Canadian Arctic Shipping Regulations and the Law of the Sea

  • James Kraska
Part of the St Antony’s Series book series (STANTS)


As Arctic nations look to develop shipping regulations, Canadian statutes — and their intersection with the international law of the sea and the rules adopted by the International Maritime Organization — are instructive for ensuring safety and security in the unique marine polar environment.


Arctic Ocean International Maritime Organization Polar Code Exclusive Economic Zone Arctic Water 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 113.
    All have asserted a territorial sea claim adjacent to ‘their’ Antarctic territories, although only Argentina and Chile have claimed an EEZ. D. R. Rothwell (1996) The Polar Regions and the Development of International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press), pp. 276–81. Australia briefly adopted authority to enforce its fishing laws in an Antarctic EEZ, but then let the law expire shortly thereafter.Google Scholar
  2. J. Kraska (2011) Maritime Power and Law of the Sea (Oxford: Oxford University Press), p. 294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. See also, S. B. Kaye and D. R. Rothwell (2002) ‘Southern Ocean Boundaries and Maritime Claims: Another Antarctic Challenge for the Law of the Sea?’, Ocean Development and International Law, 33:4–4, 364–5;Google Scholar
  4. and S. Kaye and D. R. Rothwell (1995) ‘Australia’s Antarctic Maritime Claims and Boundaries’, Ocean Development and International Law, 26:3, 195–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 114.
    IMO Doc. MSC/Circ.1056/IMO Doc. MEPC/Circ.399, Guidelines for ships operating in Arctic ice-covered waters, 23 December 2002 and IMO Doc. A.1024(26), Guidelines for Ships Operating in Polar Waters, 2 December 2009, reprinted, International Maritime Organization, IMO Pub. Sales No. E190E, Guidelines for Ships Operating in Polar Waters (2010) (Polar Code). Similarly, for a dispute concerning the term ‘best available scientific evidence’, see A. W. Harris (2005) ‘The Best Scientific Evidence Available: The Whaling Moratorium and Divergent Interpretations of Science’, William & Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review, 29, 375–450.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© James Kraska 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • James Kraska

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations