Marine Pollution Bulletin 48 (2004) 26–29
www.elsevier.com/locate/marpolbul
Viewpoint
The Caspian Sea: a microcosm for environmental science
and international cooperation
Stephen J. de Mora
a
a,*
, Tim Turner
b
Marine Environment Laboratory, International Atomic Energy Agency, 4 quai Antoine 1er , MC 98012, Monaco
b
Tethys Consultants, 69 Paliashvili str., 0179 Tbilisi, Georgia
The break up of the Soviet Union transformed the
Caspian Sea from a quiet backwater into a sea of
troubles. The largest continental water body in the
world now has five riparian states, with commensurate
increased competition for resource utilisation. However,
the Caspian lacks a legal definition. Is it a lake or a sea?
The answer influences how the boundaries are drawn
between countries, thereby delineating access to resources. While the riparian states may compete for the
resources, they share the environmental and biological
problems because pollutants discharged into the
Caspian Sea remain trapped within the basin of this
land-locked system. Acknowledging a spectrum of
environmental concerns and recognizing the Caspian
Sea as a unique environment, the riparian states have
come together to cooperate regionally to understand
and prioritise the problems. Such initiatives were
bolstered by widespread support from international
agencies. The oil industry has also recognised its
responsibility to play an active role (Efendiyeva, 2000).
As a result, increased global attention in the past decade
has exposed and publicised a number of grave environmental and ecological issues. Solutions rely on creating a legal framework to ensure a regional approach to
environmental management and sustainable development. The main environmental problems and the recent
history of international cooperation in the Caspian Sea
are outlined here, and three papers in this volume document some of the issues.
The Caspian Sea underwent a period of falling water
level through much of the Soviet era, which encouraged
human encroachment onto newly exposed shores. The
water level began to rise in 1978, a trend that has resulted in an increase of 2.5 m. As a closed basin, the only
surface outlet of water from the Caspian Sea is evaporation. Hydrological models based solely on evapora-
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +377-97977272; fax: +377-97977276.
E-mail address: [email protected] (S.J. de Mora).
0025-326X/$ - see front matter Ó 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2003.10.021
tion, precipitation and surface runoff have failed to
account for the ongoing increase in water level (Clauer
et al., 2000). These authors have suggested that inputs of
subsurface saline water in this tectonically active region
may have been the cause. Such an explanation would
offer little scope for management options for preventative measures. Responses would have to be directed at
mitigating effects rather than at the cause. Such effects
become more poignant if one considers that a 2.5 m rise
equates to a landward shift in the shoreline of up to 25
km in some locations. Quite apart from damage to
seaside infrastructures and sewage systems, notable
coastal flooding has contributed to the pollution burdens in the Caspian Sea, particularly in regions where oil
fields have been inundated (Dumont, 1995).
The main sources of pollution to the Caspian Sea
have generally been considered to be offshore oil production and land-based sources, notably the Volga
River (Karpinsky, 1992). The presence of oil in the
Caspian Sea region has been known since ancient times,
when flaming natural seeps and surface oil sumps near
Baku inspired fire worshipers and the development of
the religion Zorasterism. Oil reserves in the region were
amongst the first to be exploited in the world. Baku was
a centre for oil production at the turn of the 20th century. Further development during the era of the Soviet
Union continued using environmentally unsound practices (Efendiyeva, 2000). Exploration and exploitation,
especially of offshore reserves, have blossomed since the
break up of the Soviet Union with the increased
involvement of international, multinational companies
(Effimoff, 2000). Public opinion polls in the region have
highlighted concerns about the oil and gas industry as a
source of pollution. Oil production covers vast areas of
the coastal zone (Fig. 1), particularly along the south
coast of the Apsheron Peninsula in Azerbaijan. The
rising water level has flooded low-lying oil fields, thereby
contributing to the pollution burden (Dumont, 1998).
Although the contribution from natural seeps cannot be
ignored, scientific studies, as presented in this issue
S.J. de Mora, T. Turner / Marine Pollution Bulletin 48 (2004) 26–29
27
Fig. 1. Oil derricks in Baku Harbour, Azerbaijan (photo by S.J. de Mora).
(Tolosa et al., 2004), have confirmed hydrocarbon contamination in some parts of the Caspian Sea due to
anthropogenic activities.
The region has experienced major changes in industrial development in the past decade, with a collapse in
the traditional heavy industry of the region. Environmentally, this has been a mixed blessing. Some areas
have seen deterioration in environmental quality, as
exemplified by the accumulation and deterioration of
abandoned ships along the shoreline of Baku Harbour
(Fig. 2). Alternatively, the downturn in economic
activities has at least reduced the flux of contaminants to
the local environment. Such an example is provided by
the Sumgait industrial complex. First established 1946,
a diverse range of industrial facilities was eventually
developed at this location that included a pipe production plant, a chlor-alkali works using mercury electrodes, a synthetic rubber plant, an aluminium smelter
and several other chemical and petrochemical plants,
together with two thermoelectric power plants. Poor
environmental practices led to the region becoming one
of the most polluted places in the world, with an estimated 5 million tons of waste accumulating in the
vicinity of Sumgait. Much of the industrial effluents
were discharged directly into the Caspian Sea without
treatment. Today most of these industrial activities, together with their concomitant discharges and wastes,
have ceased. Of course, vestigial pollution remains a
Fig. 2. Ship hulls abandoned along the waterfront of Baku Harbour, Azerbaijan (photo by S.J. de Mora).
28
S.J. de Mora, T. Turner / Marine Pollution Bulletin 48 (2004) 26–29
problem, especially with respect to unknown submarine
groundwater discharges into the Caspian Sea from the
heavily contaminated industrial zone.
The threat to the environment of the Caspian Sea
posed by organochlorinated compounds from industrial
and agrochemical sources seems to have been underestimated. Several studies recognised the presence of
many chlorinated pesticides in sturgeon and seals. The
Volga River was reported to be the most important
source of DDT and hexachlorocyclohexanes (HCHs)
(Zhulidov et al., 2000). However, the flux of lindane (cHCH) from the Terek River was comparable, despite its
much smaller size, thereby indicating the importance of
agricultural activity in the catchment region. Our own
studies have shown that DDT remains a contemporary
and ubiquitous problem throughout the Caspian Sea,
despite 20 years of legislation outlawing its use in the
region (de Mora et al., 2004).
Biologically the Caspian Sea is a special region, with
endemism reaching 80% at species level (Dumont, 1998).
Biodiversity is relatively low, with the total number of
species about 40% of that found in the Black Sea
(Karpinsky, 1992). The key biological issues in recent
years relate to the decline of fisheries and caviar harvesting, the massive mortality amongst seal populations
and the introduction of invasive species.
There are several important fisheries in the Caspian
Sea, but the greatest emphasis has always been placed
on the sturgeon. The Caspian Sea has six commercially
valuable sturgeon species, four of which produce 90% of
the world’s caviar. Widespread declines in the fish stocks
have been reported, and for sturgeon, the annual catch
decreased from a maximum of 30,000 to 3000 tonnes in
1998. Several anthropogenic factors, including both
land-based and offshore pollution, threaten the survival
of all fisheries in the Caspian Sea. Of particular concern
is overfishing, which for sturgeon has been exacerbated
by illegal fishing since the break up of the Soviet Union.
Similarly, there has been a dramatic recent decline in the
funding of sturgeon hatcheries in the north Caspian Sea.
The Caspian seal (Phoca caspica) is one of only two
freshwater seal species in the world. The mass die-off of
seals has been regularly observed, predominantly in the
spring and autumn months. Based on surveys dating
back to 1971, the events in recent years (1997, 2000, and
2001) have been considered to be massive mortalities.
They provoked a wide range of studies to determine the
cause, which in most cases was considered to be canine
distemper virus (Kennedy et al., 2000). There are other
extenuating factors, such as organochlorine contamination and prey availability, that may contribute to
magnitude of these mass die-offs.
Exotic species have invaded the Caspian Sea, replicating problems already experienced in the Black Sea.
The first reliable reports during 2000–2001 brought
attention to the introduction of the comb jelly, Mne-
miopsis leidyi, into the Caspian Sea. This invasive species
arrived from the Black Sea, where it had already
threatened the anchovy industry following its invasion
there in 1982. Concerns in the Caspian Sea hinge on the
threat that Mnemiopsis might pose for the fishing
industry, particularly for the anchovy kilka (Clupeonella
sp). Declining catches of kilka have already been noted
in the past couple of years. The kilka comprise an
important commodity for human consumption, but also
are preyed on by beluga sturgeon. The advisability
continues to be debated of introducing another species,
namely the comb jelly Beroe ovata, in an attempt to
control the population of Mnemiopsis.
Returning to the legal issues, presently no regional
agreements for the Caspian Sea have been signed by all
five littoral states relating to use of natural resources or
environmental protection. Without such agreements and
the underpinning definition of the legal status of the
Caspian Sea, the countries have agreed de facto that
national rules regulate environmental protection and the
use of natural resources, including seabed resources,
within the conditional national jurisdictions. This legal
impasse was caused by the break up of the Soviet Union
in 1989 creating four new littoral Caspian states and
exacerbated by the discovery of significant offshore oil
and gas reserves. As noted previously, the debate and
deadlock hinge on whether the Caspian Sea is a sea or
lake, and, accordingly, if it should be divided in accordance with the UN Law of the Sea or the rules for a
trans-boundary lake. It is not an easy decision since it
will have a significant impact on the oil and gas revenues
that a country might receive.
Until there is agreement on the legal status, development of oil and gas reserves in the centre of the
Caspian and plans for trans-Caspian Sea pipelines have
been on hold. Draft regional agreements on environmental protection, fisheries and oil spill response lay
collecting dust. They cannot be signed or ratified for fear
that they might pre-judge the agreement on the legal
status. There is a regional settlement, supported by
bilateral and trilateral agreements, on free navigation on
the Caspian Sea that was first reached between the
Soviet Union and Persia in 1921; but other regional
understandings, such as the non-militarization of the
Caspian, seem to be weakening. While there are
encouraging signs of a closer understanding between the
countries, unfortunately there has been no great movement towards a final legal settlement.
Recognizing the threats posed by weak regional
environmental governance, the countries came together
to sign the Almaty Declaration in 1994 calling for
environmental cooperation. The Caspian Environment
Programme (CEP) was formulated soon afterwards in
1995 with the support of the World Bank, European
Union, United Nations Development Programme and
the United Nations Environment Programme. The CEP
S.J. de Mora, T. Turner / Marine Pollution Bulletin 48 (2004) 26–29
is a regional inter-governmental umbrella organization
that was physically established as an entity three years
later, with the creation of a Programme Coordination
Unit in Baku, Azerbaijan, and approval of $16 million
of technical support projects from the main donor
agencies. Over the last five years, the CEP has been
instrumental in improving dialogue between the Caspian
littoral states and drafting regional agreements on a
range of environmental issues. In particular, with the
support of UNEP and following a long series of intergovernmental meetings, the countries have agreed to the
final text of a Framework Convention for the Protection
of the Marine Environment of the Caspian Sea. The
Convention is to be open for signature by the countries
at a special meeting in Tehran, Islamic Republic of Iran,
in November 2003. This Convention will be a major step
in creating a permanent regional management structure
for the Caspian Sea.
In summary, this is a unique ecosystem confronted by
a series of environmental stresses. For the most part the
problems outlined here are not unique to the Caspian
Sea, but have become intensified due to its land-locked
nature. Unilateral solutions will not succeed in the long
term and the five riparian states must cooperate to
mitigate current and prevent future pollution. While the
Caspian Sea region cannot yet serve as a successful
model of international collaboration for environmental
management and sustainable development, the establishment of the Caspian Environment Programme and
recent openness has allowed a better understanding of
the environmental problems and a wide felt appreciation
for what is at stake. The next, but not final, step will be
29
the signing and ratification of the Framework Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of
the Caspian Sea.
References
Clauer, N., Chaudhuri, S., Toulkeridis, T., Blanc, G., 2000. Fluctuations of Caspian Sea level: beyond climatic variations? Geology
28, 1015–1018.
de Mora, S.J., Villeneuve, J.-P., Sheikholeslami, M.R., Cattini, C.,
Tolosa, I., 2004. Organochlorinated compounds in Caspian Sea
sediments. Marine Pollution Bulletin, doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.
2003.10.001.
Dumont, H.J., 1995. Ecocide in the Caspian Sea. Nature 377, 673–674.
Dumont, H.J., 1998. The Caspian Lake: history, biota, structure, and
function. Limnology and Oceanography 43, 44–52.
Efendiyeva, I.M., 2000. Ecological problems of oil exploitation in the
Caspian Sea area. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering
28, 227–231.
Effimoff, I., 2000. The oil and gas resource base of the Caspian region.
Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering 28, 157–159.
Karpinsky, M.G., 1992. Aspects of the Caspian Sea benthic ecosystem.
Marine Pollution Bulletin 24, 384–389.
Kennedy, S., Kuiken, T., Jepson, P.D., Deaville, R., Forsyth, M.,
Barrett, T., van de Bildt, M.W.G., Osterhaus, A.D.M.E., Eybatov,
T., Duck, C., Kydurmanov, A., Mitrofanov, I., Wilson, S., 2000.
Mass die-off of Caspian seals caused by canine distemper virus.
Emerging Infectious Diseases 6, 637–639.
Tolosa, I., de Mora, S.J., Sheikholeslami, M.R., Villeneuve, J.-P.,
Bartocci, J., Cattini, C., 2004. Aliphatic and aromatic hydrocarbons in coastal Caspian Sea Sediments. Marine Pollution Bulletin,
doi:10.1016/S0025-326X(03)00255-8.
Zhulidov, A.V., Headley, J.V., Pavlov, D.F., Robarts, R.D., Korotova, L.G., Vinnikov, Y.Y., Zhulidova, O.V., 2000. Riverine fluxes
of the persistent organochlorine pesticides hexachlorcyclohexane
and DDT in the Russian Federation. Chemosphere 41, 829–841.