國際海洋資訊

The United Nations BBNJ Agreement, formally titled "Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction," was officially adopted by the United Nations on 19 June 2023. Many international environmental organizations have erroneously labelled this Agreement as the "High Seas Treaty" or the "Global Ocean Treaty," reflecting the international community's high expectations or even illusions regarding the potential role of this Agreement.

Nevertheless, the Agreement has been positioned from the outset as the third Implementation Agreement under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (hereinafter referred to as "UNCLOS" or "the Convention"), which governs the issues related to the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ in short), and its interactions and complementary relations with the existing Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), lead to an expectation that once the Agreement officially enters into force and becomes operational, it will bring potential impacts on the international community and individual States regarding marine biodiversity conservation and sustainable use.

This article examines the enlightenments and challenges of the BBNJ Agreement presents for Taiwan's marine conservation tasks.

Development of BBNJ Issues within the UN System

To examine issues related to the conservation and sustainable use of "marine biological diversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction", the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) adopted Resolution 59/24 "Oceans and the Law of the Sea" during its 56th plenary meeting of the 59th session on 17 November 2004.

In Paragraph 73 of this Resolution, the UNGA decided to establish an "Ad Hoc Open-ended Informal Working Group to study issues relating to the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction" (the BBNJ Working Group). The Working Group was assigned four major tasks aimed at identifying options and approaches to promote international cooperation and coordination for BBNJ-related issues. Among them, the most important task was "[t]o examine the scientific, technical, economic, legal, environmental, socio-economic and other aspects of these issues." Furthermore, paragraph 74 of the Resolution requested the UN Secretary-General to submit a report on these issues to the 60th session of UNGA. This demonstrates that, in its early stages within the UN framework, the BBNJ issues were primarily focused on the "issues relating to the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity beyond areas of national jurisdiction."

Worth noting is that the first 3 meetings of the 9 meetings held by the BBNJ Working Group primarily focused on view exchanges, and by the 4th meeting in 2011, the Working Group adopted recommendations submitted to the UNGA (see UN Document A/66/119), within which the terminology used to define the "geographical scope subject" of the BBNJ was modified—shifting from "beyond areas of national jurisdiction" to "of areas beyond national jurisdiction" (ABNJ), highlighting the subject status of high seas and "the Area" (as defined under UNCLOS as the seabed and ocean floor and subsoil thereof beyond the limits of national jurisdiction). In other words, the geographical scope for addressing the BBNJ issues was confined to the high seas and the Area beyond the maritime zones and continental shelf under national jurisdiction. This was eventually codified in Article 1 "Use of terms" paragraph 2 of the BBNJ Agreement, which defines "areas beyond national jurisdiction" as "the high seas and the Area."

The same recommendation document (A/66/119) also proposed to the UNGA: (a) A process be initiated, by the General Assembly, with a view to ensuring that the legal framework for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction effectively addresses those issues by identifying gaps and ways forward, including through the implementation of existing instruments and the possible development of a multilateral agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea; (b) This process would address the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, in particular, together and as a whole, marine genetic resources, including questions on the sharing of benefits, measures such as area-based management tools, including marine protected areas, and environmental impact assessments, capacity-building and the transfer of marine technology. (italics for emphasis) At this point, the notion that the BBNJ issues comprise four topics that should be dealt with "as a package" and that the way to deal with it might be to develop a multilateral agreement under UNCLOS, has taken shape.

During its 9th meeting held from 20 to 23 January 2015 in New York, the BBNJ Working Group decided to recommend the UNGA to institutionalize the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, and establish a Preparatory Committee (PrepCom). Based on such recommendations, the 69th session of the UNGA adopted Resolution A/RES/69/292 on 19 June 2015, formally confirming that the BBNJ issues would be addressed through a legal institutionalization approach. This Resolution made four vital decisions:

1. decided to develop an "international legally binding instrument" (ILBI) under the UNCLOS to address BBNJ issues;
2. decided to establish a preparatory committee to make substantive recommendations to the General Assembly on the element of a draft text of an ILBI by the end of 2017 for subsequent negotiations; 
3. the General Assembly should decide on the convening and on the starting date of an intergovernmental conference (IGC) before the end of the 72nd session of the General Assembly; and
4. decided that negotiations should address the topics identified in the package, namely the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction, in particular, a. marine genetic resources, including questions on the sharing of benefits, b. measures such as area-based management tools, including marine protected areas, c. environmental impact assessments, and 4. capacity-building and the transfer of marine technology.

Therefore, in order to advance and undertake the legal institutionalization of the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction and to develop an ILBI, the UN established a PrepCom to prepare for future treaty-making negotiations. Despite divergent positions among States on multiple issues, which made achieving consensus difficult, the UNGA nevertheless decided to convene an IGC. On 24 December 2017, the UNGA adopted Resolution A/RES/72/249 without a vote, setting out fundamental principles to govern the negotiation process of the treaty as well as the relationship between the BBNJ ILBI and UNCLOS or other international legal instruments, and other global, regional, and sectoral bodies, including:

1. This process and its result should not undermine existing relevant legal instruments and frameworks and relevant global, regional and sectoral bodies;
2. It may not affect the legal status of parties or non-parties to the Convention or any other related agreements with regard to those instruments;
3. The conference shall exhaust every effort in good faith to reach agreement on substantive matters by consensus, however, if consensus cannot be achieved, decisions on substantive matters may be adopted by a two-thirds majority of the representatives present and voting, subject to the aforementioned conditions.

In summary, UNGA Resolution A/RES/69/292 established that the BBNJ issue would be addressed through the development of the third Implementation Agreement under UNCLOS while UNGA Resolution A/RES/72/249 further defined the negotiation schedule and fundamental principles for the IGC tasked with negotiating the treaty.

The negotiation process of the legally binding international instrument on BBNJ

▲View of the 1st Session BBNJ IGC Plenary on 17 September 2018

Photo by IISD/ENB | Francis Dejon

As requested by the UNGA Resolution A/RES/72/249, the UN convened an organisational meeting from 16 to 18 April 2018 at its headquarters in New York City. During the session, Singapore's Ambassador Rena Lee, officially titled Ambassador for Oceans and Law of the Sea Issues and Special Envoy of the Minister for Foreign Affairs of Singapore, was appointed by acclamation as the President of the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC).

The first session of the IGC was held from 4 to 17 September 2018 at the UN headquarters in New York, followed by the second session from 25 March to 5 April 2019, and the third session from 19 to 30 August 2019. The fourth session, originally scheduled in the first half of 2020, was postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic, delaying the anticipated adoption of the BBNJ Agreement in IGC 4. It was eventually convened from 7 to 18 March 2022, followed by the fifth session from 15 to 26 August 2022, and a resumed fifth session from 20 February to 4 March 2023.

After 5+1 formal negotiation sessions, the English version of the draft text of the BBNJ Agreement was finalised on the evening of 4 March 2023 (Saturday) New York time. Subsequently, with a resolution, an Open-ended Informal Working Group was established to undertake legal scrubbing of the treaty text and to translate it into the five other official UN languages. On 19 June 2023, the IGC convened a "further resumed fifth session," during which the BBNJ Agreement was formally adopted by consensus. The Agreement was then opened for signature on 20 September 2023 and subsequent ratification and deposit of instruments of ratification to the UN Secretary-General. The Agreement will enter into force 120 days after the 60th instrument of ratification is deposited. As of March 3 of 2025, the BBNJ Agreement has 110 signatories and 18 Parties.

Four Specific Parts of the BBNJ Agreement

Reflecting the four major topics or subject matters that the BBNJ Agreement addresses are Part II to Part V of the BBNJ Agreement. The following briefly presents the key provisions in each of the four specific Parts to deduce their potential comprehensive impacts on Taiwan and the enlightenments and challenges to marine conservation tasks.

Part II Marine Genetic Resources, including the Equitable Sharing of Benefits

Article 9 of the Agreement sets out the objectives applicable to this specific Part. Among them, the primary objective is "[t]he fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from activities with respect to marine genetic resources and digital sequence information on marine genetic resources of areas beyond national jurisdiction for the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity of areas beyond national jurisdiction" (Article 9(a)) and, at the same time, "[t]he building and development of the capacity of Parties, . . . , to carry out activities with respect to marine genetic resources and digital sequence information on marine genetic resources of areas beyond national jurisdiction" (Article 9(b)), "[t]he generation of knowledge, scientific understanding and technological innovation, including through the development and conduct of marine scientific research, as fundamental contributions to the implementation of this Agreement" (Article 9(c)), and "[t]he development and transfer of marine technology in accordance with this Agreement" (Article 9(d)).

