New Technologies in International Law / Tymofeyeva, Crhák et al.

The HST emphasizes the necessity of cooperation of the parties in the development and transfer of marine technology. 290 The treaty requires the parties to conduct an environmental impact assessment when a planned activity may have more than a minor or transitory effect on the marine environment, or the effects of the activity are unknown or poorly understood. When conducting an environmental impact assessment, the party shall consider, inter alia, the type of technology used for the activity and how it is to be conducted. 291 The HST deals with technology in a quite exhaustive way. It focuses on technology from two different perspectives, capacity-building, and transfer of marine technology. 292 It emphasizes international cooperation aimed at supporting developing States Parties, in particular the least developed countries, landlocked developing countries, geographically disadvantaged States, small island developing States, coastal African States, archipelagic States, and developing middle-income countries. 293 It lists various types of capacity building and transfer of marine technology, where we can, for example, find: The sharing of marine scientific and technological knowledge; Education and training in technology, and the application of marine science and technology, development of scientific and research capacities; Technology standards and rules etc. 294 The HST also builds its own institutional structures. In relation to the technology, it is Capacity-building and transfer of the marine technology committee. Its main task shall be to monitor and review capacity-building and the transfer of marine technology undertaken in accordance with the HTS. Another institutional body will be the Scientific and Technical Body. 295 Same as the CBD, the HST also anchors the question of funding and relevant financial mechanisms. In conclusion, the fact that HST addresses the biggest challenges we mentioned in the beginning such as inadequate capacity-building, lack of funding, and financial support, must be viewed as a step towards successful protection of biodiversity. In contrast with the CBD, The High Sea Treaty explicitly (and in a quite exhaustive manner) deals with capacity-building. Another plus is a language that has been used. HST uses more strict language than CBD (e.g. instead of “ should ” it uses “ shall ”) A question mark should be placed above the issue of funding and financial mechanisms. For instance, although CBD also regulates this issue, its efficiency has not been sufficient enough so far. The severity of the current situation and the interest of the international community regarding environmental protection might ensure that the HST will be a successful tool in fighting biodiversity loss. We already can see attempts to help with its implementation (although it is not yet in force). For example, in September 2023, IUCN and Allen Institute for AI teamed up to equip governmental and non governmental organizations with advanced AI tech to protect oceans in order to speed

290 Ibid., Art. 8. 291 Ibid., Art. 30. 292 Ibid., Art. 40–46. 293 Ibid. 294 Ibid., Annex II. 295 Ibid., Art. 49.

80