Introduction
   The conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity beyond national jurisdictions has become one of the defining environmental challenges of our time, attracting unprecedented international attention, as scientific information, albeit insufficient, continues to reveal the richness and vulnerability of such biodiversity, particularly around seamounts, hydrothermal vents, sponges, and cold-water corals.

Since the adoption of the Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) in June of 2023 significant momentum has built toward its implementation. The Agreement achieved a historic milestone when the 60th instrument of ratification was deposited on 19 September 2025, triggering its entry into force on 17 January 2026. As of March 2026, 88 countries have ratified the Agreement, including 11 Pacific Island Countries; Palau (the first country globally to ratify, in January 2024), FSM, Marshall Islands, Fiji, Niue, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu, Vanuatu, and Kiribati. The adoption of the Agreement was widely acknowledged by Pacific Island leaders. However they also recognized the special circumstances of the Pacific Islands in needing support for its implementation and called on the international community and the Council of Regional Organizations in the Pacific (CROP) agencies, such as the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC), Forum Fisheries Agency (FFA) and the Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Program (SPREP), to provide that support to ensure benefits for future generations.

Since the Agreement's adoption, a Preparatory Commission (PrepCom) was established by UN General Assembly Resolution 78/272 to prepare for the Agreement's entry into force and the convening of the first meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP1). The PrepCom has held three substantive sessions—in April 2025, August 2025, and March 2026—addressing the institutional and financial architecture of the Agreement, including rules of procedure for the COP and subsidiary bodies, funding mechanisms, secretariat arrangements, and the design of the Clearing-House Mechanism. COP1 is proposed for early 2027, and Pacific Island Countries must be prepared to engage meaningfully in this inaugural meeting.

Environmental Assessment Package
   The Agreement uses the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) processes as tools to identify and manage threats to marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) and to ensure conservation and sustainable use. Part IV of the Agreement establishes a comprehensive legal framework for EIAs, mandating that parties assess the potential environmental impacts of activities under their jurisdiction or control that may have more than a minor or transitory effect on the marine environment, or where the potential effects are unknown or poorly understood. The expectation is that processes and other requirements for conducting and reporting assessments by party countries should follow general EIA concepts and principles, such as screening, scoping, impact analysis, impact mitigation and management, stakeholder engagement, EIA reporting and publication, and impact monitoring and reporting. 
 
It is important to note that the State with jurisdiction or control over a planned activity in marine areas will be responsible for ensuring that an EIA and/or SEA is conducted either in accordance with the Agreement or through equivalent national processes, provided that the assessment meets the substantive requirements of Part IV. This will require the internationalisation and significant update of national EIA processes and standards and/or guidelines for the conduct of EIAs of activities in the ABNJ. Under Article 38, the Scientific and Technical Body of the Agreement will develop standards and guidelines, including screening thresholds, methods for assessing cumulative impacts, and required content for EIA reports, for adoption by the COP.

The Agreement establishes a Clearing House Mechanism (CHM) that serves as a centralised digital platform—described as the 'nervous system' of the Agreement—for sharing information, including country decisions to conduct EIA, stakeholder engagement and consultation practices, and for making EIA and monitoring reports available for public viewing, and for sharing technical reviews and recommendations. The CHM will also facilitate a decision-making process for a planned activity to proceed. At the request of a country, the Conference of the Parties (COP) can provide advice on whether a planned activity may proceed, taking into consideration the recommendations from the scientific and technical body of the Agreement.

Parties (including Pacific island countries) will bear significant responsibilities in the EIA process for planned activities in ABNJ, as outlined in the Agreement.[1] (They are the actors with law-making authority and legitimate power over any planned activity within their jurisdiction or under their control, and should:

• determine whether an EIA is required based on the potential impacts of the proposed activity on the marine environment during the screening stage;
• determine the scope of the EIA, including identifying the key environmental, social, economic, cultural, and other impacts as well as the cumulative impacts in the scoping stage;
• conduct impact assessment and evaluation by considering the best available scientific information, relevant traditional knowledge of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, the cumulative and transboundary impacts, and reasonable alternatives to the proposed activity;
• establish the mitigation, prevention, and impact management procedures;
• notify stakeholders and undertake public consultation at all stages;
• prepare and publish the EIA report based on the required content set by COP, which includes the data concerning the environmental record of the proponent of the activity;
• decide whether the proposed activity may proceed or not;
• monitor, review and periodically report the activity to CHM, including the Scientific and Technical Body and all states.

Activities in ABNJ
   According to the High Seas Alliance (2021), several types of proposals have emerged in recent years to conduct activities in ABNJ, some of which have not previously taken place on a significant scale, and for which there is no established body with the authority to assess and manage those activities. These proposals include floating cities (“sea steading”), large-scale floating aquaculture operations, floating renewable energy or nuclear facilities, plastic collection activities, and climate change mitigation or geoengineering proposals. In addition, there are well-known activities such as seabed mining and cable laying; the environmental impacts of these activities are not as well studied as those of some other industrial sectors affecting ABNJ.

Deep-sea mining remains one of the most contentious issues affecting ABNJ. As of early 2026, the International Seabed Authority (ISA) has yet to adopt a comprehensive Mining Code to regulate commercial exploitation, and no commercial exploitation permits have been granted. Notably, approximately 40 countries —including several Pacific Island nations such as Palau, Fiji, Samoa, and the Federated States of Micronesia —have called for a moratorium, precautionary pause, or ban on deep-sea mining, citing significant gaps in scientific understanding of deep-sea ecosystems and the potential for irreversible environmental damage. Over 950 scientists have endorsed similar calls. These developments underscore the critical importance of robust EIA processes for activities in ABNJ.

The geopolitical landscape around ABNJ activities has also evolved significantly. In 2025–2026, unilateral actions by certain States to fast-track seabed mining projects outside the ISA framework have raised concerns about the fragmentation of ocean governance and the undermining of multilateral processes. For Pacific Island Countries, these developments heighten the urgency of developing strong EIA capabilities that can ensure their interests and the health of shared ocean resources are adequately protected.

Environmental Assessment in the Pacific Islands
   The ability of Pacific Island Countries to conduct EIA and SEA in ABNJ will largely depend on the robustness of their national EIA governance and processes. Improving and strengthening the Pacific Islands' existing EIA processes and systems, and closing gaps, are key to enabling the Pacific Islands to implement the Agreement’s EIA provisions.

There are ongoing capacity constraints in Pacific Island Countries to effectively implement EIA policies to address environmental and social challenges associated with project investments. Implementing the EIA process to manage environmental and social risks from projects requires technical capacity, strong institutions with adequate resources, and engaged communities. Improved environmental and social risk identification and management require ongoing and systematic improvements, political commitment, and adequate resourcing of regulatory and implementing authorities.

One of the key objectives of SPREP, as the regional inter-governmental organisation responsible for the protection and sustainable management of the Pacific Island countries and territories, is to ensure Pacific peoples benefit from strong environmental governance and good practice in impact assessment. Notable work and achievements by SPREP toward building Pacific Island Countries' capacity in Environmental Assessment include the following. All 14 Pacific Island Countries now have legislation mandating and supporting the application of EIA. Key milestones include:

• Guidelines on impact assessment – Strengthening EIA Guidelines for Pacific Island Countries and Territories (2016)
• EIA guidelines for coastal tourism development in Pacific Island Countries and Territories (2018)
• Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Guidelines for PICT (2020)
• Good Practice in Environmental Impact Assessment for Coastal Engineering in the Pacific (2022),
• Draft Guidelines on Good Practice in Environmental Auditing for Tourism in the Pacific (2023)
• Good Practice Guidelines in Environmental Impact Assessment for Coastal Engineering in the Pacific (2023)
• Support for the development of EIA policy and sectoral and national guidelines
• Establishment of the Pacific Network for Environmental Assessment (PNEA) as a regional platform for Pacific Island government officials working on EIA/SEA, including webinars on integrating climate change in EIA processes and social and cultural impact assessments

• Subregional workshops on transboundary EIA issues, including the June 2025 workshop in Apia on applying EIA principles to hazardous waste management
• National-level capacity building workshops on EIA and SEA to integrate environmental assessments into national legal frameworks and environmental policies.
• Support for delivery of training and capacity building activities on environment and social safeguards (ESS) and enhanced academic offering on EIA at the University of the South Pacific under the Pacific Learning Partnership (PLP).
• Facilitation to connect Pacific Island countries with international organisations and experts on EIA through participation in regional and international conferences. (e.g. IAIA, EIANZ and NZAIA annual conferences)

Although many of the above initiatives are not directly related to the EIA Provisions of the Agreement, they provide essential foundations and starting points to enhance and strengthen the capacities of Pacific Island Countries to implement the EIA Provisions. The challenge now is to scale up and adapt these efforts specifically for activities in ABNJ.

Support to Pacific Island Countries
   Under its current mandate, SPREP continues to support and work with Pacific Island Countries to strengthen their capacities to implement Environmental and Social Safeguards. With the Agreement now in force and COP1 on the horizon, there are specific aspects of the EIA provisions in the Agreement that require SPREP to focus on, when building and strengthening the capacity of Pacific Island Countries:

The ability and know-how to conduct EIA in ABNJ
The marine ecosystem of the high seas or areas beyond national jurisdictions, including the seabed environment, is a highly complex and dynamic system with multiple processes and interactions. There are insufficient baseline data and many uncertainties on the sensitivity of marine life to anthropogenic activities and disturbances. Constant environmental changes in ocean ecosystems, owing to climate impacts (such as ocean acidification), ocean temperature changes, changes in circulation patterns, sea-level rise, and deoxygenation, add to the uncertainties. These conditions greatly challenge the predictive capacity of EIA and the ability of assessment processes to accurately identify and assess impacts. Monitoring and evaluation of impacts in the high seas and seabed environment also pose challenges due to limited expertise and resources, including equipment and tools, which reduce our understanding of changes already taking place.

To address these challenges, Pacific Island Countries will need access to advanced marine science capabilities, including remote sensing technologies, environmental DNA sampling, and improved ocean modelling tools. SPREP can play a catalytic role in brokering access to these technologies through partnerships with research institutions, international organisations, and technology providers. 

Modernising EIA guidelines and standards
There is a need to prioritise and update existing EIA guidelines and standards to make them adaptable for use in areas beyond national jurisdictions, including the seabed environment. This includes developing guidance on cumulative impact assessment in marine environments, establishing appropriate screening thresholds for activities in ABNJ, and incorporating the mitigation hierarchy (avoid, minimise, restore, offset) into EIA practice. SPREP's existing suite of EIA and SEA guidelines provides a strong foundation upon which to build ABNJ-specific guidance.

Use of the Clearing House Mechanism (CHM)
The CHM is established by the Agreement as a platform for sharing and exchanging information and technical advice, and for informed decision-making in EIA implementation. More specifically, the CHM is created to allow party countries to:

1. Disclose information about their screening findings and decisions on a planned activity that may cause substantial pollution of, or significant and harmful changes to, the marine environment, and to check that the EIA would be conducted according to the national process.
2. Facilitate sharing of notifications and opportunities for public participation and consultation throughout the EIA process, including when identifying the scope and when preparing the report, before a decision is made as to whether to authorise the activity.
3. Make available the draft EIA reports and monitoring reports for the scientific and technical body to consider and evaluate them, and make comments and recommendations.
4. Make available final EIA reports and monitoring reports for activities.
5. To notify the COP, parties, and the public on significant adverse impacts that either were not foreseen in the EIA or that arise from a breach of any of the conditions set out in the approval of the activity, and for the necessary actions to take such as to halt the activity, and evaluation of any measures implemented or actions taken, on time.

