Marine Biodiversity – Vital Essence of Our Oceans
Life on Earth is linked inseparably with the ocean. It covers around 71 per cent of the Earth’s surface and reaches depths of up to eleven kilometres. The ocean is thus the largest habitat on the planet and provides a multitude of services of critical importance for human survival and well-being.
In light of this, you might then expect „that the relationship of humans to the ocean would be one of deep respect, even of reverence“, said Peter Thomson, the United Nations Secretary-General’s Special Envoy for the Ocean, in his closing address at the Third United Nations Ocean Conference in Nice in June 2025. But instead, we “over-exploit … and pollute … and unrelentingly warm the ocean.“ Through these and other interventions, we not only deprive the ocean of its aesthetic and inspirational value; we also directly endanger the survival of marine species and therefore of humankind itself. Without a healthy ocean, there cannot be a sustainable future for us, for humanity.
We have chosen this statement to introduce this summary of World Ocean Review 9 because it reinforces the notion that marine biodiversity is by no means a niche topic for nature enthusiasts. Today, the ocean’s state of health concerns us all. And because people only protect what they know and regard as valuable, beautiful or useful, the challenge that we have taken on with WOR 9 is to excite and inspire as many readers as possible with lasting enthusiasm for the great diversity of marine species and habitats.
An astonishing variety of shapes, colours and functions
The dimensions of the ocean habitat are beyond human imagination. There is life everywhere in this vast space - even in places where nobody would have thought it possible: underneath the Antarctic ice shelves, for example, and in deep-sea hypersaline anoxic basins such as those found in the Mediterranean.
Precisely how many species live in and near the ocean is unknown, because we have not yet explored many marine regions, ecosystems and groups of organisms in any detail. Scientists estimate that there are between one and two million different species in the oceans, but there could be many more. Only a quarter, at most, of the estimated number has been scientifically described. And yet the variety of shapes and sizes, colours and functions of these species alone seems overwhelming – from microscopic archaea and bacteria, single-celled algae and fungi, to brightly coloured reef fish, elegant rays, darting seabirds, 30-metre-long whales and seaweeds – as well as the mysterious glass squid Galiteuthis glacialis, of which, incredibly, a living specimen was first filmed by scientists in the deep waters of the South Atlantic in March 2025. Previously, marine biologists had only studied the remains of specimens found in the stomachs of dead seabirds or whales.
- > Experts working on the World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS) keep a record of all newly discovered species. While the number of known marine species has now risen to almost 248,000, we still only know a small proportion of marine biodiversity.
- The list of fascinating marine organisms could fill many more pages – and some 2300 newly described species are added each year. To identify them, experts are increasingly turning to molecular methods such as barcoding, metabarcoding and metatranscriptomics. Researchers analyze the genetic information of organisms or, more precisely, selected regions of their DNA molecules. This information can be used to uniquely identify species, infer their functions and phylogeny, and identify successful adaptation strategies.
In this way, a large team of scientists recently showed that the Portuguese man o’ war (Physalia physalis), a vibrantly coloured siphonophore, is not in fact a single species, as previously assumed. On the contrary, the populations in the Pacific, the Atlantic and the Indian Ocean differ genetically to such an extent that the researchers were able to identify at least four separate species.
As these and many other examples show, we still don’t fully understand life in the ocean. At the same time, we need much more detailed knowledge in order to draw firm conclusions about biodiversity in any given area of the sea – whether it concerns a single ecosystem, a marine region or the ocean in its entirety.
Biodiversity: A multifaceted concept
The ocean is considered healthy and resilient when its biological communities support a large number of species that differ in their genetic make-up, appearance, characteristics and functions. If this is the case, experts speak of high biodiversity - a term derived from the words “biological” and “diversity”. Biodiversity is in fact an exceedingly complex concept.
For it is defined as the variability among living organisms of all origins including terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are a part. This includes variation in genetic, morphological, phylogenetic and functional attributes, as well as changes in abundance and distribution over time and space within and among species, biological communities and ecosystems. Terms such as “species diversity” or “species richness” are often used synonymously with biodiversity. However, as the definition shows, the concept of biodiversity is much broader. The multidimensionality of the concept of biodiversity makes it hard to grasp. In addition, researchers use a variety of methods to quantify the biodiversity of a selected area. They may estimate or measure the region’s species richness, calculate the total amount of biomass present and its distribution among species and species groups, or examine the phylogeny of the organisms living in the region and analyse the relationships between the different species.
- > In the ocean, diversity can be found at all levels of biological organization - from genetic diversity to ecosystems. Importantly, all levels are interconnected and facilitate the range of services provided by marine life.
Species-rich ecosystems are more resilient
Marine habitats displaying high species richness as well as high functional and phylogenetic diversity are generally more resilient than low-diversity ecosystems. When the biodiversity of a marine region declines, the productivity of the biological communities affected tends to decline as well. They are then no longer able to deliver all the services they usually provide.
Experts are currently observing such a decline in performance as a result of drastic losses of biodiversity in many marine regions. In some places, individual populations are in decline, while in others species and habitats are vanishing altogether. The drivers of these trends are man-made. Through climate change and the continued destruction and overexploitation of marine habitats, we are weakening marine ecosystems to the point where their survival and the many services they provide to us humans are no longer guaranteed.
Which organisms live in the sea, where and why?
Science has not yet been able to fully fathom why marine organisms occur in their ancestral habitats and not elsewhere, and which factors and mechanisms determine the distribution of species in the ocean. Scientists approach this question from two directions: Firstly, they collect and analyse data on the occurrence of species and habitats. They produce distribution maps and seek to recognize patterns and decipher the local conditions to which these patterns are attributable. At the same time, they look at the principles of how microbial, animal and plant life works and try to derive laws. However, whether or not these conceptual explanations do apply to all marine organisms must then be thoroughly tested.
The geographical distribution of animals in the ocean is best understood. Which species can settle where in the sea and find sufficient food is determined by the ambient temperature and availability of oxygen, the overall food supply in the habitat and its complexity. The latter refers in particular to parameters such as habitat structure and interactions between its inhabitants.
- > The subtle interplay between sea otters, sea urchins, brown algae (kelp) and sunflower sea stars (starfish) off the coast of California shows how species in a habitat influence each other and thus stabilize their ecosystem.
- The interplay of these key factors explains why a much higher number of species live in the light-filled coral reefs of the marginal tropics than in the surface waters of temperate latitudes or the polar seas. Many of the hotspots of marine biodiversity are therefore found in marine regions in which warm-water corals grow. At the same time, it is clear that there are exceptions to this rule – such as marine mammals, whose bodies are not dependent on the ocean temperature.
Other factors apply to deep-sea organisms, because they mainly live in marine regions with comparatively stable water temperatures. However, food is generally in short supply in very deep waters. The food factor therefore plays a much more existential role in the geographical distribution of deep-sea organisms than for organisms that inhabit productive, densely populated and generally shallow coastal waters. Gaining insights such as these, and others, into the geographical distribution of marine species, communities and ecosystems is essential for effective marine conservation. Knowing which organisms live where and what they need to survive enables us to identify climate-related changes in marine species abundance, among other things, and initiate adaptation measures wherever possible.
- > Species richness is generally higher in coastal areas than in the open ocean. Researchers have documented the highest levels of biodiversity in the Indo-Pacific Coral Triangle, the central and western Indian Ocean, the Red Sea and around the islands of the Southwest Pacific.
The value of the sea and its communities
Preserving life in the ocean means safeguarding our own natural resource base. More people are coming round to this view these days, but it is not yet shared by everyone. The reason is that people’s attitudes towards nature – and that includes the ocean – differ considerably. Our experiences of natural spaces, flora and fauna – and hence how we interact with them – also vary. For example, while some people see tiger sharks as monsters of the deep, others are working to protect these magnificent predators, recognizing that their predation of sea turtles and other marine herbivores allows seagrass beds to flourish in tropical and subtropical coastal regions and that the sharks thus play a key role in species interaction in the ocean.
The different perceptions of and interactions with nature give rise to disparate views of nature’s role as the foundation of people’s lives. This, in turn, results in a multitude of types of value attributed by people to nature.
- > People define their relationship with nature in terms of world-views, broad values, specific values and value indicators. This overview illustrates how these can differ between people, depending on their individual life frames.
- The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) has found that people often have one of four types of relationship to nature. They either live from nature, with nature or in nature, or see themselves as an intrinsic part of nature. To which of these types an individual belongs depends on that person’s world-view and on the knowledge systems used and the values and value indicators applied by that person. While all this sounds highly abstract on paper, it exerts huge practical relevance. After all, it is people’s very own relationship to nature and the oceans that determines their decisions on how to treat nature –at all levels, individual, political and economic.
IPBES concludes in its Methodological Assessment Report on the Diverse Values and Valuation of Nature that both political and economic decision-makers up to now only take account of a narrow set of largely market-based values of nature. This is why their decisions are frequently at the expense of nature and thus also at the cost of society and future generations. This is amplified by the circumstance that, in the course of advancing industrialization and urbanization, people are losing direct contact to the natural environment. The result is a disconnection from nature, in tandem with a severe loss of knowledge about the species diversity, the roles and the needs of natural biotic communities on land and in the oceans.
To halt species extinction and bolster the integrity of the natural environment, it will be essential that decision-makers at all levels, in the private sector and in public policy alike, shed past convictions and develop a new awareness of nature. Neglected values and local and indigenous knowledge need to be given consideration in decisions, and the vital role of healthy natural spaces needs to be communicated across all sectors of society. For the fact is: people will only protect and preserve what they know and understand.
Pressure from all sides
Just like us humans, marine organisms need a safe natural resource base on which they can draw for their healthy growth and reproduction. This primarily includes an intact, unpolluted habitat, ambient temperatures within their specific comfort zone, and sufficient food. However, none of these cornerstones of marine life are considered to be secure today. The direct and indirect interventions of human societies in the global ocean are too far-reaching and severe.
The principal direct drivers of the decline in marine biodiversity are the extraction of raw materials and organisms, changes in the use of coastal areas and oceans, climate change and its consequences for marine life, coastal and marine pollution, and the migration or introduction of invasive species. Indirect impacts are caused by factors such as human population growth, demographic shifts (e.g. urbanization and migration) and socio-cultural, economic, technological and political developments. These factors influence the decisions we make as societies, which ultimately affect nature and marine life. The overexploitation of marine ecosystems in European waters began as early as the Middle Ages, driven by the growing commercialization of goods, raw materials and marine ecosystem services. This continued in other marine regions of the world in colonial times. The present development trajectory can be termed as the industrialization of marine resource use and exploitation.
Its extent has increased rapidly since the 1950s, resulting in the damage, destruction or disappearance of many original marine ecosystems and a decline in the population numbers of particular animal populations by more than half since 1970. The loss of marine species diversity is now so severe that a global mass extinction can no longer be categorically ruled out.
It is also a fact that our demands on the sea and its biological communities continue to increase, despite all the species and habitat losses in the ocean. New or drastically intensifying forms of utilization include energy generation at sea, shipping traffic, and fish farming and algae cultivation in aquaculture installations. Those pressures are compounded by mounting marine pollution by waste, microplastics and other pollutants, the impacts making themselves felt in the very last nooks and crannies of the oceans.
- > The three ecosystem categories of the Living Planet Index reveal a dramatic decrease in the number of wild animal populations. The index covers 1816 marine species, 2519 terrestrial species and 1472 freshwater species inhabiting lakes, streams, rivers and ponds.
- Rising mercury levels in Arctic mammals are a vivid example of the long-term effects of marine pollutants. Despite declining mercury emissions in recent times, polar bears, toothed whales and other Arctic Ocean predators are currently exposed to increasing concentrations of this toxic heavy metal. In the Arctic, mercury concentrations are now 20 to 30 times higher than before industrialization. A study published by Danish scientists in June 2025 explains why: ocean currents are transporting legacy mercury pollution from distant regions like China to the Arctic, where it accumulates in animals and ecosystems. And because ocean currents can take up to 150 years to transport the once carelessly discarded mercury from Asia to Greenland, Arctic mercury levels are still rising instead of falling.
The consequences of climate change for marine life are a significant source of uncertainty. Not only are they driving thousands of species to leave their traditional ranges, tearing apart food webs and bringing biological processes to a standstill, they are also weakening the health and resilience of many marine organisms. Weakened or stressed organisms usually lack the energy to withstand further disturbances, so the consequences of climate change exacerbate the damage caused by other stressors. Experts speak of a cascade effect, which occurs when several disturbance factors impact in the same place at the same time, reinforcing each other’s effects.
However, there is one piece of good news: selected marine organisms and biological communities in some marine regions are now being systematically monitored, with their condition being regularly assessed by means of a number of different biodiversity indicators. This enables experts to determine whether or not measures to reduce human-induced pressures are effective and whether or not marine life may slowly be recovering.
- > Global shipping is a major cause of the immigration and introduction of non-indigenous species. This fact is highlighted in this graph, which shows the pathways through which newly discovered non-indigenous species in marine habitats and onshore waters were found to have arrived.
Non-indigenous species: Blessing and curse
An important driver of marine species turnover is the immigration and spread of non-indigenous species. These are organisms that have either been introduced into an ecosystem by humans or have been able to migrate on their own after humans removed barriers to their spread.
Non-indigenous species can migrate, for example, when the construction of a canal connects two marine areas that were previously separated. Species migrations also occur when climate change warms the ocean and warm-blooded species find suitable conditions in previously cold areas. In contrast, researchers speak of alien species introductions when organisms are brought into new habitats by ships, when they are deliberately released by humans, or when they colonize new areas because they are kept in cages or net bags for food production and manage to escape - whether through accidents, storm damage or the release of larvae.
Non-indigenous species that spread into a habitat and disrupt the normal interactions of native animals, plants and microorganisms are called invasive species. Such adverse effects occur, for example, when newcomers increase predation pressure on keystone species, displace native species or introduce diseases to which local marine life is vulnerable.
- > Researchers have been able to detect many more invasive species on land than in the oceans. However, the number of introduced marine organisms has also been increasing. This is due in part to an increased likelihood of new introductions. At the same time, new monitoring programmes mean that new arrivals are more likely to be detected.
![fig. 5.8 © after IPBES (2023). Thematic Assessment Report on Invasive Alien Species and their Control of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. [H. E. Roy, A. Pauchard, P. Stoett, T. Renard Truong (eds.)]. IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. doi:10.5281/zenodo.7430682, Figure SPM 4](https://worldoceanreview.com/en/files/2026/01/wor9_k5a_abb_5-8_b950_en-500x286.jpg "fig. 5.8 © after IPBES (2023). Thematic Assessment Report on Invasive Alien Species and their Control of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. [H. E. Roy, A. Pauchard, P. Stoett, T. Renard Truong (eds.)]. IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. doi:10.5281/zenodo.7430682, Figure SPM 4")
![fig. 5.8 © after IPBES (2023). Thematic Assessment Report on Invasive Alien Species and their Control of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. [H. E. Roy, A. Pauchard, P. Stoett, T. Renard Truong (eds.)]. IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. doi:10.5281/zenodo.7430682, Figure SPM 4](https://worldoceanreview.com/en/files/2026/01/wor9_k5a_abb_5-8_b950_en.jpg "fig. 5.8 © after IPBES (2023). Thematic Assessment Report on Invasive Alien Species and their Control of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. [H. E. Roy, A. Pauchard, P. Stoett, T. Renard Truong (eds.)]. IPBES secretariat, Bonn, Germany. doi:10.5281/zenodo.7430682, Figure SPM 4")
- There are several examples of marine invasive species. However, their numbers are much smaller than on land because marine habitats are more open at their edges. When newcomers outcompete long-established marine species, the latter are more likely to migrate or retreat into niches than many species inhabiting terrestrial habitats, such as forests or meadows. Nevertheless, scientists fear that globalisation may one day cause marine biological communities to become too similar worldwide, with the overall result that global biodiversity declines. Whether this will actually come to pass is a matter of debate, even among experts.
In species-poor marine areas such as the Wadden Sea in the south-eastern North Sea, the more than 100 known non-indigenous species have so far not displaced any of the native species. In fact, some of the invaders have actually strengthened local ecosystems. For example, the colonization of blue mussel beds in the Wadden Sea by introduced Pacific oysters has made the mixed reefs more resilient. When storms whip across the North Sea, the oyster-mussel beds tend to suffer less damage than beds formed by blue mussels alone.
Researchers have also been able to document examples in which non-indigenous species have replaced established species in their function. While this has indeed changed the species composition in the ecosystems concerned, the key aspect is that their range of functions has remained the same.
