• European Marine Science
• Open Access close
• BD close
• NEANIAS Underwater Research Communi... close

Deep-sea mining is likely to result in biodiversity loss, and the significance of this to ecosystem function is not known. "Out of kind" biodiversity offsets substituting one ecosystem type (e.g.,coral reefs) for another (e.g., abyssal nodule fields) have been proposed to compensate for such loss. Here we consider a goal of no net loss (NNL) of biodiversity and explore the challenges of applying this aim to deep seabed mining, based on the associated mitigation hierarchy (avoid,minimize, remediate). We conclude that the industry cannot at present deliver an outcome of NNL. This results from the vulnerable nature of deep-sea environments to mining impacts, currently limited technological capacity to minimize harm, significant gaps in ecological knowledge, and uncertainties of recovery potential of deep-sea ecosystems. Avoidance and minimization of impacts are therefore the only presently viable means of reducing biodiversity losses from seabed mining. Because of these constraints, when and if deep-sea mining proceeds, it must be approached in a precautionary and step-wise manner to integrate new and developing knowledge. Each step should be subject to explicit environmental management goals, monitoring protocols, and binding standards to avoid serious environmental harm and minimize loss of biodiversity. "Out of kind" measures, an option for compensation currently proposed, cannot replicate biodiversity and ecosystem services lost through mining of the deep seabed and thus cannot be considered true offsets. The ecosystem functions provided by deep-sea biodiversity contribute to a wide range of provisioning services (e.g., the exploitation of fish, energy, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics), play an essential role in regulatory services (e.g., carbon sequestration) and are important culturally. The level of "acceptable" biodiversity loss in the deep sea requires public, transparent, and well-informed consideration, as well as wide agreement. If accepted, further agreement on how to assess residual losses remaining after the robust implementation of the mitigation hierarchy is also imperative. To ameliorate some of the inter-generational inequity caused by mining-associated biodiversity losses, and only after all NNL measures have been used to the fullest extent, potential compensatory actions would need to be focused on measures to improve the knowledge and protection of the deep sea and to demonstrate benefits that will endure for future generations.

Abstract Pressure on marine areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) has increased significantly in recent decades, prompting the international community to begin formal negotiations for a legally binding agreement on the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity in these areas. The current international legal framework does not provide for the creation of holistic and cross-sectoral area-based management tools (ABMTs) in ABNJ. The forthcoming negotiations will consider how to fill this gap. Marine spatial planning (MSP) is one ABMT that could be covered in a new agreement, alongside marine protected areas (MPAs) and other measures. This article introduces the current framework for MSP in ABNJ, provides discussion of selected ongoing initiatives, and proposes some avenues for inclusion of MSP in a new agreement, including general provisions, institutional implications, and possible models for an international MSP process.

Abstract This article explores the concept of “other effective area-based conservation measures” (OECMs) in the context of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 on marine protected areas and OECMs and its linkages to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It argues that mainstreaming biodiversity through CBD Aichi Biodiversity Targets’ implementation into the SDGs can contribute to a more systemic and comprehensive implementation of SDG 14.5 on conservation of at least 10% of marine and coastal areas. It argues that OECMs can complement MPAs and contribute to ecologically representative and effectively managed marine protected areas systems integrated into broader governance systems such as marine spatial planning. Selected global and local sectoral conservation measures are therefore highlighted in this analysis as potential forms of OECMs. At the local level, a case study of ecologically or biologically significant marine areas managed as locally managed marine areas (LMMAs) in Mozambique is discussed. This case study explores how multiple-use LMMAs, which respond to short-term fisher's needs and targeted biodiversity conservation, could contribute to the achievement of specific SDGs on food security, poverty elimination and resilient ecosystems if properly supported by long-term investments, strong institutions and integrated oceans management.