16.1 Introduction

In accordance with Part XII of the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS) and various other related international agreements, parties are obliged to prevent, reduce and control pollution of the marine environment. The responsibility to implement these agreements or other non-regulatory codes or standards rests primarily on national governments. They in turn give effect to the agreements by developing domestic legislation in various forms and enforcing them within their fields of jurisdiction. The jurisdictional extent and scope of activities to which national governments can regulate is also defined by UNCLOS.

Implementing national legislation can be a very effective method to control a range of human activities in the marine environment; however, this is not necessarily the only method, as education and voluntary actions are essential components to achieve the desired outcomes and objectives of international agreements. From the discussion below, it can be noted that many stressors in the marine environment resulting from human activities actually come from land-based activities and therefore fall outside the UNCLOS framework. Nonetheless, legislation of activities such as shipping or waste disposal can have dramatic positive effects on marine pollution prevention and control. For example, in the 1960s, several major oil spill catastrophes focused on the minds of many actors in the marine environment and highlighted the need for stronger international rules to reduce and prevent such major devastations to marine and coastal environments. This led the International Maritime Organization (IMO), located in London, United Kingdom, to develop and subsequently adopt (by consensus) a number of international agreements, such as, the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocols of 1978 and 1997 relating thereto (MARPOL) that would apply to all ships. MARPOL was designed to cover all operational ship-generated pollution and ensured that ships are adequately equipped, certified and inspected by Contracting Governments. In subsequent years, modifications to MARPOL resulted in the phase out of single-hulled tankers and changes to other critical design and operational activities to achieve the dramatic reduction in oil spills from the early 1970s onwards. MARPOL in concert with other IMO agreements has made major inroads in tackling marine pollution arising from shipping. Currently, there are 160 Contracting Governments that enforce MARPOL through their legislative frameworks.

Similarly, with the adoption of the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972 (London Convention), and later the Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1996 (London Protocol), the dumping at sea of industrial and radioactive wastes is now prohibited, and only a few waste categories (such as dredge spoil) may be considered for dumping at sea following a stringent impact assessment and licensing process. This reversed a centuries-old practice that used the world’s oceans as a dumping ground for wastes generated by people, with little thought given to the consequences of such actions. It was not until the 1960s that communities began to have an increased awareness of the impact of such reckless action on the marine environment, on seafood and on other living marine resources. As of 2023, there are 87 Contracting Parties to the London Convention who agree to enforce the regulations through their own legislative frameworks.

16.2 The Global Setting

Major pollutants of global concern have been identified in a number of studies and reports in recent years. The most authoritative global study that examined the state of knowledge of the world’s ocean and the ways in which humans benefit from and impact it through, inter alia, direct and in-direct sources of marine pollution was completed in 2015 under the United Nations in the First Global Integrated Marine Assessment, 2016 World Ocean Assessment I (WOA I) (UN 2017). A good overview of hazardous pollutants may be found in Chapter 20—Coastal, Riverine and Atmospheric Inputs from Land of the WOA I. More recently, the World Ocean Assessment II (WOA II) (UN 2021) provides additional information and trends on important aspects of the ocean and more on its relationships with humans.

Another key source of information was the 2009 report by the Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Environmental Protection (GESAMP 2009), which was prepared as a contribution to the Assessment of Assessments (AoA) start-up phase for the WOA I. This has since been updated by GESAMP in 2015 (GESAMP 2015) as part of the Transboundary Water Assessment Programme (TWAP) funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and conducted through the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). The final TWAP deliverables released in July 2016, include a set of technical assessment reports for LMEs and Open Ocean as well as a summary for decision-makers, and a data portal where indicators can be visualized and data downloaded (http://onesharedocean.org). A succinct overview of key pollutants and their status as a hazard is given in Table 16.1. The table also provides an indication of trends in environmental levels or loads of the contaminants and GESAMP’s perspective regarding their relative, overall environmental significance.

Table 16.1 Major marine pollutants and trends.
Full size table

Major source countries were identified through a study carried out by Lebreton et al. (2016) by synthesizing reports by national governments and expert opinion, as shown in Figure 16.1. The amounts shown were derived from a global model of plastic inputs from rivers into oceans based on waste management, population density and hydrological information. The model itself was calibrated against measurements available in the literature.

Figure 16.1
figure 1

Top 20 river plastic emissions to the world’s oceans showing that the most polluting rivers are from countries classified by the World Bank as upper- or lower-middle income economies. This suggests that while wealth and standard of living is reasonable investment on waste management and related infrastructure is limited Data Sources: Lebreton et al. (2016); # = also includes Cameroon; ^includes Brazil, Peru, Columbia, Ecuador; ^^ includes Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, China, Myanmar, Vietnam. Image: E. Kleverlaan

Full size image

16.2.1 Global Regulatory Structure of Marine Pollution

In response to the wide range of threats to the marine environment, a global regulatory framework has been developed at different times to address pollution from a range of sources by global and regional arrangements complemented with local regulations.

