The ship and the partners are both the strength and the constraint.
Depth lives on one vessel; access, data and distribution depend on coastal states, funders and broadcasters.
How might our relationship with the ocean change by 2040?
Everything the cohort has gathered on the OceanX brief in one place: the brief, the as-is state of OceanX Education, the evidence, and first sketches of 2040. Browse the library for the evidence behind each point.
Phase 1 research, 21 October 2026. Draft for team discussion, not yet validated by the client.The brief
From OceanX Education, Hyper Island Future Scenarios module.
How might our relationship with the ocean change by 2040, and what could that mean for education?
- What might our relationship with the ocean look and feel like in 2040?
- What might shape or disrupt that relationship?
- What could an immersive educational experience look like in that future?
- Success: a future world brought to life through artefacts or prototypes you can test and get feedback on, with evidence that learning contributes to ocean impact, at scale in both reach and depth.
One ship, very deep, mostly unexplored
The OceanXplorer is lab, studio and classroom at once. Its reach goes far below what we know: less than 5% of the ocean has been directly explored, and 28.7% of the seafloor is mapped.
The story in one page
All three team decks agree on this picture.
- OceanX is a founder-led nonprofit operating program of Dalio Philanthropies.One ship is lab, studio and classroom, and its footage reaches millions through partner series.
- OceanX Education turns that science and footage into pathways for young people.Ship immersions, hackathons, a fellowship and school access, with its base in Singapore.
- Depth is high but cohorts are small; scale comes through partners and media.Capacity is up to 72 aboard and about 15 per hackathon.
- The ocean outlook is worsening faster than governance is delivering.Record heat, 10% designated but about 3.3% effectively protected, deep-sea mining moving toward permits.
- The sector counts participation; almost none proves behaviour change.That includes OceanX, which reports counts and firsts, not outcomes.
What we know so far
The short version of the research. Click any point to see the evidence behind it in the library.
Three insights
From the Phase 2 problem framing.
Everything reported counts activity, not effect.
570+ aboard, 1,610 tour visitors, 100,000+ via livestreams: none of these measure learning or behaviour. No outcome evaluation was found.
Who the audience is stays unsettled, and that affects every problem.
Stated 18–24 and 25+, described as 18–25/26, in practice high school to PhD. No needs research exists.
Five focus areas
Emerging from all three decks. Areas 2, 3 and 5 hold in all four 2040 futures, so they’re the safest to prioritise.
| Focus area | Why | Bet it rests on | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Sharpen who and what it is for | Most of the target audience never reaches the ship; audience bands conflict. | The brief-giver’s 18–25/26 priority holds. | Medium-High |
| 2. From wonder to responsibility | Awe isn’t turned into action. Responsibility predicts behaviour better than literacy. | The evidence generalises beyond one survey. | Low-Medium |
| 3. Prove it, then scale it | OceanX can’t show its education works; the pathway ends at “Continue”. | Outcome data is absent, not just unpublished. | Medium-High |
| 4. Connect threats to action | Threat choices follow science strengths, not what learners can act on. | Learner action can be rated meaningfully. | Medium |
| 5. Extend beyond the ship | Ship-based depth can’t reach most people; citizen science is set to grow. | Digital extension keeps the depth that matters. | Medium |
Constraint, not a focus: access and data depend on coastal states and partners. It shapes every option.
Four futures for 2040
Two critical uncertainties: does governance deliver, and does learning turn into action? Sketches, not predictions.
Action gap closes
People ahead of policy
Governance lags, action gap closes. Local, tangible action leads while rules trail.
Shared stewardship
Governance delivers, action gap closes. Rules and public action reinforce each other.
Action gap persists
Drift
Governance lags, action gap persists. Threats compound while attention scatters.
Rules without people
Governance delivers, action gap persists. Protection exists on paper; buy-in and enforcement lag.
Governance lagsGovernance delivers
Three decisions for the team
Vote on the level first, then the audience, then pick 2–3 focus areas that fit.
At what level do we aim?
- Political: policy and government influence
- Public: Gen Z and broader public education
- OceanX: its own evolution, partnerships, platform
- Trying all three at once risks drift
Who is the audience?
- Gen Z academic: matches stated eligibility; clearer pathway, smaller scale
- General public: matches the media route; far less evidence of behaviour change
Education or entertainment?
- Education leans on depth, pathway and proof (areas 1, 3)
- Entertainment leans on reach and media, where OceanX relies on partners (areas 2, 5)
Our recommendation
Three answers the team needs before moving into futures and prototypes: who we design for, which threats we focus on, and at what scale.
Draft based on Phase 1 evidence. For the team vote, not yet validated by the client.1. Who is the best target audience?
Answers decision 2, “Who is the audience?”, and focus area 1.
Young adults aged 18–25 in Asia-Pacific who aren’t yet in ocean careers, with educators as multipliers.
Why
- Matches the stated eligibility and the brief-giver’s priority (about 18–25/26), so it fits what OceanX already runs.
- They’ll be 32–39 in 2040: the professionals, parents and decision-makers of that future.
- The Singapore hub, booklets in Bahasa Indonesia and ministry partners (MoE, DepEd) already point to Asia-Pacific.
- Today’s programmes mostly reach young adults who already care. The bigger gain is students from design, tech, business and policy who don’t yet see an ocean role for themselves.
- Educators carry learning into classrooms far beyond the 72 places aboard.
What to check
- Applicant and participant data: are most applicants already engaged?
- A short survey or five interviews with 18–25s outside marine science.
- Whether OceanX wants school age or corporates included.
Not the general public as the primary audience. Media reach is large, but the evidence that it changes behaviour is the weakest (Blue Planet II raised intent, not real choices). Policymakers need different messaging, and nothing shows OceanX influencing policy yet.
2. What are the primary threats, and how do we address them?
Answers focus area 4: pick threats by where learners can act, not only where the science is strongest.
Pair one everyday threat with one voice threat: plastic pollution, and the gap between protection on paper and protection in practice, including the deep sea.
| Threat | Why it’s primary | How learners act | How to address it |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plastic pollution | 130 Mt now, 280 Mt by 2040 if unchanged, 47 Mt with system change. 10 of the top 20 emitting countries are in Asia. | Everyday choices, local action | Give the learner a role and a local, tangible action, then measure what they actually do, not what they intend. |
| Protection gap and deep sea | 10% designated but about 3.3% effectively protected. Mining rules deferred to March 2027. This is where OceanX’s science is unique: seamounts, mapping, digital twins, high seas. | Voice and advocacy | Pair each discovery with follow-through: show what was found, what protects it, and what the learner can push for. |
The approach behind both
- Move from wonder to responsibility: responsibility predicts action better than knowledge (0.51 vs 0.39).
- Use local, concrete actions instead of overwhelming statistics; 3 in 4 young people already find the future frightening.
- Warming and heatwaves stay as context: the strongest driver, but the hardest for one learner to act on.
What to check
- Acidification in Asia: the team named it, but no deck evidences its regional severity.
- The responsibility finding comes from one survey in one country; test it with our own audience.
3. At what scale do we address these threats?
Answers the team vote “Which scale do we go for?”
Prove it first, then build toward deep at scale.
D: Prove it first Start hereMeasure what changes before scaling. Define the step after “Continue” and pick one outcome measure, such as a real action taken three months later.
C: Deep at scale Then growBring the ship to many through livestreams, SeaSwipe, the digital twin and the Immersive Development Toolkit, using what D proved works.
A: Go deepNot alone: 72 places aboard and about 15 per hackathon can’t reach the audience.
B: Go wideNot alone: reach through partner media hasn’t been shown to change behaviour.
Why
- Nothing is deep at scale today, so C is the real opening. Jumping there without proof repeats the sector’s habit of counting activity.
- Proof and digital extension (focus areas 3 and 5) hold in all four 2040 futures, so this is a no-regret move.
- Evidence of impact is exactly what the brief asks for, and what funders, ministries and partners will want.
What it means for the prototype
- One immersive experience for 18–25s that reaches beyond the ship.
- Built around plastic and the protection gap, with a role for the learner.
- Tested with a before-and-after measure of what people actually do.