The Deep-Ocean Stewardship Initiative (DOSI) is a global network of experts working at the intersection of science, technology, policy, law, and economics. DOSI provides critical guidance on ecosystem-based management of resource use in the deep ocean and develops strategies to protect the integrity of deep-ocean ecosystems, both within and beyond national jurisdictions.
About the Experts
Christine Gaebel
Christine Gaebel is an interdisciplinary researcher with a focus on the use of scientific information and knowledge in international biodiversity governance processes, including the new Agreement under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (the BBNJ Agreement). Christine Co-Leads the BBNJ Working Group for the Deep Ocean Stewardship Initiative (DOSI), where she works with a network of deep-ocean researchers to help connect science and scientists with policy and decision-makers. Through this role, she has engaged in various UN meetings and processes, including the BBNJ negotiations, meetings of the UN Regular Process (also known as the World Ocean Assessment), the UN Ocean Decade, and the UN Ocean Conference. She is currently undertaking a PhD at the University of Edinburgh and is a Research Associate with the Nippon Foundation – University of Edinburgh Ocean Voices Programme, where she researches science-society-policy interfaces in ocean governance.
Marina Garwood
Marina Garwood is a passionate marine scientist and educator with extensive experience at the crossroads of science, policy, and community engagement. With a background in international marine science, she is dedicated to advancing impactful solutions for responsible ocean use and climate resilience. As a Science Policy Advisor for the Deep Ocean Stewardship Initiative (DOSI), she coordinates projects supporting responsible ocean stewardship and guides collaborations between science, policy, and disciplines. Her role also involves engaging with international governing bodies like the United Nations, where she represents DOSI and the critical network they provide. Marina also works in deep-sea environmental impact assessments, providing guidance and working directly at the interface where science meets the community.
Interview with the Experts
Which are the key skills needed to influence decision makers, and how can young people gain and improve these skills at the beginning of their career?
Marina Garwood: The first and most important skill is being a good listener. Listen to identify the objectives, goals, and intentions of what decision-makers are saying, as this will help you understand where science can best support policy. It’s also important to approach the outcomes of decisions objectively. These decisions aren’t personal; they involve numerous competing intentions and goals that require compromise. Viewing feedback and outcomes objectively allows for a growth mindset and constructive reflection, which is critical in this field.
Christine Gaebel: I completely agree and would add a couple more points. One of the most essential skills when engaging at the science-policy interface or attempting to influence decision-making is preparation. Know your subject matter inside and out and understand what decision-makers are able to do. Many times, interventions are made that, while ambitious, are not realistic from a decision-making perspective. For example, during the Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction Agreement (BBNJ) negotiations, some interventions advocated for eliminating fishing entirely. While well-intentioned, it’s not practical given the reliance of many coastal communities on fishing for livelihoods and cultural heritage. To truly influence decision-making, you need to provide realistic and actionable advice. Another key point is the importance of passion. Early in my career, I focused on being purely professional, but I’ve learned that decision-makers value working with people who are genuinely passionate about their field. Passion shows your dedication and helps build authentic relationships, as many decision-makers are equally passionate about the issues they address.
What are the most important skills you believe young professionals should focus on developing to be successful in science-policy negotiations?
Marina Garwood: To address the question of developing skills for success in science policy negotiations, this ties into listening and being objective. One important aspect, building on Christine's answer, is finding balance. There are three key pillars that influence any form of policy: people, economics, and the environment. You need to determine what is realistic within those pillars, allowing communities to thrive while achieving compromises in international policy. Another way to develop skills for science policy negotiations is by participating in webinars and meetings. You learn by doing in these settings. Additionally, practicing negotiation in everyday situations can be helpful. For example, negotiating something simple, like choosing a bottle of wine with your partner, helps you develop those skills. Identifying such opportunities to practice allows you to enter professional spaces with confidence and prepared negotiation skills.
Do you think interdisciplinarity and multidisciplinarity is already widely recognized as positive by workplaces or employers, or do people still think in silos?
Christine Gaebel: Interdisciplinary research and working in interdisciplinary spaces are increasingly recognized as essential. As we face more complex transboundary issues, the policy space is beginning to understand that unique interdisciplinary approaches are necessary to drive action. Whether this has been successfully implemented in practice is another discussion. However, the recognition of its importance is becoming more apparent, particularly in ocean governance spaces. For example, in the BBNJ agreement, the need for multidisciplinary expertise is explicitly included in the convention text for the Scientific and Technical Body. The challenge now is figuring out how to make this work in practice. Different disciplines have distinct ways of working and thinking, and, as an academic community, we haven’t yet developed a truly effective way to bridge these differences for policymakers. Currently, we tend to bring multiple disciplines together to provide advice, but we may not be fully integrating these perspectives in how the advice itself is formed. There is still significant room to realize these ambitions in practice.
