Scales of international ocean governance

Global mechanisms

Some mechanisms of international ocean governance operate at a global scale. For example, this includes the main UN bodies and global environmental agreements like the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) or the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC). The BBNJ Treaty applies to the entirety of marine ABNJ and is open to all countries globally to join. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) and the International Seabed Authority (ISA) are similarly open for global membership, and their work focuses on the global ocean (in the case of the IMO) and on the entirety of seabed beyond national jurisdiction (in the case of the ISA).

Regional mechanisms

Many mechanisms of international ocean governance also operate at a regional scale. For example, there are mechanisms for ecosystem protection and fisheries management that focus on specific geographic regions.

Not all regional ocean governance mechanisms impact on areas beyond national jurisdiction. However, there are many that do, and with the BBNJ Treaty coming into force, an increasing number of regional organisations are taking an interest in how their regional mandates intersect with ABNJ governance. An awareness of regional ocean governance mechanisms in different parts of the world is therefore helpful for anyone interested in ABNJ governance, especially for those interested in fostering inter-agency and cross-sectoral cooperation.

Limitations of information presented here

This page introduces some regional ocean governance mechanisms, with a particular emphasis on mechanisms for marine ecosystem protection and for fisheries management. It also provides some information on ocean governance in Earth’s polar regions.

However, the information provided here is not an exhaustive documentation of all regional mechanisms that impact on ocean governance. For example, bilateral agreements (between just two countries) that impact on ocean governance are not covered, nor are regional agreements focused on themes other than marine ecosystem conservation and fisheries. Regional trade agreements, for instance, have a significant impact on marine traffic and transportation, but are not included here. For more information on the scope of what this platform does and does not cover, please see the “About” page.

Regional Ocean Governance: Fisheries

Regional Fisheries Bodies

Regional fisheries agreements exist throughout the world, implemented through regional fisheries bodies (RFBs). Many RFBs have a mandate that is purely advisory (i.e. they cannot implement management measures).

Most advisory RFBs focus on waters under the national jurisdiction of their members. However, there are two whose role extends beyond national jurisdiction: The Western Central Atlantic Fisheries Commission (WECAFC), and the Fisheries Committee for the Eastern Central Atlantic (CECAF), both established under Article VI of the FAO Constitution.

The WECAFC Secretariat is provided by the FAO Subregional Office for the Caribbean in Bridgetown, Barbados. Further information can be found here.

The CECAF Secretariat is provided by the FAO Regional Office for Africa in Accra, Ghana. Further information can be found here.

Regional Fisheries Management Organizations

About Regional Fisheries Management Organizations

Some regional fisheries bodies (RFBs) have a mandate that includes the development and implementation of fisheries management measures (e.g. to set quotas, regulate types of fishing gear, or restrict fishing activities in specific areas or during specific seasons). They are collectively referred to as Regional Fisheries Management Organizations (RFMOs).

The term “RFMO” is used for RFBs that fulfil two conditions: 1) their geographical scope includes areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ), and 2) they have the power to implement legally binding measures. This excludes the many RFBs that have purely advisory mandates and / or whose geographical scope is limited to the combined jurisdictional waters of member states.

RFMOs are multilateral organisations that bring together countries with shared fishing interests in a particular ABNJ region. Their primary role is to implement fisheries management measures aimed at safeguarding the sustainability of fish stocks. Their wider role extends to ecosystem conservation: RFMOs have the power to identify and designate Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems or VMEs, where they can limit or manage fishing activities for the purpose of ecosystem protection.

Legal underpinning

The basic legal underpinning of RFMOs is provided in articles 117 and 118 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which place a duty on states to cooperate with each other in the protection of living resources of the High Seas and to establish multilateral organisations to facilitate this cooperation where needed.

The UN Fish Stocks Agreement (UNFSA) builds on this by naming RFMOs as the primary vehicle for cooperation between states with shared fishing interests in a particular ABNJ region. UNFSA focuses on the conservation of straddling fish stocks (i.e. those that straddle the boundary between jurisdictional waters and ABNJ), and of highly migratory fish stocks in ABNJ. The UN General Assembly encourages states to extend the principles of UNFSA to all fish stocks in ABNJ.

RFMOs can be directly established through the FAO (under Article XIV of the FAO Constitution). In practice, however, most RFMOs have been established by countries negotiating individual agreements or conventions targeted at a specific region and/or at a specific set of fish stocks.

This has given rise to some RFMOs that focus on a limited number of target species (e.g. highly migratory species), and others that manage all the fish stocks within a region. RFMOs that focus on different sets of target species often have overlapping geographical mandates.

