In the context of Russia’s full-scale armed aggression and the widespread contamination of Ukraine’s territory with landmines and other explosive remnants of war, the legal regulation of contractual relations in the field of humanitarian demining is of critical importance for ensuring the effective and transparent implementation of demining activities and the sustainable restoration of the country’s natural resource potential. The aim of this study is to identify the specific features of contractual regulation in humanitarian demining as a key component of post-conflict ecological recovery, to reveal existing legal gaps, and to develop practical recommendations for improving the regulatory framework for mine action within the broader environmental security context. The research adopts a desk-based methodology, focusing on the analysis of current Ukrainian legislation, international treaties, environmental and legal policy frameworks, and reports by national authorities (e.g., the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources, the Ministry of Defence of Ukraine) and international institutions such as the Geneva International Centre for Humanitarian Demining. Particular attention is paid to the practice of public procurement in the field of humanitarian demining (via the Prozorro system), which allows for the identification of common contract models, clarification of their legal regulation, and diagnosis of key obstacles to implementation. Through a comparative approach, the study also reviews international documents, including the International Mine Action Standards (IMAS), the UN PERAC Guidelines on environmental assessments in post-conflict settings, and the provisions of the Ottawa Convention and the Convention on Cluster Munitions. The interdisciplinary framework of the study enables an integrated understanding of demining contracts not only as legal instruments but also as tools for the sustainable management and restoration of damaged ecosystems. The findings of the research can be integrated into Ukraine’s national policy on post-war recovery and contribute to enhancing the legal and institutional foundations of environmental safety.

1. Carl Bruch, “Considerations in Framing the Environmental Dimensions of the Jus Post Bellum” in Carsten Stahn, Jens Iverson and Jeniffer Easterday (eds), Environmental Protection and Transitions from Conflict to Peace: Clarifying Norms, Principles, and Practices (Oxford Academic, 2017) 29-39 <https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198784630.003.0002>

2. Carolay Camacho-Sanchez, Ruben Yie-Pinedo and Gina Galindo, “Humanitarian Demining for the Clearance of Landmine-Affected Areas” (2023) 88(101611) Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 1-13 <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.seps.2023.101611>

3. Carsten Stahn and Jens Iverson (ed.) Just Peace after Conflict: Jus Post Bellum and the Justice of Peace (Oxford University Press, 2021) <https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198823285.001.0001>

4. Carsten Stahn, Jennifer Easterday and Jens Iverson (ed.), Jus Post Bellum: Mapping the Normative Foundations (Oxford University Press, 2014) <https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685899.001.0001>

5. Diana Pedraza, “Ethical Disconcertment and the Politics of Troublemaking” (2023) 50(3) American Ethnologist 462-473 <https://doi.org/10.1111/amet.13198>

6. Harshi Gunawardana, Dammika Tantrigoda and Anura Kumara, “Humanitarian Demining and Sustainable Land Management in Post-Conflict Settings in Sri Lanka: Literature Review” (2016) 6(3) Journal of Management and Sustainability <https://doi.org/10.5539/jms.v6n3p79>

7. International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), “Guidelines on protection of natural environment in armed conflict” <https://www.icrc.org/en/document/guidelines-protection-natural-environment-armed-conflict-rules-and-recommendations-relating> accessed February 24, 2025

8. International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), Protocol “On Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Mines, Booby-Traps and Other Devices as Amended on May 3, 1996 (Protocol II to the 1980 CCW Convention as Amended on May 3, 1996)” <https://ihl-databases.icrc.org/en/ihl-treaties/ccw-amended-protocol-ii-1996> accessed February 24, 2025

9. Iryna Lappo, Yevgenii Biriukov, Oleksii Zhurakhov and Yurii Dobryshkin, “The Mine Activities Centre: The Main Aspects of Activity and Development Prospects” (2023) 1(15) Collection of Scientific Works of the State Research Institute of Testing and Certification of Weapons and Military Equipment 74-80 <https://doi.org/10.37701/dndivsovt.15.2023.10>

10. Karen Hulme, “Using a Framework of Human Rights and Transitional Justice for Post-Conflict Environmental Protection and Remediation” in Carsten Stahn, Jens Iverson and Jeniffer Easterday (eds), Environmental Protection and Transitions from Conflict to Peace: Clarifying Norms, Principles, and Practices (Oxford Academic, 2017) 119-142 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198784630.003.0006>

11. Kirsten Stefanik, “The Environment and Armed Conflict: Employing General Principles to Protect the Environment”in Carsten Stahn, Jens Iverson and Jeniffer Easterday (eds), Environmental Protection and Transitions from Conflict to Peace: Clarifying Norms, Principles, and Practices (Oxford Academic, 2017) 93-118 <https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198784630.003.0005>

12. Maki Habib, “Humanitarian Demining: The Problem, Difficulties, Priorities, Demining Technology and the Challenge for Robotics” (2008) 5(1) International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems 1-18 <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/257873861_Humanitarian_Demining_Innovative_Solutions_and_the_Challenges_of_Technology> accessed February 22, 2025

13. Olha Drobot and Maryna Rudenko, “Algorithm of Implementing the Experience in Organizing a Technical Regulation System for Assessing Conformity and Certification of Weapons and Military Equipment. Testing and Certification of Weapons and Military Equipment” (II scientific-Technological Conference of State Research Institute of Testing and Certification of Weapons and Military Equipment, Cherkasy, December 2023) 448-449

14. Ruslan Bespalko, Taras Hutsul, Ivan Kazimir and Kateryna Myronchuk, “Modern Approaches to Assessing the Sequence of Humanitarian Demining of Territories” (2023) 1(31) Technical Sciences and Technologies 146-157 <https://doi.org/10.25140/2411-5363-2023-1(31)-146-157>

15. Serhii Poteriaiko and Anatolii Okipniak, “Mechanisms of State Management of Mine Action in Ukraine” (2022) 2(12) Scientific Bulletin: Public Administration 304-321 <https://doi.org/10.33269/2618-0065-2022-2(12)-304-321>

16. Toby Robinson and Rosanna O’Keeffe, “The Challenges of Humanitarian Mine Clearance in Ukraine” (2019) 23(1) The Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction 17-23 <https://commons.lib.jmu.edu/cisr-journal/vol23/iss1/8> accessed February 22, 2025

17. UN Office for Disarmament Affairs, “International Ammunition Technical Guidelines” <https://disarmament.unoda.org/convarms/Ammunition/IATG/> accessed February 24, 2025

18. Ursign Hofmann and Pascal Rapillard, “Do No Harm in Mine Action: Why the Environment Matters” (2015) 19(1) The Journal of ERW and Mine Action 4-9 <https://www.gichd.org/fileadmin/user_upload/Do_No_Harm_in_Mine_Action__Why_the_Environment_Matters_-_Copy.pdf> accessed February 24, 2025

19. Volodymyr Ustymenko, Yuliia Rohozian, Oleksandr Trehub, Pavlo Liashenko and Dariia Zablodska, “Economic and Legal Dimension of Humanitarian Demining of Ukraine: Problem and Research Prospects” (2023) 12(65) Amazonia Investiga 287-295 <https://doi.org/10.34069/AI/2023.65.05.27>

20. Volodymyr Zadorozhnyi, Myhailo Faifura and Vasyl Tsegelnyk, “Challenges and Needs of Ukraine during Demining of Territories Affected by the War in 2022” (2023) 1(113) Young Scientist 10-13 <https://doi.org/10.32839/2304-5809/2023-1-113-3>