1. Common Concern for the Arctic 9-10 September Ilulissat Greenland Claude Rouam DG Environment European Commission

2. Non-renewable resources: opportunities and concerns ► Adaptation to climate change ► Sustainable development ► Risk-management Question: does current environmental governance match up to the challenges?

3. Opportunities, concerns, solutions Economic opportunities Environmental concerns Possible solutions ► Oil, gas, minerals ► New shipping routes ► Tourism ► (Fisheries) ► Pollution (water, air, chemicals…) ► Climate change ► Ecosystem impact ► Accident-risk ► High standards ► EIA, SEA ► Monitoring ► Ecosystem management ► Prevention, preparedness, response ► Clean-up

4. Environmental governance: current mosaic ► National legislation ► UNCLOS ► MEAs (CBD, Espoo, CLRTAP…) ► OSPAR ► MARPOL ► Recommendations (Arctic Council…) ► Co-operation (Northern Dimension…)

5. Why is the mosaic inadequate? ► Absence of policy agenda setting ► Gaps ► Not designed for Arctic ► Lack of coordination between instruments ► Participation (key players not parties) ► Response too slow ► ‘Soft law’ too soft?

6. Why strengthen UNCLOS? ► General legal and political backbone – no need to reinvent BUT ► ‘Constitutional’ not operational ► Does not reflect recent developments of sustainable development ► Global – not tailored to Arctic ► Slow review process ► USA not party UNCLOS needs additional environmental measures for Arctic (NB: articles 123, 197, 234)

7. Possible options ► UNCLOS Implementing Agreement ► Regional Sea Agreement (OSPAR model) ► Develop MEAs ► Strengthen Arctic Council ► Increase civil society role ► EU role, tools to offer (ND Env Partnership, AC, BEAC…) ILULISSAT: Timely debate

8. "In 2007 the ice was 1.3 metres thick on average, compared with 2.6 metres in 2004" Quoted from issue 2667 of New Scientist magazine, 02 August 2008, page 7