Last weekend, it was widely reported as the lead story: a third of the oceans are to be placed under protection. What does this mean?
The 30/30 target is a noble one: by the year 2030, 30% of the entire ocean is to be protected. This demand by marine and species conservation organisations has existed for a long time; ElasmOcean has also campaigned for it from the very beginning.
But what does "marine protected area" actually mean? Nations can establish marine protected areas within their own AWZ (Ausschließliche Wirtschaftszone) – these are generally coastal areas up to the AWZ boundary at 200 NM (approx. 370 km) – beyond which lies the High Seas, which do not belong to any nation. However, this national protection is designed completely differently from country to country. An MPA (Marine Protected Area) can have a very low protection status or a high one: if it is established as a "no-take area", i.e. a zone in which no human activity such as fishing, shipping, tourism, and resource extraction is permitted, the protection for the ocean is fundamental and sustainable. With a lower protection status, however, it can happen that a tunnel may be constructed through a protected area, as is the case with the Fehmarn Belt fixed link between Germany and Denmark. Another example is the widespread permission of bottom trawling throughout the entire North and Baltic Seas, despite the presence of numerous protected areas; unfortunately, they only have that low protection status. Around 40% of the German AWZ in the North and Baltic Seas has a protection status – which makes little difference, as it actually permits everything that humans "mismanage" in the sea. From this perspective, Germany achieved the 30/30 target long ago, but only on paper, as it offers hardly any real protection and thus does not truly live up to the term "marine protected area". If the (necessary) high protection status of "no-take areas" is demanded, the German rate is actually at 0%.
On Saturday, the UN with 193 member states decided to consistently implement the 30/30 target in international waters as well. "The ship has reached the shore," announced the President of the UN Conference, Rena Lee, with relief after a 40-hour negotiation marathon. Negotiations had been ongoing for years; now the breakthrough has succeeded in a serious commitment to protect the ocean and, above all, the largely unexplored deep sea. Russia and China had attempted to weaken the enforcement of the treaty by pushing for unanimous decisions. This would have meant that any single country could cast a veto on its own, preventing all nations from implementation. Based also on relevant experience with other UN bodies, this was not adopted: the agreement provides for many decisions by a three-quarters majority, with a dispute settlement procedure – good and practicable steps. Now the resolutions must be translated into the treaty languages and ratified by the member states, which will certainly take several more months.
We hope that the designated 30% of all oceans to be placed under protection will indeed receive the necessary high status as a "no-take area". We will also monitor and campaign to ensure that no "mineral resources" such as manganese nodules may be extracted from the deep sea. As is so often the case, it will now depend on concrete implementation whether humanity once again resolves something on paper, or whether there is a genuine political will of the majority of states to protect our oceans, their marine life, and thus humanity itself!
At least: shortly before this breakthrough, extensive funds for the protection of the oceans were approved at the "Our Ocean" conference in Panama: a total of 18.8 billion euros, including 7 billion from the USA alone and over 800 million euros from the EU, are to further strengthen marine conservation in the future. This, too, is not bad news.
