Latest news with #oceanprotection
Forbes
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Forbes
The $15.8 Billion Gap: The Smart Economics Of Ocean Protection
As world leaders are gathered in Nice for the third UN Ocean Conference (UNOC), new data has revealed the staggering cost of inaction, and the surprising economics of ocean protection. Despite headline commitments like the Global Biodiversity Framework's promise to safeguard 30% of marine ecosystems by 2030, only 2.7% of the ocean is effectively protected today. That number isn't just inadequate; it's falling. Ocean protection efforts are faltering, with policy talk far outpacing tangible results. The conference is taking place at a critical inflection point. UNOC's priorities (defending ecosystems, building a sustainable blue economy, and accelerating global action) may represent one of the final windows to change course. But while political momentum grows, a fundamental question remains unresolved: who will pay to protect the ocean, and how? World Bank and OECD estimates report that the ocean provides food security for 3.2 billion people, underpins $2.6 trillion in annual economic activity, and stores over 42 times more carbon than the atmosphere. Yet degradation is intensifying: coral reefs are dying, fisheries are collapsing, and coastal ecosystems are collapsing due to underfunding, misaligned incentives, and policy inertia. Reaching the 30% target by 2030 will require establishing around 190,000 small coastal Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and 300 large offshore MPAs. According to report author Kristin Rechberger, founder and chief executive of Dynamic Planet, that's 85 MPAs per day between now and 2030. For context it took 25 years to protect just 8.4% of the ocean; now we must add 21.6% in five. The challenge isn't logistics but perception. MPAs are still seen as financial liabilities, dependent on aid rather than high-return investments. Without a significant shift in political will, financing, and implementation, the 2030 targets are unlikely to be met. Paradoxically, the price tag for turning things around is surprisingly modest. Protecting 30% of the ocean would cost just $15.8 billion a year, including $600 million to establish MPAs and $15.2 billion for their long-term management. In contrast, the IMF reported $7 trillion in fossil fuel subsidies in 2022 alone. Meanwhile, research shows the benefits associated with marine protection often exceed the costs of establishing and managing the areas within just two years. It's estimated that every dollar invested in an MPA can generate up to $10 in economic value. That isn't a burden, it's a bargain. The capital exists, the science is clear, and the solutions are ready. What's missing is not just money, but the mindset to value what the ocean provides. Marine ecosystems offer a triple dividend: climate stability, economic security, and food resilience. Yet benefits like carbon storage, storm buffering, and biodiversity are treated as invisible inputs in economic decision-making, excluded from balance sheets and national accounts. As Dr. Harald Heubaum at the Centre for Sustainable Finance, SOAS University of London emphasised in an interview, protecting mangroves, seagrass, and reefs yields quantifiable returns many times greater than their cost. We have the tools to measure these benefits, he argues, but 'what's missing is a bridge between the evidence, investable products, and connected-up approaches that encourage capital deployment at scale.' At UNOC Enric Sala, an Earthshot Prize nominee and scientific advisor to the executive producer of OCEAN with David Attenborough called for bold political leadership to ban bottom trawling within MPAs and expand no-take zones. "The worst enemy of fishing is overfishing, not protected areas," he said. Sala emphasized that robust protection is essential not just for nature, but for sustaining fishing and coastal economies. Bottom trawling is among the most destructive, and least justifiable, fishing practices still permitted. A 2025 Lancet Planetary Health report found that bottom trawling in Europe emits CO₂ on par with the aviation sector and inflicts up to €11 billion in annual societal costs while contributing less than 0.5% of the global marine catch. It also drives the bycatch crisis, killing an estimated 38 million tonnes of non-target marine life every year, including turtles, dolphins, and juvenile fish, most of which is discarded as waste. This indiscriminate damage erodes biodiversity, undermines fisheries, and weakens ocean resilience. There are signs that the tide may be turning. At UNOC, the UK government launched a