The Third UN Ocean Conference: Reflections and the road ahead

The Third UN Ocean Conference (UNOC-3), held in June in Nice, France, made a clear case for putting the ocean at the centre of the sustainable development agenda.    

UNOC-3 reaffirmed the need to leverage the ocean to promote climate action, biodiversity protection and economic development. It mobilised support for blue finance to address the underfunding of SDG14: conserving and sustainably using the oceans, seas and marine resources. And it accelerated action on governing the high seas – critical to promoting international equity.

While these achievements should be celebrated, much work remains if they are to translate into real accomplishments. Developing countries, in particular, face resource shortfalls and structural barriers that prevent them from taking full advantage of the ocean’s potential. Development co-operation can go a long way in removing these hurdles, yet ocean initiatives remain poorly integrated into development interventions. And while blue finance has much to offer, its promise will be squandered if the fundamentals – like sound macroeconomics and scaling back finance to harmful activities – are ignored. Finally, truly advancing international ocean equity means helping developing countries meet their high seas commitments and patching other gaps in global ocean governance. 

Here, we take stock of where things stand after UNOC-3 and highlight three policy priorities.  

Ocean initiatives can promote multiple development priorities at once, helping protect biodiversity, accelerate climate action, curb pollution, and drive economic development. Coastal mangrove restoration projects, for example, can protect local communities from storms and rising seas, sequester carbon, support biodiversity, and provide food and income.

This was recognised at UNOC-3, with the Nice Ocean Action Plan – UNOC-3’s political declaration – highlighting that ocean initiatives can drive progress across all SDGs. This is welcome, particularly as growing budgetary pressures heighten the need to use resources efficiently. 

The fact is, however, that the gulf between UNOC-3’s proposals and the reality of development efforts remains wide. Until now, ocean initiatives have featured only minimally in official development assistance (ODA). Between 2010 and 2023, only about 1% of global ODA went specifically to ocean-related activities. Only 63% of all ocean-related ODA supported sustainable ocean use or ocean protection. 

Development partners should incorporate a focus on oceans into their policies and programmes, taking up the Blue NDC Challenge issued at Nice, which urges countries to integrate ocean-based solutions into their climate and biodiversity plans. 

The Nice Ocean Action Plan highlighted an uncomfortable reality: SDG 14 is the least funded of the Goals. To solve this, discussions at UNOC-3 highlighted the potential of a diverse range of innovative financing tools, such as blue bonds, debt-for-nature swaps and parametric insurance. To be sure, these "blue finance" instruments can offer effective financing solutions for ocean priorities. For instance, bonds are a familiar debt instrument. But, when their proceeds are earmarked for ocean initiatives, they are an elegant tool (a "blue" bond) for funding SDG14. That said, these instruments are not a panacea. They are complex, and in developing countries typically require ODA, which is finite. In every case, it is necessary to assess whether using ODA for blue finance – instead of, for example, to support marine conservation directly – is the best use of resources.

Moreover, unless underlying macroeconomic constraints are loosened, the ability of these instruments to finance sustainable development will be limited. For instance, coordinated action to tackle high sovereign debt and servicing costs faced by many Small Island Developing States and least developed countries would not only help them free up funds for ocean initiatives, but enhance the feasibility of instruments like a sovereign blue bond – which require countries to take on more debt.

Finally, no single instrument will deliver long-term results if finance continues to support unsustainable activities. This is the case in the fisheries sector, where two-thirds of government support risks encouraging overfishing. For example, subsidies for vessel construction and purchase artificially lower fishing costs and risk incentivising unsustainable practices, particularly where fisheries management is weak. Private capital is also still flowing into offshore oil and gas projects and coastal development projects that degrade ecosystems. Policy makers should work to ensure that these funds are redirected to sustainable uses.

With the surge in ratifications of the Agreement on Marine Biodiversity in Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction, UNOC-3 marked a pivotal moment for ocean governance. This landmark treaty, which could enter into force as early as January 2026, would extend international governance to the high seas, an area covering nearly half the Earth’s surface, which has remained unregulated until now.

The agreement establishes marine protected areas and mandates environmental impact assessments in the high seas, helping preserve the ocean as a global public good. It helps safeguard the ocean’s essential functions, such as climate regulation. It promotes capacity development and technology transfer to help developing countries participate in ocean governance. And it calls for the fair sharing of benefits derived from the commercial applications (e.g. in medicine, cosmetics) of resources in the high seas. All of this can help reduce disparities between countries. 

For the Agreement to truly promote international equity, however, development partners must play a role. For countries seeking to ratify the Agreement, development partners can help identify the legal, administrative, and institutional mechanisms required to comply with it. Once the Agreement has entered into force, countries may need support with implementation, particularly with ocean monitoring, which is vital to the success of marine protected areas and environmental impact assessments. 

But the Agreement alone cannot guarantee equity between countries; other elements of ocean governance also need to be strengthened. For instance, in the fisheries sector, weak regulation of distant water fleets – mainly from wealthier countries – can allow the overexploitation of fish stocks within and beyond developing countries’ waters. This reduces supply for local fishers and disrupts ecosystems, threatening coastal communities’ food security and livelihoods. Patching these gaps is essential if international equity is to be at the heart of ocean governance.