The Challenges of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf

  • Aldino Santos de Campos
Conference paper


The UNCLOS is one of the most important multilateral agreements achieved by humankind. For the first time in our history we have one global document that has an effective impact over seventy percent of our planet’s surface. Adopted in 1982, after nine years of intense negotiations, during the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, this convention reflects, in a unique package, a multitude of issues that challenged the relationship among the nations in the past. It also sets some new challenges when breaking down our global and continuous ocean into several distinct geographic domains. While some of these domains were inherit from previously agreed conventions, such as the Territorial Sea, Continuous Zone and the High Seas, some others were introduced as new, such as the EEZ and the Area. Within the set of the maritime domains, the concept of legal continental shelf was thoroughly reviewed during the Third Conference, handing up in an agreed complex formulae to establish its outer limit. As an exercise of sovereignty, these outer limits are defined by coastal States and, the latter one, the continental shelf, must be submitted to the CLCS that issues recommendations in order to be accepted by the international community. This chapter describes the evolution of the concept of the continental shelf in international law and addresses the role and the challenges for the CLCS when considering the coastal States’ submissions to establish the outer limits in accordance with Article 76 of UNCLOS.


  1. IHB (2014) S-51 A manual on technical aspects of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea - 1982. S-51, 214.Google Scholar
  2. Lay SH, Churchill RR, Nordquist MH (eds) (1973) New directions in the law of the sea: documents, vol 1. Oceana PublicationsGoogle Scholar
  3. McDorman TL (2002) The role of the commission on the limits of the continental shelf: a technical body in a political world. Int J Mar Coast Law 17(3):301–324Google Scholar
  4. Monahan D, Macnab R (1994) Status of mapping for Article 76 in Canadian waters. Proceedings on the Law of the Sea Article 76 Workshop. Mapping the continental shelf limit: legal/technical interface, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada, pp 89–114Google Scholar
  5. Mouton MW (1952) Attempt to define the continental shelf. In: The continental shelf. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 6–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Persand S (2005) A practical overview of Article 76 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. The United Nations - The Nippon Foundation of Japan Fellowship Program, 2005 [cited 2019-04-25]Google Scholar
  7. Suarez SV (2008) The outer limits of the continental shelf: legal aspects of their establishment. Springer, Berlin-HeidelbergCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Valéry P (1931) Regards sur le monde actuel. Oeuvres, ed. J. Hytier, 2, 917Google Scholar
  9. Young R (1958) The Geneva Convention on the continental shelf: a first impression. Am J Int Law 52(4):733–738CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Documents of the CLCS

  1. Scientific and Technical Guidelines, CLCS/11, adopted 13 May 1999Google Scholar
  2. Rules of Procedure, CLCS/40, adopted 2 July 2004Google Scholar
  3. Internal code of conduct for members of the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, CLCS/47, adopted 8 September 2005Google Scholar
  4. Celebrating the twentieth anniversary of its establishment (1997-2017), Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf, 2017Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aldino Santos de Campos
    • 1
  1. 1.Portuguese Institute of International Relations (IPRI-NOVA)LisbonPortugal

Personalised recommendations