海洋垃圾污染问题的国际法规制：成就、缺失与前路
|
摘要
本文的主题为海洋垃圾污染问题的国际法规制，分为七章进行阐述。
第1章为导论，阐述论文的研究背景，界定主题和相关概念。本章以全球环境问题与对国际治理的呼唤为背景，将研究对象确定为海洋垃圾污染问题，并对国际法、国际治理等相关概念进行界定。通过对国内外研究状况进行综述，发现其在此问题上研究的不足，从而指出本文的研究意义、贡献与创新之处。
第2章为海洋垃圾污染问题的性质与由来。海洋垃圾指海洋环境中所有形式的人造或加工的固体废弃物，它分布在世界的所有海域，以近海沿岸和公海区域居多，近年来数量有增无减。海洋垃圾的来源可以分为海洋和陆地两大类，其对海洋-海岸生态系统和海洋生物有巨大负面影响，威胁人类健康，造成重大经济损失。海洋垃圾污染问题直接产生于人类的认知传统和对有关物质的不当处置方式，从政策与法律层面来看，其与政府政策的失灵、失调及失败有关。因此我们说，海洋垃圾污染问题向人类不可持续的生产、生活方式以及经济发展模式发出了质疑，也对现存的国际合作方式与国际法的效果和力度提出了挑战。解决类似海洋垃圾污染的全球环境问题要完善国际国内立法和相关政策，有效实施和执行现有法律制度，对公众进行教育等。
第3章评析国际法对海洋垃圾污染问题的规制效果。国际法在全球和区域两个层面对海洋垃圾污染问题进行规制，区域规制较之全球规制有优势。国际“硬法”规则明确，可执行性强，但是实施效果不太理想；“软法”具有灵活性，在确定优先事项上具有优势。在国际陆源海洋污染治理体制中，本章以北海为例，说明国际软法规范较之有约束力的硬法规范来说更容易实现，它能够成功地对那些怠于执行者施加政治压力，也可以通过审核体系的介入增强其执行力。国际法应对海洋污染问题的进程与效果举步维艰，某种程度上反映了国家间共同利益极为有限，以及国际治理的软弱、不成体系。本章最后指出，问题的结构和行为体数量等因素都可以影响国际法规制的效果。国际法在应对海洋垃圾污染这类全球环境问题时，面临着合作、监督和执行以及规范内容不断更新等多重挑战。国际法虽然不是治理海洋垃圾污染问题的唯一手段，但确实起到很重要的作用。
第4章为海洋垃圾污染治理的国际法原则评析。在海洋垃圾污染问题的治理中存在一些基本的原则，对实现海洋环境的保护和对海洋污染的有效治理有所指引。这些原则主要来源于两个方面：第一，来自现行海洋法公约，特别是海洋法公约有关管辖权和环境保护的规定，这些原则是对条约规则的抽象和提炼。第二，来自于国际习惯法和软法文件，如联大决议、国际性宣言、政府代表在联合国所作的声明等。这些原则也必须符合国际实践的确立原则的标准。
本章阐释并评析了八个适用于海洋垃圾污染问题上的原则，分别是：尊重海洋法和相关协议，保护和保全海洋环境，国际合作，科学管理，生态系统化管理，可持续利用，部门之间一体化合作，全球海洋环境托管原则。本文认为，尊重海洋法和相关协议原则应该与公海自由原则分别确立；保护和保全海洋环境原则与国际合作原则均应该扩展适用于非国家行为体；科学管理原则是否确立还有待商榷；可持续利用原则并不适合在海洋环境保护问题上广泛应用；生态系统化管理应该推而广之为一个普适性的原则；一体化原则是与生态系统化管理相联系，污染问题的地理范围与部门管理都要一体化考虑；托管原则缺乏适用的国际法机制。
第5章为海洋垃圾污染问题与国际法中的“对世义务”。海洋环境已经成为人类共同利益的重要内容和组成部分。国际法，特别是海洋法，其初期是对国家利用海洋设定管辖范围和配置权利义务，近来也开始为这种“共同利益”提供一定程度上的保护，“对世义务”是实现这种保护的方式之一。
在海洋治污问题上看，国际法规范对国际义务的规定方式正在从传统的“结果性义务”向“实施型义务”，甚至是“维持性义务”转变，这样会使国家管辖权内的行为也更有可能受到“对世义务”的约束。在海洋垃圾污染的治理问题上，“对世义务”仍然是处于发展中的国际法规则，且需要相应的责任机制和执行机制来保障，短时间内难以实现。
在违反“对世义务”的行为中，损害并不是构成国家责任的一项必不可少的要素。国际法现有责任机制不适用于对违反“对世义务”行为的追究，国家责任也不是违反“对世义务”的必然消极后果。倾向于采用民事责任机制或倡导私人可以与国家一样，平等地诉诸于国内法来寻求救济，这种趋势在海洋法中越来越明显。一些公约已经在利用审查和监督等预防性救济措施，来确保“对世义务”的履行。
越来越多的国际法规则或是通过施加义务，或是通过赋予权利，从而直接地作用于个人，这是现代国际法中一个日益重要的现象，国际法中出现了对个人施加“对世义务”的理论探讨。如果“对世义务”与国内法律制度相契合，它对个人的约束会更强。国际硬法不能对个人进行强制适用和执行，而国际软法中的消极义务更能影响个人的行为。个人行为者虽然不能承担促进海洋环境保护的义务，但他们可以通过为自己的行为负责来为海洋污染治理做出贡献。
第6章为海洋垃圾污染问题与国际法遵约理论。在陆源海洋污染治理体制中，不遵约可以分为三种类型，即故意的不遵约，操作上的不遵约和促进规范产生的不遵约。不遵约现象出现有三个原因：规则条款缺乏明确性；对规制对象缺乏认知；对象本身存在不确定性。以国际法规范为核心的国际治理体制对不遵约现象有两种回应方式，一是通过制定更严格的标准和修订案的方式来回应后两种类型的不遵约；二是通过改善成员方之间的信任关系，设置加强能力建设的机制来促进履约。因而，国际法体制并没有因为不遵约现象的存在而缺乏合法性。报告可以作为一种增强能力建设的方式促进遵约。在控制、减少和消除污染的过程中，不遵约可以被看作一个促进陆源海洋污染治理体制发展的因素。
本章第2节认为，国家能力机制在提高国际条约合理性和有效性方面的作用没有想象的那么强大，如果社会能力依然疲软，加强国家能力建设的很多努力就会陷入困境。环境制度的遵守和有效性评估必然将扩展到不只是关注国家的能力建设，而是国家-社会综合能力的提高上来。在环境决策领域，非政府组织可以辅助政府来履行其保护国际环境的承诺，还可以提供信息和开展政策选择的研究，监督国家的活动以确保国家的遵约。总体而言，非政府组织通过将环境问题纳入政策来加强国家能力建设。
第3节讨论通过公民诉讼形式来促进履约，从而增强国际法实施的效果。公民诉讼实施国际条约有两个主要方法。第一，环境条约从一开始制定就可以规定具体的、自执行性义务。第二，国际条约可以继续按照保护臭氧层蒙特利尔公约和东京议定书模式，在随后的国内法适用时将额外的条约义务施加于私人。公民诉讼行为大大减少了国家通过不作为的方式违约的机会。
第7章为海洋垃圾污染的国际治理体系问题探索。全球环境问题使国际环境法面临着挑战，其必然向着以国际法规范为核心的国际治理体制转变，且逐渐呈现出行为体增加，权力多中心化的趋势。海洋垃圾污染的国际治理要求国际法规范形成一个一体化的、多层次的治理框架，每个层面的规制内容和范围各有侧重，且各个部分互相联系，协调发展。国际法以及国际环境法在这些问题上是“碎片化”发展的，海洋垃圾污染的国际治理目前是不成体系的，这也是本章题目所要表达的观点。
国际组织比单个国家更能够代表整个国际共同体利益，其在全球环境问题的治理上起到引领和推动作用。国际治理机制要求国际组织能力相应地增强。联合国环境规划署正在向着更加高效、有效且关注于治理结果的新实体转变。
国家依国际法规范实行“善治”的治理行为，国际法规范中体现了法治、参与、透明、一致同意、责任、公平无歧视、回应等八项“善治”要素。国家致力于通过结合国际和国内两方面的资金力量构建国家能力，保障“善治”的实行，实施国际条约和协议，这是国际法在国内适用的理论和实践的新发展。
全球环境问题的国际法与国际治理需要与更广阔、更深层次的治理资源相连结，科学技术的发展、经济模式的转变以及人类行为方式的改变，对于海洋垃圾污染问题的解决具有更为深刻的意义。
The theme of this paper is the International Environmental Governance ofMarine Debris. It can be divided into seven parts:
The first chapter is Introduction. It elaborates the background, the theme andthe related concept. Plastic litter has recently moved centre stage as another stressfactor for the marine environment. There is a pressing need for the internationalcommunity to take action for its governance. The International Law and theInternational Governance are two main governance approaches. The author provided asum of contribution on the basis of current studies.
The Second chapter offers some essential information of marine debris.Man-made debris in the oceans is now found everywhere, and the amount increasesrapidly. There are two main sources of marine debris, and it can have numerousimpacts on the marine livings and environment. These impacts are both cultural andmulti-sectoral, rooted primarily in poor practices of solid waste management, a lack ofinfrastructure, various human activities, an inadequate understanding on the part ofthe public of the potential consequences of their actions, the lack of adequate legaland enforcement systems and a lack of financial resources. The international law havelitter effect on it and has a long way to walk.
The Third chapter comment on the effectives of international law. Ambitiousnorms are more easily achieved in soft law institutions than in legally binding ones,this is not primarily due to a bypass of the domestic ratification stage or low attentionto compliance costs. More important in the processes examined here is the greater flexibility offered by soft law instruments with respect to the states that are included,the sectors of government that participate, or the aspects of a larger problem that aresingled out for norm-building. The potential of soft law to influence the strength ofbinding institutions by putting pressure on laggards is demonstrated in the North Sea.Transformation or incorporation of soft law into hard law will improve theimplementation and effectiveness of international norms. Although most of theevidence presented here confirms the edge that hard law institutions are expected tohave over soft law with respect to implementation, the structures for intrusiveverification and review that provide part of the explanation can also be created for softlaw norms.
The Fourth chapter comment on the Eight Princles for the governance ofmarine debris. There is a widely held view that there is a need to formulate acomprehensive set of general principles for the legal regime of maritime areas, andsuch principles are already included in the United Nations Convention on the Law ofthe Sea and other international treaties and instruments.
The article draws some conclusion:“Respect for the Law of the Sea and RelatedInstruments” principle should be formulated solely by reference to freedom of thehigh seas;“The Protection and Preservation of the Marine Environment” principle and“International Co-operation” principle should be applicable for more non-state actors;the “Science-Based Approach to Management” principle still remains a question;“The Ecosystem Approach” principle is recognized to be widely used in all the oceans,and it links to the next principle;“The Integrated Approach” should be required tostrengthen cross-sectoral cooperation and address sectoral and cumulative impacts.“Sustainable and Equitable Use” principle is not suitable for widely used in protectionof marine environment.“The Responsibility of States as Stewards of the GlobalMarine Environment” principle might seem to be more specific in content, implying,inter alia, stronger commitment to and basis for joint action.
The Fifth chapter focuses the “obligations erga omnes” in international law.The legal protection of international community interests was the result of a gradualII and, at first, almost imperceptible general trend. The protection of communityinterests has already been effected in positive international law, by describing in theperspective proposed here various international legal notions and regimes, such asobligations erga omnes. This is illustrated by certain apparent paradoxes in theregimes of obligations erga omnes, responsibility towards the internationalcommunity as a whole, etc. It is also at the core of increasingly frequent debates ininternational law on possible conflicts and the appropriate balance to be foundbetween community and individual interests. The international norms begin to shiftfrom the “result-based obligation” to “action-based obligation”, even the “preservedobligation”. In that case, the action conducted in nation’s jurisdiction appears to bemore restricted in international law. It also needs the proper liability and enforcementregimes. So there is litter hope to achieve in short time.
There is a tendency that more and more nations tends to take the private Reliefmechanism to solve the dispute. A certain conventions have tried to take theinvestigation and supervision to seek relief in order to implement the obligation.
More and More norms in international law tend to exert the obligations toindividual. If the nation’s norms conform to the international law, it can be morerestricted on the individual. The individual can contribute to the governance of marinelitter by being responsible for their own behavior
The Sixth chapter focuses on the compliance theory in dealing with the issues.Noncompliance may take the form of willful, operational or norm generating. Apotential cause of compliance problems is the lack of clarity inherent inaction-oriented regimes. A lack of certainty as to the nature of the problem or theappropriate response may prevent effective action. The third potential complianceproblem is that threats and impacts on the marine environment change. However, theydo not appear to do so here. Instead, they prompt action to improve on all counts. Thiseffect appears to be largely a result of the tacit recognition of the distinction betweenwillful, norm-generating and operational noncompliance by those party to the regimes,with each type of noncompliance generating a different response. Reports can be used as capacity-building mechanisms to address one of the main reasons fornoncompliance.
In the second section, the paper points out that he interest in building statecapacity, however, may only inform us about part of the solution for improvingcompliance and effectiveness. If societal capacity remains weak, many internationalefforts to enhance state capacity may flounder. The participation of NGOs in theenvironmental policy-making realm can, moreover, assist states to meet theirinternational environmental commitments, as NGOs can provide information andcarry out research concerning different policy options. They also monitor stateactivity to ensure domestic compliance. Overall, NGOs enhance capacity bytranslating environmental concern into policies.
In the Third section, the article discusses that two overarching approaches toenforcement of international commitments by citizen suit are possible. First,environmental agreements could be made to include more specific, self-executingobligations, from the outset. Alternatively, the international agreements couldcontinue to adhere to the model common to the Montreal and Kyoto protocols,whereby states commit to broad quantitative reductions, only now with an additionaltreaty obligation to provide for private enforcement of subsequent implementinglegislation in the domestic legal system. Most important among these is that theunavailability of domestic enforcement of environmental laws through citizen suitswill tend to undermine compliance with international environmental obligations.
