U.S. oceanographic research would benefit from accession to UNCLOS
There are many other examples of benefits that would be derived from U.S. accession to the LOS Convention. For example, the U.S. research fleet frequently suffers costly delays in ship scheduling when other nations fail to respond in a timely manner to our research requests. Currently, we are not in a position to rely on articles in the Convention that address this issue, such as the “Implied Consent” article (Article 252) that allows research to proceed within 6 months if no reply to the request has been received, and other provisions that outline acceptable reasons for refusal of a research request. Also, as a party to the Convention, the U.S. could participate in the member selection process, including nominating our own representatives, for the International Law of the Sea Tribunal, as well as the Continental Shelf Commission and the various organs of the International Seabed Authority.
Quicktabs: Evidence
Arguments
Related argument(s) where this quote is used.
-
U.S. based oceanographers and others conducting marine research are at a significant disadvantage due to U.S. non-party status to UNCLOS as they have to seek slow slow and complicated approval from foreign governments from access to their exclusive economic zones or continental shelves to conduct scientific research. Ratification of UNCLOS would resolve this because they could take advantage of the more favorable "implied consent" provisions under UNCLOS to further marine research.
Keywords:Related Quotes:- UNCLOS protects the rights of marine researchers to conduct operations in foreign EEZs
- U.S. oceanographic research would benefit from accession to UNCLOS
- U.S. lead in marine research imperiled by its inability to use UNCLOS to secure marine researchers access
- UNCLOS protections necessary to preserve U.S. research rights in Arctic waters
- U.S. ability to conduct environmental and oceanographic research constrained by its non-party status to UNCLOS
Parent Arguments: