Cleaning up after human activity in Antarctica: legal obligations and remediation realities

Abstract

National Antarctic Programmes do not have a strict legal obligation to remediate the Antarctic environment following human activity. The Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (the "Madrid Protocol") obliges parties to conduct environmental impact assessments to prevent adverse impacts on the polar environment and to "clean up" pollution from waste disposal sites. The obligations stemming from the Madrid Protocol are not clearly defined, and give potential scope for parties to neglect past sites of human activity on the continent. This scope is narrowed by the work of the Committee for Environmental Protection in implementing clear practical clean-up guidelines for National Antarctic Programmes based on scientific-based recommendations from the Antarctic Treaty Parties. Despite better modern practice, Parties are still faced with damage from past activities. Some of these sites are deemed to be "beyond help." This article proposes that rather than abandoning waste disposal sites because of widely acknowledged difficulties, that National Antarctic Programmes prioritize research into restorative methodologies and techniques, while increasing cooperation with other parties to overcome the enormous logistical and economic costs of cleaning up pollution in Antarctica.

Antarctic environmental change and biological responses

“…Today, all built structures require environmental impact assessments and the minimization of environmental impact (Antarctic Treaty Environment Protocol; www.ats.aq/e/eia.html). However, there have been unintentional impacts in the past, and there is substantial effort being put into remediation, although not all restoration has the same efficiency or outcome ( 191 , 223 , 224 ). Station construction exerts considerable local disturbance, and station footprints affect a considerable proportion of available terrestrial area in parts of the continent ( 203 ).…”

Diffusive Gradients in Thin Films Can Predict the Toxicity of Metal Mixtures to Two Microalgae: Validation for Environmental Monitoring in Antarctic Marine Conditions

“…This is likely attributable to the challenges associated with access, difficulties in contaminant monitoring, and the lack of Antarctic-specific ecotoxicology data and remediation guidelines. Simple contaminant monitoring devices are needed to overcome challenges of expensive logistics, limited personnel, and limited access to contaminated sites in Antarctica (Hodgson-Johnston et al 2017;Raymond and Snape 2017).…”

Restoration dialogues: improving the governance of ecological restoration

“…Its preeminence owes to its respect and legitimacy, its coordinating capacity, its sanctions‐backed power, and its administrative apparatus (Summers ). “Restorations Dialogues” canvassed the role of law in many contexts, such as regulating private land management (Lindsay ), empowering Indigenous land use (Godden & Cowell ), and coordinating action internationally to remove ocean plastic debris (Vince & Hardesty ) or remediate Antarctic waste dumps (Hodgson‐Johnston et al ).…”