The Third UN Ocean Conference delivered historic agreements but did it fulfil the promise of genuine community leadership?
A powerful shift is emerging from the shorelines of the Global South. It’s a narrative that challenges decades of top-down conservation approaches and positions coastal communities not as passive beneficiaries, but as the architects of lasting ocean solutions.
This transformation was vividly captured during AFO’s recent webinar, “Ahead of UNOC3: Unlock the Power of Local Leadership in the Fight for Ocean Health and Resilience,” where three dynamic voices from Tanzania’s coast articulated a vision that could reshape global ocean governance.
Just weeks before UNOC3 convened, Esther Mhamila, a marine expert from Tanzania and the Conservation Programs Manager at Action For Ocean(AFO), had delivered a message that would prove prophetic: “We are not just vulnerable. We are valuable.” Her words, spoken during an AFO webinar, represented more than personal empowerment they articulated a fundamental challenge to how global ocean governance operates. As delegates gathered in Nice to celebrate unprecedented achievements, the question hanging in the salt air was whether the conference would live up to this vision of genuine shared power.
The Promise Fulfilled? Historic Breakthroughs at UNOC3
The numbers emerging from Nice were undeniably impressive. French President Emmanuel Macron announced that 55 countries had ratified the UN High Seas Treaty, with five more expected by year’s end, enough to trigger legal enforcement by January 2026. For the first time in history, the vast expanses of international waters, currently protecting just 1% of their area, would have a global framework for marine protected areas.
UNESCO announced an ambitious plan to engage 10,000 commercial and research vessels in mapping the ocean floor, aiming to lift coverage from 26.1% toward 100% by 2030. Monaco-based investors pledged €8.7 billion toward sustainable ocean economies, while over 200 coastal cities representing more than one billion citizens united in the new Ocean Rise & Coastal Resilience Coalition.
These achievements represent the kind of systemic change that coastal communities have long demanded. But they also raise a fundamental question: who shaped these decisions, and who will control their implementation?
The Elephant in the Room: Where Were the Coastal Voices?
While world leaders dined on locally sourced sustainable seafood and participated in maritime parades, the absence of meaningful coastal community representation in Nice’s power corridors was glaring. The “Nice Ocean Action Plan” promised to translate “high-level pledges into concrete country-level roadmaps,” but the language itself reveals the persistent top-down thinking that AFO’s webinar speakers had warned against.
Jestina Kimbesa, speaking from her unique perspective as both a community member and someone who has sat on a funder-eye level, had predicted this exact scenario: “Organizations struggle to win these proposals or to write those proposals, but also once they win, there are a lot of conditions and bureaucratic reporting.” The result, she warned, is that capable local organizations lose funding to larger international entities, receiving only “small pieces” of grants that should directly support their work.
The €8.7 billion investment pledge from Monaco sounds transformative, but will it reach the shorelines where Kaijage Laurian has been bridging the gap between technical data and community understanding? Or will it follow the familiar pattern of international funding that stops at the offices of large NGOs and never trickles down to the grassroots organizations that actually implement conservation on the ground?
The Protection Principle: A Paradigm Shift or Political Theater?
Perhaps the most intriguing development from UNOC3 was the launch of the “Protection Principle” by a coalition of 110 civil society organizations. This proposed evolution of the Precautionary Principle would shift the burden of proof onto those seeking to exploit marine areas, making protection the default rather than the exception.
The concept aligns perfectly with the worldview that Jestina described during the AFO webinar:
“For Global South communities, the ocean is not just a resource. It’s part and parcel of their lives. It’s like what they see as a family or a relative, not a commodity.”
If implemented genuinely, the Protection Principle could fundamentally alter the power dynamics that have historically marginalized coastal communities.
But the devil is in the details. The Task Force charged with developing operational recommendations won’t report until 2027, ahead of UNOC4. That’s a two-year window during which the current system of ocean exploitation continues unabated.
More critically, who will sit on this Task Force? Will it include the voices of coastal communities who have been practicing protection-based management for generations, or will it be dominated by lawyers and policy experts from international organizations?
The Mapping Initiative: Whose Knowledge Counts?
UNESCO’s plan to map 100% of the ocean floor by 2030 represents a remarkable scientific undertaking. But it also highlights a troubling blind spot in how the international community approaches ocean knowledge. The initiative will deploy 10,000 vessels using cutting-edge technology to chart previously unknown seabed ecosystems yet it appears to make no provision for incorporating the traditional ecological knowledge that coastal communities have accumulated over centuries.
Kaijage‘s journey from data analyst to a certified diver illustrates exactly why this matters. “Having that first-hand look of how things are underwater really shaped my understanding of the whole ecosystem and how I can align my message to the communities properly,” he reflected. His experience demonstrates that effective ocean governance requires more than technical data; it demands the kind of embodied knowledge that comes from lived experience with marine ecosystems. Just to remind that Kaijage is one among the many talents that have benefitted from the Tanzania DiveLab under the AFO’s Ocean Access Program that is creating equitable access to the ocean for Marine scientists, storytellers, filmmakers and marine rangers.
