1. From ratification to entry into force: momentum and early signals
The Treaty opened for ratification in September 2023, and pace of action has been remarkable. The third UN Ocean Conference in Nice, in June 2025, acted as a clear catalyst, with many new countries seizing this opportunity to ratify the Agreement. The entry into force of the BBNJ Agreement was eventually triggered in September 2025, when the threshold of 60 ratifications was reached, activating the 120-day countdown foreseen in the Treaty. Momentum continued thereafter. Within three months, 23 additional States ratified the Agreement, including major ocean and research nations such as Japan, China and Brazil.
Encouraging signals have emerged regarding area-based management tools (ABMTs), including marine protected areas (MPAs). Several States and organisations are already exploring potential proposals for high seas MPAs, including through the establishment of a couple of government-led initiatives, including the BBNJ First Movers group coordinated by Chile, and Germany’s Living High Seas project. Candidate sites are being identified based on robust scientific criteria such as biodiversity richness, ecosystem function and vulnerability. Examples currently discussed include the Thermal Dome in the Eastern Tropical Pacific, the Lost City hydrothermal vent field along the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, parts of the Sargasso Sea, and seamount chains in the South Pacific Ocean. These early initiatives illustrate the Agreement’s capacity to translate scientific knowledge into concrete conservation action.
2. The European Union: leadership tested by implementation
Ratification at the EU level
The European Union (EU) played a central role throughout the BBNJ negotiations, notably through its engagement in the High Ambition Coalition. The EU has ratified the Agreement as a Regional Economic Integration Organisation. However, only 16 of its 27 Member States have completed ratification to date.
Delays are linked to a combination of factors, including changes in government, constitutional constraints, and the complexity of national legal transposition. As a result, not all EU Member States will be legally bound by the Agreement’s obligations when it enters into force. Ensuring more Member States ratify ahead of the first BBNJ Conference of the Parties (COP1) will be an important contribution to universal ratification of the Agreement, promoting greater impact and effectiveness of the Treaty.
This situation does not reflect a lack of convergence on the Agreement’s objectives. Discussions within the Council Working Party on the Law of the Sea (COMAR) demonstrate broad alignment on substance, with no major divergences identified. However, important legal and institutional questions remain, notably regarding competence, representation and internal coordination. Some sensitivities have also been raised around the treatment of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities, particularly by Nordic countries.
Legal and institutional challenges within the EU
As the Agreement moves from diplomacy to implementation, a number of legal and institutional questions arise within the EU framework, notably the issue of representation. During negotiations, the EU acted with a single voice in areas falling within its competence. With the Treaty now in force, questions arise as to who represents the EU at COP1 and in subsidiary bodies, and how coordination with Member States will be organised in practice.
Competence is another key issue as decisions related to funding, the designation and management of MPAs, and benefit-sharing mechanisms raise questions about whether responsibility lies with the EU or with Member States. While the Agreement itself clearly places obligations on States, the EU’s internal legal order requires careful coordination to ensure legal certainty, coherence and effective participation.
To address these challenges, the European Commission has proposed a Directive to transpose the BBNJ Agreement into EU law. Presented in April 2025, the proposal aims to establish a common framework for implementation across the Union, including procedures for MPAs and benefit-sharing. The European Parliament adopted an ambitious position in November 2025, and discussions are ongoing in the Council, even though progress has slowed down. The outcome will be decisive for the EU’s ability to translate diplomatic leadership into clear and effective implementation together with its Member States.
Supporting countries: enabling global implementation
Beyond its internal framework, the EU is also supporting implementation globally. Through the Technical Assistance Facility, a €40 million initiative under the Global Ocean Programme, the EU is assisting developing countries in building the legal, institutional and technical capacities required by the Agreement. Implemented by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and funded by the Directorate-General for International Partnerships (DG INTPA), this support is essential to ensuring that the BBNJ regime delivers on its promises of fairness and inclusivity.
3. From entry into force to COP1: ensuring an effective operational framework
Cooperation at the heart of the Agreement
Cooperation is a defining principle of the BBNJ Agreement. States Parties are required to ensure coordination, coherence and non-undermining of existing legal instruments, frameworks and bodies, while actively promoting the objectives of the Agreement when participating in other international decision-making processes.
This obligation is particularly relevant in a governance landscape shaped by sectoral frameworks such as Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs), the International Maritime Organization (IMO) for shipping, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) for biodiversity conservation, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) for climate-related measures, the World Trade Organization (WTO) for trade-related rules, and the International Seabed Authority (ISA) for activities related to seabed resources. These examples are illustrative rather than exhaustive.
Rather than replacing these existing structures, the BBNJ Agreement is designed to operate alongside them, creating pathways for synergy and mutual reinforcement. This cooperative approach reflects the fragmented nature of ocean governance and recognises the value of regional expertise and sector-specific mandates. For example, regarding the establishment of high seas MPAs in areas covered by RFMOs, these bodies will play a crucial role in implementing and monitoring fisheries-related Area Based Management Tools (ABMTs), in close coordination with the BBNJ institutional framework. To date, the modalities on how MPAs will be implemented, managed and monitored are still under discussion.
Recent advisory opinions of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), echoing earlier jurisprudence of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, have reaffirmed that the duty to cooperate is a binding obligation under international law. The BBNJ Agreement provides a concrete framework through which this obligation can be operationalised, including through cooperation on marine scientific research and the transfer of marine technology.
Institutional architecture: from text to practice
The effectiveness of the BBNJ Agreement will depend heavily on its institutional architecture. The Treaty establishes a comprehensive and interconnected structure.
At its centre is the Conference of the Parties, which serves as the main decision-making body and provides overall guidance on implementation. It is supported by a Scientific and Technical Body, whose role is to ensure that decisions across the Agreement’s scope are informed by the best available science and knowledge. The Scientific and Technical Body will assess information and proposals submitted by Parties, provide scientific and technical advice, and support decision-making related to environmental impact assessments, capacity-building priorities and other core elements of the Treaty.
China on Friday proposed to host the secretariat of a new treaty governing the high seas, a surprise bid that underscores Beijing’s desire to expand its influence over global environmental governance. The Secretariat will provide administrative, technical and coordination support to all Treaty bodies and processes. Prior to China’s candidacy, both Belgium and Chile had formally submitted bids to host the Secretariat, although domestic political developments in Chile may affect its candidacy. The decision on which country will host the Secretariat will be made at the first COP.
The institutional framework is complemented by an Implementation and Compliance Committee, designed to support Parties in meeting their obligations in a facilitative, transparent and non-adversarial manner. This body will play a key role in the early years of implementation by identifying challenges, sharing best practices and fostering confidence in the BBNJ regime.
Additional elements include the Clearing-House Mechanism, which will facilitate transparency and information-sharing, as well as the Agreement’s funding arrangements, which are essential to ensuring that commitments can be translated into action, particularly for developing States.
Preparing for COP1
The third meeting of the Preparatory Commission (PrepCom3) that discusses the set-up of the Treaty will take place from 23 March to 2 April 2026. Chaired by Australia and Belize, it is expected to be decisive in preparing the first COP, scheduled for later in 2026. The objective is to finalise recommendations on rules of procedure, subsidiary bodies, financial rules and institutional arrangements, allowing COP1 to focus on substantive decisions rather than institutional setup. Since entry into force, although non-signatory states may attend the PrepCom3, only signatory States and Parties can participate in its decision-making. Only States Parties will have voting rights at COPs and be eligible for representation in the Agreement’s subsidiary bodies. This makes ratification before COP1 strategically important for States wishing to shape the future of the legal regime.
Conclusion: from legal achievement to effective governance
The entry into force of the BBNJ Agreement marks a historic achievement in international ocean governance. It reflects a unique multilateral process built on regional cooperation, scientific expertise and sustained civil society engagement. The Agreement provides a comprehensive legal framework for the ocean, establishes clear pathways for creating MPAs in support of global biodiversity targets, ensures fair and equitable sharing of benefits from marine genetic resources, standardises environmental impact assessments in international waters, and facilitates the transfer of marine technologies.
Yet, the Agreement’s ultimate success will depend on what happens next: on the increased number of Parties, on the scope and ambition of decisions taken at COP1, on the willingness of States to cooperate across institutional boundaries, on the provision of adequate funding to promote effective and equitable participation and implementation, and on Parties’ capacity to turn legal obligations into measurable outcomes for marine biodiversity.
The European Union has both the responsibility and the opportunity to remain a driving force of the Treaty, provided it sustains its efforts and delivers on implementation. The phase now unfolding is no longer about negotiation, but about action. The course is set, and it is time to prepare to sail.