Abstract
This chapter analyses the institutionalization of Deep Seabed Mining (DSM) governance arrangements and starts by discussing the governance context and practice of deep seabed mining, followed by examining the role of the International Seabed Authority, the role of governmental and non-governmental actors in the exploration and exploitation of marine resources from the seabed and the way this is organized. The process of (liquid) institutionalization of DSM is illustrated by the example of the Clarion Clipperton Zone (CCZ), in the Pacific Ocean. The analysis showed both stabilization, in which the existing historical power position of pioneer firms and sponsoring states is defended against change, supported by the neo-liberal and neo-mercantilist discourses; and, structuration, related to the development of the mining code and the development of the Environmental Management Plan for the CCZ. The analysis indicates characteristics of Type II and Type III liquid institutionalization within the example of DSM.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
www.isa.org.jm (visited 19/08/2021).
- 2.
www.isa.org.jm (visited 19/08/2021).
- 3.
ISA regional groups are: African group; Asian-Pacific group; Eastern European group; Latin-American and Caribbean States; Western European and other States (ISA 2019a).
- 4.
“Observer States may participate in the deliberations of the Assembly, but are not entitled to participate in the taking of decisions. Observers from the United Nations and its specialized agencies, and other intergovernmental organizations may participate in the deliberations of the Assembly if invited by the President on questions within the scope of their competence. NGO Observers may sit at public meetings of the Assembly and, upon invitation from the President and subject to approval by the Assembly, may make oral statements on questions within the scope of their activities. Written statements submitted by NGO observers within the scope of their activities which are relevant to the work of the Assembly should be made available by the Secretariat in the quantities in the languages in which the statements are submitted. All observers of ISA may designate representatives to participate, without the right to vote, in the deliberations of the Council, upon the invitation of the Council, on questions affecting them or within the scope of their activities” (https://www.isa.org.jm/observers, visited 27/01/2021).
- 5.
Members are elected in five groups. Group A: four States which consume or import more than 2% of minerals to be derived from the Area, including one Eastern European country. Group B: four States from the eight states with the largest investments in activities in the Area. Group C: four States from States, which, are major net exporters of minerals to be derived from the Area, including at least two developing States whose exports of such minerals have a substantial bearing upon their economies. Group D: six developing States, representing special interests (e.g. large populations, land-locked or geographically disadvantaged, island States, major importers of minerals to be derived from the Area, potential producers for such minerals and least developed States). Group E: 18 states elected according to the principle of ensuring an equitable geographical distribution of seats in the Council as a whole, with at least one member from each geographical region (Africa, Asia-Pacific, Eastern Europe, Latin America and the Caribbean and Western Europe and Others).
- 6.
See LOSC (n 1), Articles 153(2)(a) and 170, Annex III Article 3(1)–(2), Annex IV Article 1; 1994 Implementation Agreement (n 4), Annex Section 2 (note 33 in (Willaert 2020b)).
- 7.
“To this end the Authority shall adopt appropriate rules, regulations and procedures for inter alia: (a) the prevention, reduction and control of pollution and other hazards to the marine environment, including the coastline, and of interference with the ecological balance of the marine environment, particular attention being paid to the need for protection from harmful effects of such activities as drilling, dredging, excavation, disposal of waste, construction and operation or maintenance of installations, pipelines and other devices related to such activities; (b) the protection and conservation of the natural resources of the Area and the prevention of damage to the flora and fauna of the marine environment” (UNCLOS, art. 145).
- 8.
Summary of the 25th Session of the ISA Council, note 47, p. 7 (in: Willaert 2020a: 184).
- 9.
https://isa.org.jm/files/files/documents/isacont-update.pdf (visited 16/03/2022). March 2022 there is no information if these contracts have been renewed (https://www.isa.org.jm/exploration-contracts/polymetallic-nodules)(visited 16/03/2022).
- 10.
The USA developed its own legislation on deep sea mining, the 1980 Deep Seabed Minerals Resources Act. Based on this act and because the USA set up agreements with “reciprocating states” (such as the UK, France and Germany) Lockheed got an exploration permit for the CCZ (Zalik 2018b).
- 11.
At the 18th session (16–27 July 2012) the Council decided that the “implementation of a comprehensive management plan at the regional level is one of the measures appropriate and necessary to ensure effective protection of the marine environment of that part of the Area known as the Clarion-Clipperton Zone from harmful effects that may arise from activities in the Area and that such a plan should include provision for the establishment of a representative network of areas of particular environmental interest” (ISA 2012, ISBA/18/C/22).
- 12.
https://www.thebalance.com/mercantilism-definition-examples-significance-today-4163347 (visited 22/10/2021).
References
Ardron, Jeff A., Henry A. Ruhl, and Daniel O.B. Jones. 2018. Incorporating Transparency into the Governance of Deep-Seabed Mining in the Area beyond National Jurisdiction. Marine Policy 89 (February): 58–66. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.11.021.
