A Critical Approach to Environmental Impact Assessment in High Seas: Was the State-Led Process The Right Choice?

Abstract

Environmental impact assessment (EIA) began to be implemented in the 1970s and has increasingly become a part of the domestic law of many states since the 1980s. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, without directly addressing EIA, mandates that states assess and report the impacts of activities that may cause pollution in the parf of the protection and preservation of the marine environment. EIA is one of the four main topics of the The Agreement 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 (BBNJ). The internationalization of EIA has been a frequently mentioned issue during the negotiations of the BBNJ. However, in the final version of the BBNJ, the Agreement left the conduct of EIA to the national process of the state party. This situation grants excessive discretion to states in marine areas that are not subject to national jurisdiction. The aim of the study is to raise awareness by demonstrating the effectiveness and adequacy of the provisions of these Conventions addressing EIA. In this context, the study will briefly review the EIAs regulated in the Conventions, address the negative consequences of non-internationalization, and assess the importance of internationalizing EIAs in marine areas beyond national jurisdiction. The findings of the study suggest that the discretionary power granted to the parties reduces the effectiveness of the international community and creates legal gaps in the implementation of EIA.

Keywords

• BBNJ Agreement
• United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
• Environmental Impact Assessment
• Internationalization
• Marine Areas Outside National Jurisdiction

Açık Denizlerde Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesine Eleştirel Bir Yaklaşım: Devlet Odaklı Süreç Doğru Bir Tercih Miydi?

Abstract

Çevresel etki değerlendirmesi 1970’lerde uygulanmaya başlanmış, 1980’ler sonrasında artarak birçok devletin iç hukukunun bir parçası haline gelmiştir. Birleşmiş Milletler Deniz Hukuku Sözleşmesi’nde çevresel etki değerlendirmesi konusunda direk bir düzenleme yapılmaksızın deniz çevresinin korunması ve muhafazası kısmında devletlerin, kirlilik oluşturabilecek faaliyetlerle ilgili etkileri değerlendirmesi ve rapor etmesi yükümlülüğü düzenlenmiştir. Ulusal Yetki Alanı Dışındaki Alanlarda Deniz Biyolojik Çeşitliliğinin Korunması ve Sürdürülebilir Kullanımı Sözleşmesi (BBNJ)’nin dört ana konusundan biri de çevresel etki değerlendirmesi olmuştur. BBNJ’nin müzakeresi esnasında çevresel etki değerlendirmesinin uluslararasılaştırılması çokça dile getirilen bir konu olmuştur. Ancak neticede kabul edilen haliyle BBNJ çevresel etki değerlendirmesinin yürütülmesini taraf devletin ulusal sürecine bırakmıştır. Bu durum ulusal yetkiye tabi olmayan deniz alanlarında devletlere çok fazla takdir yetkisi tanımaktadır. Çalışmanın amacı çevresel etki değerlendirmesini ele alan söz konusu Sözleşmelerin düzenlemelerinin ne ölçüde etkin ve yeterli olduklarını ortaya koyarak bir farkındalık oluşturmaktır. Çalışmada, bu minvalde, Sözleşmelerde düzenlenen çevresel etki değerlendirmesine kısaca yer verilerek uluslararasılaştırmamanın oluşturduğu olumsuz sonuçlar ele alınacak ve ulusal yetki alanı dışındaki deniz alanlarında çevresel etki değerlendirmesinin uluslararasılaştırılmasının önemi değerlendirilecektir. Çalışmada elde edilen bulgular neticesinde taraflara tanınan takdir yetkisinin uluslararası toplumun etkinliğini azalttığı ve çevresel etki değerlendirmesinin uygulanmasında hukuki boşluklar oluşturduğu gözlemlenmiştir.

