※レポートのダウンロードはこちらから
See below for English summary.
国の管轄を越えた海は人類の共同の財産であり、その資源は人類全体の利益のために活用されるべきであると1970年12月に「海洋法に関する国際連合条約（通称：国際海洋法条約）」にて定められた。それは漁獲などの海洋資源はもちろんのこと、海が持つ環境調整機能や文化的価値、そして海底に眠る鉱物資源も含めてのことである。ところが、いま一部の企業活動によって人類共同財産である海が危機にさらされている。
気候危機がより差し迫った現象として確認される場面が増え、世界中で早急に低炭素技術への意向が叫ばれるようになった。そのことは歓迎される一方で、低炭素技術の実現に必要とされるニッケル、コバルト、銅などの重要鉱物の需要は急速に高まり、これまで合理的とされていなかった採掘地さえも現実的に検討される時代へと突入した。そんな鉱物資源のフロンティアの一つが深海底鉱物資源である。
（水深5500m付近のコバルトリッチクラスト＜写真：JAMSTEC＞）
国際海洋法条約が結ばれたころにすでに深海に鉱物資源が存在していることは確認されていたが、当時から様々な技術開発が進み、海の底に眠る鉱物はもはや手の届く範囲のものになりつつある。しかし、それは目に見える鉱物に手が届きそうになったというだけであり、容易に姿を見せない深海生態系に対する理解は決して十分でない。
わかっているのは長年外部からの影響を一切受けず、独自の生態系をつくりだしている深海生態系が存在し、その性質は時に常識を凌駕するということである。例えば、深海の海綿の一種は最古のもので約11000年前から生存しているとみられる個体が確認されている。このような深海生物の調査は近年ようやく進歩が見られたものも多く、科学者らは今日もしばしば新種を発見する状況にある。
深海底での採掘はこのような十分にわかっていない生態系に対して重機を持ち込んでかき乱すことである。
（写真提供：NOAA）
さらに、その採掘活動の影響は深海にとどまらないと見られている。深海採掘を支援する海表面での作業船活動は24時間体制で人間活動を海に持ち込むことになり、マグロ・カツオ類などの商業漁獲価値の高い魚種やオサガメ、ジンベエザメなどの絶滅危惧種の行動パターンへの悪影響も危惧されている。
（オサガメの回遊ルートが深海資源開発が進められている地域と重なる。Benson SR, Eguchi T, Foley DG, Forney KA, Bailey H, Hitipeuw C, et al. Large‐scale movements and high‐use areas of western Pacific leatherback turtles, Dermochelys coriacea. Ecosphere. 2011;2(7):1-27.よりDeep Sea Mining Campaign およびMiningWatch作成）
温室効果ガスはオフセットできるかもしれないが、生態系はオフセットできない。貴重な生態系への不可逆的な影響が危惧されることから200を超える政府機関と900を超えるNGOらによって構成される国際自然保護連合（IUCN）は2021年9月に深海鉱物採掘に関する世界的なモラトリアムを求める決議を圧倒的多数で可決させた。
IUCN以外からも深海底を保全する声は高まっており、600名を超える海洋科学者らが国連海洋科学の10年（2021～2030年）の間をモラトリアムとする声明に賛同を寄せている。
このようなモラトリアムは環境学者・海洋学者から支持されているだけでなく、BMW、Google、Patagonia、Philips、Samsung SDI、Scania、Triodos銀行グループ、Volkswagen、Volvoらが2021年に深海由来の鉱物をサプライチェーン上で使用しないことと、2030年までのモラトリアムを支持することを公表している。
環境面だけでなく問題として指摘されているのは深海での採掘行為が誰の利益になるものなのかという観点である。現在、深海資源開発を推し進めている企業の中には非常に不透明な手段で管理当局との契約を結んでいるケースも見られる。陸上での鉱物資源開発経験に照らし合わせるならばこのようなケースは人類共同の財産を一部の先進国やその資産家に独占させる流れをつくってしまい、途上国との格差を拡大させるものになってしまうことが危惧される。
具体的に、The Metals Company（TMC社）がナウル政府との合意で進めようとする深海資源開発はその実においてナウル国民の意思に反する開発でありながらも、表面上とりつくろっただけの方法で進めようとするものである。同社はトンガ、キリバスともパートナーシップを結んでおり、民主的に選ばれていない一民間企業の代表が国の代表として国際海底機構（ISA）の国際会議の場に出席・発言していることがしばしば目撃されている。
これらの国では海洋資源に依存し、高い文化的価値を置いている先住民族も居住しているが先住民族に対する事前の十分な情報に基づく合意（FPIC）が得ていることは十分に示されていない。しかも、公海への環境影響はそもそもこれらホスト国の先住民族に限られるものではない。
さらにOcean Mineral Singapore社は人口当たりGDPでは世界上位国に位置するシンガポールを「途上国」と主張することで獲得した契約でもって、米国に本社を置くLockheed Martin社やベルギーの浚渫事業者に利益をもたらすものであることが判明している。
このような不条理な海底資源開発を容認しているのが国際海底機構（ISA）であり、そのガバナンス体制はリスクの高い事業を取り締まるには極めて不十分である。にもかかわらず、日本で海底資源開発に取り組む企業少なくとも一社はIUCNの決議とは無関係にISAの定める海底資源開発に関わる規制枠組みが2023年6月までに合意されれば、その合意内容にのみ従った資源開発を継続するとNGOらからの質問に回答した。
