Marine Biodiversity Conservation and International Law

Marine biodiversity, which is the great magnitude of species, ecosystems, and genetic materials in the oceans of the world, is being threatened with unprecedented threats of overexploitation, pollution, habitat destruction, and climate change, especially in the oceans that are located beyond the national jurisdiction of the world, which are almost half the planet. This research essay is a detailed study of how the international law might be applicable in the conservation and sustainability of marine biological diversity, with the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea as the basic Constitution of the Oceans, and the supplementary agreements under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Treaty) and the Convention on Biological Diversity, and the Agreement on Straddling fish stocks. Analysis shows that although the unique Articles 192, 194, and 197 of UNCLOS contain general duties on the states to protect and conserve the marine environment, cooperate internationally, and avoid acts of pollution that are harmful to living resources, there exist loopholes in the regulations of the activities on the high seas such as deep-sea mining, exploitation of marine genetic materials and use of area-based management tools such as marine protected areas. The paper identifies some of the important findings in recent progress such as the innovative provisions of the BBNJ Treaty on the creation of networks of representative MPAs, carrying out environmental impact assessments on risky activities, sharing the benefits of marine genetic resources fairly, and capacity development of developing states, which combined aim to achieve the target of 30% protection of the ocean by 2030 in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Empirical data from case studies, including the South China Sea Arbitration and comments by the International Tribunal of the Law of the Sea regarding requests for an Advisory Opinion, demonstrate that judicial interpretations are expanding the scope of UNCLOS through ecosystem-based approaches. Still, implementation is disjointed due to sovereignty disputes, ineffective compliance instruments, and the domination of the freedom of the high seas under Article 87.