What is the high seas treaty?
The high seas treaty could be law by the end of the year, affording protection to marine life in the vast swathes of ocean that belong to no one.
The treaty was adopted by UN member states in June 2023. It has been ratified by 31 nations plus the European Union, and comes into force 120 days after its 60th ratification.
But at the UN Ocean Conference this week, hosts France said around 50 countries have ratified the pact, bringing it within reach of enactment.
The United States signed the treaty in 2023 under Joe Biden but is not expected to ratify it while Donald Trump is president.
Here are the key points of the treaty text:
- International waters -
The treaty covers international waters, which fall outside the jurisdiction of any single state, and account for more than 60 percent of the world's oceans.
Specifically, it applies to waters beyond countries' exclusive economic zones, which extend up to 200 nautical miles from the coast.
It also covers what is known as "the Area", shorthand for seabed and subsoil beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. The Area comprises just over half of the planet's seabed.
Once enacted, a decision-making body -- a Conference of the Parties (COP) -- would have to work with regional and global organizations that already oversee different aspects of the oceans.
These include regional fisheries bodies and the International Seabed Authority, the arena where nations are hotly contesting a proposed set of rules to govern deep-sea mining.
Trump's decision to sidestep the authority -- to which the US is not a member -- and issue deep-sea mining permits in international waters has raised tricky questions of jurisdiction.
- Marine protected areas -
Currently, almost all protected marine areas (MPAs) are within national territorial waters.
The treaty, however, allows for these reserves to be created in the open ocean.
Most decisions would be taken by a consensus of the COP, but an MPA can be voted into existence with a three-quarters majority, to prevent deadlock caused by a single country.
One crucial shortcoming: the text does not say how these conservation measures will be monitored and enforced over remote swathes of the ocean -- a task that will fall to the COP.
Some experts say satellites could be used to spot infractions.
Individual countries are already responsible for certain activities on the high seas that they have jurisdiction over, such as those of ships flying their flags.
- Sharing the bounty? -
On the high seas, countries and entities under their jurisdiction will be allowed to collect animal, plant, or microbial matter whose genetic material might prove useful, even commercially.
Scientists, for example, have discovered molecules with the potential to treat cancer or other diseases in microbes scooped up in sediment, or produced by sponges or marine mollusks.
Benefits-sharing of those resources has been a key point of contention between wealthy and poorer nations.
The treaty establishes frameworks for the transfer of marine research technologies to developing countries and a strengthening of their research capacities, as well as open access to data.
But it's left to the COP to decide exactly how any monetary benefits will eventually be shared, with options including a system based on specific commercialized products, or more generalized payment systems.
- Environmental impact studies -
The treaty requires signatories to assess the environmental impacts of planned activities under their control on the high seas before they are authorized in instances when such activities may have more than a minor or transitory effect.
It also calls for countries to assess the potential impact on international waters of activities within national jurisdictions that may cause "substantial pollution" or harm the high sea marine environment.
Ultimately, states are responsible for giving the green light to any potentially harmful activity -- a role NGOs hoped would go to the COP, to make controversial approvals more difficult.
The treaty also requires states to publish updates on an activity's environmental impacts. Approvals can be called into question if unanticipated impacts arise.
Though they are not specifically listed in the treaty, activities that could come under regulation include transport and fishing, as well as more controversial subjects such as deep-sea mining or even geo-engineering initiatives to mitigate global warming.
abd/np/sms

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


San Francisco Chronicle
12 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
AP PHOTOS: Trump's new travel ban takes effect, and some protest
President Donald Trump's ban on travel to the United States took effect Monday. Demonstrators outside Los Angeles International Airport held signs protesting the ban affecting citizens from 12 mainly African and Middle Eastern countries. At Miami International Airport, passengers moved steadily through an area for international arrivals. Tensions are escalating over the Trump administration's campaign of immigration enforcement. The new ban applies to citizens of Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. It also imposes heightened restrictions on people from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela who are outside the U.S. and don't hold a valid visa. This is a photo gallery curated by AP photo editors.
