Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)Vol. 25 No. 84 Tuesday, 29 May 2012
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Reporting Service for Environment and Development Negotiations
Online at http://www.iisd.ca/oceans/icp13/
ICP-13#1
13TH MEETING OF THE UNITED NATIONS OPEN-ENDED INFORMAL CONSULTATIVE PROCESS ON OCEANS AND THE LAW OF
THE SEA: 29 MAY - 1 JUNE 2012The thirteenth meeting of the United Nations Open-ended
Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea (Consultative Process or ICP-13) opens today at UN Headquarters in New York. During the week, delegates will discuss marine renewable energies, with panels focusing on: the types, uses and role of marine renewable energies in sustainable development; ongoing or planned marine renewable energies projects and work at the global and regional levels; and opportunities and challenges in the development of marine renewable energies, including for cooperation and coordination. Recommendations from the meeting will be forwarded to the General Assembly for consideration at its 67th session.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE LAW OF THE SEA AND THE CONSULTATIVE PROCESS
On 1 November 1967, Malta’s Ambassador to the UN, Arvid Pardo, asked the nations of the world to recognize a looming conflict that could devastate the oceans. In a speech to the General Assembly, he called for “an effective international regime over the seabed and the ocean floor beyond a clearly defined national jurisdiction.” The speech set in motion a process that spanned 15 years and saw the creation of the UN Seabed Committee, the signing of a treaty banning nuclear weapons on the seabed, the adoption of a declaration by the General Assembly that all resources of the seabed beyond the limits of national jurisdiction are the “common heritage of mankind,” and the convening of the Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment. These were some of the factors that led to the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea during which the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) was adopted.
UNCLOS: Opened for signature on 10 December 1982, in Montego Bay, Jamaica, at the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, UNCLOS sets forth the rights and obligations of states regarding the use of the oceans, their resources, and the protection of the marine and coastal environment. UNCLOS entered into force on 16 November 1994, and is supplemented by the 1994 Deep Seabed Mining Agreement and the 1995 Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of UNCLOS relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks (UNFSA).
GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 54/33: On 24 November 1999, the General Assembly adopted resolution 54/33 on the results of the review undertaken by the UN Commission on Sustainable Development at its seventh session on the theme of “Oceans and Seas.” In this resolution, the General Assembly established an Open-ended Informal Consultative Process to facilitate the annual review of developments in ocean affairs. The General Assembly decided that the Consultative Process would meet in New York and consider the Secretary-General’s annual report on oceans and the law of the sea, and suggest particular issues to be considered by the General Assembly, with an emphasis on identifying areas where intergovernmental and inter-agency coordination and cooperation should be enhanced. The resolution further established the framework within which meetings of the Consultative Process would be organized, and decided that the General Assembly would review the effectiveness and utility of the Consultative Process at its 57th session.
ICP-1 to 3: The first three meetings of the Consultative Process identified issues to be suggested and elements to be proposed to the General Assembly, and highlighted issues that could benefit from attention in its future work. The first meeting of the Consultative Process (30 May - 2 June 2000) held discussion panels addressing fisheries and the impacts of marine pollution and degradation. The second meeting (7-11 May 2001) focused on marine science and technology, and coordination and cooperation in combating piracy and armed robbery at sea. The third meeting (8-15 April 2002) held discussion panels on the protection and preservation of the marine environment, capacity building, regional cooperation and coordination, and integrated oceans management.
GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 57/141: On 12 December 2002, the 57th session of the General Assembly adopted resolution 57/141 on “Oceans and the law of the sea.” The General Assembly welcomed the previous work of the Consultative Process, extended it for an additional three years, and decided to review the Consultative Process’ effectiveness and utility at its 60th session.
ICP-4 and 5: The fourth meeting of the Consultative Process (2-6 June 2003) adopted recommendations on safety of navigation, the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems, and cooperation and coordination on ocean issues. The fifth meeting (7-11 June 2004) adopted recommendations on new sustainable uses of oceans, including the conservation and management of the biological diversity of the seabed in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
ICP-6: The sixth meeting of the Consultative Process (6-10 June 2005) adopted recommendations on fisheries and their contribution to sustainable development, and considered the issue of marine debris.
ICP-7: The seventh meeting (12-16 June 2006) enhanced understanding of ecosystem-based management, and adopted recommendations on ecosystem approaches and oceans.
ICP-8: The eighth meeting (25-29 June 2007) discussed issues related to marine genetic resources. Delegates were unable to agree on key language referring to the relevant legal regime for marine genetic resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction, and as a result no recommendations were adopted. However, a Co-Chairs’ summary report was forwarded to the General Assembly for consideration.
ICP-9: The ninth meeting (23-27 June 2008) adopted recommendations on the necessity of maritime security and safety in promoting the economic, social and environmental pillars of sustainable development.
ICP-10: The tenth meeting (17-19 June 2009) produced a Co-Chairs’ summary report collating outcomes of its discussions on the implementation of the outcomes of the Consultative Process, including a review of achievements and shortcomings in its first nine years, which was forwarded to the General Assembly for consideration.
ICP-11: The outcome of the eleventh meeting (21-25 June 2010) was a Co-Chairs’ summary of discussions, including: capacity building for marine science; inter-agency cooperation and coordination; issues that could benefit from attention in future work of the General Assembly on ocean affairs and the law of the sea; and the process for the selection of topics and panelists so as to facilitate the work of the General Assembly.
ICP-12: The outcome of the twelfth meeting (20-24 June 2011) was a Co-Chairs’ summary of discussions, including: sustainable development, oceans and the law of the sea; an overview of progress to date and the remaining gaps in the implementation of oceans- and seas-related outcomes of the major summits on sustainable development; new and emerging challenges for the sustainable development and use of oceans and seas; the road to Rio+20 and beyond; inter-agency cooperation and coordination; the process for the selection of topics and panelists for consideration by the General Assembly; and issues that could benefit from attention in the future work of the General Assembly on oceans and the law of the sea. The Co-Chairs’ summary was forwarded to the General Assembly for consideration.
INTERSESSIONAL HIGHLIGHTSFIRST LATIN AMERICAN CONFERENCE ON
MARINE ENERGY: This conference, convened in Santiago, Chile, from 26-27 September 2011, examined: the international context for marine energy; the activities of the UK, Canada, and Portugal on marine energy; marine energy research and development in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, and Venezuela; and means for regional coordination and promotion of marine energy development and deployment.
OPENING OF THE INTERNATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY AGENCY (IRENA) INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY CENTRE (IITC) AND IITC RENEWABLES COMPETITIVENESS AND INNOVATION WORKSHOP: The workshop met on 6 October 2011 in Bonn, Germany, to launch the IRENA Innovation and Technology Centre, which will work towards a framework for renewable energy technology support, the potential for cost reductions, and policies to support innovation and increased use of standards. Discussions at the workshop covered issues including: the
economics of renewable energy; innovation for accelerated deployment; and a roadmap to the future that addresses capacity issues.
66TH SESSION OF THE UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY: In resolution 66/231 on Oceans and the law of the sea, the General Assembly decided to provide priority funding from the voluntary trust fund to cover the travel costs of representatives from developing countries, who the Co-Chairs, having consulted governments, have invited to present during ICP-13. It also recalled that resolution 65/37A mandated that the 67th session of the General Assembly will undertake a further review of the effectiveness and utility of the Consultative Process.
OCEANS DAY AT DURBAN: Oceans Day convened in Durban, South Africa, on 3 December 2011, on the sidelines of the 17th session of the Conference of the Parties (COP 17) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). This third Oceans Day focused on seven discussion sessions: oceans and coasts at the UNFCCC and at Rio+20; climate change and African fisheries; evidence of climate change from the large marine ecosystems; progress on major oceans and climate issues; oceans and climate issues in small island developing states; capacity building and public education; and monitoring action on oceans and climate.
FIFTH WORLD FUTURE ENERGY SUMMIT (WFES): The summit convened in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, on 16-19 January 2012. It was centered on a high-level segment focusing on policy and strategy, and three forums on: business and policy; technology and innovation; and finance and regulation. The WFES served as the global launch of the International Year of Sustainable Energy for All. At the opening session, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon stressed the main goals of his Sustainable Energy for All (SE4All) initiative, which include: ensuring universal access to modern energy services; doubling the global rate of improvement in energy efficiency; and doubling the share of renewable energy in the global energy mix, all by 2030.
RENEWABLE UK WAVE AND TIDAL CONFERENCE: This conference, held on 15 March 2012 in Edinburgh, Scotland, UK, explored the challenges facing the wave and tidal energy sector, particularly the funding requirements and incentives required to get utilities and manufacturers to bring marine energy into full operation in the coming years.
ICP-13 PREPARATORY MEETING: The UN Division for Oceans and the Law of the Sea held an informal preparatory meeting for ICP-13 on 3 April 2012 at UN Headquarters in New York. Participants considered the proposed structures of the three panels for the topic of marine renewable energies, the draft agenda, and other arrangements for ICP-13.
FIFTH MEETING OF THE AD HOC OPEN-ENDED INFORMAL WORKING GROUP TO STUDY ISSUES RELATING TO THE CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF MARINE BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY BEYOND AREAS OF NATIONAL JURISDICTION: The working group convened at UN Headquarters in New York from 7-11 May 2012. Delegates discussed three issues: sharing of benefits from marine genetic resources, area-based management tools, such as protected areas, and environmental impact assessments, capacity building, and the transfer of marine technology; the organization of intersessional workshops aimed at improving understanding of these issues and clarifying key questions as an input to the work of the Working Group; and the identification of gaps and ways forward with a view to ensuring an effective legal framework for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)Vol. 25 No. 85 Wednesday, 30 May 2012
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Reporting Service for Environment and Development Negotiations
Online at http://www.iisd.ca/oceans/icp13/
ICP-13#2
ICP-13 HIGHLIGHTS: 29 MAY 2012The thirteenth meeting of the United Nations Open-ended
Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea (Consultative Process or ICP-13) opened on Tuesday, 29 May 2012, at UN Headquarters in New York. Delegates convened in plenary in the morning, addressing organizational matters and holding a general exchange of views on the meeting’s topic of marine renewable energies (MREs). In the afternoon, a panel focused on MREs: types, uses and roles in sustainable development.
