¹ Miranda Wecker, Acting Executive Director, Council on Ocean Law, Washington, DC, pers. comm. 1990.

² Boyle, Alan E., “Marine Pollution under the Law of the Sea Convention,” 79 Am. J. Int’l L. 347, 370(1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

³ See, for example, Kwiatkowska, Barbara, “Marine Pollution from Land-Based Sources: Current Problems and Prospects,” Ocean Development and Int’l L. 315 (1984).Google Scholar

⁴ See Perritano, Judith, “International Liability for Nuclear Pollution,” 11 Suffolk Transnat’l L.J. 75, 81 (1987).Google Scholar

⁵ In Art. 207 (below), the UNCLOS treaty does, however, mandate the coastal state to ensure that this regulation occur in the future: see the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (hereinafter UNCLOS), UN Doc. A/CONF.62/122, reprinted in 21 Int’l Leg. Mat. 1261 (1982).

⁶ “Pollution of Summer ’87 Seen as Oceanic Warning,” New York Times, Sept. 13, 1987, A1.

⁷ For one discussion of this see Handl, Gunther, “Environmental Protection and Development in Third World Countries: Common Destiny: Common Responsibil-ities,” (1988) Int’l L. and Pol. 20, 603.Google Scholar

⁸ Our Common Future 312–13 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987).

⁹ Kildow, Judith T., “Political and Economic Dimensions of Land-Based Sources of Marine Pollution,” in Charney, Jonathan L. (ed.), The New Nationalism and the Use of Common Spaces: Issues in Marine Pollution and the Exploitation of Antarctica (Montclair, NJ: Allenheld Osmun, 1980).Google Scholar

¹⁰ Land-Based Sources of Marine Pollution in the Wider Caribbean Region, Report of the Puerto Rico workshop (hereinafter Puerto Rico Report), Caribbean Islands Directorate, U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program, Department of State, Washington, DC, Aug. 7–9, 1989, at 2

¹¹ For a recent assessment, see State of the Mediterranean Marine Environment, United Nations Environment Program, Mediterranean Action Plan Technical Reports Series No. 28, Athens, 1989.

¹² Goering, Kevin W., “Mediterranean Protocol on Land-Based Sources: Regional Response to a Pressing Transnational Problem,” 13 Cornell Int’l L.J. 329 (1980).Google Scholar

¹³ See Kuwabara, Sachiko, The Legal Regime of the Protection of the Mediterranean against Pollution from Land-Based Sources (Dublin: Tycooly International Publishing Limited, 1984)Google Scholar, for the most comprehensive discussion of this legal regime. This regime is discussed in detail below.

¹⁴ Congressional Report on the Edwin B. Forsythe Roundtable: Land-Based Sources of Marine Pollution, Year of the Ocean Foundation, 1984–1985, Washington, DC, at 1–3.

¹⁵ “Possible Elements of a Long-Term Strategy for the Future Development of the Caribbean Environment Programme” (hereinafter UNEP Strategy paper), Meeting of Experts on the Caribbean Environment Programme, Mexico City, Sept. 7–9, 1988, Document UNEP/(OCA)/CAR WG. 1/5

¹⁶ For an excellent overview of the contemporary maritime environmental problems in the area, see the publication of one non-governmental organization active in the region, “Environmental Assessment of the Wider Caribbean Region for the United Nations Environment Programme’s Caribbean Action Plan,” Washington, DC: Greenpeace International, 1988. See also the Puerto Rico Report, op. cit. supra note 10.

¹⁷ Archer, Arthur B., “The Impact of Land-Based Sources of Pollution on the Marine Environment,” Proceedings of the 1987 Workshop of the International Association for Impact Assessment, Barbados, 1987, 264, 266.Google Scholar

¹⁸ See “Regional Overview of Environmental Problems and Priorities Affecting the Coastal and Marine Resources of the Wider Caribbean” (hereinafter UNEP Regional Overview paper), Meeting of Experts on the Caribbean Environment Programme, Mexico City, Sept. 7–9, 1988, Document UNEP/(OCA)/CAR/ WG. 1/3.

