text: certain important consequenceti should be attached to compliance with ptocedural obligations to at least induce States to do 80. Otherwise, th8r8 would be no incentives for States to take preventive measures. Article 18, therefore, tried to strike a certain balance. Non-compliance with this article would deprive the State of origin of the tight to invoke article 23 on the reduction of compeneation payable to the affected State, in case of transboundaty harm caueed by that activity. 503. Some members who addressed the article had difficulties with its basic structure and one member expressed reservation about the very principle 8xpteSSed in the article. In their view, article 18 could not deny a right of action for the affected State that miqht exist outside these articles under customary fntetnetional law. The article, they felt, should therefore be revised. A few from among theS8 members were also concerned that article 10 had perhaps gone too fat and in its current form reduced considerably the the activity causes [apptec:able] [significant] ttansboundary harm which can be causally attributed to it, the State of origin may not invoke in its favour the provisions of article 23, “w. Absence of w to the notificstion In the cases referred to in article 11, if the notifying State has provided information concerning rhe measures referred to therein, any State that dO8s not reply to the notification within a period of six months shall be pr-Jsurned to consider the measures satisfactory# this period may be extended, at the request of the State concerned, [for 8 reasonable period] [for a further six months]. States likely to be affected may ask for advice from any international organisation that is able to give it. If an assessment of the activity shows that transboundary harm cannot be avoided or cannot be adequately compensated, the State of
analysis: The text appears to be discussing the regulation of transboundary harm caused by human activities, specifically in the context of environmental protection. The language used suggests a focus on the responsibilities of states and the importance of preventing harm to other countries. The text also mentions the reduction of compensation payable to affected states, which implies a financial or economic aspect to the discussion.