PLENARYOPENING: Co-Chair Amb. Milan Jaya Meetarbhan
(Mauritius) opened ICP-13, noting the theme for this year is part of a wider debate on sustainable development. He highlighted the increased energy demand and the need for more sustainable sources of energy, recalling that this year was proclaimed the International Year of Sustainable Energy for All.
Co-Chair Amb. Don MacKay (New Zealand) highlighted challenges related to: costs; legal framework; financing; and potential environmental impacts of MREs. He underscored their potential for contributing to the energy challenges facing small island developing states (SIDS).
Sha Zukang, Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, recalled the following objectives of the Sustainable Energy for All initiative: universal access to energy; doubling global energy efficiency; and doubling global renewable energy sources, all by 2030.
Highlighting that oceans contain a reservoir of untapped potential, Stephen Mathias, Assistant Secretary-General for Legal Affairs, for the Secretary-General and for Patricia O’Brien, Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and the Legal Counsel, underscored that ICP-13 provides a unique opportunity to enhance awareness of MRE and identify areas for cooperation.
Co-Chair Meetarbhan introduced the annotated provisional agenda (A/AC.259/L.13), which was adopted without amendment. Delegates also agreed to the programme of work.
GENERAL EXCHANGE OF VIEWSMARINE RENEWABLE ENERGIES: Denmark, for
the EU, stressed the importance of technology transfer and capacity building between developed and developing countries, highlighting a potential role for the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) in assisting with this.
Algeria, for G-77/CHINA, expressed satisfaction at the balanced participation of panelists from developed and developing countries, and sought clarification on what the scope and definition of MRE is. Several delegates, including
MALAYSIA, TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO, BRAZIL, the PHILIPPINES, ARGENTINA, and INDONESIA, supported the G-77/CHINA statement.
New Zealand, for the PACIFIC ISLANDS FORUM, highlighted signing the Waiheke Declaration in 2011 for promoting clean and affordable renewable energy.
Federated States of Micronesia, for the PACIFIC SIDS, cautioned of being mindful of social, cultural and environmental impacts of MRE.
MALAYSIA expressed the wish to play a role in advancing discussions on MRE that will have relevance for other developing countries.
BANGLADESH, supporting G-77/CHINA, stressed the constraints it faces in using oceans to enhance its development, given its limited coastline. He expressed support for the Millennium Development Goals and discussions of sustainable development goals within the UN Conference on Sustainable Development’s (UNCSD or Rio+20) preparatory process. Supported by CHINA, SOUTH AFRICA and FIJI, he stressed the need for coordination and cooperation to ensure capacity building and technology transfer. With CHINA and SOUTH AFRICA, he noted the role MREs can play in creating co-benefits, such as jobs and energy security. SOUTH AFRICA, supporting G-77/CHINA, added that these energy sources should be developed in ways that do not negatively affect wildlife and seascapes. CHINA stated that countries should set their own goals for the planned development of MREs.
FIJI, supporting G-77/CHINA and the PACIFIC SIDS, noted the opportunity MRE presents for reducing its reliance on fossil fuels and carbon emissions. He stressed the high upfront costs of developing new marine renewables.
JAPAN said countries must cooperate to mobilize markets, technology and finance through public and private mechanisms to promote a low-carbon growth model. She detailed work with IRENA on renewable energy and the US$13.2 billion that Japan has provided to fast-track finance to support renewable energy-related projects.
MONACO emphasized that the absence of legislation should not discourage states from developing MRE technologies, and provided examples of ways in which MRE has been used domestically.
The US noted that MRE holds large promise for remote areas and SIDS, and provided examples of federal research-and-development support for MRE.
The PACIFIC ISLAND FORUM, VIET NAM and ARGENTINA emphasized the need for technology transfer to developing countries. The PHILIPPINES highlighted the importance of a focus on distributive justice with regards to access to resources and distribution of benefits and burdens.
MOROCCO underlined the importance of: access to energy for all; capacity building and technology transfer; and cooperation on sharing costs and benefits of renewable energy.
PARLIAMENTARY ASSEMBLY OF THE MEDITERRANEAN highlighted its renewable energy-related activities, noting the need for a regulatory framework for public and private investments.
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO underscored the need to expand research on MRE, stressing that the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea is the legal framework for addressing marine renewables.
Recalling the Secretary-General’s Report (A/67/79), BRAZIL noted the potential environmental impacts of MREs, such as: reduction of current speeds; alteration of benthic habitats; noise; and interference with feeding grounds for various species.
IUCN highlighted the benefits of MRE, but observed that all the effects of MRE need to be assessed. He underscored the importance of tools, such as: strategic environmental assessments (SEAs); environmental impact assessments (EIAs); ecosystem-based management (EBM); marine spatial planning (MSP); ecologically or biologically significant areas; and marine protected areas (MPAs).
UN ENVIRONMENT PROGRAMME (UNEP) noted its programmes on renewable energy mostly focus on terrestrial sources, and expressed support for technology transfer of marine renewables. She highlighted UNEP’s experience with EIAs, SEAs, MSP and MPAs.
OCEAN CARE and INTERNATIONAL OCEAN NOISE COALITION recognized the need to move towards a “blue economy,” but said further research is needed to ensure the impacts of MREs on marine life are minimized.
AND ROLES IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: Presentations: Alain Piquemal, University of Nice Sophia Antipolis, presented an overview of current implementation frameworks for MREs. He noted the need for legal, economic and financial instruments to guarantee investment in and implementation of MRE projects aimed at sustainable development, underscoring the importance of public-private investment. MREs have strategic interest, he said, because they: are more environmentally clean; allow states to expand their energy mix; promote research and development; attract investors; and will generate new jobs. Describing a number of projects being developed globally, he stressed the need for administrative and scientific coordination. Piquemal concluded that while MREs are a small part of renewable energies, oceans cover 70% of the world and are significant in a new era of energy production.
John Huckerby, International Energy Agency’s Ocean Energy Systems Implementing Agreement (OES), noted that marine energy resources are widespread and situated close to a third of the world’s population, and, because of their high-energy density, make limited demands for space. He stressed that MRE technologies are still immature and that unit costs of generated electricity will shape their further development, adding that environmental impacts are limited, especially for tidal and wave energy. He also provided an overview of several technologies related to waves, currents, ocean thermal energy conversion, salinity gradient power, and hybrid systems.
Jay Batongbacal, University of the Philippines, discussed the implications of MREs for distributive and social justice in the context of sustainable development. Underscoring that distributive justice is at the core of sustainable development, he noted that the focus of the MRE debate has been on
technological innovation rather than on the distribution of benefits and social impacts of these technologies. He proposed the following issues for consideration on MRE: access; distribution of benefits and burdens; and recognition that people might be affected, and their voices need to be heard. He underscored that MRE should be subject to rigorous regulatory scrutiny for potential social impacts, and suggested the adoption of policy tools, such as MRE strategic review.
Discussion: Responding to BRAZIL, Batongbacal and Huckerby supported extending the scope and jurisdiction of the International Seabed Authority beyond its current focus on mineral extraction to also cover bio-derived resources. On a question about the world’s oldest tidal barrage, La Rance, Piquemal and Huckerby attested that environmental impacts on fish and birds had been minimal.
To questions from Denmark, for the EU, on the transfer of technologies for ocean thermal energy conversion specifically to tropical countries, Huckerby said the pace of development is accelerating, but presently there is little beyond pilot-scale activities. He added that IRENA is a relatively recent organization that does not have great engagement with MRE to date. To the EU’s question on examples of best practices, Batongbacal referred to the Philippines’ Energy Regulation 1-94, which allocates a percentage of royalties from energy production directly to local communities.
To MONACO’s question on MRE’s legal component, Piquemal commended Monaco for its Code of the Sea, which integrates all marine issues, and its Governmental Council of the Sea, which plays an important advisory role.
In response to the UK, Piquemal proposed two potential MRE investment policies: setting higher prices for offshore electricity than for land-produced energy, and supporting research and development. Huckerby referred to a recent OES brochure titled “An International Vision for Ocean Energy” for specifics on relevant investment policies and commended the UK for its comprehensive ocean energy policies.
To IUCN’s question on maintenance and removal of MRE installations, Huckerby and Piquemal said permits are often awarded on condition that the installation is removed after use, while Batongbacal predicted that, considering the current lack of standards, governments are likely to modify and use the existing offshore installation standards of the International Maritime Organization.
IN THE CORRIDORSThe thirteenth meeting of the Consultative Process opened
at the same time as the third round of ‘Informal-Informal’ negotiations on the zero draft of the outcome document of Rio+20. The shadow of the Rio+20 negotiations was immediately apparent. Some delegates noted that they would be playing double duty: following the Consultative Process’ discussions, but attending the ‘Informal-Informal’ negotiations when ocean issues arise. Considering the attention given at ICP-12 to the oceans agenda, in the context of Rio+20, this dual focus seems fitting. Moreover, while several participants considered this year’s topic – MRE – “uncontroversial,” it has already shown some utility in allowing both a fruitful and non-politicized discussion of an important ocean issue, and one that should also allow the week to proceed smoothly at a time when greater energy is being directed towards Rio+20. Nonetheless, the preparation for the upcoming review of the ICP by the General Assembly, and the task of identifying topics for future consideration, provide an opportunity for more lively discussion.
Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)Vol. 25 No. 86 Thursday, 31 May 2012
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Reporting Service for Environment and Development Negotiations
Online at http://www.iisd.ca/oceans/icp13/
ICP-13#3
ICP-13 HIGHLIGHTS: WEDNESDAY, 30 MAY 2012
On Wednesday, 30 May 2012, the Consultative Process continued with morning and afternoon panels considering the topic of marine renewable energies (MREs). In the morning, delegates heard presentations detailing on-going or planned MREs projects and work at the global and regional levels. In the afternoon, panelists discussed opportunities and challenges in the development of MREs, including for cooperation and coordination.
DISCUSSION PANELON-GOING OR PLANNED MARINE RENEWABLE
ENERGIES PROJECTS AND WORK AT THE GLOBAL AND REGIONAL LEVELS: Presentations: Arjon Suddhoo, Mauritius Research Council, discussed the implications of MREs for small islands, focusing on Mauritius as a case study. Mauritius, he explained, has an exclusive economic zone totaling 2.4 million square km, which is 1,100 times its land area. He said Mauritius is developing an ocean-consolidated vision, which sees the country as an “ocean state,” and he reviewed the potential of a bundled approach to MREs that could mean Mauritius will generate 80% of its energy demand from MREs by 2020. Land-based renewables, he said, would only bring the renewables contribution to 28% by 2020.
Masahiro Matsuura, University of Tokyo, described slow progress in Japan towards widespread usage of MREs, citing opposition from fishing communities. He explained that expansion of offshore turbines must meet regulatory, cultural, political, and environmental conditions, underscoring the need for involvement of key stakeholders in future MRE development. Noting that regulatory structures and constraints for MREs are unique to every country, he encouraged being cautious when trying to create a global regulatory instrument, stressing the need for information sharing and collaboration.
Omar bin Yaakob, University of Technology of Malaysia, discussed MRE initiatives in Malaysia and South East Asia. He said MRE development in the region has focused on small-scale prototypes of various devices, since ocean current speeds, tidal range, and wave heights are low in global terms. On challenges, Yaakob highlighted: the lack of sound policy and institutional frameworks protecting the marine environment from MRE impacts; low levels of technological development; unsustainable research-and-development activities; and conflicting use with
other marine activities. To spur the development of MREs, he underscored the need for technological expertise and financial assistance from developed countries.
Segen Estefen, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, presented the ocean-related segments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) report on “Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation,” focusing on: technologies; market development; cost; resource potential; emission reduction; and deployment. On MREs, he highlighted that: while currently immature, technologies can advance rapidly, their technological potential exceeds current energy requirements; environmental impacts are low; and successful deployment can reduce costs. He also discussed Brazil’s MRE potential and research projects.
Discussions: Responding to BRAZIL, Matsuura explained that landscape impacts of offshore wind technologies have proven controversial in the US Cape Wind Project over loss of sunset views. Yaakob explained that MREs in areas beyond national jurisdiction hold great potential but an international regime for control and regulation is required. Estefen said that when using ocean thermal energy conversion (OTEC), environmental impacts can be minimized by using closed circuit technology.
To Denmark, for the EU’s request for elaboration on eligible candidates for MRE developments, Suddhoo explained that Mauritius does not have a precise business model, but envisages cooperative activities between the government, private sector and community stakeholders. Responding to the EU’s question on strengthening research and development, Yaakob explained that commonalities amongst South East Asian countries and Pacific small island developing states (SIDS) support focusing on OTEC, ocean and tidal technologies. To a question from the EU on synergies achieved with the oil and gas industries, Estefen explained that facilities in Brazil for testing MRE devices were originally built for these industries. Yaakob added that MRE devices require platforms, and could learn from experiences in developing oil and gas platforms.
To VENEZUELA’s question on regulating activities related to MREs, Estefen said the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea is the proper forum. Yaakob said rules modeled after those of the International Seabed Authority (ISA) could apply, adding that possible transboundary regulations are also needed when MREs are located near national borders. Matsuura added that in some countries many regulations already exist. SINGAPORE raised
the issue of the impact of MRE devices on rights of passage for navigation. Matsuura and Suddhoo responded that inter-agency coordination and compromise would be necessary.
Responding to TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO’s question about how SIDS can adapt to challenges of developing MREs, Suddhoo stressed the importance of political commitment.
NEW ZEALAND and the UK described examples of their successes with MREs, citing the NZ$8 million Marine Energy Deployment Fund and the SeaGen Tidal Turbine, respectively. THAILAND expressed willingness to share best practices to promote cooperation and technology transfer.
OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF MARINE RENEWABLE ENERGIES, INCLUDING FOR COOPERATION AND COORDINATION: Presentations: Vanessa E.H. Stewart, Soltage LLC, drew on the history of solar and wind industries to discuss conditions needed to create a stable investment environment for MREs. She reviewed a number of risks facing the development of MRE markets: site assessment and access risks, including permitting and environmental assessment requirements; transmission timeline and costs, which include the challenges of linking remote sources of MREs to existing electrical grids; equipment cost uncertainty; limited data on operational production and performance; instability and uncertainty in operational revenue flows; and the creditworthiness of operators.
Martin J. Attrill, University of Plymouth, presented research showing minimal negative impacts on populations of organism from operational noise, collisions and electromagnetic radiation caused by certain MREs. He said the presence of physical structures, while changing the habitat, could have positive benefits, including providing: new habitat for colonization and increasing fish populations; protection from other maritime activities, creating de facto marine protected areas; and opportunities for co-locations, including aquaculture and wind farms. He ended by saying the environmental impacts of large MRE projects remain uncertain.
Dengwen Xia, National Ocean Technology Centre, described developments in China’s MRE sector. On policy, he described the work of the State Ocean Administration in conducting investigations into MRE resources and managing technologies, both existing and pilot devices. On opportunities, he referred to funds received for MRE policy promotion, and participation of public institutions, universities and corporations. On challenges, he pointed to limited funding, environmental impacts of MRE, and conflicts amongst sea users. He concluded by suggesting the UN is an appropriate forum for a global coordination framework.
Joseph Williams, Energy Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Secretariat, presented on the opportunities and challenges in the development of MRE in the Caribbean. He noted that most Caribbean countries are dependent on imported petroleum, with Trinidad and Tobago being the only exporter of energy resources. He addressed energy challenges in CARICOM, including: security, due to over-dependency on imported petroleum; sustainability; energy poverty; and high-energy tariffs. Williams noted MRE has significant potential in the region, but progress has been very modest. He discussed opportunities, such as cooperation with industrialized countries and co-development rather than transfer of technology, and addressed challenges, including potential conflict with tourism promotion objectives,
and weak legal and regulatory frameworks. On the way forward, he mentioned the Caribbean Sustainable Energy Roadmap and Strategy (C-SERMS) as an opportunity to make further progress.
On BRAZIL’s question regarding the availability of a global repository of environmental impact assessments (EIAs), Stewart mentioned that as part of the US National Environmental Policy Act all EIAs are available on the Environmental Protection Agency’s or local governments’ websites, while Attrill said in the UK most EIAs are performed by private companies and considered commercially sensitive. SINGAPORE added that EIAs should also include impacts on vessel navigation, especially concerning risks of changes in current speeds around MRE devices.
To the EU, Stewart noted possibilities of feed-in tariff differentiation by the stage of technology development, and country involvement in site identification assessments to reduce investor risks. Williams responded that C-SERMS includes the possibility of using instruments like the Green Climate Fund, while also mentioning it is a work in progress. NEW ZEALAND said non-commercially viable technologies should be developed by countries that can bear the risks and commended the long-term vision taken by the Caribbean countries.
To OCEAN CARE and INTERNATIONAL OCEAN NOISE COALITION, Attrill mentioned that a balanced approach on the pros and cons of all the ecological, social and economic impacts should be taken concerning the cumulative effects of additional noise from large-scale MRE projects and of large underwater turbines in migratory areas.
Responding to the UK on challenges MRE developers face, Stewart said policies separating development from technological risks are better able to identify promising technologies and weed out poor technologies only considered successful due to certain factors, such as available resources or successful site assessments and project approvals.
To the IUCN, Attrill responded that water brought up by thermal gradient projects should be discharged above the surface to limit the spread of invasive species.
IN THE CORRIDORSAs ICP proceeded with panel discussions on various
aspects of MREs, delegates continued to divide their attention between these discussions and the Rio+20 “Informal-Informal” negotiations. According to one delegate, while this year’s theme is extremely relevant, outcome expectations are not too high. Although the topic is supposedly “not contentious,” difficult issues, such as possible regulatory gaps for managing MREs and the possibility of the ISA extending its mandate to regulate bio-derived resources, are simmering under the surface and could rise up later in the week. Furthermore, one delegate noted that the controversial topics of an implementing agreement for biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) and ocean fertilization are key areas of contention on the oceans agenda in the “Informal-Informal” negotiations. Given their importance, these issues may do more than just split delegates’ attention this week. Whether and how they feature will reflect the persistent discussions about the ICP’s role: should it remain, as one delegate put it, “a non-political process to inform delegates about emerging and challenging ocean issues,” or should it tackle core challenging issues such as BBNJ? It could be that delegates turn to these concerns in the closing days of ICP-13, or if not then, as they prepare to review the ICP at the 67th session of the General Assembly.
Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)Vol. 25 No. 87 Friday, 1 June 2012
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Reporting Service for Environment and Development Negotiations
Online at http://www.iisd.ca/oceans/icp13/
ICP-13#4
ICP-13 HIGHLIGHTS: THURSDAY, 31 MAY 2012
On Thursday, the Consultative Process convened for a morning plenary session to discuss: a general exchange of views on marine renewable energies (MREs); inter-agency cooperation and coordination; the process for the selection of topics and panelists so as to facilitate the work of the General Assembly; and issues that could benefit from attention in future work of the General Assembly on oceans and the law of the sea. The plenary session ended at 11:36 am to allow time for preparation of the Co-Chairs’ summary, which will be available at 10:00 am on Friday, 1 June 2012. PLENARY
GENERAL EXCHANGE OF VIEWS ON MARINE RENEWABLE ENERGIES: Co-Chair Amb. Milan Jaya Meetarbhan (Mauritius) opened the second plenary session for continued discussion on a general exchange of views on MREs.
