Debate currently exists over whether to establish a Marine Protected Area covering the entire Arctic Ocean or just focus on specific areas within national boundaries.

Why does this matter? The Arctic Ocean hosts a wealth of biodiversity and resources. With minimal human intervention, over 21,000 known species have adapted to thrive in the cold and inhospitable Arctic environment.

For the people living in the Arctic, the abundant biodiversity provides not only food but “the everyday context and basis for social identity, cultural survival and spiritual life.” Currently, the ocean is open territory with many fearing an “unprecedented free-for-all” when the ice melts.

What’s happening? As the Arctic’s floating sea ice continues to melt, the region is increasingly exposed to fishing, shipping, mining, and pollution. Efforts to protect the Arctic Ocean’s fragile ecosystem include designating the central Arctic Ocean as a marine protected area (MPA).

The disappearing ice threatens ecosystems above and below the water, and the absence of a natural barrier allows ships to exploit untouched fish populations and seabed minerals. A patchwork of treaties offers some protection, but international cooperation is crucial.

Debate exists over whether to establish an MPA covering the entire Arctic Ocean or focus on specific areas within national boundaries. (The Guardian)

Why does this matter? The Arctic Ocean hosts a wealth of biodiversity and resources. With minimal human intervention, over 21,000 known species have adapted to thrive in the cold and inhospitable Arctic environment.

For the people living in the Arctic, the abundant biodiversity provides not only food but “the everyday context and basis for social identity, cultural survival and spiritual life.” Currently, the ocean is open territory with many fearing an “unprecedented free-for-all” when the ice melts.

Legal patchwork – Preventing overexploitation will require the development of mutually agreed regulations. Much of the Arctic Ocean falls within the eight Arctic states’ 200-mile exclusive economic zones (EEZ), where some MPAs already exist, with Canada’s Tuvaijuittuq MPA being the largest. Outside of the EEZs, a sparse and time-sensitive patchwork of legal frameworks governs the Arctic Ocean’s high seas.

Among these is a 16-year commercial fishing ban, agreed among nine nations and the EU after several years of negotiations in 2018. The language used within the agreement indicates that commercial fishing will one day take place, with the ban’s timespan allowing research to form a science-based management plan.

More recently, the UN High Seas Treaty was adopted, the first ever legally binding treaty governing international waters. Although a promising step, the Treaty has significant gaps. For example, countries can veto MPAs and continue fishing or drilling unpenalised. Our previous blog post discusses the Treaty’s successes and shortfalls, available here.

Deep-sea mining is also a concern for the region, which is rich in polymetallic nodules. Norway aims to open a mining area roughly the size of Germany, retrieving nodules at a depth of 4,000m. As discussed in last month’s blog post, the deep sea is a biodiverse and largely unexplored region, with the impacts of mining relatively unknown.

A study by Flora and Fauna contends that “damage caused by deep-seabed mining would be extensive and irreversible”. Recently, the International Seabed Authority decided to delay the release of deep-sea mining regulations until 2024 after facing intense political and scientific scrutiny.

Fully protected – Countering the complex patchwork of frameworks, the 90 North Foundation are lobbying for the creation of a “fully protected” MPA that would prohibit any human activity across the entire Arctic Ocean, including shipping, mining, fishing and drilling.

The proposed North Pole Marine Reserve would be the world’s largest wildlife reserve at over 1.7 million square miles, making a significant contribution to the 30×30 goal agreed at COP15. The findings from the scientific community reinforce calls for MPAs – according to a study published by the IUCN, fully protected MPAs have been shown to increase biomass by 670%.

In a separate study led by the Smithsonian Environmental Research Center, MPAs were found to increase the health and wealth of nearby communities.

MPAs, however, are difficult to enforce and can be ineffective if incorrectly implemented. For example, China’s self-imposed squid fishing bans are failing, according to a report by Oceana. Analysis of AIS data from Global Fishing Watch shows that three of China’s bans were in areas with minimal or no prior fishing activity, whilst unsustainable practices continued elsewhere.

Creating a successful and effective Arctic MPA hinges on collective action at the global scale. Despite its flaws, the UN High Seas Treaty serves as a positive reminder that international collaboration on marine conservation is possible.

Source: The Guardian