DOCSLIB.ORG

Agreement Between Iceland and Norway on the Continental Shelf Between Iceland and Jan Mayen

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Agreement Between Iceland and Norway on the Continental Shelf Between Iceland and Jan Mayen Agreement between Iceland and Norway on the Continental Shelf Between Iceland and Jan Mayen Agla Margrét Egilsdóttir 2013 Master of Law Author: Agla Margrét Egilsdóttir ID number: 080885-2619 Instructor: Catherine Banet Lagadeild School of Law i Útdráttur Samkomulag Íslands og Noregs um landgrunnið á svæðinu milli Íslands og Jan Mayen Með samkomulagi Íslands og Noregs um landgrunnið á svæðinu milli Íslands og Jan Mayen frá 1981 var kveðið á um mörk landgrunnsins á svæðinu sem skyldu vera hin sömu og mörk efnahagslögsögu þeirra. Í samningnum var einnig skilgreint sameiginlegt nýtingarsvæði sem nær yfir beggja vegna landgrunnsmarka Íslands og Jan Mayen. Samkvæmt fyrirkomulaginu um sameiginlegt nýtingarsvæði á Ísland rétt á 25% þátttöku í olíustarfsemi á norska hluta svæðisins og einnig á Noregur rétt á 25% þátttöku í olíustarfsemi á íslenska hluta svæðisins sem er þekkt sem Drekasvæðið. Markmið þessarar ritgerðar er að rannsaka lagagrundvöll fyrirkomulagsins sem kveður á um sameiginlega nýtingasvæðið þar sem lagagrundvöllur þess hefur verið umdeildur innan þjóðaréttar og þá sérstaklega hvort það sé talin vera þjóðréttarleg skylda að ganga í slíkt fyrirkomulag um sameiginlegt nýtingarsvæði. Það verður gert með því að rannsaka samspil ákvæða Hafréttarsáttmálans og annarra reglna þjóðaréttar, venjuréttar meðal þjóða og úrskurða Alþjóðadómstólsins. Einnig var kannað hvernig aðilar samningsins hafa útfært og túlkað samninginn enn frekar, sérstaklega þar sem að síðustu misseri hefur þurft að reyna á samninginn vegna útgáfu sérleyfanna. Eftir ítarlega greiningu kom í ljós að slíkt fyrirkomulag er ekki sérstaklega krafist af þjóðarétti, heldur er það eitt af nokkrum mögulegum lögfræðilegum fyrirkomulögum. Hins vegar er skylda fyrir ríki til að ganga til samstarfs og fá fram friðsamlegar úrlausnar deilumála samkvæmt sáttmála Sameinuðu Þjóðanna. Þessi skylda hefur einnig verið staðfest sem skylda til að ganga í samstarf við ríki vegna vinnslu á kolvetnisauðlindum þar sem það hefur verið viðurkennt af venjurétti og starfsháttum þjóða. ii Abstract Agreement between Iceland and Norway on the Continental Shelf Between Iceland and Jan Mayen The Agreement on the Continental Shelf in the Area Between Iceland and Jan Mayen, 1981 provided that the delimitation line between the Parties ' parts of the continental shelf area should be the same as of their delimitation line of their economic zones. Also, the agreement defined the so called joint development zone that covers both sides of the boundaries of the continental shelf of Iceland and Jan Mayen. According to the arrangement of joint development, Norway and Iceland both have a 25% participation right in any hydrocarbon activities that take place in each other’s area. The aim of this thesis is to examine the legal basis of the arrangement that provides for joint development on the defined area, where the legal basis has been controversial in international law, especially, whether it is considered to be obligatory by international law to establish such joint development arrangements or not. The analysis will study the interaction of the provisions of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and other treaty law, customary law and state practice. Furthermore, it was examined how the Parties have implemented and interpreted the agreement further, especially because of the issuance of the concessions in the Dreki Area in January 2013, which were issued by the NEA. A thorough analysis of the joint development arrangement shows that it is not required by international law to enter into such an arrangement, but it represents a possible legal regime. However, nations have an obligation to enter into cooperation for peaceful resolution of disputes under the United Nations Charter. This obligation has also been confirmed as a duty to co-operate regarding the exploitation of hydrocarbon resources by customary law and state practice. iii Table of Contents List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ vi List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................................ vii Table of International Cases ....................................................................................................viii Table of International Treaties and Conventions ...................................................................... ix Table of Legislation and Preparatory Legislation ...................................................................... x Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... xi 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 2 Basic concepts ......................................................................................................................... 5 2.1 Sources of International Law ............................................................................................ 5 2.2 The principles of the Law of the Sea applied to the common area between Iceland and Norway .................................................................................................................................... 6 2.2.1 The Law of the Sea ..................................................................................................... 7 2.2.2 International Principles of the Law of the Sea ........................................................... 7 2.2.3 The 1982 UNCLOS .................................................................................................... 8 2.2.4 Marine spaces, Sovereignty, Territory, and Boundaries .......................................... 11 3 The Background for the Agreement ...................................................................................... 13 3.1 Jan Mayen and Iceland .................................................................................................... 13 3.2 The Jan Mayen dispute ................................................................................................... 15 3.3 The legal status of Jan Mayen as an island ..................................................................... 17 4 The Agreements between Iceland and Norway on Jan Mayen.............................................. 18 4.1 The Agreement between Iceland and Norway concerning Fishery and Continental Shelf Questions ............................................................................................................................... 18 4.2 Continental shelf of Iceland and Jan Mayen and their sovereign rights ......................... 19 4.3 Recommendations to the governments of Iceland and Norway by the Conciliation Commission .......................................................................................................................... 20 4.4 The Agreement on the Continental Shelf between Iceland and Jan Mayen ................... 23 4.4.1 Maritime boundary delimitation ............................................................................... 23 iv 4.4.2 Delimitation of the Continental shelf of the area between Iceland and Jan Mayen . 25 4.4.2.1 Consideration of relevant circumstances of Iceland and Jan Mayen ................ 28 4.5 The Iceland – Norway joint development arrangement .................................................. 30 4.5.1 The concept of joint development ............................................................................ 30 4.5.2 The Iceland – Norway joint development zone for hydrocarbon development ....... 32 5 What is the legal basis for joint development arrangements? ............................................... 37 5.1 The legal status of the Joint development arrangement between Iceland and Norway .. 37 5.2 Is the Jan Mayen Agreement a temporary solution to the delimitation problem? .......... 42 5.3 Actual significance of the Agreement between Norway and Iceland on the continental shelf between Iceland and Jan Mayen .................................................................................. 44 6 Implementation and Interpretation of the Jan Mayen Agreement today ............................... 47 6.1 Agreement between Iceland and Norway concerning transboundary hydrocarbon deposits ................................................................................................................................. 47 6.2 Hydrocarbon resources on the Jan Mayen Ridge today .................................................. 50 6.3 The Dreki Area and licenses for exploration and production of hydrocarbons .............. 51 6.3.1 The Participation rights of Norway on the Dreki Area ............................................ 53 6.4 Implementation of the Agreement by Norway today ..................................................... 53 6.5 Legal and Regulatory framework for Oil Exploration in Iceland ................................... 54 7 CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................... 57 Annex I : Agreement on the Continental Shelf Between Iceland and Jan Mayen ................... 62 Bibliography ............................................................................................................................. 66 v List of Figures Figure 1. Jan Mayen and the surrounding region. The yellow lines depict the distance from Jan Mayen
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Statement by Denmark on Behalf of Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark
    Statement by Denmark on behalf of Finland, Iceland, Norway, Sweden and Denmark 75th Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations Debate in the General Assembly Agenda item 74: Report of the International Court of Justice Delivered by: Counsellor Rasmus Jensen, Denmark New York 2 November 2020 Check against delivery E-mail: [email protected] http://fnnewyork.um.dk 1 M(r/s) Chair, I have the honour to speak on behalf of Finland, , Iceland, Norway, Sweden - and my own country - Denmark. The Nordic countries would like to thank the President of the International Court of Justice for his report on the Court’s work over the past year (A/75/4) and for his presentation today. The big amount of cases indicate the trust and confidence States place in the Court by referring disputes to it for resolution. The Nordic countries would in particular like to note the case filed by The Gambia against Myanmar regarding application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, where the Court indicated provisional measures on January 23rd. In addition to being important for the gravity of the issues The Gambia’s application seeks to address, the case is also an opportunity for the Court to develop its jurisprudence regarding obligations erga omnes and erga omnes partes. All States parties share an interest in compliance with the obligations under the Genocide Convention by all States parties. We applaud the Court and its personnel for continuing to discharge its judicial functions as described by the President in his report, despite the difficult circumstances following the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.