NORWAY described two MRE projects: offshore, floating wind power, specifically a new Statoil project currently generating 15 megawatts of power; and industrial cultivation of kelp, which has potential as a bio-energy feedstock and as a contributor to carbon sequestration.
MEXICO stressed the need for national frameworks for MREs that are aligned with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and that include: deployment targets; stakeholder participation; pilot projects; environmental impact assessments to minimize negative environmental effects; and trust funds to foster technologies on these issues.
The INTERNATIONAL OCEAN INSTITUTE described a new master's program to enhance training for sustainable use of oceans, and a new web-based, interactive mapping platform for oceans, which includes considerations for MREs.
INTER-AGENCY COOPERATION AND COORDINATION: Andrew Hudson, UN-Oceans, provided an update of the activities of UN-Oceans, noting that its tenth meeting will be held on 11 August 2012, in the Republic of Korea. He also highlighted, inter alia, that the review of UN-Oceans being conducted by the UN Joint Inspections Unit will be submitted to the 67th session of the General Assembly, and that a new terms of reference for UN-Oceans is expected to come from the review.
In response to CHINA’s question on the working mechanism of UN-Oceans, Hudson clarified that UN-Oceans is not an organization or agency, but only a coordination mechanism. To BRAZIL’s question on participation of states in the deliberations of UN-Oceans, he noted the role of the ICP for this purpose, underscoring that specific states’ participation is beyond the mandate of UN-Oceans. On ARGENTINA’s question on ensuring coherence within the UN system, he pointed to the UN-Oceans’ terms of reference, which requires that UN-Oceans align its work with the desires of the General Assembly and other processes and outcomes, such as Agenda 21 and the Millennium Development Goals.
PROCESS FOR THE SELECTION OF TOPICS AND PANELISTS SO AS TO FACILITATE THE WORK OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY: Co-Chair Meetarbhan recalled the recommendation of the General Assembly in paragraph 228 of
resolution 66/231 that the Consultative Process devise a transparent, objective and inclusive process for the selection of topics and panelists.
ARGENTINA commended the Co-Chairs for having tried to improve the methods for selecting and approving topics. She urged for an earlier presentation of the topics so as to improve the understanding on the part of the delegations of the topics prior to them being adopted, and prevent the too hasty adoption of topics, as has happened in previous years. She also stressed, as was already suggested in the past, that topics should be chosen from the perspective of sustainable development.
ISSUES THAT COULD BENEFIT FROM ATTENTION IN FUTURE WORK OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ON OCEANS AND THE LAW OF THE SEA: Co-Chair Meetarbhan referred to the composite streamlined list that has been prepared by the Co-Chairs on the basis of part C of the reports on the work of the Consultative Process from its fourth to twelfth meetings, and that the Co-Chairs will inform delegates of other topics that will be proposed during this meeting.
BRAZIL suggested, without prejudice to any other item and considering the upcoming review of the effectiveness and utility of the Consultative Process at the 67th session of the General Assembly, that ICP-14 examine the outcomes of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD or Rio+20). She added that, in particular, the topic could focus on how these outcomes impact or benefit international cooperation and coordination on items that were under the purview of UNCSD.
Denmark, for the EU, proposed, without prejudice to any other items and considering the General Assembly’s review, the topic of climate change and oceans, particularly as they relate to security and survival for low-lying nations and islands.IN THE CORRIDORS
Following a brief exchange of views in the morning, discussion of MREs was left behind and delegates quickly moved through remaining agenda items. However, following the meeting, some delegates pointed out that while the Co-Chairs were praised for their balanced choice of panelists from developing and developed countries, the topics of the presentations themselves served as more of a “cheerleading exercise,” according to one participant, than a holistic perspective of both the potential positive and negative impacts of MREs. The apparent general support from delegates for a renewal of the ICP mandate during the discussion of future topics was deemed by some to be a sign that ICP is likely to live on. However, while uncontested during the meeting, a return to the topic of Rio+20 during ICP-14, and the significance of the conference’s outcomes for oceans, seemed to take some delegates by surprise and were not received with unanimous enthusiasm. A delegate noted that Rio+20 had already been the focus of ICP-12, it has divided attention of participants at ICP-13, and a focus on it at ICP-14 would not be forward looking. Others saw it differently. One delegate lamented the weak nature of the section on oceans in the current Rio+20 negotiating text. Another supported this, explaining the positives that could come from using ICP-14 as a forum for assessing how the likely broad outcomes of Rio+20 can focus discussions and really advance the marine conservation agenda.
Interna onal Ins tute for Sustainable DevelopmentRepor ng Services (IISD RS)
Knowledge Management Resources
IISD RS, publisher of the Earth Nego a ons Bulle n, also maintains online knowledgebases that are updated daily with informa on regarding mee ngs, publica ons and other ac vi es related to interna onal sustainable development policy and its implementa on.
Each knowledgebase project consists of several integrated resources, to help the sustainable development policy and prac ce communi es assess trends and ac vi es at the interna onal level. These resources are:
• Daily news reports researched and wri en by our own experts and organized in a freely accessible, searchable on-line knowledgebase;• A comprehensive calendar of upcoming events related to interna onal sustainable development policy, which can be downloaded to your own online calendar;• And a community listserve, which exclusively delivers email updates of the most recent addi ons to our knowledgebases, as well as announcements by listserve members regarding their organiza ons’ sustainable development ac vi es.
Each knowledgebase focuses on a specifi c environmental challenge or region, as noted below:
Sustainable Development Policy & Prac ceh p://uncsd.iisd.org/
Climate Change Policy & Prac ceh p://climate-l.iisd.org/
La n America & Caribbean Regional Coverageh p://larc.iisd.org/
SIDS Policy & Prac ceh p://sids-l.iisd.org/
Biodiversity Policy & Prac ceh p://biodiversity-l.iisd.org/
Sustainable Energy Policy & Prac ceh p://energy-l.iisd.org/
Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)Vol. 25 No. 88 Monday, 4 June 2012
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A Reporting Service for Environment and Development Negotiations
Online at http://www.iisd.ca/oceans/icp13/
ICP-13FINAL
SUMMARY OF THE THIRTEENTH MEETING OF THE UNITED NATIONS OPEN-ENDED
INFORMAL CONSULTATIVE PROCESS ON OCEANS AND THE LAW OF THE SEA:
29 MAY - 1 JUNE 2012The thirteenth meeting of the UN Open-ended Informal
Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea (Consultative Process or ICP-13) took place from 29 May - 1 June 2012, at UN Headquarters in New York. The meeting brought together representatives from governments, intergovernmental organizations, non-governmental organizations and academic institutions to examine this year’s topic—marine renewable energies (MREs).
Delegates convened in plenary sessions throughout the week to discuss: views on MREs; inter-agency cooperation and coordination; the process for the selection of topics and panelists so as to facilitate the work of the UN General Assembly; issues that could benefit from attention in future work of the General Assembly on oceans and the law of the sea; and the outcome of the meeting. In addition, three discussion panels were held to consider: MREs: types, uses and role in sustainable development; ongoing or planned MREs projects and work at the global and regional levels; and opportunities and challenges in the development of MREs, including for cooperation and coordination.
The Co-Chairs, Amb. Don MacKay (New Zealand) and Amb. Milan Jaya Meetarbhan (Mauritius), distributed a Co-Chairs’ summary of discussions on Friday morning. After all the paragraphs of the report had been discussed and delegates had received an update on the voluntary trust fund and on the activities occurring to commemorate the 30th anniversary of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), Co-Chair MacKay gaveled the meeting at 12:32 pm.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE LAW OF THE SEA AND THE CONSULTATIVE PROCESS
On 1 November 1967, Malta’s Ambassador to the UN, Arvid Pardo, asked the nations of the world to recognize a looming conflict that could devastate the oceans. In a speech to the General Assembly, he called for “an effective international
regime over the seabed and the ocean floor beyond a clearly defined national jurisdiction.” The speech set in motion a process that spanned 15 years and saw the creation of the UN Seabed Committee, the signing of a treaty banning nuclear weapons on the seabed, the adoption of a declaration by the General Assembly that all resources of the seabed beyond the limits of national jurisdiction are the “common heritage of mankind,” and the convening of the Stockholm Conference on the Human Environment. These were some of the factors that led to the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea during which UNCLOS was adopted.
UNCLOS: Opened for signature on 10 December 1982, in Montego Bay, Jamaica, at the Third UN Conference on the Law of the Sea, UNCLOS sets forth the rights and obligations of states regarding the use of the oceans, their resources, and the protection of the marine and coastal environment. UNCLOS entered into force on 16 November 1994, and is supplemented by the 1994 Deep Seabed Mining Agreement and the 1995 Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of UNCLOS relating to the Conservation and Management of Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks.
GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 54/33: On 24 November 1999, the General Assembly adopted resolution 54/33 on the results of the review undertaken by the UN Commission
IN THIS ISSUE
A Brief History of the Law of the Sea and the Consultative Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1
on Sustainable Development at its seventh session on the theme of “Oceans and Seas.” In this resolution, the General Assembly established an Open-ended Informal Consultative Process to facilitate the annual review of developments in ocean affairs. The General Assembly decided that the Consultative Process would meet in New York and consider the Secretary-General’s annual report on oceans and the law of the sea, and suggest particular issues to be considered by the General Assembly, with an emphasis on identifying areas where intergovernmental and inter-agency coordination and cooperation should be enhanced. The resolution further established the framework within which meetings of the Consultative Process would be organized, and decided that the General Assembly would review the effectiveness and utility of the Consultative Process at its 57th session.