The overall primary legal instrument to protect the marine environment is the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS) and in particular Part XII, thereof, which was adopted in 1982. Further information on UNCLOS can be found at: http://www.un.org/depts/los/.

Following the increasing catastrophic oil spillages from ships, the large-scale incineration and disposal of industrial waste, as well as the disposal of radioactive wastes at sea between the 1950s and 1970s, calls were made to reduce and eliminate such accidents and damaging activities. The two global instruments mentioned above, MARPOL and the London Convention, together with a range of environmental policies were spawned following the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, held in Stockholm, Sweden in 1972 (more information on the “Stockholm Conference” can be found at: http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/CONF.48/14/REV.1).

The Stockholm Conference was the UN’s first major conference on international environmental issues and marked a turning point in the development of environmental politics. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) was also established after the Conference and the UNEP Regional Seas Programme (RSP) was initiated in 1974 to:

“address the accelerating degradation of the world’s oceans and coastal areas through a shared seas approach—namely, by engaging neighbouring countries in comprehensive and specific actions to protect their common marine environment. Today, more than 146 countries participate in 18 Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans for the sustainable management and use of the marine and coastal environment. In most cases, the Action Plan is underpinned by a strong legal framework in the form of a regional Convention and associated Protocols on specific problems”.

Other individual Conventions and Action Plans reflect a similar approach, yet each is tailored by its own governments and institutions to suit their particular environmental challenges. UN Environment coordinates the eleven UNEP Regional Seas Programme (11 RSPs), based at the Nairobi headquarters. A full list of the regional seas programme and related regional conventions with direct links to each website can be found at: https://www.unenvironment.org/explore-topics/oceans-seas/what-we-do/working-regional-seas/why-does-working-regional-seas-matter.

Shortly after the Stockholm Conference, several important marine species-related agreements were developed and adopted, including the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES 1973) and the Bonn Convention on Migratory Species (CMS 1979). The former monitors, regulates or bans trade in at-risk species with over 30,000 species protected and the CMS enables countries to make binding agreements to protect 120 migratory species. More details can be found at: https://www.cites.org/eng/disc/what.php and https://www.cms.int respectively.

Impacts to the marine environment from atmospheric inputs were recognized in the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC 1992) (also see https://unfccc.int), which was adopted at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED), Earth Summit, held in 1992 at Rio de Janeiro in Brazil. Since then, through the work being taken under the auspices of the Sustainable Development Goals (see https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org) and the Paris Agreement under the UNFCCC strong action on ocean acidification is being developed.

The activities being undertaken as a result of the adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) also adopted in 1992 at the Rio Conference (see: https://www.cbd.int/history/) have led to crucial work to protect marine areas as well as marine species. The CBD is the first international treaty to address all threats to biodiversity and ecosystem.

From the perspective of land-based sources of marine pollution, the Washington Declaration in 1995 led to the launching of the Global Programme of Action (GPA) to protect the marine environment from land-based sources of pollution. It was adopted by 108 governments and the European Union, and is the only global initiative to address terrestrial, freshwater, coastal and marine ecosystems. While not a legally binding treaty, it has launched crucial national programmes across the globe and via the regional seas conventions to address land-based sources of pollution. Figure 16.2 provides an illustrative overview of the relationship between various global and regional treaties or programmes that aim to protect the marine environment. Ultimately, all inputs, that are atmospheric, land- or sea-based pollutants, find their way to the oceans and seas.

Figure 16.2
figure 2

Context and overview of the various global and regional treaties of programmes aimed to protect the marine environment. Image: E. Kleverlaan, A. Reichelt-Brushett and K. Petersen

Full size image

16.3 Shipping

In the following paragraphs, we will look more closely at the various components of the international legal framework to protect the marine environment.

16.3.1 The International Maritime Organization (IMO)

The mandate of the IMO, as a United Nations specialized agency, is to

“promote safe, secure, environmentally sound, efficient and sustainable shipping. This is accomplished by adopting the highest practicable standards of maritime safety and security and prevention and control of pollution from ships, as well as through consideration of the related legal matters and effective implementation of IMO’s instruments with a view to their universal and uniform application”.

