In 2013, do the Inuit on either side of the U.S.-Canada Beaufort Sea maritime boundary have better tools for taking more meaningful part in decisions relating to offshore oil and gas development in the Arctic than they did in the wake of the 2010 Macondo/Deepwater Horizon explosion and spill? A review of legal and policy developments in both countries over that three-year period allows the conclusion that U.S.

Identifying marine areas of significance for Arctic communities is crucial for preventing future conflicts between coastal communities and marine-based industries. The Arctic Marine Shipping Assessment 2009 Report recommends that states conduct surveys on Arctic marine use by indigenous communities to help assess impacts from Arctic shipping activities. Arctic indigenous use mapping practices employed to date include a range of practices used in mapping the indigenous use of Arctic marine resources.

Offshore oil and gas development in arctic Alaska carries a high risk of interference with nutritionally and culturally critical bowhead whale subsistence hunting. Since the mid-1980s, the Alaska Eskimo Whaling Commission has engaged offshore oil and gas exploration and development companies, including oil majors, in an annual process of collaboration and negotiation to create mitigation measures capable of avoiding adverse impacts to bowhead whales, habitat, and hunting opportunities.

Global climate change, with its resulting loss of sea ice, has opened up access to the Arctic Ocean as never before. Moreover, the rate of global warming and the pace of development are accelerating. Stakeholders have different ideas on how to handle these changes. Depending on one’s perspective, the pace of development seems to be either too fast or too slow; and, like most contentious issues, the best solutions may lie somewhere in the middle. 

The eight Arctic countries, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, Russia, Sweden, and the United States, are in the initial phases of a profound journey to devise novel mechanisms through which they can collectively assure wise stewardship of the Arctic. This journey is urgent because the Arctic now faces dramatic changes that for the first time in millennia will transform the essential fabric of the region. These changes are not only fundamental, they are happening with unprecedented speed.

Environmentalists and free trade proponents sharply disagree on the role that trade plays in impacting environmental welfare. Contrary to environmentalist contentions, trade liberalization can improve environmental regulations, and WTO jurisprudence is more welcoming of domestic environmental regulations than popularly perceived. But, counter to free trader claims, trade’s positive impact often works through stronger regulation—not through simple increases in wealth.

A shocking 80% of the Nile’s water is consumed by one country: Egypt. The upstream riparian countries threaten to encroach on Egypt’s share of water as recordbreaking populations, droughts, and famines generate ever-greater need. Indeed, the increasingly dire fight over the Nile stands to be one of the most significant global crises and potential armed conflicts of this century. Egypt maintains the rights to a vast majority of the Nile’s waters based on colonialera treaties.

The World Bank Group (WBG) is uniquely positioned to support the growth of developing countries in a way that decreases GHG emissions and provides energy to the poor. Historically, the institution has failed to fulfill this potential, supporting carbon-intensive energy projects and neglecting renewable energy, energy efficiency and pro-poor energy development. A recent comprehensive draft energy strategy and an energy sector “Directions” document propose some positive changes, but fall far short of reorienting the institution’s energy lending in critical ways.

Some administrative agencies exist in California solely as creatures of the state legislature. Other agencies, such as the California Public Utilities Commission (PUC), exist by virtue of both the state Constitution and subsequent delegation of power and responsibilities by the legislature. In either case, administrative agencies have only such powers as have been delegated to them. And when they exercise those powers, certain rules generally apply.

The last three Takings Clause decisions in the U.S. Supreme Court have shared a common theme. In each of them, the Court has cut through the morass of arbitrary, clause-specific rules, complications, and obstacles to relief that have accrued over the past few decades. I call this process “normalization”—treating Takings Clause claims as normal constitutional claims, subject to the same procedural, jurisdictional, and remedial principles that apply to other constitutional rights.