IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Ten years after the enactment of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990: a success or a failure

Listed author(s):
  • Kim, Inho
Registered author(s):

    In response to the Exxon Valdez incident, the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 was enacted as allegedly comprehensive oil pollution legislation. There have been changes in the patterns of oil spills and the strategic response to the Act. The number and volume of oil spills from tank vessels in US waters have fallen considerably without an obvious increase in oil prices since the enactment of the Act. This implies that the Act has successfully served its purpose. The Act may also facilitate the development of other oil pollution regimes including the international regime beyond the US. However, it remains to be seen whether the reduction of oil spills in US waters will be sustained in the future. There is an irreducible risk irrespective of any policy controlling oil pollution risks. The assertion that the Act has been effective in deterring oil spills may be counteracted by statistics demonstrating that the number and quantity of oil spills have also declined worldwide since 1990. It is premature to evaluate the performance of the Act because it has not so far been tested by a major oil spill since its enactment. A major oil spill in US waters in the future would illuminate limitation of the Act and lead to a fundamental reconsideration of the structure of the Act.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Marine Policy.

    Volume (Year): 26 (2002)
    Issue (Month): 3 (May)
    Pages: 197-207

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:26:y:2002:i:3:p:197-207
    Contact details of provider: Web page:

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:26:y:2002:i:3:p:197-207. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Dana Niculescu)

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.