GME0029

The National Oceanography Centre’s response to Environmental Audit Committee’s inquiry into Governing the marine environment

About us

1. The National Oceanography Centre (NOC) is one of the world’s leading oceanographic institutions, which brings together leading scientists, researchers and engineers to deliver research from the coast to the deep sea.[1] We are an independent research organisation, with charitable status.

2. We undertake and facilitate world-class, agenda-setting scientific research and technology development to understand the ocean, which in turn underpins international and UK public policy, business and societal outcomes.  

3. NOC operates the Royal Research Ships James Cook and Discovery and develops technology for coastal and deep ocean research, including autonomous vehicles and sensors, which are used to explore the oceans to better understand and monitor marine environments. Working with our partners, we provide long-term marine science capability including sustained ocean observations, mapping and surveying, data management, scientific research and advice.

4. Among the resources that we provide on behalf of the UK are the British Oceanographic Data Centre (BODC), the Marine Autonomous and Robotic Systems (MARS) facility, the National Tide and Sea Level Facility (NTSLF), the Permanent Service for Mean Sea Level (PSMSL) and British Ocean Sediment Core Research Facility (BOSCORF). The data generated by NOC supports weather forecasting and long-term prediction of climate change impacts such as sea level rise and coastal inundation for the UK and internationally.

5. NOC welcomes the opportunity to provide written evidence to the Environmental Audit Committee’s inquiry into Governing the marine environment. We were delighted to also provide oral evidence on 8 January 2025 (Alan Evans, Head of Marine Policy) and we look forward to the Committee visiting our site in Southampton in February to find out more about some of our ocean scientific research and technology capabilities. We welcome the Committee’s recognition of the vital role of the ocean, and we look forward to working with the Committee to ensure that the Government recognises and prioritises ocean policies to enable better understanding, protection and governance.

1. Does the Government have an adequate strategy to address the actions required to ensure alignment with its environmental obligations under multiple international marine treaties? 

6. The responsibility to address the actions required to ensure alignment with its environmental obligations under multiple international marine treaties rests with a number of UK Governments Departments, however there are notable leaders at the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) and the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra). Specifically, the Ocean Policy Unit, Polar Regions and Overseas Territories Desks within FCDO and Defra’s Marine and Fisheries Directorate.

7. However, there is a gap here when it comes to an overall coordinated strategy. In 2018, the then Secretary of State for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Boris Johnson, announced a plan to bring together all the Government’s international oceans’ work under a single strategy and coordinated approach, for the first time. It was planned that this would encompass work from departments including Defra, Department for Transport (DfT) and the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS). NOC was delighted to host Boris Johnson at our site in Southampton when he unveiled this strategy, which committed to improving ocean governance, to support sustainable economic growth and deliver environmental commitments.

8. This was a much welcome announcement, however, there has not been a formal publication of this strategy. Given the current Government’s welcome focus into the link between foreign policy and the climate crisis, there is a significant opportunity for the current Government to progress with an updated International Ocean Strategy. This would be an important step for the UK to showcase its global leadership in international ocean governance and to ensure there is a coordinated approach for alignment with the UK’s environmental, and other obligations, such as marine science capacity development of low- and middle-income countries under multiple international marine treaties. This could encompass the key priorities across Whitehall to ensure that the UK is managing its obligations in a coordinated and structured approach.

9. Alongside a revived International Ocean Strategy, we also recommend that there is a more substantial and coordinated cross-Whitehall framework or strategy for ocean policy within the UK. The Marine Science Coordination Committee (MSCC), which was a science-policy Government Committee created in 2008, led by Defra and Marine Scotland to deliver the UK Marine Science Strategy, played an important role in understanding and developing UK marine science and implementation of the UK Marine Science Strategy. However, after the MSCC was dissolved in 2022, we have not seen a formal Committee set up to examine marine science in a similar way.

