THE USE OF IMO INSTRUMENTS IN THE PROTECTION … · AREAS AND SPECIES FROM INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING...
Transcript of THE USE OF IMO INSTRUMENTS IN THE PROTECTION … · AREAS AND SPECIES FROM INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING...
THE USE OF IMO INSTRUMENTS IN THE PROTECTION OF SENSITIVE MARINE
AREAS AND SPECIES FROM INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING IMPACTS
ALDO CHIRCOPCANADA RESEARCH CHAIR IN MARITIME LAW & POLICY
SCHULICH SCHOOL OF LAW, DALHOUSIE UNIVERSITY
PRESENTED AT INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON HIGH SEAS GOVERNANCE: GAPS AND CHALLENGES, SINGAPORE, 24-25 APRIL 2017
(c) Chircop 2017
1
OUTLINE
1. Introduction
2. MARPOL special areas
3. PSSAs
4. Application to high seas?
5. Conclusion
(c) Chircop 2017 2
1. INTRODUCTION
• IMO and sustainable shipping:
• Vessel marine pollution prevention (oil, noxious liquids, sewage, garbage, anti-fouling systems, responsible management)
• Vessel air pollution prevention (NOx, SOx, PM, GHGs)
• Vessel impacts (sensitive areas, exotics, biofouling, mammal strikes, noise)
• Others (ship recycling, salvage, places of refuge, preparedness and response)
• Focus:
• Area-based management tools:
• MARPOL special areas
• Particularly sensitive sea areas (PSSAs) & associated protective measures (APMs)
• Applications to high sea areas
(c) Chircop 2017
3
2. MARPOL SPECIAL AREASStatus of convention
Instrument Year
Adopted
Year in
Force
Years to
Force
State
Parties
Global
Tonnage
MARPOL Convention/
Protocol
17/02/1978 02/10/83 6 154 99.15%
Annexes I & II 17/02/1978 02/10/83 6 154 99.15%
Annex III 17/02/1978 01/07/92 14 146 98.55%
Annex IV 17/02/1978 27/09/03 25 138 91.42%
Annex V 17/02/1978 31/12/88 10 151 98.73%
Protocol 1997/Annex VI 26/09/1997 19/05/05 8 87 96.14%
(c) Chircop 2017
4
Context of special areas: MARPOL’s regulatory scope
• Global, universal standards and ‘no more favourable treatment’
• Largely functional, rather than spatial (‘ships’ on international voyages)
• Layered approach to regulation: some areas receive higher protection (zero discharges or very low concentrations)
• Primary role of flag State; roles for port and coastal States
• Provision of port reception facilities for wastes
(c) Chircop 2017
5
Definitions
Special area:
• ‘a sea area where for recognized technical reasons in relation to its oceanographical and ecological condition and to the particular character of its trafficthe adoption of special mandatory methods for the prevention of sea pollution by oil is required’
Emission control area:
• ‘where the adoption of special mandatory measures for emissions from ships is required to prevent, reduce and control air pollution from NOx or SOx and particulate matter or all three types of emissions and their attendant adverse impacts on human health and the environment.’
(c) Chircop 2017
6
MARPOL special area criteria (IMO SA Guidelines)Oceanographic conditions Ecological conditions Vessel traffic
characteristicsThe area possesses
oceanographic conditions
which may cause the
concentration or retention of
harmful substances in the
waters or sediments of the
area, including:
particular circulation
patterns (e.g., convergence
zones and gyres) or
temperature and salinity
stratification;
long residence time caused
by low flushing rates;
extreme ice state; and
adverse wind conditions.
The area possesses ecological conditions
indicating that protection of the area from
harmful substances is needed to preserve:
depleted, threatened or endangered marine
species;
areas of high natural productivity (such as
fronts, upwelling areas, gyres);
spawning, breeding and nursery areas for
important marine species and areas
representing migratory routes for seabirds and
marine mammals;
rare or fragile ecosystems such as coral reefs,
mangroves, seagrass beds and wetlands; and
critical habitats for marine resources including
fish stocks and/or areas of critical importance
for the support of large marine ecosystems.
The sea area is used by ships to
an extent that the discharge of
harmful substances by ships
when operating in accordance
with the requirements of
MARPOL for areas other than
special areas would be
unacceptable in the light of the
existing oceanographic and
ecological conditions in the
area.