While IMO’s original mandate was principally concerned with maritime safety, soon after it began in 1959, it also assumed responsibility for pollution issues and has since adopted a wide range of measures to prevent and control pollution caused by ships and mitigate the effects of any damage that may occur as a result of maritime operations. These include:

16.3.2 Hierarchy of Legalization and Responsibilities

From an IMO perspective, being a global industry regulator, new or amendments to existing regulations originate from discussions based on a number of factors. These factors may include responding to an emergency (e.g. shipping incident or disaster), acting on an innovation to improve existing procedures or standards, alleviating a chronic issue such as ongoing pollution (invasive species transmission) or taking in to account a technological or knowledge advancement important to the industry or environment.

IMO will, following an internal process, involving all members of IMO and all NGO observers, adopt global treaties and guidelines at the intergovernmental level. All rules and standards are agreed by consensus; however, Member Governments and those that have officially signed and have agreed to be bound by the new regulations, are responsible for implementing and enforcing the adopted regulatory framework. Comprehensive Flag, Port and Coastal State enforcement mechanisms will be part of the agreements and IMO will oversee implementation through inter alia, a mandatory audit scheme of all Member Governments. IMO does not have a policing or enforcing mandate.

The precise manner by which, and the timing of, the entry into force of IMO international agreements comes into effect, is unique for each agreement. The protocols a State needs to follow are also laid out within each agreement.

A thorough overview of IMO’s treaty-making process and the legal steps a State must follow to ratify or accede to a new treaty is set out under: https://www.imo.org/en/About/Conventions/Pages/Default.aspx.

Figure 16.3 illustrates the steps a State can follow to be become legally bound to a treaty, such as the London Convention or the London Protocol. In both cases, it is important that States give effect to the obligations under the treaty, through domestic law. Each State usually follows a different approach in giving effect, varying from using the text of the agreement as the basis of its domestic law, or it may develop, following an analysis of benefits and costs (such as in Australia), domestic law as a new Act of Parliament, or by modifying existing legislation or adding new sub-ordinate legislation or regulations of an existing Act. For further details about the process in Australia see: https://www.legislation.gov.au/Home and https://www.ag.gov.au/Internationalrelations/InternationalLaw/Pages/default.aspx.

Figure 16.3
figure 3

Steps a State can follow to become legally bound to a treaty. Image: E. Kleverlaan and A. Reichelt-Brushett

Full size image

The following sections will focus on marine pollution prevention agreements such as MARPOL, the AFS Convention and the London Convention and London Protocol. While the London Convention and London Protocol are not directly related to pollution arising from shipping operations and address land-based wastes that are dumped at sea, from vessels, aircraft, platforms or other manmade structures, they are both administered by the IMO.

International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL)

Adoption: 1973 (Convention), 1978 (1978 Protocol), 1997 (Protocol—Annex VI); Entry into force: 2 October 1983 (Annexes I and II)

The MARPOL Convention is the main international convention covering prevention of pollution of the marine environment by ships from operational or accidental causes and currently has six separate annexes, which set out regulations dealing with pollution from ships by oil; by noxious liquid substances carried in bulk; harmful substances carried by sea in packaged form; sewage, garbage; and the prevention of air pollution from ships. MARPOL has been updated by amendments through the years and has laid the foundation for substantial and continued reductions in pollution from ships despite a considerable increase in world seaborne trade (Table 16.2).

Table 16.2 MARPOL Annexes and their uptake by the world’s shipping fleet
Full size table

International Convention on the Control of Harmful Anti-fouling Systems on Ships, 2001 (AFS)

Adoption: 2001; Entry into force: 17/09/2008. Parties: 91 (95.93% World tonnage)

The AFS Convention is a good example of an international agreement that was agreed following scientific evidence that a particular chemical used by the shipping industry was highly detrimental to the marine environment and resulted in the banning of the use of organotins as an anti-fouling agent on ships.

The harmful environmental effects of organotin compounds were recognized by IMO in 1989. The IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) adopted a resolution recommending Governments adopt measures to eliminate the use of antifouling paints “containing TBT on non-aluminium hulled vessels of less than 25 m in length and eliminate the use of anti-fouling paints with a leaching rate of more than four µg of TBT per day”. Later in November 1999, IMO adopted an Assembly resolution that called on the MEPC to develop an instrument, legally binding throughout the world, to address the harmful effects of anti-fouling systems used on ships (see also Chapters 7 and 13).

IMO subsequently adopted a global prohibition on the application of organotin compounds which act as biocides in antifouling systems on ships in 2001 and a complete prohibition of the use of organotins as an anti-fouling agent on ships came into force in 2008.

Under the terms of the Convention “Parties are required to prohibit and/or restrict the use of harmful anti-fouling systems on ships flying their flag, as well as ships not entitled to fly their flag but which operate under their authority and all ships that enter their ports, shipyards or offshore terminals. Anti-fouling systems to be prohibited or controlled are listed in an annex to the Convention, which is updated as and when necessary”.

London Convention and London Protocol

Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972 and 1996 Protocol

Adoption: 1975; Entry into Force 30/08/1975; Parties: 87 (57.71% World Tonnage)

Protocol Adopted 1996; Entry into Force 24/03/2006; Parties: 53 (40.47% World Tonnage)

The London Convention is one of the first global conventions to protect the marine environment from human activities and has been in force since 1975. Its objective is to promote the effective control of all sources of marine pollution and to take all practicable steps to prevent pollution of the sea by dumping of wastes and other matter.

This international agreement was in response to long-term historical dumping into the ocean, dredging and incineration at sea. Its creation gained traction from the 1972 United Nations Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment, and its provisions influenced the negotiation of the ocean dumping provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, particularly Articles 210 and 216. Currently, 87 states are Parties to this Convention.

The purpose of the London Convention

“is to control all sources of marine pollution and prevent pollution of the sea through regulation of dumping into the sea of waste materials. A so-called [black- and grey-list] approach is applied for wastes, which can be considered for disposal at sea according to the hazard they present to the environment. For the blacklist items dumping is prohibited. Dumping of the grey-listed materials requires a special permit from a designated national authority under strict control and provided certain conditions are met. All other materials or substances can be dumped after a general permit has been issued”.

The Convention recognizes a change in approach

“In recognizing the need for a more precautionary and preventative approach, the [Contracting] Parties undertook a comprehensive review of the Convention leading to the London Protocol, a new, free-standing treaty which entered into force in 2006 and is intended to replace the Convention. The [Contracting Parties] to the London Protocol have responded to new activities such as carbon capture and storage and marine geoengineering through amendments to the London Protocol adopted in 2006, 2009 and 2013”.

There are currently 53 Parties to the London Protocol.

The purpose of the London Protocol is similar to that of the London Convention, but the London Protocol is more restrictive: application of a precautionary approach is included as a general obligation; a reverse list approach is adopted, which implies that all dumping is prohibited unless explicitly permitted; incineration of wastes at sea is prohibited; and export of wastes for the purpose of dumping or incineration at sea is prohibited. Extended compliance procedures and technical assistance provisions have been included, while a so-called transitional period allows new Contracting Parties to phase in compliance with the London Protocol over a period of five years, provided certain conditions are met.

Further information can be found at: https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/London-Convention-Protocol.aspx

16.3.3 Benefits of IMO Responsibility to Prevent Marine Pollution

The measures that IMO have developed have been shown to be successful in reducing vessel-sourced pollution and illustrate the commitment of the Organization and the shipping industry towards protecting the environment. This is best demonstrated by reviewing the number and scale of oil spillages over time along with the increased intensity of sea trade of these commodities.

According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development’s (UNCTAD) Maritime Review 2017, world seaborne trade has more than tripled in the forty-year period from 1969 to 2016 (Table 16.3). Yet estimates of the quantity of oil spilt during the same period show a steady reduction. Data from the Independent Tanker Owners Pollution Federation (ITOPF) reveal that, despite the rare major accident which can cause a spike in the annual statistics, the overall trend shows a continuing improvement, both in the number of oil spills and the quantity of oil spilt each year (ITOPF 2022).

Table 16.3 Growth in international sea-borne trade across the main types of goods (1970–2016) for selected years. Data source: UNCTAD 2017
Full size table

The average number of oil spills over 700 tonnes has shrunk from over 25 in the 1970s to just 3.7 in the 2000s (Figure 16.4). It is interesting to note, in this context, that the biggest single decade-to-decade reduction was from the 1970s to the 1980s, coinciding with the adoption and entry into force of the MARPOL Convention, which is credited with having had a substantial positive impact in decreasing the amount of oil that enters the sea from maritime transportation activities—both as a result of accidents or from the normal operation of ships.

Figure 16.4
figure 4

Adapted from ITOPF 2022 by A. Reichelt-Brushett

a Number of large oil spills (over 700 tonnes) from 1970 to 2021 and b the decline in the number of oil spills (over 7 tonnes) against the increase in crude oil and gas loaded.

Full size image

Similarly, if we review the effect of IMO measures to reduce greenhouse gases, namely carbon dioxide (CO2) from ships we see a downward trend of emissions (Table 16.4). The 2014 IMO Greenhouse Study found that shipping, in total, accounted for approximately 3.1% of annual global CO2 emissions for the period 2007–2012. For international shipping, the CO2 estimate dropped from 2.8% in 2007 to 2.2% in 2012.

