Why China Wants to Host the New BBNJ Secretariat |
China Power | Diplomacy | East Asia
Why China Wants to Host the New BBNJ Secretariat
China’s Xiamen bid ups the stakes in the the battle over the secretariat host.
The skyline of Xiamen, China, as viewed from the sea.
On April 2, the third and final Preparatory Commission (PrepCom3) for the Entry into Force of the Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) came to a close after two weeks intensive negotiations in New York. The meeting aimed to smooth the way for the first meeting of Conference of the Parties (COP1), set to take place in January 2027.
Among the things discussed in PrepCom 3, the choice of host city for the new BBNJ Secretariat was a focal issue. Three candidate cities – Xiamen, China; Valparaíso, Chile; Brussels, Belgium – delivered their bid presentations for the Secretariat.
The BBNJ agreement is set to rewrite the rules of worldwide high seas and abundant resources therein. The campaign for BBNJ Secretariat host is not only a procedural step but a matter of competition over and representation of influence in global ocean governance. Valparaíso was the first to express its interest in serving the secretariat and launched its campaign as early as March 9, 2023, Brussels filed its application on January 23, 2025, and Xiamen was the latest candidate, depositing its official bidding to the United Nations on January 16, 2026.
What motivated China to finally join the game? What are its pros and cons, and how high is its chance of winning?
China’s Campaign Narrative
On January 16, China submitted its formal proposal to the U.N. to host the BBNJ Secretariat in the city of Xiamen, on its southeastern coast. China delivered a presentation on its bid on March 25.
China’s campaign positions itself as a staunch supporter of multilateralism and an active contributor to ocean governance. Accordingly, it outlines a three-pronged vision for the future BBNJ Secretariat: first, to enhance the inclusivity, efficiency, and global representativeness of the Agreement’s implementation, particularly by reflecting the perspectives of the Global South.
Second, China hopes that through its efforts, the BBNJ Secretariat will go beyond administrative and executive functions to promote cooperation, particularly by advancing the equitable sharing of benefits from marine genetic resources, capacity building, and technology transfer through the Clearing-House Mechanism (CHM).
Third, China aims to establish the Secretariat as an interactive platform with other relevant international organizations. To this end, China will provide adequate venue facilities and reserve space for the future launch of the CHM for the Secretariat to use, free-of-charge. China will also provide financial support to ensure the equal participation of least developed countries, small island developing states, landlocked countries, and other countries in need.
China’s Considerations Behind the Bid
China’s participation in the competition to host the Secretariat of the BBNJ Agreement is motivated primarily by three considerations. First, China’s bid to host the Secretariat in Xiamen is a strategic move to address the geographical imbalance within the U.N. system and the mismatch between China’s contributions and its level of representation. The lack of regional representation within the U.N. system has been widely criticized, particularly in marine governance. While Asia encompasses the Pacific and Indian Oceans, none of the major administrative hubs for ocean governance – such as the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (headquartered in Hamburg, Germany), International Maritime Organization (in London, the U.K.) and International Seabed Authority (in Kingston, Jamaica) – are located in this region. In China’s presentation on March 25, Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Hua Chunying pointed out that a BBNJ Secretariat in Xiamen would be the first U.N.-related body headquartered in the entire Asia Pacific.
Furthermore, China is concerned about the mismatch between its representation within the U.N. system and its status as the world’s second-largest economy and second-largest contributor to U.N. dues. China has been making efforts to address this gap. For instance, the UNESCO International Institute for STEM Education and the World Data Organization (WDO), respectively, were recently established in Shanghai and Beijing. However, the Institute for STEM Education is a platform under UNESCO and the WDO is a non-governmental organization. Neither is comparable to the BBNJ Secretariat in terms of institutional level and global influence. As a permanent executive body established with universal membership, the BBNJ Secretariat is viewed by China as a major step forward to level up its institutional representation and influence in global governance.
Second, the campaign constitutes the latest move of China to galvanize its international reputation as a responsible power and boost its identity as a member of the Global South. China perceives itself as a legitimate representative of the Global South evidenced in its global governance endeavors, with its role in the G77+China during the BBNJ negotiation as a recent example. It aspires to be a contributor and leader in global governance and hopes that the bidding and possibly hosting will help to advance this goal.
With this in mind, China chose to submit its application on January 16 – a date falling between U.S. President Donald Trump’s January 7 signing of a presidential memorandum withdrawing the U.S. from 66 international organizations and the U.S. formal withdrawal from the World Health Organization on January 20. The date seemed to be carefully chosen by China to signal its greater commitment to the U.N. system at a time when the U.S. withdrawal cast a shadow over the future of global governance.
Third, China knows that hosting the BBNJ Secretariat would potentially give it a front row seat in witnessing and engaging in the BBNJ implementation process. As a latecomer to the Law of the Sea negotiations, China learned the downside of lacking necessary institutional expertise. The BBNJ is just about to enter the action stage; some key elements are still unresolved, and the rules of implementation are still subject to negotiation. Hosting the secretariat, China believes, will be a precious opportunity to accumulate institutional expertise and let its own voice be heard.
Things Affecting the Ultimate Decision
The competition to host the BBNJ Secretariat hinges on a complex interplay of issues. The starting point is venue facilities and financial support. While Valparaíso and Brussels each committed to covering venue costs for the first five years, Xiamen is more generous. China’s bid offers a 15-story office building and two villas, free of charge, and additional finance to support inclusive participation of developing countries.
In the meantime, three other factors also weigh in countries’ voting decisions: the BBNJ Secretariat’s institutional arrangement vis-à-vis the U.N. system, competition for geographical representation, and ongoing geopolitical dynamics. Depending on the degree of its independence vis-à-vis the United Nations, the institutional arrangement of the BBNJ Secretariat will take one of two forms: a U.N.-related organization (such as International Organization for Migration) or an agency institutionally linked to the U.N. (such as UNFCCC). If the former model is selected, Xiamen’s “one-stop” venue package and Brussels’ extensive diplomatic network could smooth a rapid set up of the administration hub. If, however, the BBNJ Secretariat is set up as an institutionally-linked agency, a host country that already has connectivity with the U.N. system will be preferable. Brussels holds a distinct edge in this regard.
Geographical representation is another critical factor affecting the voting outcome. Xiamen and Valparaíso would help address the U.N.’s representation imbalance. Xiamen would be a milestone, marking the first U.N. agency headquarters in the Asia-Pacific. Given that Jamaica already hosts the International Seabed Authority, the option of Valparaíso would further strengthen Latin America’s geographical representation in ocean governance.
Finally, geopolitical dynamics also weigh into countries’ voting calculation. The “Global South” narrative in China’s campaign strategy is not well received in some of the countries that are wary of China’s growing influence in the Global South. On the other hand, given the fact that China is involved in some unresolved maritime disputes, some countries fear that hosting the BBNJ Secretariat would give China potential leverage on issues related to these disputes. On the other hand, others think it would impose a binding obligation on China to act with greater restraint and flexibility.
Xiamen’s campaign to host the BBNJ Secretariat comes at a time when the future of global governance is dimmed by U.S. large-scale withdrawal and the United Nations’ incompetency in mitigating some of the ongoing humanitarian crises around the world. Xiamen’s geographical representativeness and venue facilities are attractive selling points, yet challenges lie in the choice of Secretariat’s institutional arrangement, the controversy surrounding the Global South, and complex geopolitical dynamics.
In the days leading up to COP1 of the BBNJ, candidates will campaign arduously to win over the hearts of member states. The final outcome should be decided by the candidate’s commitment and competence in facilitating the effective implementation of the BBNJ Agreement and the advancement of the wellbeing of humanity as a whole. The result is going to profoundly shape the future trajectory of global ocean governance.
Get to the bottom of the story
Subscribe today and join thousands of diplomats, analysts, policy professionals and business readers who rely on The Diplomat for expert Asia-Pacific coverage.
Get unlimited access to in-depth analysis you won't find anywhere else, from South China Sea tensions to ASEAN diplomacy to India-Pakistan relations. More than 5,000 articles a year.
