Sixty countries ratified the marine biodiversity conservation treaty in September 2025, which enters into force on January 17, 2026. This text covers international oceanic zones for the first time, representing 30% of the world’s ocean surface. A territory as large as Africa now subject to international law.
Thirty percent of oceans emerge from legal void
The high seas represent a considerable portion of the oceans that cover approximately 361 million square kilometers, or 70.8% of the globe’s surface. Until January 17, 2026, these international waters escaped any binding legal framework for biodiversity protection. States could fish, extract resources, and navigate there without specific environmental constraints.
The BBNJ treaty (Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction) changes this situation. Negotiated since 2004 under the auspices of the United Nations, it establishes common rules for creating marine protected areas, assessing the environmental impact of extractive activities, and sharing benefits from marine genetic resources. Ratification by the European Union, the United States, Chile, and 57 other countries gives it the force of international law.
This rapid progression of ratifications contrasts with other environmental treaties. The Paris Climate Agreement took eleven months to reach the threshold of 55 necessary ratifications. The oceanic treaty accomplished this in eighteen months, despite the technical complexity of the subject.
Forty marine protected areas planned by 2030
The stated objective of the treaty is to protect 30% of oceans by 2030, aligned with the commitments of COP15 biodiversity in Montreal. Currently, only 8% of oceans benefit from protection, mainly in national territorial waters. The treaty provides for the creation of 40 new marine protected areas in the high seas by 2030.
These protected zones may prohibit industrial fishing, mining extraction, and limit maritime transport. The Conference of the Parties, the treaty’s governing body, will decide on locations and protection levels by a two-thirds majority vote. An unprecedented mechanism: no maritime power has veto rights.
The first candidates identified by scientists include the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, rich in endemic species, and certain zones of the Southern Ocean, nurseries for whales. These designations will be subject to negotiations during the first Conference of the Parties scheduled for The Hague in June 2026.
The thorny question of enforcement without international police
The treaty creates no international ocean police force. Its implementation relies on the goodwill of signatory states and their national control means. A major weakness in a space where surveillance remains technically and financially complex.
Ocean surveillance represents a colossal logistical challenge. The high seas cover approximately 230-240 million square kilometers (64% of approximately 361 million km² of oceans). The calculation of surveillance vessel needs is not documented in official sources, but current means remain insufficient given the immensity of the space to cover.
Satellite technologies offer a promising but partial alternative. The Global Fishing Watch surveillance system detects 70,000 industrial fishing vessels in real time through AIS (Automatic Identification System) data. According to 2022-2024 data, approximately 46% of fishing vessels in Europe are not tracked by AIS (have their signal turned off), which exceeds the announced 30%.
This dependence on civilian technology raises sovereignty questions. The treaty’s effectiveness will largely depend on cooperation between states and surveillance information sharing, two areas where geopolitical tensions can compromise collective action.
A major economic stake for genetic resources
The treaty establishes a mechanism for sharing benefits derived from marine genetic resources. Pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that exploit marine organisms from the high seas must return a portion of their profits to an international conservation fund.
The economic potential is considerable. Global estimates vary significantly depending on scope: the global maritime economy is estimated at 1,500-2,600 billion dollars annually by international institutions. Microorganisms from abyssal hydrothermal vents produce enzymes used in detergents, cosmetics, and medicines. A bacterium discovered in 2023 in the Mariana Trench could revolutionize the treatment of certain cancers.
Until now, these discoveries benefited exclusively to countries and companies with the technical means to exploit them. The new mechanism aims to democratize these benefits, with a mandatory licensing system and royalties indexed to generated revenue.
Implementation remains to be specified. The treaty provides for the creation of an International Authority for Marine Genetic Resources, but its operating and financing procedures will be subject to negotiations during the first conferences of the parties. A complex undertaking that recalls the difficulties encountered by the International Seabed Authority in regulating deep ocean mining exploitation.
Emerging ocean diplomacy facing terrestrial blockages
The oceanic treaty’s entry into force occurs in a context of multiplying regional environmental governance initiatives. Unlike climate negotiations, often paralyzed by major emitters’ interests, ocean diplomacy seems to partially escape traditional geopolitical blockages.
This dynamic is explained by the asymmetry of technical capabilities. Only about twenty countries have the means to explore and exploit the high seas. This technical concentration paradoxically facilitates negotiation: stakes are better identified and actors fewer than in other environmental issues.
The rapidity of ratifications also reflects scientific urgency. Oceans are warming and acidifying faster than expected, affecting food chains on which 3.3 billion people depend. Recent discoveries about the importance of deep oceans for climate regulation strengthen the scientific argument for their protection.
The BBNJ treaty could prefigure a new generation of environmental agreements: more technical, less publicized, but potentially more effective because negotiated between directly concerned actors. An approach that contrasts with large diplomatic gatherings with often disappointing results.