Table 16.4 Table depicting the trend of CO2 emissions from ships. Data Source: IMO 2014
Full size table

It is worthy to note that IMO has also adopted instruments such as the safety of ships at sea (International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, SOLAS), collision avoidance provisions (Convention on the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, 1972, COLREGS), and standards and training of watchkeeping (International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers 1978, STWC) that provide a basis for area-based management of ships’ operations engaged in international voyages with a view to control and prevent pollution of the marine environment arising from accidents/collisions or human-error and therefore directly protect marine biological diversity. These instruments also act indirectly as environmental protective measures by reducing the likelihood of incidents or casualties.

A second strong argument to have a single global regulator responsible for international shipping as this industry, similar to the airline industry, is a unique truly global industry with vessels from almost every country on the planet voyaging across all water bodies and oceans. A ship may well be owned by a company in Greece yet registered in Panama (Flag State) and operate with a multinational crew/staff, transporting goods owned by a multitude of persons/companies from different countries travelling from various countries and traversing through a range territorial waters and arriving at a number of ports on a single voyage. The industry is therefore very complex and requires a single global regulator to ensure a universal and consistent approach.

When we review the large number of ratifications and subsequent implementation via domestic legislation of the AFS Convention, we can conclude that the IMO ban of organotin anti-fouling systems on ships is another successful outcome for the marine environment. The implementation is guaranteed through the stringent port state control regime that IMO has promoted throughout the globe coupled with the non-favourable treatment provision in the Convention of ships when they enter ports.

The effectiveness of the London Convention and London Protocol agreements is further discussed in the next section.

16.3.4 Limitations of the IMO and the London Convention and London Protocol

There are a number of general limitations that IMO has in relation to bringing adopted agreements or resolutions into force. This is often a political and or economic matter for many States and is beyond IMO’s jurisdiction. This leads to long delays in the uptake of the new regulations leading to a continuing risk to the environment. Many safety-related amendments often come into force via a tacit acceptance process, which means that the new arrangement comes into force at a particular time unless before that date, objections to the amendment are received from a specified number of Parties.

Equally important is the lack of control over implementation levels by those that have ratified or accepted the agreed regulatory framework.

IMO is largely dependent on its Member Governments to implement and enforce the agreements; however, there are mechanisms, such as Port State Control inspections, that allow national authorities to verify that ships calling at their ports are in compliance (this is applied equally to all ships regardless of flag and regardless of whether the flag state has actually ratified the Convention) this is the no favourable treatment clause found in most IMO Conventions.

For the London Convention and London Protocol, the objective and purpose of the agreements limit their scope to wastes or other matter disposed at sea from a vessel, aircraft, platform or other manmade structures. They do not address pipelines from land (such as those used for sewage outfalls or submarine disposal of mine tailings from mining operations on land) (see Chapter 5).

Having noted this, recent discussions suggest that the scope of the London Protocol has been modified to address a particular limitation and has resulted in the inclusion of CO2 waste streams for sequestration in the sea-bed pumped from land to a platform for injection into the sea-bed. The Contracting Parties to the London Protocol have also agreed that certain new technologies with the potential to cause harm to the marine environment, such as marine geoengineering (e.g. ocean fertilization) was within the scope of the agreement. In other words, while there may be limitations, some can be overcome through agreement by the Parties.

There are currently ongoing discussions under the London Convention and London Protocol about managing the submarine disposal of mine tailings through the development of guidance or best practice manuals to minimize, reduce or eliminate impacts on the marine environment (See GESAMP 2016 and: https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/newandemergingissues-default.aspx).

A case study of trends in dumping volumes of sewage sludge and dredged spoil under the London Convention and London Protocol demonstrates the effectiveness of the agreements (Figure 16.5). Volumes of sewage sludge disposal to oceans have been steadily decreasing since 1975. For dredged material, the data show that there is no upward trend even though an increase in port development and maintenance has occurred in the same period.

Figure 16.5
figure 5

Trends in volumes of sewage sludge and dredged spoil submitted by contracting parties to the London Convention and the London protocol over the period 1975 to 2010. Data Source: Pers. comm. pending IMO 2021. Image: A. Reichelt-Brushett

Full size image

Furthermore, the Parties to the Protocol, having noted that the practice of dumping sewage sludge had declined considerably and that alternatives exist for the use of the waste, agreed that there was sufficient evidence and justification for amending the Protocol to remove sewage sludge from the list of permissible wastes. This issue is currently being considered.

