There are concerns that the treaty may not protect the ocean from overfishing, shipping and deep-sea mining
The treaty will also ensure that profits from marine genetic resources — materials of plant, animal or microbes — are shared equitably and fairly. Photo: iStock.
_ After nearly two decades of negotiations, countries have agreed on a high seas treaty to conserve and sustainably use marine biodiversity beyond national boundaries.
Experts have hailed the move and called it a step in the right direction, but some concerns remain. Nations will meet again to formally adopt the treaty. It will “enter into force” when at least 60 countries ratify the treaty.
Also read: Fresh negotiations on UN High Seas Treaty begin in New York. Here’s what to expect
However, this ratification process could take some time. The United Nations (UN)-mandated Paris Agreement on climate change, for instance, was adopted in December 2015. But it entered into force almost a year later, on November 4, 2016.
The high seas are areas beyond 200 nautical miles from the exclusive economic zones of coastal countries. The high seas face threats from over- and illegal fishing, mining, oil and gas extraction, land-based pollution, habitat loss and climate change.
Despite covering more than two-thirds of the global ocean, only 1.44 per cent of the high seas are protected. The treaty aims to increase the percentage of protected areas in the high seas.
The treaty will also ensure that profits from marine genetic resources (MGR) — materials of plant, animal or microbes — are shared equitably and fairly. These resources find applications in medicine and pharma.
Additionally, the treaty provides ground rules for Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA), which deal with identifying and evaluating the potential impacts an activity could have on the ocean. Carbon sequestration activities, for example, will have to do EIAs. Ocean-based carbon sequestration involves using oceans to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
“The success of this treaty is critical to achieving the 30x30 target set at Biodiversity COP15,” Avinash Chanchal, senior climate campaigner at Greenpeace India, told Down To Earth.
The 30x30 global target intends to protect 30 per cent of the land and ocean by 2030. It was agreed at the Conference of the Parties to the UN Convention on Biological Diversity in December 2022.
“It is therefore imperative that countries ratify the treaty and begin working towards creating extensive, fully protected ocean sanctuaries covering 30 per cent of the world’s oceans by 2030,” Chanchal said.
The 30x30 target is not explicitly mentioned in the draft agreement. Still, the expert added that it is a viable starting point for protecting 30 per cent of the world’s oceans.
To achieve this goal, countries will have to annually bring roughly 10 million square kilometres of the ocean under Marine Protected Areas (MPA), according to experts.
Also read: ‘Marine Protected Areas must be evaluated for effectiveness’
MPAs enable long-term conservation by limiting human activities in certain ocean areas.
But the definition provided in the draft agreement is vague, Chanchal pointed out. The agreement stated that MPAs are “geographically defined marine area that is designated and managed to achieve specific long-term biodiversity conservation objectives and may allow, where appropriate, sustainable use provided it is consistent with the conservation objectives.”
He noted that the definition has mentioned “sustainable use”, which is a cause for concern.
There are also concerns that the treaty may not protect the ocean from overfishing, shipping and deep-sea mining.
Deep-sea mining involves extracting ores rich in cobalt, manganese, zinc and other rare metals from the sea floor. Though mining is not permitted yet, countries are exploring and pushing for it.
“These MPAs can’t control fishing, shipping and mining,” said Elizabeth Mendenhall, assistant professor, The University of Rhode Island, who observed the two-week-long negotiations in New York.
In 2017, it was agreed that this treaty “should not undermine” existing governance bodies such as the regional fisheries management organisations, International Maritime Organization and International Seabed Authority.
“So, it’s pretty maddening that people think that effective and thorough high seas MPAs are around the corner,” she added.
There is also concern that states could opt out of setting up MPAs, Chanchal noted. A new MPA could be designated once a three-quarter majority is achieved after voting.
But if a party objects to it, they could adopt equivalent and alternative measures or approaches.
Several aspects of the treaty have been watered down. “We could see movements such as limiting the involvement of the scientific and technical body in decision-making, limiting the applicability of the treaty to disputed areas and creating an opt-out mechanism for MPAs,” Mendenhall highlighted.
Developed countries will make an annual contribution, but the rate will be fixed by the conference of parties formed after the treaty enters into force.
Funding will be created to help developing states implement this treaty. This includes a special fund and a voluntary fund. The latter will allow representatives of developing nations, particularly least developed countries, landlocked developing countries and small island developing states, to participate in subsequent meetings.
Read more: Climate-smart marine protected areas can shield biota from global warming: Experts
The Global Environment Facility (GEF) — a multilateral environmental fund — has also been roped in. “We are ready to continue and intensify support for biodiversity protection and ocean health on the high seas,” executive officer and chairperson of GEF, Carlos Manuel Rodríguez, said in a statement.
The European Union announced it would provide €816.5 million for protecting the ocean on March 2, 2023.
Monetary benefits can also be achieved through MGR and their commercialisation. This “shall be shared fairly and equitably,” the agreement stated.
This was a major source of contention during the negotiations. Developing countries insisted that the “obligation to share monetary benefits should be included in the text,” according to The Guardian.
This was resolved on the last day of the negotiations, but Mendenhall is unsure how this was done.
“The developing states definitely got some victories and the rules for MGR and benefit sharing are more involved than the developed states wanted,” Mendenhall said.
Once the treaty enters into force, the conference of parties from participating countries will meet to oversee the functioning of the treaty.
States will have to start doing EIAs and make proposals for MPAs. Private actors will have to report data on MGR access, said Mendenhall.
The draft agreement stated that countries will be responsible for fulfilling international obligations of protecting and preserving the marine environment.
Many parts of the agreement are “state-driven”. The treaty is definitely a step in the right direction, but states and existing bodies must also step up, she said.
We are a voice to you; you have been a support to us. Together we build journalism that is independent, credible and fearless. You can further help us by making a donation. This will mean a lot for our ability to bring you news, perspectives and analysis from the ground so that we can make change together.
.png)
Comments are moderated and will be published only after the site moderator’s approval. Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name. Selected comments may also be used in the ‘Letters’ section of the Down To Earth print edition.