Marina Garwood: I completely agree. While there is recognition of the importance of interdisciplinary approaches, it’s not yet fully acted upon. It’s still uncommon—at least in my experience—to find people who genuinely work across both science and policy. In academia, many people tend to focus narrowly on their specific field. But at the international level, where there’s recognition of interconnectedness and the various components that make ecosystems and societies function, there’s a clear need for individuals who can see different perspectives and help connect these moving parts so everything runs smoothly. This is especially critical in adaptive management and addressing climate change, where decisions are multifaceted. One decision inevitably impacts multiple areas, often involving the three key pillars: people, economics, and the environment. It always comes back to balancing those three.
What advice would you give specifically for young people who don't have a natural science background but would like to start a blue career?
Marina Garwood: Start conversations and ask if you can join. My career took off when I was bold enough to say, "Hey, that sounds really interesting. Can I join that call or observe that field study?" You’d be surprised how often people say yes. You can learn so much by doing. Engaging in community initiatives and working directly in the environment allows you to gain knowledge in the physical space it occupies. The key is to get out there and try.
Christine Gaebel: Feel free to check out the DOSI website and join our Working Group if you're interested in BBNJ but don’t have a natural science background. Our group brings together people with diverse expertise—lawyers, social scientists, natural scientists—all engaging in scientific discussions and their connections to policy. This is a great way to gain hands-on experience, learn from scientists, and discover various activities you can get involved in through a global network. There's always a lot happening. We also have a weekly web newsletter, the Deep-Sea Round-Up, which includes numerous opportunities to participate in deep-sea scientific activities. Sign up, jump in, and you’ll learn by immersing yourself with people from natural science backgrounds.
Marina Garwood: One thing I really appreciate—and I’m so grateful to be part of DOSI’s network for—is the collaboration. Christine, who has been a significant mentor in my career, has taught me the value of collaboration over competition. Coming from a science background, where there’s often a push to publish the next paper before someone else, transitioning into a collaborative environment has been incredibly refreshing and productive. Collaboration truly is the way forward for people, science, and society.
What, according to you, are some of the most exciting developments right now in the field of ocean governance, particularly regarding conserving marine biodiversity?
Christine Gaebel: I’d like to touch on two different points. Of course, I’ll mention BBNJ because that’s where my focus is. It’s a massive achievement to get all those countries to agree on such a large agreement like the BBNJ agreement. Not only does it include sustainable use, but also conservation. Once it enters into force, we’ll start seeing proposals come in from all over the world. Some people are already preparing for this, especially regarding area-based management tools—Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in the deep sea, in areas beyond national jurisdiction. At the moment, it’s challenging to establish MPAs in these areas because of the lack of governance at that cross-sectoral, cross-boundary level. I believe this is one of the biggest advancements we’ve seen in international law of the sea. From a different perspective, the Ocean Decade is also significant. We’re almost halfway through the UN Ocean Decade, which is transformative. The decade sets out objectives that aren’t just about continuing old practices, but about finding new ways to undertake cooperative, collaborative, partnership-based scientific research on a global scale to benefit all people. This is an exciting advancement in ocean governance. I encourage everyone to look into it, explore opportunities to propose or join projects, and make the most of this decade, which is focused on marine science for people.
How could individuals interested in becoming involved in international bodies and UN processes make a start to really influence policymaking at the global level?
Marina Garwood: One way to get involved is through the UN’s various internship programs and opportunities. UNESCO’s site, in particular, lists a lot of them. This is a great way to get your foot in the door, whether it’s for volunteer or internship roles. Additionally, when working on specific projects, think not only about the goals and objectives of that project but also about what you want to achieve from it. One transformative experience in my career was conducting an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) gap analysis for deep-sea mining, with the goal of bridging my science knowledge into policy. I did the research, absorbed as much as I could, and then used that knowledge to speak about the policy surrounding it—something I had never done before. If you put in the effort to learn and understand a topic, there’s no one stopping you. You just need to find ways to connect what you’re working on to where you want to go. I used my dissertation as a bridge to gain real-world, hands-on experience with science and policy and met a lot of interesting people in that field along the way.
During the Preparatory Commission meetings for the BBNJ agreement, what were some of the key disagreements among the member states, and how were those addressed?
Christine Gaebel: I love the space where different states come together to discuss something like BBNJ. Each state brings its own perspectives, shaped by their values and culture, how they perceive the marine environment, and the level of conservation importance they attach to it. During the Preparatory Commission meetings, there were a couple of key disagreements. For example, one issue revolved around how much detail should be discussed in the PrepCom meetings versus leaving certain topics for later stages after the agreement had entered into force. Some participants wanted to dive deeply into the details and resolve everything upfront, while others took a more pragmatic approach, arguing that time constraints required focusing on the most critical issues first. Ultimately, the latter perspective prevailed. The most important issues that were explicitly outlined in the BBNJ agreement’s text as needing to be decided by the first Conference of the Parties (COP) will likely be the focus of these meetings. This is interesting because there were topics raised by states as important to consider before the first COP, for example around benefit sharing for marine genetic resources, so it will be interesting to see what will be included in the final programme of work.
What are the main hurdles that countries face in ratifying the BBNJ agreement? And how is DOSI working to support this process?
Marina Garwood: The main hurdles depend on the specific country, their political procedures, and the legislation or policies they need to navigate to ratify this treaty. It really comes down to the individual country and its circumstances, as well as the resources available to them. Capacity building, knowledge, and expertise are critical factors. Countries need to ensure they have the resources to support the agreement fully. For example, a Small Island Developing State will have vastly different resources compared to a more developed nation like the United States. There's a significant difference in what each country can contribute, so a balance needs to be struck to support all member states equitably. The goal is to ensure equity in the ratification process and, ultimately, to implement the Treaty with 60 signatures.
Christine Gaebel: There’s a procedural side where states need to determine what the Agreement will look like in their domestic context. For example, one of the provisions concerns research undertaken in areas beyond national jurisdiction. If an academic conducts research in these areas and their country has ratified the BBNJ Agreement, they will have specific obligations. These include submitting a report six months before going out to sea, updating the report with details such as geographical locations, types of samples collected, where the samples will be stored, and how the benefits derived will be shared. When a state ratifies the agreement, it takes on the responsibility to ensure that individuals of its nationality or those on vessels flying its flag comply with the rules and obligations set out in the agreement. States are obligated to do their best to ensure compliance. Additionally, the procedural process varies by country. Some states may need to go through their parliament or senate, which takes longer, while others may have a more direct process. The second challenge is capacity. When a country ratifies the agreement, it assumes obligations, such as monitoring a successful MPA (Marine Protected Area). Not all states have the scientific capabilities or infrastructure to conduct research in areas beyond national jurisdiction, which are often far from shore. This adds another layer of complexity, as states need to assess whether they can meet all the agreement’s requirements before ratifying it. It’s a balancing act.
Marina Garwood: To address the second part of the question about how DOSI supports this process, we function as a group that works to connect. We identify areas where more scientific support is needed. If there’s a lack of expertise to address a specific question, we help bring in individuals with knowledge in that field to find solutions. Our role is to act as connectors, bringing the right minds together to have productive conversations and develop effective solutions.
As a scientist, do you also find it hard to talk to policymakers in a way they can easily understand?
Marina Garwood: Sometimes, yes. If a topic is very technical and filled with jargon, it can be challenging to translate it into something more accessible for policymakers. However, one great thing about working in the deep sea is that it’s inherently fascinating. It’s one of the last true frontiers we’re exploring on this planet, so framing it as a boundary-pushing scientific exploration can catch attention and engage people. Explaining very technical graphs or concepts can be difficult, but when encountering overly technical terms, I recommend finding synonyms or alternative ways to convey the same core concept. As an educator, I work with different students and audiences, tailoring each lecture to their specific needs. This practice has helped me develop the ability to adapt explanations to different groups. It’s definitely challenging with more technical conversations, but with time and experience, it becomes easier.
Christine Gaebel: Absolutely. I was at an event a few months ago for the World Ocean Assessment, and one of the recurring themes was not just the need for scientific and ocean literacy but also policy literacy. These challenges, especially with jargon and technical terms, go both ways. It’s easy for a conversation to lose clarity if neither side fully understands the other. Flexibility and relationship-building are key. When you’re comfortable with someone, they’ll feel free to say, “Hold on, can you explain that again?” It’s about fostering trust, which often happens in informal spaces. For example, you might be having your morning coffee, and a delegate walks by, saying, “I read your policy brief, but I didn’t understand it.” You can invite them to sit down, grab a coffee, and go through it together. It’s not necessarily about simplifying the content but taking the time to ensure your point is understood while also understanding their needs as decision-makers. Ultimately, it comes down to building relationships.
Do you have any advice on potential career opportunities in BBNJ and/or the blue economy for someone without a scientific background?
Marina Garwood: One great thing is to follow newsletters. More often than not, they include potential opportunities. For example, the Ocean Bulletin or the DOSI Deep-Sea Round-Up – it’s always worth plugging those. Following these communities and newsletters can give you a sense of which organisations are hiring and where. For someone without a scientific background, there are definitely career paths in policy, communications, capacity sharing, and project management that are vital in BBNJ and the blue economy. These fields need people who can bridge gaps, organise events, and effectively communicate complex issues. As for opportunities where science and policy intersect, they are still somewhat rare, so you’ll need to be proactive in finding roles that align with your interests. I do believe opportunities will increase as the need for interdisciplinary expertise grows, but it does require persistence and networking to stay informed about the latest developments.
Christine Gaebel: Absolutely. And for someone without a scientific background, there’s still a lot you can bring to the table. If you’re interested in BBNJ, I recommend reaching out to your country’s delegation or the department leading the BBNJ process. It might sound intimidating, but find out who’s leading the delegation and send them a tailored email. Share your relevant experience, whether it’s in policy, communications, or another area, and emphasise how your skills can support their work. Even if you don’t have a science background, you can demonstrate your understanding of the key issues through policy briefs, summaries, or insights from your own work. The worst they can say is no, but it’s a great way to get on their radar. This kind of networking and showing initiative can be key to finding opportunities in these spaces, even if your background isn’t in science.