Why 2026 will decide who governs the seabed

After the International Seabed Authority’s (ISA’s) session concluded on the 19 March 2026 without agreement on the Mining Code, questions are growing over whether the current multilateral framework can keep pace with the changing deep-sea mining environment. The Code remains unfinished with over 30 countries now calling for a moratorium or pause on its adoption.

The growing US alternative

Yet at the same time the US, which is not part of the ISA, is moving forward at pace with its own initiatives. In January 2026, the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) accelerated and simplified the process for applying for deep-sea mining licenses, making permitting faster and more predictable compared to the ISA.

It has also confirmed that its first application, from The Metals Company (TMC, is in substantial compliance with the legal requirements. TMC’s project covers a~65 000 km² exploration and commercial recovery area in the international waters of the Clarion Clipperton Zone (CCZ) in the Pacific Ocean.

This raises the possibility of the US’s parallel licensing pipeline gaining traction while the ISA remains deadlocked.

Putting pressure on the ISA to shape future events

All of this means that the ISA is confronting a stark reality. If it cannot complete the Mining Code in 2026, its role as the central rule-maker for deep-sea mining may begin to unravel. This makes the ISA summer session (beginning on 29 June) a stress test, not just another negotiation round. It must produce visible and meaningful progress toward adoption of the Mining Code. If not, its credibility, already under pressure, could move into open crisis. More importantly, continued paralysis would accelerate fragmentation of deep-sea governance, as states and companies increasingly shift toward parallel national licensing pathways rather than waiting for an incomplete multilateral framework.

The ISA’s Autumn meeting, provisionally scheduled for 28 October–6 November, now increasingly looking like the ultimate deadline. Demonstrating this, by then, TMC may already be in a position to secure a mining license from NOAA.

Market momentum is accelerating without the ISA

With the new NOAA rules in place, the alternative to ISA-led governance is no longer theoretical. It is operational.

Industry and capital markets agree. Not only has the NOAA seen further seabed mining exploration license applications, from AMR and SeaX, but the commercial ecosystem around deep-sea mining is also advancing quickly. For example:

• TMC has announced development of a processing and refining hub, with commercial production targeted for early 2028.
• Investors are increasingly positive about the US approach. On 8 April, TMC announced the direct listing of The Metals Royalty Company (TMCR), which holds a 2 percent royalty on TMC’s NORI polymetallic nodule project, widely seen as the most advanced deep-sea mining asset.
• At the same time, American Ocean Minerals Corp announced an all-stock reverse merger with Odyssey Marine Exploration. Chaired by a former Rio Tinto CEO, the combined entity is valued at roughly US$1 billion and would create one of the largest deep-sea mineral portfolios in the sector.

Will the national or multilateral approach prevail?

The core issue is no longer whether deep-sea mining will move forward. It is increasingly about under whose authority, under which rules, and on what timeline. If the ISA can complete the Mining Code in 2026, it still has a chance to retain control over governance. If it cannot, it risks ceding practical leadership to faster national regimes, with the United States emerging as the most credible alternative. That makes 2026 not just another negotiating year, but the time when the future centre of gravity of seabed governance may be decided.

Read the article online at: https://www.globalminingreview.com/special-reports/22042026/why-2026-will-decide-who-governs-the-seabed/