The global rush for critical minerals has reached new depths, quite literally, as stakeholders turn their gaze to the ocean floor. The deep sea, once the preserve of scientific exploration and speculative fiction, is now a frontier in the quest for economic and political power. The viability of deep-sea mining hinges on technological advancements, shifting demand, and geopolitical maneuvering, all playing out against a backdrop of underdeveloped and incompatible regulatory frameworks.
The United Nations’ Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), adopted in 1982, established a framework for regulating oceanic activities. It introduced the concept of exclusive economic zones (EEZ) and declared the seabed beyond national jurisdiction as “the common heritage of mankind.” The International Seabed Authority (ISA), created under UNCLOS, has issued exploratory contracts but has yet to develop a regulatory regime for extraction. The ISA’s inability to establish a consensus on extraction regulations has led to uncertainty and delay, with the latest deadline for a regulatory framework passing in 2023, and no sign of progress as of June 2025.
The United States, a non-signatory to UNCLOS, has its own regulatory framework through the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act (DSHMRA) of 1980. However, the U.S. has issued few permits under this act. The Trump administration’s 2025 Executive Order “Unleashing America’s Offshore Critical Minerals and Resources” signals a renewed interest in deep-sea mining, directing NOAA to expedite permitting timelines and encouraging private sector investment.
The competing regulatory frameworks of the UN and the U.S. highlight the regulatory uncertainty surrounding deep-sea mining. This uncertainty is not unique to deep-sea mining but reflects a broader trend of increasing regulatory competition and uncertainty across critical minerals supply chains globally.
The implications of this regulatory landscape are significant. The lack of clear, consistent regulations could lead to a race to the bottom, with companies and nations exploiting the deep sea with minimal environmental and social safeguards. Conversely, overly restrictive regulations could stifle innovation and investment, slowing the development of this potentially transformative industry.
The deep-sea mining sector is at a crossroads. The ISA must expedite the development of a robust regulatory framework to prevent further delays and maintain its relevance. Meanwhile, the U.S. must reconcile its domestic regulations with international norms to avoid exacerbating regulatory fragmentation. The path forward is fraught with challenges, but the stakes are high, and the potential rewards are substantial. The deep sea’s mineral wealth could power the technologies of the future, but only if the industry can navigate the complex regulatory landscape and balance the pursuit of profit with the need for sustainability and equity.
The development of deep-sea mining will also shape the broader critical minerals sector. As demand for these minerals grows, driven by the energy transition and advancements in AI, the industry must grapple with similar regulatory and ethical questions. The lessons learned from deep-sea mining could inform the development of more sustainable and equitable supply chains for critical minerals on land and at sea.
In the end, the future of deep-sea mining will be shaped by the interplay of technology, demand, geopolitics, and regulation. The sector stands at the precipice of a new era, one that could redefine the global mining industry and the geopolitical landscape. The choices made today will echo for decades, determining not just the future of deep-sea mining, but also the broader trajectory of the critical minerals sector and the technologies it enables.