By Aakil Riyaz
The Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) Agreement entered into force on 17 January 2026, marking a significant shift in how the international community governs Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ). For a littoral state such as Sri Lanka, whose economy, environment, and maritime security are intertwined with the Indian Ocean, the agreement goes beyond a signature on paper.
Nearly 2/3rd of the world’s oceans fall outside national jurisdiction, yet these waters play a central role in sustaining migratory fish stocks, regulating climate systems, and maintaining marine biodiversity. Nevertheless, environmental degradation in the high seas does not remain geographically isolated. Ocean currents and ecological connectivity therefore mean that damage to offshore ecosystems eventually affects coastal waters and fisheries. For Sri Lanka, where fisheries support both food security and export earnings, high-seas governance is therefore intrinsically linked to domestic economic stability.
What Does the BBNJ Agreement Do?
The BBNJ Agreement establishes the first binding global framework to protect biodiversity in these areas. It introduces common standards for environmental impact assessments, enables the creation of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), regulates access to Marine Genetic Resources (MGRs), and promotes capacity-building for developing states.
Together, these measures aim to shift high-seas governance from fragmented, sector-based management toward coordinated and science-based international oversight.
One of the most relevant provisions for Sri Lanka is the requirement for standardized environmental impact assessments for activities conducted in ABNJ. The BBNJ therefore provides smaller coastal states with a multilateral platform to raise environmental concerns and demand greater transparency from actors operating far from shore, but with regional consequences.
Area-based management tools, including marine protected areas in the high seas, also have implications for Sri Lanka’s fisheries sector. Protecting breeding and feeding grounds can support long-term stock recovery, particularly for highly migratory species such as tuna. While conservation measures may appear restrictive in the short term, they can contribute to more stable fish populations and reduced pressure on nearshore ecosystems. For coastal fishing communities facing declining catches and climate-related disruptions, this linkage between offshore protection and domestic sustainability is especially relevant.
The agreement further introduces benefit-sharing mechanisms for Marine Genetic Resources used in sectors such as pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and biotechnology. Historically, access to these resources have been dominated by technologically advanced states and private corporations.
Although Sri Lanka does not currently possess extensive bioprospecting capacity, participation in benefit-sharing frameworks may allow access to research data, training opportunities, and collaborative projects. If coupled with domestic investment in marine science, these mechanisms could gradually strengthen Sri Lanka’s research institutions and innovation potential.
Sri Lanka’s ratification of the BBNJ also carries diplomatic and institutional implications. Membership allows participation in treaty bodies responsible for identifying protected areas, reviewing environmental assessments, and shaping capacity-building priorities. For a country with limited marine monitoring infrastructure, engagement with these processes could facilitate access to technical assistance, satellite data, and scientific networks. However, these benefits are not automatic and require sustained participation and administrative capacity.
At present, Sri Lanka’s ocean governance responsibilities are distributed across multiple ministries and agencies, including fisheries, environment, ports, and defence, often with limited coordination. While environmental impact assessment procedures exist for domestic development projects, offshore and transboundary marine activities are regulated less comprehensively. Aligning national legislation with BBNJ obligations, particularly regarding biodiversity monitoring, data sharing, and reporting will require targeted legal reforms and institutional strengthening. Without such alignment, Sri Lanka risks fulfilling procedural commitments without gaining substantive benefits.
Geopolitical Dimensions in the Indian Ocean Region (IOR)
The BBNJ must also be viewed within the broader geopolitical context of the Indian Ocean. The region is witnessing increased naval deployments, expanding commercial shipping routes, offshore energy exploration, and growing interest in seabed minerals. For smaller coastal states, unilateral regulation of these activities is neither practical nor effective.
Multilateral legal frameworks such as the BBNJ offer a rules-based approach to managing environmental risks while allowing states to avoid entanglement in major power competition. In this sense, the agreement complements Sri Lanka’s long-standing preference for multilateral diplomacy in maritime affairs.
From an economic perspective, the agreement presents both regulatory obligations and longterm opportunities. While conservation measures may impose constraints on certain activities in the future, ecological sustainability underpins fisheries exports, tourism, and coastal livelihoods. Depleted ecosystems ultimately impose higher economic costs than preventive regulation. Moreover, capacity-building and benefit-sharing provisions can support human
capital development in marine science and environmental management, areas that remain under-resourced domestically.
From an economic perspective, the agreement presents both regulatory obligations and long-term opportunities. While conservation measures may impose constraints on certain activities in the future, ecological sustainability underpins fisheries exports, tourism, and coastal livelihoods. Depleted ecosystems ultimately impose higher economic costs than preventive regulation. Moreover, capacity-building and benefit-sharing provisions can support human capital development in marine science and environmental management, areas that remain under-resourced domestically.
From Ratification to Implementation
The central policy question, therefore, is not whether the BBNJ is relevant to Sri Lanka, but whether Sri Lanka is institutionally prepared to operationalise its commitments. Effective implementation will require improved inter-agency coordination, sustained investment in marine research and monitoring, engagement with regional fisheries and conservation bodies, and consistent diplomatic participation in treaty institutions. Without these measures, the agreement risks becoming another underutilised international obligation
Ultimately, the BBNJ Agreement does not redefine Sri Lanka’s maritime rights, but it reshapes the governance environment of the waters that sustain those rights. For a country highly dependent on marine resources and located at the heart of Indian Ocean connectivity, the high seas cannot be treated as distant or irrelevant. Whether the BBNJ strengthens Sri Lanka’s long-term ecological resilience and economic stability will depend on how effectively the country moves from ratification to implementation.
In that transition lies the true test of the agreement’s relevance for Sri Lanka.
Aakil Riyaz holds a BSc in Politics and International Relations from the University of London and is currently a Research Intern at the Lakshman Kadirgamar Institute of International Relations and Strategic Studies (LKIIRSS). His research interests include ocean governance and the evolving implications of the BBNJ Agreement for Sri Lanka. He can be reached at aakilriaz@gmail.com.
Factum is an Asia-Pacific-focused think tank on International Relations, Tech Cooperation, and Strategic Communications accessible via www.factum.lk.
The views expressed here are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the organization’s.
