For the maritime industry, the Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) significance extends beyond environmental policy. While the BBNJ Agreement is not a shipping convention and does not regulate vessels in the same way as International Maritime Organization (IMO) instruments do, it will reshape the governance in which shipping operates.
The question for shipowners, operators and maritime stakeholders is not whether the industry will be affected, but how it can respond proactively to a new era of ocean governance.
A new chapter for ocean governance
The BBNJ Agreement was developed to address a long-standing gap in international law. While the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) established broad obligations to protect the marine environment, it did not offer detailed mechanisms for conserving biodiversity. The new agreement fills that gap through four pillars: marine genetic resources, area-based management tools (ABMTs), environmental impact assessments, and capacity building and technology transfer.
The treaty operates under a "non-undermining" principle, meaning it is intended to complement rather than replace existing instruments, frameworks and bodies such as the IMO.
According to Chahrazed Tigha, LR's Lead Regulatory Specialist, this distinction is often misunderstood. “The BBNJ Agreement should not be viewed as a new shipping regulator,” she says. “Its significance lies in the way it strengthens biodiversity governance and creates new mechanisms for cooperation and decision-making in areas beyond national jurisdiction. The challenge will be ensuring those mechanisms work coherently alongside existing frameworks such as the IMO.”
Where shipping meets biodiversity
Shipping has long been recognised as contributing to biodiversity loss. Greenhouse gas emissions, underwater radiated noise, the transfer of invasive species, ship discharges and the physical disturbance of sensitive marine habitats all play a prominent role in discussions about the health of marine ecosystems. Shipping now finds itself the focus of global policymaking.
“The convergence of decarbonisation and biodiversity agendas is one of the most important developments facing maritime stakeholders today,” says Manasi Bhopale, Sustainable Development Manager at LR.
“For many organisations, climate and biodiversity have historically been treated as separate challenges. The BBNJ Agreement reinforces the need for integrated environmental strategies. Decisions about fleet renewal, alternative fuels, energy efficiency and operational practises increasingly need to consider cumulative ecosystem impacts.”
This reflects a broader shift already underway throughout shipping. Environmental performance can no longer be viewed solely through a carbon lens. Risk of biodiversity loss is gaining prominence among investors, insurers, cargo owners and regulators, linked to long-term resilience, access to finance and corporate reputation.
Protected areas for the world’s oceans
Among the treaty's innovations is the creation of a framework for area-based management tools, including marine protected areas (MPAs).
Designating ecologically or biologically significant areas (EBSAs) will not automatically impose shipping restrictions. However, where vessel activity is identified as a risk to ecosystem health, it could consider protective measures such as changing routes, monitoring requirements, noise reduction initiatives or limits on discharges.
The industry is not entering entirely unfamiliar territory. The IMO's Particularly Sensitive Sea Area (PSSA) framework already gives mechanisms for navigation in sensitive areas with the use of associated protective measures (APM).
“The BBNJ Agreement provisions are much broader, with emphasis on monitoring, protection, governance and management ,” says Bhopale. “ABMTs could be used to designate dynamic areas based on seasonal or migratory patterns, creating different navigational considerations from fixed protected areas and requiring closer dialogue between the BBNJ and maritime communities.”
Environmental impact assessments (EIAs) are another important consideration. Under the treaty, the party with jurisdiction must screen activities to decide whether a full EIA is required. For shipping, uncertainty remains over which operations, if any, could be deemed to have an impact, and whether existing IMO processes might satisfy the treaty’s screening requirements.
“Closer dialogue between the future BBNJ COP secretariat and the IMO secretariat will therefore be essential. Success will depend on how effectively those discussions are managed,” Bhopale adds.
From consultation to collaboration
One of the less publicised but potentially most important aspects of the agreement is its emphasis on stakeholder participation. Consultation related to area-based management proposals must be inclusive and transparent, involving governments, scientific organisations, civil society and relevant industry stakeholders.
The SARGADOM Thermal Dome Project, for example, has carried out industry consultations to help develop practical shipping-sector measures for a prospective high seas PSSA.
“Through our industry consultation, we have discussed proposed protective measures including speed reductions, areas to be avoided and traffic separation schemes, as well as their potential impact on ship operations, implications for the Panama Canal and how best to support their adoption,” says Sonia Angelica Jurado Caicedo, SARGADOM Thermal Dome project coordinator.
“Meaningful protective measures for a PSSA cannot be developed without early engagement with the shipping industry. Dialogue is essential to ensure future measures are environmentally effective while reflecting commercial interests and operational realities. The consultation process has provided valuable insights, practical perspectives and constructive feedback from industry stakeholders. Most importantly, it has helped establish a transparent, honest and open dialogue with the shipping sector,” she says.
The agreement’s success will depend on the quality of collaboration between stakeholders. Maritime expertise will be essential to make sure biodiversity measures can be implemented without creating unintended consequences for safety, trade or operational efficiency.
“This is not a one-way relationship. The maritime industry can bring practical experience in capacity building, while the IMO offers a mature framework for technology transfer and support for stakeholders and member states.
“In many ways, the treaty may encourage a more constructive discussion about how conservation and commerce can coexist, rather than treating them as competing objectives,” says Tigha.
Managing uncertainty
As with any new international framework, implementation will bring uncertainty.
Many high seas ecosystems remain insufficiently mapped and scientifically understood. Questions also remain around how different states will interpret and apply treaty provisions, and how coordination between international bodies will function in practice.
“Understanding fleet exposure to future protected areas, assessing operational impacts, and incorporating biodiversity considerations into corporate risk frameworks will become increasingly important. The industry's challenge will be balancing precaution with practicality while maintaining confidence in long-term investment decisions,” says Tigha.
LR's recent Maritime ESG Maturity Index highlights a significant gap between high-level ESG commitments and the implementation of maritime-specific environmental measures. While many companies demonstrate progress in ESG governance and disclosure, key environmental impact areas remain largely unaddressed.
Whale strike prevention, underwater noise mitigation, Inventory of Hazardous Materials (IHM) compliance, and biodiversity-sensitive navigation, remain among the least adopted practices across the industry. Even companies classified as ‘Leader’ in the report score poorly on these metrics, suggesting that maritime ESG maturity is still at an early stage when it comes to addressing the sector’s biodiversity impacts.
Turning challenge into opportunity
As biodiversity becomes a central pillar of sustainability alongside climate action, shipping has an opportunity to play a leading role in shaping solutions.
This is where trusted technical expertise is so valuable. Through regulatory advisory services, environmental risk and impact assessments, fleet exposure analysis for future ABMTs and MPAs, and support for integrating biodiversity considerations into decarbonisation and ESG strategies, LR can help organisations navigate this rapidly evolving landscape. Digital tools such as EnviroManager+ offer compliance in various mandatory and voluntary requirements by navigating in complex regulatory environments.
Sahan Abeysekara, LR's Lead, Environment Policy and Strategy, says, “Rather than treating biodiversity as a compliance exercise, leading organisations are likely to view it as part of a broader approach to sustainable maritime operations and ocean stewardship.”
He adds, “We are seeing more dynamic protective measures proposed and, in some cases, introduced both within and beyond the high seas. Some programmes offer direct financial incentives for compliance, while others recognise voluntary action. Advances in AI, low-orbit connectivity and digital route planning helping to manage complex navigation challenges and provide evidence of fleet-wide compliance.
“As biodiversity metrics become increasingly connected to reporting frameworks, such as TNFD and blue finance, compliance and verification will become even more important for organisations treating biodiversity as a strategic business opportunity rather than a compliance exercise,” he says.
The BBNJ Agreement may not directly regulate shipping, but it will influence the conversations, expectations and decisions that shape its future operating environment. The most successful organisations will be those that engage early, contribute constructively and manage risks recognising that protecting marine biodiversity and enabling global trade are not mutually exclusive ambitions.
Its lasting impact may be its ability to bring those objectives closer together than ever before.
