United Nations Environment Programme

environment for development

 
Division of Environmental Law and Conventions
Manual on Compliance with and Enforcement of Multilateral Environmental Agreements
Alert someone to this resource Leave Feedback Home > Compliance > Negotiating MEAs > Reporting, Monitoring, & Verification > Case Study
A Survey of Monitoring and Reporting under Global MEAs - page 1/3

Reporting Requirements under MARPOL

MARPOL (International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships) is the treaty administered by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to control various sources of ship-generated pollution. Parties are obligated to report on their enforcement efforts against ships that violate treaty requirements. However, over the years, there has been a poor rate of reporting by Parties.

The Port State control regime has evolved to increase compliance with the IMO Conventions. For example, the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) on Port State Control between fourteen European member states is designed to increase enforcement efforts of IMO Conventions. This MOU requires members to inspect 25 percent of the ships that enter their ports and then provide the data on a daily basis. The inspection data is then sent to a centralised database. Using telex and computer links, the information is promptly compiled so that it is readily accessible to port authorities, allowing them to know in advance which ships visiting their ports have been inspected, and what the results of the inspections were. This allows them to deploy their inspection resources more efficiently and effectively. The usefulness of this information to port authorities makes them more inclined to conscientiously file their own daily reports. There are several regional MOUs on Port State Control as well as the port state control programme administered by the U.S. Coast Guard for ships entering U.S. ports.

The survey and certification systems are another approach to verification used by MARPOL. For example, certain ships can be permitted to operate only if they are fitted with an oil chamber that cannot be flushed while at sea. This allows verification of non-discharge of pollutants to take place in ports rather than at sea.

Regardless of whether a hard or soft verification mechanism is employed, it is important for the success of international agreements that Parties’ implementation of commitments be monitored. In the case of MEAs, this normally depends on Parties’ self-monitoring and self-reporting of their activities.

For more information, see http://www.imo.org/
Conventions/contents.asp?doc_id=678&topic_id=258
 
 or contact info@imo.org

The following survey of monitoring requirements for different MEAs provides some examples of various monitoring approaches.

Monitoring under the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer

Parties to the Montreal Protocol provide the Secretariat with baseline and annual data on their production, import, and export of controlled ozone depleting substances. When the data for monitoring an agreement is difficult to obtain or elaborate new structures would be needed, proxy data can be used. The data reporting tools are available at this link.

For more information, contact ozoneinfo@unep.org

A A Print this page
Search the Manual
Guidelines Search
Case Studies Search
» More Search Tools
Resources for
Guideline 14(c)
Case Studies
Funding for Reporting Capacity: Montreal Protocol, the CBD, and the UNFCCC
Common Reporting Software
Public Involvement in the Development of Ukraine’s National Reports for MEAs
National Reporting through a “Transparent and Consultative Process Involving the Public”
Review of National Reports under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
A Survey of Monitoring and Reporting under Global MEAs
Monitoring and Reporting under Regional MEAs
Assessment and Verification under CITES
Additional Resources
Additional Resources On Monitoring And Reporting Under MEAs
© UNEP | Privacy Policy | Terms & Conditions | Site Map