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ampere Analysis Breaks Down The Threat U.S. Tariffs Would Pose To European Film & TV
Speaking at NEM in Croatia, Ampere Analysis Co-Founder Guy Bisson ran the rule over the so-called plan to save Hollywood from Jon Voight and associates, and assessed the potential impact on the European film and TV biz. 'A 120% tariff on incentives to cancel out global schemes is patently ridiculous and obviously very damaging, potentially, to the European industry,' he said. 'Tax treaties, local tax treaties in the U.S., and incentive schemes, just like we use in Europe, clearly, are the way to go if you want to re-enliven your industries.' More from Deadline Donald Trump's Tariffs Deemed Unlawful & Blocked By Trade Court; White House Appeals Instantly Life After Peak TV: "It's A New World Order... There's A Rethink Required" - Berlin Streamer Content Spend To Top Commercial Broadcasters For First Time In 2025 - Report A draft of Voight's Make Hollywood Great Again plan, obtained by Deadline, included a mixture of production incentives and a 120% tariff on the value of a foreign incentive received. After he presented the plan to Donald Trump, the President public proposed a 100% tariff on all U.S. film imports, including productions that shoot in other countries. The NEM confab and sales market is held annually in Dubrovnik. The latest edition kicked off, Monday, with Bisson's session, which was entitled: 'Content Trends in the Era of Trump: Protectionism, Production and International Markets'. The Ampere executive set the scene by showing how the European content business has benefitted from the U.S. studios widening their production bases and streamers setting up shop in several parts of the continent, resulting in orders for thousands of hours of first-run programming. He also said international markets are key to those same U.S. giants monetizing their series and movies with, for example, 54% of the total box office for U.S. films coming from international markets, according to Ampere. Getting into the weeds on the suggested measures, he said a 120% tariff on any incentive received overseas is 'one of the most concerning aspects of the proposal, effectively closing the door on U.S. producers making use of any overseas incentive.' He went on to break down what might happen if the proposed measure were introduced with a slide that pinpointed the UK and Spain as the two biggest potential losers in Europe, given the volumes of U.S. production in both countries. 'Obviously the big European markets – the UK, France, Italy, Spain, Germany – are on that list, but so is Poland, for example, and Turkey, and the Scandinavian markets. They have been the [among] biggest beneficiaries of that 'runaway' production.' Speaking about the notion of tax treaties with certain countries for films substantially produced in U.S., Bisson said the idea is interesting: 'While you still have to make a majority, or spend a majority of the budget, in the U.S., you can effectively stack or double dip incentive schemes through those treaties.' He also said any re-introduction of rules that prohibit networks (and now, SVODs) fully owning shows 'would remove one of the things that's annoyed producers so much, which is streamers taking all rights in perpetuity.' Trump has said that he would meet with industry officials, and the White House said no final decisions have been made regarding the plan. Voight, Sylvester Stallone and a group that included studios and unions later wrote a letter to Trump emphasizing the need for production incentives While punchy, the NEM presentation was, thusly, analyzing what are currently theoretical scenarios. Bisson said that the best hope for the European biz is that theory never becomes practice. 'None of this is actually happening or being put in place yet, it's just a suggestion,' he said. 'Who can predict what Trump will do next. You may have heard the nickname that Trump has been given: TACO; Trump, Always Chickens Out on tariffs. That's what we can hope will happen again when it comes to our industry and the suggested protectionism being placed on film and TV.' Ted Johnson contributed to this report. Best of Deadline 2025 TV Series Renewals: Photo Gallery Tony Awards: Every Best Musical Winner Since 1949 Tony Awards: Every Best Play Winner Since 1947
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
State Legislature Acts To ‘Make Texas Healthy Again'
Under Senate Bill 25, which awaits Gov. Greg Abbott's signature, Texas could become one of the first states to mandate warning labels on foods containing artificial dyes and specific chemicals. The bill, dubbed the Make Texas Healthy Again Act, requires labels on products containing one or more of some 40-plus additives, such as Blue 1, Red 40, Yellow 5, butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA), and titanium dioxide. The label would state: 'WARNING: This product contains an ingredient that is not recommended for human consumption by the appropriate authority in Australia, Canada, the European Union, or the United Kingdom.' The warning label must be prominent, readable, and would apply to products packaged after January 1, 2027. A loophole allows producers using existing packaging through 2036 to avoid the requirement. The bill also invalidates state labeling rules if federal regulations supersede them. 'Texas can really lead here. … These bills represent a Texas way that prioritizes transparency, prioritizes good education and prioritizes incentive change,' Calley Means, a top adviser to U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., said during a Senate Health and Human Services Committee hearing. Beyond labeling, SB 25 increases physical activity requirements for middle school students from four to six semesters of 30-minute daily sessions and mandates nutrition education for undergraduates, developed by a seven-member Texas Nutrition Advisory Committee appointed by the governor by December 31, 2025. The committee would include experts in metabolic health, a licensed physician, a Texas Department of Agriculture representative, and others. In addition, doctors and nurses must complete continuing education on nutrition to maintain their licenses. 'This sweeping legislation is not just another bill. It's a call to action — one that so many Texans and Americans are realizing — that something is wrong and that something needs to change in our food industry and in our sedentary lifestyle,' Sen. Lois Kolkhorst (R-Brenham), the bill's sponsor, told The Texas Tribune. The bill garnered bipartisan support, with 10 Senate Democrats and three House Democrats sponsoring or co-sponsoring. 'This is about the MAHA parents and the crunchy granola parents coming together to say, 'We are sick and tired of being sick and tired,'' said Rep. Lacey Hull (R-Houston) before the House passed the bill on May 25. Food industry groups, including Walmart, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, General Mills, and Frito-Lay, opposed the labeling, warning in a letter that it 'could destabilize local and regional economies.' Rep. Barbara Gervin-Hawkins (D-San Antonio) expressed concern that 'the cost of food will continue to rise,' the Tribune reported. Kolkhorst countered in February that 'the market will adjust.' Supporters, like the Episcopal Health Foundation, see health benefits. 'The amount of money and time we're spending treating diabetes as opposed to preventing it is huge, especially in Texas,' said Brian Sasser, the foundation's chief communications officer, per the Tribune. Andy Keller of the Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute added, 'In a world that pretends the brain is not part of the body, this bill will put tools in the hands of children, parents and teachers to begin truly addressing emotional health and wellbeing.' The bill aligns with federal Make America Healthy Again initiatives, with Kolkhorst noting Kennedy's personal call urging its passage. 'As in so many cases, we're not waiting on Washington,' said Sen. Bryan Hughes (R-Mineola) in February. 'Texas will act.'