The above-mentioned objectives of this specific Part highlight the building, developing, and undertaking capacity for activities of MGRs and digital sequence information of MGRs of areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ), promoting scientific research and technological innovation, fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from such activities, and the transfer of marine technology.

Accordingly, most of the provisions of this Part aim to govern various related activities. For example, Article 10 "Application" paragraph 1 provides that the provisions of this Agreement shall apply to activities with respect to and utilization of MGRs and digital sequence information on MGRs of ABNJ (Article 10(1)) while Article 10(2) specifies matters which the provisions of this Part shall not apply to, along with an exception provison. Articles 11 to 16 further regulate MGR-related activities, notification on such activities, the use of traditional knowledge, benefit-sharing, the establishment of the "Access and Benefit-Sharing Committee," and the monitoring and transparency of these activities.

The most critical provisions impacting Taiwan's marine scientific research, particularly on marine genetic researchers and related activities, are the requirements that information for collection in situ of MGRs shall be notified to the Clearing-House Mechanism (CHM) six months or as early as possible prior to such activities (Article 12(2)); information on the repository or database where digital sequence information on MGRs is or will be deposited shall also be notified to the CHM (Article 12(5)(a)); and the results of and related information resulting from the (commercial) utilization of MGRs and their digital sequence information shall be notified to the CHM (Article 12(8)).

Under Article 14 "Fair and equitable sharing of benefits," more detailed provisions regulate the deposit and access of results and related information derived from the utilization of MGRs and their digital sequence information so as to prevent natural or legal persons from circumventing benefit-sharing obligations after utilizing such resources. As Article 16 "Monitoring and transparency" paragraph 1 stipulates that "[m]onitoring and transparency of activities with respect to marine genetic resources and digital sequence information on marine genetic resources of areas beyond national jurisdiction shall be achieved through notification to the Clearing-House Mechanism." Additionally, paragraph 2 stipulates that "Parties shall periodically submit reports to the access and benefit-sharing committee on their implementation of the provisions in this Part on activities with respect to marine genetic resources and digital sequence information on marine genetic resources of areas beyond national jurisdiction and the sharing of benefits therefrom, in accordance with this Part." Although Taiwan may not be able to participate in the rulemaking and operations of these two subsidiary mechanisms/bodies established under the Agreement, it may still be required to fulfil similar obligations in practice.

Part III Measures such as Area-Based Management Tools, including Marine Protected Areas and ANNEX I Indicative criteria for identification of areas

This Part contains Articles 17 to 26. Article 1 "Use of terms" paragraph 1 defines "Area-Based Management Tool" (ABMT) as "a tool, including a marine protected area, for a geographically defined area through which one or several sectors or activities are managed with the aim of achieving particular conservation and sustainable use objectives in accordance with this Agreement" while "Marine Protected Area" (MPA) means "a geographically defined marine area that is designated and managed to achieve specific long-term biodiversity conservation objectives and may allow, where appropriate, sustainable use provided it is consistent with the conservation objectives" (Article 1 paragraph 9). These two definitions indicate that either an ABMT or an MPA refers to a designated geographic area/maritime zone in which specific management measures are implemented to achieve specific conservation and sustainable use objectives. Accordingly, both ABMT and MPA permit sustainable use activities as long as such activities align with conservation objectives.

Since States lack the authority to designate ABMTs within ABNJ except for the freedoms, rights, and obligations conferred upon them under the UNCLOS, such authority must be established through a global-level multilateral implementation agreement under the UNCLOS framework and confer upon the Conference of the Parties of the Agreement.

For this purpose, Article 17 sets out five specific objectives for this Part, among them, including: Subparagraph (a) Conserve and sustainably use areas requiring protection, including through the establishment of a comprehensive system of area-based management tools, with ecologically representative and well-connected networks of marine protected areas; Subparagraph (c) Protect, preserve, restore and maintain biological diversity and ecosystems, including with a view to enhancing their productivity and health, and strengthen resilience to stressors, including those related to climate change, ocean acidification and marine pollution; and Subparagraph (d) Support food security and other socioeconomic objectives, including the protection of cultural values.