ICP-1 to 3: The first three meetings of the Consultative Process identified issues to be suggested and elements to be proposed to the General Assembly, and highlighted issues that could benefit from attention in its future work. The first meeting of the Consultative Process (30 May - 2 June 2000) held discussion panels addressing fisheries and the impacts of marine pollution and degradation. The second meeting (7-11 May 2001) focused on marine science and technology, and coordination and cooperation in combating piracy and armed robbery at sea. The third meeting (8-15 April 2002) held discussion panels on the protection and preservation of the marine environment, capacity building, regional cooperation and coordination, and integrated oceans management.
GENERAL ASSEMBLY RESOLUTION 57/141: On 12 December 2002, the 57th session of the General Assembly adopted resolution 57/141 on “Oceans and the law of the sea.” The General Assembly welcomed the previous work of the Consultative Process, extended it for an additional three years, and decided to review the Consultative Process’ effectiveness and utility at its 60th session.
ICP-4 and 5: The fourth meeting of the Consultative Process (2-6 June 2003) adopted recommendations on safety of navigation, the protection of vulnerable marine ecosystems, and cooperation and coordination on ocean issues. The fifth meeting (7-11 June 2004) adopted recommendations on new sustainable uses of oceans, including the conservation and management of the biological diversity of the seabed in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
ICP-6: The sixth meeting of the Consultative Process (6-10 June 2005) adopted recommendations on fisheries and their contribution to sustainable development, and considered the issue of marine debris.
ICP-7: The seventh meeting (12-16 June 2006) enhanced understanding of ecosystem-based management, and adopted recommendations on ecosystem approaches and oceans.
ICP-8: The eighth meeting (25-29 June 2007) discussed issues related to marine genetic resources. Delegates were unable to agree on key language referring to the relevant legal regime for marine genetic resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction, and as a result no recommendations were adopted. However, a Co-Chairs’ summary report was forwarded to the General Assembly for consideration.
ICP-9: The ninth meeting (23-27 June 2008) adopted recommendations on the necessity of maritime security and safety in promoting the economic, social and environmental pillars of sustainable development.
ICP-10: The tenth meeting (17-19 June 2009) produced a Co-Chairs’ summary report collating outcomes of its discussions on the implementation of the outcomes of the Consultative Process, including a review of achievements and shortcomings in its first nine years, which was forwarded to the General Assembly for consideration.
ICP-11: The outcome of the eleventh meeting (21-25 June 2010) was a Co-Chairs’ summary of discussions, including: capacity building for marine science; inter-agency cooperation and coordination; issues that could benefit from attention in future work of the General Assembly on ocean affairs and the law of the sea; and the process for the selection of topics and panelists so as to facilitate the work of the General Assembly.
ICP-12: The outcome of the twelfth meeting (20-24 June 2011) was a Co-Chairs’ summary of discussions, including: sustainable development, oceans and the law of the sea; an overview of progress to date and the remaining gaps in the implementation of oceans- and seas-related outcomes of the major summits on sustainable development; new and emerging challenges for the sustainable development and use of oceans and seas; the road to the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD or Rio+20) and beyond; inter-agency cooperation and coordination; the process for the selection of topics and panelists for consideration by the General Assembly; and issues that could benefit from attention in the future work of the General Assembly on oceans and the law of the sea. The Co-Chairs’ summary was forwarded to the General Assembly for consideration.
ICP-13 REPORTCo-Chair Amb. Milan Jaya Meetarbhan opened ICP-13 on
Tuesday, 29 May, noting the theme for this year is part of a wider debate on sustainable development. He highlighted the increased energy demand and the need for more sustainable sources of energy, recalling that this year was proclaimed the International Year of Sustainable Energy for All.
Co-Chair Amb. Don MacKay highlighted challenges related to: costs, legal framework, financing, and potential environmental impacts of marine renewable energies. He underscored their potential for contributing to the energy challenges facing small island developing states (SIDS).
Under-Secretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs Sha Zukang recalled the following objectives of the UN Secretary-General’s Sustainable Energy for All initiative: universal access to energy; doubling global energy efficiency; and doubling global renewable energy sources, all by 2030.
Highlighting that oceans contain a reservoir of untapped potential, Stephen Mathias, Assistant Secretary-General for Legal Affairs, for the Secretary-General and for Patricia O’Brien, Under-Secretary-General for Legal Affairs and the Legal Counsel, underscored that ICP-13 provides a unique opportunity to enhance awareness of MREs and identify areas for cooperation.
AND ROLE IN SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT: On Tuesday afternoon, Alain Piquemal, University of Nice Sophia Antipolis, presented an overview of current implementation frameworks for MREs. John Huckerby, International Energy Agency’s (IEA) Ocean Energy Systems Implementing Agreement (OES), explained that MREs are widespread and situated close to a third of the world’s population, and that they make limited demands for space because of their high-energy density. Jay Batongbacal, University of the Philippines, discussed the implications of MREs for distributive and social justice in the context of sustainable development.
In the ensuing discussion, delegates addressed, inter alia:• extendingthescopeandjurisdictionoftheInternational
Seabed Authority (ISA) beyond its current focus on mineral extraction to also cover bio-derived resources;
• thatthetransferoftechnologiesforoceanthermalenergyconversion (OTEC), specifically to tropical countries, is accelerating, but presently there is little beyond pilot-scale activities;
• thelimitedengagementoftheInternationalRenewableEnergyAgency (IRENA) with MREs to date;
• thePhilippines’engagementwithlocalcommunitiesthroughtheir Energy Regulation 1-94;
installations.A more detailed summary of the presentations and discussion
is available at: http://www.iisd.ca/vol25/enb2585e.htmlONGOING OR PLANNED MARINE RENEWABLE
ENERGIES PROJECTS AND WORK AT THE GLOBAL AND REGIONAL LEVELS: On Wednesday morning, participants convened for this second discussion panel. Arjoon Suddhoo, Mauritius Research Council, spoke on the implications of MREs for small islands, focusing on Mauritius as a case study. Masahiro Matsuura, University of Tokyo, described slow progress in Japan towards widespread usage of MREs, citing opposition from fishing communities as one reason. Omar bin Yaakob, University of Technology of Malaysia, outlined MRE initiatives in Malaysia and South East Asia. Segen Estefen, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, presented the ocean-related segments of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s report on “Renewable Energy Sources and Climate Change Mitigation.”
The subsequent discussion covered: • aninternationalregimeforcontrolandregulationofMREsin
areas beyond national jurisdiction;• thelossofsunsetviewsasalandscapeimpactofoffshore
in SIDS; and• examplesofsuccesseswithMREsintheUKandNew
Zealand.A more detailed summary of the presentations and discussion
is available at: http://www.iisd.ca/vol25/enb2586e.html OPPORTUNITIES AND CHALLENGES IN THE
DEVELOPMENT OF MARINE RENEWABLE ENERGIES, INCLUDING FOR COOPERATION AND COORDINATION: On Wednesday afternoon, Vanessa E.H. Stewart, Soltage, LLC., drew on the history of solar and wind industries to discuss conditions needed to create a stable investment environment for MREs, reviewing a number of risks facing the development of MRE markets. Martin J. Attrill, University of Plymouth, presented research showing minimal negative impacts on populations of organisms from operational noise, collisions and electromagnetic radiation caused by certain MREs and that the presence of physical structures could have positive benefits. Dengwen Xia, National Ocean Technology Centre, outlined policy and technical developments in China’s MRE sector, detailing some opportunities, challenges, and suggestions for future work. Joseph Williams, Caribbean Community Secretariat, outlined the opportunities and challenges in the development of MREs in the Caribbean, noting that most Caribbean countries are currently dependent on imported petroleum.
In the subsequent discussion, comments covered, inter alia:• thepotentialforaglobalrepositoryofenvironmentalimpact
countries that can bear the risks;• theecological,socialandeconomicimpactsconcerningthe
cumulative effects of additional noise from large-scale MRE projects;
• theneedforpoliciesseparatingdevelopmentfromtechnological risks; and
• therecommendationthatdischargewaterthatisbroughtupby thermal gradient projects should be disposed of above the surface to limit the spread of invasive species.
A more detailed summary of the presentations and discussion is available at: http://www.iisd.ca/vol25/enb2586e.html
PLENARYGENERAL EXCHANGE OF VIEWS ON MARINE
RENEWABLE ENERGIES: On Tuesday and Thursday mornings, delegates convened in plenary for a general exchange of views on MREs.
Denmark, for the European Union (EU), and supported by the Pacific Islands Forum, Viet Nam, Argentina, China, South Africa, Bangladesh, Fiji, Morocco, and the UN Environment Programme (UNEP), emphasized capacity building and technology transfer to developing countries. He also highlighted a potential role for the IRENA in this.
Algeria, for the Group of 77 and China (G-77/China), commended the balanced participation of panelists from developed and developing countries, and sought clarification on the scope and definition of MREs. Several delegates, including Malaysia, Trinidad and Tobago, Brazil, the Philippines, Argentina, and Indonesia, supported the G-77/China’s statement.
New Zealand, for the Pacific Islands Forum, highlighted signing the 2011 Waiheke Declaration on sustainable development, which includes language on promoting clean and affordable renewable energy. Malaysia expressed the wish to assist in advancing discussions on MREs with relevance for other developing countries.
Bangladesh expressed support for the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) and discussions of sustainable development goals within the preparatory process of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD or Rio+20). With China and South Africa, he noted MREs can assist in creating jobs and energy security. China said countries should set their own goals for the development of MREs.
Fiji, supporting the G-77/China and the Pacific SIDS, noted MREs provide opportunities for reducing reliance on fossil fuels. The US noted that MRE is promising for remote areas and SIDS. Morocco underlined the importance of access to energy for all, and cooperation on sharing the costs and benefits of renewable energy.
Japan said countries must cooperate to mobilize markets, technology and finance through public and private mechanisms to promote low-carbon growth.
