Why Kenya and East Africa must move from celebrating maritime heritage to protecting, documenting and investing in it
There is a powerful image in the poster announcing the International Committee on Underwater Cultural Heritage (ICUCH) engagement scheduled for August 6, 2026: a human-like stone face resting silently on the seabed, surrounded by fish and sediment.
It is more than an evocative underwater photograph. It is a metaphor for Africa’s relationship with its maritime past.
Beneath our oceans, rivers and lakes lies an enormous historical archive—shipwrecks, ancient boats, submerged settlements, harbour remains, cargoes, artefacts and other traces of human activity. Yet much of this heritage remains poorly documented, inadequately protected and almost completely absent from mainstream discussions about Africa’s Blue Economy.
That must change.
The webinar announced by ICUCH, a scientific committee of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS), could not be more timely. Its focus on Maritime and Underwater Cultural Heritage in Africa: challenges, significance and capacity-building responses, alongside the need for new approaches to managing underwater cultural heritage, should be treated not simply as an academic conversation but as a policy wake-up call for governments across the continent.
The ocean is Africa’s forgotten historical archive
Africa’s history has too often been narrated from the perspective of what survives on land.
We speak about ancient cities, forts, monuments, museums and archaeological sites. We celebrate Great Zimbabwe, the Swahili settlements, Fort Jesus, Lamu Old Town and other terrestrial heritage.
But the history of Africa’s interaction with the wider world did not stop at the shoreline.
For centuries, the Indian Ocean connected the East African coast with Arabia, Persia, India, Southeast Asia and beyond. Mombasa, Malindi, Lamu, Pate, Kilwa, Zanzibar and other coastal settlements were part of sophisticated commercial, cultural and maritime networks.
The sea was not a barrier. It was the highway.
And many chapters of that history now lie beneath the water.
UNESCO defines underwater cultural heritage as traces of human existence of cultural, historical or archaeological character that have been partially or totally underwater for at least 100 years. This includes shipwrecks, vessels and their cargoes, submerged structures, artefacts, human remains and prehistoric objects.
These are not simply old objects.
They are historical evidence.
A shipwreck can reveal what commodities were traded, where people travelled, what technologies they used, how ports functioned and how societies interacted. UNESCO describes submerged heritage as a form of time capsule capable of revealing past societies and maritime routes.
That makes the seabed an extraordinary historical library.
The tragedy is that we have barely begun reading it.
Kenya’s unfinished underwater heritage agenda
For Kenya, the issue is particularly pressing.
The country possesses a long Indian Ocean coastline and an exceptionally rich maritime history. Mombasa and other coastal settlements were embedded in centuries-old commercial networks stretching across the Indian Ocean.
Kenya has also developed significant expertise in underwater archaeology. UNESCO has previously recognised the National Museums of Kenya and Kenyan underwater archaeologists for their contribution to the field.
Yet there remains a glaring policy gap.
Kenya has been discussing ratification of the 2001 UNESCO Convention on the Protection of the Underwater Cultural Heritage for years.
In 2019, UNESCO reported that Kenya was preparing to ratify the Convention. In 2021, another UNESCO initiative reported the development of a national ratification roadmap and a proposed National Ratification Task Force. Then, in April 2024, the Kenyan National Assembly’s Departmental Committee on Sports and Culture held a sensitisation workshop in Mombasa with UNESCO and other stakeholders on the 2001 Convention. UNESCO described the Convention as one of the remaining major cultural heritage treaties awaiting Kenya’s official approval.
The message is unmistakable: the conversation has been going on for too long.
UNESCO’s current list records 81 States Parties to the Convention. Kenya should not remain indefinitely on the sidelines of an international framework specifically designed to protect the very maritime heritage it has spent years discussing.
Ratification must therefore move from the realm of workshops, consultations and road maps into the realm of action.
This is not about treasure hunting
There is an important distinction that policymakers must understand.
Underwater cultural heritage is not a licence for commercial treasure hunting.
Quite the opposite.
The 2001 Convention establishes preservation as its central principle. In-situ preservation—the protection of heritage where it lies underwater—is the preferred option. It also rejects commercial exploitation and promotes training, information sharing and international cooperation.
This is crucial for Africa, where underwater archaeological sites can be vulnerable to looting, unregulated salvage, coastal development and other forms of disturbance.
The real objective should therefore not be to remove everything from the seabed and place it behind museum glass.
It should be to understand, document, protect and responsibly interpret it.
Where recovery is scientifically or conservationally justified, it should be undertaken according to internationally accepted archaeological standards.
The seabed itself is part of the historical context. Remove an artefact without documenting its location, relationship to other objects and surrounding environment, and we may lose information that can never be recovered.
The Blue Economy must include the blue past
Africa’s Blue Economy conversation has largely focused on fisheries, shipping, ports, offshore energy, marine biotechnology, tourism and coastal development.
Those are legitimate priorities.
But the Blue Economy also has a cultural dimension.
We cannot build a sustainable blue future while destroying the blue past.
This is particularly relevant for Kenya.