The Seventh chapter attempts to discuss about the development and evolutionof international environment law and the opportunities and challenges in thedevelopment. Cooperation Issue, for the implementation of Supporter environmentlaws, is the most important challenge of environmental law. The second challenge issupervise and enforcement. Observing principles of Treaties and implementation oftheir obligations is a fundamental obligation of international law. The third challengeis Adjustment and development of commitments. There is a trend that more actorsparticipate in the international governance, and the multi-center powers will beIV established. International Law is the core element in governing the globalenvironmental issues. The International governance calls for an integrated and amulti-level framework. Marine litter is a global problem and mitigation actions shouldbe developed around a global framework, coordinated at the regional level andimplemented at the national level through development and implementation ofnational action plans or strategies that address marine litter.
International organization is more influential than the individual nation. It plays aleader in in governing the global environmental issues. UNEP is becoming a moreeffective, efficient and results-focused entity, meeting the expectations ofGovernments and its stakeholders in responding to global environmental challengesand opportunities. It faces the internal challenge of becoming a more effective,efficient and results-focused entity, delivering as “One UNEP”.
This section adopted eight elements of good governance as an analyticalframework, namely, the rule of law, participatory, transparency, consensus-baseddecision making, accountability, equity and inclusiveness, responsiveness andcoherence. These elements are partially supported by international treaty practice buthave not yet received universal acceptance. To finance the ambitious activities ahead,the Regional Seas Programmes and member countries must find and develop a solidfoundation of long-term sustainable financing by strengthening domestic commitmentand resources. Just as the Regional Seas Programmes differ in focus and scope,financial options and solutions vary from region to region as member countries havedifferent economic structures and are at varying stages of development.
第1章为导论，阐述论文的研究背景，界定主题和相关概念。本章以全球环境问题与对国际治理的呼唤为背景，将研究对象确定为海洋垃圾污染问题，并对国际法、国际治理等相关概念进行界定。通过对国内外研究状况进行综述，发现其在此问题上研究的不足，从而指出本文的研究意义、贡献与创新之处。
第2章为海洋垃圾污染问题的性质与由来。海洋垃圾指海洋环境中所有形式的人造或加工的固体废弃物，它分布在世界的所有海域，以近海沿岸和公海区域居多，近年来数量有增无减。海洋垃圾的来源可以分为海洋和陆地两大类，其对海洋-海岸生态系统和海洋生物有巨大负面影响，威胁人类健康，造成重大经济损失。海洋垃圾污染问题直接产生于人类的认知传统和对有关物质的不当处置方式，从政策与法律层面来看，其与政府政策的失灵、失调及失败有关。因此我们说，海洋垃圾污染问题向人类不可持续的生产、生活方式以及经济发展模式发出了质疑，也对现存的国际合作方式与国际法的效果和力度提出了挑战。解决类似海洋垃圾污染的全球环境问题要完善国际国内立法和相关政策，有效实施和执行现有法律制度，对公众进行教育等。
第3章评析国际法对海洋垃圾污染问题的规制效果。国际法在全球和区域两个层面对海洋垃圾污染问题进行规制，区域规制较之全球规制有优势。国际“硬法”规则明确，可执行性强，但是实施效果不太理想；“软法”具有灵活性，在确定优先事项上具有优势。在国际陆源海洋污染治理体制中，本章以北海为例，说明国际软法规范较之有约束力的硬法规范来说更容易实现，它能够成功地对那些怠于执行者施加政治压力，也可以通过审核体系的介入增强其执行力。国际法应对海洋污染问题的进程与效果举步维艰，某种程度上反映了国家间共同利益极为有限，以及国际治理的软弱、不成体系。本章最后指出，问题的结构和行为体数量等因素都可以影响国际法规制的效果。国际法在应对海洋垃圾污染这类全球环境问题时，面临着合作、监督和执行以及规范内容不断更新等多重挑战。国际法虽然不是治理海洋垃圾污染问题的唯一手段，但确实起到很重要的作用。
第4章为海洋垃圾污染治理的国际法原则评析。在海洋垃圾污染问题的治理中存在一些基本的原则，对实现海洋环境的保护和对海洋污染的有效治理有所指引。这些原则主要来源于两个方面：第一，来自现行海洋法公约，特别是海洋法公约有关管辖权和环境保护的规定，这些原则是对条约规则的抽象和提炼。第二，来自于国际习惯法和软法文件，如联大决议、国际性宣言、政府代表在联合国所作的声明等。这些原则也必须符合国际实践的确立原则的标准。
本章阐释并评析了八个适用于海洋垃圾污染问题上的原则，分别是：尊重海洋法和相关协议，保护和保全海洋环境，国际合作，科学管理，生态系统化管理，可持续利用，部门之间一体化合作，全球海洋环境托管原则。本文认为，尊重海洋法和相关协议原则应该与公海自由原则分别确立；保护和保全海洋环境原则与国际合作原则均应该扩展适用于非国家行为体；科学管理原则是否确立还有待商榷；可持续利用原则并不适合在海洋环境保护问题上广泛应用；生态系统化管理应该推而广之为一个普适性的原则；一体化原则是与生态系统化管理相联系，污染问题的地理范围与部门管理都要一体化考虑；托管原则缺乏适用的国际法机制。
第5章为海洋垃圾污染问题与国际法中的“对世义务”。海洋环境已经成为人类共同利益的重要内容和组成部分。国际法，特别是海洋法，其初期是对国家利用海洋设定管辖范围和配置权利义务，近来也开始为这种“共同利益”提供一定程度上的保护，“对世义务”是实现这种保护的方式之一。
在海洋治污问题上看，国际法规范对国际义务的规定方式正在从传统的“结果性义务”向“实施型义务”，甚至是“维持性义务”转变，这样会使国家管辖权内的行为也更有可能受到“对世义务”的约束。在海洋垃圾污染的治理问题上，“对世义务”仍然是处于发展中的国际法规则，且需要相应的责任机制和执行机制来保障，短时间内难以实现。
在违反“对世义务”的行为中，损害并不是构成国家责任的一项必不可少的要素。国际法现有责任机制不适用于对违反“对世义务”行为的追究，国家责任也不是违反“对世义务”的必然消极后果。倾向于采用民事责任机制或倡导私人可以与国家一样，平等地诉诸于国内法来寻求救济，这种趋势在海洋法中越来越明显。一些公约已经在利用审查和监督等预防性救济措施，来确保“对世义务”的履行。
越来越多的国际法规则或是通过施加义务，或是通过赋予权利，从而直接地作用于个人，这是现代国际法中一个日益重要的现象，国际法中出现了对个人施加“对世义务”的理论探讨。如果“对世义务”与国内法律制度相契合，它对个人的约束会更强。国际硬法不能对个人进行强制适用和执行，而国际软法中的消极义务更能影响个人的行为。个人行为者虽然不能承担促进海洋环境保护的义务，但他们可以通过为自己的行为负责来为海洋污染治理做出贡献。
第6章为海洋垃圾污染问题与国际法遵约理论。在陆源海洋污染治理体制中，不遵约可以分为三种类型，即故意的不遵约，操作上的不遵约和促进规范产生的不遵约。不遵约现象出现有三个原因：规则条款缺乏明确性；对规制对象缺乏认知；对象本身存在不确定性。以国际法规范为核心的国际治理体制对不遵约现象有两种回应方式，一是通过制定更严格的标准和修订案的方式来回应后两种类型的不遵约；二是通过改善成员方之间的信任关系，设置加强能力建设的机制来促进履约。因而，国际法体制并没有因为不遵约现象的存在而缺乏合法性。报告可以作为一种增强能力建设的方式促进遵约。在控制、减少和消除污染的过程中，不遵约可以被看作一个促进陆源海洋污染治理体制发展的因素。
本章第2节认为，国家能力机制在提高国际条约合理性和有效性方面的作用没有想象的那么强大，如果社会能力依然疲软，加强国家能力建设的很多努力就会陷入困境。环境制度的遵守和有效性评估必然将扩展到不只是关注国家的能力建设，而是国家-社会综合能力的提高上来。在环境决策领域，非政府组织可以辅助政府来履行其保护国际环境的承诺，还可以提供信息和开展政策选择的研究，监督国家的活动以确保国家的遵约。总体而言，非政府组织通过将环境问题纳入政策来加强国家能力建设。
第3节讨论通过公民诉讼形式来促进履约，从而增强国际法实施的效果。公民诉讼实施国际条约有两个主要方法。第一，环境条约从一开始制定就可以规定具体的、自执行性义务。第二，国际条约可以继续按照保护臭氧层蒙特利尔公约和东京议定书模式，在随后的国内法适用时将额外的条约义务施加于私人。公民诉讼行为大大减少了国家通过不作为的方式违约的机会。
第7章为海洋垃圾污染的国际治理体系问题探索。全球环境问题使国际环境法面临着挑战，其必然向着以国际法规范为核心的国际治理体制转变，且逐渐呈现出行为体增加，权力多中心化的趋势。海洋垃圾污染的国际治理要求国际法规范形成一个一体化的、多层次的治理框架，每个层面的规制内容和范围各有侧重，且各个部分互相联系，协调发展。国际法以及国际环境法在这些问题上是“碎片化”发展的，海洋垃圾污染的国际治理目前是不成体系的，这也是本章题目所要表达的观点。
国际组织比单个国家更能够代表整个国际共同体利益，其在全球环境问题的治理上起到引领和推动作用。国际治理机制要求国际组织能力相应地增强。联合国环境规划署正在向着更加高效、有效且关注于治理结果的新实体转变。
国家依国际法规范实行“善治”的治理行为，国际法规范中体现了法治、参与、透明、一致同意、责任、公平无歧视、回应等八项“善治”要素。国家致力于通过结合国际和国内两方面的资金力量构建国家能力，保障“善治”的实行，实施国际条约和协议，这是国际法在国内适用的理论和实践的新发展。
全球环境问题的国际法与国际治理需要与更广阔、更深层次的治理资源相连结，科学技术的发展、经济模式的转变以及人类行为方式的改变，对于海洋垃圾污染问题的解决具有更为深刻的意义。
The theme of this paper is the International Environmental Governance ofMarine Debris. It can be divided into seven parts:
The first chapter is Introduction. It elaborates the background, the theme andthe related concept. Plastic litter has recently moved centre stage as another stressfactor for the marine environment. There is a pressing need for the internationalcommunity to take action for its governance. The International Law and theInternational Governance are two main governance approaches. The author provided asum of contribution on the basis of current studies.
The Second chapter offers some essential information of marine debris.Man-made debris in the oceans is now found everywhere, and the amount increasesrapidly. There are two main sources of marine debris, and it can have numerousimpacts on the marine livings and environment. These impacts are both cultural andmulti-sectoral, rooted primarily in poor practices of solid waste management, a lack ofinfrastructure, various human activities, an inadequate understanding on the part ofthe public of the potential consequences of their actions, the lack of adequate legaland enforcement systems and a lack of financial resources. The international law havelitter effect on it and has a long way to walk.
The Third chapter comment on the effectives of international law. Ambitiousnorms are more easily achieved in soft law institutions than in legally binding ones,this is not primarily due to a bypass of the domestic ratification stage or low attentionto compliance costs. More important in the processes examined here is the greater flexibility offered by soft law instruments with respect to the states that are included,the sectors of government that participate, or the aspects of a larger problem that aresingled out for norm-building. The potential of soft law to influence the strength ofbinding institutions by putting pressure on laggards is demonstrated in the North Sea.Transformation or incorporation of soft law into hard law will improve theimplementation and effectiveness of international norms. Although most of theevidence presented here confirms the edge that hard law institutions are expected tohave over soft law with respect to implementation, the structures for intrusiveverification and review that provide part of the explanation can also be created for softlaw norms.
The Fourth chapter comment on the Eight Princles for the governance ofmarine debris. There is a widely held view that there is a need to formulate acomprehensive set of general principles for the legal regime of maritime areas, andsuch principles are already included in the United Nations Convention on the Law ofthe Sea and other international treaties and instruments.
The article draws some conclusion:“Respect for the Law of the Sea and RelatedInstruments” principle should be formulated solely by reference to freedom of thehigh seas;“The Protection and Preservation of the Marine Environment” principle and“International Co-operation” principle should be applicable for more non-state actors;the “Science-Based Approach to Management” principle still remains a question;“The Ecosystem Approach” principle is recognized to be widely used in all the oceans,and it links to the next principle;“The Integrated Approach” should be required tostrengthen cross-sectoral cooperation and address sectoral and cumulative impacts.“Sustainable and Equitable Use” principle is not suitable for widely used in protectionof marine environment.“The Responsibility of States as Stewards of the GlobalMarine Environment” principle might seem to be more specific in content, implying,inter alia, stronger commitment to and basis for joint action.
The Fifth chapter focuses the “obligations erga omnes” in international law.The legal protection of international community interests was the result of a gradualII and, at first, almost imperceptible general trend. The protection of communityinterests has already been effected in positive international law, by describing in theperspective proposed here various international legal notions and regimes, such asobligations erga omnes. This is illustrated by certain apparent paradoxes in theregimes of obligations erga omnes, responsibility towards the internationalcommunity as a whole, etc. It is also at the core of increasingly frequent debates ininternational law on possible conflicts and the appropriate balance to be foundbetween community and individual interests. The international norms begin to shiftfrom the “result-based obligation” to “action-based obligation”, even the “preservedobligation”. In that case, the action conducted in nation’s jurisdiction appears to bemore restricted in international law. It also needs the proper liability and enforcementregimes. So there is litter hope to achieve in short time.
There is a tendency that more and more nations tends to take the private Reliefmechanism to solve the dispute. A certain conventions have tried to take theinvestigation and supervision to seek relief in order to implement the obligation.
More and More norms in international law tend to exert the obligations toindividual. If the nation’s norms conform to the international law, it can be morerestricted on the individual. The individual can contribute to the governance of marinelitter by being responsible for their own behavior
The Sixth chapter focuses on the compliance theory in dealing with the issues.Noncompliance may take the form of willful, operational or norm generating. Apotential cause of compliance problems is the lack of clarity inherent inaction-oriented regimes. A lack of certainty as to the nature of the problem or theappropriate response may prevent effective action. The third potential complianceproblem is that threats and impacts on the marine environment change. However, theydo not appear to do so here. Instead, they prompt action to improve on all counts. Thiseffect appears to be largely a result of the tacit recognition of the distinction betweenwillful, norm-generating and operational noncompliance by those party to the regimes,with each type of noncompliance generating a different response. Reports can be used as capacity-building mechanisms to address one of the main reasons fornoncompliance.
