Environmental threats to the Great Barrier Reef

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Great Barrier Reef, the world's largest reef system, stretching along the East coast of Australia from the northern tip down to the town of Bundaberg, is composed of roughly 2,900 individual reefs and 940 islands and cays that stretch for 2,300 kilometres (1,616 mi) and cover an area of approximately 344,400 square kilometres (133,000 sq mi). The reef is located in the Coral Sea, off the coast of Queensland in northeast Australia. A large part of the reef is protected by the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park.

According to the 2014 report of the Australian Government's Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA), says that climate change is the most significant environmental threat to the Great Barrier Reef, while the other major environmental pressures are listed as decreased water quality from land-based runoff, impacts from coastal development and some persistent impacts from fishing activities. The reef is also threatened by storms, coral bleaching and ocean acidification. The 2014 report also shows that, while numerous marine life species have recovered after previous declines, the strength of the dugong population is continuing to decline. Terry Hughes, Federation Fellow, ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies at James Cook University, wrote in a 14 August 2014 Conversation piece that harmful government policies and ongoing conflicts of interest over mining royalties are risks of an equivalent magnitude.

The GBRMPA consider climate change, poor water quality, coastal development, and some impacts from fishing to be the area's major threats, but reef scientists Jon Day, Bob Pressey, Jon Brodie and Hughes stated that the "cumulative effects of many combined impacts" is the real issue.

In a Conversation Article, Mathieu Mongin, a biogeochemical modeller at CSIRO and colleagues mapped parts of the Great Barrier Reef that are most exposed to ocean acidification. This map of pH on the Great Barrier Reef presents the exposure to ocean acidification on each of the 3,581 reefs, providing managers with the information they need to tailor management to individual reefs. The Great Barrier Reef is not a singular reef nor a physical barrier that prevents exchange between reefs; it is a mixture of thousands of productive reefs and shallow areas lying on a continental shelf with complex oceanic circulation.

History

In 1967, efforts began to conserve the Great Barrier Reef. It was proposed to mine lime from Ellison Reef, but surveys showed that the reef supported a diverse community of corals and fish.

The Australian and Queensland Governments committed to act in partnership in 2007 to protect the reef, and water quality monitoring programmes were implemented. However, the World Wildlife Fund criticised the slow progress of the governments, raising a concern that as many as 700 reefs continued to be at risk from sediment runoff.

The Australian government then outlined further action after the WHC called for the completion of a strategic assessment of the Reef area in 2011. The Committee also urged the government to use the assessment data to develop a long-term plan for protecting the "Outstanding Universal Value" of the reef, which is the basis for its World Heritage listing. Again, criticisms emerged from the expert community—due to vague quantitative targets, the absence of clear, specific strategies, and no mention of the implications of climate change—but the significant efforts of both state and federal governments addressed key recommendations from the World Heritage Committee.

A 2012 UNESCO report, published by the World Heritage Committee (WHC), then criticised the government's management of the Great Barrier Reef, warning that the area could be downgraded to a world heritage site "in danger" unless major changes were implemented. The report expressed "extreme concern" at the rapid rate of coastal development, highlighting the construction of liquefied natural gas plants at Gladstone and Curtis Island, and recommended that thorough assessments are made before any new developments that could affect the reef are approved. UNESCO specifically recommended no new port development in Abbot Point, Gladstone, Hay Point, Mackay, and Townsville.

Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop informed the Australian media that she would use climate change talks, held in Lima, Peru, in December 2014, to avoid the WHC—consisting of experts from 20 nations—applying the "in danger" listing in 2015. Bishop believed that "no justification" existed for the downgrading:

It would send a message around the world that even if you meet all of the criteria set out by the world heritage committee, there is still a risk that they will place an area on the in-danger list ... It [downgrading] would have significant implications for Australia but it would also set a very dangerous precedent for countries who don’t have the opportunity to take the action that Australia has.

To avoid the Great Barrier Reef being listed as "in danger", the Queensland Government introduced the Ports Bill 2014 on 25 November 2014. The Bill seeks to restrict further port development along the coast to Brisbane and four "Priority Port Development Areas", with the latter including four ports identified by the WHC in its 2012 report. The Bill also restricts dredging over a decade-long period, with the exception of priority ports. Additionally, a long-term sustainability plan and the expansion of water-quality activities were introduced by state and federal governments, and their partner agencies.

However, in response to the Ports Bill, University of Queensland (UQ) academics said on 19 December 2014 that, although the issues are "not insurmountable", "the health of the reef is still declining and consequently more needs to be done." Australian Marine Conservation Society (AMCS) Great Barrier Reef campaign director Felicity Wishart was more damning and stated in a press release:

The new Ports Bill fails to rule out any currently proposed new dredging, the dumping of dredge spoil in the Reef's waters and is silent on maintenance dredging across the region. The millions of tonnes of dredging and dumping for mega port developments that are in the pipeline will be able to go ahead under the Bill. Despite the establishment of four Priority Port Development Areas along the Reef (Townsville, Abbot Point, Mackay/Hay Point and Gladstone), the Bill will still allow port expansion in Cairns. This fails to meet the recommendation by the World Heritage Committee that no new port developments be permitted outside of the existing port areas. The Bill contains no protections for the most northern section of the Reef or the Fitzroy Delta, and it does nothing to improve water quality in Reef waters, all matters which the World Heritage Committee wants action on.

UNESCO considers that the Reef 2050 Long-Term Sustainability Plan has been effective, noting that progress had been made to reduce agricultural runoff sediments.

Water quality

Storage Silos on the Gladstone waterfront, an industrial area in the water catchment area.

 

Water quality was first identified as a threat to the Great Barrier Reef in 1989. Thirty "major rivers" and hundreds of small streams comprise the Great Barrier Reef catchment area, which covers 423,000 square kilometres (163,000 sq mi) of land. Queensland has several major urban centers on the coast including Cairns, Townsville, Mackay, Rockhampton and the industrial city of Gladstone. Dredging in the Port of Gladstone is raising concern after dead and diseased fish where found in the harbor. Cairns and Townsville are the largest of the coastal cities, with populations of approximately 150,000 each.

There are many major water quality variables affecting coral reef health including water temperature, salinity, nutrients, suspended sediment concentrations, and pesticides. The species in the Great Barrier Reef area are adapted to tolerable variations in water quality however when critical thresholds are exceeded they may be adversely impacted. River discharges are the single biggest source of nutrients, providing significant pollution of the Reef during tropical flood events with over 90% of this pollution being sourced from farms. When the 2019 Townsville flood waters reached the Great Barrier Reef, the flood plumes covered a large area of corals, even reaching 60 km out to sea.

As of 1995, water visibility had decreased to 10 metres.

Due to the range of human uses made of the water catchment area adjacent to the Great Barrier Reef, some 700 of the 3000 reefs are within a risk zone where water quality has declined due to the naturally acidic sediment and chemical runoff from farming. Coastal development and the loss of coastal wetlands—the latter acts as natural filter—are also major factors. From mid 2012 to mid 2016, 596,000 hectares of forest in the catchment zone was cleared.

