DENİZLERİ ŞEKİLLENDİRMEK: JEOMÜHENDİSLİĞİN ULUSLARARASI DENİZ HUKUKU İLE DANSI

Öz

Jeomühendislik, iklim değişikliğiyle mücadele etmek için Dünya’nın doğal sistemlerine kasıtlı olarak büyük çapta müdahale edilmesi anlamına gelir ve deniz hukuku ile ilgili önemli yasal ve düzenleyici zorluklar ortaya çıkarır. Bu makale, jeomühendislik ile deniz hukuku kesişimini inceleyerek, Birleşmiş Milletler Deniz Hukuku Sözleşmesi (BMDHS) kapsamında mevcut hukuk sisteminin bu yeni teknolojileri nasıl ele aldığını analiz etmektedir. Okyanus gübrelemesi ve yapay yükselme gibi jeomühendislik faaliyetlerinin deniz biyolojik çeşitliliği ve ekosistemler üzerindeki potansiyel çevresel etkilerini araştırır. Ayrıca, makale, uluslararası deniz hukukunda yer alan ihtiyat ile çevre koruma ilkelerini ve bunların jeomühendislik uygulamalarına nasıl uygulandığını tartışır. Mevcut yasal araçlar ve uluslararası anlaşmaların kapsamlı bir incelemesi yoluyla, bu çalışma denizde jeomühendisliğin düzenlenmesindeki boşlukları ve belirsizlikleri vurgular. Ayrıca, deniz ortamlarının ve kıyı devletlerinin haklarının korunması ile yeniliği dengeleyerek jeomühendislik teknolojilerinin güvenli ve sürdürülebilir bir şekilde uygulanmasını sağlayacak uyumlu bir hukuk sisteminin geliştirilmesi için öneriler sunar. Bu makale, iklim değişikliğiyle mücadele ve okyanusta yeni teknolojik müdahalelerin yönetilmesinde uluslararası hukukun rolü üzerine devam eden tartışmalara katkıda bulunmayı amaçlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Deniz hukuku
• İklim jeomühendisliği
• Deniz çevresinin korunması

SHAPING THE SEAS: THE DANCE OF GEOENGINEERING AND INTERNATIONAL LAW OF THE SEA

Öz

Geoengineering, the deliberate large-scale intervention in the Earth’s natural systems to counteract climate change, poses significant legal and regulatory challenges, particularly concerning the law of the sea. This article examines the intersection of geoengineering and the law of the sea, analyzing how existing legal frameworks under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) address these emerging technologies. It explores the potential environmental impacts of geoengineering activities, such as ocean fertilization and artificial upwelling, on marine biodiversity and ecosystems. Furthermore, the article discusses the principles of precaution and environmental protection enshrined in international environmental law and how they apply to geoengineering practices. Through a comprehensive review of current legal instruments and international agreements, this study highlights the gaps and ambiguities in the regulation of geoengineering at sea. It also proposes recommendations for developing a cohesive legal framework that ensures the safe and sustainable deployment of geoengineering technologies, balancing innovation with the protection of marine environments and the rights of coastal states. This article aims to contribute to the ongoing discourse on climate change mitigation and the role of international law in governing novel technological interventions in the ocean.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Law of the sea
• Climate geoengineering
• Marine environmental protection

Kaynakça

1. Barnes, Richard, “The Continuing Vitality of UNCLOS”, Law of the Sea: UNCLOS as a Living Treaty, Ed.: Jill Barrett, Richard Barnes, London 2016.
2. Boyle, Alan, “Litigating Climate Change under Part XII of the LOSC”, International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Y. 2019, C. 34, S. 3, s. 458-481.
3. Boyle, Alan/Redgwell, Catherine, Birnie, Boyle and Redgwell’s International Law and the Environment, 4. B., Oxford 2021.
4. Böckenförde, Markus, “The Operationalization of the Precautionary Approach in International Environmental Law Treaties”, Heidelberg Journal of International Law, Y. 2003, C. 63, S. 2, s. 313-331.
5. Brent, Kerryn, Governance of Marine Geoengineering: Special Report Centre for International Governance Innovation, Waterloo 2019.
6. Cameron, James/Abouchar, Juli, “The Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law”, The Precautionary Principle and International Law, Ed.: David Freestone/Ellen Hey, The Hague 1996.
7. Certain Activities Carried out by Nicaragua in the Border Area (Costa Rica v. Nicaragua) [2015] ICJ Rep 665.
8. Chagos Marine Protected Area Arbitration, Mauritius v United Kingdom, Final Award, ICGJ 486 (PCA 2015), 18th March 2015, Permanent Court of Arbitration [PCA].

9. Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic (adopted 22 September 1992, entered into force 25 March 1998) 2354 UNTS 67.
10. Convention on Biological Diversity (adopted 5 June 1992, entered into force 29 December 1993) 1760 UNTS 79.
11. Convention on Biological Diversity Conference of the Parties, ‘Biodiversity and Climate Change’ (9 October 2008) Decision IX/16 UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/IX/16.
12. Convention on Biological Diversity Conference of the Parties, ‘Biological Diversity and Climate Change’ (29 October 2010) Decision X/33 UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/33.
13. Convention on Biological Diversity Conference of the Parties, ‘Climate-related Geoengineering’ (5 December 2012) Decision XI/20 UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/XI/20.
14. Convention on Biological Diversity Conference of the Parties, ‘Marine and Coastal Biodiversity’ (29 October 2010) Decision X/29 UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/29.
15. Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (adopted 29 December 1972, entered into force 30 August 1975) 1046 UNTS 138.
16. Decision X/33, UNEP/CBD/COP/ DEC/X/33, 29 October 2010, Biological Diversity and Climate Change.
17. Denman, Kenneth, “Climate Change, Ocean Processes and Ocean Iron Fertilization”, Marine Ecology Progress Series, Y. 2008, C. 364, S. 1, s. 219-225.
18. Du, Haomiao, An International Legal Framework for Geoengineering: Managing the Risks of an Emerging Technology, London 2019.
19. Dupuy, Pierre/Viñuales, Jorge, International Environmental Law, 2. B., Cambridge 2018.
20. Fuller, Bénédicte, The Precautionary Principle in Marine Environmental Law, New York 2013.
21. Geoengineering Monitor, Geoengineering and the UNFCCC Process: Spring 2018 (Erişim Tarihi: 30.05.2025).
22. GESAMP, High Level Review of a Wide Range of Proposed Marine Geoengineering Techniques, London 2019.
23. Ginzky, Harald/Frost, Robyn, “Marine Geo-Engineering: Legally Binding Regulation under the London Protocol”, Carbon & Climate Law Review, Y. 2014, C. 8, S. 2, s. 82-96.
24. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Global Warming of 1.5°C, Summary for Policymakers, Geneva 2018.
25. International Law Commission, ‘Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its fifty-third session’ (23 April–1 June and 2 July–10 August 2001) UN Doc A/56/10.
26. International Law Commission, ‘Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of its Seventy-Second Session’ (27 April–5 June and 6 July–7 August 2021) UN Doc A/76/10.
27. International Law Commission, Report of the Work of its Sixty-Sixth Session (5 May–6 June and 7 July–8 August 2014) UN Doc A/69/10.
28. International Maritime Organization, Marine Geoengineering: Advice from GESAMP Working Group 41 to the London Protocol Parties to Assist Them in Identifying Marine Geoengineering Techniques That It Might Be Prudent to Consider for Listing in the New Annex 4 of the Protocol (29 March 2021) IMO Doc LC/SG 44/3/Add.1.
29. International Maritime Organization, Report of the Forty-fourth Meeting of the Scientific Group of the London Convention and the Fifteenth Meeting of the Scientific Group of the London Protocol (18 June 2021) IMO Doc LC/SG 44/16.
30. International Maritime Organization, Report of the Twenty-Eighth Consultative Meeting of Contracting Parties to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter 1972 and First Meeting of Contracting Parties to the 1996 Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter 1972 (6 December 2006) LC 28/15.
31. ITLOS, Responsibilities and Obligations of States Sponsoring Persons and Entities with Respect to Activities in the Area (Advisory Opinion) [2011] ITLOS Rep 10.
32. Kerr, Baine, “Binding the International Maritime Organization to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea”, International Organizations Law Review, Y. 2022, C. 19, S. 2, s. 391-422.
33. Krueger, Hagen, Geoengineering und Völkerrecht Ein Beitrag zur Regulierung des Klimabezogenen Geoengineerings, Tübingen 2020.
34. Langlet, David, “Exporting CO2 for Sub-Seabed Storage: The Non-Effective Amendment to the London Dumping Protocol and Its Implications”, The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Y. 2015, C. 30, S. 3, s. 395-417.
35. LC 29/17, 14 December 2007, Report of the Twenty-ninth Consultative Meeting and the Second Meeting of Contracting Parties.
