This volume complements and updates the magisterial two-volume collection of maritime boundary agreements published by the American Society of International Law in 1993 and, although only five years have passed, the number of agreements that have since been concluded certainly justify its appearance. The original volumes were constructed to present and examine maritime boundary agreements from both a regional and thematic perspective. Ten regions were identified and the relevant agreements presented in separate “Reports”, each of which included the text, an illustrative map and a presentation and analysis. Each region was then the subject of a regional analysis. In addition, a number of thematic issues were identified and considered in each report. The volumes commenced with essays considering these themes and drawing from these reports.

In form and presentation, it is very much a continuation volume. The 30-plus agreements which it contains are numbered to follow on sequentially from the reports in the previous volumes and the same regional and thematic divisions are utilized. However, the introductory chapters are not revisited and, while understandable, this may be regretted by some since the 1992 Award in the St Pierre and Miquelon Arbitration (Report 1–2 (Add. 2) and the judgment of the International Court of Justice in the 1993 Denmark v. Norway (Report 9–19) case are now within the scope of the work. Arguably, the latter case has changed the delimitation landscape (seascape?) in a more significant fashion than the report suggests (p. 2519) and this might have contributed to the editors’ conclusion that the scale of developments did not warrant revisions of these overall assessments (Vol. III, xx). In contrast, the comments on the St Pierre and Miquelon case seem to go too far the other way when suggesting that the case “has a profound significance for the jurisprudence of maritime delimitation in quite a number of important respects” (p. 2155). Even if the exact nature of the impact of these two cases is a matter of debate, it is clear that, at the very least, a debate exists. Against that background, some further observations might have been welcomed by users of these volumes, even if wholesale revision was neither appropriate nor feasible. Nor have the regional reports been updated systematically. Updates have been included on the Adriatic Sea, Black Sea, Baltic Sea and