Trichodesmium bloom off the Great Barrier Reef

 

Industries in the water catchment area are cotton growing, comprising approximately 262 km²; 340 dairy farms with an average area of 2 km² each, 158 km² cattle grazing, 288 km² horticulture including banana growing, sugarcane farming, and cropping of approximately 8,000 km² wheat, 1,200 km² barley, and 6,000 to 7000 km² sorghum and maize. Fertiliser use in the cotton, dairy, beef, horticulture and sugar industries is essential to ensure productivity and profitability. However, fertiliser and byproducts from sugar cane harvesting methods form a component of surface runoff into the Great Barrier Reef lagoon.

The principal agricultural activity in the wet tropics is sugar cane farming, while cattle grazing is the primary industry in the dry tropics regions. Both are considered significant threats to high water quality. Copper, a common industrial pollutant in the waters of the Great Barrier Reef, has been shown to interfere with the development of coral polyps.

Flood plumes are flooding events associated with higher levels of nitrogen and phosphorus. In February 2007, due to a monsoonal climate system, plumes of sediment runoff have been observed reaching to the out most regions of the reef.

Runoff is especially concerning in the region south of Cairns, as it receives over 3000 mm of rain per year and the reefs are less than 30 kilometres (19 mi) away from the coastline. Farm run off is polluted as a result of overgrazing and excessive fertilizer and pesticide use. Mud pollution has increased by 800% and inorganic nitrogen pollution by 3,000% since the introduction of European farming practices on the Australian landscape. This pollution has been linked to a range of very significant risks to the reef system, including intensified outbreaks of the coral-eating Crown of Thorns Starfish which contributed to a loss of 66% of live coral cover on sampled reefs in 2000.

It is thought that the mechanism behind excess nutrients affecting the reefs is due to increased light and oxygen competition from algae, but unless herbivory is unusually low, this will not create a phase shift from the Great Barrier Reef being primarily made up of coral to being primarily made up of algae.

Acropora with brown band disease, Lizard Island.

 

It has been suggested that poor water quality due to excess nutrients encourages the spread of infectious diseases among corals. In general, the Great Barrier Reef is considered to have low incidences of coral diseases. Skeletal Eroding Band, a disease of bony corals caused by the protozoan Halofolliculina corallasia, affects 31 species of corals from six families on the reef. The long-term monitoring program has found an increase in incidences of coral disease in the period 1999–2002, although they dispute the claim that on the Great Barrier Reef, coral diseases are caused by anthropogenic pollution.

Elevated nutrient concentrations result in a range of impacts on coral communities and under extreme conditions can result in a collapse. It also affects coral by promoting phytoplankton growth which increases the number of filter-feeding organisms that compete for space. Excessive inputs of sediment from land to coral can lead to reef destruction through burial, disruption of recruitment success, or deleterious community shifts. Sediments affect coral by smothering them when particles settle out, reducing light availability and potentially reducing photosynthesis and growth. Coral reefs exist in seawater salinities from 25 to 42%. Salinity impacts to corals are increased by other flood-related stresses.

Pollution from mining

A protest against the Adani Carmichael mine, 2016.

 

A freedom of information request by the Northern Queensland Conservation Council in 2014 showed that Queensland Nickel, owned by Australian politician Clive Palmer, discharged nitrate-laden water into the Great Barrier Reef in 2009 and 2011—releasing 516 tonnes (508 long tons; 569 short tons) of toxic waste water on the latter occasion. In June 2012, Queensland Nickel stated it intended to release waste water, continuously for three months, "at least 100 times the allowed maximum level as well as heavy metals and other contaminants". A GBRMPA briefing stated the company had "threatened a compensation claim of $6.4bn should the GBRMPA intend to exert authority over the company's operations". In response to the publicisation of the dumping incidents, the GBRMPA stated:

We have strongly encouraged the company to investigate options that do not entail releasing the material to the environment and to develop a management plan to eliminate this potential hazard; however, GBRMPA does not have legislative control over how the Yabulu tailings dam is managed.

Dumping

Following a tour of the Great Barrier Reef area by WHC members, a 2012 UNESCO report, which criticised management of the Great Barrier Reef, specifically recommended no new port development outside the established areas of Abbot Point, Gladstone, Hay Point/Mackay, and Townsville. However, in December 2013, Greg Hunt, the Australian environment minister, approved a plan for dredging to create three shipping terminals as part of the construction of a coalport. According to corresponding approval documents, the process will create around 3 million cubic metres of dredged seabed that will be dumped within the Great Barrier Reef marine park area.

On 31 January 2014, the GBRMPA issued a dumping permit that will allow three million cubic metres of sea bed from Abbot Point, north of Bowen, to be transported and unloaded in the waters of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. Potential significant harms have been identified in relation to dredge spoil and the process of churning up the sea floor in the area and exposing it to air: firstly, new research shows the finer particles of dredge spoil can cloud the water and block sunlight, thereby starving sea grass and coral up to distances of 80 km away from the point of origin due to the actions of wind and currents. Furthermore, dredge spoil can literally smother reef or sea grass to death, while storms can repeatedly resuspend these particles so that the harm caused is ongoing; secondly, disturbed sea floor can release toxic substances into the surrounding environment.

The dredge spoil from the Abbot Point port project is to be dumped 24 kilometres (15 mi) away, near Bowen in north Queensland, and the approval from the Authority will result in the production of an extra 70 million tonnes of coal annually, worth between A$1.4 billion and $2.8 billion. Authority chairman, Dr Russell Reichelt, stated after the confirmation of the approval:

This approval is in line with the agency's view that port development along the Great Barrier Reef coastline should be limited to existing ports. As a deepwater port that has been in operation for nearly 30 years, Abbot Point is better placed than other ports along the Great Barrier Reef coastline to undertake expansion as the capital and maintenance dredging required will be significantly less than what would be required in other areas. It's important to note the seafloor of the approved disposal area consists of sand, silt and clay and does not contain coral reefs or seagrass beds.

The approval was provided with a corresponding set of 47 new environmental conditions that include the following:

• A long-term water quality monitoring plan extending five years after the disposal activity is completed.
• A heritage management plan to protect the Catalina second world war aircraft wreck in Abbot Bay.
• The establishment of an independent dredging and disposal technical advice panel and a management response group, to include community representatives.

Numerous responses, including online petitions, were published in opposition to the proposal: Greenpeace launched the "Save the Reef" campaign in opposition to the dumping, which remained active with over 170,000 signatures on 3 March 2014; in addition to an online petition that registered more than 250,000 signatures on 3 March 2014, political activist group GetUp! are also funding a legal case in conjunction with non-profit Environmental Defenders Office of Queensland (EDO), which represents the North Queensland Conservation Council; and "Fight for the Reef", a partnership between World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF)-Australia and the Australian Marine Conservation Society (AMCS), maintains a campaign that collects online donations to fund a "legal fighting team", and displayed nearly 60,000 supporters on its website on 11 May 2014.

The legal fighting team of the WWF-Australia and the AMCS received further support in April 2014 following the release of the "Sounds For The Reef" musical fundraising project. Produced by Straightup, the digital album features artists such as John Butler, The Herd, Sietta, Missy Higgins, The Cat Empire, Fat Freddys Drop, The Bamboos (featuring Kylie Auldist) and Resin Dogs. Released on 7 April, the album's 21 songs were sold on the Bandcamp website.

Further support for the WWF-Australia and AMCS partnership occurred in late April 2014, when the Ben & Jerry's ice cream company signed onto the "Fight for the Reef" campaign. In early April 2014, the company withdrew the popular "Phish Food" flavour in Australia due to the aquatic association and the potential for awareness-raising. The product withdrawal decision followed tours around select parts of the nation that involved Ben & Jerry's representatives distributing free ice cream to highlight the reef damage issue.

In response, Minister for the Environment and Heritage Protection of Queensland Andrew Powell said that he would be contacting parent corporation Unilever, explaining, "The only people taking a scoop out of the reef is Ben and Jerry's and Unilever. If you understand the facts, you'd want to be boycotting Ben and Jerry's". The Australian public was also informed by Australian Ben & Jerry's brand manager Kalli Swaik, who stated to the Brisbane Times newspaper: "Ben & Jerry's believes that dredging and dumping in world heritage waters surrounding the marine park area will be detrimental to the reef ecology. It threatens the health of one of Australia's most iconic treasures."

A Queensland state senator, Matthew Canavan, confirmed that he raised the issue in writing with the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) and said to The Courier-Mail:

Ben & Jerry's can campaign on whatever issue they like but as a company they have an obligation to tell Australians the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Australia has strict laws to protect consumers against misleading and deceptive behavior. These mistruths could cost jobs and development in regional Queensland. It's irresponsible behavior from a company that should know better.

After Cyclone Debbie in 2017, the Adani mine released water with eight times the permitted sediment into the Abbot Point lagoon.

Climate change

Sea temperature and bleaching of the Great Barrier Reef

 

According to the GBRMPA in 2014, the most significant threat to the status of the Great Barrier Reef is climate change, due to the consequential rise of sea temperatures, gradual ocean acidification and an increase in the number of "intense weather events". Hughes writes of "the demonstrable failure of the state and Commonwealth" to address the issue of climate change in his August 2014 article. Furthermore, a temperature rise of between two and three degrees Celsius would result in 97% of the Great Barrier Reef being bleached every year.

Reef scientist Terry Done has predicted that a one-degree rise in global temperature would result in 82% of the reef bleached—two degrees would result in 97%, while three degrees would result in "total devastation". A predictive model based on the 1998 and 2002 bleaching events has concurred that a temperature rise of three degrees would result in total coral mortality.

However, a few scientists hold that coral bleaching may in some cases be less of a problem than the mainstream believes. Professor Peter Ridd, from James Cook University in Townsville was quoted in The Australian (a conservative newspaper) as saying; "They are saying bleaching is the end of the world, but when you look into it, that is a highly dubious proposition". Research by scientist Ray Berkelmans "... has documented astonishing levels of recovery on the Keppel outcrops devastated by bleaching in 2006." A related article in The Australian newspaper goes on to explain that; "Those that expel their zooxanthellae have a narrow opening to recolonise with new, temperature-resistant algae before succumbing. In the Keppels in 2006, Berkelmans and his team noticed that the dominant strain of zooxanthellae changed from light and heat-sensitive type C2, to more robust types D and C1."

Nevertheless, most coral reef researchers anticipate severely negative effects from climate change already occurring, and potentially disastrous effects as climate change worsens. The future of the Reef may well depend on how much the planet's climate changes, and thus, on how high atmospheric greenhouse gas concentration levels are allowed to rise. On 2 September 2009, a report by the Australian Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority revealed that if carbon dioxide levels reached 450 parts per million corals and reef habitats will be highly vulnerable. If carbon dioxide levels are managed at or below 380 parts per million they will be only moderately vulnerable and the reefs will remain coral-dominated.

Global warming may have triggered the collapse of reef ecosystems throughout the tropics. Increased global temperatures are thought by some to bring more violent tropical storms, but reef systems are naturally resilient and recover from storm battering. Most people agree that an upward trend in temperature will cause much more coral bleaching; others suggest that while reefs may die in certain areas, other areas will become habitable for corals, and new reefs will form. However, the rate at which the mass bleaching events occur is estimated to be much faster than reefs can recover from, or adjust to.

However, Kleypas et al. in their 2006 report suggest that the trend towards ocean acidification indicates that as the sea's pH decreases, corals will become less able to secrete calcium carbonate. In 2009, a study showed that Porites corals, the most robust on the Great Barrier Reef, have slowed down their growth by 14.2% since 1990. It suggested that the cause was heat stress and a lower availability of dissolved calcium to the corals.

Climate change has implications for other forms of life on the Great Barrier Reef as well – some fish's preferred temperature range lead them to seek new areas to live, thus causing chick mortality in seabirds that prey on the fish. Also, in sea turtles, higher temperatures mean that the sex ratio of their populations will change, as the sex of sea turtles is determined by temperature. The habitat of sea turtles will also shrink. A 2018 study which compared the sex ratio of green sea turtles in the northern and southern populations found that the northern population was almost all female.

On April 22, 2018 Scientist concerned alarm that coral massive damage could impact ecosystem due to climate change.

Crown of Thorns Starfish

Crown-of-thorns starfish and eaten coral off the coast of Cooktown, Queensland.

 

The Crown-of-Thorns Starfish is a coral reef predator which preys on coral polyps by climbing onto them, extruding its stomach over them, and releasing digestive enzymes to absorb the liquefied tissue. An individual adult of this species can eat up to six square meters of living reef in a single year. Geological evidence suggests that the Crown-of-Thorns Starfish has been part of the Great Barrier Reef's ecology for "at least several thousand years", but there is no geological evidence for Crown of Thorns outbreaks. The first known outbreak occurred during the 1960s. Large outbreaks of these starfish can devastate reefs. In 2000, an outbreak contributed to a loss of 66% of live coral cover on sampled reefs in a study by the CRC Reefs Research Centre. Although large outbreaks of these starfish are believed to occur in natural cycles, human activity in and around the Great Barrier Reef can worsen the effects. Reduction of water quality associated with agriculture can cause the crown-of-thorns starfish larvae to thrive. Fertilizer runoff from farming increases the amount of phytoplankton available for the Crown of Thorns Starfish larvae to consume. A study by the Australian Institute of Marine Science showed that a doubling of the chlorophyll in the water leads to a tenfold increase in the crown-of-thorns starfish larvae's survival rate. Overfishing of its natural predators, such as the Giant Triton, is also considered to contribute to an increase in the number of Crown of Thorns Starfish. The CRC Reef Research Centre defines an outbreak as when there are more than 30 adult starfish in an area of one hectare. There have been three large outbreaks of COTS on the reef since observation began, between 1962 and 1976; 1978 and 1991; 1993 and 2005, and a fourth began in 2009. Investigation is being undertaken into mimicking a chemical scent released by the COTS' natural predator, the giant triton snail.

Overfishing

The unsustainable overfishing of keystone species, such as the Giant Triton and sharks, can cause disruption to food chains vital to life on the reef. Fishing also impacts the reef through increased pollution from boats, by-catch of unwanted species (such as dolphins and turtles) and reef habitat destruction from trawling, anchors and nets. Overfishing of herbivore populations can cause algal growths on reefs. The Batfish Platax pinnatus has been observed to significantly reduce algal growths in studies simulating overfishing. Sharks are fished for their meat, and when they are part of bycatch, it is common to kill the shark and throw it overboard, as there is a belief that they interfere with fishing. As of 1 July 2004, approximately one-third of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is protected from species removal of any kind, including fishing, without written permission. However, illegal poaching is not unknown in these no-take zones. A 2015 study into coral trout on the Great Barrier Reef found that the no-take zones had more coral trout and more coral trout larvae after tropical cyclone events, which helped replenish those areas sooner. The GBRMPA has a hotline to report suspected poachers.

Shipping

The Shen Neng 1 aground on the Great Barrier Reef, 5 April 2010.

 

Shipping accidents continue to be perceived as a threat, as several commercial shipping routes pass through the Great Barrier Reef. The GBRMPA estimates that about 6000 vessels greater than 50 metres (164 ft) in length use the Great Barrier Reef as a route. From 1985 to 2001, 11 collisions and 20 groundings occurred along the Great Barrier Reef shipping route, with human error identified as the leading cause of shipping accidents.

Reef pilots have stated that they consider the reef route safer than outside the reef in the event of mechanical failure, since a ship can sit safely while being repaired. The inner route is used by 75% of all ships that travel over the Great Barrier Reef. As of 2007, over 1,600 known shipwrecks have occurred in the Great Barrier Reef region.

Waste and foreign species discharged from ships in ballast water (when purging procedures are not followed) are a biological hazard to the Great Barrier Reef. Tributyltin (TBT) compounds found in some antifouling paint on ship hulls leaches into seawater and is toxic to marine organisms and humans; as of 2002, efforts are underway to restrict its use.

In April 2010, the bulk coal carrier Shen Neng 1 ran aground on the Great Barrier Reef, causing the largest grounding scar to date. The spill caused damage to a 400,000sqm section of the Great Barrier Reef and the use of oil dispersant resulted in oil spreading to reef islands 25 km away. In 2012 and 2013, there were 9619 ship voyages through the Great Barrier Reef region, and this is forecast to increase 250% over the next 20 years.

Over 9,600 ship voyages occurred in the GBRMPA between 2012 and 2013.

Oil

It was suspected that the Great Barrier Reef is the cap to an oil trap, after a 1923 paper suggested that it had the right rock formation to support "oilfields of great magnitude". After the Commonwealth Petroleum Search Subsidies Act of 1957, exploration activities increased in Queensland, including a well drilled at Wreck Island in the southern Great Barrier Reef in 1959. In the 1960s, drilling for oil and gas was investigated throughout the Great Barrier Reef, by seismic and magnetic methods in the Torres Strait, along "the eastern seaboard of Cape York to Princess Charlotte Bay" and along the coast from Cooktown to Fraser Island. In the late 1960s, more exploratory wells were drilled near Wreck Island in the Capricorn Channel, and near Darnley Island in the Torres Strait, but "all results were dry".

In 1970, responding to concern about oil spills such as the Torrey Canyon, two Royal Commissions were ordered "into exploratory and production drilling for petroleum in the area of the Great Barrier Reef". After the Royal Commissions, the federal and state governments ceased allowing petroleum drilling on the Great Barrier Reef. A study in 1990 concluded that the reef is too young to contain oil reserves. Oil drilling remains prohibited on the Great Barrier Reef, yet oil spills due to shipping routes are still a threat to the reef system, with a total of 282 oil spills between 1987–2002.

Tropical cyclones

Tropical Cyclone Larry over the Great Barrier Reef, 19 March 2006

 

Tropical cyclones are a cause of ecological disturbance to the Great Barrier Reef. The types of damage caused by tropical cyclones to the Great Barrier Reef is varied, including fragmentation, sediment plumes, and decreasing salinity following heavy rains (Cyclone Joy). The patterns of reef damage are similarly 'patchy'. From 1910–1999, 170 cyclones' paths came near or through the Great Barrier Reef. Most cyclones pass through the Great Barrier Reef within a day. In general, compact corals such as Porites fare better than branching corals under cyclone conditions. The major damage caused by Tropical Cyclone Larry was to underlying reef structures, and breakage and displacement of corals, which is overall consistent with previous tropical cyclone events. Severe tropical cyclones hit the Queensland coast every 200 to 300 years; however, during the period 1969–1999 most cyclones in the region were very weak – category one or two on the Australian Bureau of Meteorology scale.

On 2 February 2011, Severe Tropical Cyclone Yasi struck northern Queensland and caused severe damage to a stretch of hundreds of kilometres within the Great Barrier Reef. The corals could take a decade to recover fully. Cyclone Yasi had wind speeds of 290 kilometers per hour.

World Heritage Site

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Logo of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) World Heritage Committee

 

A World Heritage Site is a landmark or area which is selected by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) as having cultural, historical, scientific or other form of significance, and is legally protected by international treaties. The sites are judged important to the collective interests of humanity.

To be selected, a World Heritage Site must be an already classified landmark, unique in some respect as a geographically and historically identifiable place having special cultural or physical significance (such as an ancient ruin or historical structure, building, city, complex, desert, forest, island, lake, monument, mountain, or wilderness area). It may signify a remarkable accomplishment of humanity, and serve as evidence of our intellectual history on the planet.

The sites are intended for practical conservation for posterity, which otherwise would be subject to risk from human or animal trespassing, unmonitored/uncontrolled/unrestricted access, or threat from local administrative negligence. Sites are demarcated by UNESCO as protected zones. The list is maintained by the international World Heritage Program administered by the UNESCO World Heritage Committee, composed of 21 "states parties" that are elected by their General Assembly.

The programme catalogues, names, and conserves sites of outstanding cultural or natural importance to the common culture and heritage of humanity. Under certain conditions, listed sites can obtain funds from the World Heritage Fund. The program began with the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World's Cultural and Natural Heritage, which was adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO on 16 November 1972. Since then, 193 state parties have ratified the convention, making it one of the most widely recognized international agreements and the world's most popular cultural program. 

As of July 2019, a total of 1,121 World Heritage Sites (869 cultural, 213 natural, and 39 mixed properties) exist across 167 countries. China and Italy, both with 55 sites, have the most of any country, followed by Spain (48), Germany (46), France (45), India (38), and Mexico (35).