Nevertheless, everything possible should be done to prevent the spread of non-indigenous species, as it is also clear that many of the long-term consequences of human-induced species migrations are not yet fully understood. While intensive and, in many places, systematic research is now under way, it is often unclear which species have been present in the area under investigation for what length of time and whether that time span is long enough for them to be considered “native”. Moreover, it is still too rarely possible to compare the results of observations made in different regions.
A safety net for ocean life
Marine conservation works. This is evident from the trajectory of numerous marine species and habitats that were almost eradicated or suffered extensive human-induced degradation but are now recovering thanks to conservation measures. Indeed, according to experts, the resilience and recovery potential of marine ecosystems are so high that humankind may succeed in largely restoring the currently severely weakened marine habitats by 2050.
For a successful recovery, a mix of proven marine conservation measures, innovative and participatory approaches to marine management and effective climate policies is required. Other prerequisites are adequate funding, multidisciplinary research expertise, clear policy frameworks and broad support at all levels of our society and across multiple countries.
Experts are talking about a global partnership to rebuild marine life. This must be initiated and addressed immediately if the ambitious goal – healthy marine habitats by 2050 – is to be achieved. Marine conservation measures previously aimed primarily to mitigate or entirely prevent the immediate risks to threatened species and habitats. This was achieved by strictly regulating or prohibiting the hunting of certain species, substituting sustainable for destructive fishing methods, and combating specific sources of marine pollution, for example. Communities also began to restore weakened or degraded coastal and marine ecosystems and protect them more effectively.
- > How quickly do marine species recover from harmful impacts or events? That depends on their reproductive cycle. Oysters reproduce rapidly, but it takes 20 to 40 years for a few individual seals (pinnipeds) to develop into a colony.
- The successes that these measures achieved certainly stand up to scrutiny. Overall, however, the out-comes by no means suffice to preserve marine species abundance and biodiversity. At a time of dramatic climate change and species turnover, coordinated and dynamic marine management is needed, with alignment of its individual elements and with all groups impacted by the potential measures involved in its planning.
Indigenous knowledge has a role to play in ensuring the success of this marine management approach, along with a recognition that some sea areas will be intensively used in future. Their total area is likely to be smaller than at present because more protected areas are to be designated in future years. However, it will also be crucial to utilize the ocean outside the protected areas in a way which inflicts minimal or zero damage on the marine environment.
If this transformation is successful, ecosystems – even in intensively used marine regions – can recover and, over the long term, provide the multiple services that we have come to expect and rely on. The requisite knowledge is available. Our task now is to set the right priorities and take action.
- > On the online platform protected planet.net, the IUCN and UNEP publish a regularly updated map showing all the world’s protected areas, both terrestrial and marine, as well as areas where nature conservation should be achieved as a secondary outcome (OECMs).
Marine protected areas: All too often ineffective
Marine protected areas (MPAs) are widely regarded as a key instrument in combating overexploitation of the oceans and associated species extinction. They are established in order to protect marine organisms and habitats from human impacts by prohibiting or regulating certain activities. Their number has increased significantly in recent years. However, MPAs’ conservation objectives and management strategies vary considerably. One protected area is not like another. This makes it difficult to say for sure what percentage of the ocean is indeed protected effectively.
Consistently protecting marine regions helps to preserve local species and habitats. Yet the benefits of protected areas beyond their boundaries are not always scientifically proven, often due to a failure to implement planned conservation measures (paper parks).
Migratory species benefit from protected zones mainly when there is large-scale connectivity between these areas and they are located in regions where marine organisms breed or rear their young. Meeting the needs of all the inhabitants of a protected area simultaneously is challenging due to the often diverse behavioural patterns of the various species.
- > Site proposals that are approved by the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the Convention on Biological Diversity are immediately recognized as EBSAs and are added to the official EBSA map. However, this does not confer protected status.
- Protected areas address some of the challenges facing the marine environment, such as the risks to and destruction of local biocoenoses by overfishing, overextraction of resources, or mass tourism. However, they do not guard against large-scale pollution (e.g. microplastics) or climate change impacts. They are, therefore, just one of many tools available to combat the climate and biodiversity crisis facing the oceans.
