Advertisement

The EU and the UN Legally-Binding Instrument on the Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction

  • Luigimaria Riccardi
Conference paper

Abstract

The chapter offers an in-depth reading of the role that the European Union (EU) may play during the current negotiations in the United Nations for the adoption of a new international legally binding agreement on biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction. Despite the complexity of the object and the interests of the negotiations in question, the study stresses the added value of the EU to speak with a single voice on behalf of its Member States, thank on the new status that the EU has in the United Nations General Assembly since 2011. In fact, such a status may assist a major sharing of position of the EU among other States, by covering also the legal gaps of the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), concerning the protection of the marine biological diversity and, mainly, the definition and framework of Marine Genetic Resources. Besides, the chapter stresses the idea that the EU may interconnect the new international agreement with other international instruments and International Organizations, in which the EU is an active player, guarantying in this way a concrete coordination and implementation of UNCLOS. Finally, the study will move to consider a pragmatic position expressed by the EU during the negotiations, together with its Member States, trying to understand whether and to what extent it can represent a possible third way to walk on.

References

  1. Arico S, Salpin C (2005) Bioprospecting of genetic resources in the deep seabed: scientific, legal and policy aspects. United Nations University, YokohamaGoogle Scholar
  2. Armas Pfirter FM (2006) The management of seabed living resources in “the area” under UNCLOS. Revista Electrónica de Estudios Internacionales 11:1–29Google Scholar
  3. Barnes R (2010) Entitlement to marine living resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction. In: Oude Elferink AG, Molenaar EJ (eds) The international legal regime of areas beyond national jurisdiction: current and future developments. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, pp 81–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bengoetxea J (2011) The EU as (more than) an international organization. In: Klabbers J, Wallendahl A (eds) Research handbook on the law of international organizations. Northampton Publishing House, Northampton, pp 448–465Google Scholar
  5. Bonfanti A, Trevisanut S (2012-2013) TRIPS on the high seas: intellectual property rights on marine genetic resources. J Int Law 37:187–232Google Scholar
  6. Brewer E (2012) The participation of the European Union in the work of the United Nations: evolving to reflect the new realities of regional organizations. Int Organ Law Rev 9(1):181–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cremona M (2008) Defending the community interest: the duties of cooperation and compliance. In: Cremona M, De Witte B (eds) EU foreign relations law - constitutional fundamentals. Hart, Oxford, pp 125–169Google Scholar
  8. De La Fayette LA (2009) A new regime for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity and genetic resources beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. Int J Mar Coast Law 24:221–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diz D (2017) Marine biodiversity: unravelling the intricacies of global frameworks and applicable concepts. In: Morgera E, Razzaque J (eds) Biodiversity and nature protection law, vol III. Elgar Edward, Cheltenham, pp 123–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Emerson M et al (eds) (2011) Upgrading the EU’s role as global actor institutions, law and the restructuring of European diplomacy. CEPS Paperbacks, Leuven. Available via https://www.ceps.eu/publications/upgrading-eus-role-global-actor-institutions-law-and-restructuring-european-diplomacy
  11. Gaja G (1980–81) The European community’s participation in the law of the sea convention: some incoherencies in a compromise solution. Italian Yearb Int Law 5:110–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Glowka L (1996) The deepest of ironies: genetic resources, marine scientific research, and the area. Ocean Yearb 12(2):154–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guimãres FA (2015) Speak up! getting the EU a voice at the UN. In: Koops JA, Macaj G (eds) The European Union as a diplomatic actor. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke, pp 88–102Google Scholar
  14. Hillion C (2010) Mixity and Coherence in EU external relations: the significance of the duty of cooperation. In: Hillion C, Koutrakos P (eds) Mixed agreements in EU law revisited – the EU and its member states in the world. Hart, Oxford, pp 87–115Google Scholar
  15. Kirchner A (2010) Bioprospecting, marine scientific research and the patentability of genetic resources. In: Martínez Gutiérrez NA (ed) Serving the rule of international maritime law. Essays in Honor of professor David Joseph Attard. Routledge, London, pp 119–128Google Scholar
  16. Kiss AC (1982) La notion de patrimoine commun de l’humanité. Collect Courses Hague Acad Int Law 175:99–256Google Scholar
  17. Korn H et al (2003) Deep sea genetic resources in the context of the convention of biological diversity and the United Nations conventions on the law of the sea. Bundesamt Für Naturschutz, Bonn. Available via https://bfn.de/fileadmin/MDB/documents/skript79.pdf
  18. Leary DK (2006) International law and genetic resources of the deep sea. Martinus Nijhoff, LeidenGoogle Scholar
  19. Leary DK et al (2009) Marine genetic resources: a review of scientific and commercial interest. Mar Policy 33(2):183–194CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lijnzaad L (2014) Declarations of competence in the law of the sea, a very European affair. In: Lodge MW, Nor Quist MH (eds) Peaceful order in the world’s oceans. Essays in Honor of Satya N. Nandan. Brill/Nijhoff, Leiden/Boston, pp 186–207Google Scholar
  21. Long R (2014) The inexorable rise of the United Nations Convention on the law of the sea within the European legal order. In: Lodge MW, Nordquist MH (eds) Peaceful order in the world’s oceans. Essays in Honor of Satya N. Nandan. Brill/Nijhoff, Leiden/Boston, pp 167–185Google Scholar
