Artificially islands do not increase a countries' exclusive economic zone (EEZ). What applies to land reclamation projects that are contiguous with existing land, such as with the Maasvlakte in Rotterdam (The Netherlands)? Does the Maasvlakte extend the EEZ of The Netherlands, or does the EEZ only apply to the "natural coastline", however that may be defined?

  • My guess is that the issue has been mostly ignored since extending one's land is pretty expensive to make much difference (to the EEZ).
    – Fizz
    Nov 27 '21 at 12:16
  • More practical issue that came up from that were immediate borders such as in Qatar v. Bahrain (ICJ).
    – Fizz
    Nov 27 '21 at 12:29
  • It could happen for the opposite reason. The Netherlands might point out that the coast in England right across the sea has receded due to erosion and thus they should review the EEZ boundary.
    – FluidCode
    Nov 29 '21 at 16:02

No. The "Law of the sea" states

Artificial islands, installations and structures do not possess the status of islands. They have no territorial sea of their own.

Maasvlakte is structure, and as such it has no territorial sea. The fact it is contingent with the land does not make it "land".


You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .