Implementation of the Rules of the UNCLOS Through Universal and Regional Organizations

  • Mariko KawanoEmail author
Conference paper


Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), international cooperation through universal, regional, or subregional organizations is particularly important for the purpose of the implementation of the rules concerning the conservation and management of the fish stocks (CMFS) and the protection and preservation of the marine environment (PPME). There were numerous international organizations or conventional arrangements for these purposes even before the UNCLOS. However, since the adoption of the UNCLOS, by considering the new development of scientific and technological knowledge and recognizing the needs of new legal rules and approaches to respond to them, new organizations and arrangements have been established both for CMFS and for PPME. Moreover, the organizations and arrangements prior to the UNCLOS have been reviewed or replaced by new mechanisms. The universal organizations contribute to the development of new legal rules and provide the mechanisms for coordination and enhancement of the function of regional organizations and arrangements. Today, various and complicated overlap and interaction can be noted between the legal rules concerning CMFS and those concerning PPME. Marine living resources are considered to constitute a part of the marine environment and various principles and approaches of international environmental law are introduced to the measures for CMFS. Under these circumstances, the cooperation between the organizations for CMFS and those for PPME may contribute to the coordination and harmonization of the legal rules concerning these different but closely related matters.


  1. Boisson-Chazournes L (2010) Les relations entre organisations régionales et organisations universelles. Recueil des Cours 347:79Google Scholar
  2. Churchill R, Lowe V (1999) The law of the sea, 3rd edn. Manchester University Press, ManchesterGoogle Scholar
  3. Proelss A, Maggio AR, Blitza E, Daum O (2017) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea: commentary. CH Beck/Hart/Nomos, Munich/Oxford/Baden-BadenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Rothwell D, Stephens T (2016) The international law of the sea, 2nd edn. Hart Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  5. Sands P, Klein P, Bowett DW (2009) Bowett’s law of international institutions, 6th edn. Sweet & Maxwell: Thomson Reuters, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Schermers HG, Blokker NM (2018) International institutional law, 6th revised edn. Brill, LeidenGoogle Scholar


  1. Southern Bluefin Tuna (New Zealand v. Japan; Australia v. Japan), Provisional Measures, Order of 27 August 1999, ITLOS Reports 1999, p 280Google Scholar
  2. Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia Japan: New Zealand intervening) Judgment, I.C.J. Reports 2014, p 226Google Scholar
  3. Request for Advisory Opinion submitted by the Sub-Regional Commission, Advisory Opinion, 2 April 2015, ITLOS Reports 2015, p 4Google Scholar
  4. Chagos Marine Protected Area (Republic of Mauritius v. The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), Arbitral Award of 18 March 2015Google Scholar
  5. South China Sea Arbitration, Award of 12 July 2016Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Waseda University, Faculty of LawTokyoJapan

Personalised recommendations