In the second section, the paper points out that he interest in building statecapacity, however, may only inform us about part of the solution for improvingcompliance and effectiveness. If societal capacity remains weak, many internationalefforts to enhance state capacity may flounder. The participation of NGOs in theenvironmental policy-making realm can, moreover, assist states to meet theirinternational environmental commitments, as NGOs can provide information andcarry out research concerning different policy options. They also monitor stateactivity to ensure domestic compliance. Overall, NGOs enhance capacity bytranslating environmental concern into policies.
In the Third section, the article discusses that two overarching approaches toenforcement of international commitments by citizen suit are possible. First,environmental agreements could be made to include more specific, self-executingobligations, from the outset. Alternatively, the international agreements couldcontinue to adhere to the model common to the Montreal and Kyoto protocols,whereby states commit to broad quantitative reductions, only now with an additionaltreaty obligation to provide for private enforcement of subsequent implementinglegislation in the domestic legal system. Most important among these is that theunavailability of domestic enforcement of environmental laws through citizen suitswill tend to undermine compliance with international environmental obligations.
The Seventh chapter attempts to discuss about the development and evolutionof international environment law and the opportunities and challenges in thedevelopment. Cooperation Issue, for the implementation of Supporter environmentlaws, is the most important challenge of environmental law. The second challenge issupervise and enforcement. Observing principles of Treaties and implementation oftheir obligations is a fundamental obligation of international law. The third challengeis Adjustment and development of commitments. There is a trend that more actorsparticipate in the international governance, and the multi-center powers will beIV established. International Law is the core element in governing the globalenvironmental issues. The International governance calls for an integrated and amulti-level framework. Marine litter is a global problem and mitigation actions shouldbe developed around a global framework, coordinated at the regional level andimplemented at the national level through development and implementation ofnational action plans or strategies that address marine litter.
International organization is more influential than the individual nation. It plays aleader in in governing the global environmental issues. UNEP is becoming a moreeffective, efficient and results-focused entity, meeting the expectations ofGovernments and its stakeholders in responding to global environmental challengesand opportunities. It faces the internal challenge of becoming a more effective,efficient and results-focused entity, delivering as “One UNEP”.
This section adopted eight elements of good governance as an analyticalframework, namely, the rule of law, participatory, transparency, consensus-baseddecision making, accountability, equity and inclusiveness, responsiveness andcoherence. These elements are partially supported by international treaty practice buthave not yet received universal acceptance. To finance the ambitious activities ahead,the Regional Seas Programmes and member countries must find and develop a solidfoundation of long-term sustainable financing by strengthening domestic commitmentand resources. Just as the Regional Seas Programmes differ in focus and scope,financial options and solutions vary from region to region as member countries havedifferent economic structures and are at varying stages of development.
引文
1关于国际法治的形式内涵和实质内涵，参见:黄文艺.全球化时代的国际法治——以形式法治概念为基准的考察，吉林大学社会科学学报,2009(4).
3邵鹏.全球治理：理论与实践[M]，吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2010，第67页。
1蔡中丽，李细峰.海洋塑料污染问题研究概况，环境科学进展，1994.
2毛达.海洋垃圾污染及其治理的历史演变，云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)，2010.
3F Galgani and others, Marine Strategy Framework Directive Task Group10Report: Marine Litter(Europ eanUnion, IFREMER and ICES2010)4.
4Wurpel, G., Van D. A, Pors, J..&Wolde, T., A.(2011).Plastics do not belong in the ocean. Towards a roadmapfor a clean North Sea. IMSA Amsterdam.
1Law, K. L., Moret-Ferguson, S., Maximenko, N. A.,Proskurowski, G., Peacock, E. E., Hafner, J.&Reddy,C. M.2010Plastic Accumulation in the North AtlanticSubtropical Gyre. Science329,1185-1188.
2见Murray, F.&Cowie, P. R.2011Plastic contaminationin the decapod crustacean Nephropsnorvegicus(Linnaeus,1758). Marine Pollution Bulletin62,1207-1217.Ozdilek,2006Impact of accumulatedbeach litteron Chelonia mydas L.1758(green turtle) hatch lingsof the Samandag coast, Hatay, Turkey.Fresenius Environmental Bulletin15,95-103.
1Barnes, D. K. A., Galgani, F., Thompson, R. C.&Barlaz, M.2009Accumulation and fragmentation ofplasticdebris in global environments. PhilosophicalTransactions of the Royal Society B364,1985-1998.
1Pasi R., Environmental Responsibiliity and Cooperation between Baltic and North Sea Municipalities, MarinePollution Bulletin29, no.6-12(1994):627-630.
1UNEP.(2009) Marine litter: A global challenge. Nairobi: UNEP.
11973/1978，1974年1月15日签署，1983年10月2日生效。
2《防止倾倒废物及其物质污染海洋公约》（伦敦公约），1972年11月13日通过，1974年8月30日生效。议定书与1996年11月7日通过，2006年3月24日生效。2003年12月14日修订，其议定书于1996年
11月7日通过，2006年3月24日生效。
3《控制危险废物越境转移及其处置巴塞尔公约》，1989年3月22日签署，1992年5月5日生效。
4《联合国海洋法公约》（UNCLOS公约），1982年12月10日通过，1994年11月16日生效。
5Boyle, Alan Marine Pollution Under the Law of the Sea, The American Journal of International Law79, no.20(1985):347-372.
6Carpenter, E. J.,&Smith, K. L.(1972). Science,175(27),1240-1241.
1MAPOL公约附则V：防止船源垃圾污染规定（1988年12月31日生效）。
2修正案在2010年10月召开的IMO海洋环境保护委员会（MEPC）第61次会议上被批准，并于2011年7月的第62次会议上正式通过。
1Shomura, R. S.,&Yoshida, H.O.(eds.)(1984).Proceedings of the international research workshop on the fateand impact of marine debris. Honolulu, Hawaii: NOAA.
12008年的A/63/111，第16条。
3Andre N., Land-Based Discharges of Marine Debris: From Local to Global Regulation, Marine PollutionBulletin29, no.11(1994):649-652.
4Underwood, A. J.(1995).Ecological.Application.,5(1),232-247.(1998). Landscape And Urban Planning,40
(1-3),123-130.
1UNEP（2006）, The State of the Marine Environment: Trends and processes,28.
1《东北大西洋海洋环境保护公约》(简称OSPAR公约)，1992年生效。
2《欧盟海洋政策框架指令》（简称MSFD），2000年生效。
3Ducrotoy, J. P.,&Elliott, M.(2008). Mar. Pollut. Bull.,57(1-5),8-21.
4European Parliament Council (2008).Directive2008/56/EC (marine strategy framework derective), Officialjournal of the European union.
5关于这两个原则参见http://www.ospar.org/content/conten.asp?menu=003201090000000_000000_000000.
6Directive2008/56.EC.
1UNEP（2006）,‘The State of the Marine Environment: Trends and processes’,28.
2转引自[美]奥兰扬著，陈玉刚、薄燕译.世界事务中的治理，上海世纪出版集团2007，第56页。
1张小平.全球环境治理的法律框架[M].北京：法律出版社，2008，第6页。
1参见伦敦公约，第6(1)(d),7(3),8,9,14(4)(b)(d)条。
1UNEP/GPA (2006).The state of the marine environment.Trends and processes. The Hague: UNEP/GPA.
2该说认为国际法在解决全球环境问题中只起到30%的作用。Bodansky, D., The Art and Craft of InternationalEnvironmental Law (Harvard University Press2009)24-27.转引自Trouwborst, A., Managing Marine Litter:Exploring the Evolving Role of International and European Law in Confronting a Persistant EnvironmentalProblem,(2011)27Merkourios–Utrecht Journal of International and European Law73,4-18.
2匈牙利诉捷克苏络伐克，“加布奇科沃-大毛罗斯项目案”(1997) ICJ Rep.7.
1参见陈德恭《现代国际海洋法》和屈广清《海洋法》（第二版）等著作和教材的基本原则部分。
2Open-ended Informal Working Group to Study Issues Relating to the Conservation and Sustainable Use ofMarine Biological Diversity Beyond Areas of National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Working Group).An almost identicallist of such principles was provided to the2010BBNJ Working Group by Spain in Making an intervention onbehalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States.46
2Richard A. Barnes, Consolidating Governance Principles for Areas beyond National Jurisdiction, TheInternational Journal ofMarine and Coastal Law27(2012)261–290.
1Treves, T.,‘Principles and Objectives of the Legal Regime Governing Areas Beyond NationalJurisdiction’ inElferink, A.G. O. and Molenaar, E.J.(eds.), The International Regime of AreasBeyond National Jurisdiction:Current and Future Developments (Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden,2010),7–25, at12.
1Oceans and the Law of the Sea; Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on4December2009(A/RES/64/71of12March2010) para.112.
1《保护东北大西洋海洋环境公约》，1992年9月22日通过，1998年3月25日生效。
1Juda, L.‘Considerations in Developing a Functional Approach to the Governance of Large Marine Ecosystems’,30(Ocean Development and International Law)(OEIL),89(1991).
1参见1991年《<南极条约>环境保护议定书》。
1见also Rayfuse, R. and Warner, R.‘Securing a Sustainable Future for the Oceans Beyond National Jurisdiction:
The Legal Basis for an Integrated Cross-sectoral Regime for High Seas Governance for the21st Century’(2008)
23, International Journal for Marine and Coastal Law,399–421at408-411.
2见Rayfuse, R. and Warner, R.‘Securing a Sustainable Future for the Oceans Beyond National Jurisdiction: TheLegal Basis for an Integrated Cross-sectoral Regime for High Seas Governance for the21st Century’(2008)23,International Journal for Marine and Coastal Law,399–421at408-409.
1Ibid., quoting from Independent World Commission on the Oceans, The Oceans: Our Future (CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge1998),17.
1[法]亚历山大.基斯，张若思编译.国际环境法，法律出版社2000，第13页。
2[法]亚历山大.基斯，张若思编译.国际环境法，法律出版社2000，第13页。
3那力.国际环境法中体现人类共同利益的概念与国际法的发展[J]．载赵建文主编.国际法研究文集（第四卷），2011，第105页。
1民主刚果诉比利时逮捕令案，ICJ Reports (2002). Arrest Warrant of11April2000, Joint Separate Opinion ofJudges Higgins, Kooijmans and Buergenthal.
1这方面的研究参见Ragazzi, M. The Concept of International Obligations Erga Omnes (1997); Tams, C.J.Enforcing Obligations Erga Omnes in International Law (2005); Crawford,‘Multilateral Rights and Obligationsin International Law’,319Recueil des cours (2006)325.
2见“巴塞罗那电车案”（Barcelona Traction Case）判决，ICJ Reports,1970.
3Reservations to the Convention on Genocide, Advisory opinion [1951] ICJ Rep.23.
4South West Africa (Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa), Second Phase, Judgment [1966] ICJ Rep.
51, at paras99and100.
1公约第194条。
2伦敦公约第1条。
1譬如说，关于1987年《关于消耗臭氧层物质的蒙特利尔议定书》第5条第1项和关于1985年5月24日的地球气候变化的UNEP决议第11项e的确定上，一些发展中国家提出一些条件作为加入的保留。
1[2001] II Yrbk Int’l Law comm., Pt2, at35, para.8of the commentary to Art.2.
2[1998] II Yrbk Int’l Law comm., Pt2, at75, paras317-318and at67,para.265.
3国家责任条款草案,第48条。
4国家责任条款草案，第40和41条。
1现阶段国际法总体上不认可这种损害危险的责任，因为国家普遍不情愿。
2参见Yearbook of the ILC,1978, vol. II, part2, p.149.
3[意]安东尼奥卡塞斯（Antonio Cassese）著，蔡从燕等译：《国际法》，法律出版社，2009,10.
4新西兰和澳大利亚诉法国核试验案（（Nuclear Tests Case, Australia v. France）），ICJ Reports,1974.
1关于公益诉讼（actio popularis）法理问题的讨论，源于1966年《西南非洲案》（2段），该案判决结果否定了公益诉讼的国际法地位。
2国际法委员会关于国家责任的条款草案（2000），第43、49条，参见Rept. of ILC(2000), GAOR A/55/10,第IV章，第114-150、242-289段。
3参见[意]安东尼奥卡塞斯（Antonio Cassese）著，蔡从燕等译.国际法，法律出版社，2009,第357页。
1Boyle, in, Wetterstein (ed.), Harm to the Environment, at95ff, but compare Leigh,14Australian Yearbook ofInternational Law(YIL)(1993), at143-145.
2国家责任条款草案,第40-41条。
1参见[意]安东尼奥卡塞斯（Antonio Cassese）著，蔡从燕等译.国际法，法律出版社，2009,第355页。
2国际法院判例汇编（ICJ Rep）(1974).
3UNCLOS公约第204-206条。
1[英]波尼﹒波伊尔.国际法与环境，那力编译.高教出版社,2007,第185页。
2Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (New Application:2002)(Democratic Republic of the Congo v.Rwanda), Jurisdiction and admissibility, Judgment of3F(2006).,at para.64.
3国家责任法草案,第48条。
4见art.54[2000] Ii Yrbk Int’l Law Comm., Pt2, at70-71.
1比如1950年的《欧洲人权公约》、1957年的《欧共体条约》、1969年的《美洲国家间人权公约》、1965年的《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》和1965年的《投资争端解决公约》。
2参见《海洋法公约》第99条。
3[意]安东尼奥卡塞斯（Antonio Cassese）著，蔡从燕等译.国际法，法律出版社，2009，第315页。
4同上。
5[英]马尔科姆N肖（Malcolm N. Shaw），白桂梅等译.国际法，北京大学出版社2011，第158页。
1Moore, C. J., Synthetic polymers in the marine environment: a rapidly increasing, long-term threat.Environmental Research(2008).108,131–139.
1缅因湾计划（GPAC）是由环境合作委员会设立的执行GPA的“航海计划”，它延续了一直以来的自愿特征。但是现在其职责由缅因湾委员会议承担。参见缅因湾关于海洋环境行动计划的会议内容，
（2007-2012）http://www.gulfofmaine.org.
2Haas, P.M.“Why Comply, or Some Hypotheses in Search of an Analyst” in International Compliance withNonbinding Accords, Transnational Legal Policy Studies No.29, ed. E. Brown Weiss (Washington DC:American Society of International Law,1997),21; and A. Chayes and A.H. Chayes,“On Compliance,”International Organization47(1993):175-205.