South Africa, supporting the G-77/China, added that MREs should not negatively affect wildlife and seascapes. The Philippines highlighted the importance of distributive justice regarding access to resources and distribution of benefits and burdens. Federated States of Micronesia, for the Pacific SIDS, cautioned of being mindful of the social, cultural and environmental impacts of MREs. Recalling the Secretary-General’s report on oceans and the law of the sea (A/67/79), Brazil noted the potential environmental impacts of MREs.
The Parliamentary Assembly of the Mediterranean highlighted its renewable energy-related activities and the need for a regulatory framework for public and private investments. Monaco emphasized that the absence of legislation should not discourage states from developing MRE technologies. Trinidad and Tobago underscored the need to expand research on MRE, stressing that UNCLOS is the legal framework for addressing
this. Mexico stressed the need for national frameworks for MREs that are aligned with UNCLOS.
Norway described MRE projects on offshore, floating wind power, and industrial cultivation of kelp.
IUCN underscored the importance of tools, such as: strategic environmental assessments (SEAs); EIAs; ecosystem-based management; marine spatial planning (MSP); ecologically or biologically significant areas; and marine protected areas (MPAs). UNEP noted its renewable energy programmes mostly focus on terrestrial sources, highlighting its experience with EIAs, SEAs, MSP and MPAs. Ocean Care and International Ocean Noise Coalition said further research is needed to ensure the impacts of MREs on marine life are minimized. The International Ocean Institute described a new Master’s Degree program and web-based, interactive mapping platform for oceans, which includes considerations for MREs.
A more detailed summary of the discussion is available at: http://www.iisd.ca/vol25/enb2585e.html and http://www.iisd.ca/vol25/enb2587e.html
INTER-AGENCY COOPERATION AND COORDINATION: On Thursday, Andrew Hudson, UN-Oceans, provided an update of the activities of UN-Oceans, highlighting, inter alia, the review of UN-Oceans by the UN Joint Inspection Unit and the new terms of reference for UN-Oceans that are expected to come from the review.
Responding to China on working mechanisms, Hudson clarified that UN-Oceans is a coordination mechanism, not an organization or agency. To Brazil’s question on participation of states in the deliberations of UN-Oceans, he noted the ICP’s role for this purpose, underscoring that specific states’ participation is beyond the mandate of UN-Oceans. On Argentina’s question on ensuring coherence within the UN system, he pointed to UN-Oceans’ terms of reference, which requires its work to align with the desires of the General Assembly, and processes and outcomes such as Agenda 21 and the MDGs.
A more detailed summary of the presentation and discussion is available at: http://www.iisd.ca/vol25/enb2587e.html
PROCESS FOR THE SELECTION OF TOPICS AND PANELISTS SO AS TO FACILITATE THE WORK OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY: On Thursday, Co-Chair Meetarbhan recalled the recommendation of the General Assembly in Resolution 66/231 that the ICP devise a transparent, objective and inclusive process for selecting topics and panelists.
Argentina commended the Co-Chairs for attempting to improve methods for selecting and approving topics. She urged for an earlier presentation of topics to improve the understanding on the part of delegations of the topics prior to their being adopted, and prevent the too-hasty adoption of topics, as has happened in previous years. She also stressed, as was decided at ICP-10, that topics should be chosen from the perspective of sustainable development.
A more detailed summary of the discussion is available at: http://www.iisd.ca/vol25/enb2587e.html
ISSUES THAT COULD BENEFIT FROM ATTENTION IN THE FUTURE WORK OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY ON OCEANS AND THE LAW OF THE SEA: On Thursday, Co-Chair Meetarbhan referred to the Co-Chairs’ composite streamlined list of issues that could benefit from attention in the
future work of the General Assembly on oceans and the law of the sea. He explained that the topics come from the reports on the work of the fourth to twelfth meetings of the Consultative Process. The topics include: MPAs; implementation of international instruments; uses of the oceans; science, technology and data, including capacity building; ecosystem approaches to oceans; food security; conservation and management of living marine resources; international cooperation and coordination; marine environment; issues discussed at previous meetings; marine biological diversity and genetic resources; flag state responsibilities; human rights and labor rights; maritime security; maritime safety; settlement of disputes; hazard preparedness and mitigation; social aspects of oceans and the law and the sea; climate change and oceans; and oceans and sustainable development. Co-Chair Meetarbhan said delegates will be informed of other topics proposed during the meeting.
Considering the upcoming review of the ICP at the 67th session of the General Assembly, Brazil suggested that ICP-14 examine the outcomes of the UNCSD, in particular how these outcomes impact or benefit international cooperation and coordination on items that were under the purview of the UNCSD. Denmark, for the EU, suggested an alternative topic: climate change and oceans, particularly as they relate to security and survival for low-lying nations and islands.
A more detailed summary of the discussions is available at: http://www.iisd.ca/vol25/enb2587e.html
CONSIDERATION OF THE OUTCOME OF THE MEETINGCO-CHAIRS’ SUMMARY OF DISCUSSIONS: On Friday,
Co-Chair MacKay introduced the Co-Chairs’ summary of discussions.
The report collated the week’s discussions on: MREs: types, uses and role in sustainable development; ongoing or planned MREs projects and work at the global and regional levels; opportunities and challenges in the development of MREs, including for cooperation and coordination; inter-agency cooperation and coordination; the process for the selection of topics and panelists for consideration by the General Assembly; and issues that could benefit from attention in the future work of the General Assembly on oceans and the law of the sea.
Co-Chair MacKay reminded delegates that the document is not a “negotiated text” and thus serves only for reference purposes, and he encouraged delegates to just identify major errors, noting that: “the perfect is the enemy of the good.” He added that all the panelists’ presentations will be available on the website of the UN Division on Oceans and the Law of the Sea (DOALOS) to complement the discussion in the Co-Chairs’ summary of discussions. Delegates considered the summary document by sections and paragraphs. Sections that received comments are discussed below.
General exchange of views: Responding to China, Co-Chair Mackay clarified that the substantive points made by delegations during the general exchange of views were woven throughout the document rather than being presented in a stand-alone section.
Brazil, supporting China’s question, asked for the insertion of language referencing the UN Secretary-General’s report on oceans and the law of the sea (A/67/79) and its attention to the importance of studying the impacts of MREs.
Argentina, supported by South Africa and Mexico, asked that the reference to Part XIV of UNCLOS on the transfer of marine technology be given more emphasis, as many delegations made interventions that noted the importance of this issue. Trinidad and Tobago, also in support, noted that it should be clearer that UNCLOS provides the legal framework for the discussions contained in the report.
South Africa added that reference should be made to the common themes of many delegations’ interventions, particularly: transfer of technology, sustainable development, and environmental concerns with MREs.
China asked for reference to two points: MREs should be developed according to targets and goals set by individual countries according to their needs and circumstances; and concerning the opportunities and challenges presented by MREs, states should increase cooperation and collaboration as specified in the current international legal framework.
Marine renewable energies: types, uses and role in sustainable development: Trinidad and Tobago asked that the discussion of the possible role MREs can play in helping to alleviate the high reliance of SIDS on fossil fuel imports include a point about the need to make the use of MREs more feasible. The Philippines asked that the report better reflect the importance it places on distributive justice as a guide for how the world’s oceans, including potential MREs, are utilized. Argentina suggested clearer language be used to ensure that the Area is discussed commensurate with its legal definition as specified in UNCLOS.
Opportunities and challenges in the development of marine renewable energies, including for cooperation and coordination: New Zealand recalled the presentation by Dengwen Xia, National Ocean Technology Centre, who called for increased regional cooperation and coordination, and especially increased participation in the IEA’s OES, which is the main international platform for cooperation on MREs.
Brazil noted that a reference to the experiences with tidal barrages that were mentioned by panelists could be included here or in another part of the Co-Chairs’ summary.
On impacts of MREs on other existing uses of oceans, Singapore suggested a broad understanding of impacts of large-scale MRE facilities on navigation, which are not just “due to” but the consequence of several effects “including from” changes in speed and direction of currents.
Inter-agency cooperation and coordination: On inter-institutional cooperation, Monaco suggested including reference to IRENA and possibilities to strengthen cooperation with this agency, which is working on renewable energy internationally. Co-Chair MacKay responded that reference to IRENA is made earlier in the Co-Chairs’ summary, in a paragraph that deals specifically with technology transfer and capacity building. Brazil noted that one of the panelists referred to an agreement between the IEA and IRENA on MRE.
Regarding UN-Oceans, Argentina suggested adding reference to the new terms of reference for UN-Oceans that is expected to come from the review by the UN Joint Inspection Unit.
Issues that could benefit from attention in the future work of the General Assembly on oceans and the law of the sea: Co-Chair MacKay mentioned that, regarding topics for ICP-14,
it was brought to his attention that the paragraph does not fully capture what delegations intended and this will be changed accordingly.
This concluded discussion of the Co-Chairs’ summary of discussions, which will be forwarded by the Co-Chairs to the General Assembly for consideration at its 67th session.
CLOSING PLENARYSerguei Tarassenko, Director, DOALOS, provided an update
on the financial status of the voluntary trust fund, which was established by the General Assembly to assist the participants of developing states, in particular least developed states, SIDS, and landlocked developing states, to attend the meetings of the Consultative Process by covering travel costs. He thanked New Zealand for its contributions in 2010 and 2011, and Turkey for its contribution in 2012. He mentioned that in 2011 US$20,000 of the Trust Fund was used. For 2012, it is expected that US$31,000 will be used, which results in a net balance of the Trust Fund of US$68,000, including administrative costs.
Tarassenko also provided information on two activities for the commemoration of the 30th anniversary of the opening for signature of UNCLOS: a panel discussion at World Oceans Day on 8 June 2012, with welcoming remarks by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon; and two days of plenary meetings during the UN General Assembly, on 10-11 December 2012, to consider “Oceans and the law of the sea” and the commemoration of the 30th anniversary. He thanked all delegations for their financial and in-kind support for these activities.
Co-Chair MacKay thanked delegates for their constructive discussions. He gaveled the meeting to a close at 12:32 pm.