36. LEG/MISC/3/Rev.1, 6 January 2003, Implications of the Entry into Force of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea for the International Maritime Organization.
37. Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Advisory Opinion) [1996] ICJ Rep 226.
38. Mayer, Benoit “Obligations of Conduct in the International Law on Climate Change: A Defence”, Review of European Community and International Environmental Law, Y. 2018, C. 27, S. 2, s. 130-140.
39. Paris Agreement under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (adopted 12 December 2015, entered into force 4 November 2016) UNTS No 54113.
40. Payne, Cymie, “Case Note on Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay”, American Journal of International Law, Y. 2011, C. 105, S. 1, s. 94-101.
41. Preston, Christopher, “Ethics and Geoengineering: Reviewing the Moral Issues Raised by Solar Radiation Management and Carbon Dioxide Removal”, WIREs Climate Change, Y. 2013, C. 4, S. 1, s. 23-37.
42. Proelss, Alexander, “International Legal Challenges Concerning Marine Scientific Research in the Era of Climate Change”, Science, Technology, and New Challenges to Ocean Law, Ed.: Harry Scheiber, James Kraska, Moon-Sang Kwon, Leiden and Boston 2013.
43. Proelss, Alexander, Internationales Umweltrecht, Berlin 2022.
44. Proelss, Alexander/Chang, Hong, “Ocean Upwelling and International Law”, Ocean Development and International Law, Y. 2012, C. 43, S. 4, s. 371-385.
45. Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter (signed 7 November 1996, entered into force 24 March 2006) 36 ILM 7.
46. Pulp Mills on the River Uruguay (Argentina v. Uruguay) [2010] ICJ Rep 14.
47. Rayfuse, Rosemary, “Ocean Fertilization and Climate Change: The Need to Regulate Emerging High Seas Uses”, International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law, Y. 2008, C. 23, S. 2, s. 297-326.
48. Resolution LC – PL.2 (2010), 14 October 2010, Assessment Framework for Scientific Research Involving Ocean Fertilization.
49. Resolution LC-PL.1 (2008), 31 October 2008, Regulation of Ocean Fertilization, LC Doc 30/16 Annex 6.
50. Resolution LP.4(8), 18 October 2013, Amendment to the London Protocol to Regulate the Placement of Matter for Ocean Fertilization and other Marine Geoengineering Activities.
51. Saxler, Barbara/Siegfried, Jule/Proelss, Alexander, “International Liability for Transboundary Damage Arising from Stratospheric Aerosol Injections”, Law, Innovation and Technology, Y. 2015, C. 7, S. 1, s. 112-147.
52. Scott, Karen, “International Law in the Anthropocene: Responding to the Geoengineering Challenge”, Michigan Journal of International Law, Y. 2013, C. 34, S. 2, s. 309-358.
53. Soons, Alfred, Marine Scientific Research and the Law of the Sea, Deventer 1982.
54. Svoboda, Toby/Jean Buck, Holly/Suarez, Pablo, “Climate Engineering and Human Rights”, Environmental Politics, Y. 2019, C. 28, S. 3, s. 397-416.
55. Tanaka, Yoshifumi, The International Law of the Sea, Cambridge 2019.
56. The Royal Society, Geoengineering the Climate: Science, Governance and Uncertainty, London 2009.
57. Trouwborst, Arie, Evolution and Status of the Precautionary Principle in International Law, The Hague 2002. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (adopted 10 December 1982, entered into force 16 November 1994) 1833 UNTS 3.
58. United Nations Environment Programme, UNEP Emissions Gap Report 2017, Nairobi 2017.
59. United Nations General Assembly, Oceans and the Law of the Sea (14 March 2008) UN Doc A/RES/62/215.
60. Verlaan, Philomène, “Experimental Activities that Intentionally Perturb the Marine Environment: Implications for the Marine Environmental Protection and Marine Scientific Research Provisions of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea”, Marine Policy, Y. 2007, C. 31, S. 2, s. 210-216.
61. Voigt, Christina, “The Paris Agreement: What is the Standard of Conduct for Parties?”, Questions of International Law, Y. 2016, C. 26, S. 1, s. 17-28.
62. Whaling in the Antarctic (Australia v Japan: New Zealand intervening) [2014] ICJ Rep 226.
63. Williamson, Phillip/Bodle, Ralph, Update on Climate Geoengineering in Relation to the Convention on Biological Diversity: Potential Impacts and Regulatory Framework Technical Series No. 84 Montreal Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal 2016.
64. Winter, Gerd, “Climate Engineering and International Law: Last Resort or the End of Humanity?”, Review of European Community and International Environmental Law, Y. 2011, C. 20, S. 3, s. 277-289.