The FAO plays an important role in supporting RFMOs, by compiling and disseminating information about their role and promoting cooperating among them. The FAO also develops guidance that supports the work of RFMOs, such as the International Guidelines for the Management of Deep-Sea Fisheries in the High Seas (covering technical aspects from data collection, surveillance, assessments and monitoring), and reviews and synthesises work carried out by RFMOs (e.g. on VMEs).

Furthermore, through the FAO Compliance Agreement, the FAO aims to strengthen the control that flag states have over their vessels, so they can more easily ensure compliance with international measures, including those adopted by RFMOs.

List of Regional Fisheries Management Organizations

RFMOs can be divided into General RFMOs, Tuna RFMOs, and Specialized RFMOs.

General RFMOs have a mandate to adopt management measures for all fisheries / target species within their geographic remit, unless specifically excluded. General RFMOs have been established for most areas of the High Seas. There are eight General RFMOs:

General Fisheries Commission for the Mediterranean (GFCM)

Find out more about the GFCM

North-East Atlantic Fisheries Commission (NEAFC)

Find out more about NEAFC and the NEAFC Convention

North Pacific Fisheries Commission (NPFC)

Find out more about the NPFC and the NPFC Convention

Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization (NAFO)

Find out more about NAFO and the NAFO Convention

South-East Atlantic Fisheries Organisation (SEAFO)

Find out more about SEAFO and the SEAFO Convention

South Indian Ocean Fisheries Agreement (SIOFA)

Find out more about SIOFA and the SIOFA Agreement

South Pacific Regional Fisheries Management Organisation (SPRFMO)

Find out more about SPRFMO and the SPRFMO Convention

The Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) – CCAMLR fulfils functions that are equivalent to those of a regional seas convention (focused on environmental protection) as well as the functions of a general RFMO.

Find out more about CCAMLR and the CAMLR Convention

Tuna RFMOs focus on fisheries for tuna and tuna-like species, which are highly migratory and therefore require managing at very large geographical scales. There are five Tuna RFMOs:

Commission for the Conservation of Southern Bluefin Tuna (CCSBT)

Find out more about CCSBT and the CCSBT Convention

Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC)

Find out more about the IOTC and the IOTC Agreement

International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas (ICCAT)

Find out more about ICCAT and the ICCAT Convention

Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission (IATTC)

Find out more about the IATTC and the 2003 IATTC Convention

Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission (WCPFC)

Find out more about the WCPFC and the WCPFC Convention

Specialized RFMOs focus on other narrowly defined sets of specific fisheries or species. There is room for discussion over how many organisations qualify as Specialized RFMOs, e.g. whether the label should apply to multilateral regional or global organisations that have a mandate to manage cetaceans. There are four Specialized RFMOs:

North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organisation (NASCO)

Find out more about NASCO and the NASCO Convention

North Pacific Anadromous Fish Commission (NPAFC)

Find out more about the NPAFC and the NPAFC Convention

Convention on the Conservation and Management of Pollock Resources in the Central Bering Sea (CCBSP)

Find out more about the CCBSP and the NAFO Convention

North Atlantic Marine Mammal Commission (NAMMCO)

Find out more about NAMMCO and the NAMMCO Agreement

Regional Ocean Governance: Conservation

GEF Large Marine Ecosystems Programme

Tba, incl Benguela Current Commission

Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans (RSCAPs)

Scope of RSCAPs

There are 18 regions with Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans (RSCAPs) in different parts of the world. RSCAPs are international agreements in which countries located in the same region formally agree to cooperate in the protection of the regional marine environment.

The geographic mandate of most RSCAPs consists of the combined area within the national jurisdiction of their Parties (i.e. their combined territorial waters, EEZs and Extended Continental Shelf areas), although some have a geographic mandate that extends into areas beyond national jurisdiction.

For example, RSCAPs in the North East Atlantic, Pacific, Mediterranean and Antarctic regions have a clear mandate to protect the environment beyond jurisdictional waters (e.g. through High Seas MPAs) within a geographically defined region of the high seas. In the South East Pacific region there is an agreement with a mandate control pollution in areas beyond national jurisdiction if there is a risk of that pollution affecting the jurisdictional waters of its Parties.

With the BBNJ Agreement having come into force, regional organisations are increasingly taking an interest in the intersections between their mandates and the protection and sustainable use of biodiversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction.

Institutional arrangements

The institutional arrangements of RSCAPs differ between regions. The simplest arrangement is one agreement and one dedicated body supporting its implementation. However, in many cases there are multiple agreements and organizations that complement each other, each with a specific purpose and function.

In several regions, countries have adopted multiple complementary regional marine environmental agreements (conventions or action plans), and/or have added subsidiary Protocols that add details or expand the scope of an existing overarching agreement.

Furthermore, in several regions there is one body that fulfils the functions of a Secretariat and regional coordinating body, while other bodies carry out specialist technical work in support of implementing RSCAPs. Within UNEP’s Regional Seas Programme, these specialist technical bodies are often referred to as Regional Activity Centres.

The bodies that fulfil these functions are, in many cases, dedicated bodies that were specifically established by RSCAPs, but in some instances, pre-existing bodies have taken on these functions.

List of RSCAPs

Some RSCAPs are independent, but many were established under the auspices of UNEP’s Regional Seas Programme, and seven of those are directly administered by UNEP. UNEP’s Regional Seas Programme provides a platform for information exchange between all RSCAPs, including the four independent ones.

UNEP-administered RSCAPs exist in the following regions:

Wider Caribbean

The Caribbean Environment Programme (CEP) is underpinned by the Cartagena Convention and its subsidiary Protocols on

Oil Spills,

Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife, and

Land-Based Pollution

The implementation is overseen by the Caribbean Regional Coordinating Unit (CAR/RCU) and supported by several other organizations that fulfil technical functions.

East Asian Seas

Find out more about COBSEA and the East Asian Seas Action Plan

Western Indian Ocean

Find out more about the Nairobi Convention and its Secretariat

Mediterranean

The Mediterranean Action Plan is underpinned by the Barcelona Convention and its 1995 Amendments, as well as its subsidiary Protocols on

Land-Based Pollution,

Dumping,

Hazardous Wastes,

Integrated Coastal Zone Management,

Specially Protected areas and Biodiversity,

Oil Pollution, and

Emergency Response

The implementation is overseen by the MAP Coordinating Unit and supported by several other organizations that fulfil technical functions.

North West Pacific (NOWPAP)

Find out more about the Northwest Pacific Action Plan (NOWPAP) and the NOWPAP Regional Coordinating Unit

South East Atlantic

Find out about the Abidjan Convention and its Secretariat

Caspian Sea

Find out about the Tehran Convention and its Secretariat

Independently administered RSCAPs established under the auspices of the UNEP Regional Seas Programme exist in the following regions:

Black Sea

Find out about the Bucharest Convention and the Black Sea Commission

Red Sea and Gulf of Aden

Find out about the Jeddah Convention and PERSGA

Persian Gulf

Find out about the Kuwait Convention and ROPME

South Asian Seas

The South Asian Seas Programme is underpinned by the Colombo Declaration, with SACEP fulfilling the functions of a Secretariat

South East Pacific

Find out about the CPPS

Find out about the Lima Convention, and its subsidiary Protocols on

Land-Based Pollution,

Emergency Response,

Marine Protected Areas, and

Radioactive Pollution

Pacific

Find out about SPREP and the SPREP Agreement

Find out about the Apia Convention and the Waigani Convention

Find out about the Noumea Convention and its subsidiary Protocols on

Dumping

Emergency Response

North East Pacific

As of 2026, there is no active RSCAP in this region, but a convention has been developed that may enter into force if enough countries ratify it. Find out more about the Antigua Convention.

Independent RSCAPs exist in the following regions:

Baltic Sea

Find out about HELCOM and the Helsinki Convention

North East Atlantic

Find out about the OSPAR Convention and the OSPAR Secretariat

Arctic Region

Find out about the Ottawa Declaration, the Arctic Council and PAME

Antarctic Region

Find out about the Antarctic Treaty and its Secretariat.

The Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) – CCAMLR fulfils functions that are equivalent to those of a regional seas convention (focused on environmental protection) as well as the functions of a general RFMO. Find out more about CCAMLR and the CAMLR Convention.

Regional Ocean Governance: The Poles

About the Polar Regions

Tba – mention Polar Code https://www.imo.org/en/ourwork/safety/pages/polar-code.aspx

Antarctic Region

Not all areas beyond national jurisdiction on earth are oceanic: Antarctica is a whole continent (with adjacent maritime areas) beyond national jurisdiction, governed through international agreements known as the Antarctic Treaty System. Parties to any of the agreements within the Antarctic Treaty System are automatically bound to certain provisions in the 1959 Antarctic Treaty (in force since 1961), which grants access to Antarctica for peaceful research, while prohibiting military activities. Crucially, it includes the agreement to hold all territorial claims in abeyance. The implementation of the 1959 Antarctic Treaty is overseen by a Secretariat based in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

In terms of environmental conservation, the Antarctic Treaty is augmented by the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (signed in 1991 and in force since 1998), the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Seals (CCAS, signed in 1972 and in force since 1978), and the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CAMLR Convention, signed in 1980 and in force since 1982).