Keywords

• BBNJ Sözleşmesi
• Birleşmiş Milletler Deniz Hukuku Sözleşmesi
• Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesi
• Uluslararasılaşma
• Ulusal Yetki Alanı Dışındaki Deniz Alanları

References

1. Abdul-Sattar N, ‘Comparative Analysis of the EIA system of Developed and Developing Countries: Cases of Hydroelectric Power Plants’ (Master Thesis, Chalmers Universıty Of Technology 2007). google scholar
2. Alıca SS, ‘Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesinin Yargı Kararları Çerçevesinde İrdelenmesi’ (2011) 15 (3) Gazi Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 97-130. google scholar
3. Altınok MS, ‘Deniz Yatağı Uyuşmazlıkları Dairesi’nin Danışma Görüşü Işığında Uluslararası Derin Deniz Yatağı Madenciliğinde Sponsor Devletlerin Yükümlülükleri Ve Sorumlulukları’ (2019) 2(2) Selçuk Üniversitesi Adalet Meslek Yüksekokulu Dergisi 9-32. google scholar
4. Arnold N. Pronto, ‘Some Thoughts on the Making of International Law’ (2008) 19(3) European Journal of International Law 601-616. google scholar
5. Bastmeijer K and Roura R, ‘Environmental Impact Assessment in Antarctica’ in Kees Bastmeijer and Timo Koivurova (eds), Theory and practice of Transboundary Environmental Impact Assessment (Martinus Njihoff 2008) 175-220. google scholar
6. Bektaş S, Uluslararası Deniz Yatağının İşletilmesi ve Deniz Yatağı Uluslararası Otoritesi (Legem 2017). google scholar
7. Biermann F, ‘“Common Concern of Humankind”: The Emergence of a New Concept of International Environmental Law’ (1996) 34(4) Archiv des Völkerrechts 426-481. google scholar
8. Bindoff NL, Cheung WWL et all, ‘Changing Ocean, Marine Ecosystems, and Dependent Communities’ in Hans-Otto Pörtner, Debra C. Roberts et all (eds), IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate: Special Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge University Press 2019) 447-587. google scholar

9. Bodansky D, ‘Four Treaties in One: The Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Agreement’ (2024) 118(2) American Journal of International Law 299-323. google scholar
10. Boyle A and Chinkin C, The Making of International Law (Oxford 2007). google scholar
11. Boyle A and Redgwell C, Birnie, Boyle and Redgwell’s International Law and the Environment (4th Edition, Oxford University Press 2021). google scholar
12. Cassotta S and Goodsite ME, ‘A Regulatory Multilevel and Multidisciplinary Contextual Analysis of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) relevant to Greenland: Offshore Oil Drilling and the Imperfect Equation’ (2013) 22(2) European Energy and Environmental Law Review 46-69. google scholar
13. Combacau J and Alland D, ‘ “Primary” and “secondary” rules in the law of State responsibility categorizing international obligations’ (1985) 16 Netherlands Yearbook of International Law 81-109. google scholar
14. Craik N, ‘The Duty to Cooperate in the Customary Law of Environmental Impact Assessment’ (2020) International and Comparative Law Quarterly 69(1) 239, 239-259. google scholar
15. Craik N, The International Law of Environmental Impact Assessment: Process, Substance and Integration (Cambridge University Press 2008). google scholar
16. Dalal-Clayton B and Sadler B, ‘Strategic Environmental Assessment: a Rapidly Evolving Approach: Environmental Planning Issues No. 18’ (1999) International Institute for Environment and Development 1-12. google scholar
17. De Lucia V, ‘The integration of the ecosystem approach in the BBNJ agreement-An initial assessment of limits and opportunities’ (2024) 33(3) Review of European, Comparative and International Environmental Law 554-564. google scholar
18. De Lucia V, The ‘Ecosystem Approach’ in International Environmental Law: Genealogy and Biopolitics (Routledge 2019). google scholar
19. Doelle M and Sander G, ‘Next Generation Environmental Assessment in the Emerging High Seas Regime? An Evaluation of the State of the Negotiations’ (2020) 35(3) The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 498-532. google scholar
20. Dordeska M, ‘The Process of International Law-Making: The Relationship between the International Court of Justice and the International Law Commission’ (2015) 15(1) International and Comparative Law Review 7-57. google scholar
21. Druel E, ‘Environmental impact assessments in areas beyond national jurisdiction-Study’ (2013) N°01/13 The Institute for Sustainable Development and International Relations 1-42. google scholar
22. Duan W and Shen L, ‘The role of environmental impact assessments in the establishment and management of marine protected areas under the UNCLOS and the BBNJ Agreement’ (2024) 33(2) Review of European, Comparative & International Environmental Law 303-311. google scholar
23. Dupuy PM, ‘Soft Law and the International Law of the Environment’ (1991) 12(2) Michigan Journal of International Law 420-435. google scholar
24. Elferink AGO, ‘Environmental Impact Assessment in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction’ (2012) 27 The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 449-480. google scholar
25. Elferink AGO, ‘Governance Principles for Areas beyond National Jurisdiction’ (2012) 27(2) The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 205-259. google scholar
26. Ertürk Özdemir C, ‘Uluslararası Çevre Sözleşmelerinde Uygunluk Sistemlerine Bir Örnek Olarak Aarhus Sözleşmesi’ (2025) 45(1) Public and Private International Law Bulletin 109-140. google scholar
27. Fitzmaurice M, ‘Legitimacy of International Environmental Law. The Sovereign States Overwhelmed by Obligations: Responsibility to React to Problems Beyond National Jurisdiction?’ (2017) 77 Heidelberg Journal of International Law 339-370. google scholar
28. Friedman S, ‘The interaction of the BBNJ agreement and the legal regime of the Area, and its influence on the implementation of the BBNJ agreement’ (2024) 167:106235 Marine Policy 1-6. google scholar
29. Gemalmaz MS, ‘Transformation From Soft Law to Hard Law of International Environmental Protection: Process, Basic Concepts and Principles - Part 1: “Common Heritage of Mankind”, “Present and Future Generations”, ‘Inter Intra-Generational Equity’ and “Sustainable Development”’ (2022) 71 Annales de la Faculté de Droit D’Istanbul 119-219. google scholar
30. Gemalmaz MS, ‘Transformation From Soft Law to Hard Law of International Environmental Protection: Process, Basic Concepts And Principles – Part II: “No transboundary environmental harm”, “Precautionary”, “Environmental impact assessment” and “Access to information and participation in decision-making process” principles’ (2023) 73 Annales de la Faculté de Droit D’Istanbul 1-95. google scholar
31. Glasson J, Therivel R and Chadwick A, Introduction To Environmental Impact Assessment (E. 4th, Routledge 2012). google scholar
32. Gottlieb HM, Kachelriess D and Slobodian L, ‘Understanding the Preamble, Objectives and Principles of the BBNJ Agreement: A Focus on the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits of Marine Genetic Resources’ in Fran Humphries (ed), Decoding Marine Genetic Resource Governance Under the BBNJ Agreement (Springer 2025) 95-124. google scholar
33. Gökalp Alıca SS, ‘Ulusal Yargı Yetkisi Dışında Açık Denizlerde Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesi’ in Nesrin Algan ve Onur Gönülal (ed), Ulusal Yetki Alanları Dışında Kalan Açık Denizlerin Korunması ve Yönetilmesi (Türk Deniz Araştırmaları Vakfı 2019) 8-30. google scholar
34. Guerra F, Grilo C, Pedroso NM and Cabral H, ‘Environmental Impact Assessment in the marine environment: A comparison of legal frameworks’ (2015) 55 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 182-194. google scholar
35. Guilhon M, Singh P, Christiansen S and Turra A, ‘Revisiting procedural requirements for the assessment of environmental impacts arising from the different stages of deep seabed mining: Current practices at the International Seabed Authority and recommendations for improvement’ (2022) 96: 106846 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 1-14. google scholar
36. Gullett W and Craik N, ‘Precautionary Environmental Impact Assessments under the BBNJ Agreement: More than a Minor or Transitory Effect on the Marine Environment?’ (2025) 56(3) Ocean Development and International Law 1-29. google scholar
37. Güneş AM, Avrupa Birliği Çevre Hukuku (B. 1, On İki Levha Yayıncılık 2011). google scholar
38. Güneş AM, Çevre Hukuku (B. 6, Seçkin Yayınları 2024). google scholar
39. Hahn RW and Richards KR, ‘Internationalization of Environmental Regulation’ (1989) 30(2) Harvard International Law Journal 421-446. google scholar
40. Harrison J, Diz D et all, ‘Environmental Impact Assessment and Monitoring Under the BBNJ Agreement: Towards Effective and Equitable International Implementation’ (2024) BBNJ Implementation Policy Brief Series: Policy Brief No.4 1-9. google scholar
41. Hassanali K, ‘Internationalization of EIA in a new marine biodiversity agreement under the Law of the Sea Convention: A proposal for a tiered approach to review and decision-making’ (2021) 87: 106554 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 1-8. google scholar
42. International Association for Impact Assessment in cooperation with Institute of Environmental Assessment, Principles of Environmental Impact Assessment Best Practice, January 1999, IAIAP-FPrinciples, Part 2(1). google scholar
43. International Institute for Sustainable Development, ‘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’ (2018) 25(179) Earth Negotiations Bulletin 1-18. google scholar
44. International Institute for Sustainable Development, ‘Summary of the Fourth 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: 7-18 March 2022’ (2022) 25(225) 1-22. google scholar
45. Jiang R and Ping G, ‘Sustainable Management of Marine Protected Areas in the High Seas: From Regional Treaties to a Global New Agreement on Biodiversity in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction’ (2023) 15(15): 11575 Sustainability 1-14. google scholar
46. Kayhan AK, ‘Uluslararası Hukukta İnsanlığın Ortak Kaygısı Kavramı’ (2018) 17(1) Galatasaray Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 221-246. google scholar
47. Koivurova T, Pamela Lesser et all., Environmental Impact Assessment in the Arctic: A Guide to Best Practice (Edward Elgar Publishing 2016). google scholar
48. Kojima C, ‘Integration of general principles of international environmental law into the law of the sea: Assessment and challenges’ (2023) 149: 105497 Marine Policy 1-4. google scholar
49. Kong L, ‘Environmental Impact Assessment under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea’ (2011) 10(3) Chinese Journal of International Law 651-669. google scholar
50. Li Z and Zhang B, ‘Internationalization of EIA rules in the BBNJ Agreement: Impediments and possible solutions’ (2024) 167:106245 Marine Policy 1-7. google scholar
51. Lowe V, International Law: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford 2015). google scholar
52. Ma D, Fang Q and Guan S, ‘Current legal regime for environmental impact assessment in areas beyond national jurisdiction and its future approaches’ (2016) 56 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 23-30. google scholar
53. Maulida LS, ‘BBNJ Agreement: Mapping the Roles of the Relevant Actors and Their Issues in the Environmental Impact Assessment Process’ (2022) SSRN Electronic Journal 1-26. google scholar
54. Mendenhall E and Hassanali K, ‘The BBNJ agreement and liability’ (2023) 150: 105549 Marine Policy 1-6. google scholar
55. Millicay F, ‘Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: Securing a Sound Law of the Sea Instrument’ in David Joseph Attard, David M. Ong and Dino Kritsiotis (eds), The IMLI Treatise on Global Ocean Governance - Volume I: UN and Global Ocean Governance (Oxford University Press 2018) 167-178. google scholar
56. Morejón V, Campo AGD, Galparsoro I and Pedreschi D, ‘A New Ecosystem-Based Cumulative Effects Assessment Framework to Enhance Strategic Environmental Assessment of Marine Spatial Plans’ (2025) 75 Environmental Management 3062-3075. google scholar
57. O’Faircheallaigh C, ‘Public participation and environmental impact assessment: Purposes, implications, and lessons for public policy making’ (2010) 30(1) Environmental Impact Assessment Review 19-27. google scholar
58. Permanent Mission of the People’s Republic of China to the United Nations, ‘Written Submission of the Chinese Government on Elements of a Draft Text of 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’ (2017) Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea of Office of Legal Affairs of the United Nations 1-10. google scholar
59. Phyffer J, ‘Establishing the Erga Omnes Character of the Obligation to Prevent Transboundary Environmental Harm’ (2025) 27(1) Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law 659-698. google scholar
60. Pinto DDP, Fisheries Management in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: The Impact of Ecosystem Based Law-making (Martinus Nijhoff 2013). google scholar