History

Convention concerning the Protection of the World's Cultural and Natural Heritage

Signed	16 November 1972
Location	Paris, France
Effective	17 December 1975
Condition	20 ratifications
Ratifiers	193 (189 UN member states plus the Cook Islands, the Holy See, Niue, and Palestine)
Depositary	Director-General of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
Languages	Arabic, English, French, Russian, and Spanish

In 1954, the government of Egypt decided to build the new Aswan High Dam, whose resulting future reservoir would eventually inundate a large stretch of the Nile valley containing cultural treasures of ancient Egypt and ancient Nubia. In 1959, the governments of Egypt and Sudan requested UNESCO to assist their countries to protect and rescue the endangered monuments and sites. In 1960, the Director-General of UNESCO launched an appeal to the member states for an International Campaign to Save the Monuments of Nubia. This appeal resulted in the excavation and recording of hundreds of sites, the recovery of thousands of objects, as well as the salvage and relocation to higher ground of a number of important temples, the most famous of which are the temple complexes of Abu Simbel and Philae. The campaign, which ended in 1980, was considered a success. As tokens of its gratitude to countries which especially contributed to the campaign's success, Egypt donated four temples: the Temple of Dendur was moved to the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York City, the Temple of Debod was moved to the Parque del Oeste in Madrid, the Temple of Taffeh was moved to the Rijksmuseum van Oudheden in the Netherlands, and the Temple of Ellesyia to Museo Egizio in Turin.

The project cost $80 million, about $40 million of which was collected from 50 countries. The project's success led to other safeguarding campaigns: saving Venice and its lagoon in Italy, the ruins of Mohenjo-daro in Pakistan, and the Borobodur Temple Compounds in Indonesia. UNESCO then initiated, with the International Council on Monuments and Sites, a draft convention to protect cultural heritage.

Convention and background

The United States initiated the idea of cultural conservation with nature conservation. The White House conference in 1965 called for a "World Heritage Trust" to preserve "the world's superb natural and scenic areas and historic sites for the present and the future of the entire world citizenry". The International Union for Conservation of Nature developed similar proposals in 1968, and they were presented in 1972 to the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm. Under the World Heritage Committee, signatory countries are required to produce and submit periodic data reporting providing the World Heritage Committee with an overview of each participating nation's implementation of the World Heritage Convention and a "snapshot" of current conditions at World Heritage properties.

Based on the draft convention that UNESCO had initiated, a single text was eventually agreed on by all parties, and the "Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage" was adopted by the General Conference of UNESCO on 16 November 1972.

The Convention came into force on 17 December 1975. As of May 2017, it has been ratified by 193 states parties, including 189 UN member states plus the Cook Islands, the Holy See, Niue, and the State of Palestine. Only four UN member states have not ratified the Convention: Liechtenstein, Nauru, Somalia and Tuvalu.

Nomination process

A country must first list its significant cultural and natural sites; the result is called the Tentative List. A country may not nominate sites that have not been first included on the Tentative List. Next, it can place sites selected from that list into a Nomination File.

The Nomination File is evaluated by the International Council on Monuments and Sites and the World Conservation Union. These bodies then make their recommendations to the World Heritage Committee. The Committee meets once per year to determine whether or not to inscribe each nominated property on the World Heritage List and sometimes defers or refers the decision to request more information from the country which nominated the site. There are ten selection criteria – a site must meet at least one of them to be included on the list.

Selection criteria

Up to 2004, there were six criteria for cultural heritage and four criteria for natural heritage. In 2005, this was modified so that there is now only one set of ten criteria. Nominated sites must be of "outstanding universal value" and meet at least one of the ten criteria. These criteria have been modified or/amended several times since their creation.

Cultural

Site#252: Taj Mahal, an example of a cultural heritage site.

1. "represents a masterpiece of human creative genius and cultural significance"
2. "exhibits an important interchange of human values, over a span of time, or within a cultural area of the world, on developments in architecture or technology, monumental arts, town-planning, or landscape design"
3. "to bear a unique or at least exceptional testimony to a cultural tradition or to a civilization which is living or which has disappeared"
4. "is an outstanding example of a type of building, architectural, or technological ensemble or landscape which illustrates a significant stage in human history"
5. "is an outstanding example of a traditional human settlement, land-use, or sea-use which is representative of a culture, or human interaction with the environment especially when it has become vulnerable under the impact of irreversible change"
6. "is directly or tangibly associated with events or living traditions, with ideas, or with beliefs, with artistic and literary works of outstanding universal significance"

Natural

Site#156: Serengeti National Park, an example of a natural heritage site.

 

Site#274: Historic Sanctuary of Machu Picchu, an example of a mixed heritage site.

7. "contains superlative natural phenomena or areas of exceptional natural beauty and aesthetic importance"
8. "is an outstanding example representing major stages of Earth's history, including the record of life, significant on-going geological processes in the development of landforms, or significant geomorphic or physiographic features"
9. "is an outstanding example representing significant on-going ecological and biological processes in the evolution and development of terrestrial, fresh water, coastal and marine ecosystems, and communities of plants and animals"
10. "contains the most important and significant natural habitats for in-situ conservation of biological diversity, including those containing threatened species of outstanding universal value from the point of view of science or conservation"

Legal status

UNESCO designation as a World Heritage Site provides prima facie evidence that such culturally sensitive sites are legally protected pursuant to the Law of War, under the Geneva Convention, its articles, protocols and customs, together with other treaties including the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict and international law.

Thus, the Geneva Convention treaty promulgates:

"Article 53. PROTECTION OF CULTURAL OBJECTS AND OF PLACES OF WORSHIP. Without prejudice to the provisions of the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict of 14 May 1954,' and of other relevant international instruments, it is prohibited:

(a) To commit any acts of hostility directed against the historic monuments, works of art or places of worship which constitute the cultural or spiritual heritage of peoples;

(b) To use such objects in support of the military effort;

(c) To make such objects the object of reprisals."

Extensions and other modifications

A country may request to extend or reduce the boundaries, modify the official name, or change the selection criteria of one of its already listed sites. Any proposal for a significant boundary change or modify the site's selection criteria must be submitted as if it were a new nomination, including first placing it on the Tentative List and then onto the Nomination File.

A request for a minor boundary change, one that does not have a significantly impact on the extent of the property or affect its "outstanding universal value", is also evaluated by the advisory bodies before being sent to the Committee. Such proposals can be rejected by either the advisory bodies or the Committee if they judge it to be a significant change instead of a minor one.

Proposals to change the site's official name is sent directly to the Committee.

Endangerment

A site may be added to the List of World Heritage in Danger if there are conditions that threaten the characteristics for which the landmark or area was inscribed on the World Heritage List. Such problems may involve armed conflict and war, natural disasters, pollution, poaching, or uncontrolled urbanization or human development. This danger list is intended to increase international awareness of the threats and to encourage counteractive measures. Threats to a site can be either proven imminent threats or potential dangers that could have adverse effects on a site.

The state of conservation for each site on the danger list is reviewed on a yearly basis, after which the committee may request additional measures, delete the property from the list if the threats have ceased or consider deletion from both the List of World Heritage in Danger and the World Heritage List.

Only two sites have ever been delisted: the Arabian Oryx Sanctuary in Oman and the Dresden Elbe Valley in Germany. The Arabian Oryx Sanctuary was directly delisted in 2007, instead of first being put on the danger list, after the Omani government decided to reduce the protected area's size by 90 percent. The Dresden Elbe Valley was first placed on the danger list in 2006 when the World Heritage Committee decided that plans to construct the Waldschlösschen Bridge would significantly alter the valley's landscape. In response, Dresden City Council attempted to stop the bridge's construction, but after several court decisions allowed the building of the bridge to proceed, the valley was removed from the World Heritage List in 2009.

The first global assessment to quantitatively measure threats to Natural World Heritage sites found that 63 percent of sites have been damaged by increasing human pressures including encroaching roads, agriculture infrastructure and settlements over the last two decades. These activities endanger Natural World Heritage sites and could compromise their unique values. Of the Natural World Heritage sites that contain forest, 91 percent of those experienced some loss since the year 2000. Many Natural World Heritage sites are more threatened than previously thought and require immediate conservation action.

Statistics

UNESCO World Heritage Sites

The World Heritage Committee has divided the world into five geographic zones which it calls regions: Africa, Arab states, Asia and the Pacific, Europe and North America, and Latin America and the Caribbean.

Russia and the Caucasus states are classified as European, while Mexico and the Caribbean are classified as belonging to the Latin America & Caribbean zone. The UNESCO geographic zones also give greater emphasis on administrative, rather than geographic associations. Hence, Gough Island, located in the South Atlantic, is part of the Europe & North America region because the government of the United Kingdom nominated the site.

The table below includes a breakdown of the sites according to these zones and their classification as of July 2019:

Zone/region	Cultural	Natural	Mixed	Total	%	State Parties with inscribed properties
Africa	53	38	5	96	8.56%	35
Arab states	78	5	3	86	7.67%	18
Asia and the Pacific	189	67	12	268*	23.91%	36
Europe and North America	453	65	11	529*	47.19%	50
Latin America and the Caribbean	96	38	8	141*	12.58%	28
Total	869	213	39	1121	100%	167

*The properties "Uvs Nuur Basin" and "Landscapes of Dauria" (Mongolia, Russian Federation) are trans-regional properties located in Europe and Asia and the Pacific region. They are counted here in the Asia and the Pacific region.

*The property "The Architectural Work of Le Corbusier, an Outstanding Contribution to the Modern Movement" (Argentina, Belgium, France, Germany, India, Japan, Switzerland) is a trans-regional property with component sites located in three regions – Europe and North America, Asia and the Pacific, and Latin America and the Caribbean. It is counted here in Europe and North America.

Countries with fifteen or more sites

Countries with fifteen or more World Heritage Sites, as of July 2019.

Consequences

Despite the successes of World Heritage listing in promoting conservation, the UNESCO administered project has attracted criticism from some for perceived under-representation of heritage sites outside Europe, disputed decisions on site selection and adverse impact of mass tourism on sites unable to manage rapid growth in visitor numbers.

A sizable lobbying industry has grown around the awards because World Heritage listing has the potential to significantly increase tourism revenue from sites selected. Site listing bids are often lengthy and costly, putting poorer countries at a disadvantage. Eritrea's efforts to promote Asmara is one example.

In 2016, the Australian government was reported to have successfully lobbied for Great Barrier Reef conservation efforts to be removed from a UNESCO report titled 'World Heritage and Tourism in a Changing Climate'. The Australian government's actions were in response to their concern about the negative impact that an 'at risk' label could have on tourism revenue at a previously designated UNESCO World Heritage site.

A number of listed World Heritage locations such as George Town, Penang, and Casco Viejo, Panama, have struggled to strike the balance between the economic benefits of catering to greatly increased visitor numbers and preserving the original culture and local communities that drew the recognition.

Space law

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

Hubble Deep Field (full mosaic) released by NASA on January 15, 1996.

 

Space law is the body of law governing space-related activities, encompassing both international and domestic agreements, rules, and principles. Parameters of space law include space exploration, liability for damage, weapons use, rescue efforts, environmental preservation, information sharing, new technologies, and ethics. Other fields of law, such as administrative law, intellectual property law, arms control law, insurance law, environmental law, criminal law, and commercial law, are also integrated within space law.

The origins of space law date back to 1919, with international law recognizing each country's sovereignty over the airspace directly above their territory, later reinforced at the Chicago Convention in 1944. The onset of domestic space programs during the Cold War propelled the official creation of international space policy (i.e. the International Geophysical Year) initiated by the International Council of Scientific Unions. The Soviet Union's 1957 launch of the world's first artificial satellite, Sputnik 1, directly spurred the United States Congress to pass the Space Act, thus creating the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). Because space exploration required crossing transnational boundaries, it was during this era where space law became a field independent from traditional aerospace law.

Since the Cold War, the Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (the "Outer Space Treaty") and the International Telecommunications Union have served as the constitutional legal framework and set of principles and procedures constituting space law. Further, the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS), along with its Legal and Scientific and Technical Subcommittees, are responsible for debating issues of international space law and policy. The United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs (UNOOSA) serves as the secretariat of the Committee and is promoting Access to Space for All through a wide range of conferences and capacity-building programs. Challenges that space law will continue to face in the future are fourfold—spanning across dimensions of domestic compliance, international cooperation, ethics, and the advent of scientific innovations. Furthermore, specific guidelines on the definition of airspace have yet to be universally determined.

Early developments

At Caltech in 1942 Theodore von Kármán and other rocket scientists banded together to form Aerojet rocket company with the help of lawyer Andrew G. Haley. To toast the new corporation, Kármán said, "Now, Andy, we will make the rockets – you must make the corporation and obtain the money. Later on you will have to see that we behave well in outer space...After all, we are the scientists but you are the lawyer, and you must tell us how to behave ourselves according to law and to safeguard our innocence." Indeed, twenty years later Haley published the fundamental textbook, Space Law and Government.

Beginning in 1957 with the Space Race, nations began discussing systems to ensure the peaceful use of outer space. Bilateral discussions between the United States and USSR in 1958 resulted in the presentation of issues to the UN for debate. In 1959, the UN created the Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space (COPUOS). COPUOS in turn created two subcommittees, the Scientific and Technical Subcommittee and the Legal Subcommittee. The COPUOS Legal Subcommittee has been a primary forum for discussion and negotiation of international agreements relating to outer space.

In 1960 the International Astronautical Congress met in Stockholm and heard several submissions including a survey of legal opinion on extraterrestrial jurisdiction by Andrew G. Haley.

In 1963 Yale University Press published Law and Public Order in Space by Myres McDougal, Harold Lasswell and Ivan Vlasic.

International treaties

Five international treaties have been negotiated and drafted in the COPUOS:

• The 1967 Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (the "Outer Space Treaty").
• The 1968 Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts, the Return of Astronauts and the Return of Objects Launched into Outer Space (the "Rescue Agreement").
• The 1972 Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects (the "Liability Convention").
• The 1975 Convention on Registration of Objects Launched into Outer Space (the "Registration Convention").
• The 1979 Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (the "Moon Treaty").

The Outer Space Treaty is the most widely adopted treaty, with 104 parties. The rescue agreement, the liability convention and the registration convention all elaborate on provisions of the outer space treaty. UN delegates apparently intended that the moon treaty serve as a new comprehensive treaty which would supersede or supplement the outer space treaty, most notably by elaborating upon the outer space treaty's provisions regarding resource appropriation and prohibition of territorial sovereignty. The moon treaty has only 17 parties  however, and many consider it to be a failed treaty due to its limited acceptance. India is the only nation that has both signed the moon treaty and declared itself interested in going to the moon. India has not ratified the treaty; an analysis of India's treaty law is required to understand how this affects India legally.