10. We recognise that the Coast and Ocean Applied System Thinking (COAST) committee, which is a Government grouping of the Chief Scientific Advisors to Government Departments, has been set up to examine these issues, however there is still a significant gap here when it comes to  transparency of cross-Departmental, overarching ocean strategy, that encompasses environment, marine science, marine data, marine technology and autonomy, digital infrastructure, marine planning, and other activities that support a sustainable blue economy. We welcome the Government’s appointment of Minister Hardy, Defra’s Minister for Water and Flooding, who is responsible for water and domestic and international marine, and Minister Creagh, Defra’s Minister for Nature, who is responsible for environmental targets and biodiversity. Likewise, we acknowledge the role of Minister Dodds as Minister for Development in FCDO, with a responsibility for research and evidence. We do note that the previous joint Ministerial role between FCDO and Defra, Minister for Climate, Environment and Energy, was not appointed in the current Government. This joint role did provide a cross-departmental overview of key ocean issues, but we welcome that there are several Ministers, notably Minister Hardy and Minister Dodds, across departments who have marine in their portfolio. We therefore urge the Government to highlight its prioritisation of ocean issues with an updated International Ocean Strategy alongside a cross-Departmental strategy, which would also include the Department of Science, Innovation and Technology (DSIT) as a key component in this strategy, given DSIT’s responsibility for marine science.

11. With regards to non-legally binding and advisory opinions, the UK Government has a wealth of expertise at hand to advise and inform on issues that impact the interpretation of international treaty obligations. Analogous to advisory opinions, we note the recent written statement by Minister Dodds, in recognising a 2021 Declaration made by the Pacific Islands Forum which preserves maritime zones in the face of climate change-related sea-level rise.[2] This is an example of the UK taking note, considering such issues, undertaking its due diligence and confirming its position.

12. However, there is a lack of government support when it comes to enabling monitoring of the most basic parameters relating to the effects of carbon pollution, for example, ocean acidification. Although the UK reported on ocean acidification in the most recently published UK Marine Strategy and OSPAR assessments, the available data remains limited. There is currently no formal UK reporting of ocean acidification into the UN Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) for SDG14 Indicator 14.3.1 and we recommend that this is addressed. As it currently stands, submission of data into the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission’s (IOC) Tier II indicator framework for SDG14.3.1 for mainland UK is done voluntarily by a handful of marine researchers and is extremely limited and not funded. According to the Office of National Statistics, SDG Indicator 14.3.1 is one of three (out of 10) SDG indicators for which there is no information.[3]

2. How effectively are the UK's obligations in respect of marine protection under environmental treaties being implemented in UK law?

13. The Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ Agreement) was adopted on 19 June 2023. Representatives from the National Oceanography Centre were delighted to support the UK Government including through the provisions of a member of the UK delegation during the Treaty negotiations. We are pleased the UK was one of the first countries to sign the Agreement when it opened for signature in September 2023 and would encourage the UK ratifies it in a timely fashion. This would highlight the continued role the UK has demonstrated throughout the development of the Agreement in international leadership on climate, nature and ocean issues, and we look forward to working closely with the UK Government through the ratification and implementation of the Agreement.

14. In terms of UK’s obligations in respect of marine protection under environmental treaties being implemented in UK law, the devolved nature of environmental protection means that monitoring overall UK progress can be difficult given the varying approaches, different aspects and in some cases, different timelines, across the four nations.

15. Monitoring the effectiveness of marine protection is currently challenging given the lack of investment into understanding the general condition of the marine environment, especially in deeper waters. There is no doubt that a lack of ocean observing and data collection means we cannot readily assess the condition of UK waters. This can be resolved should ocean observations be recognised as critical UK and global infrastructure with the accompanying investment.[4]

16. We look forward to how the UK Government addresses the new 2030 targets under the CBD Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF). Given the reported failure of the UK to meet 14 of the 19 Aichi biodiversity targets, the predecessors of the GBF, there is an opportunity here for the UK to progress against the implementation of work on marine and coastal biodiversity in order to address obligations to international treaties.[5]

17. We would also recommend that the marine environment and the relevance of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) to the marine environment were once again re-introduced into the Integrated Review. Reference to the ocean and UNCLOS, other than the links to defence/navy, were removed in the 2023 Refresh. This does not reflect a position that the UK recognises the value of the ocean and the marine environment, and we would welcome their re-introduction in the next Integrated Review.[6]

3. How does the UK's performance compare to other UN ratifiers in delivering its environmental obligations under international marine treaties? 