61. Ricard P, ‘The Advent of the 2023 “BBNJ” Agreement: A Preliminary Legal Analysis’ (2024) 53(5-6) Environmental Policy and Law 427-437. google scholar
62. Roberts J, ‘Protecting Sensitive Marine Environments: The Role and Application of Ships’ Routeing Measures’ (2005) 20(1) The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 135-159. google scholar
63. Sadler B, ‘International Study of the Effectiveness of Environmental Assessment- Final Report Environmental Assessment in a Changing World: Evaluating Practice to Improve Performance’ (1996) Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 1-248. google scholar
64. Sage-Fuller B, The Precautionary Principle in Marine Environmental Law With Special Reference to High Risk Vessels (Taylor & Francis 2013). google scholar
65. Sammy GK, ‘Toward the Internationalization of Environmental Impact Asssessment in Developing Countries’ (1987) Impact Assessment 5(3) 129-143. google scholar
66. Sander G, ‘International Legal Obligations for Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment in the Arctic Ocean’ (2016) 31(1) International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 88-119. google scholar
67. Sato C, ‘The Necessity of a Global Legal Framework for Protection of Marine Biodiversity in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction: Could the BBNJ Agreement Provide the Basis for an Integrated Framework?’ (2021) 25 Max Planck Yearbook of United Nations Law 584-624. google scholar
68. Saygılı A, Çevre Hukuku Açısından Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesi (İmaj Yayıncılık 2007). google scholar
69. Rathi AKA, Handbook of Environmental Impact Assessment: Concepts and Practice (Cambridge Scholars Publishing 2021). google scholar
70. Seta M, ‘Environmental Impact Assessment of Offshore Windfarms in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction: Who Should Have Obligations?’ (2023) 41 The Australian Year Book of International Law 74-100. google scholar
71. Song Y, ‘The Obligation of EIA in the International Jurisprudence and Its Impact on the BBNJ Negotiations’ (2022) 15 Sustainability 487-497. google scholar
72. Song Y, Mao Z and Zhang Z, ‘Strategic environmental assessment in areas beyond national jurisdiction: existing regimes, challenges, and prospects’ (2024) 11: 1371511 Frontiers in Marine Science 1-13. google scholar
73. Tabanlı F, Uluslararası Hukukta Deniz Yatağı Faaliyetlerinden Kaynaklı Deniz Kirliliği ve Devletlerin Sorumluluğu (Yetkin 2021). google scholar
74. Taghizadeh Z and Hoda A, ‘From Global Commons to Global Accountability: The Erga Omnes Obligation to Safeguard Marine Biological Diversity as Common Heritage of Humankind’ (2025) 28(2) Journal of International Wildlife Law & Policy 193-220. google scholar
75. Tanaka Y, ‘Obligation to Conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in International Adjudication: Interaction between Law and Time’ (2021) 90(1) Nordic Journal of International Law 86-121. google scholar
76. Tanaka Y, ‘Obligations and Liability of Sponsoring States Concerning Activities in the Area: Reflections on the ITLOS Advisory Opinion of 1 February 2011’ (2013) 60(2) Netherlands International Law Review 205-230. google scholar
77. Tanaka Y, ‘Reflections on the Environmental Impact Assessment in the BBNJ Agreement: Its Implications for the Conservation of Biological Diversity in the Marine Arctic beyond National Jurisdiction’ (2024) 55(1-2) Ocean Development & International Law 85-114. google scholar
78. Tanaka Y, ‘Reflections on Time Elements in the International Law of the Environment’ (2013) 73 Heidelberg Journal of International Law 139-175. google scholar
79. Public and Private International Law Bulletin, 46 (1): 359–387 384 google scholar
80. Açık Denizlerde Çevresel Etki Değerlendirmesine Eleştirel Bir Yaklaşım: Devlet Odaklı Süreç Doğru Bir Tercih Miydi? Yıldız, 2026 google scholar
81. Tang J, ‘Form follows function: An initial evaluation of the BBNJ Agreement’s achievements regarding the “not undermining” proviso’ (2024) 159: 105952 Marine Policy 1-8. google scholar
82. Tarasenko S, ‘Environmental impact assessment in Antarctica: application of the “minor or transitory impact” criterion’ (2009) ANTA 502- Graduate Certificate in Antarctic Studies 1-9. google scholar
