Africa must help steer the world away from deep-sea mining

Daily Maverick

9 hours ago

Unilateral deep-sea mining, such as that planned by the Trump administration, could have grave impacts on Africa. The continent has a vital role in global ocean stewardship and safeguarding humanity's shared future.
Under President Donald Trump, the US' rush for critical minerals spans Ukraine, Greenland, the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), and now the last untouched frontier – the deep sea.
A recent White House executive order aims to position the US as a 'global leader in seabed mineral exploration and development both within and beyond national jurisdiction'. It involves extracting critical minerals such as cobalt, copper, manganese, nickel and rare earth elements from the ocean floor through dredging, hydraulic systems and subsea drilling.
Seabed or deep-sea mining (DSM) risks irreversible harm to ocean ecosystems. It involves extracting critical minerals such as cobalt, copper, manganese, nickel and rare earth elements from the ocean floor through dredging, hydraulic systems and subsea drilling.
These ventures do not align with Africa's long-term economic and environmental priorities. As the global debate intensifies – led by the United Nations' International Seabed Authority (ISA) – ocean governance is being reshaped. African countries must engage collectively or risk being sidelined.
The short-term economic benefits for miners are apparent, but several countries and stakeholders are concerned with the industry's long-term financial viability and environmental impact. This has stalled the finalisation of the ISA Mining Code to govern DSM activities, which has been in development since 2014.
During the March 2025 ISA Council meeting, Sierra Leone, on behalf of the African Group, highlighted key concerns about DSM commencing before the code is finalised. These include potential impacts on land-based mining economies and the need to bolster the economic assistance fund. There is also a need for environmental thresholds, effective compliance and enforcement mechanisms, robust anti-corruption and transparency measures, and a fair financial model for benefit sharing.
The US's planned exploration outside its waters goes against the 'common heritage of humankind' principle in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). The principle requires collective global governance of seabed resources.
Although the US is neither an ISA member nor a party to UNCLOS, the country has generally observed the treaty as customary international law. However, Trump's executive order enables unilateral exploitation of the global seabed.
Trump's global seabed 'exploitation'
It was issued barely a month after Canadian firm The Metals Company (TMC) announced it would circumvent the ISA by applying for mining licences under a US mining code. In April, TMC USA filed for licences under the 1980 US Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act to mine in the Pacific Ocean's Clarion-Clipperton Zone.
Trump's executive order risks undermining decades of multilateral efforts to protect the ocean. According to ISA Secretary-General Leticia Carvalho, 'Any unilateral action threatens not only this carefully negotiated treaty (UNCLOS) and decades of successful implementation and international cooperation, but also sets a dangerous precedent that could destabilise the entire system of global ocean governance.''
The executive order has also drawn criticism from China (which shares DSM interests), France and the European Commission for its apparent violation of international law. Even before the order was issued, 33 developed and developing countries called for a precautionary pause on DSM until scientific certainty ensured its safety.
June's UN Ocean Conference (UNOC3) in France saw global opposition to DSM grow, with 37 countries supporting a moratorium or precautionary pause. UN Secretary-General António Guterres warned that the deep sea couldn't become the 'Wild West'.
Although Trump's executive order faces strong global pushback, African countries have been less vocal than other regions. 'African states should advocate for science-based decision-making and address environmental knowledge gaps to protect shared marine resources,' says Dr Kirsty McQuaid, a researcher at the Nelson Mandela University Institute for Coastal and Marine Research and African Network of Deep-water Researchers coordinator.
Altered seafloor topography
Addressing knowledge gaps is vital. A recent study in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone revealed that more than 44 years since DSM experiments in 1979, mining equipment tracks, sediment plumes and altered seafloor topography remain. Biodiversity was also impacted, particularly among slow-growing and endemic species. Scientists continue to sound the alarm on the irreversible harm posed to marine ecosystems.
Forecasts suggest that DSM could damage African economies, particularly in land-based mineral-exporting countries. Seabed minerals could undercut the value of land-based exports like cobalt, nickel and manganese, which are major sources of revenue for several African countries.
The industry could also depress terrestrial mineral prices by flooding markets with seabed-derived alternatives. The DRC, Eritrea, Gabon, Madagascar, Mauritania, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe are especially vulnerable. Zambia and the DRC derive over half their export earnings and a substantial share of gross domestic product from these metals. African manganese producers such as South Africa, Ghana and Côte d'Ivoire may also be affected.
Ocean governance and maritime security expert Dr Ifesinachi Okafor-Yarwood told ISS Today that the US executive order 'will likely increase competition for seabed exploitation and risk further ocean degradation'. This would undermine social equity and ecological conservation, 'which is concerning given the vital role of marine fisheries in the livelihoods of millions of Africans. Africa must establish a clear stance on DSM'.
Professor Edwin Egede, an expert on international law of the sea and member of the ISA Legal and Technical Commission, agrees. 'Any unilateral appropriation of the deep seabed area and the resources therein contravenes both UNCLOS and customary international law.'
He says 'Africa should raise its voice and uphold its legacy in global ocean governance, protect the common heritage of humankind developed by a rules-based international order, and ensure international cooperation and equity guide decisions shaping humanity's shared future.'
African protective options
African states have two possible options. First, they could ask the International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea to clarify states' obligations under the 'common heritage of mankind' principle. In 2011, the tribunal affirmed that sponsoring states must comply with UNCLOS environmental standards and due diligence obligations – a decision that discourages unilateral or domestic licensing.
Second, ahead of the mid-July ISA General Assembly meeting, African countries could advocate for a DSM pause to ensure environmental safeguards and address regulatory gaps.
The momentum achieved at UNOC3 for the High Seas Treaty – with 50 of 60 required ratifications reached – faces serious threats from the rise of unilateral DSM activities, which weaken ocean governance.
Africa has a vital role in global ocean stewardship and safeguarding humanity's shared future. By advocating for stringent environmental safeguards and equitable benefit-sharing in ISA policy discussions, African countries can prevent DSM from compromising the health of our oceans and the rights of future generations. DM