The country is investing heavily in maritime infrastructure, port expansion, fisheries, coastal tourism and the wider Blue Economy. Every new port, offshore project, seabed intervention, dredging program, cable route and coastal development should therefore be informed by an understanding of what historical resources might exist beneath the water.
Heritage protection cannot be an afterthought that begins when construction equipment reaches the seabed.
It must be incorporated into marine spatial planning, environmental assessment, coastal development planning and maritime governance from the beginning.
This requires closer cooperation among the National Museums of Kenya, Kenya Maritime Authority, Kenya Ports Authority, State Department for Culture, environmental agencies, universities, marine researchers, surveyors, coastal communities and maritime industry players.
The same principle should apply throughout East Africa.
Africa needs a new generation of underwater archaeologists
Perhaps the most serious challenge is not legislation.
It is capacity.
Underwater archaeology requires specialised skills that combine archaeology, maritime history, diving science, conservation, oceanography, surveying, marine engineering, digital documentation and increasingly sophisticated technologies.
Africa cannot sustainably depend on a handful of specialists.
The continent needs an entire professional ecosystem.
Universities and maritime training institutions should begin developing programs and modules in underwater archaeology and maritime heritage management.
This could include:
· Maritime archaeology
· Underwater surveying and mapping
· Heritage conservation
· Marine spatial planning
· Underwater photogrammetry
· Remote sensing
· Digital heritage documentation
· Conservation of recovered artefacts
· Maritime history
· Heritage law and policy
· Community-based heritage management
· Responsible underwater tourism
This is where the ICUCH engagement becomes particularly important.
ICUCH describes itself as a global network promoting the protection, research and responsible management of underwater cultural heritage and supporting international cooperation, professional standards and capacity building.
Africa should use such international expertise to develop African expertise—not to create permanent dependence on foreign specialists.
Technology can bring the underwater museum to the public
There is also an extraordinary opportunity to combine heritage with technology.
Modern underwater archaeology can increasingly use digital mapping, remote sensing, photogrammetry, remotely operated systems and three-dimensional reconstruction to document submerged sites without necessarily disturbing them.
This creates possibilities far beyond conventional museums.
Imagine a young student in Nairobi, Mombasa, Dar es Salaam or Zanzibar being able to explore a three-dimensional reconstruction of an ancient shipwreck on a classroom screen.
Imagine tourists visiting an underwater heritage site and using responsible digital technologies to understand what they are seeing.
Imagine a virtual maritime museum connecting the Swahili coast’s underwater heritage across Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique and the wider Western Indian Ocean.
That is where cultural preservation intersects with the digital economy.
UNESCO itself emphasises responsible public access and education as important tools for raising awareness and protecting underwater heritage.
The objective should therefore be maximum public knowledge with minimum physical disturbance.
From wrecks to living coastal communities
There is another dimension that must not be overlooked.
Underwater heritage is not exclusively about archaeology.
It is also about people.
The East African coast is home to communities whose identity, livelihoods, traditions and memories are intimately connected with the ocean.
The dhow, the fishing boat, the harbour, the traditional navigation route and the fishing ground all form part of a broader maritime cultural landscape.
Consequently, underwater heritage policy must not become an elite project confined to archaeologists, government officials and international organisations.
Coastal communities must be participants and custodians.
Their oral histories can help researchers identify forgotten wreck sites, historic landing places and maritime routes. Their traditional knowledge can provide invaluable context to archaeological evidence.
If communities see heritage protection as something imposed from Nairobi or from international institutions, conservation will struggle.
If they see it as protection of their own history—and as a potential source of education, employment and sustainable tourism—they become the strongest guardians of the resource.
A regional East African framework is urgently needed
The Indian Ocean does not respect political boundaries.
Ships that sailed to Mombasa also sailed to Zanzibar, Kilwa, Pemba, Mozambique and ports further afield.
A wreck may therefore tell a regional story rather than a national one.
East African countries should consequently develop a cooperative framework for underwater cultural heritage.
Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique, Somalia, Seychelles, Comoros, Madagascar and other Western Indian Ocean states could cooperate on:
First, joint archaeological surveys. A shared regional inventory of known and suspected underwater heritage sites would create the foundation for rational management.
Second, specialist training. East Africa could establish a regional centre of excellence in maritime and underwater archaeology, drawing on existing maritime academies, universities, museums and international partners.
Third, information sharing. Wreck locations and archaeological information should be managed responsibly, balancing research and public education with the need to prevent looting.
Fourth, emergency response. Heritage sites need protection from accidents, pollution, coastal development and other emergencies.
Fifth, sustainable tourism. Carefully managed underwater heritage trails, museums, digital experiences and archaeological tourism could create new economic opportunities without sacrificing the integrity of the sites.
The threat is no longer only the treasure hunter
The romantic image of the treasure hunter searching for a lost fortune is only part of the problem.
Today, the threats are more complex.
UNESCO identifies looting, treasure hunting, commercial exploitation, pollution, climate disruption and coastal and marine development among the pressures facing underwater heritage.
Climate change introduces another layer of urgency.
Changes in sea levels, storms, coastal erosion, changing sediment patterns and ocean conditions can alter or expose submerged archaeological sites.
