India’s recent signing of the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) Agreement, also known as the High Seas Treaty, has sparked a mix of optimism and scepticism.

About BBNJ Agreement

• The BBNJ Treaty is the third implementing agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).
  • Other two agreements are 1994 Part XI Implementation Agreement (regulating mining in international seabed areas) and the 1995 UN Fish Stocks Agreement (conserving and managing fish stocks).

Enroll now for UPSC Online Classes

• It focuses on three main objectives:
  • Conserving Marine Biodiversity: Establishing mechanisms like Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) to safeguard ecosystems.
  • Equitable Sharing of Marine Genetic Resources: Ensuring that profits from these resources benefit all countries through a global fund.
  • Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs): Mandating evaluations for activities with potential harmful impacts on marine environments.

Challenges in Implementation of BBNJ Agreement

• Ratification and Consensus: With only 14 out of 104 signatories having ratified the agreement, it is far from the threshold of 60 ratifications needed to come into force.
  • Maritime territorial disputes, such as those in the South China Sea, complicate consensus on creating MPAs. Many countries fear such measures could infringe on their economic opportunities or territorial claims.
  • Regional apprehensions, especially in areas like the Bay of Bengal, highlight concerns about how MPAs might affect livelihoods and access to marine resources.
• Marine Genetic Resources: The treaty mandates profit-sharing from marine genetic resource exploitation.
  • Wealthier nations could potentially undermine this provision by underreporting activities due to weak accountability mechanisms.
  • Overlaps with other regimes like the Convention on Biological Diversity with risk of disadvantage for smaller nations and creating fragmented enforcement.
• Capacity-Building and Technology Transfers: While the treaty emphasizes equitable partnerships in ocean science, it lacks enforceable mechanisms to ensure capacity-building.
  • This asymmetry risks sidelining low and middle-income countries, perpetuating inequalities in research and governance.
• High-Seas and EEZ Interconnections: The treaty’s focus on high-seas governance overlooks the interconnected nature of marine ecosystems.
  • Pollution, overfishing, and habitat destruction in Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) often spill into international waters.
  • Coastal states’ reluctance to address activities within their waters further weakens the treaty’s enforcement framework.
• Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs): The treaty requires EIAs for planned activities in international waters but excludes critical issues like oil and gas exploration, which remain significant economic interests for many states.
  • There is resistance to international review of EIAs, particularly in regions with limited institutional capacity and conflicting legal standards.

Check Out UPSC NCERT Textbooks From PW Store

Way Forward

• Integration of Coastal and High-Seas Governance: Establishing a cohesive framework that aligns high-seas regulations with coastal activities.
• Incentives for Coastal States: Encouraging Global South countries to align domestic laws with international norms by providing financial and technical assistance.
• Commitment from Wealthier Nations: Ensuring equitable sharing of treaty benefits through sustained support for capacity-building and technology transfer.
• Clear Implementation Roadmap: Defining enforceable mechanisms and fostering political consensus to address the treaty’s structural limitations.

DOWNLOAD PDF