Coping with deficiencies in the Polar Code: a Russian perspective // Polar Journal. 2020. DOI 10.1080/2154896X.2020.1799615. URL: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/2154896X.2020.1799615?journalCode=rpol20. Published online: 07.09.2020.
This article examines shortcomings of the Polar Code (PC) from a Russian perspective. While the PC represents a historic milestone in international regulation of navigation in polar waters, the expert community has noted several drawbacks. Russian experts’ concerns relate mainly to potentially negative effects of the PC’s goal- oriented approach. The code leaves much to the discretion of the flag states’ administration, shipowners, and classification societies in terms of defining the exact scope and substance of the safety standards. This approach exacerbates the problem of weak control over maritime operators’ compliance with international require-ments. Since polar shipping requires special capacities, knowledge and skills available only to a limited group of stakeholders, the goal- oriented approach could pose significant risks in the Arctic. This article studies possible measures to mitigate these challenges, such as the implementation of national safety requirements based on Art. 234 of UNCLOS, establishment of a regional port state control mechanism and exercise of port state jurisdiction.
Ключевые слова: Arctic | Russia | Polar Code | maritime safety | port state control | port state |
ДРУГИЕ ПУБЛИКАЦИИ НА ЭТУ ТЕМУ:
Тодоров А.А.
Russia’s implementation of the Polar Code on the Northern Sea Route // Polar Journal. 2021. Vol. 11, Issue 1. P. 30-42. DOI 10.1080/2154896X.2021.1911044.
Russia: arms control, disarmament and international security. IMEMO supplement to the Russian edition of the SIPRI Yearbook 2019 / ed. by Alexey Arbatov, Sergey Oznobishchev and Marianna Yevtodyeva. – Moscow: IMEMO, 2020. – 175 p.
Пусенкова Н.Н.
Arctic Offshore Oil in Russia: Optimism, Pessimism and Realism // Контуры глобальных трансформаций: политика, экономика, право. 2021. Vol. 14, Special Issue. P. 62-80. DOI 10.23932/2542-0240-2019-12-5-86-108.
Тодоров А.А.
Dire straits of the Russian Arctic: Options and challenges for a potential US FONOP in the Northern Sea Route // Marine Policy. 2022. Vol. 139, Art. 105020. DOI 10.1016/j.marpol.2022.105020.
Степанова Е.А.
The “Islamic State” as a Security Problem for Russia: The Nature and Scale of the Threat [Text] / E. Stepanova // PONARS Eurasia Policy Memos. – 2015. – № 393. – С. 1 – 6.
Энтов Р.М.
The state-owned company: "State failure" or "market failure"? [Text] / R. Entov, A. Radygyn, Y. Simachev // Russian Journal of Economics. – 2015. – V. 1. – Issue 1. – Р. 55 – 80.
Клинова М.В.
Comparative assessment of state involvement in the economy in OECD studies [Text] / M.V. Klinova // Studies on Russian Economic Development. – 2017. – Vol. 28. – No 4. – P. 458-465.
Вылегжанин А., Буник И., Торкунова Е., Киенко Е.В.
Navigation in the Northern Sea Route: interaction of Russian and international applicable law // Polar Journal. 2020. Vol. 10, Issue 2. P. 285-302. DOI 10.1080/2154896X.2020.1844404.
Арбатова Н.К.
Russian view: The case for a global anti-terrorism coalition [Text] / N. Arbatova // Russia Direct. – 2016. – Vol. 4. – № 4. – P. 16 – 20.
Хантингтон Генри П., Загорский А.В., Кальтенборн Бьорн П., Хен Чхоль Шин, Доусон Д., Лукин М., Даль П., Пейцин Го, Томас Д.
Societal implications of a changing Arctic Ocean // Ambio. 2021. DOI 10.1007/s13280-021-01601-2. URL: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs13280-021-01601-2. Published: 19.07.2021.
Загорский А.В.
Konflikt in den Köpfen: Kritik der Versicherheitlichung der Arktis // Osteuropa. 2020. Issue 5. P. 81-98. DOI 10.35998/oe-2020-0031.
Тодоров А.А.
Russia in maritime areas off Spitsbergen (Svalbard): Is it worth opening the Pandora's Box? // Marine Policy. 2020. DOI 10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104264. URL: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0308597X20309106?via%3Dihub#!. Published online: 22.10.2020.
Никитина Е.Н., Kelman I., Sydnes A.K.
Norway-Russia disaster diplomacy for Svalbard // Safety Science. 2020. Vol. 130, P. 104896. DOI 10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104896.
Арбатов А.Г.
Arms control in outer space: The Russian angle, and a possible way forward [Text] / A. Arbatov // Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. – 2019. – Vol. 75. – Issue 4. – P. 151-161. DOI: 10.1080/00963402.2019.1628475.
Гаджиев К.С.
Reflections on the Features of the National Identity of Russia [Text] / K. Gadzhiev // Social Sciences. – 2019. – Vol. 8. – Issue 3. – P. 107-116. DOI: 10.11648/j.ss.20190803.16.
Канаев Е.А., Сумский В.В.
Russia’s Place in a Polycentric Naval Setup [Text] / V. Sumsky, E. Kanaev // Maritime Affairs: Journal of the National Maritime Foundation of India. – 2015. – V. 24. – Issue 2. – P. 9 – 15.
Арбатов А.Г.
Global Stability in the Nuclear World // Herald of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 2021. Vol. 91, Issue 3. P. 364-373. DOI 10.1134/S1019331621030023.
Старчак М.В.
Armenia’s nuclear industry: threats and challenges [Text] / M. Starchak // Central Asia and the Caucasus. – 2016. – Vol. 17. – № 3. – P. 75 – 87.
Загорский А.В.
Arms Control Must Remain the Goal // Arms Control Today. 2022. Vol. 52, URL: https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2022-04/features/arms-control-must-remain-goal. Date of publication: 04.04.2022.
Перегудов С.П.
Business and State bureaucracy in Russia dynamics of interaction [Text] / S.P. Peregudov // Russian Politics and Law.– 2009. – V. 47. – Issue 4.– P. 43 – 57.
Еще публикации по теме







Нет комментариев