et al., “Planning for Persistence in Marine Reserves: A Question of Catastrophic Importance” (2008) 18 Ecological Applications 670; E. McLeod, R. Salm, A. Green et al., “Designing Marine Protected Area Networks to Address the Impacts of Climate Change” (2009) 7 Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 362; S. D. Gaines, C. White, M. H. Carr et al., “Designing Marine Reserve Networks for Both Conservation and Fisheries Management” (2010) 107 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 18286; E. A. Aalto, F. Micheli, C. A. Boch et al., “Catastrophic Mortality, Allee Effects, and Marine Protected Areas” (2019) 193 American Naturalist 391; J. C. Mendoza, S. Clemente and J. C. Hernández, “Modeling the Role of Marine Protected Areas on the Recovery of Shallow Rocky Reef Ecosystem After a Catastrophic Submarine Volcanic Eruption” (2020) 155 Marine Environmental Research 104877.
22 K. E. Smith, M. T. Burrows, A. J. Hobday et al., “Socioeconomic Impacts of Marine Heatwaves: Global Issues and Opportunities” (2021) 374 (6566) Science eabj3593, 9.
23 A. E. Bates, R. S. C. Cooke, M. I. Duncan et al., “Climate Resilience in Marine Protected Areas and the ‘Protection Paradox’” (2019) 236 Biological Conservation 305, 311.
24 Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, adopted 20 May 1980, entered into force 7 April 1982, 1932 UNTS 47 [hereinafter, CAMLR Convention].
25 Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic, adopted 22 September 1992, entered into force 25 March 1998, 2354 UNTS 67 [hereinafter, OSPAR Convention].
26 D. Smith and J. Jabour, “MPAs in ABNJ: Lessons From Two High Seas Regimes” (2018) 75 ICES Journal of Marine Science 417, 418-422; B. C. O’Leary, R. L. Brown, D. E. Johnson et al., “The First Network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in the High Seas: The Process, the Challenges and Where Next” (2012) 36 Marine Policy 598, 599–600; J. A. Nilsson, E. A. Fulton, M. Haward et al., “Consensus Management in Antarctica’s High Seas—Past Success and Current Challenges” (2016) 73 Marine Policy 172, 177.
27 N. Dudley (ed), Guidelines for Applying Protected Area Management Categories (IUCN, 2008), 8.
28 Ibid, 9.
29 For example, the National Marine Sanctuary Act 2000 of the United States, when designating the interim Northwestern Hawaiian Islands Coral Reef Reserve, provides that “notwithstanding any other provision of law, no closure areas around the Northwestern Hawaiian Islands shall become permanent without adequate review and comment.” See National Marine Sanctuaries Amendments Act of 2000, 16 U.S.C. § 1434.
30 B. Lausche, Guidelines for Protected Areas Legislation (IUCN, 2011), 17–18.
31 Ibid, 34.
32 General outline of roadmap for further work on the Charlie Gibbs Fracture Zone (CGFZ)/Mid Atlantic Ridge proposal 2008/09, OSPAR 08/24/1-E, Annex 10, 23–27 June 2008.
33 See OSPAR 08/24/1-E, 23-27 June 2008 [7.24].
34 For details, see OSPAR 18/20/1-E, annex 10, 25–29 June 2018.
35 O’Leary, Brown, Johnson et al., note 26, 598.
36 Ibid, 599.
37 General consultation procedures for establishing Marine Protected Areas in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction of the OSPAR Maritime Area, OSPAR Agreement 2019-09.
38 Summary Record OSPAR 2017, [6.19].
39 OSPAR Decision 2021/1 on the establishment of the North Atlantic Current and Evlanov Sea basin Marine Protected Area, OSPAR 21/13/1, Annex 23, 27 Sept.–1 Oct. 2021.
40 Lausche, note 30, 256.
41 M. N. Shaw, International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2021), 389.
42 CCAMLR, Conservation Measure 91-04 (2011).
43 CAMLR Convention, Art 12; CCAMLR, Conservation Measure 91-04 (2011) [3].
44 Nilsson, Fulton, Haward et al., note 26, 177.
45 L. Goldsworthy, “Consensus Decision-Making in CCAMLR: Achilles’ Heel or Fundamental to Its Success?” (2022) 22 International Environmental Agreements: Politics, Law and Economics 411, 412.