¹⁹ Archer, op. cit. supra note 17, at 274–75. On tne tourism industry, see Beekuis, Jeanne V., “Tourism in the Caribbean: Impacts on the Economic, Social and Natural Environments,” to Ambio 325 (1981).Google Scholar

²⁰ Ibid., at 269.

²¹ Memorandum from Pedro Gelabert, Director, Caribbean Field Office, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Nov. 9, 1988. In the memo, Mr. Gelabert calls for the rapid conclusion of a land-based protocol.

²² UNEP Strategy paper, 1988, op. cit. supra note 15, at 2.

²³ Qing-nan, Meng, Land-Based Marine Pollution: International Law Development 63 (London: Graham & Trotman/Martinus Nijhoff, 1987).Google Scholar

²⁴ Kuwabara, op. cit. supra note 13, at 30.

²⁵ Trail Smelter Arbitration (United States v. Canada), 35 Am. J. Int’l L. 684 716 (1941).

²⁶ Corfu Channel case, [1949] I-C.J. Rep. 4, 22–23.

²⁷ Lake Lanoux Arbitration (Spain v. France), 53 Am. J. Int’l L. 156 (1959).

²⁸ Ibid., 160.

²⁹ One scholar, after examining evidence in “protests of States, bilateral and multilateral treaties, judicial decisions, activities of the UN, declarations of regional organizations, and a growing body of municipal legislation,” argues that the application of the sic utere tuo principle to land-based pollution of the high seas is “consistent with accepted application to analogous areas of international law”: Hickey, James E., “Custom and Land-Based Pollution of the High Seas,” 15 San Diego L. Rev. 409, 474 (1978).Google Scholar

³⁰ Report of the International Law Commission on the Work of Its 42nd Session, May 1-July 20, 1990, UN GAOR, Supp. No. 10, (A/45/10), at 256.

³¹ Op. cit. supra note 13, at 33.

³² Op. cit. supra note 23, at 71–82.

³³ Barbara Kwiatkowska, supra note 3, at 329. For a general review of the issue, see Sands, Philippe, “The Environment, Community, and International Law,” 30 Harv. Int’l L.J. 393–420 (1989).Google Scholar

³⁴ See, in general, Handl, Gunther, “International Liability of States for Marine Pollution,” 21 Canadian Yearbook of International Law 85 (1983).Google Scholar

³⁵ Kwiatkowska, supra note 3, at 329–30. See also Goering, supra note 12, at 331, who notes that “[d]ue to the absence of dispositive international judicial or arbitral decisions on point, it is arguable that, absent fault, no government is liable to another nation for pollution originating within the former’s jurisdiction.” However, Goering goes on to cite many authors who “now agree that nations are strictly liable under international law for pollution emanating from their territory.”

³⁶ Meng, op. cit. supra note 23 at 67.

³⁷ Kuwabara, op. cit. supra note 13, at 36.

³⁸ Downey, Joseph O., “International Pollution: The Struggle between States and Scholars over Customary Environmental Norms: The Hazy View after Chernobyl and Basel,” 12 Southern Illinois Univ. L.J. 247, 248 (1987).Google Scholar

³⁹ Sands, supra note 33.

⁴⁰ Meng, op. cit. supra note 23 at 96. For a more theoretical discussion of soft law, see Gruchalla-Wesierski, Tadeusz, “A Framework for Understanding ‘Soft Law’,” (1984) Revue de Droit de McGill 30, 37.Google Scholar

⁴¹ United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, June 16, 1972, reprinted in 11 Int’l Leg. Mat. 1416, 1420 (1972). This is the core of the Stockholm principles, and has been widely cited as legal authority ever since.

⁴² Stockhom Principle 21 was subsequently adopted in various forms, including as: a resolution of the United Nations General Assembly (Res. 2996 (XXCII), Dec. 15, 1972); Art. 30 of the Charter of Economic Rights and Duties of States (UN Gen. Ass. Res. 3281 (XXIX), Dec. 12, 1974); and Article 3(1) of the International Law Association’s Draft Rules on Transboundary Pollution, Rep. of the 60th Conference, Montreal, 1982.

⁴³ 11 Int’l Leg. Mat. 1420 (1972).

⁴⁴ See, for example, the 1972 (Oslo) Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping from Ships and Aircraft, ibid., 262; 1972 (London) International Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping Wastes and Other Matter, 26 U.S.T. 2403; 1974 (Paris) Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Land-Based Sources, 13 Int’l Leg. Mat. 352 (1974); and the 1974 (Helsinki) Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, 13 Int’l Leg. Mat. 546 (1974).

⁴⁵ Boyle, Alan E., “Marine Pollution under the Law of the Sea Convention,” supra note 2, at 348.Google Scholar

⁴⁶ Boczek, Boleslaw Adam, “Global and Regional Approaches to the Protection and Preservation of the Marine Environment,” 16 Case Western J. Int’l L. 39, 67 (1984).Google Scholar

⁴⁷ Wecker, supra note 1.

⁴⁸ Boyle, supra note 2, at. 354.

⁴⁹ Ibid 371.

⁵⁰ Boczek, supra note 46, at. 53.

⁵¹ Ibid., 53.

⁵² Ibid., 57.

⁵³ Charles Kiss, Alexandre, Survey of Current Developments in International Environmental Law (IUCN Environmental Policy and Law Paper, No. 10, 1976), at 67.Google Scholar The Paris Convention applies to the parts of the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans and the dependent seas that lie north of 36°N and between 42o W and 51 °W, excluding the Baltic and Mediterranean seas. Its parties are Belgium, Denmark, France, the Federal Republic of Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, and the United Kingdom. The European Community is also a party.

⁵⁴ McManus, Robert J., “Legal Aspects of Land-Based Sources of Marine Pollution,” in Charney, Jonathan L., op. cit. supra note 9, at 90, 95.Google Scholar

⁵⁵ Helsinki Convention, Art. 3, “Fundamental principles and obligations.”

⁵⁶ See Helsinki Convention, Art. 1, defining the convention area.

⁵⁷ United Nations General Assembly Resolution No. 2997 (XXVII), Institutional and Financial Arrangements for International Environmental Cooperation, Dec. 15, 1972.

⁵⁸ Bliss-Guest, Patricia, “The Protocol against Pollution from Land-Based Sources: A Turning Point in the Rising Tide of Pollution,” 17 Stanford J. Int’l L. 261, 263 (1981).Google Scholar

⁵⁹ For an overview of the UNEP Regional Seas Programme, see Douglas Johnston, M. and Enomoto, Lawrence M.G., “Regional Approaches to the Protection and Conservation of the Marine Environment” in Johnston, Douglas M. (ed.), The Environmental Law of the Sea 324–36 (Berlin: Erich Schmidt Verlag, 1981).Google Scholar

⁶⁰ These action plans include the Mediterranean, Kuwait, West and Central Africa, Caribbean, East Asian, South-East Pacific, Red Sea and Gulf of Aden, South Pacific, Eastern African, and South Asian Seas. See Information on the Status and Planned Development of the UNEP-Sponsored Programme for the Protection of Oceans and Coastal Areas, Document UNEP/IAMRS.7/Inf. 3, Nov. 20, 1990.

⁶¹ Johnston and Enomoto, op. cit. supra note 59, at 327.

⁶² UNEP’s regional conventions include the 1976 Mediterranean (Barcelona) Convention for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea Against Pollution, reprinted in 15 Int’l Leg. Mat. 285 (1976); the 1978 Arabian-Persian Gulf (Kuwait) Regional Convention for Co-operation on the Protection of the Marine Environment from Pollution, reprinted in 17 Int’l Leg. Mat. 511 (1978); the West Africa (Abidjan) Convention for Co-operation in the Protection and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the West and Central African Region, reprinted in 20 Int’l Leg. Mat. 729 (1981); the Southeast Pacific (Lima) Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and Coastal Areas of the South-East Pacific, (1981) UN Doc. No. UNEP/CPPS/Ig. 32/4; the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden (Jeddah) Regional Convention for the Conservation of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden Environment, (1982), noted in 22 Int’l Leg. Mat. 219 (1983), reprinted in UNEP, Register of International Treaties and Other Agreements in the Field of the Environment (1985); and the Caribbean (Cartagena) Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region, reprinted in 22 Int’l Leg. Mat. 227 (1983).

⁶³ 1980 Athens Protocol for the Protection of the Mediterranean Sea Against Pollution from Land-Based Sources, reprinted in 19 Int’l Leg. Mat. 863 (1980), and 1983 Quito Protocol for the Protection of the South-East Pacific against Pollution from Land-Based Sources, reprinted in 22 Int’l Leg. Mat. (1983). As protocols, these agreements are ratified independently but, when ratified, have the binding force of the convention itself. In order to become a party to a protocol, a state must first become a party to the convention.

⁶⁴ Action Plan for the Mediterranean, reprinted in 14 Int’l Leg. Mat. 475 (1975).

⁶⁵ For an account of these negotiations, see Dobbert, Jean-Pierre, “Protocol to Control Pollution in the Mediterranean,” 6 Environmental Pol. and L. 110 (1980).Google Scholar For a discussion of the preparatory stages ( 1977–79), see also McManus, supra note 54.

⁶⁶ For a good discussion of this, see Haas, Peter, Saving the Mediterranean: The Politics of International Environmental Co-operation (New York: Columbia University Press, 1990).Google Scholar

⁶⁷ Kildow, supra note 9, at 77

⁶⁸ Goering, supra note 12, at 340–41.

⁶⁹ “From Assessment to Action: An Urgent Role to Save the Mediterranean,” Fourth Meeting of Contracting Parties, Mediterranean Plan, Genoa, Sept. 9, 1985.

⁷⁰ This action was taken pursuant to decision 10/24 °£ May 31, 1982 of the Governing Council of UNEP. For a detailed background, see Final Report, Ad Hoc Working Group of Experts on the Protection of the Marine Environment against Pollution from Land-based Sources, UNEP/WG. 120/3, Apr. 19, 1985.

⁷¹ These meetings are discussed in Meng, op. cit. supra note 23, at 164–67.

⁷² Decision 13/18/II of the Governing Council of UNEP, May 24, 1985.

⁷³ Montreal Guidelines, 1.

⁷⁴ Ibid.

⁷⁵ Ibid.

⁷⁶ For a more detailed review of the provisions, see Meng, op. cit. supra note 23, at 117–51 (Montreal Guidelines) and 168–210 (Mediterranean Protocol), and Kuwabara, op. cit. supra note 13, at 46–77 (Mediterranean Protocol).

⁷⁷ UNCLOS, Art. 212.

⁷⁸ Bliss-Guest, supra note 58 at 271–72. See also Peter Haas, op. cit. supra note 66.

⁷⁹ Meng, op. cit. supra note 23, at 173. Under the LOS Convention, pollution from offshore activities is also dealt with separately from land-based sources (Art. 208), and the existing regional agreements vary in their application to offshore structures. The Paris Convention covers all such structures, while the Athens Protocol covers only those which “serve purposes other than exploration and exploitation“ of mineral resources of the continental shelf and seabed. The Montreal Guidelines compromise this by covering all offshore structures “save to the extent that these sources are governed by appropriate international agreements.” This provision ensures that such structures are covered while avoiding the “overlapping of international legal controls” (Meng, ibid., 174).

⁸⁰ LOS Convention, Art. 207.

⁸¹ Barcelona Convention, Art. 8; Kuwait Convention, Art. 7; Jeddah Convention, Art. 6. The Athens Protocol, Art. 1, refers to “prevent, reduce, combat and control,” as does Art. 7 of the Abidjan Convention.

⁸² Art. 1

⁸³ Art. 6 and Art. 4 respectively.

⁸⁴ Op. cit. supra note 13, at 71.

⁸⁵ Montreal Guidelines, Guideline 11, para. (a).

⁸⁶ Ibid., para(b).

⁸⁷ Ibid., para. (c).