Since adopting ABMT measures, including the designation of MPAs (networks), on the high seas would generate great impacts on national interests and human activities, Article 18 brings into a political arrangement regarding the "Area of application" of this specific Part: "The establishment of area-based management tools, including marine protected areas, shall not include any areas within national jurisdiction and shall not be relied upon as a basis for asserting or denying any claims to sovereignty, sovereign rights or jurisdiction, including in respect of any disputes relating thereto. The Conference of the Parties shall not consider for decision proposals for the establishment of such area-based management tools, including marine protected areas, and in no case shall such proposals be interpreted as recognition or non-recognition of any claims to sovereignty, sovereign rights or jurisdiction."

Part IV Environmental Impact Assessments

Article 28 "Obligation to conduct environmental impact assessments" paragraph 1 and 2, respectively, provide that Parties shall conduct a marine environmental impact assessment in accordance with this Part or with domestic procedures, in respect of any activity under its jurisdiction or control that is planned to be carried out in the ABNJ and any activity planned to be carried out in marine areas within national jurisdiction (AWNJ), but which may cause substantial pollution of, or significant and harmful changes to, the marine environment in ABNJ. Therefore, to effectively fulfil the requirements of this Part, Taiwan must have a domestic marine environmental impact assessment legal framework that complies with the provisions of this Part. Articles 30 to 33 deal with the thresholds and requirements for conducting EIAs, process, public notification and consultation, and the preparation and submission of EIA reports. Article 34 "Decision-making" paragraph 1 expressly stipulates that "A Party under whose jurisdiction or control a planned activity falls shall be responsible for determining if it may proceed." After the authorized activities are initiated, they are subject to the requirements of Article 35 "Monitoring of Impacts of Authorized Activities," Article 36 "Reporting of Impacts of Authorized Activities," and Article 37 "Review of Authorized Activities and their Impacts." Article 38 empowers the "Scientific and Technical Body" to develop standards and/or guidelines for EIAs, and Article 39 provides for "strategic environmental assessments."

The provisions developed in this Part are the latest and most complete international regulatory document or framework for marine environmental impact assessment at the global level to date, highlighting the international community's recognition of the complexity of marine ecosystems and the interconnected nature of their components, as well as the Agreement's efforts to regulate marine EIAs from a systemic perspective (e.g., long-term data and information collection, information exchange, follow-up monitoring (control) mechanisms, etc.). In general, once the Agreement comes into force, it will have a significant "international standard setting" impact on marine EIA legislation, policies and administrative measures at the regional and national levels (including ours).

Part V Capacity-Building and Transfer of Marine Technology and ANNEX II Types of capacity-building and of the transfer of marine technology

The Potential Comprehensive Impacts of the BBNJ Agreement on Taiwan

Reading from the contents of the BBNJ Agreement, the author believes that the potential comprehensive impacts of the BBNJ Agreement on Taiwan may include the following:

1. Article 7 of Part I of the Agreement stipulates "General principles and approaches" which lists, inter alia, (e) the precautionary principle or precautionary approach, (f) an ecosystem approach, (g) an integrated approach to ocean management, (h) an approach that builds ecosystem resilience, including to adverse effects of climate change and ocean acidification, and also maintains and restores ecosystem integrity, including the carbon cycling services that underpin the role of the ocean in climate, (i) the use of the best available science and scientific information, and (j) the use of relevant traditional knowledge of Indigenous Peoples and local communities. These principles or approaches are not found in the texts of Taiwan's Environmental Impact Assessment Act or Marine Conservation Act, which shows that there is still a gap between Taiwan's domestic legal frameworks and the international regime, and that the alignment with international regime should be strengthened in the future through legal amendments or policy adjustments.
2. This Agreement will establish an "Access and Benefit-Sharing Committee" for the development and operation of an access and benefit-sharing (ABS) mechanism for marine genetic resources (see Article 15 of the Agreement), a "Scientific and Technical Body" for the interdisciplinary professional needs of the Agreement (Article 49), and a "Clearing-House Mechanism" for the purposes of notification and information sharing (Article 51). Taiwan may have difficulties to participate in these bodies, however, as they have the right to develop and propose further detailed rules and regulations, they may affect Taiwan's future marine science research capabilities and the development potentiality of its biopharmaceutical industry supply chains.
3. Once the trend of designating high seas MPAs (networks) emerges under the framework of this global-level multilateral agreement, the competence of the regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs) that Taiwan participates in or is a member thereof, as well as the interests of Taiwan's high seas commercial fisheries, may be affected. In principle, the BBNJ Agreement shall not be applied in a manner that undermines other relevant legal instruments and frameworks, and relevant global, regional, subregional, and sectoral bodies (see Article 5 paragraph 2 of the Agreement), however, Article 8 "International cooperation" paragraph 2 states "Parties shall endeavour to promote, as appropriate, the objectives of this Agreement when participating in decisionmaking under other relevant legal instruments, frameworks, or global, regional, subregional or sectoral bodies" that enables certain States or regional economic integration organizations, such as the European Union, who actively pursue the conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction, to promote decisions consistent with the objectives of this Agreement in international legal instruments to which they are Parties or in international organizations in which they participate. This will further enable the norms of this Agreement to transcend the decision-making and operational scope of the Agreement itself and enter into and affect the decisions and operation of other international instruments or organizations, such as the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) or regional or subregional fisheries organizations. This development warrants our heightened vigilance and careful attention.
4. There is still room for further revision and strengthening of Taiwan's existing EIA legal framework to meet better the characteristics of marine environmental impact assessment (especially cumulative impacts) and the required policy tools as emphasized in the BBNJ Agreement. For example, the concept of "best available science" (BAS) or "best available scientific information" has been developed to include best available data and information in the natural and social sciences, as well as "adaptive management" which is emphasized in ocean governance. Furthermore, the scientific meaning of traditional knowledge (TK) of Indigenous Peoples and local communities has been a factor repeatedly emphasized in the current international regime, and has also been adopted in the EIA Part of the BBNJ Agreement. The development of these modern concepts of international ocean governance suggests that Taiwan's existing EIA legal framework must be further revised and strengthened to ensure the effectiveness of our ocean use activities in the future. In addition, Taiwan's current terrestrial-centered EIA Act does not contain the "transboundary" concept as shown in the BBNJ Agreement, which distinguishes yet connects "areas within national jurisdiction" (AWNJ) and "areas beyond national jurisdiction" (ABNJ). As the international community establishes clearer marine environmental impact assessment processes and standards, the current EIA legal framework of Taiwan may need to be further examined and reviewed in terms of its applicability to the development activities in the maritime areas, and even a separate and specific law on marine environmental impact assessment may be enacted to ensure the alignment with the international regime.
5. Capacity-building and the transfer of marine technology are related to the policies and actions of "ocean diplomacy." Under Article 46 of the BBNJ Agreement, a "Capacity-building and Transfer of Marine Technology Committee" will be established. The recommendations made by this subsidiary body, along with the recommended types as shown in Annex II "Types of capacity-building and of the transfer of marine technology," will inevitably shape the expectations of recipient countries and the substance of their "wish list" as well as Taiwan's external operations.
6. The four substantive issues or specific Parts mentioned above all involve the use of relevant traditional knowledge of Indigenous Peoples and local communities, and, other than the specific Part on Marine Genetic Resources, the participation of relevant stakeholders appears in the other three substantive issues specific Parts. To protect the potential benefits derived from the use of traditional knowledge of living marine resources of our marine Indigenous Peoples and to respect the traditional knowledge of the Indigenous Peoples of other small island developing States, Taiwan must investigate and understand such traditional knowledge.
7. Since the future operation of the BBNJ Agreement and its regime may depend on the participation and implementation of regional-level intergovernmental organizations, such development may bring positive opportunities for Taiwan's international engagement. In particular, the BBNJ's wide-ranging issues involve multi-sectoral intergovernmental organizations at regional level, which allows our Government to indirectly influence or participate in the operation and decision-making of the BBNJ issues by leveraging its expertise in specific issues.

Conclusion: Enlightenments and Challenges of the BBNJ Agreement for Taiwan

As seen in the preceding analysis, due to its unique constraints on international participation, Taiwan is unlikely to become a Contracting Party to the BBNJ Agreement and substantively engage in its implementation. However, as a member of the international community, Taiwan must face and respond to the influence at the global, regional, and national levels that this Agreement may bring about, due to its operation and which are most likely impacting on our national rights and interests.

To do a good job in marine conservation, it should extend beyond narrow approaches focused on conserving specific marine species or protecting specific marine ecosystems. Instead, it requires a recognition of marine water bodies and ecological environment as an intrinsic unity, and possessing "cross-boundary" international perspective and vision for international cooperation in which the AWNJ and the ABNJ are considered as a whole.

Reading from the specific Part II of the BBNJ Agreement on MGRs, for safeguarding the national interests in collecting MGRs and the subsequent research and development (including digital sequencing), commercial utilization, exchange, and benefit-sharing, relevant government agencies, research institutions, and marine scientists must be aware that every stage of the process, from the formulation and execution of research projects to the commercial application of marine genetic and sequencing data and the long-term preservation of associated samples and information, is conducted with full transparency and subject to rigorous monitoring (including mandatory notification and reporting). These national interest requirements will lead to the development of software and hardware. The former and administrative measures to provide Taiwan with sufficient domestic legal authority and regulations when engaging in international scientific research collaboration and data exchange (e.g., the enactment of a "Marine Genetic Resources Conservation and Management Act"). The latter includes establishing relevant data repositories and physical specimen preservation facilities, as data integrity not only facilitates Taiwan's reciprocal access to corresponding information from international society, but also helps to safeguard the status of the information submitted by our country. In other words, if the information submitted by Taiwan is sufficiently complete, when it is utilized by other countries, Taiwan will be able to maintain an internal record to prove that the subsequent research, utilization or products are derived from the MGRs collected by Taiwanese scientists or their data sequencing efforts. Therefore, it is crucial to establish a traceable record-keeping system for high-seas research in advance.

The greatest enlightenment that Part III of the BBNJ Agreement "Measures such as Area-Based Management Tools, including Marine Protected Areas", or the specific Part on ABMTs, gives us is that the designation and adoption of MPAs/ABMTs is an important tool for the conservation and sustainable use of marine genetic resources. Due to the intrinsic unity of the marine water body and ecological environment, Taiwan must be aware of and recognize the "transboundary" characteristic of the AWNJ and ABNJ and consider them as a whole. Given this understanding, Taiwan should consider either amending existing legal frameworks or enacting a specialized law for "The Designation, Establishment and Management of Area-based Management Tools, including Marine Protected Areas."

The greatest enlightenment that Part IV of the Agreement, which is a specific Part dedicated to environmental impact assessment, provides us is that, if the impacts that human marine activities could bring upon the "protection and preservation of the marine environment" could be clearly understood and controlled beforehand, it can truly promote the conservation and protection of marine biodiversity, including MGRs, and the marine environment as well. Therefore, Taiwan must take responsibility for determining and/or conducting marine environmental impact assessments and/or strategic environmental assessments in advance on any marine activities under Taiwan's jurisdiction or control that may cause significant adverse impacts on marine biodiversity, including MGRs, or the marine environment.

To achieve this goal, Taiwan may consider amending and supplementing the existing relevant EIA legal frameworks or enacting a separate specialized "Marine Environmental Impact Assessment Act," which incorporates the "transboundary" approach that distinguishes yet connects AWNJ and ABNJ. The principles or approaches of "best available science and scientific information" and "relevant traditional knowledge of Indigenous Peoples and local communities" must also be incorporated. Consideration should also be given to the designation of "transboundary MPA networks" and the establishment of co-management mechanisms, and even to the issues of how to undertake EIAs in maritime areas where disputes over overlapping maritime claims or maritime delimitation persist.

Part V of the Agreement, concerning capacity-building and the transfer of marine technology, tells us that strengthening the capacity of the developing States in conserving marine biodiversity and protecting marine environments is an approach to achieving the objectives of the BBNJ Agreement. If Taiwan is willing to embrace the spirit of "empathy and helping" and pursue the aspiration of "Universal Harmony and Global Common Good," we should make more contributions to marine development aid. Such engagement would not only advance Taiwan's international standing, but also effectively support the conservation objectives established by the BBNJ Agreement.

HOME