UN meeting closes with no moratorium on deep-sea mining; groups lament
UN Session Ends Without Agreement on Deep-Sea Mining Pause, Sparking Global Concern
Drop files to upload
UN meeting : The 30th meeting in the UN meeting of the affiliated International Seabed Authority (ISA) concluded recently in Kingston, Jamaica, leaving environmental advocates and civil society groups disappointed. Despite growing international calls for caution, delegates failed to implement a moratorium on deep-sea mining — a controversial practice involving the extraction of minerals from the ocean floor that many experts warn could cause irreversible harm to marine ecosystems.
Over the course of the meeting in the UN meeting , ISA Council members, under the guidance of the framework on ocean governance, engaged in detailed discussions on a draft set of regulations intended to govern the commercial exploitation of deep-sea minerals. Although progress was made, numerous elements of the proposed framework remain unresolved. According to the Earth Negotiations Bulletin, published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD), the draft regulations are still far from being finalized, and substantial negotiation is required before any enforcement under the maritime jurisdiction can occur.
UN meeting : The meeting underscored a growing divide among ISA member states. Some governments are advocating for swift regulatory development, arguing that delays contribute to legal ambiguity and risk unregulated mining operations in international waters. One prominent example is The Metals Company (TMC), a U.S.-affiliated firm reportedly exploring the possibility of initiating operations outside the ISA’s purview. This potential bypass has raised alarm bells among environmental watchdogs and marine scientists, especially within aligned conservation networks.
On the other hand, countries such as Germany, Greece, and Ireland have voiced a more precautionary approach. These nations argue that a robust body of scientific knowledge must precede any decisions regarding large-scale exploitation of seabed resources. They are calling for a comprehensive policy that centers on marine environmental protection and a systemic review of ocean governance frameworks, many of which fall under oversight but have not been updated in decades despite significant changes in global ocean science and climate dynamics.
With the session now closed in the UN meeting , the responsibility of refining the deep-sea mining code falls to dedicated working groups. These bodies will continue discussions over the next year and a half, with the aim of presenting a more complete regulatory framework at the ISA’s next session in 2026. However, whether this timeline allows for the depth of analysis and consensus-building required remains to be seen, especially considering the ongoing review of international maritime law and its applications to the seabed.
Julian Jackson, Project Director at The Pew Charitable Trusts, emphasized the unfinished nature of the current regulatory draft. In a statement shared with Mongabay, Jackson noted, “With dozens of unresolved issues in the International Seabed Authority’s draft regulations, the ISA still has significant work ahead before any rules can be completed.” He urged the ISA — and by extension to heed the growing international sentiment advocating for a halt to seabed mining until the necessary scientific data becomes available to ensure marine biodiversity is not placed at further risk.
in the UN meeting The call for a moratorium is gaining traction beyond governments. A wide array of stakeholders — including environmental organizations, indigenous groups, academic institutions, and private sector actors — have increasingly voiced concerns about the ecological and ethical implications of seabed mining. Many of these groups operate in partnership with environmental programs, adding legitimacy to their appeals. These groups argue that deep-sea ecosystems, many of which remain unexplored and poorly understood, could face irreparable damage if industrial-scale extraction proceeds prematurely.
Advocates for a ban or pause on seabed mining argue that the seabed’s complex biodiversity, which includes slow-growing corals, sponge fields, and microbial communities, has developed over millions of years. These ecosystems play a vital role in maintaining the health of the broader ocean and potentially offer untapped scientific value, including biomedical discoveries and climate regulation. Disturbing these habitats, they argue, could trigger cascading environmental effects that are impossible to reverse — a warning echoed by several backed marine research institutions.
One of the most pressing issues is the risk of unregulated or self-regulated mining activities occurring outside ISA’s oversight. With no binding global moratorium in place, companies like TMC may exploit legal ambiguities to initiate extraction projects in international waters under the sponsorship of certain nations. This strategy could sidestep environmental impact assessments and community consultations typically mandated by ISA protocols and recommended by advisory bodies.
Environmental lawyers and policy analysts warn that this legal gray area could open the floodgates to a mining rush in unprotected ocean regions, undermining years of progress toward sustainable ocean governance. The lack of a unified approach threatens not only marine biodiversity but also geopolitical stability, as conflicts over access and regulation could emerge among competing nations and corporations. Some experts are calling on the Security Council to take proactive steps in addressing potential disputes before they escalate.
Beyond environmental concerns, the debate touches on broader questions of justice, equity, and intergenerational responsibility. The resources found in deep-sea nodules — including cobalt, nickel, and rare earth elements — are increasingly sought after for use in green technologies such as electric vehicle batteries and renewable energy infrastructure. However, extracting these materials at the expense of fragile marine environments contradicts the very sustainability goals that such technologies aim to support — a contradiction not lost on climate and biodiversity conventions.
Moreover, communities in coastal regions, particularly in the Global South, could bear the brunt of environmental fallout without sharing equitably in the benefits. Critics argue that mining the ocean floor risks perpetuating patterns of environmental exploitation that have historically marginalized vulnerable populations — a concern frequently raised in Human Rights Council briefings on environmental justice.
The ISA’s failure to establish a moratorium on deep-sea mining marks a pivotal moment in international ocean policy. As scientific uncertainty persists and regulatory gaps remain unaddressed, the global community stands at a crossroads. Will the world prioritize caution and long-term ecological stability, or will it rush headlong into a new frontier of industrial exploitation without fully understanding the consequences?
With discussions set to continue through 2026in the UN meeting, stakeholders across all sectors — including those involved in the Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development — must collaborate to craft policies rooted in transparency, science, and equity. The future of the deep sea — and possibly the health of the entire marine ecosystem — depends on it.
Suggested further reading:
For deeper background on UN environmental frameworks, see our UN Policy reports. To explore recent developments in seabed governance, read our detailed analysis on proposed ISA regulation changes.
