Pollution or protection? The International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea’s advisory opinion on climate change and its relevance for marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR)
汚染か保護か？気候変動に関する国際海洋法裁判所の勧告的意見と海洋二酸化炭素除去（mCDR）への関連性 (AI 翻訳)
Miranda Boettcher, Rakhyun E. Kim
🤖 gxceed AI 要約
日本語
ITLOSが2024年5月に公表した気候変動勧告的意見を分析し、海洋二酸化炭素除去（mCDR）が海洋汚染か保護かを考察。結果は曖昧で、政治的利用の可能性を指摘。
English
This paper analyzes the ITLOS advisory opinion on climate change and its implications for marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR). It finds the opinion leaves ambiguity on whether mCDR is pollution or protection, warning that this could be used politically to shift climate problems to the ocean.
Unofficial AI-generated summary based on the public title and abstract. Not an official translation.
📝 gxceed 編集解説 — Why this matters
日本のGX文脈において
日本は海洋国家であり、mCDRの規制枠組み形成に国際的な意思決定が影響を与える可能性がある。日本の海洋政策・気候政策に関連。
In the global GX context
The ITLOS opinion has global implications for governing marine carbon removal. It highlights the legal ambiguity that could affect emerging carbon removal projects and international climate policy.
👥 読者別の含意
🔬研究者:Provides a legal analysis of ITLOS opinion and its impact on mCDR governance.
🏢実務担当者:Relevant for firms involved in marine carbon removal or ocean-based climate solutions, highlighting regulatory risks.
🏛政策担当者:Key for policymakers considering mCDR regulations and international ocean governance.
📄 Abstract（原文）
Abstract In May 2024, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) published an advisory opinion on climate change. Many expected that this decision would help to clarify the balance between the paradigms of ocean protection and utilisation in the context of climate change. This is especially relevant for governing emerging marine carbon dioxide removal (mCDR) approaches being proposed to increase the carbon drawdown potential of the ocean to mitigate climate change. Does mCDR constitute marine pollution or marine protection in the face of climate change? To help answer this question, we analyse the advisory opinion and map the different emerging interpretations of the decision in relation to mCDR. We find that, although the resulting advisory opinion provided clarity on the responsibility of states to protect the oceans from “pollution” by atmospheric CO 2 , it left a lot of room for ambiguity about whether mCDR would constitute marine pollution or marine protection in the face of climate change. We show how this ambiguous decision could be used politically to either promote or prevent problem shifting of the climate problem to the marine environment. We caution that international treaty bodies and national regulatory authorities should be prepared for these different interpretations to play a role in ongoing climate and ocean governance processes.
🔗 Provenance — このレコードを発見したソース
- openalex https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-026-09727-yfirst seen 2026-07-03 04:39:55
🔔 こうした論文の新着を逃したくない方は キーワードアラート に登録（無料・3キーワードまで）。
gxceed は公開メタデータに基づく研究支援データセットです。要約・翻訳・解説は AI 支援で生成されています。 最終的な解釈・検証は利用者が原典資料に基づいて行うことを前提とします。