‘Significant Inadequacies’ Persist With International Seabed Authority Processes Designed to Safeguard the Deep Sea

The latest Code Project report finds “significant inadequacies” in the International Seabed Authority (ISA) process to evaluate environmental impacts of deep-sea mining exploration activities. The report evaluates the ISA’s current environmental impact assessment (EIA) process compared with EIA best practices. Findings underscore that the ISA urgently needs to reform its EIA process because exploration activities that could potentially cause environmental harm are likely to become more frequent.

The ISA is responsible for regulating mining of the ocean floor beyond the limits of national jurisdiction and ensuring the protection of marine ecosystems from mining activities. The body issues the contracts for exploration, which then require contractors to gather enough scientific data and feasibility information before a mining application can be submitted. However, this exploration can involve test mining and use of intensive equipment that may have environmental impacts similar to commercial mining, albeit on a smaller scale.

An EIA is meant to inform a decision on whether to permit a project, and it takes into account any risks and uncertainties associated with a proposed activity. As such, an EIA is an essential tool for the ISA to ensure the effective protection of the marine environment, fulfilling its obligation.

The Code Project is a cooperative enterprise of more than 19 scientists and legal scholars from 11 nations. Its mission is to provide analyses of the regulatory framework for deep-sea mining under development at the ISA. The project’s efforts are aimed at establishing precautionary and environmentally sound regulations that would ensure protection of the marine environment from the effects of mining.

The Pew Charitable Trusts provided funding for this project, but Pew is not responsible for errors in this paper and does not necessarily endorse its findings or conclusions.