The High Seas Treaty – formally the Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) – entered into force on 17 January 2026, introducing, for the first time, a legally binding global framework to conserve biodiversity and manage human activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction – waters that cover over two-thirds of our ocean, around half of the planet’s surface area, and which underpin a significant share of global fisheries.
Now that it’s international law, the treaty gives the international community a greater ability to protect the High Seas by establishing basic modern requirements for assessing and managing planned human activities that could harm high seas life. In addition, it will provide a legal pathway to establish the first High Seas marine protected areas (MPAs), regarded as a key contribution to achieving the Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework target of at least 30% marine protection by 2030.
For the fishing sector, the treaty does not replace existing fisheries management systems. Instead, it adds a new layer of governance that will increasingly shape how high seas activities are assessed, coordinated and regulated.
From ratification to implementation
The agreement passed a critical milestone in September 2025, when it reached the required 60 ratifications, triggering entry into force 120 days later. As of mid-January 2026, 81 countries had ratified the treaty, with 145 states having signed.
While the treaty became law in January, much of the operational detail will be determined over the coming year, explained a recent webinar hosted by the High Sea Alliance – a global coalition of over 70 NGOs and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), formed in 2011 to protect the High Seas. A Preparatory Commission (PrepCom) is currently finalising rules for implementation, ahead of the first Conference of the Parties (CoP1), which must take place by January 2027.
What changes for fisheries?
Importantly for the fishing industry, the High Seas Treaty is not a fisheries agreement and does not transfer fisheries management authority away from regional fisheries management organisations (RFMOs). However, it will influence fisheries indirectly in several key ways.
First, the treaty introduces mandatory environmental impact assessments (EIAs) for activities in areas beyond national jurisdiction that may have significant environmental effects. While most fishing activities are already regulated through RFMOs, future fishing practices, new gears or expansions into sensitive areas could increasingly face scrutiny under broader ecosystem-based assessment frameworks.
Second, the treaty establishes a process for creating MPAs in the high seas. These MPAs will not automatically close areas to fishing, but they may introduce spatial management measures that intersect with existing RFMO rules. Coordination between the treaty’s institutions and fisheries bodies will therefore be critical.
“There is no way to reach the global 30×30 ocean protection target without high seas MPAs,” said Adam McCarthy, Chief Counsel and First Assistant Secretary at the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Australia and Co-chair of the PrepCom. “That means the MPA component of the treaty will be central, including for fisheries.”
Cooperation with existing fisheries bodies
A key principle of the treaty is cooperation. States that ratify the agreement are obliged to promote its objectives when participating in other international and regional fora – including RFMOs.
This does not give the treaty authority over fisheries bodies, but it does increase pressure for alignment on issues such as biodiversity protection, cumulative impacts and ecosystem health.
For fisheries managers, this is likely to translate into:
- Greater interaction between RFMO processes and treaty institutions
- Increased emphasis on ecosystem-based management
- Stronger expectations around transparency, data sharing and scientific justification
Marine protected areas: preparation begins
While no high seas MPAs can be formally designated until after CoP1, preparatory work is already underway. Around 20 potential sites have been identified globally, spanning regions including the Eastern Tropical Pacific, South Atlantic, Southern Ocean and parts of the Indian Ocean.
According to Tekau Frere, Marine Protected Area Coordinator at the High Seas Alliance, robust MPA proposals must be science-based, inclusive and operationally realistic.
“For fisheries, this means early engagement is essential,” she said. “If sectoral actors are not involved during the proposal development phase, it becomes much harder to ensure workable outcomes later.”
Industry stakeholders, including fishing nations and RFMO representatives, are expected to play a role in shaping proposals, particularly where MPAs overlap with established fishing grounds.
Compliance and enforcement: facilitative, not punitive
The treaty does not introduce a global enforcement authority for fisheries. Instead, it relies on reporting obligations, transparency requirements and a new Compliance Committee, which will be established at CoP1.
“There is a clear move away from punitive enforcement,” said Janine Felsen, Ambassador and Permanent Representative of the Permanent Mission of Belize to the UN and PrepCom Co-chair. “The focus is on facilitating compliance, capacity building and cooperation.”
For fisheries operators, this suggests incremental change rather than sudden disruption, but also rising expectations around documentation, environmental performance and participation in consultation processes.
What happens next?
The coming year will be pivotal. The third and final PrepCom meeting in March will finalise key institutional arrangements, while CoP1 will determine:
- Rules of procedure
- The location of the treaty’s Secretariat
- Frameworks for MPAs, benefit-sharing and capacity building
Countries that have not ratified the treaty can attend meetings but will not have decision-making power, increasing incentives for major fishing nations to join before CoP1.
A new operating environment for high seas fisheries
While the High Seas Treaty does not rewrite fisheries law, it does change the context in which high seas fishing operates. Expectations around sustainability, transparency and ecosystem impacts are set to increase, and decisions taken under the treaty may influence access, reputation and market perception over time.
For fisheries and seafood businesses, early engagement – through governments, RFMOs and industry associations – will be key to shaping outcomes that balance conservation goals with viable fishing activity.
As Rebecca Hubbard, Director of the High Seas Alliance, concluded: “This is a once-in-a-generation shift in ocean governance. The question for fisheries is not whether it will matter, but how well the sector engages with it.”
BBNJ REACTIONS
‘This treaty provides one of the biggest opportunities we have to protect the ocean from those who wish to destroy it for short-term profit, and to end an era of exploitation. Governments must move fast and ambitiously to turn commitments into real protections. The high seas are the blue, beating heart of our planet, regulating our climate and underpinning all life on Earth. The moment to act is now, and history will judge whether leaders rose to it’
Steve Trent, Environmental Justice Foundation
‘This Treaty embodies hope, resolve, and a shared commitment to a brighter future for the ocean and our planet’
Rena Lee, Singapore’s Ambassador for International Law
‘The High Seas Treaty shows us that meaningful progress is achieved through vision, perseverance and leadership’
Jason Knauf, The Earthshot Prize
‘Nations must now use the treaty’s blueprint to build the necessary institutions, procedures and bodies that will create a solid foundation from which to carry out the agreement’s conservation vision: to create lasting protections for the high seas’
Liz Karan, The Pew Charitable Trusts
