A Post-2030 Ocean Economy Agenda: Aligning Measurement and Targets

Last updated on 28 Nov 2025

Authors:
Sarah Taylor
(Water Research Centre, UK)
Phil James
(Global Ocean Accounts Partnership, UNSW Centre for Sustainable Development Reform)

With now just over 4 years until 2030, countries have an opportunity to do something different with ocean economics: align measurement and target-setting from the start, rather than setting targets first and building the measurement systems later.

The opportunity is timely. After nearly a decade of building and testing Ocean Economy Satellite Accounts (OESAs), the foundation is strong. What once needed justification is now widely accepted: understanding the ocean's role in our economies requires a system that connects ocean-based industries to national accounts. A growing number of countries have piloted approaches showing what's possible in practice.

This progress is happening just as the global policy context is shifting. The Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework requires integrating biodiversity values into national accounts. The UNFCCC Ocean and Climate Dialogues are bringing blue mitigation and adaptation to the negotiating table. And at the UN Ocean Conference, countries recognised the "critical need" for ocean accounts, raising expectations that post-2030 commitments must be not only ambitious but verifiable.

What's needed now is a collective push to move from diverse pilots to a harmonised, globally coherent system. The Ocean Accounts Framework offers clear guidance for this standardisation.

Ocean accounts are not a parallel system; they work with and enhance national statistics so that ocean indicators can be trusted alongside core economic measures. They offer a vital framework and data source for measuring global ocean, climate, and development goals post-2030.

The questions have shifted.
No longer "why measure the ocean economy?" or "why ocean accounts?" but "what do we need ocean accounts to deliver for the post-2030 ocean agenda?"

Aligning Measurement and Target-Setting

Global processes have typically moved in a "targets first, measures second" sequence. With functioning frameworks and growing experience, there's now an opportunity to align measurement and target-setting so they reinforce one another. This means using what can already be measured credibly and comparably to ground new targets, while developing the accounts needed to measure forthcoming commitments. Alignment doesn't reduce ambition—it focuses ambition, makes it measurable, and holds us all accountable.

What changes when we align measurement and target-setting?

Targets become evidence-anchored. Negotiated goals reflect statistical capacity across countries, raising the odds of delivery. Goals are framed with known indicators and compilation methods, and include a pathway to extend measurement where gaps remain.

Uptake accelerates. Countries commit to standardised methodologies, speeding progress towards common targets and comparability.

Accountability strengthens. Every commitment comes with a transparent audit trail back to national accounts.

Data fuels ambition. Making some goals measurable with existing systems means other goals can be more ambitious with bespoke monitoring.

In short, post-2030 success depends on alignment: let existing measures anchor new targets, and let new targets guide the next round of measurement.

What We Should Measure Post-2030 (Before We Set New Targets)

The real frontier is moving towards decision-ready indicators. Below are indicator families that countries can compile now using the Ocean Accounts Framework. These could form the backbone for robust, transparent, and trackable post-2030 target-setting.

Dependencies, not just contributions

What to measure: For each ocean sector (tourism, fisheries, ports, offshore energy), quantify how dependent its output and jobs are on the condition of specific ecosystems (reefs, mangroves, beaches).

Why it matters: This reveals where economic value is most exposed to ecosystem decline and where restoration yields the biggest economic co-benefits.

How to build from an Ocean Account: Break down the Ocean Account to the same coastal and marine spatial units used in SEEA Ecosystem Accounting. Link sector output to ecosystem condition and service flows in those places, not just to the ocean or asset as a whole.

Pressures alongside production

What to measure: Publish environmental pressure indicators alongside economic ones (emissions, waste, habitat disturbance, water quality pressures) by ocean sector and coastal unit.

Why it matters: Puts growth and impact in the same frame, enabling policy to target the pressure, not just the sector.

How to build from an Ocean Account: For each Ocean Economy Satellite Account (OESA) economic activity group, report pressure indicators from environmental accounts side by side at the same industry (or product, if possible) level.

Transition signals

What to measure: Capital investment, employment, and exports in activities aligned with the transition—low-carbon shipping, offshore renewables and grid connections, blue carbon restoration supply chains.

Why it matters: These are early indicators of whether transition plans are credible and financeable.

How to build from an Ocean Account: OESAs can display disaggregated economic information on emerging industries, highlighting economic output, value added, and employment.

Resilience of ocean-dependent jobs and assets

What to measure: The share of ocean economy jobs, establishments, and public assets in locations exposed to coastal hazards (erosion, storm surge, sea-level rise).

Why it matters: Grounds adaptation planning in the real economy and helps prioritise protection or redesign.

How to build from an Ocean Account: Add shared identifiers that appear in every relevant table—spatial keys (spatial unit reference), industry or activity keys (such as ISIC), and ecosystem service keys (ecosystem service class code).

Equity and inclusion in the ocean economy

What to measure: Who benefits? Track participation, food production, and income for small-scale fishers, women in coastal tourism, youth in blue tech start-ups, and Indigenous and local communities in co-management areas.

Why it matters: Aligns ocean policy with social goals, enables tracking of a just transition, and unlocks inclusive financing.

How to build from ocean accounts: Disaggregate OESA indicators so different groups' participation in the economy can be recognised and linked to ecosystem health. Develop the social domain of an Ocean Account to track specific societal goals not within the production boundary of the OESA.

Nature-positive alignment

What to measure: The share of ocean economy output and capital expenditure aligned with nature-positive criteria (activities that maintain or improve ecosystem condition), and the share at high risk of nature-related losses.

Why it matters: Connects national accounts to corporate disclosure and investment decisions, helping to crowd in private capital safely.

Design principle: Build these indicators first, with clear methods and open data files. Then let them shape the next generation of national and international targets (GBF follow-on, UNFCCC cycles, UNOC pledges). Understanding what we can measure now will enable a more ambitious and achievable post-2030 agenda.

The Quiet Brake: Comparability and Transferability

Designing better indicators is only half the job. One reason OESAs haven't yet scaled consistently across countries is the challenge of comparability and methodological transferability. To compare them across countries and let them guide international targets, we need an enabling architecture that makes the numbers travel.

Countries slice up their economies differently. To classify economic activities, the United States uses NAICS, Europe uses NACE, South Africa uses SIC-7, and Australasia uses ANZSIC. Each is broadly aligned with the international ISIC framework, but not identical. Differences in detail, structure, and update cycles mean categories don't always match one-to-one. Many ocean-related activities are also only part of broader classes, like coastal tourism or marine construction, which requires agreed methods to isolate the "ocean share."

The practical effect: a pilot methodology that works well in one country won't always lift and drop into another without adjustment. You can still produce the same indicators (marine GVA, employment, exports), but the results are broadly comparable rather than strictly identical—unless you harmonise two things:

Activity boundary: Agree on a shared "core ocean" list (anchored in ISIC) so you're counting the same set of activities.
Mapping to national codes: Publish simple crosswalks between national systems and the international list.

With this backbone in place, measurement can lead the next wave of commitments.

What the Ocean Accounts Community Must Do Next

The community already has the scaffolding through the Global Ocean Accounts Partnership (GOAP) and the UN's SEEA framework. The real frontier now is indicators that are not just "UNOC-ready" but "post-2030-ready." In practice, that means three concrete actions:

Start with a core set of shared indicators that all countries can measure. How much of the economy depends on healthy ecosystems? How much investment is flowing into low-carbon shipping? Share the methods openly.

Set clear rules for comparability. Make results comparable across different national systems. This includes agreeing on the minimum level of detail to publish, the types of data that are acceptable, and how to handle industries that are only partly ocean-related (like tourism or construction).

Test these indicators in practice across countries, refining both the methods and the policy questions as we go.

In short:

standardise the what
(the activity list)
share the how
(the methods and files)
focus the outputs on the why
(indicators that guide and verify real commitments).

Bottom Line

Measuring the ocean economy is no longer the debate. The real test is making those measures comparable, trusted, and powerful enough to drive the next chapter of ocean policy.

Post-2030, success will come from aligning measurement with target-setting: anchoring new commitments in what can be counted today, and using those commitments to build the indicators we still need for tomorrow.