A risk assessment for the remote ocean: the case of the South East Atlantic

Abstract

Degradation of the natural world and associated ecosystem services is attributed to a historical failure to include its ‘value’ in decision-making. Uncertainty in the quantification of the relationship between natural capital ‘assets’ that give rise to critical societal benefits and people is one reason for the omission of these values from natural resource management. As this uncertainty increases in marine systems and further still with distance from the coast, the connection between society and natural capital assets is less likely to be included adequately in decision-making. Natural capital assets of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ), including those of the deep sea, are distant but are known to generate many benefits for society, from the diffuse and broad-scale benefits of climate regulation to the provision of wild fish for food. While our understanding of the precise relationships (the status of asset stocks, ecosystem functions and processes) that control the availability of ecosystem services and the flows of benefits is limited, this does not preclude opening a discourse on how these natural capital assets could best be managed to continue to benefit society. Here we apply a natural capital approach to the South East Atlantic ABNJ, one of the least scientifically understood regions of the planet, and develop a framework for risk assessment. We do this by describing the benefit flows from the natural capital assets of the region, appraising how activities are creating pressures on these flows and whether the controls for these pressures protect them. Our risk register highlights how governance currently favours the protection of direct (extractive) benefit flows from natural capital assets of the region, which are primarily targeted for financial benefit. Without a systems-based framework that can account for the cumulative pressures on natural capital assets their status, associated ecosystem services and benefits are at risk. Such an approach is essential to capture and protect the foundational and often diffuse connections between marine natural capital and global society.

Reflections on the past, present, and potential futures of knowledge hierarchies in ocean biodiversity governance research

“…Common across all case studies was the creation of space for the inclusion of all voices to bring the various ways that humans 'value' biodiversity into relief, to demonstrate not only that these values exist but their legitimacy and significance to decisionmaking under existing and emerging international obligations. The various methodological approaches applied to this end are described within case studies and range from arts-based (Erwin et al, 2022;McGarry, 2023) to deeply sociological (Mbatha, 2018;Francis and McGarry, 2023;McGarry, 2023), legal (Shields et al, 2023;Strand et al, 2023) and to natural capital approaches (Niner et al, 2024). These methods present a spectrum through which often obscured or ignored relationships with biodiversity are brought to light.…”

“…In demonstrating connections and risk within the system using all available data (La Niner et al, 2024), our research challenges the norms that the only data that can drive precaution and constrain immediate economic extraction is quantified and statistically certain. The frameworks developed seek to change how uncertainty and risk are viewed in decision-making such that demands for precaution and protection of these important regions are supported (Niner et al, 2024).…”

“…In demonstrating connections and risk within the system using all available data (La Niner et al, 2024), our research challenges the norms that the only data that can drive precaution and constrain immediate economic extraction is quantified and statistically certain. The frameworks developed seek to change how uncertainty and risk are viewed in decision-making such that demands for precaution and protection of these important regions are supported (Niner et al, 2024). As such, natural capital approaches may be perceived by some as perpetuating the current capitalist agenda through accepting normative decision-making protocols that diminish biodiversity and human-nature relationships to support cost-benefit analysis or exchange, viewing them as isolated systems.…”

“…There is growing interest in both the protection and the potential economic opportunities of Areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ), those areas of the ocean beyond State's economic limits of 200 nautical miles (Van Dover et al, 2017;Levin et al, 2023;Morgera et al, 2023;Vrancken, 2023). Ecological understanding of these regions is highly uncertain, yet we know that as part of the global ocean ABNJ are critical to thriving societies (Niner et al, 2024). This radical uncertainty challenges the appropriate integration of knowledge and information that represents all human-ocean and marine biodiversity relationships.…”