Journal Article

Deep-Sea Mining With No Net Loss of Biodiversity—An Impossible Aim

Jones, Daniel O. B., Escobar, Elva G., Jaeckel, Aline, Van Dover, Cindy L., Gianni, Matthew, Niner, Holly J., Turner, Phillip J., Watling, Les, Smith, Craig R., Ardron, Jeff A., Thiele, Torsten, Gjerde, Kristina M., Levin, Lisa A.

2018

Overview

Deep-sea mining is likely to result in biodiversity loss, and the significance of this to ecosystem function is not known. “Out of kind” biodiversity offsets substituting one ecosystem type (e.g., coral reefs) for another (e.g., abyssal nodule fields) have been proposed to compensate for such loss. Here we consider a goal of no net loss (NNL) of biodiversity and explore the challenges of applying this aim to deep seabed mining, based on the associated mitigation hierarchy (avoid, minimize, remediate). We conclude that the industry cannot at present deliver an outcome of NNL. This results from the vulnerable nature of deep-sea environments to mining impacts, currently limited technological capacity to minimize harm, significant gaps in ecological knowledge, and uncertainties of recovery potential of deep-sea ecosystems. Avoidance and minimization of impacts are therefore the only presently viable means of reducing biodiversity losses from seabed mining. Because of these constraints, when and if deep-sea mining proceeds, it must be approached in a precautionary and step-wise manner to integrate new and developing knowledge. Each step should be subject to explicit environmental management goals, monitoring protocols, and binding standards to avoid serious environmental harm and minimize loss of biodiversity. “Out of kind” measures, an option for compensation currently proposed, cannot replicate biodiversity and ecosystem services lost through mining of the deep seabed and thus cannot be considered true offsets. The ecosystem functions provided by deep-sea biodiversity contribute to a wide range of provisioning services (e.g., the exploitation of fish, energy, pharmaceuticals, and cosmetics), play an essential role in regulatory services (e.g., carbon sequestration) and are important culturally. The level of “acceptable” biodiversity loss in the deep sea requires public, transparent, and well-informed consideration, as well as wide agreement. If accepted, further agreement on how to assess residual losses remaining after the robust implementation of the mitigation hierarchy is also imperative. To ameliorate some of the inter-generational inequity caused by mining-associated biodiversity losses, and only after all NNL measures have been used to the fullest extent, potential compensatory actions would need to be focused on measures to improve the knowledge and protection of the deep sea and to demonstrate benefits that will endure for future generations.

• Publisher: Frontiers Research Foundation,Frontiers Media S.A
• Subject: BBNJ Agreement / Biodiversity / Biodiversity loss / biodiversity offsetting / Climate change / compensation / Deep sea mining / Deep water / Ecosystems / Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) / Exclusive economic zone / Fish / Habitat loss / Maritime law / Mineral resources / Mining / mitigation hierarchy / Net losses / no net loss / Oceanography / open climate campaign / Sustainable fisheries / Weddings