A BRIEF ANALYSIS OF ICP-13The thirteenth session of the UN Open-ended Informal
Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea (Consultative Process or ICP-13) convened in the shadow cast by the concurrent proceedings of the third round of “Informal-Informal” Negotiations on the zero-draft outcome document of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development. Nevertheless, ICP-13’s theme of marine renewable energies (MREs) provided a good opportunity for participants to engage with a new topic that is critical to both ocean affairs and sustainable development. During the four-day session, delegates highlighted key opportunities and challenges, from energy-security concerns, such as dependence on fossil-fuel imports, to the need to identify, assess and address the economic, environmental and social effects of new energy-generating technologies. Given the salience of energy supply and demand issues, especially in remote and isolated regions, such as small island developing states, many participants agreed that MREs merit attention and a sound governance regime.
This brief analysis assesses the content and proceedings of ICP-13, particularly in light of the upcoming review of the effectiveness and utility of the Consultative Process scheduled for the 67th session of the General Assembly in October 2012.
FINDING THE RIGHT MIX OF ENERGY SOURCES According to the Secretary-General’s report on oceans and the
law of the sea (A/67/79), MREs derive from natural processes
in the marine environment. They can be usefully categorized into four types: ocean energy; wind energy from turbines located in off-shore areas; geothermal energy derived from sub-marine geothermal resources; and bio-energy derived from marine biomass, particularly ocean-derived algae. Throughout the week, panelists presented on ongoing, pilot and future MRE initiatives. Topics covered ranged from: available MRE technologies; investment opportunities; country-specific experiences; the use of MREs in the context of climate change; and the role of distributive justice as an element of MREs in the context of sustainable development. All presentations touched upon both the challenges and opportunities for furthering the use of MREs.
The mix of topics covered spurred two central themes. First, delegates focused on the legal and governance gaps presented by MREs. Several presentations noted the need for regulatory frameworks and increased coordination and cooperation among states, and the volume of questions from the floor seeking greater clarification on this highlighted that these issues demand further investigation. A number of delegates made general, statements recognizing that the legal framework for MRE is the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). However, UNCLOS does not specifically refer to MREs, and possible ways to operationalize attention to MREs within UNCLOS were not discussed in depth. For some this was not a cause for concern, since they wanted to learn more about the technologies before engaging in legal discussions; for others, the question was when and where the legal issues would be addressed, since MREs will likely not be revisited again in this forum. Delegates were also not clear about the allocation of responsibility for dealing with MREs among existing international bodies. They raised a number of questions about the roles of the well-established International Energy Agency and the recently established International Renewable Energy Agency, and some delegates noted the logical role the former might play on this topic. These concerns reflect that when discussing technical issues, such as MREs, the ICP provides an opportunity to identify and consider the relevant global governance gaps and opportunities.
A mere discussion of technical issues and potential governance gaps, however, does not skirt the ongoing challenge the ICP faces in finding an acceptable balance among the different social, economic and environmental issues relevant to ocean affairs. This issue was the second central theme throughout the week. Participants raised concerns that, while informative and interesting, the scope of presentations did not really cover all the potential adverse impacts of all types of MREs, with some delegates seeking more information on the impacts referenced in the Secretary-General’s report. These include: reduction of marine current velocity; decrease in the heights of waves, caused by the extraction of wave or tidal energy; alteration of benthic habitats; killings or changes in the behavior of fish and mammals from noise in electromagnetic fields; and interference with movement, feeding, spawning and migration paths of marine fauna. These gaps in coverage could have been addressed by presentations and plenary discussions on well-known tools that contribute to the implementation of ecosystem-based management, such as environmental impact assessments, as required by Part XII of UNCLOS on the protection and preservation of the marine environment, and also marine spatial
planning, strategic environmental assessments, and marine protected areas (MPAs). Other participants were more content with the lack of specific focus on environmental concerns, given that the mandate of the Consultative Process is to address ocean issues in the context of sustainable development. Similarly, an overarching point that was raised throughout the week from all sides, especially in accordance with Part XIV of UNCLOS on marine technology transfer, was the need for the transfer of knowledge and technology from developed to developing countries. It was widely acknowledged that, at present, the greatest proportion of know-how and financial resources for the design and implementation of MREs are within developed countries and therefore the need for cooperation, and especially co-development of these technologies, should be encouraged. Many delegates also stressed the sustainable-development benefits of these transfers, noting how MREs can help address the heavy reliance of certain countries on fossil-fuel imports, while also reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
OFF-THE GRID, BUT STILL SUSTAINABLY FUELEDAttendance at this year’s ICP was notably lower than previous
years. The Co-Chairs’ summary of discussions from ICP-13 reported 78 delegations from states and other participant bodies, compared to 117 during ICP-12. Speculation was rife as to the underlying reasons. The most frequently cited explanation was the concurrent meeting of the “Informal-Informal” Rio+20 negotiations. In some instances, delegations were splitting their attention between the two processes; in others, priority was given to Rio+20. This was particularly the case for civil society representatives. In addition, questions were also raised about whether the presentation of the technical side of the chosen subject matter was an additional deterrent. Many concluded that it was likely a bit of both.
In spite of the lackluster reception for this year’s topic, delegates showed support for a continuation of the ICP. For one, this is linked to leadership. During ICP-13, many commented on the skillful leadership provided by the Co-Chairs and noted its importance for the ICP’s future. Participants praised the selection of geographically well-balanced panels with panelists from developed and developing countries, with the latter, in particular, expressing appreciation to the Co-Chairs and the Secretariat.
Additionally, several delegates acknowledged that the Consultative Process presents a unique forum to transparently discuss ocean affairs, including emerging and challenging issues, within the context of the three pillars of sustainable development. However, some cautioned that continuation is conditional on the non-negotiating nature of the process. This latter point follows from the fact that during ICP-8 delegates were unable to agree to a set of elements on marine genetic resources. As a result, during ICP-10 in 2009—a year dedicated to a review of the Consultative Process—delegates decided that a recommendatory process was counterproductive, since each year they had to re-negotiate the text during the sessions of the General Assembly on oceans and the law of the sea. Not having a negotiated outcome avoids turning the Consultative Process into a political process, which would limit the possibility of an open and informal discussion of ocean issues.
CAN MARINE RENEWABLE ENERGIES FUEL THE FUTURE OF ICP?
Considering the many challenges facing the world’s oceans, the role of the Consultative Process, established in 1999 to facilitate the annual review of developments in ocean affairs by the General Assembly, has never been more important. The Co-Chairs prepared a long list of issues identified by delegates at previous ICP meetings that could benefit from the General Assembly’s attention, suggesting that the ICP can still serve a useful function in assisting its annual ocean deliberations. Some of these issues include: MPAs; implementation of international instruments; uses of the oceans; science, technology and data, including capacity building; ecosystem approaches to oceans; food security; conservation and management of living marine resources; marine environment; marine biological diversity and genetic resources; flag state responsibilities; hazard preparedness and mitigation; social aspects of oceans and the law and the sea; and climate change and oceans. While some expected extensive discussions on the suitability of any of these topics for a future theme of the ICP, this was not the case. In plenary, only two delegations spoke on the matter, putting forward the following topics for the General Assembly’s consideration: assessing the outcomes of the UNCSD; and climate change and oceans, particularly as they relate to security and survival for low-lying nations and islands. While climate change and oceans was on the original list, the suggestion of a review of Rio+20 was new. In spite of this, no further opinions were expressed in plenary on the topic.
Even though debate was lacking on the floor, this was not necessarily a sign of consensus among delegates. This year was different from previous years when strong opinions on the selection of topics were expressed in plenary. However, some delegates commented that neither of the two proposed topics are adequate and envisaged that the real debate over this would occur during the upcoming debate at the General Assembly. Debate is also expected with respect to the criteria for the selection of topics. One delegate noted that priority should be given to topics that feed directly into existing processes, such as the General Assembly’s Ad Hoc Open-ended Informal Working Group to study issues relating to the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction. Others referred to the need to select topics on the basis of their relevance for sustainable development.
It remains to be seen what topic will be selected for ICP-14, in the event that, as many delegates expect, the Consultative Process is renewed. One key tension that will have to be dealt with is the following: Should ICP focus on highly technical issues that have little probability of politicization, as the topic of MRE during ICP-13 has shown? Or should the focus be on less technical yet potentially more political issues, such as Rio+20 or climate change, as suggested for next year? Some clearly showed preference for the former approach, indicating that ICP-13 was successful as a “non-political process to inform delegates,” while others found that a less technical topic could give the Consultative Process greater relevance, even though most delegates do not want it to become a forum for negotiations. The question then is which of these two approaches could mostly benefit the General Assembly in advancing the oceans agenda.
