Print this pageAbstract: Legal Aspects of Resource Development in Antarctica
Seven countries have laid claim to parts of Antarctica: the United Kingdom, New Zealand, Australia, France, Norway, Chile, and Argentina. Most claims are based on the international-law principle of occupation, which requires discovery, possession, and administration. Unresolved is the question whether the physical conditions in Antarctica permit relaxation of these requirements. The status of all territorial claims is doubtful; none is recognized by either the United States or the Soviet Union. However, the claims give rise to further questions of vital importance to resource development. Can territorial sovereignty be acquired over an ice shelf (or floating ice) or over a continental landmass submerged by ice? Would territorial sovereignty include rights to a territorial sea, a continental shelf, and an exclusive economic zone?
The 19 parties to the Antarctic Treaty of 1959 (the 7 claimant states plus Belgium, Brazil, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, German Democratic Republic, Japan, Netherlands, Poland, Romania, South Africa, USSR, and the United States) have agreed to promote freedom and international cooperation in scientific investigation in the area south of 60°S lat. However, the treaty does not extend explicitly to resource exploration and exploitation. These issues have caused renewed interest in the status of territorial claims in Antarctica which, by Article IV of the treaty, are neither recognized nor renounced by the parties. Territorial sovereignty could provide a means of regulation of resource development in Antarctica. Alternatively, the treaty could be amended to deal with resource development a possibility presently under active consideration by the major parties.
However, some members of the world community prefer a third option--leave Antarctica neither to the claimant states nor to the treaty parties. The view has been expressed that Antarctica forms part of the "the common heritage of mankind." The parallel with the deep-sea bed beyond the limits of national jurisdiction is clear. However, the attempt to create an international authority to manage the resources of the deep-sea bed has provided the greatest challenge yet to the Third United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea--a challenge so far unmet.
AAPG Search and Discovery Article #90962©1978 AAPG 2nd Circum-Pacific Energy and Minerals Resource Conference, Honolulu, Hawaii