1. Introduction
The term climate inherently implies an inseparable connection between atmospheric conditions and water. Oceans play a critical role in the climate system by absorbing and redistributing carbon, anthropogenic CO₂, and heat, while also exerting a vital influence on the Earth’s water cycle. One of the earliest effects of climate change is atmospheric warming and the rise in average air temperature. The warming triggers a chain of consequences, including increased precipitation, altered storm patterns and ocean currents, changes in river systems, and ultimately sea-level rise, which may even affect maritime boundaries and baselines.
Given the wide-ranging effects of climate change, the U.N. climate regime interacts with numerous institutions and legal frameworks. However, international rules in this field have largely kept obligations at the level of preferences and aspirations rather than creating enforceable commitments. The present study aimed to examine the current situation through a review of international documents and reports, as well as the views of various scholars. It sought to answer the following questions: What ocean-based legal solutions exist for addressing climate change? And are the existing rules sufficient, or do they need to be revised or supplemented with new solutions?
2. Literature Review
Persian-language scholarship offers numerous studies on climate change, but very few address the intersection of climate change and the law of the sea. For example, in their article titled “Climate Change and Changes in the Baseline of Coastal Countries: Solutions and Challenges,” Habibi and Raee-Dehaghi (2020) discussed only the impact of climate change on maritime boundaries. Given the significant role of the oceans, many international works have dealt with this issue, such as the edited volumes The Law of the Sea and Climate Change: Solutions and Constraints (Johansen et al., 2021) and The Environmental Rule of Law for Oceans: Designing Legal Solutions (Platjouwa & Pozdnakova, 2023).
3. Materials and Methods
The present study employed a descriptive–analytical approach and a library research method to collect and analyze data drawn from international documents, books, and relevant articles.
4. Results and Discussion
The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), also called the Law of the Sea Convention, was negotiated at a time when climate change had not yet emerged as a major issue in international environmental law. Nevertheless, Part XII of the Convention is applicable to greenhouse gas emissions and climate change insofar as they affect the marine environment. Even the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the broader climate governance framework primarily focus on land-based and atmospheric matters, with only limited application to the oceans.
As a first step, a dynamic interpretation of UNCLOS could expand its scope and help fill this gap. Article 194, in particular, provides significant potential for such an interpretation, allowing climate action to be emphasized as part of the broader objective of protecting rare ecosystems. In the next step, national and international judicial bodies could also play an important role by adopting dynamic interpretive approaches. The diversity of dispute settlement mechanisms under the law of the sea makes this field particularly well suited to such developments.
The 2023 High Seas Treaty has opened a new avenue for marine environmental protection by addressing the impacts of climate change. Relevant frameworks and tools for responding to environmental harm are set out in Part III and Part IV. This agreement is significant because no previous international legal instrument governing the oceans had explicitly and directly addressed marine biodiversity and environmental protection within the framework of ocean governance. However, it should be noted that the treaty’s obligations regarding hazardous activities are primarily preventive and participatory and do not provide concrete solutions for addressing such activities.
As of September 29, 2024, only 13 of the 114 signatory states had ratified the agreement, while 60 ratifications are required for it to enter into force. Under Article 25 of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, a treaty may be applied provisionally before its formal entry into force if the negotiating states so agree. However, despite the practical need for such a mechanism, the 2023 High Seas Treaty does not include any provision for provisional application. Therefore, under Article 25(1)(b), the signatory states can adopt a protocol or separate instrument providing for provisional application. This could significantly assist the Preparatory Commission in making arrangements for the treaty’s implementation and for the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
5. Conclusion
The importance and central role of the oceans in mitigating the effects of climate change are well recognized by scholars in this field. In addition to the shortcomings of climate-related conventions, the law of the sea framework has also been limited in addressing the impacts of climate change on the oceans. This research aimed to evaluate ocean-based legal solutions for combating climate change within the framework of the 1982 UNCLOS and the 2023 High Seas Treaty.
Although the 1982 Convention did not explicitly address climate change, it provides considerable capacity for dynamic interpretation and for the use of international dispute settlement mechanisms. Criticizing the Convention based on the historical context in which it was adopted seems unreasonable. Despite being in force for more than 40 years, the UNCLOS has demonstrated a significant degree of adaptability and responsiveness.
The 2023 High Seas Treaty was developed with the primary objective of preserving the oceans’ unique biodiversity. Although it explicitly—yet only briefly—refers to the impacts of climate change on the oceans (e.g., acidification, rising temperatures, and sea-level rise), the treaty adopts a relatively soft approach. While it establishes frameworks for addressing environmental challenges—such as identifying and designating marine protected areas and conducting environmental impact assessments—it does not set out binding commitments specifically aimed at combating climate change. The persistent challenge of financial and technology transfer also remains insufficiently addressed. Moreover, in contrast to the accelerating pace of climate change, the process of ratification and implementation of the treaty has been notably slow.
It seems that relying on the existing capacities of the 1982 Law of the Sea Convention is a sound approach. However, the 2023 High Seas Treaty faces an uncertain future in terms of both its entry into force and its practical effectiveness.
Convening a meeting of the signatory states to adopt an annex or separate instrument providing for the treaty’s provisional application before its formal entry into force could represent an important step in responding to the urgency of the situation.