46 FAO, The State of World Fisheries and Aquaculture 2022: Towards Blue Transformation (FAO, 2022), 21.
47 N. B. Gardiner, “Marine Protected Areas in the Southern Ocean: Is the Antarctic Treaty System Ready to Co-Exist with a New United Nations Instrument for Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction?” (2020) 122 Marine Policy article 104212, 5.
48 K. N. Scott, “MPAs in the Southern Ocean under CCAMLR: Implementing SDG 14.5” (2021) 9 Korean Journal of International and Comparative Law 84, 89–90.
49 Smith and Jabour, note 26, 419–420.
50 Ibid, 419.
51 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, adopted 10 December 1982, entered into force 16 November 1994, 1833 UNTS 397 [hereinafter, UNCLOS].
52 T. Stephens, “Article 198 Notification of Imminent or Actual Damage” in A. Proelss, A. R. Maggio, E. Blitza et al. (eds), United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: A Commentary (Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 2017), 1334.
53 UNCLOS, Arts 162(2)(w) and 165(2)(k).
54 UNCLOS, Arts 290(1) and 290(5).
55 T. Treves, “Article 290 Provisional Measures” in A. Proelss, A. R. Maggio, E. Blitza et al. (eds), United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: A Commentary (Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 2017), 1866, 1873.
56 Bruch, Nijenhuis and McClain, note 9, 356.
57 P. W. Birnie, A. E. Boyle and C. Redgwell, International Law and the Environment (Oxford University Press, 2019), 380.
58 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 adopted 2 November 1973, entered into force 2 October 1983, 12 ILM 1319.
59 International Convention on oil pollution preparedness, response and cooperation, adopted 30 November 1990, entered into force 13 May 1995, 1891 UNTS 77.
60 E. Anyanova, “Oil Pollution and International Marine Environmental Law” in S. Curkovic (eds), Sustainable Development—Authoritative and Leading Edge Content for Environmental Management (IntechOpen, 2012), 29, 35; J. C. Sainlos, “The International Maritime Organization and the Protection of the Marine Environment” in D. Vidas and P. J. Schei (eds), The World Ocean in Globalisation: Climate Change, Sustainable Fisheries, Biodiversity, Shipping, Regional Issues (Leiden: Martinus Nijhoff, 2011), 321, 339–340.
61 For example, Protocol concerning co-operation in combating pollution of the Mediterranean Sea by oil and other harmful substances in cases of emergency, adopted 16 February 1976, entered into force 12 February 1978, 1102 UNTS 122; Agreement on regional co-operation in combating pollution of the South-East Pacific by oil and other harmful substances in cases of emergency, adopted 12 November 1981, entered into force 14 July 1986, 1648 UNTS 35; Protocol concerning Co-operation in Combating Pollution Emergencies in the South Pacific Region, adopted 25 November 1986, entered into force 22 August 1990; Protocol concerning Co-operation in Combating Pollution Emergencies in the South Pacific Region, adopted 23 March 1982, entered into force 5 August 1984.
62 For example, Convention on Early Notification of a Nuclear Accident, adopted 26 September 1986, entered into force 27 October 1986, 1439 UNTS 275; Convention on Assistance in the Case of a Nuclear Accident or Radiological Emergency, adopted 26 September 1986, entered into force 26 February 1987, 1457 UNTS 133; International Atomic Energy Agency, Safety Standards Series No. GSR Part 7, Preparedness and Response for a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency (2015); International Atomic Energy Agency, Safety Standards Series No. GSG-2, Criteria for Use in Preparedness and Response for a Nuclear or Radiological Emergency (2011).
63 Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks, adopted 4 August 1995, entered into force 11 December 2001, 2167 UNTS 3 [hereinafter, FSA].
64 Convention on the Conservation and Management of High Seas Fishery Resources in the South Pacific Ocean, adopted 14 November 2009, entered into force 24 September 2012, 2899 UNTS 211 [hereinafter, SPRFMO Convention].
65 Convention for the conservation of salmon in the North Atlantic Ocean, adopted 2 March 1982, entered into force 1 October 1983, 1338 UNTS 33.
66 Convention on the Conservation and Management of Highly Migratory Fish Stocks in the Western and Central Pacific Ocean, adopted 5 September 2000, entered into force 19 June 2004, 2275 UNTS 43.
67 Article 4 of Resolution 12/01: “If an unanticipated event, such as a natural phenomenon has a significant adverse impact on the status of a stock or its associated environment, the Commission shall adopt Conservation and Management Measures on an emergency basis to ensure that fishing activity does not exacerbate such adverse impacts.”
68 United Nations Secretary General, Gaps in International Environmental Law and Environment-Related Instruments: Towards a Global Pact for the Environment: Report of the Secretary General to the General Assembly, UN Doc A/73/419* (2018), 1.
69 J. Peel and D. Fisher, “International Law at the Intersection of Environmental Protection and Disaster Risk Reduction” in Jacqueline Peel and David Fisher (eds), The Role of International Environmental Law in Disaster Risk Reduction (Brill | Nijhoff, 2016), 1, 7.
70 UN Environment and OCHA Joint Unit, “Integration of Environmental Emergencies in Preparedness and Contingency Planning” April 2013, Environmental Emergencies Centre at: https://resources.eecentre.org/resources/un-environment-ocha-joint-unit-integration-of-environmental-emergencies-in-preparedness-and-contingency-planning (accessed on 18 June 2023).
71 R. Nijenhuis and C. Bruch, “Brief 6: Environmental Emergencies: Challenges and Lessons for International Environmental Governance” 1 June 2012, ScholarWorks at UMass Boston at: https://scholarworks.umb.edu/cgs_issue_brief_series/6 (accessed 18 June 2023).
72 T. Ginsburg and M. Versteeg, “States of Emergencies: Part 1” 17 April 2022, Harvard Law Review at: https://blog.harvardlawreview.org/states-of-emergencies-part-i (accessed 18 June 2023).
73 C. Chitty, S. Rosenne, L. B. Sohn et al., United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, 1982: A Commentary, Volume V (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, 1989), 57–58.
74 The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, Section 77(1)(a).
75 Oceans Act 1996 (S.C. 1996, c. 31) (last amended, 2019), Section 35(1)(4).
76 J. Patterson, C. Wyborn, L. Westman et al., “The Political Effects of Emergency Frames in Sustainability” (2021) 4 Nature Sustainability 841, 848.
77 Rules of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, Arts 89–95; Rules of Procedure of the Council of the International Seabed Authority, Rules 6, 13.
78 J. Peel, “Changing Conceptions of Environmental Risk” in J. E. Viñuales (ed), The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development: A Commentary (Oxford University Press, 2015), 75, 79.
79 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, adopted June 14 1992, 31 ILM 874, Principle 15 [hereinafter, Rio Declaration].
80 Southern Bluefin Tuna Cases (New Zealand/Japan; Australia/Japan), Provisional Measures, Order, ITLOS Reports 1999 p. 280 [hereinafter, Southern Bluefin Tuna Case].
81 Ibid, p. 296, [79–80].
82 Southern Bluefin Tuna Case, Separate opinion of Judge ad hoc Shearer, ITLOS Reports 1999, p. 327. See also Responsibilities and obligations of States sponsoring persons and entities with respect to activities in the Area, Advisory Opinion, ITLOS Reports 2011, p. 46–47, [132] [hereinafter, Advisory Opinion of Seabed Disputes Chamber].
83 FSA, Art 6; SPRFMO Convention, Art 20.
84 Advisory Opinion of Seabed Disputes Chamber, Advisory Opinion, note 82, p. 47, [135].
85 CCAMLR, Conservation Measure 91-04 (2011), Art 3: “The Commission shall establish CCAMLR MPAs following advice from the Scientific Committee by adopting conservation measures in accordance with this measure.” Also, Article 12 of the CAMLR Convention provides that “decisions of the Commission on matters of substance shall be taken by consensus.”
86 CCAMLR, Conservation Measure 24-04-2017, [5].
87 N. de Sadeleer, Environmental Law Principles from Political Slogans to Legal Rules (Oxford University Press, 2020), 135.
88 J. Stacey, “The Public Law Paradoxes of Climate Emergency Declarations” (2022) 11 Transnational Environmental Law 291, 300.
89 N. Osborne and A. Carlson, “Against a Nation State of Emergency: How Climate Emergency Politics Can Undermine Climate Justice” (2013) 2 npj Climate Action 1, 1–11.
90 D. Bodansky, “Law: Scientific Uncertainty and the Precautionary Principle” (1991) 33 Environment: Science and Policy for Sustainable Development 4, 5.
91 C. K. Judging, “‘Best Available Science’: Emerging Issues and the Role of Experts” (2018) 9 Journal of International Dispute Settlement 388, 388.
92 FSA and SPRFMO Convention both use “best scientific evidence available” in their Article 6(7) and Article 20(5), respectively.
93 J. Wakefield, Reforming the Common Fisheries Policy (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2016), 78–79.
94 For example, in the commentary to Article 17 “Notification of an emergency” of the Draft articles on Prevention of Transboundary Harm from Hazardous Activities, the International Law Commission (ILC) states that the seriousness of the harm involved together with the suddenness of the emergency’s occurrence justifies the measures required. See Draft Article on Prevention of Transboundary Harm from Hazardous Activities, with commentaries (2001), II Yearbook of the International Law Commission (2001), Part Two, Art 2 and its commentaries, 169.
95 K. Loevy, Emergencies in Public Law: The Legal Politics of Containment (Cambridge University Press, 2016), 218.
96 Ibid.
97 R. Wolfrum, “Provisional Measures: International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS)” May 2019, Max Planck Encyclopedias of International Procedural Law at: https://opil.ouplaw.com/display/10.1093/law-mpeipro/e3507.013.3507/law-mpeipro-e3507 (accessed 12 January 2024), [27].
98 M/V “Saiga” (No. 2) Case (Saint Vincent and the Grenadines/Guinea), Provisional Measures, Separate Opinion of Judge Laing, ITLOS Reports 1998, p. 61, [26].
99 Passage through the Great Belt (Finland/Denmark), Provisional Measures, Provisional Measures, Order, I.C.J. Reports 1991, p. 17, [23].
100 Southern Bluefin Tuna Case, note 80, p. 295, [63]; R. Wolfrum, note 97, [16].
101 H. Yang, “1982 Law of the Sea Convention: Dispute Settlement Procedures for Foreign Merchant Ships” (2005) 20 International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 117, 128.
102 J. Barboza, Sixth Report on International Liability for Injurious Consequences Arising out of Acts not Prohibited by International Law, March 15, 1990, UN Doc. A/CN.4/428, 41; H. Xue, Transboundary Damage in International Law (Cambridge University Press, 2003), 8.
103 Draft Article on Prevention of Transboundary Harm from Hazardous Activities, with commentaries (2001), II Yearbook of the International Law Commission (2001), Part Two, Art 2 and its commentaries, 148.
104 Ibid, 152.
105 Ibid.
106 ISA, Regulations on Prospecting and Exploration for Polymetallic Nodules in the Area, UN Doc ISBA/6/A/18 (2000); ISA, Regulations on Prospecting and Exploration for Polymetallic Sulphides in the Area, UN Doc ISBA/16/A/12/Rev.1 (2010), as amended by ISBA/19/A/12, 25 July 2013 and ISBA/20/A/10, 24 July 2014; ISA, Regulations on Prospecting and Exploration for Cobalt-rich Ferromanganese Crusts in the Area, UN Doc ISBA/18/A/11 (2012), as amended by ISBA/19/A/12, 25 July 2013.
107 L. A. Levin, K. Mengerink, K. M. Gjerde et al., “Defining ‘Serious Harm’ to the Marine Environment in the Context of Deep-Seabed Mining” (2016) 74 Marine Policy 245, 248.
108 K. Sachariew, “The Definition of Thresholds of Tolerance for Transboundary Environmental Injury Under International Law: Development and Present Status” (1990) 37 Netherlands International Law Review 193, 196.
109 R. Churchill and V. Lowe, The Law of the Sea (Juris Publishing, Inc., 1999), 206.
110 Chagos Marine Protected Area Arbitration (Mauritius/United Kingdom), Award, 31 R.I.A.A 359, 571–572, [519].
111 Ibid.
112 International Convention relating to intervention on the high seas in cases of oil pollution casualties, adopted 29 November 1969, entered into force 6 May 1975, 970 UNTS 211.