consultation to extend its bottom‑trawling ban across 41 MPAs, nearly doubling the areas currently protected to 30,000 km². The move could safeguard vital seabeds, boost biodiversity and carbon storage, and deliver an estimated £3.1 billion in ecosystem benefits. But isolated progress isn't enough. What's needed now are strong, enforceable commitments and coordinated implementation at scale, turning policy signals into lasting protection. Neglecting ocean protection carries a steep and rising cost. Coastal storms and floods already cost up to $40 billion annually, projected to hit $1 trillion by 2050. Seagrass decline alone could cost the global economy $213 billion over the next 25 years. These aren't future risks, they're the mounting price of mismanagement. Ocean finance remains fundamentally misaligned. Despite years of pledges, fossil fuel subsidies remain high, with no significant reduction from 2016 to 2023, according to Nature Climate Change Worse, fossil fossil development is expanding into critical marine ecosystems—over 60% of seagrass beds and 15% of mangroves now overlap with active oil and gas blocks. This is not just policy failure; it's a structural contradiction. We are using public money to fund the destruction of the very systems we claim to protect. The same holds true for fisheries. Harmful subsidies that expand fleet capacity, enable distant-water fishing, or ignore sustainability safeguards continue to fuel overfishing and ecological decline. Aquaculture and agricultural subsidies contribute as well, degrading coastal habitats through pollution and conversion. Reforming these subsidies is a core aim of global efforts like the WTO fisheries subsidies agreement, but progress has been painfully slow. Until these distortions are addressed, efforts to finance a thriving blue economy will be fighting against a current of self-defeating incentives. Another barrier to action is the failure to fund early-stage conservation. Projects like blue carbon initiatives or the development of MPAs often require upfront capital to identify suitable sites, conduct environmental assessments, and engage local communities. This early work often falls into a funding gap, seen as too technical for philanthropy and too early or risky for commercial investors. Still, there is progress. Builders Vision and the Earthshot Prize are working to close a $900 billion funding gap for scalable marine solutions by 2030. Builders Vision has already deployed over $260 million across 158 marine projects, while companies like Fair Carbon are pioneering new approaches to finance, such as repayable finance tailored to blue carbon realities. Peter Bryant, program director, Oceans at Builders Vision said: "We invest in marketable, innovative solutions to build a more resilient future. This week we are harnessing the power of our collective influence to urge global finance, government and industry leaders to get more capital off the sidelines and into ocean innovations that will ensure a thriving blue economy and resilient ocean." For investors, ocean degradation is not just a climate or reputational concern, its a material risk. Marine-dependent industries face growing operational and reputational risk. Salmon farming, for example, depends heavily on fishmeal and fish oil from already overfished wild stocks. Peru's cancelled anchovy season in 2023 doubled global fish oil prices, sending feed costs soaring across the aquaculture sector. As ocean ecosystems become less predictable, so does the business environment. Ocean protection is a critical necessity, for food systems, stability and long term resilience. Three hurdles must be overcome: the ambition gap (what governments promise vs. what they plan), the finance gap (capital isn't flowing), and the implementation gap (where protection exists on paper but not in practice). The near-ratification of the UN High Seas Treaty, now backed by over 100 countries, could be transformative if matched by funding, enforcement, and real collaboration. As of June 9, 2025, 49 countries (plus the European Union) had ratified, just 11 short of the 60 needed. Crucially, 18 countries have ratified during UNOC so far, signalling the potential for significant action. Ocean protection is essential, achievable, and economically smart, but it requires decisive and immediate action. As negotiations continue in Nice, the UN Ocean Conference presents a critical opportunity to close the protection gap. The evidence is clear: marine conservation delivers substantial economic, environmental, and social return. Further delay is not a neutral choice, it is a decision to deepen risk, accelerate loss, and forfeit opportunity.
Washington Post
17 hours ago
- Science
- Washington Post
High Seas Treaty gains momentum as 18 new countries pledge support
NICE, France — Eighteen countries ratified the High Seas Treaty on Monday, bringing the total to 49 — just 11 short of the 60 needed for the ocean agreement to enter into force. The surge in support, occurring during the U.N. Ocean Conference in Nice, France, adds momentum to what could become a historic shift in how the world governs the open ocean. Here's what the treaty is, why it matters and what happens next. Formally known as the Agreement on Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction, the High Seas Treaty is the first legally binding agreement focused on protecting marine biodiversity in international waters. These waters, which are beyond the jurisdiction of any single country, make up nearly two-thirds of the ocean and almost half the surface of the planet. Until now, there has been no comprehensive legal framework to create marine protected areas or enforce conservation on the high seas. Despite their remoteness, the high seas are under growing pressure from overfishing, climate change and the threat of deep-sea mining . Environmental advocates warn that without proper protections, marine ecosystems in international waters face irreversible harm. 'Until now, it has been the wild west on the high seas,' said Megan Randles, global political lead for oceans at Greenpeace. 'Now we have a chance to properly put protections in place.' The treaty is also essential to achieving the global '30x30' target — an international pledge to protect 30% of the planet's land and sea by 2030. The treaty creates a legal process for countries to establish marine protected areas in the high seas, including rules for destructive activities like deep-sea mining and geo-engineering. It also establishes a framework for technology-sharing, funding mechanisms and scientific collaboration among countries. Crucially, decisions under the treaty will be made multilaterally through conferences of parties (COPs) rather than by individual countries acting alone. Once 60 countries ratify the treaty, a 120-day countdown begins before it officially enters into force. That would unlock the ability to begin designating protected areas in the high seas and put oversight mechanisms into motion. As of Monday evening, 49 countries and the EU had ratified, meaning 11 more are needed to trigger that countdown. The first Conference of the Parties (COP1) must take place within one year of the treaty's entry into force. That meeting will lay the groundwork for implementation, including decisions on governance, financing and the creation of key bodies to evaluate marine protection proposals. Environmental groups are pushing to surpass the required 60 ratifications, and to do so quickly – the more countries that ratify, the stronger and more representative the treaty's implementation will be. There's also a deadline: only countries that ratify by COP1 will be eligible to vote on critical decisions that determine how the treaty will operate. 'To reach 60 ratifications would be an absolutely enormous achievement, but for the treaty to be as effective as possible, we need countries from all over the world to engage in its implementation,' said Rebecca Hubbard, director of the High Seas Alliance. 'So the next step will be to go from 60 to global.' The surge in support on Monday has raised hopes that 2025 could mark a turning point for high seas protection. 'We're on the brink of making high seas history,' Hubbard said. ___ Follow Annika Hammerschlag on Instagram @ahammergram ___ The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP's environmental coverage, visit
The Independent
17 hours ago
- Science
- The Independent
High Seas Treaty gains momentum as 18 new countries pledge support
Eighteen countries ratified the High Seas Treaty on Monday, bringing the total to 49 — just 11 short of the 60 needed for the ocean agreement to enter into force. The surge in support, occurring during the U.N. Ocean Conference in Nice, France, adds momentum to what could become a historic shift in how the world governs the open ocean. Here's what the treaty is, why it matters and what happens next. What is the High Seas Treaty Formally known as the Agreement on Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction, the High Seas Treaty is the first legally binding agreement focused on protecting marine biodiversity in international waters. These waters, which are beyond the jurisdiction of any single country, make up nearly two-thirds of the ocean and almost half the surface of the planet. Until now, there has been no comprehensive legal framework to create marine protected areas or enforce conservation on the high seas. Why is it needed Despite their remoteness, the high seas are under growing pressure from overfishing, climate change and the threat of deep-sea mining. Environmental advocates warn that without proper protections, marine ecosystems in international waters face irreversible harm. 'Until now, it has been the wild west on the high seas," said Megan Randles, global political lead for oceans at Greenpeace. "Now we have a chance to properly put protections in place.' The treaty is also essential to achieving the global '30x30' target — an international pledge to protect 30% of the planet's land and sea by 2030. How the treaty works The treaty creates a legal process for countries to establish marine protected areas in the high seas, including rules for destructive activities like deep-sea mining and geo-engineering. It also establishes a framework for technology-sharing, funding mechanisms and scientific collaboration among countries. Crucially, decisions under the treaty will be made multilaterally through conferences of parties (COPs) rather than by individual countries acting alone. What happens when it reaches 60 ratifications Once 60 countries ratify the treaty, a 120-day countdown begins before it officially enters into force. That would unlock the ability to begin designating protected areas in the high seas and put oversight mechanisms into motion. As of Monday evening, 49 countries and the EU had ratified, meaning 11 more are needed to trigger that countdown. What comes after ratification The first Conference of the Parties (COP1) must take place within one year of the treaty's entry into force. That meeting will lay the groundwork for implementation, including decisions on governance, financing and the creation of key bodies to evaluate marine protection proposals. Environmental groups are pushing to surpass the required 60 ratifications, and to do so quickly – the more countries that ratify, the stronger and more representative the treaty's implementation will be. There's also a deadline: only countries that ratify by COP1 will be eligible to vote on critical decisions that determine how the treaty will operate. 'To reach 60 ratifications would be an absolutely enormous achievement, but for the treaty to be as effective as possible, we need countries from all over the world to engage in its implementation,' said Rebecca Hubbard, director of the High Seas Alliance. 'So the next step will be to go from 60 to global.' The surge in support on Monday has raised hopes that 2025 could mark a turning point for high seas protection. 'We're on the brink of making high seas history,' Hubbard said. ___ ___
RNZ News
a day ago
- Politics
- RNZ News
Seabed mine fears ignite coast towns on Ocean Day
A group on the Taranaki cape completed representation for the region's three waka: Aotea at Pātea, Tokomaru at Ngāmotu and Kurahaupō at Pungarehu. Photo: Supplied / Climate Justice Taranaki A match lit six weeks ago in the coastal Taranaki town of Ōpunakē has ignited fires the length of the North Island - and far across the Pacific - with seabed mining opponents taking to the coast on World Ocean Day. South Taranaki's 15-year fight against an Australian mining bid was picked up by more than 200 surfers, stand-up paddleboarders, body boarders, waka ama crew and kayakers at eight spots along the coast between Wellington to Auckland on Sunday. As they paddled-out from Island Bay, Whanganui, Pātea, Pungarehu, New Plymouth, Raglan, Port Waikato and Muriwai hundreds more rallied on shore, with organisers saying strong turnouts in New Plymouth and Raglan took total numbers over 1200. Four-thousand kilometres away supporters in Tāhiti also hit the waves, they said. Fiona Young of Protect Our Moana Taranaki said coastal communities jumped on board after the first paddle-out at Ōpunakē in April. "It's important being connected together for this, because if given the greenlight here it would set a very dangerous precedent for all the rest of our coast and the Pacific." "It's a new experimental extractive industry that doesn't belong in our oceans." Trans-Tasman Resources (TTR) has approval to vacuum up 50 million tonnes of sand annually from the South Taranaki seabed for 35 years to extract iron, vanadium and titanium. But the company still needs consent to discharge 45 million tonnes of unwanted sediment a year back into the shallow waters - 160,000 tonnes daily of a recognised pollutant. After a decade failing to win discharge consent right through to the Supreme Court, Trans-Tasman last year quit the latest environment hearing to seek consent via the new Fast-track Approvals Act. Many locals fear sediment would smother reefs and stunt marine photosynthesis by filtering sunlight. TTR's executive chairman Alan Eggers said the discharge wouldn't bother the marine ecology. "De-ored sands will be returned immediately to the seafloor in a controlled process to minimise the generation of suspended sediment ... the plume generated is localised," said Eggers, who's also executive director of TTR's new owners, Australia miner Manuka Resources. Surfboards and water craft spelled-out 'no seabed mining' on the black sand of Autere. Photo: Photo / Tania Niwa The mining ship would work