⁸⁸ See, for example, Art. 16 of the Helsinki Convention, Art. 9 of the Athens Protocol, Art. 10 of the Quito Protocol, and Guideline 8 of the Montreal Guidelines.

⁸⁹ Art. 9.

⁹⁰ Paris Convention, Art. 10.

⁹¹ Bliss-Guest, supra note 58, at 275.

⁹² For a discussion of the technical options considered by the participants in the Montreal Guidelines negotiations, see “Technical Strategies and Options for Con-trolling Marine Pollution from Land-based Sources,” Ad Hoc Working Group of Experts on the Protection of the Marine Environment against Pollution from Land-Based Sources, 2nd Session, Geneva, Nov. 19–24, 1984, Doc. UNEP/WG. 109/3. See also McManus, supra note 54, at 104–7.

⁹³ Bliss-Guest, supra note 58, at 273.

⁹⁴ Annex III para, (c) refers to the “characteristics of discharge site and receiving marine environment.”

⁹⁵ Goering, supra note 12, at 347.

⁹⁶ Ibid., 347.

⁹⁷ These rules were developed by the Committee on Legal Aspects of the Conservation of Environment and adopted at the 6oth International Law Association’s Annual Conference, Aug.-Sept. 1982, Montreal.

⁹⁸ Article 6 obliges states to “reduce” existing and “forestall” any new pollution, subject to various criteria. For a discussion of this, see Kwiatkowska, supra note 3, at 323–24.

⁹⁹ See Goering, supra note 12, at 347.

¹⁰⁰ Kwiatkowska, supra note 3, at 328.

¹⁰¹ Ibid.

¹⁰² These are discussed in Meng, op. cit. supra note 23, at 204.

¹⁰³ Meng, ibid., at 213; Goering, supra note 12, at 345.

¹⁰⁴ Perritano, supra note 4, at 78.

¹⁰⁵ For a review of these, see Gunther Handl, supra note 34. For a very good summary of the law as it applies to transnational pollution damage, see Perritano, supra at 92–96. See also Sands, supra note 33.

¹⁰⁶ Meng, op. cit. supra note 23, at 201.

¹⁰⁷ Ibid.

¹⁰⁸ Kuwabara, op. cit. supra note 13, at 115.

¹⁰⁹ Op. cit. supra note 30, Art. 3.

¹¹⁰ Kwiatkowska, supra note 3, at p. 329.

¹¹¹ This débâcle is recounted in Kuwabara, op. cit. supra note 13, at 110.

¹¹² Para. 5.

¹¹³ Bliss-Guest, supra note 58, at 270.

¹¹⁴ It ls beyond the scope of this article to consider the many global agencies of relevance. However, these include, above all, the United Nations Environment Programme, the Food and Agricultural Organization, the World Health Organization, the International Maritime Organization, the International Océanographie Commission, and the Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of Marine Pollution (GESAMP).

¹¹⁵ From an institutional viewpoint, the general agreements under the Regional Seas Programme (such as the Barcelona Convention in the Mediterranean and the Cartagena Convention in the Caribbean) are even more significant.

¹¹⁶ Kuwabara has suggested four areas where additional specificity is required: ( ι ) the development of a prior authorization system (for annex I substances), the records of which would be submitted periodically to the parties, along with other implementation reports; (2) the assignment of precise time limits for the adoption of programs and measures either jointly or individually; (3) systematic monitoring, and: (4) the maintenance of uniform regional standards, with economic capacity affecting only the timetable for achieving those standards, not the level of the standards themselves, op. cit. supra note 13, at 74. This specificity has been achieved to the greatest degree in the Oslo and Paris Commissions, discussed below.

¹¹⁷ Guideline 19.

¹¹⁸ See Goering, supra note 12, at 348–49.

¹¹⁹ Meng, op. cit. supra note 23, at 211.

¹²⁰ Ibid.

^120a Ibid.

¹²¹ This phrase is not meant in the jurisprudential sense associated with the school of legal realism, but is simply meant to focus analysis on those elements of the legal system that encourage or impede the attainment of tangible results.

