Search for a command to run...
The global marine environment continues to face escalating and intersecting threats. Ocean warming, acidification, biodiversity loss, plastic pollution, and vessel-sourced emissions are no longer isolated concerns-they represent systemic challenges that demand cohesive, interdisciplinary responses at every level of governance, from domestic legislation to international treaty regimes. Building on the momentum established in Volume I of this Research Topic, this second collection amplifies the conversation by extending its reach into emerging frontiers: the governance of deep-sea mineral extraction, the decarbonisation of international shipping, the integration of human rights into ocean law, and the quest for a binding global plastics treaty. This Research Topic received an extraordinary response from the global scholarly community, which serves as a testament to the urgency and salience of marine environmental protection in contemporary science and policy discourse. The diversity of contributions-spanning original research, reviews, policy briefs, and perspective pieces-reflects the inherently interdisciplinary character of ocean governance, where environmental science, international law, economics, and technology converge. These articles collectively illuminate both the persistence of longstanding challenges and the emergence of innovative solutions that hold genuine promise for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers alike.The oceans remain a commons under stress. Approximately 80% of marine pollution originates from land-based sources, global shipping accounts for roughly 3% of greenhouse gas emissions, and the negotiations for a global plastics treaty have encountered persistent diplomatic difficulties (Khan et al., 2024). At the same time, new pressures are arising in the deep sea, where technological capabilities for mineral extraction are advancing faster than the governance frameworks designed to regulate them. This collection confronts these realities through rigorous scholarship, offering analytical frameworks, legal assessments, policy recommendations, and empirical findings that together constitute a valuable resource for advancing the sustainability of ocean ecosystems.The contributions to Volume II are organised around several cross-cutting themes: the governance of marine plastic pollution and the plastics treaty negotiations; maritime decarbonisation and the role of alternative fuels; deep-sea mining and its environmental and legal dimensions; human rights-based approaches to marine environmental protection; and the evolution of national and international governance frameworks. Each theme is introduced briefly in this editorial, with in-text references directing readers to the relevant articles for deeper engagement.Few environmental challenges rival marine plastic pollution in its pervasive, transboundary, and long-term consequences (Khan, 2021). Plastic debris-ranging from macro-scale discarded fishing gear to invisible microplastic particles-contaminates every ocean zone from surface waters to deep-sea sediments, with cascading effects on marine biodiversity, food security, and human health (Chang et al., 2024;Khan, 2023). The international community has been responding, but the response remains fragmented, creating regulatory gaps that undermine effective action at scale. Several contributions in this Research Topic dissect the structural weaknesses of the current governance architecture and propose pathways toward a more cohesive legal framework.Bridging fragmented legal regulations for marine plastic pollution examines the patchwork of global, regional, and national instruments governing marine plastic pollution and identifies the critical enforcement gaps, insufficient international cooperation, and lack of standardised regulations that collectively undermine their effectiveness. The study advocates for a unified international agreement-one that can coordinate action across existing frameworks and impose binding obligations on states and producers alike.The contours of such an agreement-currently under negotiation as a Global Plastics Treaty (GPT)-have been the subject of intense multilateral deliberation, and several articles in this collection provide timely analyses (Khan & Chang, 2025). Divergences and challenges in the negotiation of the global plastics treaty explore the fault lines among negotiating parties, revealing how divergent national interests, concerns over economic competitiveness, and differing views on the treaty's scope and ambition have complicated progress toward consensus.Complementing this, The plastics treaty: steps forward, agreement deferred traces the trajectory of the negotiations and situates the current impasse within the broader context of global environmental diplomacy, drawing lessons from comparable multilateral treaty-making processes.A particularly nuanced contribution comes from Dilemma in global governance of marine plastic pollution, which proposes an innovative "umbrella convention plus specialised protocols" architecture for the GPT. This framework would align the treaty vertically with the Paris Agreement's carbon market mechanisms-recognising the climate-plastics nexus-while horizontally deepening extended producer responsibility and technology transfer through the Basel Convention and mutual recognition of regional standards. The inclusion of a no-regression clause and production caps within the GPT's core provisions, as recommended by this study, would represent a paradigmatic shift from waste management to source prevention.The territorial dimension of plastic governance is also addressed in this collection. The Multilevel governance of Arctic marine plastic pollution investigates the particular vulnerabilities of Arctic marine environments to plastic contamination-exacerbated by ocean circulation patterns that concentrate debris in polar waters-and assesses the adequacy of the existing multi-level governance architecture comprising Arctic Council initiatives, regional agreements, and national legislation. The article highlights governance gaps in monitoring, enforcement, and coordination among Arctic states, and calls for enhanced institutional mechanisms tailored to the unique ecological and geopolitical context of the Arctic Ocean.The intersection of international trade and plastic pollution receives critical attention in International trade and plastic waste in oceans: legal and policy, which examines how global trade flows contribute to the transboundary movement of plastic waste and argues that trade agreements must be leveraged as vehicles for environmental protection rather than remaining silent enablers of pollution. Binding environmental provisions within trade instruments, the study argues, are essential for ensuring that economic liberalisation does not come at the cost of marine ecosystem integrity. Finally, Mechanical recycling and upcycling of marine macro-and microplastics offer a technological perspective, reviewing advances in recycling and upcycling technologies for marine plastic waste and assessing their technical and economic feasibility as part of a circular economy strategy.Taken together, these contributions demonstrate that solving the marine plastics crisis requires the simultaneous pursuit of a legally robust global treaty, the greening of international trade frameworks, targeted regional governance for ecologically vulnerable areas, and the scaling up of technological innovation in plastic waste management.Shipping is the backbone of global trade-responsible for transporting more than 80% of goods by volume (Khan et al., 2022)-but its reliance on fossil fuels makes it a significant and growing source of greenhouse gas emissions. Under the International Maritime Organisation's Revised This finding is particularly timely given recent developments: in April 2025, the United States government issued an Executive Order authorising domestic companies to seek mining permits from national authorities, bypassing the ISA's regulatory framework-a unilateral action with potentially far-reaching implications for the integrity of the international deep-seabed governance regime. The human rights dimensions of this challenge are explored in the contributions on the "right to environment at sea" discussed below, which argue that even landlocked states may have legitimate claims to participate in deep-sea governance by virtue of their citizens' environmental rights.One of the most intellectually ambitious clusters of contributions in this Research Topic involves the application of human rights frameworks to marine environmental governance-a field at the intersection of international human rights law and the law of the sea, which has historically operated as two largely separate legal universes.The right to environment at sea: a human rights-based approach to marine environmental protection introduces the novel concept of the "right to environment at sea"-defined as the human right of individuals and communities to a clean, healthy, and sustainable marine environment. The article systematically develops the normative content of this proposed right: identifying right-holders (both present and future generations, including citizens of landlocked states in relation to the high seas), duty-bearers (states, corporations, and international organisations), and corresponding obligations (to respect, protect, and fulfil). Crucially, it demonstrates the practical relevance of this right across three contexts-deep-sea mining, marine pollution, and marine biodiversity-and proposes enforcement pathways through human rights treaty bodies, the Human Rights Council, regional human rights courts, the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, and the International Court of Justice.This contribution builds on a growing body of international jurisprudence: the 2022 UN General Assembly resolution recognising access to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment as a universal human right; the 2025 Human Rights Council resolution explicitly linking this right to the marine context; and the advisory opinions of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the climate emergency, which emphasise states' obligations to protect the rights of future generations from climate impacts. By extending this right into the marine domain, the article offers a powerful tool to overcome the limitations of the state-centric UNCLOS framework and to expand accountability for ocean degradation.A complementary perspective is offered by protection and preservation of the marine environment through human rights-based approach: potentials, limitations and recommendations. This article applies the human rights-based approach (HRBA) -a framework that treats the realisation of human rights as both the goal and the means of environmental protection -to the marine context, examining both its direct application through the emerging right to a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment and its indirect application through established rights to life, health, and an adequate standard of living. While acknowledging the genuine potential of the HRBA to add humanitarian dimensions to marine governance, enhance the interpretive power of UNCLOS provisions, and strengthen the accountability of coastal states, the article also honestly confronts its limitations: the direct approach faces a weak normative basis in existing law, and the indirect approach cannot fully address marine environmental issues per se. The article therefore recommends a comprehensive human rights orientation that balances collective and individual rights, civil and political rights with economic and social rights, and incorporates best practices from regional and national experience to advance the international law-making process for a marine-specific environmental right.Together, these contributions represent a significant intellectual contribution to the emerging field of ocean and human rights. They demonstrate that the convergence between human rights law and the law of the sea is no longer merely aspirational-it is becoming a practical imperative as the consequences of marine degradation for fundamental human welfare become ever clearer.A recurring theme across this Research Topic is the need to strengthen the institutional and legal architecture of marine governance at both national and international levels. The oceans present a uniquely complex governance challenge: they are simultaneously a global commons, a shared resource, and a transboundary sink for pollution-requiring instruments that are simultaneously universal in their normative reach and adaptable to the particular contexts of different maritime zones and ecosystems.A strategy for risk control of marine pollution from land-based sources addresses one of the most persistent and under-regulated categories of marine pollution. Since approximately 80% of marine pollutants originate from land-based activities-including industrial discharges, agricultural runoff, sewage, and plastic waste-the article argues that the current international legal framework, which remains fragmented and largely dependent on state discretion, is inadequate for effective risk control. The article proposes establishing a Multilateral Guarantee