国際枠組みによる取り締まり体制が十分でない中で、海底での不可逆的な影響や途上国の権利や国民を無視した開発を止めるにはESGリスクを十分に把握した金融の取り組みが不可欠である。UNEP-FIでは深海資源開発を海の持続可能な利用を実現するための「ブルー・エコノミー」からは名指しで除外しており、オランダのトリオドス銀行は金融機関として唯一深海由来の鉱物を使用しないことおよび深海採掘のモラトリアムを支持する国際声明に賛同している。
しかし、日本の金融機関はどれ一つとして深海資源開発に関して投融資方針を定めていない。取り返しのつかない事態を招く前に金融機関各社は下記の対策を講じるべきである：
・自社で深海由来の鉱物を使用しない方針を採用し、公開すること
・国連海洋科学の10年における深海採掘のモラトリアムへの支持を表明すること
・投融資先企業が同様に深海由来の鉱物をサプライチェーンから除外し、モラトリアムへの支持を表明するよう促す方針を定め、公開すること
What will financial flows into deep sea mining bring?
High seas beyond the jurisdiction of any country are considered a common estate for all humans, and resources derived from the high seas shall be utilized for the good of mankind as a whole. That is one of the main ideas of what was agreed upon in the “The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea” in December 1970.[1] The resources discussed here include marine fisheries, environmental conditioning functions that allow us and all other species on the Earth to survive, cultural assets, and also the mineral resources that are found deep underwater. However, currently this common estate is under threat due to a handful of private sector entities.
Because the climate crises is more imminent than ever, the world is in a rush to make a swift transition to low-carbon technologies. While this is welcomed by many environmentalists who have been urging for that energy transition to happen, it has also brought massive new demands for mineral resources such as nickel, cobalt and copper. The World Bank estimates that annual nickel production will have to be doubled compared to 2018 production levels, and cobalt will have to be more than quadrupled right now and to have it sustained until 2050 in order to achieve the “2 degree scenario” projected by the IPCC.[2] Thus we are now in a world where places that were previously not seriously considered as viable investment for mineral mining are being considered. One such frontier for mineral procurement is the deep sea.
When the Convention on the Law of the Sea was signed, governments already knew mineral deposits are available in the deep sea, but there were no means of efficiently exploiting them. However, half a century of technological advancements have brought the minerals within our reach. We now know a lot more about the prospects of these minerals, but on the other hand, we still know very little about deep sea creatures and the ecosystem that nurture them.