Pacific Islands countries will require appropriate training and skills to use the CHM effectively in the areas for BBNJ EIA implementation. The PrepCom sessions have been actively designing the CHM as a robust, centralised digital platform intended to facilitate transparency, open access to scientific data, and matchmaking between capacity-building needs and opportunities. SPREP should ensure that Pacific Island Countries are equipped with the digital infrastructure, technical skills, and institutional arrangements necessary to engage with the CHM from its launch.

Preparing for COP1 and the Scientific and Technical Body
With COP1 proposed for early 2027, Pacific Island Countries must be well-prepared to participate in the decisions that will shape the Agreement's implementation, including the adoption of EIA standards and guidelines, the operationalisation of the CHM and the Scientific and Technical Body, and the establishment of financial mechanisms. SPREP, in coordination with OPOC and other CROP agencies, should support Pacific delegations with technical briefings, negotiation strategy development, and coordinated regional positions on key EIA-related agenda items.

Expand technical partnerships
SPREP is also to expand its partnerships with international organisations that can provide expert advice and support, including capacity building and transfer of technology in EIA in ABNJ, connect PICs with organisations, and facilitate access to a pool of experts who can support the preparation of EIA for activities in ABNJ. This includes leveraging the Global Environment Facility (GEF), which the PrepCom has been considering as a key financial mechanism for supporting capacity building under the Agreement.

Collaborate with other Pacific CROP agencies and development partners
SPREP is working with CROP agencies efforts with other Pacific CROP agencies, such as the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC), Office of Pacific Ocean Commissioner (OPOC), the University of the South Pacific (USP), the World Bank, etc., to identify synergies and areas of collaboration to deliver capacity development programs for regional support regarding the implementation of the BBNJ agreement.

In November 2023, Pacific Islands Forum Leaders mandated OPOC to coordinate with CROP agencies, including SPREP, to support members in the ratification, domestication, and implementation of the BBNJ Agreement. This mandate provides an important institutional framework for coordinated regional action, and SPREP should leverage it to ensure that EIA capacity building is embedded within the broader BBNJ implementation support program. Since the Agreement’s entry into force on 17 January 2026, institutional preparations have accelerated. Three Preparatory Commission (PrepCom) sessions have been held in New York (April 2025, August 2025, and March 2026), addressing governance arrangements, financial rules, the Clearing-House Mechanism operationalisation, and Secretariat arrangements, with three countries (Chile, Belgium, and China) bidding to host the Secretariat. COP1 must convene before 17 January 2027. The GEF has allocated up to USD 34 million from GEF-8 to support BBNJ ratification and early implementation, with over 30 states receiving support through FAO, UNDP, and UNEP. Pacific SIDS, through the AOSIS and PSIDS groupings, have advocated for dedicated SIDS representation on the Bureau and special consideration of SIDS circumstances in implementation arrangements.

Conclusions
   The EIA practices of some Pacific Island Countries do not yet meet the standards required for undertaking EIA in ABNJ. With the Agreement now in force as of January 2026, the window for capacity building has narrowed significantly. Given the complex and dynamic nature of the marine environment and the increased interest in commercial activities in ABNJ, including the Pacific Ocean, it is imperative for SPREP to support the upgrade of member country EIA practices and systems to be consistent with the EIA provisions of the Agreement. This is through continued and new capacity-building programs that SPREP will deliver with the support and collaboration of its partners. With COP1 on the horizon—anticipated for early 2027—there is an urgent need for coordinated regional preparation to ensure Pacific Island Countries can participate meaningfully in the decisions that will shape the Agreement's EIA framework for years to come. Failing to act decisively now will have consequences for the broader marine environment, including within the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) of Pacific Island Countries, and risks leaving Pacific voices underrepresented at the very moment when the rules governing ocean biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction are being set.

With the Agreement now in force and COP1 expected before January 2027, the window for preparatory action is narrow. The establishment of the Scientific and Technical Body, the operationalisation of the Clearing-House Mechanism, and the development of EIA standards and thresholds will all require active Pacific engagement. SPREP’s existing regional EIA guidelines and the Pacific Network for Environmental Assessment (PNEA) provide a strong institutional foundation, but significant investment in capacity building, technology transfer, and integration of traditional knowledge will be essential to ensure Pacific Island Countries can fully participate in and benefit from the new framework.


Footnote
[1] https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/cbd-bbnj-booklet-en.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwjIu86p76yTAxWkzjQHHcrdCgQQy_kOegQIAxAH&opi=89978449&cd&psig=AOvVaw1Cx9Sjano6d8ZMLddn33RD&ust=1774040856067000.


References
  Deep Sea Conservation Coalition (2025). Momentum for a Moratorium [on Deep-Sea Mining]. https://deep-sea-conservation.org/solutions/no-deep-sea-mining/momentum-for-a-moratorium/
   
  Global Environment Facility (GEF) (2024). Initial Guidelines for Enabling Activities and BBNJ Ratification Support Project. GEF/C.66/07. https://www.thegef.org/council-meeting-documents/gef-c-66-07

  Hassanali, K. (2021). Internationalization of EIA in a new marine biodiversity agreement under the Law of the Sea Convention: A proposal for a tiered approach to review and decision-making. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, 87 (2021)  j.eiar.2021.106554  

  High Sea Alliance (2021). How could the EIA provisions of the BBNJ Agreement apply to activities and existing bodies?  https://www.highseasalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/FINAL-How-would-the-EIA-provisions-of-the-BBNJ-Treaty-apply-in-practice-7.8.21.pdf  

  High Seas Alliance. (2026). Historic High Seas Treaty Enters into Force, Launching a New Era of Global Ocean Governance. 16 January 2026. https://highseasalliance.org/2026/01/16/historic-high-seas-treaty-enters-into-force-launching-a-new-era-of-global-ocean-governance/

  IISD Earth Negotiations Bulletin. (2023). Summary of the Resumed Fifth Session of the Intergovernmental Conference on an International Legally Binding Instrument under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biodiversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction: 20 February – 4 March 2023, Vol 25 No. 250  https://enb.iisd.org/sites/default/files/2023-03/enb25250e.pdf

  IISD Earth Negotiations Bulletin. (2025). Summary of the First Session of the Preparatory Commission of the BBNJ Agreement. April 2025.  https://enb.iisd.org/marine-biodiversity-beyond-national-jurisdiction-bbnj-cop-prepcom1-summary

  IISD Earth Negotiations Bulletin. (2025). Summary reports from the First and Second Sessions of the BBNJ Preparatory Commission, April and August 2025. https://enb.iisd.org/marine-biodiversity-beyond-national-jurisdiction-bbnj-cop-prepcom2-briefing-note

  Pacific Islands Forum. (2023). Forum Leaders Communiqué, November 2023: Mandate to OPOC for coordinated BBNJ implementation support. https://forumsec.org/sites/default/files/2024-03/52nd%20Pacific%20Islands%20Forum%20Communique%2020231109.pdf

  UNESCO-IOC. (2026). BBNJ Agreement Entry into Force: Status and Implications for Marine Science and Governance. https://www.ioc.unesco.org/en/articles/bbnj-treaty-enters-force

  United Nations Treaty Collection. (2026). Status of the Agreement under UNCLOS on Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction. https://treaties.un.org/Pages/ViewDetails.aspx?src=TREATY&mtdsg_no=XXI-10&chapter=21&clang=_en

Download as PDF