    [Show full text]
  • Inventory of Networks – Phase II
    Inventory of Networks – Phase II ICELAND Compiled by Rannís and Arctic Portal 1/20/2012 Iceland Preface The Arctic Council and IASC agreed in 2011 to establish Sustaining Arctic Observing Networks (SAON). Yet preparation for SAON had been underway since 2007. The purpose of SAON is to support and strengthen the development of multinational engagement for sustained and coordinated pan-Arctic observing and data sharing systems that serve societal needs, particularly related to environmental, social, economic and cultural issues. SAON promotes the vision of well-defined observing networks that enable users to have access to free, open and high quality data that will realize pan-Arctic and global value-added services and provide societal benefits. Its goal is to enhance Arctic-wide observing activities by facilitating partnerships and synergies among existing observing and data networks (“building blocks”), and promoting sharing and synthesis of data and information. SAON also is committed to facilitating the inclusion of Arctic indigenous people in observing activities, in particular by promoting community-based monitoring (CBM) efforts. Iceland has a unique feature – alongside Greenland ‐ of being the only state that is fully situated within the Arctic. Iceland is also an interesting case study since it is an island in the midst of the north Atlantic, where changes of climate and other aspects of nature can be viewed in a relatively isolated ecosystem. This report introduces the contemporary monitoring institutions and networks in the country. These institutions cover many fields of research and monitoring and they belong to six different ministries. As one of the roles of the Icelandic Centre of Research (RANNIS) is to coordinate and promote Icelandic participation in collaborative international projects in science and technology, RANNIS has been appointed as the national contact point for SAON in Iceland.
    [Show full text]
  • Iceland (Háskóli Íslands) Otago's Second Semester 2009 Degree Programme While on Exchange: Earth Science My Majors: Geology and Zoology Iceland
    Z. Hynd University of Iceland (Háskóli Íslands) Otago's second semester 2009 Degree programme while on exchange: Earth Science My Majors: Geology and Zoology Iceland Ísland - Fire and Ice Pronounced “eesland” ( ís is ice). This is definitely the coolest (but not coldest) place you can go on exchange with Otago! It's not as frigid as its name suggests, everyone knows Iceland is green and Greenland is ice. The capitol city, Reykjavík (pronounced “rake-ya-veek”) enjoys positive temperatures almost the whole year round. On the odd occasion it does drop below 0°C it will rarely reach double digits. Yes they speak English! Though Icelandic (or Íslenska) is the main language, almost everyone except for young children and the extreme elderly can speak very good English. Reykjavík means “smoky bay” in Icelandic. The original Norwegian settlers ~870 AD named it this because of the steam rising from the geothermal springs. The country sits atop the diverging North American and Eurasian tectonic plates and the reason it is not underwater like the rest of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge is because of the Iceland Hotspot. Centred beneath Europe's largest glacier Vatnajökull (“vatna- yerk-idl”), this suspected mantle-plume is responsible for all the excess volcanism on the island. Iceland is geological wonderland on a par with Hawaii and New Zealand and is obviously a fantastic place for geologists, but before tourism focused on its natural wonders, people came to Iceland for its literature. The legendary Icelandic Sagas are the most famous of Icelandic literature, from which it is said J.R.R.
    [Show full text]
  • ICELAND Journey to Iceland and Explore How Its Geography Helped Shape Its Unique Culture and Its Independence from Fossil Fuels
    Faces® Teacher Guide: November/December 2018 ICELAND Journey to Iceland and explore how its geography helped shape its unique culture and its independence from fossil fuels. CONVERSATION QUESTION How does Iceland’s geography influence its culture? In addition to supplemental materials TEACHING OBJECTIVES focused on core Social Studies skills, • Students will learn about Icelandic geography and this flexible teaching tool offers culture. vocabulary-building activities, • Students will describe how the physical characteristics of places are connected to human questions for discussion, and cross- cultures. curricular activities. • Students will analyze the combinations of cultural and environmental characteristics that make places different from other places. • Students will explain how cultural patterns and economic decisions influence environments and the SELECTIONS daily lives of people. • In the Kitchens of Fire and Ice • Students will use details from a text to write a story. Expository Nonfiction, ~1150L • Students will conduct research using print and digital • Weathering the Weather sources. Expository Nonfiction, ~1150L • Students will create a multimedia presentation. • The Eco-Friendliest Country on Earth Expository Nonfiction, ~1150L U33T http://www.cricketmedia.com/classroom/Faces-magazine Faces® Teacher Guide: November/December 2018 In the Kitchens of Fire and ENGAGE Ice Conversation Question: How does Iceland’s geography influence its culture? pp. 12–15, Expository Nonfiction Explore how the rugged geography and Explain that Iceland’s geography is dominated by rocky soil and climate of Iceland have influenced its mountainous terrain with many active volcanoes. Also explain it is an farming practices and its cuisine. island in the far north, near the Arctic Circle. Ask students to hypothesize how the geography of Iceland influences the types of foods that are commonly eaten there.
    [Show full text]
  • The Feasibility of Meeting the Demand for Fresh Food from Horticulture in Iceland
    Final Thesis for MS-Degree in Environment and Natural Resources The Feasibility of Meeting the Demand for Fresh Food from Horticulture in Iceland Azusa Yamada Supervisor: Sveinn Agnarsson Ragnheidur Inga Thorarinsdottir The Feasibility of Meeting the Demand for Fresh Food from Horticulture in Iceland Azusa Yamada Final Thesis for MS Degree in Environment and Natural Resources Supervisors: Sveinn Agnarsson Ragnheidur Inga Thorarinsdottir Faculty of Business Administration School of Social Sciences, University of Iceland Graduating February 2020 1 The feasibility of meeting the demand for fresh food from horticulture in Iceland. This is a 30-credit thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for an MS degree in Environment and Natural Resources linked with the Faculty of Business Administration, School of Social Sciences, University of Iceland. © 2020 Azusa Yamada This thesis can be copied only with the author’s permission. Printed by: Háskólaprent Reykjavík 2020 2 Acknowledgements First and foremost, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisors, Ragnheidur Inga Thorarinsdottir and Sveinn Agnarsson. Thank you, Ragnheidur, for seeing the potential in this topic at an early stage and encouraging me with constructive advice. Sveinn, thank you for your profound belief in my work and unparalleled support. I couldn’t have come this far without your support and guidance. I would also like to acknowledge and thank all of the interviewees and experts, whose names cannot be disclosed, who were involved in this project. Their passionate participation and input were indispensable to this work. I am also grateful to the Watanabe Trust Fund of the University of Iceland scholarship programme for allowing me to explore my passions and cultivate my intellectual curiosity in this beautiful country.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing the Financial Crises in Iceland and Ireland
    Financial crises in Iceland and Ireland: Does EU and Euro membership matter? This working paper by Prof Baldur Thorhallsson and Prof Peadar Kirby is being published by TASC in Dublin and by the Centre for Small State Studies at the University of Iceland in Reykjavik. Financial Crises in Iceland and Ireland | November 2011 Financial crises in Iceland and Ireland: Does EU and Euro membership matter? Baldur Thorhallsson and Peadar Kirby1 Introduction The collapse of the banking systems in Iceland and Ireland in 2008, the impacts on economy and society of this collapse, and the measures taken by the political authorities in each country to deal with the crises, have all been the subject of extensive commentary (see for example, Krugman (2009, 2010) and O’Brien (2011c)). Yet little attention has been devoted to the role that membership of the European Union (EU) and of the Euro played in the case of Ireland, contrasted with Iceland which is a member of neither. This is the purpose of this report. It begins by situating the study in the political science literature on small states, framing it as testing the claim in this literature that small states prosper better by being members of multilateral organizations that provide them with a shelter, particularly valuable at a time of economic and political crisis. The report then examines the Irish and Icelandic cases under three headings – their respective economic booms before the crises, the trajectory of the crisis in each country, and the role of EU membership and of the Euro in the Irish case compared with its absence in the case of Iceland.
    [Show full text]
  • Overtourism in Iceland: Fantasy Or Reality?
    sustainability Article Overtourism in Iceland: Fantasy or Reality? Anna Dóra Sæþórsdóttir 1,* , C. Michael Hall 2,3,4 and Margrét Wendt 1 1 Department of Geography & Tourism, Faculty of Life and Environmental Sciences, University of Iceland, 101 Reykjavík, Iceland; [email protected] 2 Department of Management, Marketing and Entrepreneurship, University of Canterbury, Christchurch 8140, New Zealand; [email protected] 3 Department of Service Management and Service Studies, Lund University, Campus Helsingborg, 25108 Helsingborg, Sweden 4 Geography Research Unit, University of Oulu, 90014 Oulu, Finland * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +354-5254287 Received: 8 July 2020; Accepted: 5 September 2020; Published: 8 September 2020 Abstract: Iceland has been one of the main destinations that have been incorporated into the discourse of overtourism. However, Iceland is different to many other supposed overtourism destinations in that its tourism is based on natural areas. Nevertheless, destination discourses can play an important part in influencing tourist decision-making and government and industry policy making. A media analysis was conducted of 507 online media articles on overtourism in Iceland that were published in 2018, with the main themes being identified via content analysis. The results indicated that the media discourse represented only a partial picture of overtourism and the crowding phenomenon in Iceland, with mechanisms to respond to crowding, the satisfaction level of tourists with their Icelandic nature experience, and local people’s support for tourism being underreported. Some of the findings reflect that of other media analyses. However, there are considerable discontinuities between media representations and discourses of overtourism in Iceland, which highlight the importance of national- or destination-level media analysis.
    [Show full text]
  • Marla J. Koberstein
    Master‘s thesis Expansion of the brown shrimp Crangon crangon L. onto juvenile plaice Pleuronectes platessa L. nursery habitat in the Westfjords of Iceland Marla J. Koberstein Advisor: Jόnas Páll Jόnasson University of Akureyri Faculty of Business and Science University Centre of the Westfjords Master of Resource Management: Coastal and Marine Management Ísafjörður, February 2013 Supervisory Committee Advisor: Name, title Reader: Name, title Program Director: Dagný Arnarsdóttir, MSc. Marla Koberstein Expansion of the brown shrimp Crangon crangon L. onto juvenile plaice Pleuronectes platessa L. nursery habitat in the Westfjords of Iceland 45 ECTS thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of a Master of Resource Management degree in Coastal and Marine Management at the University Centre of the Westfjords, Suðurgata 12, 400 Ísafjörður, Iceland Degree accredited by the University of Akureyri, Faculty of Business and Science, Borgir, 600 Akureyri, Iceland Copyright © 2013 Marla Koberstein All rights reserved Printing: Háskólaprent, Reykjavik, February 2013 Declaration I hereby confirm that I am the sole author of this thesis and it is a product of my own academic research. __________________________________________ Student‘s name Abstract Sandy-bottom coastal ecosystems provide integral nursery habitat for juvenile fishes, and threats to these regions compromise populations at this critical life stage. The threat of aquatic invasive species in particular can be difficult to detect, and climate change may facilitate the spread and establishment of new species. In 2003, the European brown shrimp Crangon crangon L. was discovered off the southwest coast of Iceland. This species is a concern for Iceland due to the combination of its dominance in coastal communities and level of predation on juvenile flatfish, namely plaice Pleuronectes platessa L., observed in its native range.