UPCOMING MEETINGS Third PrepCom for UNCSD: This Third Preparatory
Committee Meeting for the United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development will take place in Brazil prior to the Conference. dates: 13-15 June 2012 location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil contact: UNCSD Secretariat email: [email protected] www: http://www.uncsd2012.org
SD-Learning: “SD-Learning: Reaching sustainable development through knowledge” is a capacity-building event in the context of the UNCSD, consisting of multiple courses on sustainable development, such as food security and sustainable agriculture, energy access and efficiency, sound water and land management, sustainable cities, management of the oceans, improving resilience and disaster preparedness, and transition to a green economy. The courses seek to provide participants with practical knowledge and hands-on training from experts around the world. SD-Learning courses are open for accredited participants that have registered and been selected through the website. The deadline for applications is 3 June 2012. dates: 13-22 June 2012 location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil contact: UNCSD Secretariat email: [email protected] www: http://www.uncsd2012.org/rio20/meetings_sdlearning.html
Oceans Day at UNCSD: The Global Ocean Forum will organize “Oceans Day” during the thematic days immediately preceding the UNCSD. The meeting will bring together representatives from governments, international organizations, NGOs, industry, and the science community to: push for a strong oceans outcome at the negotiations of the UNCSD; showcase major funded initiatives to spur action on oceans, coasts, and small island developing states (SIDS) in the post-Rio+20 world; and consider the opportunities and challenges for implementation of the “oceans package” emanating from the Rio+20 conference. date: 16 June 2012 location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil contact: Miriam Balgos, Program Coordinator, Global Ocean Forum phone: +1-302-831-8086 email: [email protected] www: http://www.globaloceans.org
Sustainable Development Dialogues: Organized by the Government of Brazil with the support of the UN, this event is a forum for civil society, to be held in the context of the UNCSD. Civil society representatives will debate 10 topics: sustainable development for fighting poverty; sustainable development as an answer to the economic and financial crises; unemployment, decent work and migrations; the economics of sustainable development, including sustainable patterns of production and consumption; forests; food and nutrition security; sustainable energy for all; water; sustainable cities and innovation; and oceans. Their recommendations will be conveyed directly to the Heads of State and Government present at the High Level Segment of Rio+20. dates: 16-19 June 2012 location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil www: http://www.uncsd2012.org/rio20/index.php?page=view&nr=596&type=13&menu=23
International Network on Offshore Renewable Energy (INORE) Symposium 2012 - USA: This first US symposium, which is supported by the New England Marine Renewable Energy Center, will bring together early stage researchers in offshore renewable energy, including wave, tidal, and offshore wind energy, with industry representatives and policy makers. The symposium includes keynote speeches, roundtable
discussions on the state of the industry, presentations by all attendees, collaborative tasks, and a visit to the Energy Oceans Conference in Boston. dates: 17-21 June 2012 location: Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts, USA contact: Alana Duerr phone: +1-509-710-5617 email: [email protected] www: http://inore.org/events/inore_2012_us_symposium/
22nd International Ocean and Polar Engineering Conference: This conference, organized by the International Society of Offshore and Polar Engineers (ISOPE), will bring together researchers and engineers to discuss, inter alia: Offshore Technology and Ocean Engineering; Frontier Energy Resources Technology; Renewable Energy and Environment; Geotechnical Engineering; Nanotechnologies For Clean Energy; and Hydrodynamics. dates: 17-22 June 2012 location: Rhodes, Greece contact: ISOPE Meetings Department phone: +1-650-254-1871 fax: +1-650-254-2038 email: [email protected] www: http://www.isope2012.org/index.htm
UN Conference on Sustainable Development: The UNCSD will mark the 20th anniversary of the UN Conference on Environment and Development, which convened in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil in 1992. dates: 20-22 June 2012 location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil contact: UNCSD Secretariat email: [email protected] www: http://www.uncsd2012.org/
Know our Ocean, Protect our Marine Treasures, Empower Ocean Citizens: This UNCSD side event, which is organized by the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) of the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), will present and discuss a number of initiatives that support the Rio+20 ocean targets leading to the sustainable use of the ocean. The side event will be structured around three inter-connected themes: knowledge for an improved management of the oceans; protection of the natural and cultural heritage of the ocean and coasts and the essential services they provide to society; and empowerment of ocean citizens and society. date: 20 June 2012 location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil contact: Julian Barbière, UNESCO IOC phone: +33-14-568-3983 e-mail: [email protected] www: http://www.uncsd2012.org/rio20/index.php?page=view&type=1000&nr=103&menu=126
Third Official EU-OEA Annual Conference: Ocean Energy 2012: This conference, organized by the European Ocean Energy Association, will bring together policy makers and industry representatives from the entire ocean energy supply chain to discuss latest technologies, the development of policies, and investment opportunities. dates: 26-27 June 2012 location: Brussels, Belgium contact: Anna Watson phone: +44-203-355-4216 email: [email protected] www: http://www.greenpowerconferences.com
Fourth East Asian Seas Congress 2012: With the theme “Building a Blue Economy: Strategy, Opportunities and Partnerships in the Seas of East Asia,” the Congress will address new opportunities for the ocean economy of East Asia, the range of partnerships that have developed and are required in order to realize the full potential of a blue economy, and the progress and achievements in governance of regional/sub-regional seas within the framework of the Sustainable Development Strategy for the Seas of East Asia. dates: 9-13 July 2012 location: Changwon,
Republic of Korea contact: EAS Congress Secretariat phone: +63 (2) 929-2992 fax: +63 (2) 926-9712 email: [email protected] www: http://eascongress.pemsea.org/
Southern Indian Ocean Regional Workshop to Facilitate the Description of Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs): This workshop aims to facilitate the description of EBSAs through the application of scientific criteria adopted at the ninth session of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) as well as other relevant compatible and complementary nationally and intergovernmentally-agreed scientific criteria, as well as the scientific guidance on the identification of marine areas beyond national jurisdiction. dates: 30 July - 3 August 2012 location: Mauritius contact: CBD Secretariat phone: +1-514-288-2220 fax: +1-514-288-6588 email: [email protected] www: http://www.cbd.int/doc/?meeting=EBSA-SIO-01
Oceans of Potential Conference: The “Oceans of Potential” conference is an initiative of Plymouth’s marine science organizations and coordinated by Plymouth Marine Laboratory. It will bring together stakeholders from a broad range of disciplines to discuss the opportunities offered by oceans, including renewable energy, carbon sequestration, human health, bioengineering and new approaches to food production. dates: 11-12 September 2012 location: Plymouth, United Kingdom contact: Conference Secretariat email: [email protected] www: www.oceansofpotential.org
67th Session of the UN General Assembly: The 67th regular session of the UN General Assembly (UNGA 67) will convene at UN Headquarters on Tuesday, 18 September 2012. The General Debate will open on Tuesday, 25 September. This session will include a review of the effectiveness and utility of the UN Open-ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea (Resolution 65/37A). The preliminary list of items to be included in the provisional agenda is contained in document A/67/50. A draft programme of work of the plenary is expected to be issued in July 2012. date: 18 September 2012 location: UN Headquarters, New York www: http://www.un.org/ga/
Third Symposium on the Ocean in a High-CO2 World: This symposium is sponsored by the Scientific Committee on Oceanographic Research (SCOR), the IOC of UNESCO, and the International Geosphere-Biosphere Programme. The symposium aims to attract over 300 of the world’s leading scientists to discuss the impacts of ocean acidification on marine organisms, ecosystems, and biogeochemical cycles. It will also cover socioeconomic consequences of ocean acidification, including policy and management implications. dates: 24-27 September 2012 location: Monterey, California, USA email: [email protected] www: http://www.highco2-iii.org
Sixth Meeting of the Parties to the UNECE Water Convention: The sixth session of the Meeting of the Parties (MOP) to the UN Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes will mark the 20th anniversary since its adoption. The MOP will adopt a work programme for 2013-2015 and will address the future evolution of the Convention becoming a global instrument with a forthcoming entry into force of the amendments opening it to countries outside the UNECE region. dates: 28-30 November
Ad Hoc Open-ended Informal Working Group to Study Issues Relating to the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity Beyond Areas of National Jurisdiction: The sixth meeting of the Ad Hoc Open-ended Informal Working Group to study issues relating to the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction is expected to be convened by the General Assembly at its sixty-seventh session. It will be preceded by two intersessional workshops at dates to be determined. dates: second half of 2013 location: UN Headquarters, New York contact: UN-DOALOS phone: +1-212-963-3962 fax: +1-212-963-5847 email: [email protected] www: http://www.un.org/depts/los/biodiversityworkinggroup/biodiversityworkinggroup.htm
14th Meeting of the UN Open-ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the Sea: The meeting is expected to take place in May or June 2013, at UN Headquarters in New York. The decision to hold this meeting will be taken by the UN General Assembly in December 2012. For more information, contact: UN-DOALOS phone: +1-212-963-3969 fax: +1-212-963-5847 email: [email protected]; www: http://www.un.org/Depts/los/
GLOSSARY
DOALOS UN Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea
EIA Environmental impact assessmentICP UN Open-ended Informal Consultative Process on Oceans and the Law of the SeaIEA International Energy AgencyIRENA International Renewable Energy AgencyISA International Seabed AuthorityMDGs Millennium Development GoalsMPA Marine protected areaMREs Marine renewable energiesMSP Marine spatial planningOES Ocean Energy Systems Implementing AgreementOTEC Ocean thermal energy conversionRio+20 UN Conference on Sustainable Development (UNCSD)SEA Strategic environmental assessmentSIDS Small island developing statesUNCLOS UN Convention on the Law of the SeaUNCSD UN Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20)UNEP UN Environment Programme
Interna onal Ins tute for Sustainable DevelopmentRepor ng Services (IISD RS)
Knowledge Management Resources
IISD RS, publisher of the Earth Nego a ons Bulle n, also maintains online knowledgebases that are updated daily with informa on regarding mee ngs, publica ons and other ac vi es related to interna onal sustainable development policy and its implementa on.
Each knowledgebase project consists of several integrated resources, to help the sustainable development policy and prac ce communi es assess trends and ac vi es at the interna onal level. These resources are:
• Daily news reports researched and wri en by our own experts and organized in a freely accessible, searchable on-line knowledgebase;• A comprehensive calendar of upcoming events related to interna onal sustainable development policy, which can be downloaded to your own online calendar;• And a community listserve, which exclusively delivers email updates of the most recent addi ons to our knowledgebases, as well as announcements by listserve members regarding their organiza ons’ sustainable development ac vi es.
Each knowledgebase focuses on a specifi c environmental challenge or region, as noted below:
Sustainable Development Policy & Prac ceh p://uncsd.iisd.org/
Climate Change Policy & Prac ceh p://climate-l.iisd.org/
La n America & Caribbean Regional Coverageh p://larc.iisd.org/
SIDS Policy & Prac ceh p://sids-l.iisd.org/
Biodiversity Policy & Prac ceh p://biodiversity-l.iisd.org/
Sustainable Energy Policy & Prac ceh p://energy-l.iisd.org/
