KINGSTON, Jamaica. Walk down Port Royal Street in downtown Kingston and you pass the headquarters of the largest landlord on earth. It owns no houses, collects no rent and has never sold a single acre. Yet the International Seabed Authority, at 14 to 20 Port Royal Street, administers the mineral resources of a stretch of the planet larger than all the dry land on Earth combined.
The Authority speaks for what international law calls “the Area”: the seabed beyond any country’s jurisdiction. By the Authority’s own figures it covers 181.63 million square kilometres, about 54 per cent of the world’s oceans and more than the land surface of every continent put together. That is roughly 16,500 times the size of Jamaica.
Under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, opened for signature at Montego Bay, nobody may own this ground. Its minerals belong, in the treaty’s words, to “mankind as a whole”. But 31 exploration contracts already carve out about 1.4 million square kilometres, one of them is sponsored by Jamaica itself, and an American company is now asking Washington, not Kingston, for permission to start mining. The question of who owns the ocean floor has never been more practical.
A Landlord Born in Montego Bay
The idea began with a speech. On 1 November 1967 Arvid Pardo, Malta’s ambassador to the United Nations, asked the General Assembly to treat the deep seabed not as a frontier to be claimed but as a commons belonging equally to every nation and every future generation. Fifteen years later that principle, “the common heritage of mankind”, was written into the Law of the Sea.
Jamaica hosted the moment. On 10 December 1982 the convention was opened for signature in Montego Bay and drew 119 signatures on the first day, then the largest number ever attached to a treaty on its opening. It entered into force on 16 November 1994, and the Authority it created set up home in Kingston. Today it has 172 members, 171 states and the European Union. In 2025 its Assembly proclaimed 1 November the International Day of the Deep Seabed, on a proposal from Fiji, Jamaica, Malta and Singapore.
The rules are blunt. Article 137 of the convention forbids any state from claiming sovereignty over the Area, and any state, company or person from appropriating any part of it or its resources. Companies may explore only under a contract with the Authority, and only if a member state sponsors them and accepts a legal duty to control them.
Who Holds the Claims
The Authority’s registers list 31 exploration contracts: 19 for polymetallic nodules, the potato sized lumps of manganese, nickel, copper and cobalt that litter the abyssal plain; eight for polymetallic sulphides around hydrothermal vents; and four for cobalt rich crusts on underwater mountains. Each runs for 15 years and can be extended in five year steps.
China leads, with five contracts held by three state linked bodies: the China Ocean Mineral Resources Research and Development Association, China Minmetals and Beijing Pioneer Hi Tech. Russia, South Korea and India hold three each. India gained its third in September 2025, a sulphide licence on the Indian Ocean ridge running to 2040. Japan, France, Germany and the United Kingdom hold two apiece. The rest belong to single holders: Belgium and Poland, a string of small island states (Nauru, Tonga, Kiribati, the Cook Islands, Singapore and Jamaica), and a six nation consortium of Bulgaria, Cuba, Czechia, Poland, Russia and Slovakia.
| Rank | Sponsor | Contracts | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | China | 5 | 3 nodule, 1 sulphide, 1 crust |
| 2 | Russia | 3 | 1 nodule, 1 sulphide, 1 crust |
| 2 | South Korea | 3 | 1 of each type |
| 2 | India | 3 | 1 nodule, 2 sulphide |
| 5 | France | 2 | 1 nodule, 1 sulphide |
| 5 | Germany | 2 | 1 nodule, 1 sulphide |
| 5 | Japan | 2 | 1 nodule, 1 crust |
| 5 | United Kingdom | 2 | 2 nodule |
| 9 | Poland | 1 | 1 sulphide, plus consortium share |
| 9 | Six nation consortium | 1 | 1 nodule |
| 9 | Belgium | 1 | 1 nodule |
| 9 | Nauru | 1 | 1 nodule |
| 9 | Tonga | 1 | 1 nodule |
| 9 | Kiribati | 1 | 1 nodule |
| 9 | Singapore | 1 | 1 nodule |
| 9 | Cook Islands | 1 | 1 nodule |
| 9 | Jamaica | 1 | 1 nodule |
Since 2001 contractors have funded 255 research cruises and, the Authority says, invested more than US$2 billion in exploration. Most of it went to one place: the Clarion Clipperton Zone, a stretch of the Pacific between Hawaii and Mexico that hosts 17 of the 31 contracts.
The Most Valuable Mud on Earth
The Clarion Clipperton Zone is the prize. The United States Geological Survey puts its nodule field at about 21.1 billion dry tonnes, the largest known on the planet, lying four to six kilometres down.
The nodule fields are also home to life that is barely catalogued. A 2023 checklist published in the journal Current Biology recorded 5,578 animal species from the zone. Global mapping is not much further ahead: the Nippon Foundation and GEBCO Seabed 2030 project reported in April 2026 that only 28.7 per cent of the world’s seafloor has been mapped to modern standards.
To protect some of it before any mining begins, the Authority has set aside 13 Areas of Particular Environmental Interest in the zone, covering about 1.97 million square kilometres. That protected ground is larger than all the exploration contracts combined.
Jamaica Takes a Stake
For a quarter of a century Jamaica was the landlord’s host and nothing more. That changed on 30 January 2019, when the Government announced that Cabinet had agreed that Jamaica would sponsor a locally incorporated subsidiary of Blue Minerals Ltd, Blue Minerals Jamaica Limited, in an application for nodule exploration. The post Cabinet report described a “100% Jamaican company that would own all mineral rights, all geological data and all revenue” and said the exercise would cost the Government nothing.
The application reached the Authority on 4 June 2020. The contract was signed on 16 March 2021 and took effect on 4 April 2021. It runs to 3 April 2036 and covers 74,916 square kilometres in four blocks of the Clarion Clipperton Zone, almost seven times the size of Jamaica. Jamaica became the second Caribbean country and the sixth small island developing state to sponsor a seabed contractor. At the signing, Jamaica’s then Permanent Representative, Ambassador Alison Stone Roofe, said the Government looked forward to the venture’s “contribution to the economic growth and development of Jamaica”.
The ground did not come from nowhere. It was carved from “reserved areas”, parcels that richer applicants must hand over when they apply and that are held for developing countries. Jamaica’s blocks were contributed by UK Seabed Resources, the Government of South Korea and the six nation Interoceanmetal consortium. The reserved area system is the mechanism the convention built so that small states could share the common heritage. Jamaica is one of the few that has used it.
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1 Nov 1967 | Arvid Pardo proposes the seabed as a common heritage |
| 10 Dec 1982 | Law of the Sea opens for signature at Montego Bay |
| 16 Nov 1994 | Convention in force; Authority established in Kingston |
| 30 Jan 2019 | Cabinet decision to sponsor Blue Minerals Jamaica announced |
| 4 Jun 2020 | Application received by the Authority |
| 4 Apr 2021 | 15 year exploration contract takes effect |
| Nov 2024 | Senate questions over the company’s ownership |
| 3 Apr 2036 | Contract due to expire unless extended |
Who Really Owns Blue Minerals Jamaica?
The company’s public filings with the Authority list Allseas Group, the Swiss based offshore engineering firm, as the institution running its training programme, and describe Allseas as a strategic partner on mining technology. Its director at the signing was Peter H. Jantzen. A peer reviewed study of seabed mining ownership published in 2025 traced the company’s shares from a single local holder to a Swiss company, Jantzen and Spinelli Capital Power, and then in January 2021 to Blue Minerals Switzerland, which the study, citing the Environmental Justice Foundation, describes as appearing to be a holding company linked to Allseas. It also reports that three Allseas directors joined the Jamaican company’s board in December 2020.
