Kristina M. Gjerde

Pelagic protected areas: the missing dimension in ocean conservation.

Fewer protected areas exist in the pelagic ocean than any other ecosystem on Earth. Although there is increasing support for marine protected areas (MPAs) as a tool for pelagic conservation, there have also been numerous criticisms of the ecological, logistical and economic feasibility of place-based management in the dynamic pelagic environment. Here we argue that recent advances across conservation, oceanography and fisheries science provide the evidence, tools and information to address these criticisms and confirm MPAs as defensible and feasible instruments for pelagic conservation. Debate over the efficacy of protected areas relative to other conservation measures cannot be resolved without further implementation of MPAs in the pelagic ocean.

A Call for Deep-Ocean Stewardship

The precautionary approach and collaborative governance must balance deep-ocean use and protection. Covering more than half the planet, the deep ocean sequesters atmospheric CO2 and recycles major nutrients; is predicted to hold millions of yet-to-be-described species; and stores mind-boggling quantities of untapped energy resources, precious metals, and minerals (1). It is an immense, remote biome, critical to the health of the planet and human well-being. The deep ocean (defined here as below a typical continental shelf break, >200 m) faces mounting challenges as technological advances—including robotics, imaging, and structural engineering—greatly improve access. We recommend a move from a frontier mentality of exploitation and single-sector management to a precautionary system that balances use of living marine resources, energy, and minerals from the deep ocean with maintenance of a productive and healthy marine environment, while improving knowledge and collaboration.

Managing mining of the deep seabed

Contracts are being granted, but protections are lagging Interest in mining the deep seabed is not new; however, recent technological advances and increasing global demand for metals and rare-earth elements may make it economically viable in the near future (1). Since 2001, the International Seabed Authority (ISA) has granted 26 contracts (18 in the last 4 years) to explore for minerals on the deep seabed, encompassing ∼1 million km2 in the Pacific, Atlantic, and Indian Oceans in areas beyond national jurisdiction (2). However, as fragile habitat structures and extremely slow recovery rates leave diverse deep-sea communities vulnerable to physical disturbances such as those caused by mining (3), the current regulatory framework could be improved. We offer recommendations to support the application of a precautionary approach when the ISA meets later this July.

Ocean in peril: Reforming the management of global ocean living resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction

This article presents the outcome of research aimed at assisting governments in meeting their commitments and legal obligations for sustainable fisheries, based on increasing evidence that global fisheries are in crisis. The article assesses the effectiveness of the existing legal and institutional framework for high seas living resources. It focuses on: (1) the role of regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs); (2) tools for compliance and enforcement to stem illegal fishing; and (3) mechanisms for habitat protection. The article further highlights a variety of options for addressing key weaknesses and gaps in current ocean governance, including United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolutions, reforms at the regional level, as well as a possible new legal instrument, with a view to informing international discussions on ways to ensure the sustainable use of high seas resources without compromising the health of the marine environment.

An ecosystem-based deep-ocean strategy

Monitoring and assessment must underpin development of a new international agreement Increasing exploration and industrial exploitation of the vast and fragile deep-ocean environment for a wide range of resources (e.g., oil, gas, fisheries, new molecules, and soon, minerals) raises global concerns about potential ecological impacts (1–3). Multiple impacts on deep-sea ecosystems (>200 m below sea level; ∼65% of the Earths surface is covered by deep ocean) caused by human activities may act synergistically and span extensive areas. Cumulative impacts could eventually cause regime shifts and alter deep-ocean life-support services, such as the biological pump or nutrient recycling (2, 4, 5). Although international law and national legislation largely ignore the deep seas critical role in the functioning and buffering of planetary systems, there are promising developments in support of deep-sea protection at the United Nations and the International Seabed Authority (ISA). We propose a strategy that builds from existing infrastructures to address research and monitoring needs to inform governments and regulators.

Marine Protected Areas beyond National Jurisdiction: Some Practical Perspectives for Moving Ahead

AbstractDespite strong legal duties and political commitments for marine conservation and ecosystem-based management, biodiversity in the high seas and the Area (jointly referred to as areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ)) is under increasing threat. One important tool for enhancing conservation and multi-sectoral cooperation is the establishment and maintenance of representative networks of marine protected areas (MPAs). This commentary reviews potential avenues for accelerating progress towards representative MPA networks as part of a larger-scale effort towards improving the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction. It builds on the report by Petra Drankier, Marine Protected Areas in Areas beyond National Jurisdiction, Report on Research Question 2 of the Study on ‘Biological Diversity and Governance of the High Seas’ (2011), which describes the applicable global and regional conventions by discussing the strengths and weaknesses of proposed avenues for progress, including a possible multilateral agreement under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC). The commentary concludes with some observations for a pragmatic path ahead.

Science-based management in decline in the Southern Ocean

The burden of proof is being turned upside down With an internationally lauded approach to conserving Southern Ocean ecosystems (1), the healthiest marine ecosystems on Earth, the Commission on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR), has committed to adopting marine protected areas (MPAs) in the waters around Antarctica (2). But conflict over MPAs has led CCAMLR member states to disregard the best available science, distort the foundational rules of their convention, break trust, and threaten the integrity of one of the worlds most well-regarded science-based multinational governance efforts. With negotiations resuming at the CCAMLR meeting beginning 17 October, we offer recommendations aimed at implementing effective Southern Ocean MPAs, upholding CCAMLRs mandate, and maintaining its global leadership in ecosystem-based management. Given the historic conservation and diplomatic success of CCAMLR and Antarctic governance writ large, if we cannot adopt meaningful MPAs in the Southern Ocean, it does not bode well for doing so in the rest of the high seas.

Ocean Fertilisation and Climate Change: The Need to Regulate Emerging High Seas Uses

Geo-engineering and environmental modification techniques are increasingly being proposed as climate change mitigation strategies. Ocean fertilisation has been promoted as a simple solution to the problem of increasing atmospheric CO2 levels. However, neither its environmental safety nor its efficacy has been adequately assessed. This article examines the legality of ocean fertilisation under the law of the sea and concludes that it is subject to regulation under the London Convention and London Protocol as its potential for harm is contrary to the aims of these agreements. Hence, the sale of carbon offsets to fund ocean fertilisation activities should be prohibited unless and until an adequate risk assessment based on independent peer-reviewed science has established that the benefits outweigh the potential for harm, and appropriate regulation is in place to ensure that real, measurable, long-term CO2 sequestration can be independently verified. The initial uncertainties surrounding the appropriate regulatory regime for ocean fertilisation highlight the need for a comprehensive global regime for the prior assessment and on-going monitoring of existing, new and emerging high seas activities and uses to ensure they do not have adverse impacts on marine biodiversity and the marine environment in areas beyond national jurisdiction.

Deep-Sea Mining With No Net Loss of Biodiversity—An Impossible Aim

*We have been given permission to submit an abstract of 350 words and a body text of up to 7000 words. As a result, the portal will not let me paste the full text.

A strategy for the conservation of biodiversity on mid-ocean ridges from deep-sea mining

An international initiative takes conservation planning into the deep ocean to inform environmental management of deep-sea mining. Mineral exploitation has spread from land to shallow coastal waters and is now planned for the offshore, deep seabed. Large seafloor areas are being approved for exploration for seafloor mineral deposits, creating an urgent need for regional environmental management plans. Networks of areas where mining and mining impacts are prohibited are key elements of these plans. We adapt marine reserve design principles to the distinctive biophysical environment of mid-ocean ridges, offer a framework for design and evaluation of these networks to support conservation of benthic ecosystems on mid-ocean ridges, and introduce projected climate-induced changes in the deep sea to the evaluation of reserve design. We enumerate a suite of metrics to measure network performance against conservation targets and network design criteria promulgated by the Convention on Biological Diversity. We apply these metrics to network scenarios on the northern and equatorial Mid-Atlantic Ridge, where contractors are exploring for seafloor massive sulfide (SMS) deposits. A latitudinally distributed network of areas performs well at (i) capturing ecologically important areas and 30 to 50% of the spreading ridge areas, (ii) replicating representative areas, (iii) maintaining along-ridge population connectivity, and (iv) protecting areas potentially less affected by climate-related changes. Critically, the network design is adaptive, allowing for refinement based on new knowledge and the location of mining sites, provided that design principles and conservation targets are maintained. This framework can be applied along the global mid-ocean ridge system as a precautionary measure to protect biodiversity and ecosystem function from impacts of SMS mining.