83. The Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress, The National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended. google scholar
84. Treves T, ‘Environmental Impact Assessment and the Precautionary Approach: Why Are International Courts and Tribunals Reluctant to Consider Them as General Principles of Law?’ in Mads Andenas, Malgosia Fitzmaurice, Attila Tanzi, and Jan Wouters (eds), General Principles and the Coherence of International Law (Brill / Nijhoff 2019) 379-388. google scholar
85. van Staden F and Retief F, ‘Pluralism in EIA Practice: A Q-Method Analysis of the Economic Growth-Environment Nexus’ (2022) Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal 40 (4) 342-352. google scholar
86. Wang C and Li Y, ‘On the implementation of the provisions regarding environmental impact assessments under the BBNJ agreement’ (2025) 12:1657649 Frontiers in Marine Science 1-11. google scholar
87. Wang Y and Pan X, ‘Application of the environmental impact assessment provisions under the BBNJ Agreement in high seas marine protected area: challenges and suggestion’ (2025) 12:1589936 Frontiers in Marine Science 1-23. google scholar
88. Warner RM, ‘Oceans beyond boundaries: environmental assessment frameworks’ (2012) 27 (2) International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law 481-499. google scholar
89. Williams A and Dupuy K, ‘Deciding over nature: Corruption and environmental impact assessments’ (2017) 65 Environmental Impact Assessment Review 118-124. google scholar
90. Wolfrum R, ‘Freedom of Navigation: New Challenges’ in Myron H. Nordquist, Tommy Koh, and John Norton Moore (eds), Freedom of Seas, Passage Rights and the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention (Martinus Nijhoff 2009) 79-101. google scholar
91. World Bank Environment Department, Environmental Assessment Sourcebook Volume I Policies, Procedures, and Cross-Sectoral Issues, October 1989, World Bank Technical Paper Number 139. google scholar
92. Yang T, ‘The Emergence of the Environmental Impact Assessment Duty as a Global Legal Norm and General Principle of Law’ (2019) 70 Hastings Law Journal 525-572. google scholar
93. Yılmaz SG ve Kara B, ‘Implementation of the BBNJ Agreement: A general overview and Turkish perspective’ (2025) 31(2) Journal of the Black Sea / Mediterranean Environment 142-178. google scholar
94. Zhang Z, Cao D, Ma T, Liu H and Mao Z, ‘International cooperation for a biodiverse future: Opportunities and challenges under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework’ (2025) 58 Global Ecology and Conservation 1-10. google scholar
95. Advisory Opinion AO-32/25 (Climate Emergency and Human Rights) (IACtHR, 29 May 2025). google scholar
96. Certain Activities Carried Out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v Nicaragua) and Construction of a Road in Costa Rica along the San Juan River (Nicaragua v Costa Rica) (Judgment) (2015) ICJ Rep 665. google scholar
97. Gabcikovo-Nagymaros Project (Hungary v Slovakia) (Judgment) (1997) ICJ Rep 7. google scholar
98. Land Reclamation in and around the Straits of Johor (Malaysia v Singapore) (Provisional Measures, Order of 8 October 2003) ITLOS Rep 10. google scholar
99. MOX Plant (Ireland v United Kingdom) (Provisional Measures, Order of 3 December 2001) ITLOS Rep 95, Separate Opinion of Judge Mensah. google scholar
100. Obligations of States in respect of Climate Change (Advisory Opinion) (2025) ICJ Rep 187. google scholar
101. Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v Uruguay) (Judgment) (2010) ICJ Rep 14. google scholar
102. Request for an Advisory Opinion submitted by the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law (Advisory Opinion) (2024) ITLOS Rep 4. google scholar
103. Responsibilities and Obligations of States with Respect to Activities in the Area (Advisory Opinion) (2011) ITLOS Rep 10. google scholar
104. Verein KlimaSeniorinnen Schweiz and Others v Switzerland App no 53600/20 (ECHR, 9 April 2024). google scholar
105. Agreement 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 (adopted 19 June 2023, entered into force 17 January 2026) UN Doc A/RES/77/321 (BBNJ Agreement). google scholar
106. CBD Secretariat, Voluntary Guidelines on Biodiversity-Inclusive Impact Assessment (2006) CBD Technical Series No 26 (Guidelines on Biodiversity-Inclusive Impact Assessment). google scholar
107. Convention on Access to Information, Public Participation in Decision-making and Access to Justice in Environmental Matters (adopted 25 June 1998, entered into force 30 October 2001) 2161 UNTS 447 (Aarhus Convention). google scholar
108. Convention on Biological Diversity (opened for signature 5 June 1992, entered into force 29 December 1993) 1760 UNTS 79 (CBD). google scholar
109. Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (adopted 25 February 1991, entered into force 10 September 1997) 1989 UNTS 309 (Espoo Convention). google scholar
110. Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (opened for signature 3 March 1973, entered into force 1 July 1975) 993 UNTS 243. google scholar
111. Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (opened for signature 19 September 1979, entered into force 1 June 1982) 1284 UNTS 209 (Bern Convention). google scholar
112. Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (adopted 23 June 1979, entered into force 1 November 1983) 1651 UNTS 333. google scholar
113. Convention on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat (adopted 2 February 1971, entered into force 21 December 1975) 996 UNTS 245. google scholar
114. Draft articles on Prevention of Transboundary Harm from Hazardous Activities, with commentaries, 2001. google scholar
115. Draft articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts, with commentaries, 2001, General Commentary. google scholar
116. On The Revised Consolidated Text: Draft Regulations on Exploitation of Mineral Resources in the Area, Dated 29 November 2024 (ISBA/30/C/CRP.1). google scholar
117. Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (adopted 4 October 1991, entered into force 14 January 1998) 2941 UNTS 3 (Madrid Protocol). google scholar
118. The Single European Act (SEA) 17 February 1986 (1987) OJ L. 169/1. google scholar
119. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (adopted 10 December 1982, entered into force 16 November 1994) 1833 UNTS 3 (UNCLOS). google scholar
120. Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, Revised Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment in Antarctica, Adopted 01/06/2016, Resolution 1 (2016) - ATCM XXXIX - CEP XIX, Santiago. google scholar
121. Implementation Committee, Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, Annex 1: Espoo Convention complaint. google scholar
122. International Seabed Authority, Draft regulations on exploitation of mineral resources in the Area: Parts IV and VI and related Annexes, Council session, part I: Kingston, 16-31 March 2023, ISBA/28/C/IWG/ENV/CRP.1. google scholar
123. International Seabed Authority, Draft Standard and Guidelines for environmental impact assessment process Developed by the Legal and Technical Commission, 2020. google scholar
124. International Seabed Authority, Recommendations for the guidance of the contractors for the assessment of the possible environmental impacts arising from exploration for polymetallic nodules in the Area, Legal and Technical Commission Seventh seession, Kingston, 2-13 July 2001, ISBA/7/LTC/1/Rev.1. google scholar
125. International Seabed Authority, Recommendations for the guidance of contractors for the assessment of the possible environmental impacts arising from exploration for marine minerals in the Area, Legal and Technical Commission session, part I; Kingston, 4-15 March 2019, ISBA/25/LTC/6/Rev.2. google scholar
126. Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency (SIDA), Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessments in International Development Cooperation, July 1988. google scholar
127. The Food and Agriculture Organization, International Guidelines for the Management of Deep-sea Fisheries in the High Seas, 2009. google scholar
128. United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Revised Guidelines on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context for Central Asian Countries, 2019. google scholar
129. United Nations Environment Programe, Assessing Environmental ImpactsA Global Review of Legislation, UN Environment Law Division and UN Environment World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Nairobi-Kenya, 2018. google scholar
130. United Nations Environment Programme, Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Fifteenth meeting -Part II: Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, Montreal, 7-19 December 2022, UN Doc CBD/COP/DEC/15/4. google scholar