3Jacobson, H.K. and Weiss, E. B.“A Framework for Analysis,” in Engaging Countries: Strengthening Compliancewith International Environmental Accords, ed. Weiss, E. B. and Jacobson, H. K.(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,1998),4.
1见Cogan, J. K. Non-Compliance and the International Rule of Law, Yale Journal of International Law31
(2006):207.
1United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)/GPA, The State of the Marine Envrionment: Trends and
Processes (The Hague: UNEP/GPA,2006).
2Helsinki Commission (2003).报告将“遵约”（compliance）和“执行”（implementation）交互使用。
3Helsinki commission, Activities2006Overview, Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings, Baltic Sea environment
Proceedings, No.112(BSEP No.112)(Helsinki: Helsinki Commission,2007), at43.
4Gulf of Maine council on the Marine Environment, Action Plan2007-2012(Gulf of Maine Council on the
Marine Environment,2007),27.另见Tides of Change, supra note29, at33.
5Canadian Council of Ministers of the environment,“Municipal Wastewater Effluent in Canada”(December2006), at ii and2, available at www.ccme.ca/assets/pdf/mwwegeneralbackgroundere.pdf.
1Sand, P. H.‘Information Disclosure as an Instrument of Environmental Governance’, Heidelberg Journal ofInternational Law63(2003):487–502.
1Helsinki Convention, art.6.
4HELCOM Recommendation24/3,”Measures Aimed at the Reduction of Emissions and Discharges fromAgriculture”(25June2003), para.1(a).
5Ibid., paras.2and3.
1Helsinki Commission, The Third Baltic Sea Pollution Load Compilation (PLC3), Baltic Sea EnvironmentProceedings, No.70(BSEP No.70)(Helsinki: Helsinki Commission,1998), preface at3.
2UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Center (WCMC), A Survey of Global and Regional MarineEnvironmental Assessments and Related Scientific Activities (2003), at8, available atwww.unep-wcmc.org/marine/GMA.
3Helsinki Commission2003, at2; at27.
4BSEP No.112.
1BSEP, No. at8.
2(UNEP)/GPA, The State of the Marine Environment: Trends and Processes (The Hague: UNEP/GPA,2006), at37.
3Helsinki Commission, BSEP No.112, at43.
4Birnie, P. and Boyle, A.. International Law and the Environment,2d ed.(Oxford: Oxford University Press,2002),355.
1见Coordinating Body of the Seas of East Asia (Cobsea), available at www.cobsea.org/index.html.
2Sand, P. H. Institution-Building to Assist Compliance with International Environmental Law: Perspectives,Heidelberg Journal of International Law56(1996):775.
1Gulf of Maine Council on the Marine Environment2007, at29.
2见Vinogradov, S. E. Kirk, A. and Emeseh, E. Implementation of the GPA at Regional Level: The Role ofRegional Seas Conventions and Their Protocols (The Hague: UNEP/GPA,2006).
3Brunnee J. and Toope, S. J. Environmental Security and Freshwater Resources: Ecosystem Regime Building,American Journal of International law91(1997):26-59.
4见, for example, Bodansky D., The Legitimacy of International Governance: A Coming Challenge forInternational Environmental Law?” American Journal of International Law93(1999):596-624.
5关于这六个因素的解释，参见Franck, T. M. The Power of Legitimacy Among Nations (Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press,1990), note67-71.
6Brunn′ee, J. and Toope, S. J.“International Law and Constructivism: Elements of an Interactional Theory ofInternational Law,” Columbia Journal of Transnational Law39(2000):19–74.
1Brunn′ee, J. and Toope, S. J. Environmental Security and Freshwater Resources: Ecosystem Regime Building,American Journal of International Law91(1997):26–59.
2Helsinki commission2003, at2.
1见Ko h H. H.,“Why Do Nations Obey International Law?”Yale Law Journal106(1996-97):2599-2659.
2Helsinki Commission2003, at2.
3UNEP/GPA, Progress in Implementing the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marineenvironment from Land-Based Activities at the International, Regional and National Levels in the Period2002-2006, UNEP/GPA/IGR.2/2(9August2006),2006.
4见UNEP/GPA, Guidance on the Implementation of the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of theMarine Environment form Land-Based Activities for2007-2011: Global Programme of Action Contribution tothe Internationally Agreed Goals and Targets for the Sustainable Development of Oceans, Coasts and Islands,UNEP/GPA/IGR.2/3(21July2006).
5Helsinki commission, The Review of More Specific Targets to Reach the Goal Set Up in the1988/1998Ministerial Declarations Regarding Nutrients, Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings, No.89(BSEP No.89)(Helsinki: Helsinki Commission,2003).
6HELCOM Ministerial Declaration (HELCOM Bremen Declaration), adopted on25June2003in Bremenby theHELCOM Ministerial Meeting, sec. VI,见www.helcom.fi.
7HELCOM Recommendation24/3.
1Raustilia, K. Reporting and Review Institutions in10Multilateral Envieonmental Agreements (UNEP,2001),reproducedin Making Law Work: Environmental Compliance and Sustainable Development, ed. D. Zaelke, D.Kaniaru, and E. Kruzikova (London: Cameron May,2005), at230.
2Mitchell, R.B. Compliance Theory: An Overview, in Improving Compliance with International EnvironmentalLaw, ed. Camerson,J. Werksman, J. and Roderick P.(London: Earthscan,1996),11.
3例如，见Montreal Protocol on Substances that deplete the Ozaone Layer, Article7, International LegalMaterials26(1987):1550, as amended in London1990, Copenhagen1992, Montreal1997, and Beijing1999;amended text available at www.unep.ch/ozone/treaties.shtml.
4Ibid., at60-61.
5Gulf of Maine Council on the Marine Environment, Action Plan2001-2006(Gulf of Maine Council on theMarine Environment,2002), at21.
6见Strategic Action Programme for the South China Sea (Draft Version3,24February1999UNEP SCS/SAPVer.3), available at www.nuep.org/unep/regoffs/roap/eaasrcu/publication/sap V3.doc; and Commission on theProtection of the Black Sea Against Pollution, State of the Environment of the Black Sea: Pressures and Trends1996-2000, available at www.blacksea-commission.org/main.htm.
7见HELCOM MONAS at http://www.HELCOM.fi.
1Mitchell, R. B.“Sources of Transparency: Information systems in International Regimes,” International StudiesQuarterly42(1998):113.
2见HELCOM Periodic Assessments of State of the Marine Environment discussed in Helsinki CommissionBSEP No.82A; and BSEP No.35A.还见Environment Canada.
3见reporting under the1974Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Land-Based Sources Paris
4th June1974, International Legal Materials13(1974):352, as discussed in A. Kiss, Reporting Obligations andAssessment of Reports, in Beyerlin et al., at237.
4Helsinki Commission, BSEP No.35A, at25.
5见the diagram in Helsinki Commission, BSEP No.82A, at4.
1the Northeast Atlantic Region regime where the OSPAR commission’s “Strategy for a Joint Assessment andMonitoring Programme,” Reference No.2003-22,2006rev., addresses this issue.
2Helsinki Commission, BSEP No.82A, at20.
3Canada NPA, at11.
4GESAMP Report No.71, at3.
5Environment Canada, National Indicators and Reporting Office Steering Committee, Environmental Signals:Canada’s National Environmental Indicator Series (2003), available at www.ec.gc.ca/soer-ree.
1Kirk, E. A. Sherlock, K. and Reeves, A. D.“SUDS Law: Non-State Actors and the Haphazard Route toImplementation of International Obligations,”Non-State Actors and International Law4(2004):87-109.
1[意]安东尼奥卡塞斯（Antonio Cassese）著，蔡从燕等译.国际法，法律出版社，2009，第11页。
1保护地中海免受污染公约《巴塞罗那公约》，1976年通过，区域性框架条约。
1VanDeveer, S. D.2000. Protecting Europe’s Seas: Lessons from the Past25Years. Environment42(6):10–26.
2关于体制的有效性问题可以参见[美]奥兰扬(Young, O. R.)著，陈玉刚、薄燕译：《世界事务中的治理》，上海世纪出版集团2007年8月版，第五章。
3Weiss, E. B. and Jacobson, H.1998. Engaging Countries: Strengthening Compliancewith InternationalEnvironmental Accords. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
4VanDeveer, S. D., and Dabelko, G.2001. It’s Capacity, Stupid: International Assistanceand NationalImplementation. Global Environmental Politics1(2):18–28.
1Raustiala, Kal.1997. States, NGOs, and International Environmental Institutions. International Studies Quarterly
41:719–740.
1关于基本博弈理论和国际合作方面内容，参见Kenneth A. Oye, Explaining Cooperation Under Anarchy:Hypotheses and Strategies6-9(1985).
2见generally Joseph R. B, Daniel H&Gary D. Libecap, Public Choice Issues in Collective Action: ConstituentGroup Pressures and International global Warming regulation, International center for economic researchWorking Paper, June20,2000.
1Neil Gormley, Standing in the Way of Cooperation: Citizen Standing and Compliance with EnvironmentalAgreements,16Hastings William and Mary Environmental law and Policy Review,3972010.
2Chantal Thomas, Trade-related Labor and Environmental Agreements?, Journal of International Economic Law,
791.(2002).
3见generally William F. Shughart II, Katrinanomics: The Politics and Economics of Disaster Relief,127Pub
Choice31(2006).
1UNEP’s Mid-Term Strategy&Marine and Coastal Strategy，10th Meeting of the Regional Seas Conventions&Action Plans,2008,25-27.
[1][美]奥兰·扬.陈玉刚，薄燕译.世界事务中的治理[M].上海：上海世纪出版集团，2007.
[2][意]安东尼奥·卡塞斯.蔡从燕等译.国际法[M].北京：法律出版社，2009.
[3][英]波尼波义尔.那力，王彦志等译.国际法与环境（第二版）[M].北京：高等教育出版社，2007.
[4]陈德恭.现代国际海洋法[M].北京：海洋出版社，2009.
[5]傅崐成等.弗吉尼亚大学海洋法论文三十年精选集1977-2007（第三卷）[C].厦门：厦门大学出版社，2009.
[6]傅崐成编校.海洋法相关公约及中英文索引[M].福建：厦门大学出版社，2005.
[7]谷德近.多边环境协定的资金机制[M].北京：法律出版社，2008.
[8][美]杰克戈·德史密斯.埃里克·波斯纳，龚宇译.国际法的局限性[M].北京：法律出版社，2010.
[9]李可.马克思恩格斯环境法哲学初探[M].北京：法律出版社，2006.
[10]刘中民.国际海洋环境制度导论[M].北京：海洋出版社，2007.
[11][英]马尔科姆·N·肖.白桂梅，高健军等译.国际法（上、下）[M].北京：北京大学出版社，2011.
[12]那力.国际环境法[M].北京：科学出版社，2005.
[13]那力，何志鹏. WTO与环境保护[M].长春：吉林人民出版社，2002.
[14]屈广清，曲波主编.海洋法（第二版）[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社，2011.
[15]邵沙平、余敏友.国际法问题专论[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社，2002.
[16]邵鹏.全球治理：理论与实践[M].长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2010.
[17]苏长和.全球公共问题与国际合作：一种制度的分析[M].上海：上海人民出版社，2009.
[18]万霞.国际环境法案例评析[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社，2011.
[19]王前军.国际环境合作问题分析[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社，2007.
[20]王秀梅.国家对国际社会整体的义务[M].北京：法律出版社，2009
[21]伍亚荣.国际环境保护领域内的国家责任及其实现[M].北京：法律出版社，
[22]小田繁郎[日]著.我们时代的海洋法，1979.
[23]徐祥民，申进忠.海洋环境的法律保护研究[M].青岛：青岛海洋大学出版社，2006.
[24]张海文等绘制.《联合国海洋法公约》图解[M].北京：法律出版社，2010.
[25]张小平.全球环境治理的法律框架[M].北京：法律出版社，2008.
[26]张晓君，张辉.生态环境保护的国际法理论与实践[M].厦门：厦门大学出版社，2006.
[27]朱庆林，郭佩芳，张越美.海洋环境保护[M].青岛：中国海洋大学出版社，2011.
[28]朱庆林等编著.海洋环境保护[M].北京：中国海洋大学出版社，2011.
[1]陈斌.基于太平洋塑料垃圾带的经济损失分析研究[J]．生态经济，2010（06）.
[2]广部和也[日]，沈重译.海洋污染与国际条约[J]．国外法学，1980（05）.
[3]李刚.海洋治污的法律（上、下）[J]．中国远洋航务公告，2004（10）.
[4]毛达.海洋垃圾污染及其治理的历史演变[J]．云南师范大学学报（哲学社会科学版），2010（11）.
[5]那力.国际环境法中体现人类共同利益的概念与国际法的发展[J]．载赵建文主编.国际法研究（第四卷）[M].北京：中国人民公安大学出版社，2011.
[6]王小波.海洋垃圾知多少[J]．航海，1992（04）.
[7]王志雄.全球性和地区性海洋环境保护国际公约[J]．海洋与海岸带开发，1992（01）.138
[8]许健.论国际合作原则在国际环境保护领域的拓展[J]．天津大学学报（社会科学版），2010（05）.
[9]姚莹.东北亚区域海洋环境合作路径选择[J]．当代法学，2010（05）.
[10]佚名.海洋垃圾助长物种入侵[J]．防灾博览，2002（05）.
[11]易琪.论海洋环境污染的国际立法[J]．法制与社会，2008（18）.
[12]赵守梁.论海洋环境保护的国际合作[J]．齐鲁渔业，2005（12）.
[13]郑金林.世界海洋委员会的成立宗旨[J]．海洋信息，1996（01）.
[1]代云江.陆源污染物污染海洋环境防治法律制度研究[D]．硕士论文.青岛：中国海洋大学，2008.
[2]范晓丽.海洋环境保护的法律制度与国际合作[D]．博士论文.北京：中国政法大学，2003.
[3]高益民.海洋环境保护若干基本问题研究[D]．博士论文.青岛：中国海洋大学，2008.
[4]李刚.论海洋污染责任认定及赔偿[D]．博士论文.北京：中国政法大学，2006.
[5]金正九.东北亚海域环境污染防治的国际合作[D]．博士论文.大连：大连海事大学，2011.
[6]张晨.海洋污染防治的中的国际合作研究[D]．博士论文.青岛：中国海洋大学，2009.