Unlimited articles and expert analysis
Weekly newsletter with exclusive insights
16-year archive of diplomatic coverage
Ad-free reading on all devices
Support independent journalism
Already have an account? Log in.
On April 2, the third and final Preparatory Commission (PrepCom3) for the Entry into Force of the Agreement on the Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine Biological Diversity of Areas beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) came to a close after two weeks intensive negotiations in New York. The meeting aimed to smooth the way for the first meeting of Conference of the Parties (COP1), set to take place in January 2027.
Among the things discussed in PrepCom 3, the choice of host city for the new BBNJ Secretariat was a focal issue. Three candidate cities – Xiamen, China; Valparaíso, Chile; Brussels, Belgium – delivered their bid presentations for the Secretariat.
The BBNJ agreement is set to rewrite the rules of worldwide high seas and abundant resources therein. The campaign for BBNJ Secretariat host is not only a procedural step but a matter of competition over and representation of influence in global ocean governance. Valparaíso was the first to express its interest in serving the secretariat and launched its campaign as early as March 9, 2023, Brussels filed its application on January 23, 2025, and Xiamen was the latest candidate, depositing its official bidding to the United Nations on January 16, 2026.
What motivated China to finally join the game? What are its pros and cons, and how high is its chance of winning?
China’s Campaign Narrative
On January 16, China submitted its formal proposal to the U.N. to host the BBNJ Secretariat in the city of Xiamen, on its southeastern coast. China delivered a presentation on its bid on March 25.
China’s campaign positions itself as a staunch supporter of multilateralism and an active contributor to ocean governance. Accordingly, it outlines a three-pronged vision for the future BBNJ Secretariat: first, to enhance the inclusivity, efficiency, and global representativeness of the Agreement’s implementation, particularly by reflecting the perspectives of the Global South.
Second, China hopes that through its efforts, the BBNJ Secretariat will go beyond administrative and executive functions to promote cooperation, particularly by advancing the equitable sharing of benefits from marine genetic resources, capacity building, and technology transfer through the Clearing-House Mechanism (CHM).
Third, China aims to establish the Secretariat as an interactive platform with other relevant international organizations. To this end, China will provide adequate venue facilities and reserve space for the future launch of the CHM for the Secretariat to use, free-of-charge. China will also provide financial support to ensure the equal participation of least developed countries, small island developing states, landlocked countries, and other countries in need.
China’s Considerations Behind the Bid
China’s participation in the competition to host the Secretariat of the BBNJ Agreement is motivated primarily by three considerations. First, China’s bid to host the Secretariat in Xiamen is a strategic move to address the geographical imbalance within the U.N. system and the mismatch between China’s contributions and its level of representation. The lack of regional representation within the U.N. system has been widely criticized, particularly in marine governance. While Asia encompasses the Pacific and Indian Oceans, none of the major administrative hubs for ocean governance – such as the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (headquartered in Hamburg, Germany), International Maritime Organization (in London, the U.K.) and International Seabed Authority (in Kingston, Jamaica) – are located in this region. In China’s presentation on March 25, Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Hua Chunying pointed out that a BBNJ Secretariat in Xiamen would be the first U.N.-related body headquartered in the entire Asia Pacific.
Furthermore, China is concerned about the mismatch between its representation within the U.N. system and its status as the world’s second-largest economy and second-largest contributor to U.N. dues. China has been making efforts to address this gap. For instance, the UNESCO International Institute for STEM Education and the World Data Organization (WDO), respectively, were recently established in Shanghai and Beijing. However, the Institute for STEM Education is a platform under UNESCO and the WDO is a non-governmental organization. Neither is comparable to the BBNJ Secretariat in terms of institutional level and global influence. As a permanent executive body established with universal membership, the BBNJ Secretariat is viewed by China as a major step forward to level up its institutional representation and influence in global governance.
