Beyond royalties: a multidimensional equity framework for deep-seabed mining under the common heritage of humankind

Deep in the ocean, far beyond the borders of any single country, lies a vast stretch of seabed known as the Area. This region holds valuable minerals, but under international law, these resources do not belong to the nation that happens to be closest to them. Instead, they are the common heritage of all humankind. This means that if anyone ever extracts these minerals, the profits and benefits must be shared fairly among every person on Earth, not just the companies doing the digging or the governments that sponsor them. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea established this idea, creating a special organization called the International Seabed Authority to act as the steward for everyone. For years, the debate has focused on a simple question: how much money should mining companies pay, and how should that cash be divided up among nations? But this narrow focus misses a deeper problem. Even if the money is collected, there is no guarantee it will actually become a benefit for people. It could get lost in administrative costs, used to pay for environmental damage, or delivered through systems that are too weak to reach the intended recipients.

A new study by Wanping Zeng at Shanghai Maritime University looks beyond the simple math of royalties to ask a more fundamental question: how do we turn the value of these deep-sea resources into a genuine, fair benefit for humanity? The researcher examined twenty-four legal documents, policy drafts, and financial reports from the International Seabed Authority, covering work done between 2018 and mid-2026. The analysis reveals that the current system is broken in a specific way. The rules for collecting money are being written in one room, while the rules for spending it are being discussed in another, with no clear connection between the two. The study finds that the system treats environmental costs and administrative fees as if they were the same kind of money as the profits meant for the public. It also shows that while there is a lot of talk about who gets a share, there is very little on how to ensure that the people who are supposed to receive it can actually influence the decisions or verify that the help arrived.

The core finding of the paper is that fairness is not just a formula applied after the money arrives; it is a quality that must be built into every single step of the process, from the moment a company starts digging to the moment the benefits reach a community. The author proposes a six-stage chain to fix this. First, the value of the resource must be captured through payments. Second, these payments must be sorted into different legal buckets so that money meant for environmental repair is never mixed with money meant for public sharing. Third, the money for fixing environmental harm must be ring-fenced, meaning it is strictly protected and cannot be used for anything else. Fourth, the remaining money for the public must be divided using a system that guarantees a small, basic share for everyone, while also giving extra weight to nations that are poorer or more vulnerable. Fifth, benefits must be delivered not just as cash, but also as training, technology, and data, provided these are real additions and not just things the companies were already required to do. Finally, the entire process must be open to public scrutiny, with clear records showing exactly where every dollar went and whether it actually helped people.

The study also tests this new framework against three major real-world challenges. First, it looks at the International Seabed Authority's own recent meetings, where leaders admitted they still do not have a complete set of rules for sharing benefits, even as they prepare to allow mining to begin. The paper argues that mining should not start until these rules are in place. Second, it considers the United States, which is moving to create its own fast-track system for licensing deep-sea mining outside of the international authority. The analysis warns that if mining happens outside the global system, the chain of fairness breaks completely, and the common heritage of humanity is lost to unilateral control. Third, it compares the situation to a new treaty on marine biodiversity, which successfully separates money from non-monetary benefits and links them to capacity building. This shows that a better system is possible, but it requires careful design rather than just copying one part of the solution.

Ultimately, the paper concludes that the idea of the common heritage is not just about dividing up a pot of gold. It is about creating a trustworthy system where the value of the deep ocean is converted into real, lasting improvements for people. If the rules allow environmental costs to be counted as benefits, or if the money disappears into bureaucracy, then the principle of sharing is empty. The research suggests that without a complete, transparent, and accountable process that connects the collection of value to its delivery, the deep seabed will remain a resource that is legally owned by everyone but practically controlled by a few. The path forward requires building a bridge between the technical rules of mining and the human need for justice, ensuring that the wealth of the deep ocean serves the whole world, not just the bottom line of a corporation.