Commercial deep-sea mining for critical minerals could begin in the Pacific as early as 2027, despite the absence of an internationally agreed regulatory framework, according to a new Lowy Institute analysis.
The report, Fault lines beneath the Blue Pacific: Deep-sea mining and the future of Pacific unity, by Dr Connor Graham, warns that growing competition between the United States and China for critical minerals is putting Pacific Island countries at risk of exploitation.
The Pacific seafloor contains large quantities of polymetallic nodules containing minerals needed for batteries, weapons systems and clean energy infrastructure.
While some Pacific governments see seabed minerals as a potential source of significant revenue, a growing coalition is calling for a moratorium or precautionary pause because of concerns about irreversible damage to ocean ecosystems, fisheries, food security, livelihoods and culture.
Dr Graham says the lack of an international governance framework leaves Pacific countries negotiating without agreed protections and makes them increasingly dependent on individual agreements with companies seeking access to their seabed resources.
“For the Pacific Island nations caught in the middle of this great power battle for critical mineral supremacy, the economic proposition is difficult to refuse,” writes Dr Graham. “In return for sponsoring mining companies … Pacific nations are being promised significant revenue.”
“The problem is not that Pacific nations disagree; it is that they are being forced to negotiate individually against parties with vastly more resources, information, and legal capacity — and that the international framework designed to protect them has stalled.”
The report says the International Seabed Authority(ISA) has spent more than a decade developing a mining code, but there is still no agreed set of standards, liability framework or guaranteed benefit-sharing protections for commercial deep-sea mining.
It warns that the governance gap has been widened by the United States’ decision to pursue commercial licensing outside the international system.
Australia has also yet to take a clear policy position on deep-sea mining in the Pacific.
“The environmental regulations Australia says must precede deep-sea mining do not exist, and the International Seabed Authority’s mining code remains unfinished, yet commercial operations appear imminent,” says Dr Graham.
“A commitment to standards that have not been written as a condition for activity that is about to begin is less of a policy, and more of an abstention. But Australia cannot afford to abstain from this debate.”
“Australia has the standing, the relationships, and the institutional presence to change those conditions,” he writes.
The report calls on Australia to invest in the capacity of Pacific countries to regulate seabed mining, support a Pacific-led governance framework through the Pacific Islands Forum and reaffirm its obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS).
It also recommends that Australia push for the completion of an international mining code before commercial deep-sea mining begins.
The analysis says the Pacific will remain at the centre of deep-sea mining activity because of its mineral-rich seafloor, but Pacific countries remain divided over whether the industry represents an economic opportunity or an environmental threat.
Dr Graham argues that Pacific unity will be tested as governments weigh the promise of mining revenues against the risks to the ocean resources on which their communities depend.