The question reached Parliament. In the Senate in November 2024, Opposition senators questioned the Government on the sponsorship: Sophia Fraser Binns tabled the questions, Lambert Brown asked how the company was chosen and whether Jamaica would benefit, and Peter Bunting pressed on who ultimately owned it. Mr Bunting told the Senate that Companies Office records still showed a single share held by Dawkins Brown, six years after incorporation, although the shares had been transferred. Deputy Senate President Charles Sinclair cautioned that the transfer may have happened that year and not yet reached the register, and the Government said it would inquire about updating the records. Senator Kamina Johnson Smith, Leader of Government Business, replied that the Government was not aware of any breach of the sponsorship agreement, that its terms were confidential as is standard, that Jamaica had no financial obligations under it and that “as a sponsoring state, Jamaica is not liable for the actions of the contractor”. She said there would be potential financial benefits if mining took place, and that Jamaica would support exploitation only under comprehensive regulation and strong environmental protection.
Both sides have a case. Supporters argue that sponsorship gives a small country a seat among seabed powers at no cost to taxpayers. Critics argue that a sponsor must exercise “effective control” over its contractor, and that the 2011 advisory opinion of the Seabed Disputes Chamber shields a sponsor from liability only if it has taken all necessary and appropriate measures, including national law. Senator Johnson Smith said in 2024 that Jamaica had not yet promulgated a deep sea mining policy and that a Cabinet submission seeking drafting instructions for legislation was being finalised. The Authority’s Council is now negotiating an “effective control” standard that would apply directly to arrangements like this one.
The American Detour
The sharpest challenge to the Kingston landlord comes from a country that never joined. The United States has not ratified the Law of the Sea. In April 2025 President Trump signed Executive Order 14285 directing agencies to speed seabed mining permits under a 1980 American law, the Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act. In January 2026 the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration finalised a rule allowing a single combined application to explore and to mine.
The Metals Company, listed in New York, was first through the door. Its subsidiary TMC USA filed a combined application for about 65,000 square kilometres of the Clarion Clipperton Zone, which NOAA found fully compliant in April 2026. The public comment period, which closed on 19 October, drew more than 1,600 comments. In its quarterly update on 12 November 2026 the company said NOAA now expects to decide on certification by mid December, after earlier guidance of October. A separate exploration application covering about 122,000 square kilometres is under environmental review and is being challenged in a Hawaii federal court by the Conservation Council for Hawai’i and the Center for Biological Diversity. The company targets commissioning of its collection system with Allseas in the fourth quarter of 2027. It reported cash of US$79.3 million at the end of September.
The Authority’s position is that any mining in the Area without its authorisation would breach international law, and that the prohibition binds non members as customary law. The company argues that American law gives it a lawful route and that the Kingston process has run for more than a decade without a mining code. The United States, which says it is not bound by the treaty’s seabed chapter, told the Authority’s Council in July 2026 that its regime rests on strong environmental and transparency standards and that publishing an application is not an approval. At the same session the interim head of the Authority’s mining arm, the Enterprise, Eden Charles, warned that applications filed outside the treaty overlap areas reserved for the Enterprise and developing countries; delegations including the African Group put the overlap at roughly 80,000 square kilometres.
Showdown in Kingston
The dispute has already reached court. On 30 May 2026 two contractors linked to The Metals Company, Nauru Ocean Resources and Tonga Offshore Mining, filed the first contentious cases ever brought before the Seabed Disputes Chamber, challenging the Authority’s inquiry into whether they had breached their contracts. On 18 July the Chamber refused to halt the inquiry but ordered the Authority to follow due process and give the companies the information they need to respond.
Three days later the Council extended Nauru Ocean Resources’ exploration contract for five years, insisting the extension was “strictly without prejudice” to the inquiry. Members remain divided. By the close of the July session 46 states, about a quarter of the membership, backed a moratorium or precautionary pause on deep sea mining, among them France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Canada, Brazil and, in the Caribbean, Antigua and Barbuda and the Dominican Republic. China and others pressed for the mining code to be finished. Jamaica is not on the pause list. The Council ended July with no code adopted and asked for a roadmap.
Myth Check: More Metal Than All the Mines on Land?
The most repeated number in this debate is that the Clarion Clipperton nodules hold more nickel, cobalt and manganese than all the world’s land reserves. It is close to true and still misleading. The United States Geological Survey does find that tonnages of several critical metals in the nodules exceed global land based reserves. But a land “reserve” is metal proven to be economic to mine today, while the seabed figure counts everything lying on the bottom. The Authority itself cautions that its 21 billion tonne estimate is “total geological occurrence, not economically recoverable resources”. Copper is the exception: land reserves far exceed what the nodules hold.