131. United Nations Environment Programme, Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, Voluntary guidelines on biodiversity-inclusive impact-Appendix II, Curitiba, Brazil, 20-31 March 2006,UN Doc UNEP/CBD/ COP/8/27/Add.2. google scholar
132. United Nations Environment Programme, Environmental Impact Assessment and Strategic Environmental Assessment: Towards an Integrated Approach, 2004, 29-31.Arctic Environment Protection Strategy, Guidelines for Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in the Arctic, 1997. google scholar
133. United Nations General Assembly, 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 Fourth session New York, 7-18 March 2022, Textual proposals submitted by delegations by 20 February 2020, for consideration at the fourth session of the 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 (the Conference), in response to the invitation by the President of the Conference in her Note of 18 November 2019 (A/CONF.232/2020/3) Article-by-article compilation, UN Doc A/CONF.232/2022/INF.1. google scholar
134. United Nations General Assembly, Report of the UnitedNations Conference on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992, UN Doc A/CONF.151/26 (Vol. I). google scholar
135. United Nations General Assembly, 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, First session New York, 4-17 September 2018, UN Doc A/CONF.232/2018/7. google scholar
136. United Nations General Assembly, 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, Fifth session, New York, 15-26 August 2022, UN Doc A/CONF.232/2022/5. google scholar
137. United Nations General Assembly, 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: Statement by the President of the conference at the closing of the third session, New York, 19-30 August 2019, A/CONF.232/2019/10. google scholar
138. United Nations General Assembly, 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, Further resumed fifth session, New York 19 and 20 June 2023, Agreement 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, A/CONF.232/2023/4. google scholar
139. United Nations General Assembly, Report of the Preparatory Committee established by General Assembly resolution 69/292: Development of 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, Fourth session, New York, 10-21 July 2017, UN Doc A/AC.287/2017/PC.4/2. google scholar
140. United Nations General Assembly, Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 24 December 2017, 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, A/RES/72/249. google scholar
141. United Nations, ‘Chair’s streamlined non-paper on elements of a draft text of 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: Explanatory note’ (2017) 1-57. google scholar
142. United Nations, Reports of International Arbitral Awards: Trail Smelter Case (United States, Canada), 16 April 1938 and 11 March 1941, Vol. III, 2006. google scholar
143. Behnke L, ‘Environmental impact assessments under the BBNJ Agreement’ (5 March 2025) Regional BBNJ Workshop for the Western Indian Ocean -Eastern and Southern Africa Region Erişim Tarihi 10 Eylül 2025. google scholar
144. Bowling C, ‘Elizabeth Pierson and Stephanie Ratté, The Common Concern of Humankind: A Potential Framework for a New International Legally Binding Instrument on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity in the High Seas’ (2016) Erişim Tarihi 23 Ekim 2025. google scholar
145. International Maritime Organization, ‘Ships’ routeing’ Erişim Tarihi 31 Ekim 2025. google scholar
146. ‘High Seas: MPA Guide Protection Status’ (Marine Protection Atlas) Erişim Tarihi 2 Ağustos 2025. google scholar
147. Robb S, Jaeckel A and Blanchard C, ‘How could the BBNJ Agreement affect the International Seabed Authority’s Mining Code?‘ (EJIL:Talk! Blog of the European Journal of International Law, 13 April 2023) Erişim Tarihi 23 Eylül 2025. google scholar
148. ‘Practical Solution in applying the Espoo Convention: Guidance on the Practical Application of the Espoo Convention’ (United Nations Economic Commission for Europe) Erişim Tarihi 5 Ekim 2025. google scholar
149. ‘International Environmental Agreements (IEA) Database Project (Agreement List)’ (Université Laval) Erişim Tarihi 1 Eylül 2025. google scholar