Turning the Tide: Unpacking the High Seas Treaty

Emily Carter

Alright, everyone, so let’s set the scene because I think it’s easy to forget sometimes just how critical the situation is for our oceans. We’re seeing ocean warming, acidification, and—well—plastic pollution on a frankly staggering scale. If you can believe it, over 17 million metric tons of plastic entered the ocean just in 2021. That’s about 85% of all marine litter! Imagine standing on a beach and just... being surrounded by plastic for miles. It’s heartbreaking, honestly.

Michael Thompson

Yeah, Emily, and the numbers just get more alarming the deeper you go. There’s a UN estimate floating around that says, by 2050, there could actually be more plastic in the ocean than fish unless we turn this around fast. And it’s not just fish that pay the price—marine ecosystem health is tied directly to our own food supply. The biodiversity loss we’re witnessing isn’t just about the creatures themselves. It’s going to hit human food security too, especially for the billions who depend on oceans for protein. That cascading impact, I mean, it keeps me up at night sometimes.

Charlotte Hughes

That really resonates with me, Michael. It reminds me of the very start of my policy career, years back. I was visiting a UK coastal town, and I remember how untreated wastewater was flowing straight into the estuary. One season, local shellfish populations just crashed—it was catastrophic for the fisheries, the community, and the whole coastal ecosystem. Seeing it up close—how one environmental failure can ripple through an entire system—well, it sticks with you. And that’s only more relevant now. The need for coordinated, robust global action is, I think, more urgent than ever.

James Miller

You know, for a lot of folks, and I get this from talking to volunteers, pollution or overfishing sounds kinda distant—like it’s something happening far away. But when you realize those plastics, those chemicals? They circle back. They’re in the fish we eat, in the air we breathe. Stuff’s not just an “ocean problem”—it’s a people problem, and it’s getting pretty personal for communities everywhere.

James Miller

Yeah, which brings us to what’s supposed to be this turning point: the 2023 UN High Seas Treaty, the BBNJ Agreement. It’s the first-ever legally binding global pact for areas beyond national jurisdiction, which is—let me try to phrase this right—basically, everything out there past any country’s waters. The Treaty’s meant to cover things like marine genetic resources, and sets up a process to establish marine protected areas. Big headline target is protecting 30% of the ocean by 2030, really ambitious stuff. But a lot of the details are still a work in progress.

Charlotte Hughes

Exactly, James. The Treaty aims to hit these key objectives: conservation, fairness in using ocean resources, strong scientific cooperation, and sharing benefits more equitably. The process has been a marathon, honestly, not a sprint. The High Ambition Coalition—think 52 countries, led by the EU—really helped get signatories around the table and hammer out compromises. Their push brought in commitments to capacity-building and environmental impact assessments—making sure that, before anyone can start, say, deep-sea mining or extracting genetic resources, science and equity come first.

Emily Carter

Still, there are some sizable hurdles. One biggie is ratification—we need at least 60 countries to approve this thing before it actually has teeth, and so far only about 87 have signed but way fewer have ratified it. Then you’ve got the ambiguities, especially around fishing. The Treaty talks about “sustainable use,” but doesn’t actually ban commercial fishing from future Marine Protected Areas—there’s all this language about aligning with conservation objectives, but it’s not super crisp in Articles 17.4(e) and 19.4. And, as ever, commercial and conservation interests don’t always line up, so negotiators kicked some of the trickiest stuff down the road for future working groups to sort out. It’s a massive achievement, but we’re definitely not at the finish line yet.

Michael Thompson

And to build on that, the origins of this treaty didn’t just pop up overnight. It’s been in the works for years—since the Ocean Decade initiative began back in 2021, ramping up international collaboration to actually get science and policy folks pulling in the same direction. But like you said, Emily, the “how” of putting these promises into practice is still very much an open question.

Michael Thompson

So, let’s get real for a second—how do we actually go from words to action? Dr. Carolyn Currie sets out a pretty detailed taxonomy for the kinds of regulatory models that might work. Think of it as a spectrum—from weak to strong enforcement modes, different levels of compliance audits (some just reviewing paperwork, others doing surprise inspections), and then a kind of pyramid of sanctions that starts gentle—with persuasion, warning letters—and ramps up to fines, prosecution, or even shutting down polluting operations if people don’t play ball. The idea is, don’t hammer everyone right out of the gate, but escalate only when scientific evidence says it’s needed. That way, you actually build resilience—not just more rules nobody follows.

Charlotte Hughes

And enforcement needs funding, obviously. That’s where international finance comes in. We’ve got examples like the EU already pledging over €800 million towards implementation, plus the Global Environment Facility and innovative models like blended finance or public-private partnerships. These funding avenues could really accelerate implementation, especially in lower- and middle-income countries that bear the brunt of both pollution and underinvestment. It’s going to be critical—if the financial support falls short, this Treaty won’t go anywhere, no matter how well intentioned it is.

James Miller

But let’s not kid ourselves—implementation’s got serious holes right now. There’s nothing yet that says, “no fishing here, ever” in the new MPAs—just sort of, “use it sustainably.” I’ve got a recent example: in the Western Indian Ocean, illegal and unregulated fishing already wiped out about 35% of fish stocks. And in regions like the Coral Triangle, IUU fishing and even deep-sea mining are still happening despite all the talk. Unless the Treaty gets some real bite, we risk it ending up as window dressing, not a shield for biodiversity.

Emily Carter

Yeah, and this is where public pressure and scientific oversight come in. If national governments and treaty bodies aren’t transparent, and if communities don’t have a say in how these systems are set up, we’re going to repeat the same oversights that got us here in the first place. It’s a global ocean, but without local accountability and the cash to make changes on the ground—or in the water—we’re just circling the drain. That sounds dramatic but, honestly, the stakes are that high.

Michael Thompson

Alright, I think that’s a good snapshot of the road ahead—messy, complicated, but not impossible. We’ll keep tracking developments as countries debate ratification, funding kicks in, and hopefully, enforcement approaches move from theory to real impact. Be sure to join us next time as we dive even deeper into ocean innovation and what the next wave of ocean governance could look like.

Emily Carter

Thank you everyone for joining us—loved this conversation. And as always, if you’re curious what’s happening in your coastal area, get in touch or check out www.ouroceans.org.au for more updates.

James Miller

Yeah, thanks, everybody. Keep making noise for the ocean, and we’ll see you on the next episode!

Charlotte Hughes

Take care all, and thanks for listening. Let’s keep the conversation going—and the oceans thriving. Bye for now!