18. The IOC-UNESCO Global Ocean Science Report (GOSR) is the indicator framework for SDG14.a.1 that provides a global record of how, where and by whom, ocean science is conducted.[7] However, as with SDG14.3.1, the UK has no formal reporting mechanism. The NOC undertook this exercise for the 2020 report to ensure UK inclusion. However, due to a lack of relevant information the GOSR2020 does not provide a true reflection of the UK’s efforts. More recent efforts to convince UK Government to undertake this exercise have not been successful.

19. If the UK is to be regarded as a science superpower and demonstrate the financial investment into the marine environment, then proof of such can be achieved through the GOSR.
20. There is therefore an opportunity here for the UK to highlight its global scientific leadership, to ensure full visibility and transparency of marine scientific reporting and to highlight the role of marine research and technology.

4. What are the existing pressures on the marine environment?

21. There are a number of existing pressures spatially competing activities on the marine environment. These include, but are not limited to, fishing (commercial, recreational) overfishing and the harmful effects of fishing such bycatch, energy production, including renewable energy generation, pollution, including from sewage, persistent organic pollutants, heavy metals and plastics, tourism and recreational activities, shipping and climate change.[8] 

5. Does the UK have a sufficiently integrated and effective marine spatial planning strategy?

22. The UK as a whole does not have a sufficiently integrated and effective marine spatial planning strategy, but individual devolved administrations are often seen as leading the way. The Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO (IOC-UNESCO) ‘MSP global International Guide on Marine/Maritime Spatial Planning’, published in 2021, prominently highlights the examples of Wales’s and Scotland’s National Marine Plans and outlines them as best practice.[9]

23. Despite the pressures and threats listed earlier, the marine environment offers significant opportunities, if we manage its uses sustainably, and there are a number of international examples for the UK to follow, including  the efforts by the Republic of Ireland to map  its entire Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) and continental shelf beyond 200 nautical miles, a total area of 880,000 square km, providing an understanding of the marine environment and, given the data is now readily available, allowing for ease of planning processes.[10] Norway’s MAREANO programme aimed to provide, amongst other things, answers to questions such as biodiversity, habitat and biotopes distribution and what is the relationship between the physical environment, biodiversity and biological resources, as well as how much contaminants are stores in the sediments.[11] Similarly, the USA has undertaken significant mapping of their continental shelf areas, motivated by a need to identify the extent of their continental shelf, but in doing so collecting valuable environmental data.[12]

24. Defra’s UK Marine Strategy (UKMS) provides the framework for delivering marine policy at the UK level and in implementing the government’s marine environmental objectives. However, there is a concern that there is a gap between the UKMS and the UK marine planning activities, especially in regard to data sharing. There could be greater engagement between the UKMS community and the marine planning community to better ensure benefits associated with more effective and efficient marine data sharing. We recognise the existence of the strategy but are concerned it is not fit for purpose to truly understand the condition of the UK waters, which could be better understand by a more cross-Departmental strategy.

6. Are the economic, social, environmental, and scientific demands on the marine environment adequately balanced in the context of marine spatial planning?

No response

7. What actions should be taken to ensure the UK's marine spatial planning function is fit for the future?

25. Many of the technologies exist to support the management and governance of UK’s marine spatial planning function, as well as general knowledge generation of the marine environment, however, the necessity here is on scaling up what currently exists with sustained funding. We cannot manage what we have not measured, and in order to accurately and effectively understand the seabed and water column, we must increase the number of mapping and monitoring activities in the ocean. As outlined by Alan Evans, Head of Marine Policy at NOC during the Committee’s oral evidence session on 8 January, emerging technologies, in parallel to the use of ships, can support with a range of important monitoring and mapping programmes. NOC is delighted to champion both “hard” technology, such as autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs), for example Boaty McBoatface, and sensor technology and “soft” technology, such as the use of AI and digital twins, and to work with the wider marine science community across the UK and globally to effectively implement the use of these technologies.

26. Regulation on the use of autonomy is still in development, but for the use of surface autonomy the current UK regulations are more advanced. The Maritime and Coastguard Agency’s (MCA) Marine Guidance Note (MGN) 664 certification process applies to all vessels over 2.5m. This accounts for a significant number of surface autonomy that can be used for marine management, including Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing. The equivalence given to a 2.6m Autonomous Surface Vehicle (ASV) with a 50m autonomous ship is counterproductive. Furthermore, the MCA regulations apply to UK vessels wherever they may be and all non-UK vessels in UK waters[13]. However, we recognise and appreciate the recent release of MGN 705 allowing exception for vessels 2.5m to <4.5m. But the full implications of these MGNs for use in marine scientific research are yet to be determined.
27. Data is an essential component of the UK’s marine spatial planning function. NOC is delighted to be a member of the Marine Environmental Data and Information Network (MEDIN), a national network of organisations committed to increasing access to the UK’s marine environmental data resources.[14] Marine data is an essential requirement for effectively governing our marine environment, and to ensure that the UK’s marine spatial planning function is effective, efficient and accurate, policies must be put in place which can ensure best use of data. For example, making data available via MEDIN, as the national hub for marine data, and developing a significant upgrade in the UK’s marine data infrastructure, supported by greater ocean observation capabilities. The transformation in digital technologies such as AI and digital twins will make data more accessible and useful for environmental prediction and policy implementation in real or near real time but must be supported alongside other aspects of marine science.
28. There is a significant lack of funding for long-term ocean observations which can support the understanding of effectiveness of marine spatial planning functions. Currently, ocean observations are funded via piecemeal, ad-hoc and short-term research projects. Compared to other science programmes, however, the cost to deliver ocean observations as infrastructure would still be relatively small. For example, UK spend on space in 2022-23 was £647 million[15]. In comparison, the total budget for the NOC-led UK National Capability programme for Atlantic Climate and Environment Strategic Science (AtlantiS), is £8 million/year, and only for 5 years.

8. How does the UK Government work with devolved nations to ensure that commitments such as '30 by 30' are met across the four nations in a fair and equitable way?

29. To some degree, the UK has achieved its 30by30 target with 38% of UK waters designated with some form of protection.[16] However, this percentage relates to the combined geographical extent designated as Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) by the UK Government and devolved nations, not necessarily the effectiveness of the MPAs.[17] In order to truly meet 30by30 commitments across the four nations, there must be a review of the extent and status of MPAs more broadly, to effectively assess the process of designation and subsequent management to prevent damaging activities.

9. How can the consenting process for marine developments be improved to ensure effective collaboration between planning officers and developers, while balancing environmental protection and economic growth?

No response

10. Do UK regulations give sufficient protection to the environment covered by Marine Protected Areas in domestic waters?

30. The way that UK Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) were established has partially divorced spatial conservation measures from marine spatial planning. Furthermore, although 89 MCZs have been established in England’s waters, damaging activities such as bottom trawling or dredging still occur in many of them. Authorities are supposed to take conservation objectives of such sites into account when granting licenses for specific activities. For terrestrial areas with protected designations which incorporate coastal ecosystems, for example, Sites of Special Scientific Interests (SSSIs), only half are reported to be in good condition. To meet the Kunming-Montreal target of 30% of representative marine ecosystems to be effectively protected, the extent and status of MCZs and protected coastal habitats in the UK will need to be reviewed, including the process of designation and subsequent management to prevent damaging activities. [18]

31. It is true to say that, to some degree, the UK has achieved its 30by30 target with 38% of UK waters designated with some form of protection. However, the more critical issue relates to the effective implementation of these designations. Only around 44% of MPA protected features are actually in a favourable condition.[19] By this metric, we will not meet the 30by30 target of protection and implementation, with the current situation without a change or resolution. There is a concern that MPAs are merely paper parks, without management, enforcement of regulations or meeting conservation objectives, and there needs to be greater integration of the designation process into marine spatial planning.

32. At NOC, we are delighted to be able to offer significant expertise in this area, and to support the Government with the ability to map and monitor marine habitats and ecosystems. For example, our scientists, using a combination of ships, autonomy and Remotely Operated Vehicles (ROVs) supported the provision of data and research which led to the designation of the Whittard Canyon MCZ. NOC’s autonomous capability is also utilised to undertake repeat surveying of the Haig Fras MPA, specifically its biodiversity, to determine whether the conservations objectives of the MPA are being met. We would be delighted to continue to support the Government further with mapping and monitoring to ensure that not only can the 30by30 target be met by protection and designation, but also, crucially, by effectiveness of implementation.

              January 2025