Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) Agreement
Why in news ?
India’s recent signing of the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) Agreement — better known as the High Seas Treaty — has drawn both praise and scepticism from maritime observers.
Provisions ?
Hailed as a landmark step in ocean governance, the treaty seeks to
- protect marine ecosystems
- promote the sustainable use of resources in areas beyond national jurisdiction.
क्या कुछ चैलेंज है इसको लेके ?
despite its laudable intentions to address critical gaps in international maritime regulation, the pact’s structural complexities and potential challenges warrant examination.
As the third implementing agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), the BBNJ treaty follows earlier accords on deep-sea mining and fisheries management.
Its provisions focus on three objectives:
- conserving marine biodiversity,
- ensuring equitable sharing of benefits from marine genetic resources,
- and mandating environmental impact assessments for harmful activities.
But some fault :
- geopolitical rivalries,
- jurisdictional overlap,
- and weak enforcement mechanisms.
Fraught with challenges
और भी क्या क्या कमियाँ हैं ???
lack of a clear implementation roadmap
With only 14 of its 104 signatories having ratified the agreement, it remains far from the required threshold of 60 needed to come into force.
Overlapping issues
Much of the hesitation stems from disputes over maritime territories, particularly in regions such as the South China Sea, where overlapping claims complicate consensus on Marine Protected Areas (MPAs).
Southeast Asian nations remain divided
on whether high-seas “national parks” could affect territorial claims or limit economic opportunities for coastal communities that depend on marine resources.
Bay of Bengal states echo similar
apprehensions about MPAs affecting livelihood and resource access, underscoring the broader regional hesitations surrounding the treaty’s implementation.
Critics argue that the treaty’s emphasis on the
1 high-seas principle” risks overshadowing the “common heritage of mankind” concept, which prioritizes preservation over access.
2 One of the treaty’s most contentious provisions involves marine genetic resources. The treaty obligates nations to share the profits derived from exploiting these resources through a global fund.
3, without robust accountability measures, this provision risks being undermined by wealthier nations underreporting their activities.
pact also risks conflicting with regimes
like the Convention on Biological Diversity, potentially disadvantaging smaller states and fragmenting enforcement.
Capacity-building and technology transfers present yet another challenge
for low and middle-income countries. The treaty calls for equitable partnerships in ocean science, but lacks enforceable mechanisms, leaving less capable nations vulnerable to being sidelined. .
Asymmetry threatens to perpetuate inequalities in maritime research and governance.
overlooks the interconnectedness of marine ecosystems
The treaty’s focus on the high seas overlooks the interconnectedness of marine ecosystems, where harmful activities in EEZs often cascade into international waters.
The 2021 X-Press Pearl disaster off Sri Lanka
which spilled hazardous chemicals into the Indian Ocean, is a stark reminder of how localised incidents can have global repercussions.
overfishing
within the EEZs in West Africa has depleted fish stocks far beyond national jurisdictions, exacerbating marine resource scarcity on the high seas
failing to reconcile high-seas governance with coastal regulations
While the BBNJ Agreement aspires to reshape global ocean governance, its potential hinges on bridging the gap between ambition and action.
Its greatest limitation lies in failing to reconcile high-seas governance with coastal regulations, assuming international waters can be managed in isolation despite the impact of pollution, overfishing, and habitat destruction in EEZs.
More troubling is the reluctance of coastal states to assume greater responsibility for activities within their waters.
silent on the damaging harms during oil and gas exploration
While the treaty mandates environmental impact assessments (EIAs) for planned activities, it remains silent on the damaging harms during oil and gas exploration — that the pact does not cover — and which constitutes an important economic interest of states.
Bridging the divide
For the High Seas Treaty to succeed, it must overcome its structural and political limitations. This requires a radical shift in maritime governance — one that integrates high-seas and coastal regulations into a cohesive framework.
Coastal states, particularly those in the Global South, need incentives to align their domestic laws with international norms, while wealthier nations must commit to providing technical and financial support to ensure the treaty’s benefits are equitably shared.
The treaty’s success ultimately hinges on fostering a collective commitment among nations to safeguard the oceans as a shared global resource. Without political consensus, clear strategies, and enforceable mechanisms, the BBNJ risks becoming an ineffective instrument — an outcome the oceans, already under immense stress, cannot afford.
Source the hindu
Comments
Post a Comment