    [Show full text]
  • Ireland and Iceland in Crisis D: Similarities and Differences
    The Journal of Financial Crises Volume 1 Issue 3 2019 Ireland and Iceland in Crisis D: Similarities and Differences Arwin G. Zeissler Yale University Daisuke Ikeda Bank of Japan Andrew Metrick Yale University Follow this and additional works at: https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/journal-of-financial-crises Part of the Comparative Politics Commons, Economic History Commons, Economic Policy Commons, European Law Commons, International Relations Commons, Macroeconomics Commons, Policy History, Theory, and Methods Commons, Political Economy Commons, and the Public Policy Commons Recommended Citation Zeissler, Arwin G.; Ikeda, Daisuke; and Metrick, Andrew (2019) "Ireland and Iceland in Crisis D: Similarities and Differences," The Journal of Financial Crises: Vol. 1 : Iss. 3, 44-56. Available at: https://elischolar.library.yale.edu/journal-of-financial-crises/vol1/iss3/4 This Case Study is brought to you for free and open access by the Journal of Financial Crises and EliScholar – A Digital Platform for Scholarly Publishing at Yale. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Ireland and Iceland in Crisis D: Similarities and Differences1 Arwin G. Zeissler2 Daisuke Ikeda3 Andrew Metrick4 Yale Program on Financial Stability Case Study 2014-5A-V1 December 1, 2014, Revised: October 1, 2015, October 30, 2019 Abstract On September 29, 2008—two weeks after the collapse of Lehman Brothers—the government of Ireland took the bold step of guaranteeing almost all liabilities of the country’s major banks. The total amount guaranteed by the government was more than double Ireland’s gross domestic product, but none of the banks were immediately nationalized. The Icelandic banking system also collapsed in 2008, just one week after the Irish government issued its comprehensive guarantee.
    [Show full text]
  • Ireland, Iceland, & Scotland Cruise
    Ireland, Iceland, & Scotland Cruise June 3rd - June 14th, 2019 Included in your voyage: 11 nights aboard the Celebrity Reflection All meals and on-board entertainment University of Louisville escort Special group gifts, amenities and parties A pre-trip Documents Party in Louisville Date Port Location Arrive Depart 03 JUN DUBLIN, IRELAND 10:15 PM 04 JUN BELFAST, NORTHERN IRELAND 11:00 AM 8:15 PM 05 JUN AT SEA 06 JUN REYKJAVIK, ICELAND (OVERNIGHT) 1:00 PM 07 JUN REYKJAVIK, ICELAND 3:00 PM 08 JUN AKUREYRI, ICELAND (OVERNIGHT) 10:30 AM 09 JUN AKUREYRI, ICELAND 5:00 PM 10 JUN AT SEA 11 JUN LERWICK/SHETLAND, SCOTLAND 10:00 AM 6:00 PM 12 JUN AT SEA 13 JUN DUBLIN, IRELAND 8:00 AM 14 JUN DUBLIN, IRELAND 502.848.0626 | [email protected] For questions or to reserve your cabin, please call or e-mail Ntaba World Travel: STATEROOM CATEGORY U of L GROUP RATE Inside Stateroom 10 $1669 Outside Stateroom 8 $2099 Balcony Stateroom 2B $2439 Concierge Balcony Stateroom C3 $2679 *Rates are cruise only, based on double occupancy. Port charges ($300), transfers, taxes ($91.96), fuel surcharges, and airfare are additional and subject to change. Other categories available upon request. A refundable deposit of $450 is required to reserve (unless a single – then $900 to reserve). Admin. Fee of $50 per person will also apply to all cancellations. Final payment is due 2/1/2019. At the time of reser- vation, please advise your category preference and passengers traveling with you. Pre-cruise Tour is available (please see attached).
    [Show full text]
  • Greenland and Iceland
    December 2020 Greenland and Iceland Report of the Greenland Committee Appointed by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Development Co-operation Excerpt Graenland-A4-enska.pdf 1 09/12/2020 13:51 December 2020 Qaanaaq Thule Air Base Avannaata Kommunia Kalaallit nunaanni Nuna eqqissisimatiaq (Northeast Greenland National Park) C Upernavik M Y CM MY Uummannaq CY Ittoqqortoormiit CMY K Qeqertarsuaq Ilulissat Aasiaat Kangaatsiaq Qasigiannguit Kommuneqarfik Kommune Sermersooq Quqertalik Sisimiut Qeqqata 2.166.086 km2 Kommunia total area Maniitsoq Excerpt from a Report of the Greenland Committee 80% Appointed by the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Tasiilaq is covered by ice sheet International Development Co-operation Nuuk 21x Publisher: the total area of Iceland The Ministry for Foreign Affairs 44.087 km length of coastline December 2020 Paamiut Kommune Kujalleq utn.is | [email protected] Ivittuut 3.694 m highest point, Narsarsuaq Gunnbjørn Fjeld ©2020 The Ministry for Foreign Affairs Narsaq Qaqortoq 56.081 population Nanortalik 3 Greenland and Iceland in the New Arctic December 2020 Preface In a letter dated 9 April 2019, the Minister for Foreign Affairs appointed a It includes a discussion on the land and society, Greenlandic government three-member Greenland Committee to submit recommendations on how structure and politics, and infrastructure development, including the con- to improve co-operation between Greenland and Iceland. The Committee siderable development of air and sea transport. The fishing industry, travel was also tasked with analysing current bilateral relations between the two industry and mining operations are discussed in special chapters, which countries. Össur Skarphéðinsson was appointed Chairman, and other mem- also include proposals for co-operation.
    [Show full text]
  • Azores and Iceland
    13th World Conference on Earthquake Engineering Vancouver, B.C., Canada August 1-6, 2004 Paper No. 2369 A COMPARATIVE STUDY ON STRONG GROUND MOTION IN TWO VOLCANIC ENVIRONMENTS: AZORES AND ICELAND Carlos S. OLIVEIRA1, Ragnar SIGBJÖRNSSON2, Simon ÓLAFSSON3 SUMMARY The objective of this paper is to present the main results of a comparative study of strong ground motion on the Azores and Iceland. These islands are a super-structural part of the Mid Atlantic Ridge, which marks the boundary between the North-American Plate and the Eurasian Plate and creates a north-south oriented belt of seismic and volcanic activity. The tectonic environments are described and compared emphasising the similarities in the geological structure, including surface geology and its effects on strong ground motion. Furthermore, the seismicity of the Azores and Iceland is compared based on earthquake catalogues using statistical analysis. The strong-motion networks on the islands are described along with the strong-motion data used in the subsequent analysis. The strong-motion data are compared using statistical analysis. The main emphasis is put on attenuation of strong-motion data, characterised by root mean square acceleration and peak ground acceleration. The attenuation is also compared to some of the common attenuation relationships, used by the engineering community in Europe and America. The main findings are that there are significant similarities between the tectonic environments of the Azores and Iceland. Furthermore, the similarities found in seismicity are statistically significant. The attenuation is characterised by rapid decay with increasing distance and high acceleration in the near source area. It is found that the same ground motion estimation models can be applied on the Azores and in Iceland.
    [Show full text]