2026 Ocean Benchmark: Key insights, leading practices and strategic recommendations

Ocean sectors are expected to be significantly impacted by climate chang. The IPCC estimated that climate induced declines in ocean health will cost the global economy $428 billion per year by 2050 and $1.98 trillion per year by 2100. Like all sectors, ocean economy sectors, also have an impact on climate through GHG emissions. For instance the shipping industry as a whole represents around 3% of global emissions, which makes it one of the significant contributors to climate change. The fishing industry represents 4% of global food production GHG emissions and the cruise industry represents around 1% of global GHG emissions. Moreover, climate change is predicted to have significant impacts on the ocean economy, especially in the seafood and tourism sectors. 

Yet, the ocean benchmark shows that while more than half of the companies assessed have a target to reduce their GHG emissions, only 7% of the companies reporting actual progress on reducing their GHG emissions, with Thai Union and Orsted having set a target in line with 1,5C scenario. Compared to non ocean sectors, ocean sectors fall behind when it comes to using sectoral pathways compatible with a 1,5C scenario and reporting progress on reducing their emissions. When looking at the sectoral breakdown, offshore wind leads on overall performance for this indicator, followed by seafood and maritime transport. However, in terms of setting targets, offshore wind and maritime transport lead the way. In terms of reporting progress, only a handful of seafood and offshore wind companies reported actual progress in reducing emissions.

Call to action: Ocean companies must also ensure that they have credible and robust climate transition plans in place to mitigate and adapt to the consequences of climate change.

Ocean biodiversity has been declining rapidly over the past 50 years with marine population species falling on average 56% since 1970 and critical ecosystems like coral reefs, mangrove forests, kelp forests, salt marshes and seagrass beds diminishing in both extent and condition. Ocean sectors therefore must transition to a sustainable and resilient blue economy, one that protects, restores and manages diverse and productive marine ecosystems. This transition is increasingly being guided by the Global Biodiversity Framework targets and the collective global goal of achieving nature positive i.e. to “halt and reverse nature loss by 2030 on a 2020 baseline and achieve full recovery by 2050”, including in the ocean.

Achieving nature-positive in the ocean will require action across all sectors of society, with the private sector playing a critical role. Business activities and supply chains often interact with ocean systems, giving companies a significant influence on addressing biodiversity loss. At the same time, many businesses rely heavily on healthy ocean ecosystems and therefore face substantial existential risks from environmental degradation. Companies must take swift and decisive steps to shift their practices away from damaging activities and move toward approaches that support restoration and regeneration of ocean ecosystems.

Based on the TNFD LEAP approach, in order for companies to manage their nature related risks and impacts, they must first locate their interface with nature, then evaluate their impacts and dependencies on nature and finally, assess their nature related risks and opportunities. The ocean benchmark found that 17/80 companies, distributed across all ocean economy sectors, have identified their interface with ecologically sensitive locations. With regards to measuring their impact on nature, we found that only 12/80 companies assess their impact drivers and 2 also assess their impacts (NYK Lines and Vattenfall). With regards to measuring risks and dependencies, 7/80 companies (3 seafood, 2 offshore wind) having assessed their nature related dependencies and only 5/80 companies were found to having assessed their nature-related risks (3 from maritime transport and 2 from seafood), and only one has assessed both its risks and dependencies (Mowi). Regarding a transition towards a nature positive ocean econony, only 1 offshore wind company (Vatenfall) and 1 seafood company (Mowi) disclose a nature transition plan.

Call to action: assess your impacts, risks and dependencies on nature and develop nature transition plans – what it is, including key frameworks and guidance, including ocean specific guidance: 

• TNFD ocean guidance: https://tnfd.global/tnfd-releases-oceans-guidance/
• WWF Pathways for corporate contributions towards nature positive for the ocean: https://www.worldwildlife.org/our-work/oceans/seascapes/towards-nature-positive-for-the-ocean-pathways-for-corporate-contribution/
• SBTN Ocean Hub: https://sciencebasedtargetsnetwork.org/about/hubs/ocean/ Nature Positive Iniative state of nature metrics for marine ecosystems: https://www.naturepositive.org/news/blog/nature-positive-marine-metrics/

The ocean economy currently employs at least 133 million people globally, with potential growth to 184 millions joby by 2050 if sustainable practices are adopted. The largest sector by employment by far is marine and coastal tourism, followed by seafood and shipping. However, ocean sectors face a number of human rights risks including human trafficking, forced labour, worker exploitation and marginization of coastal communities, especially indigenous people. While seafood faces systemic risks of forced labour, maritime transport also face human rights risks related to oil spills and air pollution and offshore energy can be linked to risks to community and indigenous rights.

Respecting human rights at sea

While not all ocean sector face the same human rights risks, companies in all sectors have a duty to ensure human rights are respecting in their operations and supply chains. As defined by the UN Guiding Principles for Business and Human rights as well as increasing legislation in certain countries, companies are expected to carry out comprehensive human rights due diligence, including having robust grievance mechanisms in place.

Across all ocean sectors, we found that only 8/80 companies demonstrate having assessed their human rights risks and impacts and only 2 companies (Orsted and Wallenius Wilhelmsen) have integrated and acted on its risks and impact assessment. Offshore wind companies outperform other ocean sectors, with cruise tourism, shipbuilding and port operations clearly lagging behind.

Stakeholder engagement as a path towards ocean equity 

Access to ocean resources and industries is often not equitable. Benefits tend to be concentrated among a small number of actors, while the negative impacts of development are disproportionately experienced by the most vulnerable communities. Addressing ocean inequities is essential to building a sustainable ocean economy that ensures inclusivity, safeguards human rights, promotes fair access to resources, and supports transparent, responsible business practices and equitable growth. While a large number of companies (32/80) disclose a stakeholder engagement process and the issues raised during that process (35/80), very few disclose engaging with marginalized stakeholders and how they respond to the issues raised during that process, with only Mowi and Vattenfall doing both. Companies may question why they should contribute to ocean equity, however there is growing recognition that addressing these issues will be crucial for maintaining corporate legitimacy and securing their long-term permission to operate.

Indigenous people 

The loss of biodiversity and the degradation of the ocean threaten not only the physical environment but also the cultural rights of indigenous communities. For many indigenous groups, the ocean is not merely a resource but an integral part of their identity, spirituality, and traditions. As defined by the UN Declaration on Human Rights of Indigenous People and like other human rights, companies have a responsibility for ensuring the rights indigenous people are respected. We found that performance across all ocean sectors is very low on this topic, with only one company, Orsted, commiting to respect respect rights related to the ownership and use of natural resources. 

Human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable ocean 

In 2022, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution that formally recognizes that there is a universal human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. Therefore, along other human rights, companies have a responsibility to respect the human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment, including in the ocean. While there is evidence human rights impacts associated with the degradation of the ocean environment are accelerating, we found that corporate action on this topic is low. Indeed, only 7/80 companies apply environmental dimensions in their processes to identify and assess human rights risks and impacts. Only 2 companies (Nueva Pescanova and CMA CGM) have a public commitment to respect the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment and 3 companies (Vatenfall, RWE and NYK Line) disclose actions to prevent and mitigate actual and potential negative human rights impacts resulting from environmental harms. 

Call to action: A sustainable ocean economy cannot be achieved if it is not done justly and while ensuring human rights are respected. As expectations from regulators, investors and workers rise, companies must embed human rights due diligence into governance, procurement, supply chain management and transition planning processes, supported by effective grievance and remedy mechanism.