Traditional Dimensions of Seabed Resource Management in the Context of Deep Sea Mining in the Pacific: Learning From the Socio-Ecological Interconnectivity Between Island Communities and the Ocean Realm

Abstract

In many of the Pacific Islands, local communities have long-held cultural and spiritual attachments to the sea, in particular to species and specific marine areas, processes, habitats, islands, and natural seabed formations. Traditional knowledge, customary marine management approaches and integrated relationships between biodiversity, ecosystems and local communities promote conservation and ensure that marine benefits are reaped in a holistic, sustainable and equitable manner. However, the interaction between local traditional knowledge, contemporary scientific approaches to marine resource management and specific regulatory frameworks has often been challenging. To some extent, the value of community practices and customary law, which have provided an incentive for regional cooperation and coordination around ocean governance, is acknowledged in several legal systems in the Pacific and a number of regional and international instruments, but this important connection can be further enhanced. In this article we present a science-based overview of the marine habitats that would be affected by deep seabed mining (DSM) along with an analysis of some traditional dimensions and cultural/societal aspects of marine resource management. We then assess whether the applicable legal frameworks at different levels attach sufficient importance to these traditional dimensions and to the human and societal aspects of seabed (mineral) resource management in the region. On the basis of this analysis, we identify best practices and formulate recommendations with regard to the current regulatory frameworks and seabed resource management approaches. Indeed, the policies and practices developed in the Pacific could well serve as a suitable model elsewhere to reconcile commercial, ecological, cultural and social values within the context of deep sea mineral exploitation in addition to sustaining the Human Well-being and Sustainable Livelihoods (HWSL) of the Pacific communities and the health of the Global Ocean.

The Concept of Oceanian Sovereignty in the Context of Deep Sea Mining in the Pacific Region

“…It appears clear that Oceanian States need robust laws to govern key marine environmental issues (biodiversity conservation, marine bio-prospection, coastal and deep sea mining, ocean acidification, climate change, pollutions and their impacts). After all, international treaties are not always effective and can in various situations not be applied, while regional conventions mainly provide guidelines for States on how to develop suitable legal frameworks and thus do not typically constitute binding instruments by themselves (Tilot et al, 2021a).…”

“…Sovereignty and the urge for development in Oceania, rather than locally driven and respectful of cultural heritage, are another transforming force for the use of marine resources and minerals. During the last decades, traditional management systems and customary marine tenure processes have undergone revitalization in many Pacific island countries and have been acknowledged to a certain extent in several legal systems in the Pacific and a number of regional and international instruments, but this important connection can certainly be further developed (Veitayaki, 2004;Govan et al, 2008;Veitayaki et al, 2011;Bambridge, 2016;Tilot et al, 2021a).…”

Preserving Community’s Environmental Interests in a Meta-Ocean Governance Framework towards Sustainable Development Goal 14: A Mechanism of Promoting Coordination between Institutions Responsible for Curbing Marine Pollution

“…There are further activities conducted under the UNEP programmes, including but not limited to the public awareness, education, knowledge management, advocacy campaigns, and database platforms. Such programmes are primarily available through the Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment in the Wider Caribbean Region (Cartagena Convention), OSPAR Convention, Convention for the Protection of the Natural Resources and Environment of the South Pacific Region (Noumea Convention), and Northwest Pacific Action Plan [92,98,100] (as provided in Table 1). However, there are specific weaknesses regarding public awareness and education in other areas, specifically in the Southeast Asian and South Asian Seas, due to lack of obligation through any legal framework.…”

“…A relatively more minor focus is on the integrated mechanism for climate adaptation strategy in the mitigation of ocean acidification [29]. Although the nation-state-parties under the Regional Convention for the Conservation of the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden Environment (Jeddah Convention), The Convention for Cooperation in the Protection, Management and Development of the Marine and Coastal Environment of the Atlantic Coast of the West and Central Africa Region (Abidjan Convention), Nairobi Convention, Barcelona Convention, and the Noumea Convention share the information regarding rising sea levels (coastal flood risk), they are weak regarding the capacity in implementation of mechanisms for ocean acidification mitigation [23,82,84,90,92] (as provided in Table 1). Thus, in the climate change governance arena, there shall be serious efforts to address adaptation issues in mitigation of ocean acidification and to develop measures specific to address rising sea levels.…”

Deep seabed mining and communities: A transdisciplinary approach to ecological risk assessment in the South Pacific

“…It considers four equally weighted dimensions: economic, social, cultural, and environmental well‐being (Faaui, 2018; Pascua et al, 2017). Recently, Tilot et al (2021) provided a thorough consideration of these traditional dimensions in the context of deep seabed mining in the Pacific and linked these to legal frameworks. Further to this, in a more general but relevant framework, the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UN General Assembly, 2007) specifically recognizes “the urgent need to respect and promote the inherent rights of indigenous peoples which derive from their political, economic and social structures and from their cultures, spiritual traditions, histories and philosophies, especially their rights to their lands, territories and resources.”…”