The mapping initiative’s focus on technological solutions, while valuable, perpetuates the very “messiah complex” that Kaijage warned against the assumption that external expertise is inherently superior to local knowledge. True ocean mapping would integrate satellite data with the wisdom of fishers who have read currents and understood seasonal patterns for generations.
The Gender Revolution: Diving Deeper into Change
One of the most promising aspects of UNOC3 was its recognition of the need for inclusive participation, particularly regarding gender equity in ocean governance. The conference’s commitment to “urgent, inclusive, science-based actions” acknowledges that effective ocean stewardship requires diverse perspectives and leadership.
This recognition resonates with the transformative changes already happening in coastal communities.
As Esther noted, seeing women overcome their fears to become divers represents something “you would never have witnessed 20 years, 30 years back.” These individual acts of courage signal broader shifts in how coastal communities approach ocean governance.
But inclusion means more than adding women to existing structures it requires fundamental changes in how those structures operate. Will the new Ocean Finance Facility, targeted for launch in 2028, incorporate the kind of participatory budgeting that Jestina advocated, where communities have a meaningful say in resource allocation? Or will it perpetuate the bureaucratic reporting requirements that systematically exclude grassroots organizations?
The Financing Paradox: €8.7 Billion and the Last Mile Problem
The massive financial commitments announced at UNOC3 could represent a turning point for ocean conservation or they could exacerbate existing inequalities. The €8.7 billion pledge from Monaco-based investors sounds impressive, but the real test will be whether these funds can navigate what development practitioners call the “last mile problem”, the persistent challenge of getting resources to the communities that need them most.
Jestina’s experience working with donors revealed the vicious cycle that traps many grassroots organizations: they struggle to write successful proposals, but even when they win funding, they face bureaucratic reporting requirements that consume their limited capacity. Meanwhile, larger international organizations with dedicated grant-writing teams capture the majority of funding, leaving local groups to fight over “small pieces” of what should be direct support.
The new UN Ocean Finance Facility could break this cycle by prioritizing direct funding to grassroots organizations, simplifying grant processes, and investing in local capacity building. But it could just as easily perpetuate existing patterns if it’s designed by the same international institutions that have historically excluded coastal communities from meaningful participation.
The High Seas Treaty: Protection or Colonization?
The High Seas Treaty’s path to ratification represents one of international law’s most significant achievements in decades. The prospect of creating marine protected areas in international waters currently protecting just 1% of these vast spaces offers hope for preserving ocean ecosystems at the scale required by the climate crisis.
But the treaty also raises uncomfortable questions about sovereignty and self-determination. Who will decide where these protected areas are established? How will enforcement work in practice? Most critically, will the treaty’s implementation respect the traditional management systems of coastal communities whose territories extend into international waters?
The risk is that the High Seas Treaty becomes another form of “green colonialism”, imposing external conservation models without regard for local knowledge or community rights. The alternative is to use the treaty as a framework for supporting community-led conservation, recognizing that the most effective marine protected areas are often those managed by the people who depend on them most directly.
Beyond Nice: The Real Test Begins Now
As delegates departed Nice, Secretary-General António Guterres warned that
“multilateralism works but only if we match words with action.”
His challenge applies not just to implementing the specific commitments made at UNOC3, but to the deeper question of whether the international community can move beyond tokenistic participation to genuine shared power.
The true test of UNOC3’s success won’t be measured in the number of ratifications or the size of financial commitments, it will be seen in whether coastal communities like those represented by AFO, Esther, Jestina, and Kaijage find themselves with greater agency over their ocean futures. Will the Nice Ocean Action Plan create space for the kind of adaptive management that Kaijage described, where “if we make mistakes writing the proposal in some aspects, we can reform them and try to make them align as much as possible with what the local needs require”?
The Tide of Change: What Comes Next
The momentum generated by UNOC3 creates unprecedented opportunities for advancing ocean governance, but it also risks reinforcing the very power structures that have marginalized coastal communities for decades. The conference’s emphasis on “urgent action” could be used to justify bypassing community consultation in favor of top-down implementation or it could catalyze the kind of fundamental shifts in power that would make ocean governance truly democratic.
The next two years, leading up to UNOC4, will be crucial. Will the Protection Principle Task Force include meaningful representation from coastal communities? Will the Ocean Finance Facility prioritize direct funding and simplified processes? Will the High Seas Treaty’s implementation support community-led conservation rather than imposing external models?
Most importantly, will the international community heed Esther’s powerful declaration that coastal communities are “not vulnerable, but valuable”? The ocean is indeed “explorable,” as she concluded, but only if we’re willing to dive beneath the surface of traditional power structures and engage with the communities who know it best.
The tide of change is rising from the shorelines, just as it was before UNOC3 convened. The question is whether the wave of commitments and funding that emerged from Nice will carry that tide forward or whether it will crash against the same institutional barriers that have historically excluded coastal voices from ocean governance.
As the High Seas Treaty moves toward implementation and billions of dollars flow toward ocean conservation, the real measure of success will be whether those who declared themselves “valuable” find their voices amplified rather than drowned out by the roar of international diplomacy. The ocean’s future depends on getting this right.
Javis Bashabula
Communications and Knowledge Management Lead - AFO