In addition, the 1963 Treaty Banning Nuclear Weapon Tests in the Atmosphere, in Outer Space, and Under Water ("Partial Test Ban Treaty") banned the testing of nuclear weapons in outer space.

International principles and declarations

The five treaties and agreements of international space law cover "non-appropriation of outer space by any one country, arms control, the freedom of exploration, liability for damage caused by space objects, the safety and rescue of spacecraft and astronauts, the prevention of harmful interference with space activities and the environment, the notification and registration of space activities, scientific investigation and the exploitation of natural resources in outer space and the settlement of disputes."

The United Nations General Assembly adopted five declarations and legal principles which encourage exercising the international laws, as well as unified communication between countries. The five declarations and principles are:

• The Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Uses of Outer Space (1963)

All space exploration will be done with good intentions and is equally open to all States that comply with international law. No one nation may claim ownership of outer space or any celestial body. Activities carried out in space must abide by the international law and the nations undergoing these said activities must accept responsibility for the governmental or non-governmental agency involved. Objects launched into space are subject to their nation of belonging, including people. Objects, parts, and components discovered outside the jurisdiction of a nation will be returned upon identification. If a nation launches an object into space, they are responsible for any damages that occur internationally.

• Agreement Governing the Activities of States on the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies (1979)
  

• Apollo 15 Moon landing. Jul 26, 1971 – Aug 7, 1971
  The agreement exists to promote the exploration of outer space but to keep the moon and other celestial bodies in pristine conditions for the common heritage of man, meaning that no nation may claim sovereignty over any part of space. All countries should have equal rights to conduct research on the moon or other celestial bodies. Weapons of mass destruction of any kind including nuclear and bases built for military purposes are specifically banned by the treaty. The United Nations resolution also states that all State Parties may conduct their enterprises below the surface of the moon or any celestial body so long as efforts are made to protect it from contamination. All activities in space are required to be attached to a nation and any damages to other nations equipment or facilities caused by another party must be repaid in full to that nation. Any discovery of a dangerous hazard such as an area that is radioactive must notify the United Nations Secretary General and the greater international scientific community immediately.
  

All missions in space lasting longer than 60 days must notify the UN Secretary General and the greater scientific community every 30 days of progress. Any samples that are collected from space must be made available at earliest convenience to the scientific community. The agreement does not include objects that fall to earth by natural means. Currently not a single nation that conducts its own missions in space has ratified the agreement. This likely signifies that the 'Moon Treaty is likely a failed treaty because none of the nations that actually go into space signed or ratified the agreement.

 

• The Principles Governing the Use by States of Artificial Earth Satellites for International Direct Television Broadcasting (1982)

 

Activities of this nature must be transpired in accordance with the sovereign rights of States. Said activities should "promote the free dissemination and mutual exchange of information and knowledge in cultural and scientific fields, assist in educational, social and economic development, particularly in the developing countries, enhance the qualities of life of all peoples and provide recreation with due respect to the political and cultural integrity of States." All States have equal rights to pursue these activities and must maintain responsibility for anything carried out under their boundaries of authority. States planning activities need to contact the Secretary-General of the United Nations with details of the undergoing activities.

• The Principles Relating to Remote Sensing of the Earth from Outer Space (1986)

 

Fifteen principles are stated under this category. The basic understanding comes from these descriptions given by the United Nations Office for Outer Space Affairs:

 

(a) The term "remote sensing" means the sensing of the Earth's surface from space by making use of the properties of electromagnetic waves emitted, reflected or :diffracted by the sensed objects, for the purpose of improving natural resources management, land use and the protection of the environment;

(b) The term "primary data" means those raw data that are acquired by remote sensors borne by a space object and that are transmitted or delivered to the ground :from space by telemetry in the form of electromagnetic signals, by photographic film, magnetic tape or any other means;

(c) The term "processed data" means the products resulting from the processing of the primary data, needed to make such data usable;

(d) The term "analysed information" means the information resulting from the interpretation of processed data, inputs of data and knowledge from other sources;

(e) The term "remote sensing activities" means the operation of remote sensing space systems, primary data collection and storage stations, and activities in :processing, interpreting and disseminating the processed data.

• The Principles Relevant to the Use of Nuclear Power Sources in Outer Space (1992)

 

"States launching space objects with nuclear power sources on board shall endeavour to protect individuals, populations and the biosphere against radiological hazards. The design and use of space objects with nuclear power sources on board shall ensure, with a high degree of confidence, that the hazards, in foreseeable operational or accidental circumstances, are kept below acceptable levels..."

• The Declaration on International Cooperation in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space for the Benefit and in the Interest of All States, Taking into Particular Account the Needs of Developing Countries (1996)

 

"States are free to determine all aspects of their participation in international cooperation in the exploration and use of outer space on an equitable and mutually acceptable basis. All States, particularly those with relevant space capabilities and with programmes for the exploration and use of outer space, should contribute to promoting and fostering international cooperation on an equitable and mutually acceptable basis. In this context, particular attention should be given to the benefit for and the interests of developing countries and countries with incipient space programmes stemming from such international cooperation conducted with countries with more advanced space capabilities. International cooperation should be conducted in the modes that are considered most effective and appropriate by the countries concerned, including, inter alia, governmental and non-governmental; commercial and non-commercial; global, multilateral, regional or bilateral; and international cooperation among countries in all levels of development."

Consensus

The United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space and its Scientific and Technical and Legal Subcommittees operate on the basis of consensus, i.e. all delegations from member States must agree on any matter, be it treaty language before it can be included in the final version of a treaty or new items on Committee/Subcommittee's agendas. One reason that the U.N. space treaties lack definitions and are unclear in other respects, is that it is easier to achieve consensus when language and terms are vague. In recent years, the Legal Subcommittee has been unable to achieve consensus on discussion of a new comprehensive space agreement (the idea of which, though, was proposed just by a few member States). It is also unlikely that the Subcommittee will be able to agree to amend the Outer Space Treaty in the foreseeable future. Many space faring nations seem to believe that discussing a new space agreement or amendment of the Outer Space Treaty would be futile and time-consuming, because entrenched differences regarding resource appropriation, property rights and other issues relating to commercial activity make consensus unlikely.

1998 ISS agreement

In addition to the international treaties that have been negotiated at the United Nations, the nations participating in the International Space Station have entered into the 1998 Agreement among the governments of Canada, Member States of the European Space Agency, Japan, Russian Federation, and the United States concerning cooperation on the Civil International Space Station. This agreement provides, among other things, that NASA is the lead agency in coordinating the member states' contributions to and activities on the space station, and that each nation has jurisdiction over its own module(s). The agreement also provides for protection of intellectual property and procedures for criminal prosecution. This agreement may very well serve as a model for future agreements regarding international cooperation in facilities on the Moon and Mars, where the first off-world colonies and scientific/industrial bases are likely to be established.

National law

Space law also encompasses national laws, and many countries have passed national space legislation in recent years. The Outer Space Treaty gives responsibility for regulating space activities, including both government and private sector, to the individual countries where the activity is taking place. If a national of, or an organization incorporated in one country launches a spacecraft in a different country, interpretations differ as to whether the home country or the launching country has jurisdiction.