[1] Alian, S.&Molcard, A. Hitch-hiking on floating marine debris: macrobenthicspecies in the Western Mediterranean Sea, Hydrobiologia(2003),503:59–67.
[2] Andrady, A. L. Microplastics in the marine environment, Marine PollutionBulletin62(2011)1596–1605.
[3] Andre, N. Land-Based Discharges of Marine Debris: From Local to GlobalRegulation Marine Pollution Bulletin29, no.11(1994):649-652
[4] Andrea L. M., Core Rules of Internatioanl environmental Law, Hein Online--16ILSA J. Int'l&Comp (2009-2010). L.257.
[5] Arevalo, L. B. The Work of The International law Ommission in the Field ofInternational Environmental Law, Environmental Affairs (2009), Vol.32:493.
[6] Barnes D.K.A. and others, Accumulation and Fragmentation of Plastic Debris inGlobal Environments (2009)364Philosophical Transactions of the Royal SocietyB1985,1995.
[7] Birnie, P. and Boyle, A. International Law and the Environment,2d ed.(Oxford:Oxford University Press,2002),355.
[8] Bliss, A. Marine Debris: Engaging Activities to Promote Awareness, ConferencePapers--North American Association of Environmental Education;2009AnnualMeeting,1,0.
[9] Boelens, R. G. V. From Policies to Science, Strategies for Marine EnvironmentalProtection, Marine Pollution Bulletin25,1-4(1992):14-17.
[10] Bork, K. The Legal Regulation of Floats and Gliders—In Quest of a NewRegime?, Ocean Development&International Law(2008).,39:298–328
[11] Boyle, A. Marine Pollution Under the Law of the Sea, The American Journal ofInternational Law，79, no.20(1985):347-372.
[12] Brachtha, C. Explaining global governance—a complexity perspective, ambridgeReview of International Affairs,(2011), Volume24, Number2.
[13] Brunnee J. and Toope, S. J.“Environmental Security and Freshwater Resources:Ecosystem Regime Building”, American Journal of International law91(1997):26-59.
[14] Candidate, J.D. A Sea Change to Change The Sea: Stopping The Spread of ThePacific garbage Patch With Small-Scale Environmental Legislation, WilliamandMary Law Review, Vol.51:1959.
[15] Cole, M. Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: A review,Marine Pollution Bulletin62(2011)2588–2597.
[16] Coulter, J.R. A Sea Change to Change the Sea: Stopping the Spread of thePacific Garbage Patch with Small-scale Environmental Legislation (2010)51William and Mary Law Review1959.
[17] David L.V. and Ann P. The Protection of the Marine Environment fromLand-Based Pollution and Activities: Gauging the Tide of Global and RegionalGovernance. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law(2008),23:423-452.
[18] Dentand, M. C. and Richter, P., Sub-Regional Cooperation and DevelopmentalRegionalism: The Case of BIMP-EAGA, Contemporary Southeast Asia Vol.33,No.1(2011),29.
[19] Derraik, J. G. B. The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: areview, Marine Pollution Bulletin44(2002)842–852.
[20] Dong OH CHO, Challenges to Marine Debris Management in Korea. CoastalManagement (2005),33:389–409.
[21] Farer, T. and Sisk, T. D., Enhancing International Cooperation: Between Historyand Necessity, Global Governance16(2010),1–12.
[22] Galgani and others, Marine Strategy Framework Directive Task Group10Report:Marine Litter (European Union, IFREMER and ICES (2010)4.
[23] Gormley, N. Standing in the Way of Cooperation: Citizen Standing andCompliance with Environmental Agreements, William and Mary Environmentallaw and Policy Review (2010),397.
[24] Hassan, D. Protecting the Marine Environment from Land-Based Sources ofPollution: Towards Effective International Cooperation, Review of EuropeanCommunity&International Environmental Law (2007), Vol.16Issue3,379-380.2.
[25] Holland, G. and Nauke, M. The Role and Development of Global MarineConventions, Two case Histories, Marine Pollution Bulletin25, no.4(1992):74-79.
[26] Ivanova, Maria,. Institutional design and UNEP reform: historical insights onform, function and financing. International Affairs(2012), Vol.88Issue3,565-584.20.
[27] Ivanova1, M., UNEP in Global Environmental Governance: Design, Leadership,ocation, Global Environmental Politics(2010),10:1,.
[28] Justin P. and Neal B.P. WTO Is Responsible For Marine Debris? TheInternational Politics of Cleaning Our Oceans. Journal of International Affairs(2005), Vol59，no.1.
[29] Kazarian, U. Islands of Garbage Continue to grow in Pacific (2009)7,sustainable Development Law and Policy63.
[30] Kirk, A. E. Noncompliance and the Development of Regimes Addressing MarinePollution from Land-Based Activities, Ocean Development&InternationalLaw(2008),39:235–256.
[31] Kirk, E. A. Sherlock, K. and Reeves, A. D.“SUDS Law: Non-State Actors andthe Haphazard Route to Implementation of International Obligations,” Non-StateActors and International Law4(2004):87-109.
[32] Koh, H. H.“Why Do Nations Obey International Law?”Yale Law Journal106(1996-97):2599-2659.
[33] Koivurova, T. The Arctic Council: A Testing Ground for New InternationalEnvironmental Governance, Brown Journal of World Affairs (2012), vol xix,issue1
[34] Kramer, L. The Contribution of the European Union to Marine PollutionPrevention (2007) Hamburg Studies on Maritime Affairs,1, Volume10,Pollution of the Sea—Prevention and Compensation, Part II, Pages63-83.
[35] Kroepelien, K. F. The Norwegian Barents Sea Management Plan and the ECMarine Strategy Directive: Some Political and Legal Challenges with anEcosystem-Based Approach to the Protection of the European MarineEnvironment. Review of European Community&International EnvironmentalLaw (RECIEL).(2007), Vol.16Issue1, p24-35.12p.
[36] Lattin, L.G. et al.,"A comparison of neustonic plastic and zooplankton atdifferent depths near the southern California shore," Marine Pollution Bulletin(2004),49, no.4.
[37] Lawrence J. The European Union and the Marine Strategy FrameworkDirective: Continuing the Development of European Ocean Use Management.Ocean Development&International Law(2010),41:34-54.
[38] Law, K. L., Moret-Ferguson, S., Maximenko, N. A.,Proskurowski, G., Peacock,E. E., Hafner, J.&Reddy,C. M.2010Plastic Accumulation in the North AtlanticSubtropical Gyre. Science329,1185-1188.
[39] Leous, J.P. and Parry, N.B. Who is Responsible for Marine Debris? TheInternational Politics of Cleaning Our Ocean (2005)59Journal of InternationalAffairs257.
[40] Matthews, E. G. International Law and Policy on Marine EnvironmentalProtection and Management, Trends and Prospects, Marine Pollution Bulletin25,no.1-4(1992):70-73.
[41] Maureen G. Reed Shannon Bruyneel, Rescaling environmental governance,rethinking the state: A three-dimensional review, Progress in Human Geography34(5).
[42] McDermid, J. K. and McMullen, T. L."Quantitative analysis of small-plasticdebris on beaches in the Hawaiian archipelago," Marine Pollution Bulletin(2004)48, no.7-8.
[43] McIlgorm, A. The economic cost and control of marine debris damage in theAsia-Pacific region, Ocean&Coastal Management,(2011)1-9.
[44] Moore, C.J., Synthetic polymers in the marine environment: a rapidly increasing,long-term threat Environmental Research(2008),108,131–139.
[45] Moore, C.J."Trashed: Across the Pacific Ocean, Plastics, Plastics, Everywhere,"Natural History Magazine,(2003).
[46] Moore, C.J."A comparison of plastic and plankton in the North Pacific centralgyre," Marine Pollution Bulletin(2001),42, no.12.
[47] Mushkat, R., Compliance with International Environmental Regimes: ChineseLessons, William and Mary Environmental law and Policy Review (2009-2010),493.
[48] Nollkaemper A.(1994). Laws of the sea. Land-based discharges of marine debris:from local to global regulation. Marine Pollution Bulletin28(11):649-652.
[49] Nordquist, M.H.(ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea1982; ACommentary (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden1990) Vol. IV,412.
[50] Pasi Rinne, Environmental Responsibiliity and Cooperation between Baltic andNorth Sea Municipalities, Marine Pollution Bulletin29, no.6-12(1994):627-630.
[51] Pietri, D. The Arctic Shipping and Environmental Management Agreement: ARegime for Marine Pollution, Coastal Management (2008),36:508–523.
[52] Rathzel, N. and Uzzell, D., Changing relations in global environmental change,Global Environmental Change19(2009)326–335.
[53] Rayfuse, R. and Warner, R., Securing a Sustainable Future for the OceansBeyond National Jurisdiction: The Legal Basis for an Integrated Cross-SectoralRegime for High Seas Governance for the21st Century, The InternationalJournal of Marine and Coastal Law23(2008)399–421.
[54] Rayfuse, R. and Robin W. Securing a Sustainable Future for the Oceans BeyondNational Jurisdiction: The Legal Basis for an Integrated Cross-SectoralRegime for High Seas Governance for the21st Century. The InternationalJournal of Marine and Coastal Law(2008),23:399-421.
[55] Richard A. Barnes, Consolidating Governance Principles for Areas beyondNational Jurisdiction, The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law27(2012)261–290.
[56] Rinne, P. Environmental Responsibility and Cooperation between Baltic andNorth Sea Municipalities, Marine Pollution Bulletin29, no.6-12(1994):627-630.
[57] Sand, P. H. Information Disclosure as an Instrument of EnvironmentalGovernance, Heidelberg Journal of International Law63(2003):487–502
[58] Santiago V. The Legal Dimension of the International Community: HowCommunity Interests Are Protected in International Law. The European Journalof International Law (2010), Vol.21no.2.
[59] Santos, R. I. Marine debris contamination along undeveloped tropical beachesfrom northeast Brazil, Environment Assess (2009)148:455–462.
[60] Schiffman, Howard. A Dual Approach to Ocean Governance: The Cases ofZonal and Integrated Management in International Law of the Sea. AshgateInternational Law Series.(2009) Ashgate Publishing.
[61] Schroeder, M. Forgotten at Sea-An International Call to Combat Islands ofPlastic Waste in the Pacific Ocean (2010)16Southwestern Journal ofInternational Law265.
[62] Steenhard, R. Plastic Soup–What Legal Response to Marine Debris Pollution?On July5,2011· Leave a Comment.
[63] Terttu M. Regional marine environmental management and theGPA-LBA:perspectives and the need for scientific support. Ocean&CoastalManagement(2000),43:713-724.
[64] Trouwborst, A., Managing Marine Litter: Exploring the Evolving Role ofInternational and European Law in Confronting a Persistant EnvironmentalProblem,(2011)27Merkourios–Utrecht Journal of International and EuropeanLaw73,4-18.
[65] Vanderzwaag, D. L. and Powers, A. The Protection of the Marine environmentform Land-Based Pollution and Activities: gauging the Tides of Global andRegional Governance (2008)23, International Journal of Marine and CoastalLaw423.
[66] VanDeveer, S D., and Geoff D. It’s Capacity, Stupid: International AssistanceandNational Implementation. Global Environmental Politics2001(2):18–28.
[67] Verlaan, P., Current Legal Developments London Convention and LondonProtocol, The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law26(2011)185–194.
[68] Villalpando, S.The Legal Dimension of the nternational Community: HowCommunity Interests Are Protected in International Law. The European Journalof International Law(2010) Vol.21no.2. EJIL.
[69] Vinuales, J. E., Legal Techniques for Dealing with Scientific Uncertainty inEnvironmental Law, Vand. J. Transnat'l L (2010).437.
[70] Vinuales, J. E. Legal Techniques for Dealing with Scientific Uncertainty inEnvironmental Law,43Vanderbil Tournal of Transna Tional Law(2010),437..
[71] Waves of Change: Global Lessons to Inspire Local Action,5th InternationalMarine Debris Conference, Honolulu, Hawai’I,（2011）,20-25.
[72] Weiss, E. B. Conclusions: Understanding Compliance and Soft Law, inCommitment and Compliance: The Role of Non-Binding Norms in theInternational Legal System, ed. D. Shelton (Oxford: Oxford University Press,2000),535–553.
[73] Weinstein, S. Main Ingredient in Marine Soup: Eliminating Plastic Bag PollutionThrough Consumer Disincentive,40California Western International LawJournal (2009-2010),291-333.
[74] Winchester, N. B., Emerging Global Environmental Governance, IndianaJournal of Global Legal Studies (2009) Vol.161.
[75] Yasumasa K. Evaluating Regional Environmental Governance in NortheastAsia. Asian Affairs（2010），37:1-25.
[76] Yen-Chiang Chang, International Legal Obligations in Relation to Good OceanGovernance, Chinese Journal of International Law (2010),589–605.
[1] GREENPEACE(2006). Plastic Debris in the World’s Oceans.
[2] NATUR VARDS VERKET/GPA(2001). Marine Litter: trash that kills.
[3] UNEP/GPA (2006). Financing the implementation of regional seas conventionsand action plans: A guide for national action.
[4] UNEP/GPA (2006). Implementation of the GPA at regional level: The role ofregional seas conventions and their protocols.
[5] UNEP/GPA (2006). The State of the Marine Environment: trends and processes
[6] UNEP (2005). Marine Litter: An Analytical Overview. United NationsEnvironment Programme.
[7] UNEP (2007).National Marine Debris Monitoring Program.
[8] UNEP (2009). Marine Litter: A Global Challenge. United Nations EnvironmentProgramme.
[9] UNEP (2009). Guidelines on the Use of Market-based Instruments to Address theProblem of Marine Litter.
[10] UNEP (2009). Abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gear.
[11] UNEP (2009).UNEP/IOC Guidelines on Survey and Monitoring of MarineLitter.
[12] UNEP (2009). UNEP’s Global Initiative on Marine Litter. United NationsEnvironment Programme.
[13] UNEP (2010). ANNUAL REPORT.
[14] UNEP/GPA (2011). Global Programme of Action for the Protection of theMarine Environment from Land-based Activities.
[15] UNEP (2011).UNEP YEARBOOK: Emerging Issues in Our Global Environment
[16] UNEP(2011). The Other70%: UNEP Marine and Coastal Strategy.
[17] UNEP(2011). Marine Debris as a Global Environmental Problem: Introducing asolution based framework focused on plastic.
