High on promise

Details of High Seas Treaty will have to be worked out

The United Nations-facilitated High Seas Treaty, agreed upon by nearly 200 nations, has received wide acclaim as it fulfils the long-pending need for a legally binding mechanism to conserve and utilise in a sustainable manner valuable marine resources that are under threat from indiscriminate anthropogenic activity, pollution, and climate change. It essentially envisages setting apart about 30 per cent of the oceans outside the exclusive economic zones (EEZs) of the countries as protected areas by 2030 to allow them to recuperate. These marine zones would be akin to wildlife sanctuaries where any activity harmful to flora and fauna is prohibited.

Such a measure has been deemed imperative because, going by the latest assessment of the International Union for Conservation of Nature, about 10 per cent of all the marine species are at risk of extinction. Over 40 per cent of the threatened species are particularly vulnerable to global warming. Over-fishing, increased shipping traffic, elevated salinity, pollution, and climate change, including oceanic heat waves, are among the major causes of loss of marine biodiversity. Whales, sharks, several types of shellfish, and a horde of other fish species are under pressure because of their growing demand for food and making drugs and various other pharmaceutical products.

At present, international waters (outside national jurisdictions), which constitute about two-thirds of the world’s oceans and almost half the planet, are open for unrestricted fishing, navigation, mining, research, or any other activity by anyone. Only around 1 per cent of these waters are under some kind of protection. Evidently, only large companies of developed countries have the capacity to exploit the genetic resources of these deep sea regions. Most of the developing countries are unable even to optimally tap the resources of their EEZs. The marine sanctuaries established under the new treaty would put limits on fishing activities, delineate shipping routes, and impose well-judged curbs on exploration works like mining, particularly when these are undertaken in the seabed deeper than 200 metres below the surface. The objective, obviously, is to avoid damage to fish-breeding grounds and minimise the scope for pollution, including noise pollution, which can impair aquatic life.

Notably, the High Seas Treaty provides for sharing marine genetic resources, including plants and animals, for food and commercial purposes but without spelling out the modus operandi of doing so. It also moots regularly monitoring marine environments, especially in areas used for fishing, shipping, and mining. Though the protracted negotiations leading to this accord were on the verge of breaking down on several occasions over issues concerning fishing rights and funding, the rich nations are said to have finally consented to finance the implementation of various provisions of the pact. However, environmentalists, mindful of defaults in meeting the funding pledges for climate mitigation action, are sceptical about the developed countries’ assurances for providing financial, scientific, and technical support for maintaining the ecological health of the oceans. Consequently, many of these activists consider this agreement the basic framework for the preservation of marine ecosystems, leaving the precise modalities to be worked out later. But it is undisputedly a momentous step forward in safeguarding and strengthening the blue economy, which is set to play a significant role in environmentally safe economic development in future.