The Outer Space Treaty also incorporates the UN Charter by reference, and requires parties to ensure that activities are conducted in accordance with other forms of international law such as customary international law (the custom and practice of states). 

The advent of commercial activities like space mining, space tourism, private exploration, and the development of many commercial spaceports, is leading many countries to consider how to regulate private space activities. The challenge is to regulate these activities in a manner that does not hinder or preclude investment, while still ensuring that commercial activities comply with international law. The developing nations are concerned that the spacefaring nations will monopolize space resources.^{[citation needed]} Royalties paid to developing countries is one reason the United States has not ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and why some oppose applying the same principles to outer space.

Several nations have recently updated their statutory space law, among them Luxembourg in 2017, the United States in 2015, and Japan, with the Basic Space Law in 2008. Due to the expansion of the domain of space research and allied activities, in India, the Draft Space Activities Bill was introduced in the year 2017.

Geostationary orbit allocation

Source: Own work, Earth bitmap is File:North_pole_february_ice-pack_1978-2002.png by Geo Swan. Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license. (No changes made.)

Allocative Limitations

Objects in geostationary orbits remain stationary over a point on the earth due to gravity. There are numerous advantages in being able to use these orbits, mostly due to the unique ability to send radio frequencies to and from satellites to collect data and send signals to various locations. The United Nations Committee on Peaceful Uses of Outer Space has approved seven nonmilitary uses for these orbits: communications, meteorology, earth resources and environment, navigation and aircraft control, testing of new systems, astronomy, and data relay. The requirement to space these satellites apart means that there is a limited number of orbital "slots" available, thus only a limited number of satellites can be placed in geostationary orbit. This has led to conflict between different countries wishing access to the same orbital slots (countries at the same longitude but differing latitudes). These disputes are addressed through the ITU allocation mechanism.

Countries located at the Earth's equator have also asserted their legal claim to control the use of space above their territory, notably in 1976, when many countries located at the Earth's equator created the Bogota Declaration, in which they asserted their legal claim to control the use of space above their territory.

Political Controversy

Future developments using geostationary orbits may include an expansion of services in telecommunication, broadcasting, and meteorology. As a result, uses for geostationary orbits may stir political controversy. For example, broadcasting and telecommunication services of satellites orbiting above Earth from certain nations may accidentally "spill over" into other nations' territory. This may prompt conflict with nations that wish to restrict access to information and communication. Current and future political and legal concerns allocation may pose may be addressed by international legislatures, such as the United Nations Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space and the International Telecommunication Union.

Ethics

Ethics can be defined as "the task of being human." In space law, ethics extend to topics regarding space exploration, space tourism, space ownership, the militarization of space, environmental protection, and distinguishing the boundaries of space itself.

Commercial Use

Early discussions regarding space ethics revolved around whether or not the space frontier should be available for use, gaining prominence at the time of the Soviet Union and United States' Space Race. In 1967, the "Outer Space Treaty" dictated that all nations in compliance with international regulation are permitted to exploit space. As a result, the commercial use of space is open to exploitation by public and private entities, especially in relation to mining and space tourism. This principle has been the subject of controversy, particularly by those in favor of environmental protection, sustainability, and conservation.

Environmental Protection

More recent discussions focus on the need for the international community to draft and institute a code of space ethics to prevent the destruction of the space environment. Furthermore, the advancement of life in space pertain to questions related to the ethics of biocentrism and anthropocentrism, or in other words, determining how much value we place in all living things versus human beings specifically. Currently, researchers in the bioengineering field are working towards contamination control measures integrated into spacecrafts to protect both space and earth's biosphere.

Defining "space"

Many ethical questions arise from the difficulty of defining the term "space." Scholars not only debate its geographical definition (i.e. upper and lower limits), but also whether or not it also encompasses various objects within it (i.e. celestial objects, human beings, man-made devices). Lower limits are generally estimated to be about 50 kilometers. More difficulties arise trying to define the upper bounds of "space," as it would require more inquiry into the nature of the universe and the role of earth (along with within it.)

Future developments

Exploitation

American Society of International Law Space Interest Group 2014 Board meeting

 

While this field of the law is still in its infancy, it is in an era of rapid change and development. Arguably the resources of space are infinite. If commercial space transportation becomes widely available, with substantially lower launch costs, then all countries will be able to directly reap the benefits of space resources. In that situation, it seems likely that consensus will be much easier to achieve with respect to commercial development and human settlement of outer space. High costs are not the only factor preventing the economic exploitation of space: it is argued that space should be considered as a pristine environment worthy of protection and conservation, and that the legal regime for space should further protect it from being used as a resource for Earth's needs. Debate is also focused on whether space should continue to be legally defined as part of the “common heritage of man,” and therefore unavailable for national claims, or whether its legal definition should be changed to allow private property in space.

As of 2013, NASA's plans to capture an asteroid by 2021 has raised questions about how space law would be applied in practice.

In 2016, the nation of Luxembourg has set out a formal legal framework which ensures that private companies engaged in mining resources in space have rights to those resources.

Legal profession

Michael Dodge, of Long Beach, Mississippi, was the first law school graduate to receive a space law certificate in the United States. Dodge graduated from the National Center for Remote Sensing, Air and Space Law at the University of Mississippi School of Law in 2008. He is now an assistant professor in the Department of Space Studies at the University of North Dakota.

The University of Mississippi School of Law continues to be the only law school in the United States to offer a Master of Laws (LL.M.) Program in Air and Space Law.

The University of Sunderland is the first UK University to offer a space law module as part of its LLB programme.

The University of Nebraska College of Law offers the U.S.’s first and only LL.M. and Doctor of the Science of Law (J.S.D.) in space, cyber, and telecommunications law. Professor Frans von der Dunk, former Director of space law research at Leiden University joined the program in 2007. In addition to the LL.M., students can earn a J.D. at Nebraska Law with an emphasis in space and telecommunications law. The program also hosts three space and telecommunications conferences each year.

For more than 10 years, the University of Paris-Sud with the Institute of Space and Telecommunications Law have offered a Master's degree in Space Activities and Telecommunications Law. This Master is supported by numerous companies of space and telecommunications sectors.

In August 2012, students at the University of the Pacific, McGeorge School of Law in Sacramento, California created the McGeorge Society for Space Law and Policy.

In September 2012, the Space Law Society (SLS) at the University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law was established. A legal resources team united in Maryland, a "Space Science State," with Jorge Rodriguez, Lee Sampson, Patrick Gardiner, Lyra Correa and Juliana Neelbauer as SLS founding members.

In August 2014, students at Northeastern University School of Law founded the school's Space Law Society. 

Since 1951, the McGill Faculty of Law in Montreal, Canada hosts the Institute of Air and Space Law, and offers an LL.M. in Air and Space law. Leiden University, Netherlands hosts an International Institute of Air and Space Law and offers an LL.M. degree. 

In 2014, students at American University Washington College of Law founded the school's Space Law Society, with the help of Pamela L. Meredith, space lawyer and adjunct professor of Satellite Communications and Space Law.