[18] UNEP (2013).UNEP Yearbook: Emerging Issues in Our Global Environment.
[19] UNEP (2013): United Nations Environment Programme Medium-term Strategy2010–2013, UNEP/GCSS.X/8.
[1] Algalita Marine Research Foundation,"Plastic Debris Rivers to Sea Project," athttp://plasticdebris.org/(29October2011).
[2] Andrady, L. A. Plastics and Their Impacts in the Marine Environment,2000, athttp://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Ocean/Plastics-Impacts-Marine-Andrady6aug00.htm (29October2011).
[3] Conservation Science Institute,"Marine Debris," athttp://www.conservationinstitute.org/marinedebris.htm (30October2011).
[4] http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/debris/(29October2011).
[5] http://www.oceans. greenpeace.org.(29October2011)
[6] Canada's National Programme of Action for the Protection of the MarineEnvironment from Land Based Activities (NPA),"Marine Debris in Canada:Facts and Figures,"2003, at http://www.ec.gc.ca/marine/debris/eng/facts.htm (13August2012).
[7] The London Convention1972, Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollutionby Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter,1972, Revised14December2003, athttp://www.londonconvention.org/(18October2012).
3邵鹏.全球治理：理论与实践[M]，吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2010，第67页。
1蔡中丽，李细峰.海洋塑料污染问题研究概况，环境科学进展，1994.
2毛达.海洋垃圾污染及其治理的历史演变，云南师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版)，2010.
3F Galgani and others, Marine Strategy Framework Directive Task Group10Report: Marine Litter(Europ eanUnion, IFREMER and ICES2010)4.
4Wurpel, G., Van D. A, Pors, J..&Wolde, T., A.(2011).Plastics do not belong in the ocean. Towards a roadmapfor a clean North Sea. IMSA Amsterdam.
1Law, K. L., Moret-Ferguson, S., Maximenko, N. A.,Proskurowski, G., Peacock, E. E., Hafner, J.&Reddy,C. M.2010Plastic Accumulation in the North AtlanticSubtropical Gyre. Science329,1185-1188.
2见Murray, F.&Cowie, P. R.2011Plastic contaminationin the decapod crustacean Nephropsnorvegicus(Linnaeus,1758). Marine Pollution Bulletin62,1207-1217.Ozdilek,2006Impact of accumulatedbeach litteron Chelonia mydas L.1758(green turtle) hatch lingsof the Samandag coast, Hatay, Turkey.Fresenius Environmental Bulletin15,95-103.
1Barnes, D. K. A., Galgani, F., Thompson, R. C.&Barlaz, M.2009Accumulation and fragmentation ofplasticdebris in global environments. PhilosophicalTransactions of the Royal Society B364,1985-1998.
1Pasi R., Environmental Responsibiliity and Cooperation between Baltic and North Sea Municipalities, MarinePollution Bulletin29, no.6-12(1994):627-630.
1UNEP.(2009) Marine litter: A global challenge. Nairobi: UNEP.
11973/1978，1974年1月15日签署，1983年10月2日生效。
2《防止倾倒废物及其物质污染海洋公约》（伦敦公约），1972年11月13日通过，1974年8月30日生效。议定书与1996年11月7日通过，2006年3月24日生效。2003年12月14日修订，其议定书于1996年
11月7日通过，2006年3月24日生效。
3《控制危险废物越境转移及其处置巴塞尔公约》，1989年3月22日签署，1992年5月5日生效。
4《联合国海洋法公约》（UNCLOS公约），1982年12月10日通过，1994年11月16日生效。
5Boyle, Alan Marine Pollution Under the Law of the Sea, The American Journal of International Law79, no.20(1985):347-372.
6Carpenter, E. J.,&Smith, K. L.(1972). Science,175(27),1240-1241.
1MAPOL公约附则V：防止船源垃圾污染规定（1988年12月31日生效）。
2修正案在2010年10月召开的IMO海洋环境保护委员会（MEPC）第61次会议上被批准，并于2011年7月的第62次会议上正式通过。
1Shomura, R. S.,&Yoshida, H.O.(eds.)(1984).Proceedings of the international research workshop on the fateand impact of marine debris. Honolulu, Hawaii: NOAA.
12008年的A/63/111，第16条。
3Andre N., Land-Based Discharges of Marine Debris: From Local to Global Regulation, Marine PollutionBulletin29, no.11(1994):649-652.
4Underwood, A. J.(1995).Ecological.Application.,5(1),232-247.(1998). Landscape And Urban Planning,40
(1-3),123-130.
1UNEP（2006）, The State of the Marine Environment: Trends and processes,28.
1《东北大西洋海洋环境保护公约》(简称OSPAR公约)，1992年生效。
2《欧盟海洋政策框架指令》（简称MSFD），2000年生效。
3Ducrotoy, J. P.,&Elliott, M.(2008). Mar. Pollut. Bull.,57(1-5),8-21.
4European Parliament Council (2008).Directive2008/56/EC (marine strategy framework derective), Officialjournal of the European union.
5关于这两个原则参见http://www.ospar.org/content/conten.asp?menu=003201090000000_000000_000000.
6Directive2008/56.EC.
1UNEP（2006）,‘The State of the Marine Environment: Trends and processes’,28.
2转引自[美]奥兰扬著，陈玉刚、薄燕译.世界事务中的治理，上海世纪出版集团2007，第56页。
1张小平.全球环境治理的法律框架[M].北京：法律出版社，2008，第6页。
1参见伦敦公约，第6(1)(d),7(3),8,9,14(4)(b)(d)条。
1UNEP/GPA (2006).The state of the marine environment.Trends and processes. The Hague: UNEP/GPA.
2该说认为国际法在解决全球环境问题中只起到30%的作用。Bodansky, D., The Art and Craft of InternationalEnvironmental Law (Harvard University Press2009)24-27.转引自Trouwborst, A., Managing Marine Litter:Exploring the Evolving Role of International and European Law in Confronting a Persistant EnvironmentalProblem,(2011)27Merkourios–Utrecht Journal of International and European Law73,4-18.
2匈牙利诉捷克苏络伐克，“加布奇科沃-大毛罗斯项目案”(1997) ICJ Rep.7.
1参见陈德恭《现代国际海洋法》和屈广清《海洋法》（第二版）等著作和教材的基本原则部分。
2Open-ended Informal Working Group to Study Issues Relating to the Conservation and Sustainable Use ofMarine Biological Diversity Beyond Areas of National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Working Group).An almost identicallist of such principles was provided to the2010BBNJ Working Group by Spain in Making an intervention onbehalf of the European Union (EU) and its Member States.46
2Richard A. Barnes, Consolidating Governance Principles for Areas beyond National Jurisdiction, TheInternational Journal ofMarine and Coastal Law27(2012)261–290.
1Treves, T.,‘Principles and Objectives of the Legal Regime Governing Areas Beyond NationalJurisdiction’ inElferink, A.G. O. and Molenaar, E.J.(eds.), The International Regime of AreasBeyond National Jurisdiction:Current and Future Developments (Martinus Nijhoff, Leiden,2010),7–25, at12.
1Oceans and the Law of the Sea; Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on4December2009(A/RES/64/71of12March2010) para.112.
1《保护东北大西洋海洋环境公约》，1992年9月22日通过，1998年3月25日生效。
1Juda, L.‘Considerations in Developing a Functional Approach to the Governance of Large Marine Ecosystems’,30(Ocean Development and International Law)(OEIL),89(1991).
1参见1991年《<南极条约>环境保护议定书》。
1见also Rayfuse, R. and Warner, R.‘Securing a Sustainable Future for the Oceans Beyond National Jurisdiction:
The Legal Basis for an Integrated Cross-sectoral Regime for High Seas Governance for the21st Century’(2008)
23, International Journal for Marine and Coastal Law,399–421at408-411.
2见Rayfuse, R. and Warner, R.‘Securing a Sustainable Future for the Oceans Beyond National Jurisdiction: TheLegal Basis for an Integrated Cross-sectoral Regime for High Seas Governance for the21st Century’(2008)23,International Journal for Marine and Coastal Law,399–421at408-409.
1Ibid., quoting from Independent World Commission on the Oceans, The Oceans: Our Future (CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge1998),17.
1[法]亚历山大.基斯，张若思编译.国际环境法，法律出版社2000，第13页。
2[法]亚历山大.基斯，张若思编译.国际环境法，法律出版社2000，第13页。
3那力.国际环境法中体现人类共同利益的概念与国际法的发展[J]．载赵建文主编.国际法研究文集（第四卷），2011，第105页。
1民主刚果诉比利时逮捕令案，ICJ Reports (2002). Arrest Warrant of11April2000, Joint Separate Opinion ofJudges Higgins, Kooijmans and Buergenthal.
1这方面的研究参见Ragazzi, M. The Concept of International Obligations Erga Omnes (1997); Tams, C.J.Enforcing Obligations Erga Omnes in International Law (2005); Crawford,‘Multilateral Rights and Obligationsin International Law’,319Recueil des cours (2006)325.
2见“巴塞罗那电车案”（Barcelona Traction Case）判决，ICJ Reports,1970.
3Reservations to the Convention on Genocide, Advisory opinion [1951] ICJ Rep.23.
4South West Africa (Ethiopia v. South Africa; Liberia v. South Africa), Second Phase, Judgment [1966] ICJ Rep.
51, at paras99and100.
1公约第194条。
2伦敦公约第1条。
1譬如说，关于1987年《关于消耗臭氧层物质的蒙特利尔议定书》第5条第1项和关于1985年5月24日的地球气候变化的UNEP决议第11项e的确定上，一些发展中国家提出一些条件作为加入的保留。
1[2001] II Yrbk Int’l Law comm., Pt2, at35, para.8of the commentary to Art.2.
2[1998] II Yrbk Int’l Law comm., Pt2, at75, paras317-318and at67,para.265.
3国家责任条款草案,第48条。
4国家责任条款草案，第40和41条。
1现阶段国际法总体上不认可这种损害危险的责任，因为国家普遍不情愿。
2参见Yearbook of the ILC,1978, vol. II, part2, p.149.
3[意]安东尼奥卡塞斯（Antonio Cassese）著，蔡从燕等译：《国际法》，法律出版社，2009,10.
4新西兰和澳大利亚诉法国核试验案（（Nuclear Tests Case, Australia v. France）），ICJ Reports,1974.
1关于公益诉讼（actio popularis）法理问题的讨论，源于1966年《西南非洲案》（2段），该案判决结果否定了公益诉讼的国际法地位。
2国际法委员会关于国家责任的条款草案（2000），第43、49条，参见Rept. of ILC(2000), GAOR A/55/10,第IV章，第114-150、242-289段。
3参见[意]安东尼奥卡塞斯（Antonio Cassese）著，蔡从燕等译.国际法，法律出版社，2009,第357页。
1Boyle, in, Wetterstein (ed.), Harm to the Environment, at95ff, but compare Leigh,14Australian Yearbook ofInternational Law(YIL)(1993), at143-145.
2国家责任条款草案,第40-41条。
1参见[意]安东尼奥卡塞斯（Antonio Cassese）著，蔡从燕等译.国际法，法律出版社，2009,第355页。
2国际法院判例汇编（ICJ Rep）(1974).
3UNCLOS公约第204-206条。
1[英]波尼﹒波伊尔.国际法与环境，那力编译.高教出版社,2007,第185页。
2Armed Activities on the Territory of the Congo (New Application:2002)(Democratic Republic of the Congo v.Rwanda), Jurisdiction and admissibility, Judgment of3F(2006).,at para.64.
3国家责任法草案,第48条。
4见art.54[2000] Ii Yrbk Int’l Law Comm., Pt2, at70-71.
1比如1950年的《欧洲人权公约》、1957年的《欧共体条约》、1969年的《美洲国家间人权公约》、1965年的《消除一切形式种族歧视国际公约》和1965年的《投资争端解决公约》。
2参见《海洋法公约》第99条。
3[意]安东尼奥卡塞斯（Antonio Cassese）著，蔡从燕等译.国际法，法律出版社，2009，第315页。
4同上。
5[英]马尔科姆N肖（Malcolm N. Shaw），白桂梅等译.国际法，北京大学出版社2011，第158页。
1Moore, C. J., Synthetic polymers in the marine environment: a rapidly increasing, long-term threat.Environmental Research(2008).108,131–139.
1缅因湾计划（GPAC）是由环境合作委员会设立的执行GPA的“航海计划”，它延续了一直以来的自愿特征。但是现在其职责由缅因湾委员会议承担。参见缅因湾关于海洋环境行动计划的会议内容，
（2007-2012）http://www.gulfofmaine.org.
2Haas, P.M.“Why Comply, or Some Hypotheses in Search of an Analyst” in International Compliance withNonbinding Accords, Transnational Legal Policy Studies No.29, ed. E. Brown Weiss (Washington DC:American Society of International Law,1997),21; and A. Chayes and A.H. Chayes,“On Compliance,”International Organization47(1993):175-205.
3Jacobson, H.K. and Weiss, E. B.“A Framework for Analysis,” in Engaging Countries: Strengthening Compliancewith International Environmental Accords, ed. Weiss, E. B. and Jacobson, H. K.(Cambridge, MA: MIT Press,1998),4.
1见Cogan, J. K. Non-Compliance and the International Rule of Law, Yale Journal of International Law31
(2006):207.
1United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP)/GPA, The State of the Marine Envrionment: Trends and
Processes (The Hague: UNEP/GPA,2006).
2Helsinki Commission (2003).报告将“遵约”（compliance）和“执行”（implementation）交互使用。
3Helsinki commission, Activities2006Overview, Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings, Baltic Sea environment
Proceedings, No.112(BSEP No.112)(Helsinki: Helsinki Commission,2007), at43.
4Gulf of Maine council on the Marine Environment, Action Plan2007-2012(Gulf of Maine Council on the
Marine Environment,2007),27.另见Tides of Change, supra note29, at33.
5Canadian Council of Ministers of the environment,“Municipal Wastewater Effluent in Canada”(December2006), at ii and2, available at www.ccme.ca/assets/pdf/mwwegeneralbackgroundere.pdf.
1Sand, P. H.‘Information Disclosure as an Instrument of Environmental Governance’, Heidelberg Journal ofInternational Law63(2003):487–502.
1Helsinki Convention, art.6.
4HELCOM Recommendation24/3,”Measures Aimed at the Reduction of Emissions and Discharges fromAgriculture”(25June2003), para.1(a).
