This article argues that the concept of diligence provides a useful role in clarifying (and perhaps narrowing) the discretionary powers of the State with respect to the development of natural resources. The claim has two branches. First, the concept of due diligence plays an important role in bridging the normative gap between the harms caused by private actors and the international law of State responsibility. It is the vehicle by which States can be made to assume responsibility for private developments within their jurisdiction and control that cause harm to other States. Second, the concept of due diligence plays an important role (a “generative role”) in teasing out the detailed logical implications of more abstract primary norms such as the duty of prevention. These derivative duties include the duties to make a preliminary assessment of whether the proposed activity may cause a risk of significant transboundary harm: to conduct an environmental impact assessment (EIA) if there is a risk of significant harm and, if the EIA confirms that risk, to notify and consult with respect to possible measures to prevent or mitigate that risk. The article demonstrates both of these claims through an examination of the jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and arbitral awards. Finally, the article applies these claims in the context of possible resource developments in Alaska, British Columbia and Yukon that may have transboundary implications.

中文翻译：

---

关于尽职调查在明确国家在北极自然资源开发中的自由裁量权中的作用的思考

本文认为，勤勉的概念在阐明（或许还可以缩小）国家在自然资源开发方面的自由裁量权方面发挥了有用的作用。索赔有两个分支。首先，尽职调查的概念在弥合私人行为者造成的损害与国家责任国际法之间的规范差距方面发挥着重要作用。它是使各国对其管辖和控制范围内对其他国家造成损害的私人发展承担责任的工具。其次，尽职调查的概念在梳理更抽象的主要规范（例如预防义务）的详细逻辑含义方面发挥着重要作用（“生成作用”）。这些衍生职责包括对拟议活动是否可能造成重大跨界损害风险进行初步评估的职责：如果存在重大损害风险，并且如果 EIA 确认该风险，则进行环境影响评估 (EIA) ，就预防或减轻该风险的可能措施进行通知和协商。本文通过审查国际法院、国际海洋法法庭和仲裁裁决的判例来证明这两种主张。最后，本文将这些主张应用于阿拉斯加、不列颠哥伦比亚省和育空地区可能具有跨界影响的资源开发。如果存在重大损害的风险，则进行环境影响评估 (EIA)，如果 EIA 确认该风险，则通知并就预防或减轻该风险的可能措施进行磋商。本文通过审查国际法院、国际海洋法法庭和仲裁裁决的判例来证明这两种主张。最后，本文将这些主张应用于阿拉斯加、不列颠哥伦比亚省和育空地区可能具有跨界影响的资源开发。如果存在重大损害风险，则进行环境影响评估 (EIA)，如果 EIA 确认该风险，则通知并就预防或减轻该风险的可能措施进行磋商。本文通过审查国际法院、国际海洋法法庭和仲裁裁决的判例来证明这两种主张。最后，本文将这些主张应用于阿拉斯加、不列颠哥伦比亚省和育空地区可能具有跨界影响的资源开发。本文通过审查国际法院、国际海洋法法庭和仲裁裁决的判例来证明这两种主张。最后，本文将这些主张应用于阿拉斯加、不列颠哥伦比亚省和育空地区可能具有跨界影响的资源开发。本文通过审查国际法院、国际海洋法法庭和仲裁裁决的判例来证明这两种主张。最后，本文将这些主张应用于阿拉斯加、不列颠哥伦比亚省和育空地区可能具有跨界影响的资源开发。