The Protocol on Environmental Protection has been signed by all Contracting Parties to the main Antarctic Treaty. It designates Antarctica as a “natural reserve devoted to peace and science”, prohibits all types of mineral resource exploitation, and places strict environmental regulations on all other activities. It has six Annexes, the first four of which (on environmental impact assessments, the protection of fauna and flora, waste disposal and marine pollution) were adopted and entered into force together with the Protocol itself. Annex V (on protected areas) was adopted in 1991 and entered into force in 2002, and Annex VI on Liability Arising from Environmental Emergencies was adopted in 2005 and is not yet in force.

The Antarctic Treaty System includes the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CAMLR Convention). This was established in 1982 for the purpose of protecting the marine life of the Antarctic. It applies to all Antarctic marine living organisms except whales (which are protected under a global convention, the 1946 International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling) and seals (which are protected under the 1972 Convention for the Conservation of Antarctic Seals, another agreement within the Antarctic Treaty System).

The implementation of the CAMLR Convention is coordinated by the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR). CCAMLR is based in Hobart, Tasmania (Australia).

While the geographical mandate of the 1959 Antarctic Treaty and the Protocol apply to the area south of the 60th parallel, CCAMLR applies within the Southern Ocean as bounded by the Antarctic Convergence, which is north of the 60th parallel in some places. Within this area, CCAMLR has a mandate to protect Antarctic marine living resources, with functions that encompass fisheries management as well as environmental conservation within the Antarctic region. This means that, within the Antarctic region, CCAMLR effectively plays the role of an RSCAP as well as that of a general RFMO.

The fisheries management work of CCAMLR is currently centred on managing fisheries for Patagonian toothfish, Antarctic toothfish, and Antarctic krill. CCAMLR has established dedicated programmes to gather the information it needs to manage these fisheries effectively, including through fisheries monitoring, scientific observers on fishing vessels, and wider ecosystem monitoring. CCAMLR can also draw from the advice, expertise and information provided by its Scientific Committee, made up of scientific experts from CCAMLR Contracting Parties. The Scientific Committee meets every year, and has working groups on

ecosystem monitoring and management,

fish stock assessment,

statistics, assessments and modelling,

incidental mortality associated with fishing, and

acoustics, survey and analysis methods.

Further Information can be found on the CCAMLR website.

Arctic Region

There is no Arctic Regional Seas Convention or Action Plan. However, there exists a complex of organisations active in the Arctic region whose wider remits effectively encompass the work covered by RSCAPs in other parts of the world.

The main forum promoting international cooperation in the Arctic region is the Arctic Council, established through the Ottawa Declaration in 1996. It has a Secretariat based in Tromsø, Norway. Its membership encompasses the eight nations of the Arctic region and six organisations representing indigenous peoples (the Aleut International Association, the Arctic Athabaskan Council, Gwich’in Council International, the Inuit Circumpolar Council, Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North and the Saami Council). The remit of the Arctic Council is to address common Arctic issues, in particular in relation to sustainable development and environmental protection, both in terrestrial and maritime areas of the region.

The Arctic Council has six permanent Working Groups:

The Arctic Contaminants Action Program (ACAP), focused on the reduction of emissions and pollutants. Its Secretariat is based at the Arctic Council Secretariat in Tromsø, Norway.

The Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP), focused on monitoring and the provision of scientific information. Its Secretariat is based in Tromsø, Norway.

The Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna Working Group (CAFF), focused on the conservation of Arctic biodiversity. Its Secretariat is based in Akureyri, Iceland.

The Emergency Prevention, Preparedness and Response Working Group (EPPR), focused on preventing and managing the impacts of the accidental release of pollutants or radionuclides. Its Secretariat is based at the Arctic Council Secretariat in Tromsø, Norway.

The Protection of the Arctic Marine Environment (PAME) Working Group, focused on the protection and sustainable use of the Arctic marine environment. Given its marine remit, this is one of the most relevant organisations in the Arctic region in the context of regional seas management and protection. Its Secretariat is based in Akureyri, Iceland.

The Sustainable Development Working Group (SDWG), which works to advance sustainable development in the Arctic and to improve the conditions of Arctic communities as a whole. It is based in Ottawa, Canada.

Further information can be found on the Arctic Council website.

Introduction and Overview of Ocean Governance

Regional Governance