16.4 Other Global Instruments that Relate to Marine Pollution

As highlighted in Chapter 1, the major threats to the health, productivity and biodiversity of marine environments result from human activities on land—in coastal areas and further inland. Around 80% of pollution in the oceans originates from land-based activities. Many of these pollutants can be found all through the ocean from the shallowest waters to the deepest depths (e.g. Angiolillo et al. 2021) and most remote polar seas (e.g. Isla et al. 2018). They predominantly affect the productive coastal areas and many can be transportable globally via the atmosphere. The intense pressures put on the coastal systems require serious commitment and preventative action at all levels of governance: local, national, regional and global.

As noted previously, The Global Program of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities (GPA) is a non-legally binding instrument, aimed at preventing the degradation of the marine environment from land-based activities by facilitating the realization of the duty of States to preserve and protect the marine environment. It proposes action primarily at the national and regional levels with some coordination tasks at the global level. The GPA is designed to be a source of practical guidance to States in taking actions within their respective policies, priorities and resources.

Additional to land-based sources, there are dissipating pollutants that are transported to the ocean via the atmosphere. The text below provides some examples that link to topics covered in this textbook and highlight relevant agreement, conventions and protocols.

16.4.1 The Paris Agreement

The Paris Agreement is a legally binding international treaty on climate change. It was adopted by 196 Parties at the Conference of the Parties (COP 21) in Paris, on 12 December 2015 and was entered into force on 4 November 2016. Its goal is to limit global warming to well below 2.0 °C, preferably to 1.5 °C, compared to pre-industrial levels with countries aiming to reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible to achieve a climate neutral world by mid-century. The Paris Agreement is a landmark in the multilateral climate change process because, for the first time, a binding agreement where nations made pledges of nationally determined contributions (NDCs) to show how they will combat climate change and adapt to its effects. These are to be updated every 5 years.

There is a series of marine mitigation and adaptions in NDCs which have been defined into categories by Gallo et al. (2017) (Table 16.5), as well, 39 countries have NDCs for doing additional research related to the marine environment. Interestingly, of those Parties that do not include the oceans in their NDCs, 14 are coastal, some with very large Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) such as Australia, Brazil, the European Union, Micronesia, New Zealand, Norway, the Russian Federation, and the United States of America (Gallo et al. 2017).

Table 16.5 Marine mitigations and adaption categories and the number of Parties of the Paris Agreement with NDCs. Data Source: Gallo et al. 2017
Full size table

According to Bopp et al. (2013), the four marine stressors for marine ecosystems are ocean warming, acidification, deoxygenation and changes in primary productivity. The NDCs address these to some extent but not as multiple stressors. Furthermore, Harrould-Kolieb (2019) argues that ocean acidification should be a core obligation along with the central focus on temperature targets in Paris Agreement. However, because it has been framed by the scientific community as a concurrent threat to climate change rather than an effect of it, it now falls outside of the direct purpose of the Paris Agreement (Harrould-Kolieb 2019). Gallo et al. (2017) highlight that the few Parties that address ocean acidification in NDCs mostly are from small island developing countries, and there is even less interest in deoxygenation, suggesting a lack of knowledge at the international policy level about causes of deoxygenation and acidification. Chapter 11 explains in detail the important connections between greenhouse emissions and ocean acidification, and Chapters 1 and 4 address deoxygenation.

16.4.2 Other Conventions

The 1989 Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, the 1998 Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade, the 2001 Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, and the 2013 Minamata Convention on Mercury all aim to protect human health and the environment from hazardous chemicals and wastes. They do not directly relate to marine pollution, however, they are applicable. The four conventions have joined together to highlight the impacts of pollution on biodiversity in a recent report titled “Interlinkages between the chemicals and waste multilateral environmental agreements and biodiversity: Key Insights”. It seeks to enable the four conventions to contribute to discussions on and implementation of the post-2020 biodiversity framework and the future work of biodiversity-related instruments. It highlighted that pollution was a major driver for biodiversity loss and several conclusions were directly relevant to the marine environment including:

  • the increasing anthropogenic mercury emissions have severe consequences for human health and the environment, particularly biodiversity;

  • Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) that are persist in the air, water, and soil, (e.g. PCBs and DDT) are continuing to be found in biota and PCBs are associated with declines in killer whale populations;

  • global food security is at risk from threats to pollinators and the deterioration of soil ecosystems, with agricultural runoff including pesticides being a major source of water pollution and contamination of groundwater aquifers;

  • plastics negatively affect marine species through entanglement, ingestion, contamination, and transport, and have potential to also threaten terrestrial ecosystems, including soils; and

  • climate change amplifies the effects of chemicals and is expected to contribute to the re-volatilization of both mercury and POPs (e.g. melting permafrost and ice are expected to release significant quantities of both into the environment).

16.4.3 The International Seabed Authority

The International Seabed Authority (ISA) is made up of 167 Member States, and the European Union. It is mandated under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea to organize, regulate and control all mineral-related activities in the international seabed area for the benefit of mankind as a whole. To date, no deep-sea mineral extraction has occurred globally; however, there has been much exploration and there is great interest in extracting these resources.

ISA has the duty to ensure the effective protection of the marine environment from harmful effects that may arise from deep-seabed-related activities. It is currently developing regulations for seabed mining but one of the greatest challenges is conducting risk assessment of ecosystems that are poorly understood and still being discovered. As part of the regulations, the legal owner of the resource needs to be clarified. Those located within the EEZ of countries are within national jurisdictions that extend up to 200 nautical miles from the coast and beyond the EEZ there are international waters (or the Area) that fall under international regulatory arrangements that are the responsibility of the United Nations International Seabed Authority (ISA) (e.g. Reichelt-Brushett et al. 2022). The South Pacific nation of Nauru is currently working towards active seabed mining operations. In June 2021 Nauru notified the ISA on its intention to invoke Section 1(15) of the 1994 Implementing Agreement (1994 Agreement Relating to the Implementation of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (New York, 28 July 1994, in force 28 July 1996) 1836 UNTS 3.)) and intends to apply for the approval of a plan of work for the exploitation of seabed minerals in the Area. This effectively triggered the "two-year rule" during which the ISA has two years to finalize regulations governing the deep-sea mining industry Singh, 2022).

16.4.4 International Atomic Energy Agency

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) involves many treaties, which play an important role in establishing legally binding international rules in the areas that they cover and in relation to atomic energy. They do not directly relate to the marine environment but because of their existence the marine environment has gained protection from intentional radioactive pollution.

16.4.5 Convention of Biological Diversity

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) entered into force on 29 December 1993 and is signed by 150 government leaders at the 1992 Rio Earth Summit. It has three main objectives

“the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of the components of biological diversity, the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources”.

The Convention helps to address the spread of invasive species which are considered to be a main driver of biodiversity loss (see Chapter 12).

16.4.6 Global Legislation on Plastic Waste?

Chapter 9 provides an in-depth discussion about the problem of plastics in our oceans. It highlights the magnitude of the global problem and ineffectual solutions given that plastic pollution is a growing concern, albeit now getting serious research attention. Some inter-country agreements have been made on a regional scale that addresses plastics along with other land-based pollutants (e.g. The Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (the OSPAR Convention 1998), but to date no global agreements exist.

Given the global nature of the problem, it suggests that a global legal instrument is necessary. Indeed, some attempts have been made to consider this, for example in December 2017 at the United Nations Environmental Assembly (UNEA) of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) member states supported actions to eliminate the discharge of plastic litter and microplastics to the oceans. The actions included preventing plastic waste, increasing reuse and recycling and avoiding the unnecessary use of plastic, and highlighted the role of the extended producer responsibilities. To develop an ongoing and co-ordinated international action the Ad Hoc Open-Ended Expert Group on Marine Litter and Microplastics (AHEG) was established in 2017 to examine options for combatting marine plastic litter and microplastics from all sources, including through globally legally binding mechanisms. In 2019, the UNEA adopted the resolution (UNEP/EA.4/Res.6) (see also UNEP/EA.3/Res.7), in which

“noting with concern that the high and rapidly increasing levels of marine litter, including plastic litter and microplastics, represent a serious environmental problem at a global scale”.

In March 2022, the UNEA passed a resolution (UNEP/EA5/L23/REV.1) to end plastic pollution and forge an international legally binding agreement by 2024. Heads of State, Ministers of environment and other representatives from 175 nations endorsed this landmark agreement that addresses the full lifecycle of plastic from source to sea.

According to the UNEP, plastic production has risen exponentially in the last decades and now amounts to some 400 million tonnes per year—a figure set to double by 2040.

For further reading:

https://www.unep.org/news-and-stories/story/what-you-need-know-about-plastic-pollution-resolution.

In 2018, IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) adopted the IMO Action Plan to address marine plastic litter from ships, which aims to enhance existing regulations and introduce new supporting measures to reduce marine plastic litter from ships. The Action Plan provides IMO with a mechanism to identify specific outcomes, and actions to achieve these outcomes, in a way that is meaningful and measurable. It builds on existing policy and regulatory frameworks, identifies opportunities to enhance these frameworks and introduces new supporting measures to address the issue of marine plastic litter from ships.

Since 2020, IMO and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) have been co-implementing a global project, called GloLitter, which aims to prevent and reduce marine plastic litter from the shipping and fisheries sectors.

For further reading: https://www.imo.org/en/MediaCentre/HotTopics/Pages/marinelitter-default.aspx, and https://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/PartnershipsProjects/Pages/GloLitter-Partnerships-Project-.aspx.

Another step in global legislative frameworks to manage marine plastics occurred in 2019, at the 14th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the Basel Convention. In this meeting, the COP adopted two important decisions to address plastic waste: Decision BC-14/12 by which the COP amended Annexes II, VIII and IX to the Convention in relation to plastic waste, and decision BC-14/13 on further actions to address plastic waste. These actions provide recognition of the importance of enhanced cooperation in tackling plastic waste. Furthermore, the COP requested the Secretariat through decision BC-14/21 among others to continue to work closely with other international organizations on activities related marine plastic litter and microplastics.

Various POPs may also be contained in plastic waste (e.g. brominated flame retardants and short-chain chlorinated paraffins). Research continues to understand if the leaching of POPs from plastic particles may have significant adverse effect on the health of both terrestrial and marine wildlife (Chapter 9). Plastic debris can also adsorb POPs such as PCBs, DDT and dioxins which, if ingested, exhibit a wide range of adverse chronic effects in marine organisms. The Stockholm Convention controls various POPs and through decision BC-14/13, the COP welcomed the work of the Stockholm Convention to eliminate or control the production or use of POPs in plastic products that may reduce the presence of such pollutants in plastics waste. This further contributes to reducing the environmental risks associated with marine plastic litter and microplastics at the global level.

For further reading: http://www.basel.int/Implementation/Plasticwaste/Cooperationwithothers/tabid/8335/Default.aspx

16.4.7 The Precautionary Principle

On a final note, the precautionary principle is a guiding principle to encourage decision-makers to consider the likely harmful effects of their proposed activities on the environment. It has emerged as a principle of law, requiring that polluters use appropriate burden of proof to demonstrate that their activities are not causing damage to the environment (Cameron and Abouchar 1991). It has increased global consciousness of the political importance of protecting the environment and is evident as an underlying concept of the London Convention and London Protocol and more generally by the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) Governing Council.

16.5 Summary

Implementing national legislation can be a very effective method to control a range of human activities in the marine environment; however, this is not necessarily the only method, as education and voluntary actions are essential components to achieve the desired outcomes and objectives of international agreements. The first global agreement that tackled marine pollution from shipping was established by the IMO and is known as International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocols of 1978 and 1997 relating thereto (MARPOL) that would apply to all ships. The Convention requires the 160 Parties or signatories to develop legislation to implement the Convention within their jurisdictions. For this reason, the IMO is largely dependent on its Member Governments to implement and enforce the agreements.

Similarly, with the adoption of the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972, and later the 1996 London Protocol, the dumping at sea of industrial and radioactive wastes is now prohibited, and only a few waste categories (such as dredge spoil) may be considered for dumping at sea following a stringent impact assessment and licensing process.

Over the years, a wide range of measures to prevent and control pollution to the marine environment have been established. Some main ones include:

  • the Global Program of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities (GPA), a United Nations Environment was adopted by over 108 governments on the 3 November 1995;

  • the UNEP Regional Seas Programme (RSP) and the related regional seas conventions and action plans currently being implemented by more than 146 countries addressing the degradation of the oceans and seas at a regional level;

  • the Paris Agreement is a legally binding international treaty on climate change; and

  • the International Seabed Authority (ISA) is made up of 167 Member States, and the European Union. It is mandated under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea to organize, regulate and control all mineral-related activities in the international seabed area for the benefit of mankind as a whole.

In March 2022 Heads of State, Ministers of environment and other representatives from UN Member States committed to developing a legally binding agreement by 2024 to

“End Plastic Pollution and forge an international legally binding agreement by 2024. The resolution addresses the full lifecycle of plastic, including its production, design and disposal.”

This resolution was endorsed at the UN Environment Assembly (UNEA-5).

16.6 Study Questions and Activities

  1. 1.

    Look up the national (and possibly state) Acts or legislative instruments that are used in your country to implement MARPOL and the London Convention and London Protocol (if your country is a signatory or has acceded to the treaties).

  2. 2.

    Plastic wastes from land-based and sea-based sources (maritime and fishing sectors) in the marine environment are becoming an increasingly alarming problem across the globe, affecting the marine habitats, marine organisms and the livelihoods of people—can you indicate what your country is doing to address this problem and can you give some new ideas on how this can be improved, also in terms of using international laws and programmes, not governing activities but also manufacturing, use and disposal?

  3. 3.

    List the non-governmental organizations or civil society groups that are making a difference on marine environment protection in your country and what specific international agreements they are supporting.