Belgian Government. 2018. Belgian Response to the Public Consultation.
Bourrel, Marie, Torsten Thiele, and Duncan Currie. 2018. The Common of Heritage of Mankind as a Means to Assess and Advance Equity in Deep Sea Mining. Marine Policy 95 (September): 311–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2016.07.017.
Filer, Colin, and Jennifer Gabriel. 2018. How Could Nautilus Minerals Get a Social Licence to Operate the World’s First Deep Sea Mine? Marine Policy 95 (October): 394–400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2016.12.001.
FPS Economy. 2018. Environmental Impact Statement from Global Sea Mineral Resources for Small-Scale Testing of Nodule Collector Components on the Seafloor.
Giddens, Anthony. 1984. The Constitution of Society. Outline of the Theory of Structuration. Oxford, UK: Polity Press.
Ginzky, H., P. Singh, and T. Markus. 2020. Strengthening the International Seabed Authority’s Knowledge-Base: Addressing Uncertainties to Enhance Decision-Making. Marine Policy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.103823.
Hacker, Jacob S., Paul Pierson, and Kathleen Thelen. 2015. Drift and Conversion: Hidden Faces of Institutional Change. In Advances in Comparative-Historical Analysis, ed. James Mahoney and Kathleen Thelen, 180–208. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316273104.008.
ISA. 2011. Environmental Management Plan for the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (ISBA/17/LTC/7).
———. 2012. Decision of the Council Relating to an Environmental Management Plan for the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (ISBA/18/C/22).
———. 2019a. International Seabed Authority—Authority.
———. 2019b. International Seabed Authority—Observers.
Jones, Daniel O.B., Jennifer M. Durden, Kevin Murphy, Kristina M. Gjerde, Aleksandra Gebicka, Ana Colaço, Telmo Morato, Daphne Cuvelier, and David S.M. Billett. 2019. Existing Environmental Management Approaches Relevant to Deep-Sea Mining. Marine Policy 103 (May): 172–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.01.006.
Lodge, Michael, David Johnson, Gwenaëlle Le Gurun, Markus Wengler, Phil Weaver, and Vikki Gunn. 2014. Seabed Mining: International Seabed Authority Environmental Management Plan for the Clarion–Clipperton Zone. A Partnership Approach. Marine Policy 49 (November): 66–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2014.04.006.
Ovesen, Vidar, Ron Hackett, Lee Burns, Peter Mullins, and Scott Roger. 2018. Managing Deep Sea Mining Revenues for the Public Good—Ensuring Transparency and Distribution Equity. Marine Policy 95 (September): 332–336. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.02.010.
Seas at Risk. 2018a. Environmental Groups Call for a U-Turn on Deep Sea Mining.
———. 2018b. Public Consultation on First Deep Sea Mining Equipment Test in the Clarion Clipperton Zone. September 2018.
Smits, Coco C.A., Judith van Leeuwen, and Jan P.M. van Tatenhove. 2017. Oil and Gas Development in Greenland: A Social License to Operate, Trust and Legitimacy in Environmental Governance. Resources Policy 53: 109–116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2017.06.004.
Toonen, Hilde M., and Jan P.M. van Tatenhove. 2020. Uncharted Territories in Tropical Seas? Marine Scaping and the Interplay of Reflexivity and Information. Maritime Studies 19 (3): 359–374. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40152-020-00177-z.
Voyer, Michelle, and Judith van Leeuwen. 2019. ‘Social License to Operate’ in the Blue Economy. Resources Policy 62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2019.02.020.
Warner, Robin. 2020. International Environmental Law Principles Relevant to Exploitation Activity in the Area. Marine Policy 114 (April). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2019.04.007.
Willaert, Klaas. 2020a. Effective Protection of the Marine Environment and Equitable Benefit Sharing in the Area: Empty Promises or Feasible Goals? Ocean Development & International Law 51 (2): 175–192. https://doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2020.1737444.
———. 2020b. On the Legitimacy of National Interests of Sponsoring States: A Deep Sea Mining Conundrum. The International Journal of Marine and Coastal Law October: 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1163/15718085-BJA10011.
Zalik, Anna. 2018a. Mining the Seabed, Enclosing the Area: Ocean Grabbing, Proprietary Knowledge and the Geopolitics of the Extractive Frontier beyond National Jurisdiction. International Social Science Journal 68 (229–230): 343–359. https://doi.org/10.1111/issj.12159.
———. 2018b. Mining the Seabed, Enclosing the Area: Proprietary Knowledge and the Geopolitics of the Extractive Frontier beyond National Jurisdiction. International Social Science Journal 15. https://doi.org/10.1111/issj.12159.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2022 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
van Tatenhove, J.P.M. (2022). Deep Seabed Mining. In: Liquid Institutionalization at Sea. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09771-3_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-09771-3_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-031-09770-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-031-09771-3
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)