113 Birnie, Boyle and Redgwell, note 57, 426; International Convention on Salvage, 1989, adopted 28 April 1989, entered into force 14 July 1996, 1953 UNTS 165.
114 J. B. Wiener, “Precautionary Principle” in Michael Faure (ed), Encyclopedia of Environmental Law: Volume VI (Edward Elgar Publishing, Inc., 2018), 174, 182.
115 SPRFMO Convention, Art 20.5(b).
116 The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, Section 77.1(b).
117 United Nations Meetings Coverage, “‘The Ship Has Reached the Shore’, President Announces, as Intergovernmental Conference Concludes Historic New Maritime Biodiversity Treaty” 3 March 2023, United Nations at: https://press.un.org/en/2023/sea2175.doc.htm (accessed 12 January 2024).
118 For example, the High Seas Alliance (HSA) submitted its suggestion for emergency measures and interim measures as an institutional arrangement in March 2016; see NRDC, “High Seas Alliance Suggestions for Consideration by the Preparatory Committee” March 2016, High Seas Alliance at: https://www.highseasalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/HSASubmissiontoPrepComNRDCfinal.pdf (accessed on 18 June 2023); Greenpeace also proposed responsive measures or emergency measures twice for consideration; for responsive measures, see Greenpeace, “Ten Steps to Marine Protection: Greenpeace’s recommendations on the identification, designation, management and enforcement of marine protected areas and marine reserves in areas beyond national jurisdiction under the new UN Ocean Agreement” at: https://www.un.org/depts/los/biodiversity/prepcom_files/greenpeace2.pdf (accessed on 18 June 2023); for emergency measures, see Greenpeace, “Options for Legal Text on a process for the designation and implementation of a representative network of Marine Protected Areas, including Marine Reserves in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction under the new Instrument: Greenpeace’s rolling submission to the Third Session of the Preparatory Process (PrepCom 3)” March 2017 at: https://www.un.org/depts/los/biodiversity/prepcom_files/rolling_comp/greenpeace3.pdf (accessed on 18 June 2023).
119 In IGC-1, Papua New Guinea called for interim measures, given the potential lengthy MPA establishment process; HSA suggested emergency measures; the Federated States of Micronesia suggested temporary ABMTs in contrast to permanent ones. See E. Morgera, A. Appleton, D. Diz et al., “Summary of the First Session of the Intergovernmental Conference on an International Legally Binding Instrument under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: 4–17 September 2018” (2018) 25(No.179) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 1, 8–16. In IGC-2, “interim measures for areas under review in case a two-step designation process is selected” were discussed. See IISD, “Daily report for 28 March 2019” 28 March 2019 Earth Negotiations Bulletin at: https://enb.iisd.org/events/2nd-session-intergovernmental-conference-igc-conservation-and-sustainable-use-marine/daily-5 (accessed 12 January 2024). During IGC-3, New Zealand, supported by IUCN and the HSA, proposed a provision on emergency or interim measures. See IISD, “Daily report for 28 August 2019” 28 August 2019, Earth Negotiations Bulletin at: https://enb.iisd.org/events/3rd-session-intergovernmental-conference-igc-conservation-and-sustainable-use-marine/daily-0 (accessed 12 January 2024). No evidence shows that IGC-4 discussed the emergency or interim measures.
120 Draft text of an agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, A/CONF.232/2019/6, 17 May 2019.
121 Revised draft text of an agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, A/CONF.232/2020/3, 18 November 2019.
122 Further revised draft text of an agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, A/CONF.232/2022/5, 1 June 2022 [hereinafter, Third Draft].
123 T. Kantai, N. Schabus, A. Tsioumanis et al., “Summary of the Fifth Session of the Intergovernmental Conference on an International Legally Binding Instrument under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: 15–26 August 2022” (2022) 25(No. 240) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 1, 6; T. Kantai, M. Ovalle, N. Schabus et al., “Summary of the Resumed Fifth Session of the Intergovernmental Conference on an International Legally Binding Instrument under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: 20 February–4 March 2023” (2023) 25(No. 250) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 1, 8.