A second claim, that nodules make “dark oxygen” on the sea floor, is also unsettled. The Authority describes it as an open question with divided scientific views.
Why There Is No Honest Price on the Seabed
No one can yet say what the Area is worth. Valuations quoted in investor material run into trillions of dollars, but they multiply estimated tonnages by today’s metal prices and ignore the cost of lifting rock from five kilometres down. The Authority calls such projections “speculative”. Contract sizes are published, but resource estimates inside most contract areas are confidential. And the payment regime that would decide how much reaches humankind, through royalties and a proposed Common Heritage Fund, is still being negotiated. One study presented to the Council in July estimated that in a peak year mining could cost land based producers in developing countries about US$1.9 billion, more than the Authority might earn. For now the honest ledger shows rights, not revenue.
The Race Inside National Waters
Not every seabed is common ground. Within 200 nautical miles of the coast, a country controls its own seabed. Japan retrieved rare earth rich mud from about 5,600 metres off Minamitorishima in February 2026 and plans a full scale test in February 2027 aiming for 350 tonnes a day. The Cook Islands estimates 6.7 billion wet tonnes of nodules in its waters and has pushed any decision on mining to at least 2032 by extending exploration. Norway went the other way: having opened about 281,000 square kilometres of Arctic seabed, its parliament agreed in December 2025, as part of a budget deal, to issue no licences for four years, until at least 2029.
Jamaica’s own maritime estate is large. The island became an archipelagic state under the Maritime Areas Act, and estimates of its exclusive economic zone range from about 181,000 to 235,000 square kilometres, between 16 and 21 times its land area, depending on the source. There is no known commercial mineral prospect in it, but the Pedro Bank alone covers roughly 8,000 square kilometres, close to three quarters the size of the mainland.
What This Means for Jamaica
For Jamaica the seabed question is unusually personal. The Authority is a Kingston employer and a reason diplomats fill Kingston hotels every March and July. Its budget for 2027 and 2028, approved in July, is US$30.7 million, about 16 per cent above the previous two years. The country’s name is on a claim almost seven times its own size. And Jamaica sits on both sides of the argument: host of the institution that insists on rules first, sponsor of a contractor whose partner is building the machinery to mine.
There are practical questions that Parliament has already begun to ask. Who ultimately owns Blue Minerals Jamaica, and is that reflected in the public register? What law will let Jamaica exercise the “effective control” the convention demands before any mining begins? What share of any royalties would reach Jamaica, and on what terms, given the sponsorship agreement is confidential? If the American route succeeds, does the reserved area system that gave Jamaica its claim survive?
Ground Nobody Can Own
Every investigation in this series has followed land to its owners: churches, families, the Crown, sovereign funds. The deep seabed is the one place where the law says the owner is everyone. Whether that promise holds will be decided, in large part, a short walk from the Kingston waterfront.
The largest piece of real estate on earth was never meant to have a landlord. The test now is whether the rules written in Montego Bay can outlast the race to the bottom of the sea.
Method: Figures on the Area, contracts, protected zones, membership and exploration spending come from the International Seabed Authority’s published registers, media briefing and session documents; contract counts by sponsor were compiled from its three contract registers. Blue Minerals Jamaica details come from the Authority’s public contract information, its 2021 press release and the 2019 post Cabinet report; Senate exchanges are as reported by The Gleaner in November 2024; ownership history is as reported in a 2025 peer reviewed study and has not been independently verified. US figures come from NOAA Federal Register notices and The Metals Company’s filings with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. Nodule tonnage is the USGS estimate. Jamaica’s exclusive economic zone is shown as a range because published estimates differ. Comparisons with Jamaica use a land area of 10,991 square kilometres; all ratios were calculated by Jamaica Homes News and are rounded. The overlap with reserved areas is an approximate figure given by delegations in Council debate.
Dean Jones is Director of Jamaica Homes Ltd and a Realtor.
Visit our YouTube Community ↗