SEABED AUTHORITY ENDS TENTH ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL SESSION WITH EXPERT PANEL ON FUTURE DIRECTIONS

SEABED AUTHORITY ENDS TENTH ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL SESSION

with EXPERT PANEL on FUTURE DIRECTIONS

(Reissued as received.)

KINGSTON, 26 May (International Seabed Authority) -- The International Seabed Authority today concluded the two-day observance of its tenth anniversary with a second panel discussion by experts on its future directions and prospects.

The Authority was established soon after the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea entered into force on 16 November 1994 with the sixtieth ratification or accession.  The Authority’s Assembly held a special session yesterday as part of the tenth anniversary celebrations.

Today’s discussions, moderated by the Chairman of the Legal and Technical Commission Jean-Marie Auzende (France), also covered the role of the Authority as a Law of the Sea institution, status and prospects for deep seabed mineral resources, the deep ocean environment and the protection of its biodiversity and future directions for the Authority.

The participants were Ambassador Felipe Paolillo, Permanent Representative of Uruguay to the United Nations in New York and co-Chairman of the United Nations Informal Consultative Process on Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea;

Prof. Chris German of the Southampton Oceanography Centre, United Kingdom; Dr. P. John Lambshead, of the British Natural History Museum in London; Dr. Brian Bett of the Southampton Oceanography Centre/Census of Marine Life; and Prof. Tullio Scovazzi of the Faculty of Law, University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.  The first panel yesterday assessed the achievements of the Authority.

Ambassador Paolillo traced the history of the International Seabed Authority back to the years before its establishment in 1994.  He described the Authority’s ten years of existence as “a happy childhood and adolescence”, in stark contrast to the “lengthy and tormented period of its conception and birth”.

What made the early years so difficult, he said, was the reality of what was at stake -- the access to and control of the tremendous wealth of the world’s oceans -- and predictions that if the exploitation of polymetallic nodules did not begin before the end of the twentieth century, the demand for certain metals would exceed the production capacity of land-based sources and the world would face a terrible crisis.

From the outset, Ambassador Paolillo explained, there were two positions which seemed irreconcilable.  The industrialized nations envisioned an Authority with functions limited to ensuring that activities in the international seabed area were conducted in an orderly fashion, while issuing, almost automatically, the required licenses for these activities to be carried out.

However, the developing countries saw an opportunity to establish a regime for exploiting the sea’s wealth, which would be based on the principle of the “common heritage of mankind”, and which would be the foundation of a new world economic order.

After many years of dispute, debate and negotiation, the application of the laws which govern the Area was now the clear responsibility of the Authority.  With the discovery of more mineral resources and the intensification of scientific research into the biodiversity of the Area, there would emerge new challenges for the Authority.  It was to be hoped that States would use the institution as a tool to move forward towards greater integration of international society and towards the achievement of a more equitable distribution of the world’s resources, said Ambassador Paolillo.

Prospects for Deep Seabed

Professor German, head of the Hydrothermal Processes Group at Southampton Oceanography Centre in the United Kingdom, discussed the “status and prospects for deep seabed mineral resources”.  He informed delegates of findings in global exploration for seafloor hydrothermal systems, noting that investigation throughout the Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic ridges had led to greater understanding of the way those systems developed, their mineral resources and ecosystems they hosted.

Professor German said the latest work in hydrothermal vent fields revealed 300% more vents than were previously predicted since 1996 with hundreds more vents sites yet to be discovered.  Ten years ago, few vent sites were known worldwide with nearly all located in the Pacific Ocean.  According to Professor German, in the past decade vent sites with wide geo-diversity have been found in every ocean basin, thanks to systematic exploration methods.

For the future, Professor German said new techniques for deep-sea exploration must be developed, and the importance of the Atlantic, Indian and Arctic oceans must be taken into account.  He said it was also important for the protection and preservation of the marine environment, not to lose sight of vent biogeography and biodiversity during research and exploration activities.

Future Directions

Dr. P. John Lambshead of the Natural History Museum in the United Kingdom, spoke about the research carried out in the deep ocean environment and the protection of its biodiversity.  Among the conclusions reached was that far fewer species existed than the millions previously estimated, perhaps less than ten thousand.  It was also found that the species had large ranges -- their habitats could cover thousands of kilometres.  That meant that they were less threatened by extinction than if they were confined to small areas of the ocean.

Although the research results were based on superficial light-microscope studies, which might not provide the highest level of accuracy in the identification of samples, Dr. Lambshead pointed out that more sophisticated identification methods (using a method called microstructure morphology) was impractical, as it was too time-consuming and costly, and because there were approximately twenty experts trained in that field worldwide.

His team had acquired research grants to develop primers and methods to barcode British coastal animals and fit them into a phylogenetic tree of life to provide background data.  Grants and samples had been obtained for the development of deep-sea monitoring protocols.  The new technology for monitoring the deep seabed was cheap and fast.  The skills for their use were widely available globally.

When completed, deep sea barcoding would be one of most efficient, effective, sophisticated, global monitoring network ever devised.

For the future, he said the objective was to develop a cost-effective monitoring strategy to protect deep-sea biodiversity.  More pure research grants would be sought from foundations and other bodies in the United Kingdom, United States and France.

Dr. Lambshead gave the International Seabed Authority full credit for asking questions that stimulated a revolution in scientific research and led to a transformation in the paradigm of what scientists thought they knew about biodiversity in the deep seabed.  He said that a definitive paper on the new knowledge on deep-sea biodiversity would be published by the end of June.

In a paper on the deep-ocean environment and the protection of its biodiversity, Dr. Brian Bett said there was little scientific knowledge and understanding about the structure of high seas habitats and their functioning.  He spoke about the nature and effect of the potential threats, such as intensive scientific study, bioprospecting, mineral resource exploitation and threat from the high seas fisheries.

Quoting from the relevant provisions of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, he said States had the obligation to protect and preserve the marine environment.  They must reduce and control pollution of the marine environment from any source.  The measures States took must include those necessary to protect and preserve rare or fragile ecosystems as well as the habitat of depleted, threatened or endangered species and other forms of marine life.

Professor Tullio Scovazzi offered a legal perspective towards the future direction of the Authority in light of uncertainty over whether the Authority had a mandate to regulate bioprospecting and fishing in the deep seabed. 

Arguing in favour of the Authority expanding its role in the Area to include control of activities and resources other than minerals, Professor Scovazzi relied on what he said was the innovative ideal included in the United Nations Convention of the Law of the Sea:  that the seabed space beyond the 200-miles limit was the common heritage of mankind.  He noted that several provisions of the Convention established the Authority’s role and competences relating to the protection of the marine environment, including provisions under Article 145 and the 1994 Agreement.

Professor Scovazzi urged closer scrutiny of the mandate of the Authority related to exploration of genetic resources since such activities, not now included in its terms of reference, could become the most immediate and profitable activity on the deep seabed.  While bioprospecting was not specifically regulated in the Convention, “there is an inextricable factual link between the protection of the deepseabed environment, including its biodiversity, marine scientific research and bioprospecting”, he said.

It was his opinion that the role of the International Seabed Authority could be expanded in the future to meet new objectives under commonly agreed cooperative schemes.

The regular session resumed in the afternoon with the Legal and Technical Commission and the Finance Committee in closed meetings.

* *** *