(c) Chircop 2017
8
Annexes Special areas Adopted In force EffectivityI: Oil (10) Mediterranean Sea 02/11/73 02/10/83 02/10/83
Baltic Sea 02/11/73 02/10/83 02/10/83
Black Sea 02/11/73 02/10/83 02/10/83
Red Sea 02/11/73 02/10/83 Not in effect
Gulfs’ area 02/11/73 02/10/83 01/08/08
Gulf of Aden 01/12/87 01/04/89 Not in effect
Antarctic area 16/11/90 17/03/92 17/03/92
North West European waters 25/09/97 01/02/99 01/08/99
Oman area (Arabian Sea) 15/10/04 01/01/07 Not in effect
Southern South African waters 13/10/06 01/03/08 01/08/08
II: Noxious liquid
substances (1) Antarctic area 30/10/92 01/0794 01/07/94
IV: Sewage (1) Baltic Sea 15/07/11 01/01/13 Not in effect
9
(c) Chircop 2017
Annexes Special area/ECA Adopted In force EffectivityV: Garbage (8) Mediterranean Sea 02/11/73 31/12/88 01/05/09
Baltic Sea 02/11/73 31/12/88 01/10/89
Black Sea 02/11/73 31/12/88 Not in effect
Red Sea 02/11/73 31/12/88 Not in effect
Gulfs’ area 02/11/73 31/12/88 01/08/08
North Sea 17/10/89 18/02/91 18/02/91
Antarctic area 16/11/90 17/03/92 17/03/92
Wider Caribbean region 04/07/91 04/04/93 01/05/11
VI: Air
pollution (6 in
3/4 regions)
Baltic Sea (SOx) 26/09/97 19/05/05 19/05/06
North Sea (SOx) 22/07/05 22/11/06 22/11/07
North American (SOx & PM) 26/03/10 01/08/11 01/08/12
North American (NOx) 26/03/10 01/08/11 01/01/16*
US Caribbean Sea (SOx/PM) 26/07/11 01/01/13 01/01/14
US Caribbean Sea (NOx) 26/07/11 01/01/13 01/01/16* (c) Chircop 2017
10
3. PSSAs
Definition
• a marine area ‘that needs special protection through action by IMO because of its significance for recognized ecological, socio-economic, or scientific attributes where such attributes may be vulnerableto damage by international shipping activities’
Distinguished from other tools
• Adopted under the IMO’s general authority, rather than a specific convention
• Are not adopted by amending a convention, like MARPOL special areas
• Can be designated in principle (precautionary?) & accompanied by APMs
• APMs can be mandatory or recommended
• May involve measures other than pollution prevention, but may include special areas
• Different from LOS Convention Art 211(6) special mandatory measure, but latter may be an APM (c) Chircop 2017
11
PSSA Year Proponents Great Barrier Reef 1990 Australia
Sabana-Camaguey Archipelago 1997 Cuba
Wadden Sea 2002 Denmark, Germany, Netherlands
Florida Keys sea area 2002 United States
Malpelo Island 2002 Colombia
Paracas National Reserve 2003 Peru
Western European Area 2004 Belgium, France, Ireland, Portugal, Spain and UK
Torres Strait (GBR PSSA extension) 2005 Australia, Papua New Guinea
Canary Islands 2005 Spain
Galapagos Archipelago 2005 Ecuador
Baltic Sea (excluding Russian waters) 2005 Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia,
Lithuania, Poland, Sweden
Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument (Hawaii) 2008 United States
The Strait of Bonifacio 2011 France, Italy
Saba Bank, North-eastern Caribbean 2012 The Netherlands
Southwest part of Coral Sea (extension to GBR PSSA) 2015 Australia
The Jomard Entrance 2016 Papua New Guinea
(c) Chircop 2017
13
Requirements for PSSA designation
1. The proposed area has to have particular attributes that attest to its sensitivity.
2. The proposed area must be vulnerable to international shipping activities.
3. The protection of the area demands the use of tools that are within the IMO’s competence.
(c) Chircop 2017 14
PSSA criteria (IMO PSSA Guidelines)Ecological cluster Social, cultural and
economic cluster
Scientific and
educational cluster
(1) Uniqueness or rarity
(2) Critical habitat
(3) Dependency
(4) Representativeness
(5) Diversity
(6) Productivity
(7) Spawning or breeding grounds
(8) Naturalness
(9) Integrity
(10) Vulnerability
(11) Bio-geographical importance
(12) Economic benefit
(13) Recreation
(14) Human
dependency
(15) Research
(16) Baseline and
monitoring studies
(17) Education
(c) Chircop 2017
15
Vulnerability factors (IMO PSSA Guidelines)
Vessel traffic characteristics Physical factors Operational factors – Types of maritime activities (e.g.
small fishing boats, small pleasure craft, oil and gas
rigs) in the proposed area that by their presence may
reduce the safety of navigation.
Vessel types – Types of vessels passing through or
adjacent to the area (e.g., high-speed vessels, large
tankers, or bulk carriers with small under-keel
clearance).
Traffic characteristics – Volume or concentration of
traffic, vessel interaction, distance offshore or other
dangers to navigation, are such as to involve greater
risk of collision or grounding.
Harmful substances carried – Type and quantity of
substances on board, whether cargo, fuel or stores,
that would be harmful if released into the sea.
