On 29 June 2024, the INRAE-Cirad-Ifremer-IRD Ethics in Common Committee published a Guidance on the exploration, exploitation and preservation of pristine and minimally anthropised environments, based on the case of the deep seabed. It highlights the need to bring together all the players concerned, for each deep-sea research programme, from research institutes to industry, including the general public, in order to define together the "stakes for knowledge" faced by each of them. The Committee underlines the importance of creating a robust legal status to protect these environments.

Deep-sea exploration raises a fundamental question about the stakes for knowledge. This Guidance stresses the importance of distinguishing between the intrinsic value of knowledge and the consequences of acquiring it, and of encouraging the parties involved in a deep-sea research project to decide together whether or not it is worth continuing. The Committee's deliberations on this issue highlighted the limitations of the traditional benefit/risk approach.

"The benefit/risk approach simply develops a culture of impact, i.e., asking what impact research has on the environment. However, it does not take into account all the issues involved in exploiting the seabed", says Bernadette Bensaude Vincent, former vice-president of the Ethics in Common committee.

The Committee has therefore developed the notion of "stakes for knowledge", which are borne by each of the players (research organisations, instrument manufacturers, financial backers, citizens, industry, etc.) involved in or affected by research. These stakes can be many and varied, depending on the stakeholder concerned. Do we want to improve our understanding of how the ocean works in order to protect it, to use it, to exploit it, to legislate it...? The Committee therefore recommends that these stakes should be expressed in a transparent manner, and that a comprehensive list be drawn up before any research programme is initiated and during its life-span.

The Committee encourages research institutes to work together to establish a common scale of values in order to define the priorities that should guide decisions in research, while ensuring that the preservation of the Earth's long-term habitability, the conservation of biodiversity, geodiversity and human health remain absolute priorities.

A strict legal status to prevent misuse

The Committee strongly underlines the critical need for a robust legal status for the preservation of the deep seabed. The Committee's discussions highlighted the limitations of the "common heritage of mankind" status, which does not generate any binding legal obligations, thus limiting its effectiveness in terms of protection. Several countries have granted "legal personality" status to natural entities such as rivers and forests so that they enjoy rights and can be represented in the same way as humans. Such an approach would lay the cornerstone for the deep seabed to be considered other than just an exploitable resource and to recognise its intrinsic and moral value. 

"A century ago, no one questioned the legal status of Mount Everest, and today parties of mountaineers pay an exorbitant price to climb to the summit, leaving tonnes of waste in their wake. The value of financial interests has taken precedence over the intrinsic value of preserving Everest. We now have the opportunity to do better for the deep seabed, but to do so we need to set strict legal limits as of now", says Michel Badré, former chairman of the Ethics in Common committee.

_{Illustration: Ifremer (1998). PICO campaign - Hydrothermal site. Ifremer. https://image.ifremer.fr/data/00805/91659/ | Credit: Ifremer}