1999
DOI: 10.1111/1467-9388.00174
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Preventing Pollution from Ships – Reflections on the ’Adequacy’ of Existing Rules

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
20
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(20 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
20
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The work of producing internationally agreed shipping standards is now largely complete: Enforcement needs to be the priority (Anderson 1998;Ringbom 1999). Part XII, Section 6 of UNCLOS may have the appearance of a set of environmental enforcement provisions, but the somewhat elastic definition of what qualifies as an "environmental" standard, combined with the lack of any alternative enforcement provisions, means that it can be pushed into a wider role than was originally intended.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The work of producing internationally agreed shipping standards is now largely complete: Enforcement needs to be the priority (Anderson 1998;Ringbom 1999). Part XII, Section 6 of UNCLOS may have the appearance of a set of environmental enforcement provisions, but the somewhat elastic definition of what qualifies as an "environmental" standard, combined with the lack of any alternative enforcement provisions, means that it can be pushed into a wider role than was originally intended.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Part XII of UNCLOS involved a series of negotiated compromises between states with a variety of conflicting interests and priorities (see Shearer 1986;Drel 1988;Bodansky 1991;Stephenson 1992;McDorman 1997;Tan 1997;Keselj 1999;Ringbom 1999), with one early commentator remarking that "the articles, fairly described as incorporating the 'lowest common denominator' of diverse views, are extremely complex, contradictory, evasive and even unintelligible" (Bernhardt 1980). It obliges states to "protect and preserve the marine environment" (art 192) 2 and then sets out a range of areas in which states are expected to take action against pollution including pollution from land-based sources, dumping, vessels, as well as installations and devices operated at sea (art 194).…”
Section: The Role Of Part XIImentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the national jurisdiction over ships and sea, the shipping regime is, in many aspects, uniform compared to other internationally managed areas (Ringbom, 1999). The regional or international organizations, such as the IMO, generally agree for undertaking initiatives on new protective standards for shipping.…”
Section: Competing and Complementing Legal Competencementioning
confidence: 99%
“…And what is the role of the EU? Despite some national discretion to regulate shipping, Ringbom (1999) notes that national states are reluctant to diverge from international standards, especially when such protective measures are lacking or unsatisfactory. Although the acceptance for port states to decide on protective measures is usually higher than that for coastal states, port states tend to hold back on national regulation if it is in conflict with the general global level of regulation.…”
Section: Acting Globally or Regionally?mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Regulation 14 is specifically concerned with the regulation of sulphur dioxide (SO x ) and particulate matter, and in 2006, 2007, and 2012, emission control areas (ECAs) restricting the emission of SO x were established in the Baltic, North Sea, and North American zones, respectively. While the pollution restrictions that were initially established by MARPOL were originally considered to be ineffective with regard to environmental impact by some commentators (Ringbom 1999) plans to restrict sulphur levels to 0.1% by 2015 in ECAs are thought by some to represent a 'step change' in practice.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%