¹²² Gray, Mark Allan, “The United Nations Environment Programme: An Assessment,” 20 Environmental Law 291, at 313 (1990).Google Scholar

¹²³ Resolution SS.II/6, Need for effective global protection of ocean ecosystems, Aug. 3- •990.

¹²⁴ Document 39/13 of the 13th Consultative Meeting of Contracting Parties, Nov. 2, 1990. In the statement, the parties recommended that the 1992 Conference take under consideration “a global instrument and new and improved regional agreements to address land-based sources of marine pollution.”

¹²⁵ One of tne most interesting aspects of this problem is the problematic statistical basis of past management analyses. For a very informative review of the problem, see Peterman, Randall M., “Statistical Power Analysis Can Improve Fisheries Research and Management,” 47 Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 2–15 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar More generally, see Gerrodette, T., “A Power Analysis for Detecting Trends,” 68 Ecology 1364–72 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹²⁶ Adopted Nov. 24-25, 1987, London. Section VII of the Declaration states: “Accepting that, in order to protect the North Sea from possibly damaging side effects of the most dangerous substances, a precautionary approach is necessary which may require action to control inputs of such substances even before a causal link has been established by absolutely clear scientific evidence.”

¹²⁷ Recommendation 89/1, adopted June 22, 1989. This principle mirrors a UNEP resolution passed at the 15th Session of the UNEP Governing Council urging the adoption at the national and international levels of the “principle of precautionary action”: UNEP Decision 15/27, May 25,1989. A similar recommendation was accepted at the Sixth Meeting of the Contracting Parties to the Barcelona Convention in Athens on October 3–6, 1989 in its protocol on dumping, see Annex V, Recommendations approved by the Contracting Parties, Section A, 3, para. 6.

¹²⁸ This approach has been advanced in the regional seas context as the basic policy of Greenpeace International. See, for example, Peter Taylor, “The Precautionary Approach to Pollution,” submission to the Paris Commission, June 1988, Amsterdam: Greenpeace International.

¹²⁹ At the international level, these issues are gradually being addressed, especially in the Oslo and Paris Commissions, and in the London Dumping Convention.

¹³⁰ Clifton E. Curtis, “International Ocean Pollution Agreements: What Is Needed?,” workshop paper for “Freedom for the Seas in the 21st Century: A New Look at Ocean Governance and Stewardship,” Honolulu, Hawaii, Dec. 10–12, 1990, at 8.

¹³¹ Five options comprise this hierarchy (in the following order): (1) elimination or reduction at the source; (2) reuse or recycle; (3) destruction of hazardous constituents by physical, chemical or biological means; (4) treatment to reduce the hazard, and (5) disposal into land, air, and water. The latter stage would be subject to an extensive risk-benefit analysis. For a detailed discussion of this, see Greenpeace International, “Policy Principles and Options for the Expansion of the London Dumping Convention,“ Submission to the First meeting of the Steering Group on a Long-Term Strategy for the London Dumping Convention, London, April 17–20, 1990.

¹³² See Document II/4 B, Aug. 3, 1990.

¹³³ OSCOM Decision 89/1 on the Reduction and Cessation of Dumping Industrial Wastes at Sea, 15th Meeting of the Oslo Commission, Dublin, Ireland, June 14, 1989. As part of this decision, the Commission adopted a “Prior Justification Procedure,” which requires a review of alternative disposal options, including alternative production processes that will lead to waste reduction, recycling, and so on.

¹³⁴ See Report of the 13th Session of the Contracting Parties, London Dumping Convention, Nov. 2, 1990, London.

¹³⁵ The Commission set up a Working Group on Industrial Sectors at its Eleventh Meeting, Dublin, 1989, PARCOM Doc. 11 /9/1. The second meeting of the Group took place in Madrid in Jan.-Feb. 1990.

¹³⁶ See, for example, the Report of the Third Meeting of the Ad Hoc Group of Experts on the Annexes of the Convention, London Dumping Convention, London, Jan. 15–19, 1990. One possibility for altering the annexes is by a procedure of “reverse listing” whereby substances being allowed for dumping would be listed in the annexes, rather than those which were prohibited. This would effectively shift the burden of proof for dumping. The convention’s draft “New Assessment Procedure” has, however, sparked much controversy between those adovcating a continued reliance on assumilative capacity and those arguing for the clear adoption of the principle of precautionary action. For the text of the draft, see Document LDC.2/Circ. 266, June 19, 1990.

