The Effectiveness of Environmental Laws in Preventing Transboundary Pollution from Oil Drilling in the Arctic

摘要

The current legal frameworks from UNCLOS to OPRC do not effectively protect the Arctic environment from transboundary pollution resulting from extractive activities. Existing international agreements fail for three reasons: they fail to modify state actors' utilities, they fail to facilitate learning and are inflexible, and they fail in facilitating coordination. This Note recommends three specific solutions. First, a binding agreement that focuses on long range transboundary marine pollution, which would harmonize approaches of all Arctic states and improve our understanding of the Arctic marine environment through research, data gathering and monitoring. Second, this Note proposes a mechanism by which private actors can be integrated into policies protecting the Arctic environment. The solution requires a regional insurance treaty drafted and incorporated by insurance companies which would force companies undertaking extractive activities to internalize the costs of pollution. Finally, this Note proposes a scheme of conservation through marine protected areas with flexible buffer zones. "Hydrocarbon development in the marine Arctic is already a reality."221' There is a tendency for the law to be reactive rather than proactive, and this tendency ought to be corrected. As one key insurance agent commented in response to disasters, "[r]egulations rushed into force do not address underlying causes but public outrage, often generated by shocking images: ... a soiled beach, an oil-covered seabird."22' Collective action cannot wait for one of the last few pristine environments on this planet to be irreversibly contaminated. States have an obligation to prevent transboundary harm and to protect marine biodiversity. The last remaining sea ice has somewhat deterred extractive activity. States should use this time wisely and put into place the aforementioned protections.