In the context of the melting icecap and the growing shipping activity in the Arctic, the International Maritime Organization (imo) spent several years preparing polar navigation rules aimed at providing appropriate safety and environmental protection standards. The rules underwent several transformations before emerging as the binding International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters (Polar Code). The Polar Code is expected to enter into force on 1 January 2017. This paper examines the formation and development of the Polar Code and its principles and provisions, expounds upon the unique characteristics of the Code, and discusses expected future practices.

The International Maritime Organization (IMO) plays a significant role in global marine environmental governance, providing a forum of regulatory oversight for member states. Member states are the main actors of the IMO and exert considerable influence on the process of lawmaking. Among these member states, China is unique due to its multiple identities. There are various factors influencing interests behind China’s multiple identities, which fully engage the country in various shipping and maritime trade activities. This article examines China’s role in the IMO marine environmental regulatory governance. It identifies the impact of China on global ocean governance and indicates the development and reforms in the global governance system. China enacted the China Ocean Agenda 21 for its strategy of ocean development. Thus, China is the object of study in this examination of empirical research that collects submissions from 2001 to 2020 related to marine environmental governance. The findings reveal that the extent to which China participates in such governance has considerably increased, and although the contribution of China’s submissions is still in development, its role in the IMO is no longer merely that of a follower, and the efforts of the country have had a positive influence on the IMO’s marine environmental regulatory governance, including its legal instruments.

Since the International Maritime Organization's (IMO) ban on the use and carriage for use of heavy fuel oil (HFO) for ships operating in Antarctic waters came into effect in 2011, the international community has been engaged in a discourse on whether to adopt a similar standard for ships operating in Arctic waters. The issues are complex as, in addition to reducing the environmental risks posed by HFOs, there are economic and social consequences, including dependence on such fuels by Indigenous peoples. The discourse has involved the IMO, the Arctic Council, industry associations, environmental nongovernmental organizations, and Indigenous peoples. The issue was first raised during the development of the Polar Code and is considered unfinished business of the Code. This chapter discusses the nature of the problem and the challenges to explore a possible regulatory strategy. The chapter will consider the issue in the larger context of the public and private maritime law conventions to consider how an HFO regulatory strategy complements and remains consistent with other elements of maritime regulation.

No abstract

No abstract