¹³⁷ This is well discussed in Peter Taylor, “Justification Procedures and the Revision of the Annexes of the London Dumping Convention,” Ad Hoc Group of Experts on the Annexes to the London Dumping Convention, 3rd meeting. London, Jan. 15–19, 1990, Document WP. 10.

¹³⁸ This is discussed in Goering, supra note 12, at 347–48.

¹³⁹ See Doeker, Gunter and Gehring, Thoomas, “Private or Transnational Liability for Transnational Environmental Damage: The Precedent of Conventional Lia-bility Regimes,” 2 J.Environmental L. 1–16 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

¹⁴⁰ Report of the International Law Commission on the work of its 39th session, UN GAOR, Supp. No 10 (A/39/10), at 720. Professor McCafferey states there that many developing countries would often not have the knowledge and capability to be said to exercise “control,” but that this responsibility would also be subject to the necessity to exercise “due diligence.”

¹⁴¹ Discussed in Kuwabara, op. cit. supra note 13, at 110–11.

¹⁴² The present author prefers to refer to “developing sustainability” because it more clearly implies the creation of new sustainable economic and political institu-tions, rather than simply minor modifications to existing processes of economic “development.” For a general survey of the issues in the international context, see Muldoon, Paul R., “The International Law of Ecodevelopment: Emerging Norms for Development Assistance Agencies,” Texas Int’l L.J. 1–52 (1986).Google Scholar

¹⁴³ Tolba, op. cit. supra note 69, at 4.

¹⁴⁴ Gamman, John K. and McCreary, Scott T., “Suggestions for Integrating Environmental Planning and Economic Development in the Caribbean Region,” Proceedings of the 1987 Workshop of the International Association for Impact Assessment, Barbados, 1987, at 118,Google Scholar 121–23.

¹⁴⁵ UNEP Regional Overview paper, 1988, op. cit. supra note 18, at 33.

¹⁴⁶ Such a scheme has recently been discussed at the Sixth Ordinary Meeting of Parties to the Mediterranean Regional Seas (Athens) Convention. There it was proposed that enviromental financing could be obtained by “charging of a modest fee on airline tickets purchased by tourists visiting the region”: see UNEP/ (OCA)/MED IG. 1/5, Nov. 1, 1989.

¹⁴⁷ Direct taxing schemes have, however, not received the attention they deserve not only because of the omnipresent desire by national governments to “keep their hands on the purse strings,” but because of a concern for the efficiency and fiscal responsibility of international organizations, including UNEP. Resistance might be overcome, for example, by linking these revenues to specific pollution reduction strategies approved by the contracting parties through such entities as the UNEP Priority Actions Programme. In the Mediterranean, this program has targeted specific action on matters like the establishment of port ballast reception facilities, improved impact assessment processes, and the development of industrial waste disposal alternatives. These priorities are set out in the Genoa Decla-ration on the second Mediterranean decade, adopted by the Fourth Meeting of the Contracting Parties of the Barcelona Convention, Genoa, Italy, Sept. 9–13, 1985.

¹⁴⁸ In United Nations General Assembly, Law of the Sea: Protection and Preservation of the Marine Environment, Report of the Secretary-General, A/44/461, Sept. 18, 1989 (emphasis added).

¹⁴⁹ “The first ten years of the Mediterranean Action Plan: A Critical Review,” Secretariat paper presented to the Fourth Meeting of the Contracting Parties, Genoa: I985, Doc. UNEP/IG.56/Inf.4.

¹⁵⁰ Meng, op. cit. supra note 23, at 236 and 237.

¹⁵¹ Op. cit. supra note 8, at 330.

¹⁵² On this generally, see Handl, Guenther, “National Uses of Transboundary Air Resources: The International Entitlement Issue Reconsidered,” 26 Natural Resources J. 405 (1986).Google Scholar