The few things we know is that deep sea creatures have constructed an ecosystem that has not had to deal with invaders for tens and hundreds of centuries, and have characteristics that are sometimes beyond imagination. For example, a species of sponges were found to live for centuries, and one of the oldest of the kind found is estimated to have lived already for over 11,000 years.[3] Knowledge about these extraordinary species has just begun to develop, and researchers regularly find new species each time they take a deep dive into the sea bed.
Deep sea mining is literally bulldozing this rather unknown habitat before understanding more about it.
The impacts are said to not be contained to the deep sea. Support vessels that operate at the surface will bring 24 hour human activity including light and noise pollution to areas of the Pacific that are known to be important paths for commercially valuable fish like varieties of tuna. Potential mine sites also cross intersect with migration routes and feeding grounds for whale sharks and leather-back turtles, both of which are on the verge of extinction.
Changes in the activity patterns of these migratory species will have lasting impacts beyond the mining area. Various pacific indigenous peoples and small scale fisherfolks depend on tuna and other commercially viable fisheries. If these patterns are disrupted these vulnerable communities will be hit hardest.
Greenhouse gases may be possible to be off-set, but biodiversity cannot. Due to suspected irreversible impacts, the IUCN, which holds over 200 government bodies and over 900 civil society organizations in its membership, overwhelmingly approved a demand for a global moratorium on deep sea mining in September 2021.
Similar views are also voiced by a group of over 600 marine scientists, who demand that a moratorium should be placed during the United Nations Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development starting from 2021 and going until 2030.
In support of this demand, major private companies are already beginning to declare exclusion of deep sea minerals from their supply chains and support for a decade of moratorium on deep sea mining. As of December, 2021, BMW, Google, Patagonia, Philips, Samsung SDI, Scania, Triodos Bank, Volkswagen, and Volvo have signed this declaration.
In addition to the environmental considerations, questions are also raised regarding who benefits from the exploitation of the deep sea. Currently, some private actors are signing contracts with the regulatory agency, International Seabed Authority (ISA) in non-transparent manners. Learning from such practices of exploitation on land, watchdogs have reason to believe the common estate will be exploited for the fortunes of the few in the Global North as shown further in this report. This will again bring wealth to developed countries at the expense of the South, of humanity, and the environment.
One such example is The Metals Company (TMC) with its headquarters in Canada. TMC is pushing forward a contract with ISA, utilizing the Government of Nauru as its sponsor for the ISA application. But the benefit sharing between TMC and Nauru is not made clear. Nauru can easily end up gaining close to nothing while having to inherit a destroyed ocean. The people of Nauru have already voiced their opposition to be exploited in that manner, and rejected being used as pawns in the rush for deep sea resources. However, TMC has made legal maneuvers that do not change the substance of the deal, but that gives them a veneer of deniability. Essentially, the owners sold the Nauru-based subsidiary to two Nauru-based foundations that they themselves own, so that the subsidiary looks like it is controlled by Nauru-based entities. But the fact remains that TMC publicity documents still claim the subsidiary to be 100 percent owned by TMC[4]. This is completely contradictory to the ISA application filed in 2011 that states that the local company in question, Nauru Offshore Resources Inc (NORI), “is no longer affiliated with […any] entity or person outside the jurisdiction of the sponsoring State”[5] This raises serious question about the deal and is apparently a betrayal to the people of Nauru. Similar questionable arrangements are made with the governments of Tonga and Kiribati. Which makes us wonder, why won’t this company have its own national Canadian government, sponsor its exploration contracts?
Interestingly, Glencore, a major land-based mining company, has signed an offtake agreement with TMC ensuring that 50% of the minerals, if mining ever succeeds, will go to Glencore. So who is the benefactor here? A multi-billion mining giant, a dodgy entrepreneur, its investors, or a small island nation that was lured into stamping its name on the contract? If history is any lesson, the small Pacific island nations have already been exploited by powerful nations for its rich mineral deposits. Demanding clarity and mechanisms to ensure equitable benefit sharing should not be considered an overreaction.