as close as 22 kilometres off Pātea. Saturday's cold snap cloaked Taranaki Maunga with winter's first heavy snowfall but, after dawn karakia, 20 surfers shrugged off the chill at Pātea Beach and formed Sunday's first circle on the water. Among them was Te Pāti Māori co-leader Debbie Ngarewa-Packer. As a Ngāti Ruanui leader she fought the miners for a decade before entering Parliament. Ngarewa-Packer said World Ocean Day helped highlight that the proposed mine was an untested precedent, here and internationally. "Seabed mining leaves behind the sludge, or the mud. Imagine 45 million tons of sludge ... a lot of our magic reef life and our marine life will be absolutely annihilated." Sand extraction is common but doesn't involve dumping most of what's taken back into the environment, opponents say. Among the 100 supporters on Pātea's beach and dunes was onshore oil driller Hayden Fowler. Despite working in an extractive industry, Fowler brought his teenage daughter Amelia to Pātea to oppose the marine mine. "I just don't think it's the right thing to be doing." "A lot of people don't actually understand what will take place if it happens ... so it's probably a little bit misunderstood as to how bad it could be." Te Rūnanga o Ngāti Ruanui kaiwhakahaere Rachel Arnott said TTR kept losing in court because judges found environmental safety evidence unconvincing "TTR had nothing and in the Fast-track application we still haven't seen any sign that they've adapted to the courts' demands for proof - nothing fresh in terms of evidence." Surfers, kayakers and waka ama paddlers were amongst the 130 who formed a circle off Autere East End Beach in Ngāmotu - one of nine community actions against seabed mining on Sunday. Photo: Photo / Tania Niwa On Sunday afternoon 500 gathered at New Plymouth's Autere, or East End Beach, to cheer more than 130 taking to the waves. Surfer Fiona Gordon said she was there to celebrate the ocean. "The beautiful things that it brings to our lives and the risks that are posed when we start interfering with that, in ways we don't fully understand." Many travelled from Pātea to join the Ngāmotu event including Bruce Boyd, head of community underwater science researchers Project Reef. "I dive off Pātea, that's my playground, and I don't want to see what's there changed in any way, shape, or form. Especially not covered by that sludge." TTR expects to earn US$312 million a year before tax, giving shareholders a near 40 percent rate of return on investment of US$602 million. The company promises an economic boost in Taranaki and Whanganui, creating over 1350 New Zealand jobs and becoming one of the country's top exporters. Opponents believe the financial benefits will land with mostly-foreign shareholders. LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Rift over oceans: Macron rebukes climate change deniers ahead of Nice summit
Hosted by Prince Albert of Monaco, the final day of the Blue Economy and Finance Forum (BEFF) closed with leaders pledging their support and calling for global responsibility to protect the oceans. William, Prince of Wales, said the challenge of protecting the world's oceans was "like none that we have faced before" and that the clock is ticking: "I believe that urgency and optimism have the power to bring about the action needed to change the course of history. I'm an optimist because as the founder of the Earthshot Prize, I see the incredible examples of the ideas, innovations and technologies that are harnessing the power of the ocean whilst protecting its vitality." "Watching human activity reduce beautiful sea forests to barren deserts, the base of our oceans is simply heart-breaking for many. It is an urgent wake-up call to just what is going on in our oceans, but it can no longer be a matter of out of sight, out of mind. The need to act to protect our ocean is now in full view, as ever," Prince William added. Meanwhile, in his closing speech, French President Emmanuel Macron criticised countries that deny climate change and cut budgets on this matter. 'We've been hearing that, basically, climate change, the threat to biodiversity, the issue of the oceans, all of that, is a matter of opinion," Macron said. He continued: "I'm going to tell you: no, we don't have the right to do that because it's not an opinion, but it's scientifically established." The French president also hinted at potential developments in the near future: "We have a duty to mobilise because the science is clear and the facts are there. There is no inevitability. And so, with a few governments, we will in the coming days make strong decisions and mobilise the international community." A major focus of the weeklong summit was the push to ratify the High Seas Treaty, which would enable conservation in international waters. The forum is the precursor to the United Nations Oceans Conference (UNOC) in Nice, where more than 50 world leaders are expected to attend. The US administration will not send representatives.
