POLICY AND PRACTICE REVIEWS article
Front. Mar. Sci.
Sec. Marine Pollution
Volume 12 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fmars.2025.1638999
This article is part of the Research TopicAdvances in Marine Environmental Protection: Challenges, Solutions and Perspectives Volume IIView all 29 articles
Optimization of the Environmental Compensation Fund System for the Area: An Analysis Based on the ISA 2025 Draft
Provisionally accepted
- 1East China University of Political Science and Law, Shanghai, China
- 2School of Humanities, Jinan University, Zhuhai, China
Select one of your emails
You have multiple emails registered with Frontiers:
Notify me on publication
Please enter your email address:
If you already have an account, please login
You don't have a Frontiers account ? You can register here
The latest negotiating text from the International Seabed Authority (ISA) on the Environmental Compensation Fund (ECF) system shows significant progress compared to the provisions in the 2019 Draft Exploitation Regulations. First, the formulation of ECF rules and procedures has been further elaborated. Second, the scope of application of the ECF has been more precisely delineated. Third, the mechanisms for funding the ECF have been improved. Fourth, the "polluter-pays principle" has been introduced for the first time. Fifth, a periodic review mechanism has also been incorporated for the first time. Nevertheless, the 2025 Draft continues to exhibit certain deficiencies. First, the financial foundations of the ECF remain unreliable. Several new or modified sources of funding, such as voluntary contributions from member States, targeted contributions from sponsoring States, and donations from international or non-governmental organizations, are inherently uncertain. Second, the text fails to establish clear and operational criteria for determining eligibility to submit claims to the ECF. Third, the scope of compensation available under the ECF remains inadequately defined. Fourth, transparency for stakeholders with respect to the operation of the ECF is insufficient. This study proposes the following recommendations to deal with the abovementioned deficiencies. First, the principles, mechanisms, and specific measures for ECF fundraising and management should be optimized. Second, with respect to eligible claimants, a multi-tiered and sequential framework is recommended. Third, the scope of the ECF's compensatory mandate should be refined, and detailed standards developed to ensure that the ECF is used exclusively to address liability gaps where environmental harm cannot otherwise be remedied. Fourth, stakeholder transparency must be enhanced.
Keywords: International Seabed Area, Marine environmental protection, Seabed Mining Regulations for the Area, Environmental Compensation Fund, International Seabed Authority
Received: 01 Jun 2025; Accepted: 08 Aug 2025.
Copyright: © 2025 Wang, Wang and Pan. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
* Correspondence: Xin Pan, School of Humanities, Jinan University, Zhuhai, China
Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.