Another deep sea mining company, Ocean Mineral Singapore (OMS), based in Singapore, claims Singapore is a “developing country”, when in fact they rank among the top 10 richest countries in terms of per capita GDP. Yet, they signed an agreement with ISA which allows OMS to mine in deep sea territories that have been “reserved” for developing nations, so as to prevent monopoly exploitation by developed countries.[6] Research into corporate ownership structures by Fair Finance Guide Japan has shown that a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin has an investment of USD 20 million in the company and owns 19.9% of its shares. Thus, they are expected to benefit from any proceeds that OMS makes. A Belgian dredging company, DEME, is also expected to benefit through business dealings with OMS. So this arrangement also begs the question, is this what fair and equitable benefit sharing looks like?
Meanwhile, marine-based indigenous peoples and small-scale fisherfolks who depend on marine resources for their food, revenue and culture are all but left out from all this conversation.
The authority that is allowing these dodgy deals to take place is ISA, and it is obviously not well governed to prevent such exploitation from taking place. And yet, at least one Japanese mining company, Sumitomo Metal and Mining, responded to NGOs that regardless of IUCN resolutions and other proposals/recommendations, they will solely adhere to ISA standards.
Right now, ISA has not agreed upon standards for code of conduct in mining the high seas. But it has a mandate to come up with a rule by June 2023. If no rules are agreed upon by then, that will be the law of the seas; that deep sea mining shall not be regulated by an international authority. Businesses seem to have open arms for this result.
International regulatory framework is all but absent, but the risks form deep sea mining are becoming clearer than ever. Financial institutions are also expected to act. Seeing this situation, UNEP-FI has singled out deep sea mineral mining from its scope of Blue Economy, and made it clear in its guidance document. The Dutch bank, Triodos Bank, as mentioned above is already a signatory to a declaration which pledges not to use minerals sourced from the deep sea and to support a moratorium on deep sea mining. Financial Institutions across the globe should join in creating a league of responsible financial institutions.
Disappointingly, no Japanese financial institutions have yet endorsed the same pledge, and no institution has any specific policy that touches on deep sea mining. But whether financial institutions are ready or not, deep sea mining is coming to their doorstep soon. We urge all financial institutions to become actors in preventing the destruction and exploitation of the high seas by taking the following actions:
-Construct and disclose strict policies on its own use of deep sea minerals
-Declare support for a moratorium on deep sea mining
-Construct and disclose policies so that companies they invest and finance will be promoted into declaring exclusion of deep sea minerals from their supply chains and support for a moratorium on deep sea mining
(Citations)
[1] “United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea” available online https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf
[2] World Bank, “Minerals for Climate Action: The Mineral Intensity of the Clean Energy”, 2020 available online https://pubdocs.worldbank.org/en/961711588875536384/Minerals-for-Climate-Action-The-Mineral-Intensity-of-the-Clean-Energy-Transition.pdf
[3] Jochum KP, Wang X, Vennemann TW, Sinha B, Müller WEG. Siliceous deep-sea sponge Monorhaphis chuni: A potential paleoclimate archive in ancient animals. Chemical Geology. 2012;300-301:143-51.
[4] See for example “Technical Report Summary: Initial Assessment of the NORI Property, Clarion-Clipperton Zone” filed with U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), 17 March, 2021 available online https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1798562/000121390021033645/fs42021a2ex96-1_sustainable.htm
[5] International Seabed Authority, ISBA/17/C/9, 11-22 July, 2011, 17th Session (Distr. 11 July 2011). Last accessed 16 Nov 2020. Available online: https://isa.org.jm/files/files/documents/isba-17c-9_1.pdf.
[6] Greenpeace International “Deep Trouble: The murky world of the deep sea mining indusry”, December 2020 available online https://www.greenpeace.org/static/planet4-international-stateless/c86ff110-pto-deep-trouble-report-final-1.pdf
