The United Nations’ BBNJ Agreement, aimed at protecting marine biodiversity, faces challenges as regulators rely on outdated 2D maps for spatial planning, despite ecological and economic activities occurring across three-dimensional ocean spaces, according to a 2026 study published in Science.
Why 2D maps fall short in managing ocean resources
The BBNJ Agreement, which entered into force in 2026, seeks to safeguard marine ecosystems beyond national jurisdiction. However, current marine spatial planning, licensing, and environmental assessments still depend on two-dimensional (2D) maps, according to a 2026 analysis in Science. This approach fails to account for the vertical distribution of ecological risks and economic activities, such as deep-sea fishing and seabed mining, which occur at varying depths and times.
Industrial fisheries are increasingly targeting deeper waters, yet marine protection efforts remain concentrated in shallow zones, creating a mismatch between conservation strategies and ecological realities. “The ocean is a dynamic 3D environment, but our planning tools are stuck in 2D,” said Dr. Lena Voss, a marine ecologist at the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). “This leads to fragmented policies that cannot address the full spectrum of human impact.”
In Plain English: The Clinical Takeaway
- Current ocean management uses 2D maps, which ignore depth and time-based ecological changes.
- Deep-sea activities like fishing and mining require 3D planning to avoid overexploitation and habitat damage.
- Regulators must update policies to align with the complex, layered nature of marine ecosystems.
How 3D planning could transform marine governance
Marine spatial planning (MSP) traditionally divides ocean areas into zones based on latitude and longitude, but this method does not capture vertical movements of species or the temporal variability of environmental conditions. A 2025 study in Nature Climate Change found that 3D modeling could improve the accuracy of fisheries management by 40% by accounting for depth-specific fish migrations.
For example, the European Union’s Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) has begun integrating depth-based data into its assessments, though implementation remains inconsistent. In the U.S., the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has piloted 3D mapping tools for deep-sea coral conservation, reporting a 25% increase in protected area efficiency.
Regional implications and policy challenges
The shift to 3D planning has significant implications for regional regulatory bodies. In the European Union, the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) has allocated €120 million to develop 3D spatial models for fisheries management, according to the European Joint Research Centre. Similarly, the U.S. National Ocean Policy has emphasized the need for “multi-layered data integration” to address deep-sea mining conflicts, as outlined in a 2026 White House report.
However, challenges persist. Developing 3D models requires advanced data collection technologies, such as sonar mapping and satellite telemetry, which are costly. The International Maritime Organization (IMO) notes that only 30% of global fisheries have access to depth-specific monitoring systems, limiting the scalability of 3D planning.
| Region | 3D Planning Adoption | Key Challenges |
|---|---|---|
| EU | Partial (2026) | High costs, data gaps |
| U.S. | Pilot programs | Regulatory fragmentation |
| Asia-Pacific | Low (2026) | Technical capacity gaps |
Who funds the push for 3D ocean management?
Research into 3D marine planning is largely supported by international organizations and private foundations. The Global Environment Facility (GEF) has funded a $45 million initiative to develop 3D spatial tools for the BBNJ Agreement, as detailed in a 2026 GEF report. Additionally, the Pew Charitable Trusts has invested $18 million in deep-sea biodiversity studies, emphasizing the need for “dynamic, depth-aware policies.”
Industry stakeholders, including fishing cooperatives and seabed mining firms, have also contributed to research. The International Seafood Sustainability Foundation (ISSF) funded a 2025 study showing that 3D models could reduce bycatch by 15% in pelagic fisheries.
Contraindications & When to Consult a Doctor
While the shift to 3D planning is critical for marine conservation, stakeholders should consider the following:
Policy