5Ibid., paras.2and3.
1Helsinki Commission, The Third Baltic Sea Pollution Load Compilation (PLC3), Baltic Sea EnvironmentProceedings, No.70(BSEP No.70)(Helsinki: Helsinki Commission,1998), preface at3.
2UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring Center (WCMC), A Survey of Global and Regional MarineEnvironmental Assessments and Related Scientific Activities (2003), at8, available atwww.unep-wcmc.org/marine/GMA.
3Helsinki Commission2003, at2; at27.
4BSEP No.112.
1BSEP, No. at8.
2(UNEP)/GPA, The State of the Marine Environment: Trends and Processes (The Hague: UNEP/GPA,2006), at37.
3Helsinki Commission, BSEP No.112, at43.
4Birnie, P. and Boyle, A.. International Law and the Environment,2d ed.(Oxford: Oxford University Press,2002),355.
1见Coordinating Body of the Seas of East Asia (Cobsea), available at www.cobsea.org/index.html.
2Sand, P. H. Institution-Building to Assist Compliance with International Environmental Law: Perspectives,Heidelberg Journal of International Law56(1996):775.
1Gulf of Maine Council on the Marine Environment2007, at29.
2见Vinogradov, S. E. Kirk, A. and Emeseh, E. Implementation of the GPA at Regional Level: The Role ofRegional Seas Conventions and Their Protocols (The Hague: UNEP/GPA,2006).
3Brunnee J. and Toope, S. J. Environmental Security and Freshwater Resources: Ecosystem Regime Building,American Journal of International law91(1997):26-59.
4见, for example, Bodansky D., The Legitimacy of International Governance: A Coming Challenge forInternational Environmental Law?” American Journal of International Law93(1999):596-624.
5关于这六个因素的解释，参见Franck, T. M. The Power of Legitimacy Among Nations (Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press,1990), note67-71.
6Brunn′ee, J. and Toope, S. J.“International Law and Constructivism: Elements of an Interactional Theory ofInternational Law,” Columbia Journal of Transnational Law39(2000):19–74.
1Brunn′ee, J. and Toope, S. J. Environmental Security and Freshwater Resources: Ecosystem Regime Building,American Journal of International Law91(1997):26–59.
2Helsinki commission2003, at2.
1见Ko h H. H.,“Why Do Nations Obey International Law?”Yale Law Journal106(1996-97):2599-2659.
2Helsinki Commission2003, at2.
3UNEP/GPA, Progress in Implementing the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marineenvironment from Land-Based Activities at the International, Regional and National Levels in the Period2002-2006, UNEP/GPA/IGR.2/2(9August2006),2006.
4见UNEP/GPA, Guidance on the Implementation of the Global Programme of Action for the Protection of theMarine Environment form Land-Based Activities for2007-2011: Global Programme of Action Contribution tothe Internationally Agreed Goals and Targets for the Sustainable Development of Oceans, Coasts and Islands,UNEP/GPA/IGR.2/3(21July2006).
5Helsinki commission, The Review of More Specific Targets to Reach the Goal Set Up in the1988/1998Ministerial Declarations Regarding Nutrients, Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings, No.89(BSEP No.89)(Helsinki: Helsinki Commission,2003).
6HELCOM Ministerial Declaration (HELCOM Bremen Declaration), adopted on25June2003in Bremenby theHELCOM Ministerial Meeting, sec. VI,见www.helcom.fi.
7HELCOM Recommendation24/3.
1Raustilia, K. Reporting and Review Institutions in10Multilateral Envieonmental Agreements (UNEP,2001),reproducedin Making Law Work: Environmental Compliance and Sustainable Development, ed. D. Zaelke, D.Kaniaru, and E. Kruzikova (London: Cameron May,2005), at230.
2Mitchell, R.B. Compliance Theory: An Overview, in Improving Compliance with International EnvironmentalLaw, ed. Camerson,J. Werksman, J. and Roderick P.(London: Earthscan,1996),11.
3例如，见Montreal Protocol on Substances that deplete the Ozaone Layer, Article7, International LegalMaterials26(1987):1550, as amended in London1990, Copenhagen1992, Montreal1997, and Beijing1999;amended text available at www.unep.ch/ozone/treaties.shtml.
4Ibid., at60-61.
5Gulf of Maine Council on the Marine Environment, Action Plan2001-2006(Gulf of Maine Council on theMarine Environment,2002), at21.
6见Strategic Action Programme for the South China Sea (Draft Version3,24February1999UNEP SCS/SAPVer.3), available at www.nuep.org/unep/regoffs/roap/eaasrcu/publication/sap V3.doc; and Commission on theProtection of the Black Sea Against Pollution, State of the Environment of the Black Sea: Pressures and Trends1996-2000, available at www.blacksea-commission.org/main.htm.
7见HELCOM MONAS at http://www.HELCOM.fi.
1Mitchell, R. B.“Sources of Transparency: Information systems in International Regimes,” International StudiesQuarterly42(1998):113.
2见HELCOM Periodic Assessments of State of the Marine Environment discussed in Helsinki CommissionBSEP No.82A; and BSEP No.35A.还见Environment Canada.
3见reporting under the1974Convention for the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Land-Based Sources Paris
4th June1974, International Legal Materials13(1974):352, as discussed in A. Kiss, Reporting Obligations andAssessment of Reports, in Beyerlin et al., at237.
4Helsinki Commission, BSEP No.35A, at25.
5见the diagram in Helsinki Commission, BSEP No.82A, at4.
1the Northeast Atlantic Region regime where the OSPAR commission’s “Strategy for a Joint Assessment andMonitoring Programme,” Reference No.2003-22,2006rev., addresses this issue.
2Helsinki Commission, BSEP No.82A, at20.
3Canada NPA, at11.
4GESAMP Report No.71, at3.
5Environment Canada, National Indicators and Reporting Office Steering Committee, Environmental Signals:Canada’s National Environmental Indicator Series (2003), available at www.ec.gc.ca/soer-ree.
1Kirk, E. A. Sherlock, K. and Reeves, A. D.“SUDS Law: Non-State Actors and the Haphazard Route toImplementation of International Obligations,”Non-State Actors and International Law4(2004):87-109.
1[意]安东尼奥卡塞斯（Antonio Cassese）著，蔡从燕等译.国际法，法律出版社，2009，第11页。
1保护地中海免受污染公约《巴塞罗那公约》，1976年通过，区域性框架条约。
1VanDeveer, S. D.2000. Protecting Europe’s Seas: Lessons from the Past25Years. Environment42(6):10–26.
2关于体制的有效性问题可以参见[美]奥兰扬(Young, O. R.)著，陈玉刚、薄燕译：《世界事务中的治理》，上海世纪出版集团2007年8月版，第五章。
3Weiss, E. B. and Jacobson, H.1998. Engaging Countries: Strengthening Compliancewith InternationalEnvironmental Accords. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
4VanDeveer, S. D., and Dabelko, G.2001. It’s Capacity, Stupid: International Assistanceand NationalImplementation. Global Environmental Politics1(2):18–28.
1Raustiala, Kal.1997. States, NGOs, and International Environmental Institutions. International Studies Quarterly
41:719–740.
1关于基本博弈理论和国际合作方面内容，参见Kenneth A. Oye, Explaining Cooperation Under Anarchy:Hypotheses and Strategies6-9(1985).
2见generally Joseph R. B, Daniel H&Gary D. Libecap, Public Choice Issues in Collective Action: ConstituentGroup Pressures and International global Warming regulation, International center for economic researchWorking Paper, June20,2000.
1Neil Gormley, Standing in the Way of Cooperation: Citizen Standing and Compliance with EnvironmentalAgreements,16Hastings William and Mary Environmental law and Policy Review,3972010.
2Chantal Thomas, Trade-related Labor and Environmental Agreements?, Journal of International Economic Law,
791.(2002).
3见generally William F. Shughart II, Katrinanomics: The Politics and Economics of Disaster Relief,127Pub
Choice31(2006).
1UNEP’s Mid-Term Strategy&Marine and Coastal Strategy，10th Meeting of the Regional Seas Conventions&Action Plans,2008,25-27.
[1][美]奥兰·扬.陈玉刚，薄燕译.世界事务中的治理[M].上海：上海世纪出版集团，2007.
[2][意]安东尼奥·卡塞斯.蔡从燕等译.国际法[M].北京：法律出版社，2009.
[3][英]波尼波义尔.那力，王彦志等译.国际法与环境（第二版）[M].北京：高等教育出版社，2007.
[4]陈德恭.现代国际海洋法[M].北京：海洋出版社，2009.
[5]傅崐成等.弗吉尼亚大学海洋法论文三十年精选集1977-2007（第三卷）[C].厦门：厦门大学出版社，2009.
[6]傅崐成编校.海洋法相关公约及中英文索引[M].福建：厦门大学出版社，2005.
[7]谷德近.多边环境协定的资金机制[M].北京：法律出版社，2008.
[8][美]杰克戈·德史密斯.埃里克·波斯纳，龚宇译.国际法的局限性[M].北京：法律出版社，2010.
[9]李可.马克思恩格斯环境法哲学初探[M].北京：法律出版社，2006.
[10]刘中民.国际海洋环境制度导论[M].北京：海洋出版社，2007.
[11][英]马尔科姆·N·肖.白桂梅，高健军等译.国际法（上、下）[M].北京：北京大学出版社，2011.
[12]那力.国际环境法[M].北京：科学出版社，2005.
[13]那力，何志鹏. WTO与环境保护[M].长春：吉林人民出版社，2002.
[14]屈广清，曲波主编.海洋法（第二版）[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社，2011.
[15]邵沙平、余敏友.国际法问题专论[M].武汉：武汉大学出版社，2002.
[16]邵鹏.全球治理：理论与实践[M].长春：吉林出版集团有限责任公司，2010.
[17]苏长和.全球公共问题与国际合作：一种制度的分析[M].上海：上海人民出版社，2009.
[18]万霞.国际环境法案例评析[M].北京：中国政法大学出版社，2011.
[19]王前军.国际环境合作问题分析[M].北京：中国环境科学出版社，2007.
[20]王秀梅.国家对国际社会整体的义务[M].北京：法律出版社，2009
[21]伍亚荣.国际环境保护领域内的国家责任及其实现[M].北京：法律出版社，
[22]小田繁郎[日]著.我们时代的海洋法，1979.
[23]徐祥民，申进忠.海洋环境的法律保护研究[M].青岛：青岛海洋大学出版社，2006.
[24]张海文等绘制.《联合国海洋法公约》图解[M].北京：法律出版社，2010.
[25]张小平.全球环境治理的法律框架[M].北京：法律出版社，2008.
[26]张晓君，张辉.生态环境保护的国际法理论与实践[M].厦门：厦门大学出版社，2006.
[27]朱庆林，郭佩芳，张越美.海洋环境保护[M].青岛：中国海洋大学出版社，2011.
[28]朱庆林等编著.海洋环境保护[M].北京：中国海洋大学出版社，2011.
[1]陈斌.基于太平洋塑料垃圾带的经济损失分析研究[J]．生态经济，2010（06）.
[2]广部和也[日]，沈重译.海洋污染与国际条约[J]．国外法学，1980（05）.
[3]李刚.海洋治污的法律（上、下）[J]．中国远洋航务公告，2004（10）.
[4]毛达.海洋垃圾污染及其治理的历史演变[J]．云南师范大学学报（哲学社会科学版），2010（11）.
[5]那力.国际环境法中体现人类共同利益的概念与国际法的发展[J]．载赵建文主编.国际法研究（第四卷）[M].北京：中国人民公安大学出版社，2011.
[6]王小波.海洋垃圾知多少[J]．航海，1992（04）.
[7]王志雄.全球性和地区性海洋环境保护国际公约[J]．海洋与海岸带开发，1992（01）.138
[8]许健.论国际合作原则在国际环境保护领域的拓展[J]．天津大学学报（社会科学版），2010（05）.
[9]姚莹.东北亚区域海洋环境合作路径选择[J]．当代法学，2010（05）.
[10]佚名.海洋垃圾助长物种入侵[J]．防灾博览，2002（05）.
[11]易琪.论海洋环境污染的国际立法[J]．法制与社会，2008（18）.
[12]赵守梁.论海洋环境保护的国际合作[J]．齐鲁渔业，2005（12）.
[13]郑金林.世界海洋委员会的成立宗旨[J]．海洋信息，1996（01）.
[1]代云江.陆源污染物污染海洋环境防治法律制度研究[D]．硕士论文.青岛：中国海洋大学，2008.
[2]范晓丽.海洋环境保护的法律制度与国际合作[D]．博士论文.北京：中国政法大学，2003.
[3]高益民.海洋环境保护若干基本问题研究[D]．博士论文.青岛：中国海洋大学，2008.
[4]李刚.论海洋污染责任认定及赔偿[D]．博士论文.北京：中国政法大学，2006.
[5]金正九.东北亚海域环境污染防治的国际合作[D]．博士论文.大连：大连海事大学，2011.
[6]张晨.海洋污染防治的中的国际合作研究[D]．博士论文.青岛：中国海洋大学，2009.
[1] Alian, S.&Molcard, A. Hitch-hiking on floating marine debris: macrobenthicspecies in the Western Mediterranean Sea, Hydrobiologia(2003),503:59–67.
[2] Andrady, A. L. Microplastics in the marine environment, Marine PollutionBulletin62(2011)1596–1605.
[3] Andre, N. Land-Based Discharges of Marine Debris: From Local to GlobalRegulation Marine Pollution Bulletin29, no.11(1994):649-652
[4] Andrea L. M., Core Rules of Internatioanl environmental Law, Hein Online--16ILSA J. Int'l&Comp (2009-2010). L.257.
[5] Arevalo, L. B. The Work of The International law Ommission in the Field ofInternational Environmental Law, Environmental Affairs (2009), Vol.32:493.
[6] Barnes D.K.A. and others, Accumulation and Fragmentation of Plastic Debris inGlobal Environments (2009)364Philosophical Transactions of the Royal SocietyB1985,1995.
[7] Birnie, P. and Boyle, A. International Law and the Environment,2d ed.(Oxford:Oxford University Press,2002),355.
[8] Bliss, A. Marine Debris: Engaging Activities to Promote Awareness, ConferencePapers--North American Association of Environmental Education;2009AnnualMeeting,1,0.
[9] Boelens, R. G. V. From Policies to Science, Strategies for Marine EnvironmentalProtection, Marine Pollution Bulletin25,1-4(1992):14-17.
[10] Bork, K. The Legal Regulation of Floats and Gliders—In Quest of a NewRegime?, Ocean Development&International Law(2008).,39:298–328
[11] Boyle, A. Marine Pollution Under the Law of the Sea, The American Journal ofInternational Law，79, no.20(1985):347-372.
[12] Brachtha, C. Explaining global governance—a complexity perspective, ambridgeReview of International Affairs,(2011), Volume24, Number2.
[13] Brunnee J. and Toope, S. J.“Environmental Security and Freshwater Resources:Ecosystem Regime Building”, American Journal of International law91(1997):26-59.
[14] Candidate, J.D. A Sea Change to Change The Sea: Stopping The Spread of ThePacific garbage Patch With Small-Scale Environmental Legislation, WilliamandMary Law Review, Vol.51:1959.
[15] Cole, M. Microplastics as contaminants in the marine environment: A review,Marine Pollution Bulletin62(2011)2588–2597.
[16] Coulter, J.R. A Sea Change to Change the Sea: Stopping the Spread of thePacific Garbage Patch with Small-scale Environmental Legislation (2010)51William and Mary Law Review1959.
[17] David L.V. and Ann P. The Protection of the Marine Environment fromLand-Based Pollution and Activities: Gauging the Tide of Global and RegionalGovernance. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law(2008),23:423-452.
[18] Dentand, M. C. and Richter, P., Sub-Regional Cooperation and DevelopmentalRegionalism: The Case of BIMP-EAGA, Contemporary Southeast Asia Vol.33,No.1(2011),29.
[19] Derraik, J. G. B. The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: areview, Marine Pollution Bulletin44(2002)842–852.
[20] Dong OH CHO, Challenges to Marine Debris Management in Korea. CoastalManagement (2005),33:389–409.
[21] Farer, T. and Sisk, T. D., Enhancing International Cooperation: Between Historyand Necessity, Global Governance16(2010),1–12.
[22] Galgani and others, Marine Strategy Framework Directive Task Group10Report:Marine Litter (European Union, IFREMER and ICES (2010)4.
[23] Gormley, N. Standing in the Way of Cooperation: Citizen Standing andCompliance with Environmental Agreements, William and Mary Environmentallaw and Policy Review (2010),397.
[24] Hassan, D. Protecting the Marine Environment from Land-Based Sources ofPollution: Towards Effective International Cooperation, Review of EuropeanCommunity&International Environmental Law (2007), Vol.16Issue3,379-380.2.
[25] Holland, G. and Nauke, M. The Role and Development of Global MarineConventions, Two case Histories, Marine Pollution Bulletin25, no.4(1992):74-79.
[26] Ivanova, Maria,. Institutional design and UNEP reform: historical insights onform, function and financing. International Affairs(2012), Vol.88Issue3,565-584.20.
[27] Ivanova1, M., UNEP in Global Environmental Governance: Design, Leadership,ocation, Global Environmental Politics(2010),10:1,.
[28] Justin P. and Neal B.P. WTO Is Responsible For Marine Debris? TheInternational Politics of Cleaning Our Oceans. Journal of International Affairs(2005), Vol59，no.1.
[29] Kazarian, U. Islands of Garbage Continue to grow in Pacific (2009)7,sustainable Development Law and Policy63.
[30] Kirk, A. E. Noncompliance and the Development of Regimes Addressing MarinePollution from Land-Based Activities, Ocean Development&InternationalLaw(2008),39:235–256.
[31] Kirk, E. A. Sherlock, K. and Reeves, A. D.“SUDS Law: Non-State Actors andthe Haphazard Route to Implementation of International Obligations,” Non-StateActors and International Law4(2004):87-109.
[32] Koh, H. H.“Why Do Nations Obey International Law?”Yale Law Journal106(1996-97):2599-2659.
[33] Koivurova, T. The Arctic Council: A Testing Ground for New InternationalEnvironmental Governance, Brown Journal of World Affairs (2012), vol xix,issue1
[34] Kramer, L. The Contribution of the European Union to Marine PollutionPrevention (2007) Hamburg Studies on Maritime Affairs,1, Volume10,Pollution of the Sea—Prevention and Compensation, Part II, Pages63-83.
[35] Kroepelien, K. F. The Norwegian Barents Sea Management Plan and the ECMarine Strategy Directive: Some Political and Legal Challenges with anEcosystem-Based Approach to the Protection of the European MarineEnvironment. Review of European Community&International EnvironmentalLaw (RECIEL).(2007), Vol.16Issue1, p24-35.12p.
[36] Lattin, L.G. et al.,"A comparison of neustonic plastic and zooplankton atdifferent depths near the southern California shore," Marine Pollution Bulletin(2004),49, no.4.
[37] Lawrence J. The European Union and the Marine Strategy FrameworkDirective: Continuing the Development of European Ocean Use Management.Ocean Development&International Law(2010),41:34-54.
[38] Law, K. L., Moret-Ferguson, S., Maximenko, N. A.,Proskurowski, G., Peacock,E. E., Hafner, J.&Reddy,C. M.2010Plastic Accumulation in the North AtlanticSubtropical Gyre. Science329,1185-1188.
[39] Leous, J.P. and Parry, N.B. Who is Responsible for Marine Debris? TheInternational Politics of Cleaning Our Ocean (2005)59Journal of InternationalAffairs257.
[40] Matthews, E. G. International Law and Policy on Marine EnvironmentalProtection and Management, Trends and Prospects, Marine Pollution Bulletin25,no.1-4(1992):70-73.
[41] Maureen G. Reed Shannon Bruyneel, Rescaling environmental governance,rethinking the state: A three-dimensional review, Progress in Human Geography34(5).
[42] McDermid, J. K. and McMullen, T. L."Quantitative analysis of small-plasticdebris on beaches in the Hawaiian archipelago," Marine Pollution Bulletin(2004)48, no.7-8.
[43] McIlgorm, A. The economic cost and control of marine debris damage in theAsia-Pacific region, Ocean&Coastal Management,(2011)1-9.
[44] Moore, C.J., Synthetic polymers in the marine environment: a rapidly increasing,long-term threat Environmental Research(2008),108,131–139.
[45] Moore, C.J."Trashed: Across the Pacific Ocean, Plastics, Plastics, Everywhere,"Natural History Magazine,(2003).
[46] Moore, C.J."A comparison of plastic and plankton in the North Pacific centralgyre," Marine Pollution Bulletin(2001),42, no.12.
[47] Mushkat, R., Compliance with International Environmental Regimes: ChineseLessons, William and Mary Environmental law and Policy Review (2009-2010),493.
[48] Nollkaemper A.(1994). Laws of the sea. Land-based discharges of marine debris:from local to global regulation. Marine Pollution Bulletin28(11):649-652.
[49] Nordquist, M.H.(ed.) United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea1982; ACommentary (Martinus Nijhoff Publishers, Leiden1990) Vol. IV,412.
[50] Pasi Rinne, Environmental Responsibiliity and Cooperation between Baltic andNorth Sea Municipalities, Marine Pollution Bulletin29, no.6-12(1994):627-630.
[51] Pietri, D. The Arctic Shipping and Environmental Management Agreement: ARegime for Marine Pollution, Coastal Management (2008),36:508–523.
[52] Rathzel, N. and Uzzell, D., Changing relations in global environmental change,Global Environmental Change19(2009)326–335.
[53] Rayfuse, R. and Warner, R., Securing a Sustainable Future for the OceansBeyond National Jurisdiction: The Legal Basis for an Integrated Cross-SectoralRegime for High Seas Governance for the21st Century, The InternationalJournal of Marine and Coastal Law23(2008)399–421.
[54] Rayfuse, R. and Robin W. Securing a Sustainable Future for the Oceans BeyondNational Jurisdiction: The Legal Basis for an Integrated Cross-SectoralRegime for High Seas Governance for the21st Century. The InternationalJournal of Marine and Coastal Law(2008),23:399-421.
[55] Richard A. Barnes, Consolidating Governance Principles for Areas beyondNational Jurisdiction, The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law27(2012)261–290.
[56] Rinne, P. Environmental Responsibility and Cooperation between Baltic andNorth Sea Municipalities, Marine Pollution Bulletin29, no.6-12(1994):627-630.
[57] Sand, P. H. Information Disclosure as an Instrument of EnvironmentalGovernance, Heidelberg Journal of International Law63(2003):487–502
[58] Santiago V. The Legal Dimension of the International Community: HowCommunity Interests Are Protected in International Law. The European Journalof International Law (2010), Vol.21no.2.
[59] Santos, R. I. Marine debris contamination along undeveloped tropical beachesfrom northeast Brazil, Environment Assess (2009)148:455–462.
[60] Schiffman, Howard. A Dual Approach to Ocean Governance: The Cases ofZonal and Integrated Management in International Law of the Sea. AshgateInternational Law Series.(2009) Ashgate Publishing.
[61] Schroeder, M. Forgotten at Sea-An International Call to Combat Islands ofPlastic Waste in the Pacific Ocean (2010)16Southwestern Journal ofInternational Law265.
[62] Steenhard, R. Plastic Soup–What Legal Response to Marine Debris Pollution?On July5,2011· Leave a Comment.
[63] Terttu M. Regional marine environmental management and theGPA-LBA:perspectives and the need for scientific support. Ocean&CoastalManagement(2000),43:713-724.
[64] Trouwborst, A., Managing Marine Litter: Exploring the Evolving Role ofInternational and European Law in Confronting a Persistant EnvironmentalProblem,(2011)27Merkourios–Utrecht Journal of International and EuropeanLaw73,4-18.
[65] Vanderzwaag, D. L. and Powers, A. The Protection of the Marine environmentform Land-Based Pollution and Activities: gauging the Tides of Global andRegional Governance (2008)23, International Journal of Marine and CoastalLaw423.
[66] VanDeveer, S D., and Geoff D. It’s Capacity, Stupid: International AssistanceandNational Implementation. Global Environmental Politics2001(2):18–28.
[67] Verlaan, P., Current Legal Developments London Convention and LondonProtocol, The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law26(2011)185–194.
[68] Villalpando, S.The Legal Dimension of the nternational Community: HowCommunity Interests Are Protected in International Law. The European Journalof International Law(2010) Vol.21no.2. EJIL.
[69] Vinuales, J. E., Legal Techniques for Dealing with Scientific Uncertainty inEnvironmental Law, Vand. J. Transnat'l L (2010).437.
[70] Vinuales, J. E. Legal Techniques for Dealing with Scientific Uncertainty inEnvironmental Law,43Vanderbil Tournal of Transna Tional Law(2010),437..
[71] Waves of Change: Global Lessons to Inspire Local Action,5th InternationalMarine Debris Conference, Honolulu, Hawai’I,（2011）,20-25.
[72] Weiss, E. B. Conclusions: Understanding Compliance and Soft Law, inCommitment and Compliance: The Role of Non-Binding Norms in theInternational Legal System, ed. D. Shelton (Oxford: Oxford University Press,2000),535–553.
[73] Weinstein, S. Main Ingredient in Marine Soup: Eliminating Plastic Bag PollutionThrough Consumer Disincentive,40California Western International LawJournal (2009-2010),291-333.
[74] Winchester, N. B., Emerging Global Environmental Governance, IndianaJournal of Global Legal Studies (2009) Vol.161.
[75] Yasumasa K. Evaluating Regional Environmental Governance in NortheastAsia. Asian Affairs（2010），37:1-25.
[76] Yen-Chiang Chang, International Legal Obligations in Relation to Good OceanGovernance, Chinese Journal of International Law (2010),589–605.
[1] GREENPEACE(2006). Plastic Debris in the World’s Oceans.
[2] NATUR VARDS VERKET/GPA(2001). Marine Litter: trash that kills.
[3] UNEP/GPA (2006). Financing the implementation of regional seas conventionsand action plans: A guide for national action.
[4] UNEP/GPA (2006). Implementation of the GPA at regional level: The role ofregional seas conventions and their protocols.
[5] UNEP/GPA (2006). The State of the Marine Environment: trends and processes
[6] UNEP (2005). Marine Litter: An Analytical Overview. United NationsEnvironment Programme.
[7] UNEP (2007).National Marine Debris Monitoring Program.
[8] UNEP (2009). Marine Litter: A Global Challenge. United Nations EnvironmentProgramme.
[9] UNEP (2009). Guidelines on the Use of Market-based Instruments to Address theProblem of Marine Litter.
[10] UNEP (2009). Abandoned, lost or otherwise discarded fishing gear.
[11] UNEP (2009).UNEP/IOC Guidelines on Survey and Monitoring of MarineLitter.
[12] UNEP (2009). UNEP’s Global Initiative on Marine Litter. United NationsEnvironment Programme.
[13] UNEP (2010). ANNUAL REPORT.
[14] UNEP/GPA (2011). Global Programme of Action for the Protection of theMarine Environment from Land-based Activities.
[15] UNEP (2011).UNEP YEARBOOK: Emerging Issues in Our Global Environment
[16] UNEP(2011). The Other70%: UNEP Marine and Coastal Strategy.
[17] UNEP(2011). Marine Debris as a Global Environmental Problem: Introducing asolution based framework focused on plastic.
[18] UNEP (2013).UNEP Yearbook: Emerging Issues in Our Global Environment.
[19] UNEP (2013): United Nations Environment Programme Medium-term Strategy2010–2013, UNEP/GCSS.X/8.
[1] Algalita Marine Research Foundation,"Plastic Debris Rivers to Sea Project," athttp://plasticdebris.org/(29October2011).
[2] Andrady, L. A. Plastics and Their Impacts in the Marine Environment,2000, athttp://www.mindfully.org/Plastic/Ocean/Plastics-Impacts-Marine-Andrady6aug00.htm (29October2011).
[3] Conservation Science Institute,"Marine Debris," athttp://www.conservationinstitute.org/marinedebris.htm (30October2011).
[4] http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/debris/(29October2011).
[5] http://www.oceans. greenpeace.org.(29October2011)
[6] Canada's National Programme of Action for the Protection of the MarineEnvironment from Land Based Activities (NPA),"Marine Debris in Canada:Facts and Figures,"2003, at http://www.ec.gc.ca/marine/debris/eng/facts.htm (13August2012).
[7] The London Convention1972, Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollutionby Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter,1972, Revised14December2003, athttp://www.londonconvention.org/(18October2012).