Decision-Making on Deep-Sea Mineral Stewardship: A Supply Chain Perspective

The report examines the potential for deep-sea mineral exploitation to meet the rising demand for metals needed for the clean energy transition. It identifies significant gaps in scientific and economic knowledge, particularly regarding the long-term effects on marine ecosystems and human communities. The authors argue that current decision-making processes, especially within the International Seabed Authority (ISA), lack sufficient stakeholder representation from the Global South and the downstream supply chain. The paper recommends that manufacturers and markets proactively establish ESG principles and support open-access knowledge sharing to prevent irreversible environmental damage and ensure social acceptance.

• There is a significant 'consensus gap' regarding the benchmarks for responsible stewardship of deep-sea minerals. While general principles are aligned, there are no agreed-upon standards for what constitutes 'precautionary' approaches, 'comprehensive' risk appreciation, or 'thorough' research.
• The predictability of the effects of deep-sea mining varies by category: physical effects like sediment plumes and noise are highly predictable, but the resulting impacts on marine ecosystems and human communities are low-predictability.
• Deep-sea mineral deposits, particularly in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone (CCZ), contain vast quantities of metals critical for decarbonization, including cobalt (340% to 600% of land-based reserves), nickel (180–340%), and manganese (over 100%).
• The transition to deep-sea mining could have unpredictable economic consequences for land-based mining nations, potentially reducing export earnings for developing states, though the ISA plans to establish a compensation fund.
• Stakeholder representation within the International Seabed Authority (ISA) is limited. An analysis of non-governmental observers shows that 81% are headquartered in OECD countries, and there is a lack of representation for affected communities, such as indigenous groups or fishing communities.
• Manufacturers and markets are increasingly expected to conduct due diligence on deep-sea minerals, similar to terrestrial sourcing, but existing frameworks (such as the biodiversity mitigation hierarchy) do not easily transfer to the deep-sea context.
• Scientific consensus on the environmental effects of nodule exploitation in the CCZ is estimated to take significant time: an average of 18.5 years for knowledge of biota and ecosystems, and 19.5 years for the potential effects of mineral exploitation.
• Several major companies, including BMW, Google, Volvo, and Volkswagen, have signed a statement supporting a moratorium on deep-sea minerals until environmental and social risks are comprehensively investigated.

APA

World Economic Forum (2022). Decision-Making on Deep-Sea Mineral Stewardship: A Supply Chain Perspective. https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Decision_Making_on_Deep_Sea_Mineral_Stewardship_2022.pdf

Chicago

World Economic Forum. Decision-Making on Deep-Sea Mineral Stewardship: A Supply Chain Perspective. 2022. https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Decision_Making_on_Deep_Sea_Mineral_Stewardship_2022.pdf.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |author=World Economic Forum |title=Decision-Making on Deep-Sea Mineral Stewardship: A Supply Chain Perspective |date=April 2022 |url=https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Decision_Making_on_Deep_Sea_Mineral_Stewardship_2022.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{worldeconomicforum2022decisionmaking, author = {{World Economic Forum}}, title = {{Decision-Making on Deep-Sea Mineral Stewardship: A Supply Chain Perspective}}, institution = {World Economic Forum}, year = {2022}, month = apr, url = {https://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_Decision_Making_on_Deep_Sea_Mineral_Stewardship_2022.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }