Global regimes, regional adaptation; environmental safety in Baltic sea oil transportation

Maritime Policy and Management

Volumn 37, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 489-503

  Hassler, Björn ^a  

^a School of Life Sciences Södertörn University   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

CAPACITY BUILDING; CRUDE OIL; INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION; OIL SPILL; PORT DEVELOPMENT; SHIPPING; TRANSPORTATION SAFETY;

ATLANTIC OCEAN; BALTIC SEA;

EID: 77957781838     PISSN: 03088839     EISSN: 14645254     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/03088839.2010.503715     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. HELCOM, 2008, Kaliningrad to Host a Stakeholder Workshop on Improving Accident Response Capability in the Southeastern Baltic. Press release 13 August 2008, Helsinki, Helcom Information Service.
2. BRUSENDORFF, A. C. and EHLERS, P., 2002, The HELCOM Copenhagen declaration: A regional environmental approach for safer shipping. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, 17(3), 351-395.
3. HINDS, L., 2003, Ocean governance and the implementation gap. Marine Policy, 27, 349-356.
4. MOLLER, T. H. and SANTNER, R. S., undated, Oil Spill Preparedness and Response: The Role of Industry. Unpublished manuscript (London: The International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation Ltd.).
5. I am grateful to Dr Tosh Moller, Managing Director at The International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation Limited (ITOPF), who spelled out this argument at a workshop held in Visby, Sweden, in April 2008.
6. In some respects, SKJAERSETH, J. B., 2006, Protecting the Northeast Atlantic: One problem, three institutions. In: Institutional Interaction in Global Environmental Governance: Synergy and Conflict among International and EU Policies, edited by S. Oberthür and T. Gehring (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 103-125.
7. adopts a perspective somewhat similar to the one presented here when arguing that the soft-law International North Sea Conferences were instrumental in speeding up tighter environmental regulation in the Northeast Atlantic.
8. KEOHANE, R. O., 1984, After Hegemony: Cooperation and Discord in the Word Political Economy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press).
9. AXELROD, R., 1984, The Evolution of Cooperation (New York, NY: Basic Books).
10. KREPS, D. M., ROBERTS, J. and WILSON, R., 1982, Rational cooperation in the finitely repeated prisoners' dilemma. Journal of Economic Theory, 2(27), 245-252;
11. CAMERER, C. F. and FEHR, E., 2004, Measuring social norms and preferences using experimental games. A guide for social scientists. In: Foundations of Human Sociality Economic Experiments and Ethnographic Evidence from Fifteen Small-Scale Societies, edited by J. Henrich, R. Boyd, S. Bowles, C. F. Camerer, E. Fehr and H. Gintis (Oxford: Oxford University Press), pp. 55-96.
12. OLSON, M., 1965, The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press); SEBENIUS, S. K., 1983, Negotiation arithmetic: Adding and subtracting issues and parties. International Organization, 37(2), 281-316.
13. UNDERDAL, A., 1980, The Politics of International Fisheries Management: The Case of the North-East Atlantic (Oslo: Scandinavian University Press).
14. VICTOR, D., 2006, Toward effective international collaboration on climate change: Numbers, interests and institutions. Global Environmental Politics, 6(3), 90-103.
15. MITCHELL, R. D. and KEILBACH, P. M., 2004, Situation structure and institutional design: Reciprocity, coercion and exchange. In: The Rational Design of International Institutions, edited by B. Koremenos, C. Lipson and D. Snidal (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 891-917.
16. UNDERDAL, A., 2002, One question, two answers. In: Environmental Regime Effectiveness: Confronting Theory with Evidence, edited by E. L. Miles, A. Underdal, S. Andresen, J. Wettestad, J. B. Skjærset and E. M. Carlin (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 3-45;
17. MITCHELL, R. D., 2006, Problem structure, institutional design, and the relative effectiveness of international environmental agreements. Global Environmental Politics, 6(3), 72-89.
18. SAMPSON, H. and BLOOR, M., 2007, When Jack gets out of the box: The problems of regulating a global industry. Sociology, 41(3), 551-569.