Hydrographical – Water depth, bottom and coastline
topography, lack of proximate safe anchorages and
other factors which call for increased navigational
caution.
Meteorological – Prevailing weather, wind strength
and direction, atmospheric visibility and other factors
which increase the risk of collision and grounding and
also the risk of damage to the sea area from
discharges.
Oceanographic – Tidal streams, ocean currents, ice,
and other factors which increase the risk of collision
and grounding and also the risk of damage to the sea
area.
(c) Chircop 2017
16
Other factors
• Evidence of threats
• History of incidents (e.g., casualties, groundings, spills)
• Potential shifting of risks from one area of the marine environment to another as a result of designation
• Other environmental stressors (e.g., fishing, other traffic, pollution, etc.)
• Measures already in place (e.g., marine protected area, infrastructure and services)
• Size is relative
(c) Chircop 2017 17
In practice, most PSSAs carry multiple protections …
National MPA, marine
sanctuary, national
monument,
etc.
International status, e.g.: WHC site, Biosphere
reserve, EBSA Ramsar site,
MARPOL special area,
etc.
PSSA isadditional
protection –area, buffer and APMs
Necessity
Proportionality
Legality
Efficiency
Effectiveness
(c) Chircop 2017 18
APMs consist of least restrictive routeing, reporting and other measures that address the particular risks and hazards
Routeing (SOLAS) Reporting (SOLAS) Other Areas to be avoided Deep water routes Established direction of traffic flow Inshore traffic zones Precautionary areas Recommended direction of traffic flow Recommended routes Recommended tracks Roundabouts Traffic lanes Traffic separation schemes Two-way routes
Established by a government after accept by IMO as SOLAS compliant
Radar surveillance Interactive ship/shore
reporting (mandatory or recommended)
MARPOL special areas Special mandatory
measure under LOSConvention Art 211(6)
Measure under another IMO instrument (i.e., has legal basis, e.g., COLREGs, weather routeing)
Others uniquely fashioned for area (e.g., pilotage, towage)
(c) Chircop 2017 19
4. HIGH SEAS APPLICATIONS
• LOS considerations:
• High seas locations:
• Superjacent the extended continental shelf
• Superjacent the international seabed area
• High seas are areas beyond national jurisdiction
• High seas are subject to fundamental ‘freedoms’, including navigation
• Exclusive jurisdiction of the flag State over its ships
• MARPOL consideration:
• Port State inspections apply also to MARPOL infractions on the high seas
• Oceanographic considerations:
• High seas are generally deep, open waters (with the exception of polar waters) and high energy environments
(c) Chircop 2017
20
(a) Potential factors in favour
MARPOL special areas
• Convention: general focus on ‘ships’ on ‘international voyages’
• Annexes’ definition: ‘sea area’ does not exclude high seas
• 2013 Guidelines: area may enclose an entire enclosed or semi-enclosed sea
• Practice: Mediterranean, Wider Caribbean, Antarctic waters include high seas
• Polar waters definition includes Central Arctic Ocean
• Scientific criteria potentially include high sea upwellings, migratory routes, gyres, etc.
PSSAs
• IMO Convention and PSSA Guidelines do not exclude high sea areas (but none exist in high sea areas)
• PSSA criteria apply to areas within and beyond territorial sea limits
• Coastal State may wish to protect ecosystems/sedentary species of the extended continental shelf
• Only one criterion needs to be met
(c) Chircop 2017
21
(b) Potential factors against
MARPOL special areas
• Establishing that oceanography of high sea area causes concentration/retention of harmful substances in the waters or sediments (gyre or convergence zone)
• Further restriction on the freedom of navigation is likely to be opposed by major maritime States and some large registers
• Proponent State(s)? Increase of onboard waste? Port reception facilities?
• Compliance strategy? (mitigated by port State control and automated/passive location/reporting systems)
PSSAs
• Ecological values to protect from direct shipping threats (marine mammals?)
• Social, cultural and economic criteria might not be easy to meet (but scientific and educational criteria might)
• Disclosure of protective action at the national level
• Functionality of APMs on the high seas
• Proponent State(s)?
• Compliance strategy? (mitigated by automated/passive location/reporting systems)
(c) Chircop 2017
22
5. CONCLUSION
• IMO regulation must respect delicate jurisdictional and user balances in LOS Convention
• MARPOL special areas:
• If not all special areas are effective, why create more? Compelling need?
• New MARPOL special areas for high sea areas are theoretically possible, but will need to demonstrate that current standards are insufficient for the proposed areas and port facilities are available
• PSSAs:
• Application in high sea areas is in theory possible if the criteria can be met
• Difficulty in establishing nexus between sensitive area’s vulnerability and high seas shipping
• APM(s) will be tested against a high threshold because of freedom of navigation
• Periodic review and reporting?
(c) Chircop 2017
23