At the same time, expanding ports, offshore infrastructure, seabed extraction, cables, pipelines and other marine activities increase the need for systematic archaeological assessment.
This means underwater heritage should be integrated into the same environmental and spatial planning systems used to manage other marine resources.
What is not mapped cannot be adequately protected.
KPA and the maritime industry have a role
Kenya’s maritime institutions cannot remain outside this discussion.
The Kenya Ports Authority, shipping lines, ship agents, surveyors, dredging companies, offshore contractors and other maritime stakeholders interact directly or indirectly with the seabed and coastal environment.
Port development should therefore incorporate underwater cultural heritage assessments into project planning.
The shipping industry can also contribute to research, documentation and awareness.
This should not be viewed simply as another compliance obligation.
A shipping company that helps preserve the history of the maritime routes it serves is contributing to a broader understanding of global trade.
After all, today’s shipping lanes are often superimposed on routes that have connected peoples and economies for centuries.
A Maritime Heritage Fund would be a game changer
Kenya should consider establishing a dedicated National Maritime and Underwater Cultural Heritage Fund.
Its resources could support:
· Underwater archaeological surveys
· Conservation and documentation
· Training and scholarships
· Digital mapping
· Research vessels and equipment
· Community heritage initiatives
· Emergency protection of wrecks
· Museums and exhibitions
· Regional research partnerships
· Development of sustainable maritime heritage tourism
Funding could be drawn from government allocations, research institutions, tourism revenues, international cultural partnerships and carefully structured private-sector contributions.
The principle should be simple: if Kenya’s ocean is an economic asset, its history beneath that ocean is also a national asset.
Ratification must be followed by implementation
Ratification of the UNESCO 2001 Convention would be an important milestone, but it should not become another ceremonial achievement.
The Convention itself emphasises national capacity, inventories, preservation, training, information sharing and international cooperation.
Kenya therefore needs an implementation roadmap with measurable targets.
That roadmap should include a national inventory, clear institutional mandates, regulations for underwater archaeological activities, professional standards, research protocols, enforcement mechanisms and a sustainable financing model.
The country should also establish a clear national competent authority or specialised institutional mechanism capable of coordinating underwater cultural heritage management across government.
Most importantly, underwater heritage should be brought into Kenya’s wider Blue Economy strategy.
It cannot remain trapped inside the cultural heritage department while the rest of government plans the ocean around shipping, fisheries, ports, energy and tourism.
The ocean is one interconnected space. Its natural, economic and cultural dimensions must be governed accordingly.
Africa must reclaim its maritime narrative
There is also a deeper issue at stake: historical ownership of the African narrative.
For too long, African history has often been presented as something that happened on land and was subsequently interpreted by outsiders.
The Indian Ocean tells a different story.
It reveals African societies as active participants in commerce, navigation, technology, migration and cultural exchange.
The Swahili coast was not an isolated fringe of world civilisation. It was part of a sophisticated maritime system.
Our underwater heritage can help demonstrate that history with physical evidence.
Shipwrecks and submerged sites can challenge simplistic narratives about Africa’s relationship with the outside world. They can show that African coastal societies were connected to global networks long before the modern shipping industry emerged.
The seabed, in other words, is not merely a graveyard of ships.
It is an archive of African agency.
The August 6 conversation should be a beginning, not an ending
The ICUCH webinar scheduled for August 6, 2026, featuring discussions on African maritime and underwater cultural heritage and new approaches to its management, comes at an important moment. The participation of experts such as Moussa Wélé and Bita Caesar underscores the importance of bringing African experience and expertise into the global conversation.
But webinars alone will not save Africa’s underwater heritage.
Nor will conferences, declarations and policy documents.
What is required is political commitment.
Kenya should seize the moment to complete its ratification of the UNESCO 2001 Convention, establish a functioning national implementation framework, strengthen the National Museums of Kenya’s underwater archaeology capacity, invest in specialised training and place underwater cultural heritage firmly inside the country’s Blue Economy agenda.
East Africa should go further and establish a regional cooperation mechanism.
The choice is becoming increasingly stark.
We can continue treating the seabed as an empty space available for exploitation until somebody discovers a wreck by accident.
Or we can recognise it for what it really is: Africa’s largest submerged archive.
The face staring silently from the seabed in the ICUCH poster is therefore more than an archaeological curiosity.
It is a warning.
Our maritime past is disappearing beneath sediment, pollution, climate pressure, development and neglect.
We have spent decades learning how to extract wealth from the ocean.
Now we must learn how to protect its memory.
The Blue Economy should not be measured only by the value we extract from the sea. It should also be measured by the history we preserve beneath it.
Africa’s underwater heritage belongs not only to the past. It belongs to future generations.
And the time to protect it is now.
The writer is a Mombasa based Maritime Policy Analyst and Blue Economy Specialist.
Key policy references
· UNESCO — 2001 Convention on the Protection of Underwater Cultural Heritage
· UNESCO — Principles of the 2001 Convention
· UNESCO — Kenya and the ratification process
· ICUCH — Mission and mandate