Written by: Keyola Greene Montserrat depends heavily on the ocean. It has supported the economy, boosted tourism, facilitated transportation, and sustained livelihoods, but when decisions about the future of the deep seabed are negotiated internationally, who actually speaks for Montserratians? This question reaches far beyond our black-sand shores and opens up a wider conversation about representation, influence, and the future of the Caribbean Sea. Increased interest in the emerging deep-sea mining industry has sparked concern about how the region is represented in international ocean governance and who has a seat at the table. For decades, Caribbean islands have collaborated to address issues that transcend their individual borders. But what does that cooperation look like when the seas connecting the region do not recognize political boundaries, and everyone does not possess the same or equal power to influence change? For overseas territories like Montserrat, it is more complicated than regional collaboration. It is about individual representation, access to the decision making process, and being able to influence the course of action that will directly affect us. Deep-Sea Mining The deep sea, which is generally classified at a depth where light begins to fade (typically around 200 meters), has been described in a 2007 UN Environment Programme report as “the oldest and largest biome on Earth” that “we have little knowledge of”. It is home to diverse and largely unexplored ecosystems, with unique species and habitats that have adapted to extreme conditions such as darkness, high pressure, and low temperatures. On the seafloor in some parts of the deep ocean are polymetallic nodules, which contain valuable mineral deposits such as cobalt, nickel, manganese, copper, silver, zinc, and other rare metals. These nodules are among the primary targets of deep-sea mining Proponents argue deep-sea mining could provide additional sources of minerals needed for various technologies, while critics question whether the environmental risks are justified given the scientific uncertainties. Much of the exploration and commercial attention has primarily been focused within the Pacific Ocean, particularly the Clarion-Clipperton Zone between Hawaii and Mexico, with small projects taking place in parts of the Atlantic, Indian, and Western Pacific oceans. However, discussions are ongoing over how exploitation should be governed, and while the Caribbean is not currently under the spotlight, some Caribbean states are part of the conversations. Why DSM Matters for the Caribbean The Caribbean’s interest in deep-sea mining should be heightened by the fact that decisions made about commercial seabed mining in one area could set precedents for how the wider ocean is governed. When assessing the Caribbean’s role in deep-sea mining, the region must look to accountability, preparedness, and influence. Senior Campaigner at RISE UP for the Ocean, Khadija Stewart, says governments considering their involvement must weigh the potential economic benefits against public resources, risks, and limited capacity. “If governments are investing significant public resources in preparing for or participating in deep-sea mining, they should be able to demonstrate why that investment is in the national interest,” she said. Stewart said, “Building the institutions needed to regulate a new extractive industry has to be weighed against the many other urgent ocean, climate and development priorities facing the region.” “Governments are operating with limited scientific, technical and financial capacity while trying to respond to multiple crises at once. Adding another poorly understood layer of risk without knowing the scale, duration or cumulative consequences would make an already difficult governance landscape even more challenging,” she said. Concerns of deep-sea mining should not solely be based on what happens at a mining site. Independent Ocean Conservation Policy Consultant Bobbi-Jo DoBush warns that “plumes from deep-sea mining could travel hundreds or thousands of kilometers and affect the entire midwater food web, up to commercially important fish.” “Noise from deep-sea mining would affect many animals, including those that use sonar for communication, including whales, which provide significant tourism revenue,’ she said. Stewart says this creates a serious preparedness challenge. “We cannot adequately plan for impacts that science still does not fully understand. Significant gaps remain around deep-sea biodiversity, ecological connectivity, ecosystem functions, recovery and the potential wider consequences of industrial-scale disturbance,” she said. What does meaningful representation look like? The international seabed is governed by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), with the Jamaica-based International Seabed Authority (ISA), the international organisation responsible for organising and controlling mineral-related activities in the Area. Caribbean States that are parties to UNCLOS are automatically members of the International Seabed Authority and participate in its Assembly, the Authority’s plenary decision-making body. These include Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Cuba, Dominica, the Dominican Republic, Grenada, Guyana, Haiti, Jamaica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Suriname, and Trinidad and Tobago. Participation in the ISA Council is more limited: in 2026, Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago are the Caribbean states serving on the 36-member Council, where much of the detailed negotiation on the regulatory framework for deep-seabed mining takes place. Caribbean Overseas Territories have different constitutional arrangements and do not participate in the ISA in the same way as independent states. For British Overseas Territories, for example, the UK is responsible for external relations, while the territories retain significant self-government. For British Overseas Territories (BOTs) like Montserrat, the question of who has authority over deep-sea mining has been an ongoing discussion in the United Kingdom (UK) Parliament. On 24 May 2021, the late Lord Jones of Cheltenham asked the Government whether it had the power to issue deep-sea mining licenses in the waters of BOTs and whether it planned to do so. In his response, then Minister of Government Lord Callanan said “the Deep Sea Mining Act 1981 (as amended by the Deep Sea Mining Act 2014) sets out the Government’s powers in relation to issuing deep sea mining licences, including the relationship with contracts granted by the International Seabed Authority (ISA).” At the time, he said, “no such Order in Council or Statutory Instrument has been taken forward, and there are no current