124 Kantai, Schabus, Tsioumanis et al., note 123, 6.
125 Third Draft, Art 48(6).
126 IISD, “Daily report for 19 August 2022” 19 August 2022, Earth Negotiations Bulletin at: https://enb.iisd.org/marine-biodiversity-beyond-national-jurisdiction-bbnj-igc5-daily-report-19aug2022 (accessed 12 January 2024).
127 Ibid.
128 Ibid.
129 Further refreshed draft text of an agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, A/CONF.232/2023/2, 12 December 2022 [hereinafter, Fourth Draft].
130 IISD, “Daily report for 22 February 2023” 22 February 2023, Earth Negotiations Bulletin at: https://enb.iisd.org/marine-biodiversity-beyond-national-jurisdiction-bbnj-igc5-resumed-daily-report-22feb2022 (accessed on 12 January 2024).
131 “Facilitator, 1 March 2023: Plenary Report Back on ABMTs” 1 March 2023, TreatyTracker at: https://highseasalliance.org/treatytracker/statements/facilitator-1-march-2023-plenary-report-back-on-abmts (accessed 18 June 2023).
132 FSA, Art 6(7); SPRFMO Convention, Art 20(5).
133 Third Draft, Art 48(6).
134 IISD, note 126.
135 Fourth Draft, Art 20 ante, Paragraph 1.
136 BBNJ Agreement, Art 24(1).
137 Mendenhall, Tiller and Nyman, note 7, 6.
138 BBNJ Agreement, Art 24(2); IISD, note 126.
139 Personal notes of the authors.
140 BBNJ Agreement, Art 24(3).
141 Fourth Draft, Art 20 ante, Paragraph (b).
142 Article 5 of the BBNJ Agreement provides that “this Agreement shall be interpreted and applied in a manner that does not undermine relevant legal instruments and frameworks and relevant global, regional, subregional and sectoral bodies and that promotes coherence and coordination with those instruments, frameworks and bodies.”
143 BBNJ Agreement, Art 24(3).
144 J. Lenoir, R. Bertrand, L. Comte et al., “Species Better Track Climate Warming in the Oceans Than on Land” (2020) 4 Nature Ecology & Evolution 1044, 1044; R. A. Hastings, L. A. Rutterford, J. J. Freer et al., “Climate Change Drives Poleward Increases and Equatorward Declines in Marine Species” (2020) 30 Current Biology 1572, 1572.
145 Kantai, Ovalle, Schabus et al., note 123, 3.
146 P. Sandin, “Dimensions of the Precautionary Principle” (1999) 5 Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal 889, 892.
147 Ibid.
148 IISD, “Daily report for 24 February 2023” 24 February 2023, Earth Negotiations Bulletin at: https://enb.iisd.org/marine-biodiversity-beyond-national-jurisdiction-bbnj-igc5-resumed-daily-report-24feb2022 (accessed 12 January 2024).
149 BBNJ Agreement, Art 24(1).
150 BBNJ Agreement, Art 23.
151 The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010, Section 77(2); Oceans Act (S.C. 1996, c. 31) (last amended 2019), Section 35(3)(1).
152 “Facilitator, 23 February 2023: Plenary Report Back on ABMTs” 3 February 2023, TreatyTracker at: https://highseasalliance.org/treatytracker/statements/facilitator-23-february-2023-plenary-report-back-on-abmts (accessed 18 June 2023).
153 IPCC, note 10, 611–612.
154 IPCC, Longer Report of Climate Change 2023 (2023), 34, 63.
155 See C. M. Roberts, B. C. O’Leary, D. J. McCauley et al., “Marine Reserves Can Mitigate and Promote Adaptation to Climate Change” (2017) 114 Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 6167, 6170.
156 BBNJ Agreement, Art 1(9).
157 United Nations, World Ocean Assessment II: Volume I (United Nations publication, 2021), 188-189.
158 R. M. Freedman, J. A. Brown, C. Caldow et al., “Marine Protected Areas Do Not Prevent Marine Heatwave-Induced Fish Community Structure Changes in a Temperate Transition Zone” (2020) 10 Scientific Reports 1, 5.
159 A. E. Bates, R. S. C. Cooke, M. I. Duncan et al., “Climate Resilience in Marine Protected Areas and the ‘Protection Paradox,’” (2019) 236 Biological Conservation 305, 305.