Challenges Ahead for the Next Session of the International Seabed Authority
Pedro Madureira and Eduardo Silva highlight the risks that multilateral governance of the deep ocean faces from unilateral actions and the key issues requiring agreement for the adoption of regulations on deep seabed mining.
According to Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and the 1994 Implementation Agreement, the International Seabed Authority (ISA) is the organization through which the 171 States Parties to the Convention shall organize and control activities (exploration and exploitation) in the Area, particularly with a view to administering its mineral resources for the benefit of (Hu)mankind. The Area is defined by UNCLOS as the seabed and ocean floor and subsoil thereof, beyond the limits of national jurisdiction. The ISA currently administers 31 contracts for exploration, which are sponsored by 20 member States, both developed and developing.
Since 2019, the Council, which constitutes the ISA’s executive body, has been negotiating the regulations for mineral exploitation (or deep-sea mining) in the Area. The last Council session (30th Session) was convened less than a month after the Third United Nations Ocean Conference (UNOC) held in Nice, France, from 9-13 June 2025. At UNOC2025, the UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, echoed the main threats currently faced by the global Ocean and recognized the different views shared by countries on deep-sea mining. He also expressed support for the ongoing work of the ISA on this matter, underlining that “The deep-sea cannot become the Wild West”.
The need for exploitation regulations
While the adoption of exploitation regulations would not automatically trigger the start of commercial deep-sea mining, it would provide clarity and accountability, setting the bar required to develop a potential new industry at sea. The timely adoption of regulations is also relevant for protecting the Area and its resources from unilateral actions that may risk the governance of the deep seabed and the mandate of the ISA.
Recently, concerns have been raised about the executive order issued by the President of the United States of America (a non-party to UNCLOS) on 24 April 2025, which seeks to expedite the process for reviewing and issuing mineral exploration licenses and commercial recovery permits under the U.S. law and including seabed areas beyond national jurisdiction. As the U.S. approach may pose difficulties to secure exclusive rights to mine sites in the deep ocean floor, this may lead to further militarization of the high seas.
The marine environment
Article 145 of UNCLOS gives to the ISA a core mandate to take the necessary measures with respect to activities in the Area to ensure effective protection for the marine environment from harmful effects which may arise from such activities. Article 162 grants clear authority to the Council to disapprove areas for exploitation in cases where substantial evidence indicates the risk of serious harm to the marine environment. Since the Convention does not place the burden of proof on applicants wanting to develop activities in the Area, the ISA has been negotiating the mining code with the specific obligation for all actors (ISA, sponsoring States, and contractors) to apply a precautionary approach. Contractors aiming to proceed to exploitation need to assess the environmental impacts against a robust environmental baseline determined during the exploration phase.
The Council is setting environmental goals and objectives for the different areas where exploration is taking place, and has nominated a group of 30 experts from 19 countries to provide scientific and technical support in specific areas, namely in the definition of environmental threshold levels for deep-sea mining activities including early warning thresholds. Notwithstanding the need to implement a science-based decision process, the consideration of the traditional knowledge from indigenous communities can also contribute to address the environmental and social impacts from deep-sea mining.
As the regulatory body for the activities in the Area, the ISA must also assume its critical role in monitoring both the marine environment and contractors’ activities. This monitoring must be transparent to all stakeholders and grounded in standardized protocols and technology capable of detecting changes within environmental thresholds. The development of digital twins to assist “real-time” monitoring and AI-based tools to predict short-term changes in the marine environment can contribute to support the decision-making processes by implementing adaptive management measures that translate the effective protection of the marine environment into actions. The capacity to implement transparent monitoring will be crucial to increase trust among stakeholders.
The payment regime and the equitable sharing
According to Article 140 of UNCLOS, the ISA is tasked with developing a mechanism to provide for the “equitable sharing of financial and other economic benefits” from deep-sea mining activities in the Area. As stated in the Convention, it is for the ISA’s Assembly, where all States parties have a seat, to consider and approve the rules, regulations, and procedures on this mechanism (Article 160 of UNCLOS). Moreover, following the 1994 Agreement, decisions of the Assembly and the Council on this matter shall consider recommendations from the Finance Committee.
This organ has already published a technical study on the equitable sharing, which aimed to provide three alternative formulae for the allocation of the financial income, taking into account widely accepted measures of relative inequality and global social welfare, and an alternative approach based on the establishment of a Seabed Sustainability Fund (now dubbed as the Common Heritage Fund) administered by the ISA. The objective of the Fund would be to invest in knowledge and competence related to the Area and, thus, it would fund marine scientific research and capacity-building while also fostering other public goods related to the seabed with a view to enhancing ISA’s contributions to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Discussions on this mechanism will certainly proceed with a view to operationalize the concept of the common heritage of (Hu)mankind.
However, to comply with the principles developed in Part XI of the Convention, a fair determination of royalties and fees needs to be at the forefront of Council discussions. Considering polymetallic nodules as an example, it may be argued that their intrinsic value is broader (e.g., by giving support to ecosystem functions) than the content of metals targeted for commercial mining and, thus, the natural capital should be also reflected in the economic models. The consideration of a royalty on a basket of metals that are not envisaged to be processed at least in the initial phases of exploitation may better value the common heritage of (Hu)mankind and can constitute an incentive to promote further innovation in nodules processing. Regarding the area that may be included in an exploitation contract beyond the one targeted for commercial mining, the Council could consider the implementation of an acreage fee to promote the efficient use of the Area and its resources. An acreage fee will incentivize contractors to make an efficient use of the area under their exploitation contract promoting its further exploration or, otherwise, to relinquish those parts that may be considered of less commercial interest.
It is our belief that the aforementioned issues will remain at the core of the negotiations that the Council will pursue in the next ISA session in March 2026. We also trust in the ability of the ISA to provide an inclusive multilateral platform where the activities in the Area are administered for the benefit of all.
Pedro Madureira is an Associate Professor teaching geology at the University of Évora (Portugal). His work is funded by national funds through FCT, within the framework of UIDB/06107/2025 - CREATE.
Eduardo Silva is a Professor teaching engineering at the Instituto Superior de Engenharia do Porto (Portugal) and the coordinator of the Robotics and Autonomous Systems Laboratory at INESC TEC.
Photo by Allan Carvalho