Second, the campaign constitutes the latest move of China to galvanize its international reputation as a responsible power and boost its identity as a member of the Global South. China perceives itself as a legitimate representative of the Global South evidenced in its global governance endeavors, with its role in the G77+China during the BBNJ negotiation as a recent example. It aspires to be a contributor and leader in global governance and hopes that the bidding and possibly hosting will help to advance this goal.
With this in mind, China chose to submit its application on January 16 – a date falling between U.S. President Donald Trump’s January 7 signing of a presidential memorandum withdrawing the U.S. from 66 international organizations and the U.S. formal withdrawal from the World Health Organization on January 20. The date seemed to be carefully chosen by China to signal its greater commitment to the U.N. system at a time when the U.S. withdrawal cast a shadow over the future of global governance.
Third, China knows that hosting the BBNJ Secretariat would potentially give it a front row seat in witnessing and engaging in the BBNJ implementation process. As a latecomer to the Law of the Sea negotiations, China learned the downside of lacking necessary institutional expertise. The BBNJ is just about to enter the action stage; some key elements are still unresolved, and the rules of implementation are still subject to negotiation. Hosting the secretariat, China believes, will be a precious opportunity to accumulate institutional expertise and let its own voice be heard.
Things Affecting the Ultimate Decision
The competition to host the BBNJ Secretariat hinges on a complex interplay of issues. The starting point is venue facilities and financial support. While Valparaíso and Brussels each committed to covering venue costs for the first five years, Xiamen is more generous. China’s bid offers a 15-story office building and two villas, free of charge, and additional finance to support inclusive participation of developing countries.
In the meantime, three other factors also weigh in countries’ voting decisions: the BBNJ Secretariat’s institutional arrangement vis-à-vis the U.N. system, competition for geographical representation, and ongoing geopolitical dynamics. Depending on the degree of its independence vis-à-vis the United Nations, the institutional arrangement of the BBNJ Secretariat will take one of two forms: a U.N.-related organization (such as International Organization for Migration) or an agency institutionally linked to the U.N. (such as UNFCCC). If the former model is selected, Xiamen’s “one-stop” venue package and Brussels’ extensive diplomatic network could smooth a rapid set up of the administration hub. If, however, the BBNJ Secretariat is set up as an institutionally-linked agency, a host country that already has connectivity with the U.N. system will be preferable. Brussels holds a distinct edge in this regard.
Geographical representation is another critical factor affecting the voting outcome. Xiamen and Valparaíso would help address the U.N.’s representation imbalance. Xiamen would be a milestone, marking the first U.N. agency headquarters in the Asia-Pacific. Given that Jamaica already hosts the International Seabed Authority, the option of Valparaíso would further strengthen Latin America’s geographical representation in ocean governance.
Finally, geopolitical dynamics also weigh into countries’ voting calculation. The “Global South” narrative in China’s campaign strategy is not well received in some of the countries that are wary of China’s growing influence in the Global South. On the other hand, given the fact that China is involved in some unresolved maritime disputes, some countries fear that hosting the BBNJ Secretariat would give China potential leverage on issues related to these disputes. On the other hand, others think it would impose a binding obligation on China to act with greater restraint and flexibility.
Xiamen’s campaign to host the BBNJ Secretariat comes at a time when the future of global governance is dimmed by U.S. large-scale withdrawal and the United Nations’ incompetency in mitigating some of the ongoing humanitarian crises around the world. Xiamen’s geographical representativeness and venue facilities are attractive selling points, yet challenges lie in the choice of Secretariat’s institutional arrangement, the controversy surrounding the Global South, and complex geopolitical dynamics.
In the days leading up to COP1 of the BBNJ, candidates will campaign arduously to win over the hearts of member states. The final outcome should be decided by the candidate’s commitment and competence in facilitating the effective implementation of the BBNJ Agreement and the advancement of the wellbeing of humanity as a whole. The result is going to profoundly shape the future trajectory of global ocean governance.
Li Lingqun is an associate professor at the School of International Studies, Nanjing University.
Ge Xinying is a research assistant of the China Center for Collaborative Studies of the South China Sea.
China in the United Nations
International law of the sea
Treaty on Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ)