Research for regions: Strengthening marine technology transfer for Pacific Island Countries and biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction

Pacific Island Countries have limited capacity to engage in scientific research involving marine genetic resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ). Marine scientific research and capacity development are central to the regime for technology transfer established by the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (LOSC), but gaps and ambiguities weaken this framework. In this article, options to strengthen scientific capacity in Pacific Island Countries, through the development of a new international legally binding instrument for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in ABNJ under the LOSC, are examined. The international framework for technology transfer could be strengthened by fostering an integrated approach to the advancement, sharing and application of scientific knowledge. Coordination and collaboration at global and regional levels will be required to increase marine science cooperation, improve access to data and information, deliver training, and overcome barriers to develop institutional and individual scientific capacity

New laws for the high seas: four key issues the UN talks need to tackle

United Nations negotiations begin today in New York on the elements of an international agreement to govern the conservation and sustainable use of the high seas

Protect high seas biodiversity

The high seas—marine areas beyond national jurisdiction (1)—cover nearly half of Earth’s surface (2). The high seas support our planet in countless ways, from regulating the climate, to feeding millions of people, to supporting industries that contribute billions of dollars to the global economy (3). Even so, less than 1% of the high seas are fully protected (4), and the current patchwork of management and lack of oversight leaves them vulnerable to abuse. In 2017, the United Nations resolved to develop an international treaty for the conservation and sustainable use of the high seas. Negotiations are set to end this year. We must ensure that the forthcoming framework conserves high-seas biodiversity and promotes sustainable and equitable use

Inclusive innovation : Enhancing global participation in and benefit sharing linked to the utilization of marine genetic resources from areas beyond national jurisdiction

Funding This project has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant agreement ID: GA 721421 H2020-MSCA-ITN-2016. Declaration of competing interest MJ is founder of, has shares in, and consultant to GyreOx Ltd, a company that uses marine genetic resources from areas within national jurisdiction to develop potential drug molecules. Acknowledgements Many thanks to Arianna Broggiato and Abbe Brown for helpful discussions and comments on the manuscript. Thanks also to the Marie Curie H2020 fund for supporting this research.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Climate change considerations are fundamental to management of deep‐sea resource extraction

Climate change manifestation in the ocean, through warming, oxygen loss, increasing acidification, and changing particulate organic carbon flux (one metric of altered food supply), is projected to affect most deep‐ocean ecosystems concomitantly with increasing direct human disturbance. Climate drivers will alter deep‐sea biodiversity and associated ecosystem services, and may interact with disturbance from resource extraction activities or even climate geoengineering. We suggest that to ensure the effective management of increasing use of the deep ocean (e.g., for bottom fishing, oil and gas extraction, and deep‐seabed mining), environmental management and developing regulations must consider climate change. Strategic planning, impact assessment and monitoring, spatial management, application of the precautionary approach, and full‐cost accounting of extraction activities should embrace climate consciousness. Coupled climate and biological modeling approaches applied in the water and on the seafloor can help accomplish this goal. For example, Earth‐System Model projections of climate‐change parameters at the seafloor reveal heterogeneity in projected climate hazard and time of emergence (beyond natural variability) in regions targeted for deep‐seabed mining. Models that combine climate‐induced changes in ocean circulation with particle tracking predict altered transport of early life stages (larvae) under climate change. Habitat suitability models can help assess the consequences of altered larval dispersal, predict climate refugia, and identify vulnerable regions for multiple species under climate change. Engaging the deep observing community can support the necessary data provisioning to mainstream climate into the development of environmental management plans. To illustrate this approach, we focus on deep‐seabed mining and the International Seabed Authority, whose mandates include regulation of all mineral‐related activities in international waters and protecting the marine environment from the harmful effects of mining. However, achieving deep‐ocean sustainability under the UN Sustainable Development Goals will require integration of climate consideration across all policy sectors.This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. © 2020 The Authors. Global Change Biology published by John Wiley & Sons Lt

Social equity is key to sustainable ocean governance

Calls to address social equity in ocean governance are expanding. Yet ‘equity’ is seldom clearly defined. Here we present a framework to support contextually-informed assessment of equity in ocean governance. Guiding questions include: (1) Where and (2) Why is equity being examined? (3) Equity for or amongst Whom? (4) What is being distributed? (5) When is equity considered? And (6) How do governance structures impact equity? The framework supports consistent operationalization of equity, challenges oversimplification, and allows evaluation of progress. It is a step toward securing the equitable ocean governance already reflected in national and international commitments