评估环境影响和合作的义务

IF 0.5 Q4 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Zoe Scanlon, Robert Beckman
{"title":"评估环境影响和合作的义务","authors":"Zoe Scanlon, Robert Beckman","doi":"10.1163/24519391-00301002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Philippines v China Award contained a number of novel and highly progressive findings with respect to obligations for the protection of the marine environment under UNCLOS. Thus far, these elements of the decision have gone largely unexamined in the surrounding literature. This article concentrates on two specific aspects of these findings: the obligations in respect of environmental impact assessments in articles 205 and 206, and articles 197 and 123 and the duty to cooperate. It analyses the Award and identifies some concerns with the Tribunal's reasoning in these areas. Although broadly, the Award upholds effective protections for the marine environment; this article highlights aspects of the decision in which different approaches could have been taken that would have led to stronger outcomes for the marine environment.","PeriodicalId":29867,"journal":{"name":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2018-06-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/24519391-00301002","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessing Environmental Impact and the Duty to Cooperate\",\"authors\":\"Zoe Scanlon, Robert Beckman\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/24519391-00301002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The Philippines v China Award contained a number of novel and highly progressive findings with respect to obligations for the protection of the marine environment under UNCLOS. Thus far, these elements of the decision have gone largely unexamined in the surrounding literature. This article concentrates on two specific aspects of these findings: the obligations in respect of environmental impact assessments in articles 205 and 206, and articles 197 and 123 and the duty to cooperate. It analyses the Award and identifies some concerns with the Tribunal's reasoning in these areas. Although broadly, the Award upholds effective protections for the marine environment; this article highlights aspects of the decision in which different approaches could have been taken that would have led to stronger outcomes for the marine environment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29867,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-06-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1163/24519391-00301002\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-00301002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Ocean Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/24519391-00301002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

菲律宾诉中国的裁决在《联合国海洋法公约》规定的海洋环境保护义务方面包含了一些新颖和高度进步的结论。到目前为止,这一决定的这些因素在周围的文献中基本上没有被研究过。本条集中讨论这些调查结果的两个具体方面:第205条和206条以及第197条和第123条中关于环境影响评估的义务以及合作的义务。它分析了裁决,并指出了对法庭在这些领域的推理的一些关切。虽然从广义上讲,该奖项支持对海洋环境的有效保护;这篇文章强调了该决定的各个方面,其中可以采取不同的方法,从而为海洋环境带来更强的结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessing Environmental Impact and the Duty to Cooperate
The Philippines v China Award contained a number of novel and highly progressive findings with respect to obligations for the protection of the marine environment under UNCLOS. Thus far, these elements of the decision have gone largely unexamined in the surrounding literature. This article concentrates on two specific aspects of these findings: the obligations in respect of environmental impact assessments in articles 205 and 206, and articles 197 and 123 and the duty to cooperate. It analyses the Award and identifies some concerns with the Tribunal's reasoning in these areas. Although broadly, the Award upholds effective protections for the marine environment; this article highlights aspects of the decision in which different approaches could have been taken that would have led to stronger outcomes for the marine environment.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信