Minerals Report - International Seabed Authority

Minerals Report - International Seabed Authority Minerals Report - International Seabed Authority

05.02.2013 Views

entities. Many of them included mining companies that had capital, or access to capital and therefore a situation would be created that seemed somehow unfair between Authority and the consortia. The United States in response stated that the industrialized countries could contribute towards the first operation of the Enterprise in the following way: one half of the capital required for the operation would be contributed in cash by States parties and the other half would be in the form of bonds to be deposited with the Authority or to be used to raise funds or cashed if this became necessary. This formula was incorporated in the provisions contained in article 11 of Annex IV of the Convention. The next issue was technology, because even if money was available, the Enterprise had neither the technology nor the technical know-how to actually participate in the parallel system. To that question, the answer provided was that there would be some provision for making technology available on a fair and reasonable commercial basis in the Convention. That is the fundamental basis on which the whole parallel system developed, and that is how the system for nodules was provided for in the Convention. The subsequent 1994 Implementation Agreement eliminated the provision that required states parties to contribute in cash or in the establishment of bonds b for the first operation of the Enterprise. Instead, it substituted a joint-venture operation for the first operation of the Enterprise, and thereafter it requires the Council to determine how subsequent operations will proceed. The 1994 Implementation Agreement also addressed the ideological problem with the transfer of technology provisions in the Convention. As the transfer of technology provisions evolved in the Convention they came to be seen as provisions for compulsory transfer of technology rather than technology transfer in the context of the dual or parallel system. The final formulation for transfer of technology in the Convention was as follows: if the Enterprise or a developing country operating in the seabed was not able to otherwise obtain technology in the open market, then the Authority could ask the contractor to make available the same technology at a fair and reasonable commercial price. That provision was modified in the1994 Implementation Agreement so that States whose nationals have the technology are required to assist in obtaining the INTERNATIONAL SEABED AUTHORITY 48

technology on a fair and reasonable commercial price. The obligation is therefore shifted from the contractor to the Sponsoring State. The Secretary-General pointed out that there was rigidity in the system that was prescribed for deep seabed polymetallic nodules. He recalled that during the Conference, proposals from the United States were designed to make sure that all decisions that had to be taken were already prescribed and incorporated in the Convention, so that there was no flexibility or discretion for the Authority. This position of the United States resulted in the Group of 77 adding their own little bit, so that inflexibility compounded itself in the system and rules that evolved. Based on this experience, the Secretary-General stated that as regards seafloor massive sulphides and cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts it is necessary to bear in mind, firstly that the political and ideological problems that were raised when the rules and regulations for deep seabed polymetallic nodules were being formulated will surface again. Secondly, that the inflexibility of the regime for nodule exploration would need to be examined, to determine whether that regime will be suitable for seafloor massive sulphides and cobalt-rich ferromanganese crust deposits. The Secretary-General noted that during the period of the Conference, not much was known about the exploitability of deep seabed polymetallic nodules. He stated that there was a lot of speculation and that misleading calculations and exaggerations were made. As regards seafloor massive sulphides and cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts, he pointed out that the international community might know even less about these resources. He observed that in political negotiations people seek all kinds of safeguards. In practice, however, things are different and more rational. As far as these types of new mineral resources are concerned, he stated that it is necessary for the international community to understand their nature and distribution for rule making. Looking at the system that has been devised for deep seabed polymetallic nodules, the first question that needs to address is whether this system is applicable to seafloor massive sulphides and cobalt-rich ferromanganese crusts. INTERNATIONAL SEABED AUTHORITY 49

entities. Many of them included mining companies that had capital, or access<br />

to capital and therefore a situation would be created that seemed somehow<br />

unfair between <strong>Authority</strong> and the consortia. The United States in response<br />

stated that the industrialized countries could contribute towards the first<br />

operation of the Enterprise in the following way: one half of the capital<br />

required for the operation would be contributed in cash by States parties and<br />

the other half would be in the form of bonds to be deposited with the<br />

<strong>Authority</strong> or to be used to raise funds or cashed if this became necessary. This<br />

formula was incorporated in the provisions contained in article 11 of Annex<br />

IV of the Convention.<br />

The next issue was technology, because even if money was available,<br />

the Enterprise had neither the technology nor the technical know-how to<br />

actually participate in the parallel system. To that question, the answer<br />

provided was that there would be some provision for making technology<br />

available on a fair and reasonable commercial basis in the Convention. That is<br />

the fundamental basis on which the whole parallel system developed, and<br />

that is how the system for nodules was provided for in the Convention.<br />

The subsequent 1994 Implementation Agreement eliminated the<br />

provision that required states parties to contribute in cash or in the<br />

establishment of bonds b for the first operation of the Enterprise. Instead, it<br />

substituted a joint-venture operation for the first operation of the Enterprise,<br />

and thereafter it requires the Council to determine how subsequent operations<br />

will proceed. The 1994 Implementation Agreement also addressed the<br />

ideological problem with the transfer of technology provisions in the<br />

Convention. As the transfer of technology provisions evolved in the<br />

Convention they came to be seen as provisions for compulsory transfer of<br />

technology rather than technology transfer in the context of the dual or<br />

parallel system. The final formulation for transfer of technology in the<br />

Convention was as follows: if the Enterprise or a developing country<br />

operating in the seabed was not able to otherwise obtain technology in the<br />

open market, then the <strong>Authority</strong> could ask the contractor to make available<br />

the same technology at a fair and reasonable commercial price. That<br />

provision was modified in the1994 Implementation Agreement so that States<br />

whose nationals have the technology are required to assist in obtaining the<br />

INTERNATIONAL SEABED AUTHORITY 48

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!