As more protected areas are designated, conflicts of interests increase – especially in areas with previously intensive human use, such as fishing. When planning a protected area, it is therefore absolutely vital that the interests of all user groups are genuinely considered. The prospects of success increase if protected areas are planned, implemented and monitored inclusively and transparently and user groups are offered alternative income sources.
- In order to assess a protected area’s trajectory and performance, scientific studies are required, which must be conducted regularly over extended periods. This research should aim to determine whether the original conservation objectives are being achieved, whether the granting of protected status has a positive effect on ecosystems, and which species benefit from the protected area.
Methods that enable early identification and assessment of the benefits and disadvantages of protected status for people, the ocean and society should also be utilized more frequently. These forecasts can help encourage the diverse user groups to champion the area’s protected status.
When planning, implementing and evaluating protected areas, the impacts of climate change on marine life will need to be given more consideration. New, flexible protected areas that are closely monitored and can be adapted and shifted in tandem with climate-induced species migration are required. Flexible buffers, corridors and protected stepping stones are essential to enable marine organisms to migrate into climatically suitable zones.
- > In the face of ocean warming, some marine species are shifting polewards or into deeper waters. To ensure that these species continue to be safeguarded, protected areas must move with them. This can be achieved if dynamic and flexible areas, stepping stones and corridors are factored into planning from the outset.
Cooperation across all borders and levels
The ocean has no national or institutional boundaries. This presents the international community with at least two major challenges in marine management and biodiversity conservation. Firstly, stakeholders across all governance levels must collaborate on all topics of relevance to the ocean and coordinate their plans for its sustainable use. Secondly, it is essential to develop solutions that strengthen biocoenoses locally or regionally without causing harm elsewhere in the ocean. Ideally, local measures such as sustainable fisheries or restoration of degraded seagrass beds and salt marshes will promote the health of all or much of the ocean.
Humankind, however, is still a long way from realizing this ideal of integrated ocean governance that is aligned with marine ecosystems’ needs. At present, ocean issues at all levels are dealt with by multiple stakeholders and institutions which, in turn, are governed by a diverse array of agreements and legislation, depending on the topic.
This fragmented system of ocean governance causes conflicts of interests and inefficiency. Moreover, it limits our scope and capacities to mitigate the mutually reinforcing effects of four environmental crises: marine overexploitation, climate change, species extinction and ocean pollution. “We are not facing a crisis of knowledge but a crisis of willingness and implementation,” said Razan Al Mubarak, President of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), at the Third United Nations Ocean Conference, summing up the weaknesses of ocean governance.
New and, above all, holistic thinking about marine conservation and management is therefore required. It is essential to focus strategically on the preservation, protection and recovery of ocean life and deprioritize short-term economic interests that harm the ocean’s biocoenoses.
Will the new UN High Seas Treaty be a turning point?
Currently, there are high hopes of the new UN High Seas Treaty (BBNJ), which enters into force at 17 January 2026. It regulates the criteria for designating marine protected areas in the high seas and obliges regional fisheries management organizations to cooperate more intensively with other ocean governance stakeholders.
It also states that every project in international waters must undergo a prior environmental impact assessment. It includes provisions on transnational knowledge and technology transfer and establishes fair benefit-sharing and participation for all as a guiding principle, including the notion that all states should share in the monetary and non-monetary benefits from the utilization of marine genetic resources and, accordingly, in any economic gains of such utilization.
To halt the decline of marine biodiversity, a radical transformation of ocean governance is required. Which specific steps can initiate this process? It’s difficult to say. However, experts do have a clear idea of the general framework needed for future national and international marine policymaking aimed at preserving and protecting ocean life effectively. It is essential to think holistically about the needs of human communities and ocean life, to share knowledge and data, embrace collective and transparent decision-making, provide adequate funding for innovations and monitoring systems, and act with foresight to optimally mitigate the mutually reinforcing impacts of climate change and other environmental crises on ocean life.
Ocean life is a vital natural resource base for humankind. Investing in its conservation and protection is not an act of charity. Summed up in the words of one of the participants at the Third United Nations Ocean Conference, it is “the smartest and most cost-effective investment that we as a society can make for the sake of our climate, our food supply, our security, our health, and our own and our children’s future”. Let’s make a start!