Mechanism (MGM) as an innovative institutional solution that coordinates international obligations, supervises polluting sources, and provides effective compensation for marine environmental damage across borders. This proposal reflects a broader recognition that landbased marine pollution requires dedicated multilateral legal instruments, analogous to those that exist for ship-source pollution under MARPOL.The fisheries and blue economy dimensions of marine governance are examined in How does ocean farming empower the fishery economy? A policy analysis. Using panel data from 43Chinese coastal cities over 15 years, this study employs a difference-in-differences model to demonstrate that marine ranch demonstration zones-a form of structured ocean farming that combines ecological restoration with productive fisheries-significantly increase fishery output by improving marine ecosystems, extending industrial chains, and conserving biological resources. The findings reveal spatial heterogeneity in policy effectiveness, with enhancementoriented and recreation-oriented marine ranches showing the most pronounced impacts, offering actionable guidance for coastal cities seeking to transition from extractive fishing to sustainable blue economy models.The governance of vessel pollution in a rapidly evolving legal landscape is further illuminated by Implications of ITLOS Advisory Opinion No. 31 for the maritime sector, which analyses how the ITLOS Advisory Opinion on climate change -the first by any international court to authoritatively interpret states' obligations to protect the marine environment from anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions-reshapes the responsibilities of flag, port, and coastal states under international maritime law. This article positions the Advisory Opinion as a catalyst for legal evolution, potentially opening new pathways for climate litigation in maritime contexts and compelling states to integrate climate mitigation into their marine governance strategies.The human rights of coastal and indigenous communities in marine governance are also considered through contributions addressing the "right to environment at sea," discussed above, which emphasise that states have obligations not merely to other states but to individualsincluding those of landlocked nations-whose well-being depends on the health of marine ecosystems they may never physically access. This normative expansion has profound implications for the inclusivity and legitimacy of international ocean governance processes.The relationship between the international law of the sea and the international climate regime has long been characterised by institutional silos and legal lacunae. UNCLOS, drafted in the late 1970s and adopted in 1982, predates the emergence of climate change as a central challenge of international environmental law, and its provisions on the protection of the marine environment-while broad in principle-were not designed with the specific challenge of ocean warming, acidification, or sea-level rise in mind. Several contributors to this Research Topic address this governance gap from multiple perspectives. The contributions assembled in this Research Topic collectively demonstrate that marine environmental protection in the twenty-first century is no longer a peripheral concern of environmental law and science-it is a central challenge of global governance, deeply intertwined with climate action, human rights, economic development, and technological innovation. The breadth and quality of the manuscripts submitted to this collection, and the extraordinary scholarly engagement, reflect the growing recognition among the global research community that the oceans are at a critical juncture.Several overarching insights emerge from this collection. First, legal and institutional fragmentation remains the Achilles' heel of marine governance. Whether addressing plastic pollution, shipping emissions, land-based pollutants, or deep-sea mining, the consistent finding across contributions is that the existing patchwork of instruments is inadequate-too fragmented, too dependent on voluntary compliance, and too slow to respond to rapidly evolving threats. The path forward lies in developing more integrated, legally binding frameworks capable of coordinating action across governance scales and sectors.Second, technology is both a driver of marine environmental challenges and a critical enabler of solutions. Hydrogen-powered vessels, blockchain-enabled compliance systems, AI-driven monitoring platforms, and advanced plastic recycling technologies all represent areas where innovation can meaningfully accelerate the transition to sustainable ocean use-but only if governance frameworks evolve in tandem to provide the regulatory certainty and financial incentives needed to bring them to scale.Third, the human dimension of marine governance is increasingly central to both diagnosing ocean challenges and designing effective responses. The emerging literature on human rights and ocean law-powerfully represented in this collection-signals a paradigmatic shift in how the international community conceptualises obligations toward the marine environment: not merely as duties owed by states to each other, but as duties owed by states and corporations to individuals and communities whose lives, livelihoods, and fundamental rights depend on healthy oceans.Looking ahead, several priority areas demand sustained research attention. The negotiation of the Global Plastics Treaty remains incomplete, and scholarly analyses of negotiating positions, governance architectures, and implementation challenges will be essential to informing a successful outcome. The legal and environmental governance of deep-sea mining requires urgent development-particularly in light of unilateral moves to exploit seabed resources outside the ISA framework-if the principles of the common heritage of mankind are to retain practical meaning. The full implications of the ITLOS Advisory Opinion on climate change for maritime law and state obligations have only begun to be explored, and will reward sustained interdisciplinary investigation. Moreover, the integration of the "right to environment at sea" into enforceable legal instruments represents a horizon that scholars, advocates, and policymakers can work toward with growing empirical and normative foundations.This Research Topic has served as a vital platform for advancing knowledge, fostering dialogue, and catalyzing collaboration among the diverse communities-legal scholars, environmental scientists, policymakers, and maritime practitioners-who share a commitment to the sustainable