19. I owe this qualification to Professor Kjell Larsson at Gotland University, who suggested this at a workshop held in Visby, Sweden, in April 2008.
20. This section to a considerable extent builds upon the informed account given in MITCHELL, R.D., MCCONNELL, M. L., ROGINKO, A. and BARRETT, A., 1999, International vessel-source oil pollution. In: The Effectiveness of International Environmental Regimes: Causal Connections and Behavioural Mechanisms, edited by O. R. Young (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press), pp. 35-37.
21. The MARPOL 73 Convention was signed but never went into force because of different views on Appendix II (hazardous liquid substances). Appendix I was later revised and the member states were allowed to postpone the ratification of Appendix II. Finally, the Convention - now labeled MARPOL 73/78 went into force in October 1983. MARPOL 73/78 covers all kinds of pollution from ships, operational as well as accidental.
22. IMO regulation 13F, agreed upon in 1992, entered into force in 1993.
23. HELCOM, 2003, Status of the Implementation of the Copenhagen Declaration (Helsinki: Helsinki Commission).
24. Moreover, it should be noted that a significant number of initiatives at sub-regional or bilateral levels targeting diffuse oil pollution (e.g. from cleaning of tanks at sea, emitting oily waste waters) have been undertaken. These initiatives are, however, not discussed below, since the focus in this article is on large-scale hazards from tanker accidents.
25. More specifically, the Resolution required (1 July 2002) all new vessels over 300 ton and abiding by the SOLAS Convention to have AIS. On 31 December 2004, all vessels in international traffic were required to have AIS, and in 1 July 2007, also ships only sailing national waters had to comply with the same regulation. Although not required, an increasing number of private vessels are being equipped with AIS capability.
26. SWEDISH MARINE ADMINISTRATION, 28 June 2007. http://www.sjofartsverket.se/templates/SFVXPage____875.aspx
27. HELCOM, 2007, HELCOM to conduct annual maritime oil spill response exercise. Press Release 30 August 2007 (Helsinki: Helcom Information Service).
28. HELCOM, 2008, HELCOM fleet to drill response to an oil platform accident off Kaliningrad. Press release 7 August 2008 (Helsinki: Helcom Information Service);
29. HELCOM, 2009, HELCOM fleet to hold a major disaster response exercise in the Gulf of Riga. Press release 27 July 2009 (Helsinki: Helcom Information Service).
30. IMO, 2005, New and Amended Traffic Separation, COLREG.2/Circ.56, 6 December 2005, London.
31. JOLMA, K., 2005, Threat of Oil Spill in the Gulf of Finland and SYKE New Technology to Deal With (Helsinki: Finnish Environment Institute, SYKE).
32. SØVÆRNETS OPERATIVE KOMMANDO, 2004, Beredskabsplan for det Statslige Danske Beredskab til Bekæmpelse af Forurening af Havet med Olie og Andre Skadelige Stoffer: Huvudplan (Del I). Copenhagen, Søværnets Operative Kommando, March 2004.
33. This does not necessarily mean that no surveillance has been carried out by Russian authorities, but lack of data on these matters makes assessments problematic. See HELCOM, 2006, HELCOM Report on Illegal Discharges Observed During Surveillance Flights in 2005. Helsinki: Helsinki Commission.
34. HELCOM, 2009, Annual 2008 HELCOM Report on Illegal Discharges Observed During Aerial Surveillance. August 2009. Helsinki: Helsinki Commission.
35. LINDÉN, O., CHIRCOP, A., POURZANJANI, M., SCHRÖDER, J-.U. and RAYMAAKERS, S., 2009, PSSA in the Baltic Sea: Present Situation and Future Possibilities. Research Brief, Malmö: World Maritime University.
36. HELCOM, 2006, HELCOM publishes mariners routing guide for the Baltic Sea. Press release 8 August 2006 (Helsinki: Helsinki Commission).
37. SWEDISH MARITIME AUTHORITY, 17 January 2008. http://www.sjofartsverket.se/templates/SFVXPage____884.aspx
38. UGGLA, Y., 2007, Environmental protection and the freedom of the high seas: The Baltic Sea as a PSSA from a Swedish perspective. Marine Policy, 31, 251-257.
39. KNUDSEN, O. F., 2006, Environmental constraints and market forces in a disputed regime: The case of Russian oil exports in the Baltic Sea. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, March 22-25, San Diego, CA.