  22. Marquardt S (2017) Still new kids on the EU’s institutional block? the high representative and the European external action service seven years after the entry into force of the treaty of Lisbon. In: Czuczai J, Naert F (eds) The EU as a global actor – bridging legal theory and practice. Brill/Nijhoff, Leiden/Boston, pp 3–37Google Scholar
  23. Millicay F (2007) A legal regime for the biodiversity of the area. Law. In: Nordquist MH, Long R, Heider T, Moore JN (eds) Law, science and ocean management. Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden, pp 739–850CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Millicay F (2015) The common heritage of mankind: 21st century challenges of a revolutionary concept. In: Del Castillo L (ed) Law of the sea, from Grotius to the international tribunal law of the sea: liber amicorum judge Hugo Caminos. Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, pp 272–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Morgera E (2015) Benefit-sharing in marine areas beyond national jurisdiction: where are we at? (part. II). Available via https://www.research.ed.ac.uk/portal/files/18927151/Morgera_Benefit_sharing_in_Marine_Areas_Part_II_BENELEX.pdf
  26. Morgera E et al (2018) Summary of the first session of the intergovernmental conference on an international legally binding instrument under the UN convention on the law of the sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction: 4–17 September 2018. Earth Negot Bull 25(179):1–18. Available Via http://enb.iisd.org/oceans/bbnj/igc1/
  27. Morris-Sharma NY (2016) Marine genetic resources in area beyond national jurisdiction: issues with, in and outside of UNCLOS. Max Planck Yearb United Nations Law 20:71–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Neframi E (2010) The duty of loyalty: rethinking its scope through its application in the field of the EU external relations. Common Mark Law Rev 47(2):323–359Google Scholar
  29. Oude Elferink AG (2007) The regime of the area: delineating the scope of application of the common heritage principle and freedom of the high seas. Int J Mar Coast Law 22:143–176CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Paasivirta E (2015) The European Union and the United Nations convention on the law of the sea. Fordham Int Law J 38(5):1045–1071Google Scholar
  31. Paasivirta E, Porter D (2006) EU coordination at the UN general assembly and ECOSOC: a view from Brussels, a view from New York. In: Wouters J et al (eds) The United Nations and the European Union. T.M.C. Asser Press, The Hague, pp 35–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Pardo A (1975) The common heritage: selected papers on oceans and world order 1967–1974. Malta University Press, MaltaGoogle Scholar
  33. Prip C (2016) Towards a new legally binding instrument on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction. In: The JCLOS Blog. K.G. Jebsen Centre for the Law of the Sea. Available via http://site.uit.no/jclos/files/2016/10/Towards-a-new-legally-binding-instrument-on-the-conservation-and-sustainable-use-of-marine-biodiversity-of-areas-beyond-national-jurisdiction.pdf
  34. Ridgeway LL (2009) Marine genetic resources: outcomes of the United Nations informal consultative process. Int J Mar Coast Law 24(2):309–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Scovazzi T (2004) Mining, protection of the environment, scientific research and bioprospecting: some considerations on the role of the international seabed authority. Int J Mar Coast Law 19:383–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Scovazzi T (2007) The concept of common heritage of mankind and the genetic resources of the seabed beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. Agenda Int 25:11–30Google Scholar
  37. Scovazzi T (2011) Note on the establishment of marine protected areas beyond national jurisdiction or in areas where the limits of national sovereignty or jurisdiction have not yet been defined in the Mediterranean Sea. Ed. RAC/SPA. United Nations Environment Programme, Tunis. Available via http://www.rac-spa.org/sites/default/files/doc_spamis/note_amp_en.pdf
  38. Scovazzi T (2015) Negotiating conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction: prospects and challenges. Ital Yearb Int Law 24:63–85Google Scholar
  39. Scovazzi T (2016) The Negotiations for a binding instrument on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity beyond national jurisdiction. Mar Policy 70:188–207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Serrano De Haro PA (2012) Participation of the European Union in the work of the United Nations: general assembly resolution 65/276. CLEER Working Paper. T.M.C. Asser Instituut. Available via http://www.asser.nl/media/1633/cleer2012-4web.pdf
  41. Simmonds KR (1989) The European economic community and the new law of the sea. Collect Courses Hague Acad Int Law 218:9–154Google Scholar
  42. Treves T (1976) La Comunità economica europea e la conferenza sul diritto del mare. Rivista di diritto internazionale 2:455–467Google Scholar
  43. Treves T (2002) The European community and the law of the sea convention: new developments. In: Cannizzaro E (ed) The European Union as an actor in international relations. Kluwer Law International, The Hague, pp 279–296Google Scholar
  44. von Bogdandy A (2012) Neither an international organization nor a nation state: the European Union as a supranational federation. In: Jones E, Menon A, Weatherill S (eds) The Oxford handbook of the European Union. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 761–776Google Scholar
  45. Wessel R (2011) The legal framework for the participation of the European Union in international institutions. J Eur Integr 33(6):621–635CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Documents

  1. UN-BBNJ (2018) Intergovernmental conference on an international legally binding instrument under the United Nations convention on the law of the sea on the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (General Assembly resolution 72/249). Available via https://www.un.org/bbnj/content/meeting-coverage

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luigimaria Riccardi
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Pisa, Department of LawPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations