Report to the Ninth Meeting
of the Conference of the Parties of the
Convention on Biological Diversity,
19-30 May 2008, Bonn, Germany
POLICY BRIEF ON MARINE BIODIVERSITY AND
NETWORKS OF MARINE PROTECTED AREAS
Global Oceans Conference
GOC 2008
Vietnam
R O Korea
Indonesia
Organized by the
Global Forum on Oceans,
Coasts, and Islands and
Hosted by the Government of
CANADA
Vietnam, Ministry of
Flemish Government,
Belgium
Agriculture and Rural
Development
with principal funding
from the Global
Environment Facility
Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands ­ Strategic Oceans Planning to 2016
The Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands has undertaken a strategic planning effort for the period 2006-
2016 to develop policy recommendations for specific next steps needed to advance the global oceans agenda aimed at
governments, UN agencies, NGOs, industry, and scientific groups. To this effect, Working Groups have been
organized around 12 major topic areas related to the global oceans commitments made at the 2002 World Summit on
Sustainable Development and to emerging issues facing the global oceans community.

The Working Groups have been organized and coordinated by the Global Forum Secretariat, under the direction of
Dr. Biliana Cicin-Sain, Co-Chair and Head of Secretariat, Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands, and
involving the following staff from the Gerard J. Mangone Center for Marine Policy, University of Delaware: Miriam
Balgos, Kateryna Wowk, Caitlin Snyder, Shelby Hockenberry, and Kathleen McCole.

Working Group on Marine Biodiversity and Networks of Marine Protected Areas


WORKING GROUP LEADERS:



Jihyun Lee, Convention on Biological
Russell Reichelt, CRC Reef Research
Diversity
Centre, Australia


Sue Wells, Independent Consultant
Nik Sekhran, United Nations Development

Programme
Dan Laffoley, World Commission on

Protected Areas-Marine, IUCN
Nick Davidson, Ramsar Convention


Dan Basta, Marine Sanctuaries Program,
Julius Francis, WIOMSA Secretariat
NOAA


Gregor Hodgson, Reef Check
Do Van Khuong, Research Institute of Marine

Fisheries
Noah Idechong, Palau Conservation

Society
James Hardcastle, The Nature Conservancy


Carl Lundin, IUCN
Marea Hatziolos, World Bank


Arthur Paterson, NOAA IPO
Nicole Glineur, Global Environment Facility


Evelia Rivera-Arriaga, EPOMEX, Mexico


WORKING GROUP MEMBERS:
Nirmal Jivan Shah, Nature Seychelles


Julian Barbiere, IOC, UNESCO
Marjo Vierros, UNU-IAS


Stefano Belfiore, IOC, UNESCO
Renee Sauve/Jennifer Mooney,

Department of Fisheries and Oceans,
Chu Tien Vinh, National Directorate of
Canada
Aquatic Resource Protection and Conservation,
MARD, Vietnam


Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands

Working Group on Marine Biodiversity and Networks of Marine Protected
Areas










Policy Brief:
Marine Biodiversity and Networks of Marine Protected
Areas

Lead Author:
Sue Wells, Consultant to the Global Forum, United Kingdom
with contributions from the Working Group Leaders
and the Global Forum Secretariat










Submitted to the Ninth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties
to the Convention on Biological Diversity
Bonn, Germany
19­30 May 2008



Table of Contents


Foreword by Biliana Cicin-Sain, Global Forum
iii
Policy Brief

1. Introduction
1
2. Preliminary Assessment of Progress in Achieving 2010
2
and 2012 targets


2.1. Marine Biodiversity
2
2.2. Marine and Coastal Protected Areas
11
3. Major Obstacles and Challenges
16
4. Priority Policy Issues to Move Forward
17


4.1. Reduce the rate of loss of marine biodiversity
17


4.2 Improving mechanisms for assessing progress
21
towards the 2010/2012 targets

5. Conclusions and Recommendations
25
Acknowledgements
28


Acronyms
29



ii
Foreword

Working Group on Marine Biodiversity and Networks
of Marine Protected Areas


This report is being submitted to the Ninth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to
the Convention on Biological Diversity, held in Bonn, Germany from 19 to 30 May
2008.

Halting the loss of marine and coastal biodiversity is an important component of
maintaining ocean and coastal ecosystem function. The 2002 WSSD established the
following goals:

· To achieve by 2010 a significant reduction of the current rate of biodiversity
loss at the global, regional and national level as a contribution to poverty
alleviation and to the benefit of all life on earth.

· Develop and facilitate the use of diverse approaches and tools, including the
ecosystem approach, the elimination of destructive fishing practices, and the
establishment of marine protected areas consistent with international law and
based on scientific information, including representative networks by 2012.

Considering progress on the achievement of the WSSD biodiversity and marine
protected area goals, it seems that in this area tangible progress has been made since
2002. Important initiatives are underway at both national and regional levels, and in
the national reports to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), a large
proportion of nations reporting note that they have designated marine protected areas
(MPAs) and/or have plans to improve existing MPAs. Implementation of the WSSD
biodiversity and MPA goals benefits from the connection to an international
convention-- the Convention on Biological Diversity-- and its Secretariat, which
provide a well organized structure and process for advancing biodiversity around the
world. In this area, too, there is generally good monitoring and regular reporting of
progress on biodiversity conservation through such means as the national reports, the
conference of the parties, and the scientific meetings. This is not the case with regard
to many of the other WSSD goals.

Many challenges still remain, however, in halting biodiversity loss and in the
establishment of networks of marine protected areas, including, insufficient funding,
inadequate awareness about the value of the resources, lack of political will and lack
of shared long-term vision among stakeholders. It is also important to embed the
creation of MPAs within broader governance systems of integrated ocean and coastal
management. These considerations are essential because the effectiveness of MPAs is
not only influenced by the management of activities within the designated areas, but
also human activities that are sometimes far removed from the protected area.

The issue of high seas and deep seabed biodiversity will continue to be a key issue in
the coming years. There is an important opportunity to build momentum towards
addressing this issue in a collaborative and inclusive way in the near term. Many
iii
national governments, NGOs, as well as intergovernmental organizations are poised
to move forward and take significant steps towards conserving and maintaining
biodiversity in marine areas beyond national jurisdiction. Finally, it is important to
underline that the achievement of the biodiversity conservation goals is directly tied to
the efforts to meet the goals related to fisheries as well as the goals on integrated
ocean and coastal management and on ecosystem management. These goals should be
considered mutually supporting and, to the extent possible, they should be considered
as parts of a whole.

Discussions Held on Marine Biodiversity and Networks of Marine Protected
Areas at the Fourth Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands, April 7-
11, 2008, Hanoi, Vietnam

1. Examined, in particular, the interrelationship between biodiversity preservation
and climate change, and the policy implications that are raised by projected impacts.

2. Considered the detailed priority steps articulated in the Policy Brief on two major
areas:

· Improving the mechanisms for considering progress toward the 2010/2012
targets, including improving the conduct of periodic reporting and selection of
indicators (a theme that runs through a number of the other policy briefs)

· Accelerating efforts to reduce the loss of marine biodiversity at national,
regional, and global levels

3. Considered additional recommendations made in the Policy Brief for possibly
useful roles that could be played by the Global Forum, e.g., the Global Forum could
concentrate on:

· bringing together national economic planners, tourism planners and other
leaders from different oceans sectors to exchange information on how to
create economic growth while fostering marine biodiversity conservation,
and in so doing raise the need for integrated marine and coastal management
planning, as well as the work of the Regional Seas conventions

· highlighting successful initiatives which demonstrate the value of marine
biodiversity conservation through, for example:

o MPAs that have brought local and national benefits in terms of
alternative livelihoods and strengthening economic growth, through,
for example, fisheries and tourism

o Protection of vulnerable coastal communities and thus adaptation to
climate change

· promoting support for valuation of marine biodiversity and ecosystem
services

iv
· facilitating efforts to build up a global picture of existing MPA initiatives (see
the related discussions of the SIDS Working Group) and encourage sharing of
information and expertise

· exploring the possibility of a Friends of the Jakarta Mandate Group

· promoting partnership work on key issues such as coral reef and mangrove
monitoring and management through organizations such as Reef
Check/GCMRN.

· encouraging the development of a reporting mechanism for CBD and other
international bodies that helps Parties to contribute data on marine
biodiversity trends and MPA status to the global centers and databases (e.g.
WDPA, WCPA-Marine, ReefBase, GCRMN) for analysis, and that ensures
good dissemination of the results and benefits to all those involved from
provision of better data on trends

· supporting opportunities and funding for activities that increase the exchange
of information and lessons learned among the marine conservation
community so that progress toward the 2012 target accelerates.


The Global Forum Secretariat is indebted to Sue Wells, UK, for her work in preparing
the policy brief. Many thanks are due to Dr. Jihyun Lee, Environmental Affairs
Office for Marine and Coastal Biodiversity, Secretariat of the Convention on
Biological Diversity, for leading the Working Group with great energy and efficiency,
and to the many other contributions made by Working Group leaders and members to
the report. We also are very grateful to the following individuals who provided
specific input and comment on the text: Chris Tompkins (UK, formerly with
DEFRA), Gregor Hodgson (ReefCheck), Clive Wilkinson (GCRMN), Yvonne
Sadovy (IUCN/SSC), Nicholas Pilcher (IUCN/SSC Marine Turtle Specialist Group),
James Hardcastle and Alan White (TNC), Colleen Corrigan (UNEP-WCMC), and
Kristian Teleki (ICRAN).








Biliana Cicin-Sain
Global
Forum
on
Oceans,
Coasts,
and






Islands













v

POLICY BRIEF:
MARINE BIODIVERSITY AND
NETWORKS OF MARINE PROTECTED AREAS

1. Introduction
sharks and horseshoe crabs have the potential

to play vital roles in the development of
In April 2002, the Conference of the Parties to
treatments for cancer, muscle diseases, and
the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
chronic pain4.
committed themselves to achieving by 2010 a

significant reduction in the current rate of
The world's population is gravitating towards
biodiversity loss at the global, regional and
the oceans, adding to pressures on an already
national level as a contribution to poverty
stressed marine resource base. 70% of cities
alleviation and to the benefit of all life on
with populations over 8 million are now
Earth. This target was subsequently endorsed
located on the coast. 90% of sewage is simply
by the world's political leaders at the World
dumped into the sea in developing countries,
Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD)
and half the world's coastal wetlands have
in 2002 and the United Nations General
disappeared. 75% of global fisheries are fully
Assembly (UNGA) and was incorporated as a
utilised or over-fished, and 60% of coral reefs
new target under the Millennium Development
are threatened, along with the benefits to
Goals.
livelihoods, biodiversity, coastal protection

and medical advances.
The case for conserving marine biodiversity is

compelling. It is essential to human life in
Marine protected areas (MPAs) are key tools
numerous ways ­ providing food and essential
for halting marine biodiversity loss and
compounds for drugs and technology; tourism
achieving the 2010 biodiversity target.
attractions and recreational activities, and
Ranging in kind from strict protection to
protection from storms and shore erosion. The
multiple-use, they provide an effective
potential global value of marine ecosystems is
mechanism to combine long term conservation
vast, and may well outweigh terrestrial
of marine resources with economic
equivalents1. Marine fish and invertebrates are
development and food security, providing
the last source of wild food on the planet,
opportunities for coastal communities to
providing over 2.6 billion people with at least
generating income, creating jobs, and
20% of their average per capita protein
providing for recreation and tourism. They
intake2. Globally, almost US$ 10 billion is
provide a model of the value of the ecosystem
spent on coral reef tourism every year;
approach, and will be a key tool in future
potential fishing benefits from healthy coral
adaptation strategies to address climate
reefs are estimated at US$ 5.7 billion
change.
annually3. Marine species such as cone shells,

Article 8 of the CBD requires Parties to

establish a system of protected areas or areas
1 The following global estimated values of marine
where special measures need to be taken to
ecosystems are often quoted: US$24,000ha/yr for
estuaries, US$20,000 ha/yr for seagrass/algal beds,
conserve biological diversity. In 2002, the
US$10,000 for mangroves and tidal marshes, and
WSSD called for the "establishment of
US$6,000 for coral reefs (Costanza et al. 1997. The
marine protected areas consistent with
value of the world's ecosystem services and natural
international law and based on scientific
capital. Nature 387: 253­260.). These figures are
information, including representative
often disputed but nevertheless give some idea of
networks by 2012". Subsequently, at the 7th
the economic importance of marine ecosystems..
2 Nellemann, C., Hain, S., and Alder, J. (Eds).

2008. In Dead Water ­ merging of climate change
Social Benefits of Protected Areas. Secretariat of
with pollution, over-harvest, and infestations in the
the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal,
world's fishing grounds. UNEP, GRID-Arendal,
30 pages.
Norway, www.grida.no
4 Chivian, E. and Bernstein, A. (eds). 2008.
3 Mulongoy, K.J. and S.B. Gidda (2008). The Value
Sustaining Life: How Human Health Depends on
of Nature: Ecological, Economic, Cultural and
Biodiversity. Oxford University Press

1
meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the
Technological Advice (SBSTTA 13); the
CBD (COP7) in 2004, Parties committed to
results of a survey circulated to the members
the target in the WSSD Plan of
of the Working Group on Marine Biodiversity
Implementation.
and Networks of Marine Protected Areas by

the Global Forum Secretariat; and a review of
Global sustainable development and poverty
progress made in establishing MPA networks
reduction over the next decade and beyond
that has been undertaken by the UNEP World
requires healthier oceans and stable coastal
Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-
communities, both of which depend on
WCMC) and the UNEP Regional Seas
reversing the declining trends in marine
Programme (UNEP RSP)7.
biodiversity. This Policy Brief provides a

preliminary review of the progress made at
2. Preliminary Assessment of
global, regional, and/or national levels in
meeting the global target for biodiversity in
progress in achieving 2010 and
relation to the marine environment, and the
2012 targets
targets for representative networks of MPAs. It

provides a comparison with the review
At the CBD COP7, an elaborated POW on
undertaken by the Global Forum in 20065,
marine and coastal biological diversity was
summarises the main problems and obstacles
adopted (Annex 1 to Decision VII/50 that is
to achieving the targets, and identifies priority
aimed at assisting Parties to implement the
policy issues and recommendations for
Jakarta Mandate. It identifies key operational
addressing these. A draft was presented at the
objectives and priority activities within five
4th Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts, and
programme elements, namely: (i)
Islands (7-11 April 2008, Hanoi, Vietnam) and
implementation of integrated marine and
this revision incorporates the outcomes of
coastal area management; (ii) marine and
some of the discussions held there. The Brief
coastal living resources; (iii) marine and
will also contribute to discussions at the World
coastal protected areas; (iv) mariculture; and
Ocean Conference (11-15 May 2009, Manado,
(v) invasive alien species. This Brief is
Indonesia), and to the in-depth review of the
concerned with the elements relating to marine
CBD Programme of Work (POW) on marine
and coastal living resources (excluding the
and coastal biological diversity that will be
specific topic of fisheries which is covered
undertaken at COP10 in 2010.
elsewhere), MPAs and invasive alien species.
The Brief was prepared using information
The CBD's Programme of Work on Protected
from a number of sources including: the
Areas (POWPA) is also relevant and progress
review and synthesis6 of the 3rd National
made towards some of the activities defined
Reports to the CBD; the information papers
under this is also reviewed.
for and the report of the 13th meeting of the

Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and
2.1. Marine Biodiversity


For both terrestrial and marine biodiversity,
5 Cicin-Sain, B., Vandeweerd, V., Bernal, P.A.,
assessing global progress towards the 2010
Williams, L.C. and Balgos, M.C. 2006. Meeting the
Commitments on Oceans, Coasts, and Small Island
target is not easy given the paucity of
Developing States Made at the 2002 World
consistent and repeated measures, although at
Summit on Sustainable Development: How Well
national and regional scales there are more
Are We Doing? Co-Chairs' Report--Volume 1,
datasets8. Since the target is ``a significant
Third Global Conference on Oceans, Coasts and
reduction in the current rate of loss of
Islands, June 2006.
biological diversity'' the rate of loss must be
6 Refer to documents UNEP/CBD/WG-RI/2/INF/1,
measured, which means that at least three
UNEP/CBD/WG-RI/2/INF/1/Add.1,
UNEP/CBD/WG-RI/2/INF/1/Add.2, and

UNEP/CBD/WG-RI/2/INF/1/Add.3. Note that 134
7 Establishing national and regional networks of
Parties had submitted their 3rd national reports as of
MPAs ­ a review of progress with lessons learned.
January 2008, but only 123 reports were loaded in
Draft report to UNEP-WCMC and UNEP Regional
the National Reports Analyzer and were used in the
Seas Programme, 2008.
analysis for this Policy Brief (see
8 Biodiversity. Chap 4 in Millennium Ecosystem
http://www.cbd.int/reports/analyzer.shtml)
Assessment

2
estimates need to be available prior to 2010;
·
Trends in extent of selected biomes,
measures at only two different points in time
ecosystems and habitats
will show absolute change but not changes in
·
Trends in abundance and distribution
rate. A further complication is that, in highly
of selected species
degraded ecosystems, the rate of loss may be
·
Change in status of threatened species
reduced simply because any further loss has to

be at a slower rate, a situation that may be
2.1.1. Trends in extent of selected biomes,
occurring with some coral reefs and
ecosystems and habitats
mangroves. The choice of baseline against

which change is measured is thus important - a
For some habitats and ecosystems, existing
slight increase over a short period of time
assessment and monitoring programmes are
could be interpreted as a reduction in rate,
providing preliminary data on progress
whereas if the same increase is compared with
towards the 2010 target, but for many there is
a historically longer and greater decline it may
no information. Although this indicator
be evident that there has been no overall
specifies trends in `extent', it is equally
reduction in biodiversity loss.
important that trends in `health' or `quality' of

an ecosystem are measured. Ecosystems, such
Assessing global progress is particularly
as pelagic waters and abyssal plains, may
difficult for marine biodiversity as, in addition
change little in extent, but their `health' in
to the lack of knowledge on current rates of
terms of the species that live within them is
loss, we have no clear baseline starting point.
vitally important. Biomes, ecosystems and
We do not yet understand the full scope of
habitats for which data are available at the
marine biodiversity, with thousands of species
global level include tropical coral reefs,
still undescribed, many marine ecosystems and
mangroves, sea grass beds, estuaries and the
habitats poorly understood, and knowledge of
deep sea and these are reviewed below.
marine genetic resources still in its infancy.

We do not even know how many marine

species have scientific names, with estimates
1. Tropical Coral Reefs
ranging between 300,000 and one million.

The estimated total of existing marine species
The CBD's POW puts particular emphasis on
is equally vague, ranging between 500,000 and
coral reefs given their extreme vulnerability.
100 million, with vast numbers of small
Tropical coral reefs are comparatively well
organisms and prokaryotes awaiting
monitored and mapped and, unlike many
description9. What has been known for many
ecosystems, some quantitative assessments can
years is the enormous diversity of the marine
be made. This is largely a result of the Global
environment, with 32 of the 33 animal phyla
Coral Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN)
being found in the sea, and 15 of these being
which was established in 1995, as part of the
exclusively marine.
International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI), and

its 17 regional networks. Global status reports
Three of the `2010 Indicators' proposed by the
are produced on a regular basis, with the next
CBD10 to help assess progress towards the
one due in 200811. A parallel monitoring
targets address biodiversity status are
network, Reef Check was established in 2006
discussed in the following sections:
to mobilize volunteer divers and communities
to monitor of reefs and raise awareness; it runs
the only standard volunteer monitoring

program with teams in 93 countries and
9 UNEP (2007) Deep-Sea Biodiversity and
territories. Data from both the GCRMN and
Ecosystems: A scoping report on their socio-
Reef Check are sent to the global coral reef
economy, management and governance. UNEP-
database, ReefBase, established at the
WCMC Biodiversity Series No 28 (www.unep-
wcmc.org/resources/publications/UNEP_WCMC_b
WorldFish Center in Penang Malaysia. An
io_series); UNEP Regional Seas Reports and
additional assessment tool is the Millennium
Studies N° 184

(www.unep.org/regionalseas/Publications/Reports/
11 Wilkinson, C. (ed). 2004. Status of Coral Reefs
Series_Reports/Reports_and_Studies)
of the World: 2004. Australian Institute of Marine
10 http://www.twentyten.net/target.aspx
Science, Townsville, Queensland.

3
Coral Reef Mapping Project, a product of the
places, particularly around the Lesser Antilles,
Institute for Marine Remote Sensing at the
coral cover has declined by 50% and
University of South Florida and funded by the
populations of key reef-building species by
Oceanography Program of the National
73%. Many corals were still bleached into
Aeronautics and Space Administration
2006 and in a few places they were still
(NASA); it is planning to release a worldwide
bleached in 2007 or were succumbing to
inventory of coral reefs using high-resolution
disease. The report predicts that coral
satellite imagery in July 2008.
bleaching will occur more frequently by 2030

and is likely to be an annual event by 2100.
There are an estimated 28.4 million ha of coral

reef. The summary of the GCRMN 2004
A further tool is the Reefs at Risk assessment
assessment, based on the opinions of the 240
of threats to coral reefs, produced by a
authors, is that12:
partnership lead by the World Resources

Institute (WRI) and the International Coral
·
About 20% of the world's reefs have
Reef Action Network (ICRAN). The 1998
been effectively destroyed and show
version showed that almost 60% of the world
no immediate prospects of recovery;
reefs were threatened by human activities,
·
About 16% of the world's reefs were
with 35% of reefs threatened by
seriously damaged by coral bleaching
overexploitation, and over 30% by coastal
in 1998, but of these about 40% have
development. More detailed regional analyses
either recovered or are recovering
were undertaken for the Caribbean (2004) and
well;
Southeast Asia (2002) and showed similar
·
About 24% of the remaining reefs are
trends16. A revised global assessment will be
under imminent risk of collapse
released in 2008.
through human pressures; and

Despite this gloomy situation, there is much
·
A further 26% are under a longer-
activity underway to attempt to reverse these
term threat of collapse.
trends as indicated by the 3rd national reports

to the CBD as shown in Table 1; it should be
These conclusions are supported by trends
noted that this table considerably under-
identified by ReefCheck13, and by the regional
estimates the initiatives being undertaken;
GCRMN reports for the tsunami-affected
many countries have failed to report their
countries14 and Caribbean15. In the Caribbean,
activities to the CBD. A more complete review
abnormally high sea temperatures caused
is available in Wilkinson (2006)12.
severe coral mortality as a result of bleaching
or subsequent infections by disease. In some

12 Wilkinson, C. 2006. Status of coral reefs of the
world: summary of threats and remedial action.
Chap 1. In: Cote, I.M. and Reynolds, J.D. (Eds).
Coral Reef Conservation. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, UK.
13 Hodgson, G. 1999. A global assessment of
human effects on coral reefs. Mar. Poll. Bull. 38(5)
345-355.
Hodgson, G. and J. Liebeler. 2002. The global
coral reef crisis ­ trends and solutions. Reef Check,
Institute of the Environment, University of
California, Los Angeles.77 pp
14 Wilkinson, C., Souter, D.and Goldberg, J. 2005.
Status of Coral Reefs in Tsunami Affected
Countries: 2005. Australian Institute of Marine
Science, Townsville, Queensland.
15 Wilkinson, C. and Souter, D. 2005. Status of
Caribbean Coral Reefs after Bleaching and
Hurricanes in 2005. Australian Institute of Marine

Science, Townsville, Queensland.
16 http://www.wri.org/project/reefs-at-risk

4
Table 1. Number of Parties reporting coral reef progress according to the 3rd national reports to
the CBD, as of January 2008. Total number of reporting countries = 123 of which c. 80 have
reefs.

Coral Reef Intervention
% reporting
Examples of national efforts
countries with
reefs (no.
countries)
Integrated coastal
43 (34)
Brazil: atlas of coral reefs; initiatives taken to
management and protected
establish a Coral Reef Protection Network.
areas
St Lucia: 26 marine reserves established and being
managed by Soufriere Marine Management
Authority.
Viet Nam efforts on coral reef protection closely
linked to integrated coastal management projects.
Philippines: Focus on Tubbataha Reef National
Marine Park and World Heritage Site.
Ecological assessment and
54 (43)
Brazil: baseline for national monitoring program
monitoring of reefs
linked to the GCRMN established;
Japan: International coral reef research and
monitoring centre set up in 2000, responsible for
long-term national coral monitoring program, and 5-
yearly survey of coral coverage.
Socio-economic assessments 41 (33)
Australia: undertaken as part of the Great Barrier
and monitoring of
Reef Marine Park Authority (GBRMPA)'s Climate
communities and
Change Response Program.
stakeholders
Indonesia: undertaken in 10 provinces through
COREMAP (Coral Reef Rehabilitation and
Management Program);
Stakeholder partnerships,
50 (40)

community participation
programmes and public
education campaigns in
place
Initiatives to identify and
28 (22)
India: underway through the "Techno-socio-
implement additional and
economic program" with CORDIO (Coral Reef
alternative livelihoods for
Degradation in the Indian Ocean Programme)
people who directly depend
Indonesia: inter-ministerial collaborative efforts
on coral reef services
underway.
Efforts on restoration and
34 (27)
Malaysia: State Committee for inland and coastal
rehabilitation of degraded
water assessed the need for coral rehabilitation
coral reef habitats
including artificial reef development
Japan: launched a coral reef rehabilitation project in
2005; published a manual for reef restoration and
remediation.
Development of an early
15 (12)
Australia: the GBRMPA has established a coral
warning system for coral
bleaching response that includes an early warning
bleaching as well as a rapid
system and rapid response capability, and involves
response capability to
building partnerships with various stakeholders; the
document coral bleaching
GBRMPA Climate Change Response Program
and mortality
includes identification and implementation of
adaptation strategies.
Brazil: project on global climate change and coral
bleaching
St Lucia: monitoring of coral bleaching underway



5
2. Mangroves
but in the future data should become available

through various the monitoring programmes
Global mangrove cover in 2005 was estimated
including SeaGrassNet (primarily for
at 15.2 million ha, with the largest areas in
managers and professionals; a global protocol
Asia and Africa followed by North and Central
is being developed that involves quarterly data
America. Twenty percent, or 3.6 million ha
collection) and Seagrass Watch (a monitoring
have been lost from the 18.8 million covering
programme for communities and volunteers)20.
the planet in 1980. The rate of net loss appears
Small scale studies have shown that seagrass
to have slowed recently but is still very high:
beds are undergoing significant declines both
from about 185,000 ha a year in the 1980s to
in extent and in health, and these losses are
about 102,000 ha a year over the period 2000-
expected to accelerate, particularly in South-
200517. The major causes of mangrove decline
East Asia and the Caribbean, as human
are conversion to aquaculture and agriculture,
pressure on the coastal zone grows21.
and urban, residential and tourism

development.
4. Estuaries

There has been much greater attention to this
Worldwide, there are about 1,200 major
ecosystem since the 2004 tsunami, which
estuaries covering some 500,000 km2. Some
raised awareness of the value of mangroves,
idea of their status can be obtained from a
particularly in terms of shore protection. In
study22 of the magnitude and causes of
2007 FAO identified 2900 national and
ecological change in 12 estuaries and coastal
subnational data sets on the extent of
seas23 in Europe, North America, and
mangrove forests17. For example, Malaysia has
Australia. This traced changes in important
completed an assessment and monitoring of
species, habitats, water quality parameters and
mangrove ecosystems using remote sensing
species invasions from the onset of human
and geographic information system (GIS), and
settlement to the present day, using
launched a national mangrove replanting
palaeontological, archaeological, historical,
programme. Extensive replanting programmes
and ecological records. The primary cause of
have been initiated particularly in South-East
estuarine damage was human exploitation
Asia, which should lead ultimately to
which caused 95% of species depletions and
increased extent, and reduction in the rate of
96% of extinctions, often in combination with
loss, but not necessarily to the full biodiversity
habitat destruction. Most mammals, birds and
complement compared with original
reptiles in estuaries were depleted by 1900 and
mangroves forests. The Mangroves for the
had declined further by 1950. Among fish,
Future initiative, led by IUCN (International
salmon and sturgeon were depleted first,
Union for Conservation of Nature) in
followed by tuna and sharks, cod and halibut,
collaboration with a range of partners, is using
and herring and sardines. Oysters were the
mangroves as a flagship to promote sound
first invertebrate resource to degrade because
coastal management in the tsunami affected
of their value and accessibility as well as
countries18.
destructive harvesting methods. Human


3. Sea grass beds
20 http://www.seagrassnet.org

21 Duarte, C.M. 2002. The future of seagrass
Seagrasses cover about 0.1­0.2% of the global
meadows. Environmental Conservation 29: 192-
ocean. In 2003, UNEP-WCMC produced the
206
World Atlas of Seagrasses with an associated
22 Lotze,H.K., Lenihan, H.S., Bourque, B.J.,
database that is being continually updated19.
Bradbury, R.H., Cooke, R.G., Kay, M.C., Kidwell,
At present there are no global assessments
S.M., Kirby, M.X., Peterson, C.H., Jackson, B.C.
showing trends in the extent of this ecosystem
2006. Depletion, degradation and recovery
potential of estuaries and coastal seas. Science 23

(312) 5781:1806 - 1809
17 FAO 2007. The World's Mangroves 1980-2005.
23 Massachusetts Bay, Delaware Bay, Chesapeake
FAO Forestry Paper 153, FAO, Rome.
Bay, Pamlico Sound, Galveston Bay, Francisco
18 www.mangrovesforthefuture.org
Bay, Western Baltic Sea, Wadden Sea, Northern
19 Green, E.R. and Short, F.T. 2003. World Atlas of
Adriatic Sea, Southern Gulf of St. Lawrence, Outer
Seagrasses. UNEP-WCMC
Bay of Fundy, and Moreton Bay

6
impacts also destroyed over 65% of seagrass
·
Cold water coral reefs: these cover an
and wetland habitat, degraded water quality,
estimated 284,300 km2, mainly on the
and accelerated species invasions.
edge of continental shelves or on
seamounts; they grow at about one tenth
The same study found that some species,
of the speed of tropical reefs; corals are
notably birds and seals, were recovering, with
less diverse but overall diversity
78% of recoveries due to reduction of at least
approaches that of coral reefs.
two of three identified human activities:
·
Hydrothermal vents: these are found
resource exploitation, habitat destruction, and
along all active mid-ocean ridges and
pollution. Conservation efforts have led to
back-arc spreading centers; the Inter
partial recovery of upper trophic levels but
Ridge Hydrothermal Vent Database lists
have so far failed to restore former ecosystem
212 separate known vent sites and there
structure and function. The trends suggest that
are likely to be more. Over 470 species
estuaries may have passed the low point and
have been recorded from hydrothermal
are on the path to recovery in developed
vents, of which 91% are endemic. Micro-
countries but that in developing countries,
organisms predominate and thousands of
population growth may further increase
low-abundance populations account for
degradation. In the coming years invasive
most of the observed diversity between
species and climate change may play a larger
phyla (molluscs (29%), crustaceans
role in stressing estuarine resources.
(33%), and polychaetes (17%)).
Biogeographic differentiation of the vents
5. Deep Sea
is not yet understood.

·
Sponge reefs: these are constructed by
Rapid progress is being made in our
glass sponges; they are slow-growing;
understanding of the deep seas and seabed24
still relatively unknown and the only
and there is now a growing body of
known sites are in Canadian waters;
information on some of the key ecosystems.
associated communities are very diverse.
This will provide an important baseline for
·
Cold seeps (oil and gas seeps): These are
developing long-term monitoring programmes.
found at depths of between <15 m to

>7,400 m in all oceans in except the Polar
·
Seamounts: The Census of Marine Life
regions, and only a small fraction of them
project (CenSeam) is collating
have been located and mapped. Cold seep
information on this ecosystem. About
communities produce organic carbon in
100,000 seamounts over 1 km high have
large quantities through microbial
been identified, as well as many smaller
chemosynthesis, and this contributes to
ones. At least 70% are located in marine
the high biomass present and the large
areas beyond national jurisdiction.
size of the fauna. These communities are
Seamounts are of particular conservation
dominated by symbiont-bearing
concern as they are often linked with cold
tubeworms, mussels, and clams, often
water coral reefs and hydrothermal vents,
belonging to genera occurring also at
attract predators and have high species
hydrothermal vents.25
biodiversity (c. 800 fish species
The recent synthesis prepared by the CBD26
described), with an estimated 20%
demonstrated that there is clear evidence of
endemism. Many seamount communities
detrimental human impact on these habitats in
have been depleted by overfishing.
the form of destructive fishing practices, such

as bottom trawling, as well as climate change,
24 UNEP (2007) Deep-Sea Biodiversity and
pollution, mining, research, bioprospecting,
Ecosystems: A scoping report on their socio-
and carbon sequestration. Conservation action
economy, management and governance. UNEP-
is therefore needed on the basis of the
WCMC Biodiversity Series No 28 (www.unep-
precautionary approach, even if though
wcmc.org/resources/publications/UNEP_WCMC_b
scientific understanding is still imperfect.
io_series); UNEP Regional Seas Reports and
Studies N° 184

(www.unep.org/regionalseas/Publications/Reports/
25 UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/13/INF/13
Series_Reports/Reports_and_Studies)
26 UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/13/INF/11

7
Urgent research efforts are needed to identify
Information System (OBIS)30. The associated
the potential impacts of ocean acidification,
World Register of Marine Species (WoRMS)
which is a major threat, particularly to cold
allows for the listing all published names of
water corals.
marine species; 100,000 names had been listed

by the end of 2007 and it is intended that
2.1.2. Trends in abundance and distribution
200,000 should be listed by the end of 2008.
of selected species


For a few well-studied species, primarily the
Data on trends in abundance and distribution
larger, more `charismatic' species (seabirds,
of marine species are very limited. The
turtles, cetaceans, large fish), long-term
``shifting baseline syndrome'' first described
population data are available, and some
in the context of fisheries (i.e., that every new
examples are given below.
generation accepts as a baseline the population

size and species composition present when
Marine turtles: Data on marine turtles are
they started measurements), is a particular
compiled through a number of initiatives, and
issue in the marine environment27, given the
databases have been established at UNEP
very recent ability to measure marine
WCMC, the Archie Carr Sea Turtle Research
biodiversity and the lack of knowledge about
Center in Florida, the Pacific Regional
pristine communities before human activities
Environment Programme, and the IOSEA
began to have an impact. Projected changes
Secretariat in Bangkok. A recent world wide
due to climate change also mean that it is very
review of over 80 key nesting stocks of the
urgent to establish current distributions of
hawksbill Eretmochelys imbricata showed that
marine species. There is already evidence that
while many populations are stable or even
warm water species of fish, benthic and
increasing, the majority remain far below
intertidal organisms and plankton are moving
historical levels.
polewards in both hemispheres: for example,

warm water copepods (crustaceans) have
Cetaceans: Whale populations are monitored
moved northwards by about 1000 km within
by the Scientific Committee of the
the last 40-50 years in the North-East
International Whaling Commission. Three
Atlantic28.
species show increasing trends for some

populations (gray whale Eschrichtius robustus
A baseline for marine biodiversity is being
- eastern north Pacific; bowhead whale
established through the Census of Marine Life
Balaena mysticetus - Bering-Chukchi-Beaufort
(CoML)29, a 10-year programme that started in
Seas stock; humpback whale Megaptera
2000 and involves over 2000 researchers from
novaeangliae - western north Atlantic and
over 80 countries. It will release its first
Southern Hemisphere south of 60oS in
comprehensive report in 2010. It comprises a
summer), reflecting recovery following a
number of interlinked programmes including
period of heavy harvesting pressure. However,
zooplankton (CmarZ), marine microbes,
these are very small changes in the context of
abyssal marine life, seamounts, coral reefs
major overall declines of whale species since
(CReefs), and shore areas (Natural Geography
the onset of commercial whaling.31
In Shore Areas (NaGISA). Data gathered

through these programmes are deposited in the
Seabirds: the Global Seabird Programme,
global database of the Ocean Biogeographical
which is co-ordinated on behalf of the
BirdLife International Partnership, by the
Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

(RSPB), is documenting trends in seabird
27 www.shiftingbaselines.org; Jackson et al. 200.
populations; many species, such as albatross,
Historical overfishing and the recent collapse of
are showing significant declines.
marine ecosystems. Science 293 (5530): 629 - 637

28 Nellemann, C., Hain, S., and Alder, J. (Eds).
2008. In Dead Water ­ merging of climate change
with pollution, over-harvest, and infestations in the

world's fishing grounds. UNEP, GRID-Arendal,
30 www.iobis.org
Norway, www.grida.no
31 Biodiversity. Ch 4. in Millenium Ecosystem
29 www.coml.org
Assessment

8
Fig.1. Trends in catches in oceanic

ecosystems between 1960 and 200032










Fish: The global decline of commercially
(3.7%) of the 41,415 species on the IUCN Red
important fish stocks or populations is
List (20 March 2008) are marine, with the
relatively well documented (see examples in
majority being seabirds, turtles, marine
Fig.1). All recorded shark species within the
mammals, sharks, and rays.
North Atlantic, with the exception of makos,

have experienced a decline of more than 50%
in the past 8­15 years, largely

due to increased
bycatch from pelagic long-line fisheries and
direct exploitation for shark fins. Sharks

grow
and reproduce slowly, so even if exploitation
were stopped, their recovery would be slow 24.

opulatio
P
ns of coral reef fish are also
declining in abundance, particularly those
species that depend on corals for food or
shelter33.

.1.3. Change in status of
2
threatened species

he IUCN Red List34
T
is the most objective and
authoritative listing of species considered
globally at risk of extinction. Species are
assigned to different categor
on
ies depending

the degree of threat, which is assess

ed in detail
Marine extinctions have, until recently, been
through a process involving numerous experts
significantly under-rated and it is only now
and the relevant IUCN/SSC Specialist Group
that the extent of local and regional extinctions
where this exists. At present, only 1,530
are being understood, as well as the global
implications of such events for marine

biodiversity.
32 Myers, R., and Worm, B. 2003. Rapid worldwide

depletion of predatory fish communities. Nature
Measuring the change in status of threatened
423: 280-283.
33 Pratchett MS, Munday MS, Wilson SK, Graham
species requires that there are several
NAJ, Cinner JE, Bellwood DR, Jones GP, Polunin
assessments of a species according to the Red
NVC, McClanahan TR (2008) Effects of climate-
List criteria over time. Seabirds are the only
induced coral bleaching on coral-reef fishes:
marine species group for which such data are
ecological and economic consequences.
available and for which trends in the
Oceanography and Marine Biology: An Annual
conservation status (i.e. whether the species
Review 46: 251-296.
are moving from a more threatened Red List
34 www.iucnredlist.org

9
category (e.g. Critical, Endangered) to a less
for distinct population segments, further
threatened category (e.g. Vulnerable)) can be
refining the review and assessment process.
seen. The Red List Indices (RLIs) method has

been developed to help measure this. The Red
The IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group will
List Index for any particular taxonomic group
publish its 2088 Global Shark Red List
is based on the number of species in each Red
Assessment this year: a significant proportion
List category, and on the number of species
of shark stocks qualify for inclusion on the
changing categories between assessments as a
IUCN Red List. Invertebrates and other fish
result of genuine improvement or deterioration
species have received much less attention,
in status. An analysis for all bird species
partly because it was difficult to apply the Red
shows that their overall threat status has
List criteria. In 1996, a marine Red-Listing
continued to deteriorate since 1988 (Figure 2);
workshop on fishes led to refinement of some
disaggregated indices show that particularly
of the criteria to better reflect the specific
steep declines in the indices for seabirds and
characteristics of marine organisms. The SSC
for albatrosses and petrels in particular (driven
Marine Conservation Sub-Committee
by incidental mortality in commercial longline
(MCSC) was established in 2005 to focus
fisheries) 35.
marine conservation initia
ivities
tives and act

within the SSC,37 and looks at bycatch,
Marine mammals, sharks and turtles have also
overexploitation in the context of the 2010
been assessed under the Red List criteria and
sustainability indicators, trade data, and
ultimately it may be possible to undertake such
promotes documentation of Life history
analyses. The IUCN Species Survival
spectacles, i.e. life history phases that
of
are
Commission (SSC) Marine Turtle Specialist
critical importance for species or
Group36 (MTSG) conducts frequent updates to
populations persistence, especially when
the Red List status of these species, drawing
on a network of some 300 specialists around
pacted.
these are exploited or otherwise im

the globe. Regional initiatives linked with the

MTSG include WIDECAST (in the
In 2005, the Global Marine Species
38
Caribbean), the Mediterranean Sea Turtle
sse
A
ssment (GMSA) was set up as a joint
Working Group, the IOSEA MoU (Indian
, with
effort of IUCN/SSC under the MCSC
Ocean and Southeast Asia), the Abidjan MoU
Conservation International (CI) and other
(West Africa) and a new initiative for East
partners, to review the conservation status of
Africa. Information is also being collated
every marine vertebrate species and of
through the State of the World's Sea Turtles
select

ed invertebrates and plants, with a target
(SWOT) project, a partnership of
of 20,000 species assessed by
o
2012. Pri rity
Conservation International and the MTSG.
taxa for assessment were identified at a
The hawksbill was recently re-listed by the
strategy meeting in November 2005 using 10
MTSG as Critically Endangered, but the Olive
criteria including amount of biomass
Ridley Lepidochelys olivacea was recently
extracted, economic value, by-catch, habitat
upgraded from Endangered to Vulnerable
deterioration, importance in comm
ty
uni
following a better understanding of their
structure and function, intrinsically vulne
e
rabl
biology and population status, and as a result
life history regime, and feasibility of
of conservation efforts. Reviews are underway
successful completion of a comprehensive Red
for the Leatherback, the Loggerhead, the
List Assessment for the ent
ic
ire taxonom
Kemp's Ridley and the Flatback. The MTSG
group in question. The priorities include all
has also started to introduce regional listings
fish, habitat-forming primary
ea
producers (s
grass, selected macro-algae, mangroves and

corals) and invertebrates (e.g. selected
35
mollusks and echinoderms - heavily exploited
Butchart SHM, Stattersfield AJ, Bennun
LA, Shutes SM, Akçakaya HR, et al. 2004.

Measuring Global Trends in the Status of

Biodiversity: Red List Indices for Birds PLoS
37 C. Campagna & Y. Sadovy 2006. Final report:
Biology 2(12) e383
Strategic Planning Meeting for the SSC Marine
doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0020383
Conservation Sub-Committee, November, 2006,
36 http://www.seaturtlestatus.org/
Wattens, Austria. 35 pp.
http://www.seaturtlestatus.org/
38 http://www.sci.odu.edu/gmsa

10
sea cucumbers). The GMSA is using the
Pacific and the Indo-Pacific regions; two of
assessment methodology developed by IUCN's
the most common coral species that previously
Biodiversity Assessment Unit, and data are
had a high percentage of coral cover in the
entered into IUCN's Species Information
Caribbean, Acropora palmata and A.
Service database. Distribution maps are
cervicornis, are already on
angered
the US End
compiled for each species, using information
Species list.
from published journal articles and books,

fisheries data, museum collections, and
At the national level, several countries are
FishBase. Some species groups are easier to
starting to undertake the assessments needed
assess on a global level; for example, expertise
to develop a better understanding of the status
in the IUCN Grouper and Wrasses Specialist
of marine biodiversity. For example, Germany
Group permitted a global assessment of these
has prepared Red Lists of endangered animal
two taxa as a whole, but regional workshops
and plant species and biotope types for the
were necessary for sharks and rays, and for the
marine and coastal areas of the German North
reef-building corals. Corals have been
Sea and Baltic Sea, and these will be revised
assessed in the Caribbean, the Eastern Tropical
by 2008.


Invasive Alien Species


In vasive alien species are an emerging threat to marine biodiversity, but have already transformed marine
ha bitats around the world by displacing native species, changing community structure and food webs, and

altering fundamental processes, such as nutrient cycling and sedimentation; they affect fisheries, foul ships'

hulls, clog intake pipes, and damage human health. Only a small fraction of the many marine species
in troduced outside their native range thrive and invade new habitats, but once this happens, it can be l
a most
i
mpossible to eliminate it.

B ore in
ef
itiating eradication measures it is essential to understand which species are likely to be most harmful,
their current distributions and how they are likely to be transported to new regions.1The Nature Conservancy

(TNC) has therefore set up an online database of marine invasive species. A total of 329 species have been

entered; the dominant groups are crustaceans (59 species), molluscs (54), algae (46), fish (38), annelids (31),
pl ants (19), and cnidarians (17). The least invaded areas are the Southern and Arctic Oceans.
siderable effort is being put towards reducing this threat. According to the CBD 3rd
Con
national reports, some

countries have put mechanisms in place to control potential invasions from ballast water (30%), aquaculture

(30%), accidental releases (16%), and hull fouling (7%). Australia has established a National Introduced
M arine Pests Coordination Group (NIMPCG) to develop a comprehensive national system for the prevention

and management of marine pest incursions; In Canada, control of ballast water is being undertaken in

accordance with "Voluntary Guidelines for the Control of Ballast Water Discharges from Ships Proceeding to
th e St. Lawrence River and Great Lakes"; China and South Africa have developed strategic plans of ballast
water management through the demonstration projects of GloBallast (GEF/UNDP/IMO global project of

ballast water management); and Malaysia conducted a regional workshop, through the initiative of
,
NACA on

alien-species carrying pathogens.

S
ources: www.nature.org/marineinvasions; and Molnar, J.L., Gamboa, R.L., Revenga, C. and Spalding, M.D.
20 08. Assessing the global threat of invasive species to marine biodiversity. Frontiers in Ecology and

Environment 6.


2.2. Marine and Coastal Protected Areas
addressing MPAs, or Marine Management

Areas (MMAs) as they are generally known in
he CBD 3 national repor
rd
T
ts submitted by
the Pacific, in their national strategies and
Parties to the CBD during the period of 2005-
actions plans (Table 2).
2008 show that many Parties are


11
Table 2. Parties reporting MPA progress in their 3rd national reports to the CBD, as of January 2008.
Total number of reporting countries = 123.

Conservation Action
% reporting countries
(no. countries)
Designated some MPAs
67% (83)
Plans exist to develop new MPAs
75% (92)
Effective management with
52% (42)
enforcement and monitoring
Plans to improve management
74% (91)
MPA system under development
49% (60)
MPA system in place
28% (34)

This section looks at the following key
take or strictly protected. At the current rate of
parameters involved in meeting the 2012 MPA
progress, therefore it would not be until 2067
target:
that 10% of the oceans would be protected, or
·
Area coverage of MPAs in relation to
2047 to achieve protection of 10% of the
the 10% target
world's EEZs40.
·
Development of representative,

resilient and connected networks or
However, at the local level, considerable
systems39 of MPAs
progress is being made. 67% of countries
·
Management effectiveness
reporting to the CBD have designated at least

some MPAs, and 75% have plans to create
2.2.1. MPA number and area
new MPAs (Table 2). At least 17 countries

have made major commitments to increasing
Although the 2010 target for protected areas is
their MPA coverage, often with more
that 10% of each biogeographic region and
ambitious and longer-term targets than those
habitat should be protected, many scientists
set under the CBD. Good progress is being
and conservationists consider that for MPAs
made in many countries (Table 3) in protecting
the target should be considerably higher,
inshore waters and/or waters over the
possibly up to 30%. According to MPAGlobal,
continental shelf. There is a growing tendency
the database developed by the Sea Around Us
to designate large MPAs covering several
Project in collaboration with UNEP-WCMC,
linked ecosystems.
WWF and IUCN-WCPA, and now being
reintegrated with the World Database on
Protected Areas (WDPA), in March 2008 there
were an estimated 4435 MPAs worldwide,
covering about 2.35 million km2 which is
equivalent to 0.65% of the world's ocean
surface or 1.6% of the world's total EEZ
coverage. This compares with the terrestrial
environment which has 12% coverage by
protected areas. Only 12.8% of the total MPA
area (or 0.08% of the world's oceans) is no-

39 The words `network' and `system' tend to be
used interchangeably by different countries as there
is no agreed definition for either term. The
simplest interpretation of a `system' is a group of
MPAs within a country, in which case all countries
with more than one MPA can be said to be making
progress. However, a system or network of

protected areas is now generally considered to have
40 Wood, L.J., Fish, L., Laughren, J. and Pauly, D.
specific criteria of bioregional representativeness,
in press. Assessing progress towards global marine
adequacy, connectivity etc., and rather fewer
protection targets: shortfalls in information and
countries have taken steps towards this.
action. Oryx

12
Table 3. Examples of national and regional progress in MPA establishment. Sources:
CBD 3rd national reports, UNEP-WCMC (in prep.); 2008-2010 strategy of the Global
Islands Partnership.

Country/region

Palau, Federated States
Micronesia Challenge: a joint commitment by the five countries to conserve
of Micronesia, Marshall
at least 30% of their nearshore waters and 20% of their terrestrial resources
Islands, Guam and
by 2020 - more than 20% of the Pacific Island Region and 5% of the Pacific
Northern Marianas
Ocean,
Kiribati
Phoenix Islands Protected Area (PIPA) - covers 410,000 km2 and includes
much of the country's EEZ; largest MPA in the world.
Fiji
commitment to implement a network of MMAs in 30% of its Exclusive
Economic Zone (EEZ) by 2020
Australia
Establishment of an MPA system that is `comprehensive, adequate and
representative,'; each state is developing its own system, and the
Commonwealth is responsible for establishing an MPA system in non-state
waters. By 2005, there were 214 MPAs, and about 7.5% of the EEZ is
protected (1.6% of mainland EEZ and over 10% of its EEZ around its
offshore islands), of which 3% was no-take; Australia has the world's second
largest MPA, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park.
East Timor, Malaysia,
Coral Triangle, with support from Australia, the US, the GEF, ADB and
Papua New Guinea,
several NGOs.
Philippines, Indonesia,
Solomon Islands
Indonesia
target to gazette 10 million ha of its waters as MPAs by 2010, and 20 million
ha by 2020. There are currently about 120 MPAs, and over 70 new sites have
been proposed. A National Committee for Marine Conservation has been
established to review the existing network and identify gaps.
Vietnam
China
90 marine nature reserves by 2004, of which 24 are at national level
Seychelles, Comoros,
working to improve the management and ecological status of more than 26
Madagascar, Mauritius
marine protected areas in their region, with partners pledging 1.9 million
Euros to support and expand the initiative
South Africa
Target to protect 20% of the coastline by 2010; by 2005, there were 23
MPAs; 23% of the coastline lies within an MPA, and 9% in no-take areas;
networks of MPAs are also under development for the offshore component of
the EEZ and for the EEZ surrounding Prince Edward Islands.
Antigua and Barbuda,
The Caribbean Challenge brings together these island nations which have
Bahamas, Barbados,
committed to protect 10% of their marine ecosystems by 2010 with the
Belize, Cuba, Dominica,
support of a 20 million US$ grant from TNC; some countries have parallel
Dominican Republic,
national goals.
Grenada, Haiti, Jamaica,
St. Kitts and Nevis, St.
Vincent and the
Grenadines, and Trinidad
and Tobago
Brazil
2006 National Plan for Protected Areas; 145 coastal and 22 marine candidate
sites have been identified and there are also a number of existing MPAs.
Canada
National MPA strategy for a federal network of MPAs covering all three of
the oceans has been developed. In addition to the existing Marine Parks
established by Parks Canada, six Marine Protected Areas have been gazetted
by Fisheries and Oceans Canada, including British Columbia's Endeavour
Hydrothermal Vents (2003), the Gully off Nova Scotia which is the largest
marine canyon in the western North Atlantic (2004), and four other new
Atlantic MPAs (2005 and 2007).
Norway
500 coastal nature reserves established under the Nature Conservation Act of
Norway
Germany
established ten MPAs in its EEZ in the North Sea and Baltic Sea as a
contribution to the Natura 2000 network

13
2.2.2. Networks of MPAs
ecosystems ­ with small total areas and

precipitous declines ­ a much greater
Although number of MPAs and the area they
proportion than 10% should be protected.
cover provide useful information on progress
Finer scale regional level assessments are also
towards conserving biodiversity, these
needed; in the North-East Atlantic, for
indicators do not show whether a group of
example, it has been found that 13 of 22
MPAs operates as a network or system.
biogeographic zones still have no MPAs. A
Several sets of criteria have been identified for
growing number of MPAs are being
measuring the adequacy of networks, but the
established for deep sea habitats; for example,
key features are:
Canada and the Azores have protected
·
adequacy ­ size and spatial
hydrothermal vents; the UK, USA and Norway
distribution;
have protected cold water corals; and the
·
representation ­ inclusion of the full
Azores, Madeira and New Zealand have
range of biodiversity;
closed areas of deep sea benthic habitat to
·
resilience (or replication) ­ ensuring
trawling42. Although large areas of pelagic
that the network can withstand major
water are found within MPAs, few sites have
impacts by including multiple
been designated specifically for this
samples; and
ecosystem43.
·
connectivity ­ ensuring linkages

between sites through larval and adult
The principle of resilience has been used
dispersal, currents etc.
relatively little in the planning of MPA

networks, but TNC is testing guidelines for
National networks
addressing resilience in MPA design in

relation to coral reefs and spawning
Table 3 provides examples of some of the
aggregations at several sites. Similarly, few
initiatives underway to develop planned
networks have addressed connectivity but
networks or systems of MPAs at different
rapid research in this field is yielding
spatial or geographical scales.41 28% of
information that can be used for management.
countries reporting to the CBD report that they
For reef species, there is growing evidence
have a national system in place (although the
that dispersal distances of larvae are less than
reporting system does not require elaboration
previously thought and there are indications
as to how this system is defined), and 49%
that there may be significant genetic
report that they are developing a system.
differences between reefs as close as 10-20 km

apart. Inter-MPA distances within a network
At the global level, there is far from adequate
may therefore need to be as little as 20 km. A
representation of all ecosystems and
preliminary assessment suggests that just over
biogeographic regions. About 65% of the total
50% of existing MPAs are within at least 10-
marine area protected is in tropical waters,
20 km of another MPA40. Further research is
with most of the remainder in the northern
needed, as well as analysis of existing
hemisphere; southern temperate and polar
networks to determine future best practices in
latitudes are least well represented. Most
relation to connectivity.
MPAs are on the continental shelf and in

coastal waters; an estimated 4.3% of shelf
Regional networks
areas to 200 m depth are protected. At the

ecosystem level, an estimated 17-19% of
At the regional level, MPA network planning
global mangrove cover, 15-22% of coral reefs,
requires a multi-country collaborative
10% of seagrass beds, 8% of estuaries and 2%
approach. Regions with a strong co-ordinating
of seamounts lie within MPAs. For coral
framework and supporting treaty or
reefs, mangroves and seagrass beds, the CBD
agreement, such as those participating in the
target has thus been met, but for such


42 Report of SBSTTA13
41Establishing national and regional networks of
43 Establishing national and regional networks of
MPAs ­ a review of progress with lessons learned.
MPAs ­ a review of progress with lessons learned.
Report to UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring
Draft report to UNEP-WCMC and UNEP Regional
Centre and the UNEP Regional Seas Programme.
Seas Programme, 2008

14
UNEP-RSP, have generally progressed
Sulu-Sulawesi area, as well as a number of
furthest. Regional networks of MPAs are well
national initiatives. The Coral Reef MPAs of
advanced in the North-east Atlantic and Baltic
East Asia and Micronesia is a joint project
regions, through the OSPAR and HELCOM
between the WorldFish Centre and the Japan
processes. Six of the UNEP-RSP regions
Wildlife Research Centre to gather
(Black Sea, East Africa, Mediterranean,
information on MPAs with coral reefs
North-east and South-East Pacific, Wider
throughout the region.
Caribbean and Antarctic) have Protocols that

assist in the establishment of MPAs. The
High Seas MPAs (HSMPAs)
Mediterranean and Wider Caribbean have

Regional Activity Centres for biodiversity and
Some 64% of the world's oceans (c. 202
protected areas that support work on MPAs
million km2) are in areas beyond national
and encourage a more focused and
jurisdiction, and include fragile habitats (e.g.
collaborative approach, with relatively well-
cold water coral reefs, sea mounts and
organized regional networks of organisations
hydrothermal vents) with high biodiversity
and individuals. The Regional Organisation
that are relatively rare in waters under national
for the Protection of the Marine Environment
jurisdiction. At the World Parks Congress in
(ROPME) Region is working on the
2003, a target was set to have at least five
development of an MPA programme.
ecologically significant MPAs designated on

the high seas by 2008. There have been several
Regional MPA network initiatives are also
initiatives to identify sites that might be
underway through the WWF Ecoregion
included in a HSMPA system and criteria are
programmes (e.g. East Africa, Western Indian
being developed. There are significant issues
Ocean, West Africa, Fiji, Sulu-Sulawesi Sea),
in relation to the legal and implementation
and with support of LME (e.g. West Africa)
arrangements for HSMPAs and these are
and WCPA-Marine projects (e.g. South-East
discussed elsewhere.
Asia). The Micronesia and Caribbean

Challenges, and the Coral Triangle Initiative,
Roberts et al. (2005)45 used MARXAN with
are examples of regional networks
global datasets for several taxonomic groups
championed by island nations that work
to design an ecologically representative
together to exchange experiences and
network of potential High Sea marine reserves,
strengthen collaboration through the Global
that they recommend should be made off
Islands Partnership (GLISPA), an open
limits to all extractive and destructive uses.
platform of 20 island Parties, Parties with
The network comprises 25 `marine reserves'
islands and international and regional
and four `reference sites' and would cover
organizations44.
over 40% of the world's oceans. The proposed

sites are representative and comprehensive in
In several cases, smaller regional MPA
relation to data on water temperature
networks are being developed within larger
gradients, upwellings, hotspots for large and
initiatives. Europe has many layers of this
vulnerable species, sea mounts and other
nature, with some 10 agreements and
seabed characteristics. Cheung et al.
initiatives that are developing the MPA system
(2005)46 highlight the following priorities:
approach, e.g. Natura 2000, Emerald network,

four Regional Seas and related Programmes
· the high seas of the Indo-Pacific,
(Mediterranean, Black Sea, OSPAR and
specifically centered on SE Asia,
HELCOM) and the North Sea Conference.
East Asia also has a large number of inter-

related sub-regional programmes including the
45 Roberts, C.M., Mason, L. and Hawkins, J.P.
WCPA-Marine South-East Asia MPA system
2005. Roadmap to Recovery: a global network of
plan for South-East Asia, the WWF and CI
marine reserves. Greenpeace
46
supported Indonesian/Philippine/Malaysian
Cheung, W., Alder, J., Karpouzi, V., Watson, R.,
initiative to establish an MPA system for the
Lam, V., Day, C., Kaechner, K., and Pauly, D.
2005. Patterns of Species Richness in the High

Seas. Technical Series No. 20, Secretariat of the
44 http://www.cbd.int/island/glispa.shtml
Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal. 31

pp.

15
Northern Australia and the Tasman
3. Major obstacles and challenges
Sea;

· seamounts in the high seas of the
The obstacles and challenges to conserving
North and South Atlantic, and the
marine biodiversity and MPAs are similar to
Southern Ocean convergence zone,
those for biodiversity conservation in general.
especially as protecting seamounts and
In their reports to the CBD and in other
surrounding areas will help to protect
reviews48, Parties have tended to rate similar
cold-water corals;
challenges in the implementation of various
· high seas areas adjacent to islands in
articles, provisions and thematic areas of the
the Southern Ocean; and
CBD 49,50. They are summarised as follows
· small shelf areas in the high seas of
and discussed in more detail in Section 4
the Northeast and Northwest Atlantic.
where policy recommendations to overcome

these challenges are described.
Potential HSMPAs have also been identified

by analyzing sea-bird sighting data in the
3.1. Lack of political commitment and
Southern Ocean, on the basis that seabird
support, and political instability: This is
distributions reflect the distribution,
often due to poor understanding of the
abundance, and availability of their prey, and
benefits, goods and services of biodiversity
that high densities of seabirds and/or seabird
and its contribution to sustainable
species diversity is observable in specific areas
development. It can lead to a lack of
over decadal scales. This approach could be
leadership; low national priority for
particularly useful in relation to climate
biodiversity conservation and protected areas;
change, since prey and predator species may
and a poor understanding of national
migrate over the course of coming decades;
commitments and international obligations;
studies could be repeated in, say, 50 years'
and poor regional cooperation; competition for
time, and if the at-sea distributions of seabirds
time amongst decision makers in light of other
change in response to rising sea-surface
global and regional events (such as wars,
temperatures, new candidate MPAs could be
diseases, etc.); lack of access to and required
identified47.
skills for working with / informing decision

makers amongst the conservation community;
2.2.3. Management Effectiveness of MPAs


3.2. Institutional and policy obstacles and
Ensuring the effective management of existing
weaknesses: lack of vision, attitude and
marine and coastal protected areas is as
perceptions; lack of inter-sectoral
important as establishing new areas.
coordination; conflicting legislation;
According to the 3rd CBD national reports,
contradictory government policies limiting
42% of Parties reported that effective
opportunities; lack of multi-stakeholder
management of MPAs has been put in place
coordination mechanisms; limited marketing
with enforcement and monitoring, but it is not
strategies for protected area goods and
known on what basis such judgments were
services; low willingness of governments to
made. 31% reported having an MPA system
implement assessment results; bureaucratic
surrounded by sustainable management
hurdles; lack of transparency in decision-
practices, and 38% responded that their
making process; inadequate law enforcement;
national MPA systems include areas excluding
lack of legislative and policy measures to
extractive uses (i.e. no-take zones). The
retain revenue generated by protected areas;
general experience is that many MPAs are
lack of cooperation between NGOs and
having difficulty meeting their objectives, with
government institutions;
funding shortfalls, low compliance, lack of

enforcement, and other challenges.
3.3. Insufficient human and technical

resources and capacity: inadequate and


47 Harris, J and Woehler, E. 2007. A New
48 Sub-regional capacity building workshops on
Approach to Selecting Marine Protected Areas
protected areas conducted by the CBD in 2007
(MPAs) in the Southern Ocean Antarctic Science
49 Document UNEP/CBD/WG-RI/2/INF/1
19(2): 189-194
50 Document UNEP/CBD/WG-PA/2/2

16
poorly qualified staffing; lack of committed
3.10. Lack of economic incentives: lack of
and enthusiastic personnel; lack of incentives
adequate mechanism of sharing benefits
for dedicated staff; non-continuity of trained
arising from the use of biodiversity resources;
personnel and change of staff;
and limited technology transfer.


3.4. Limited financial resources: insufficient

government allocations ­ low priority for
4. Priority Policy Issues to Move
protected areas; lack of compensatory
Forward
mechanisms; high reliance on one source of
funding; lack of local capacity to generate

revenue; resistance to create new taxes;
There are two key priorities:
limited skills to develop suitable funding

proposals and follow through with donors;
·
reducing the current rate of loss of

marine biodiversity; and
3.5. Lack of suitable data and poor skills in
·
improving our ability to measure
data use: weak linkages in data collection
progress towards the 2010/2012
and analysis; lack of standardized data
targets in relation to marine
collection and management; lack of use of the
biodiversity.
vast current array of data; lack of decision

making skills on limited but useful data sets;
4.1. Reduce the rate of loss of marine
biodiversity


3.6. Lack of `suitable' and easily applicable
The efforts required to reduce the rate of loss
guidelines/tools and insufficient training in
of marine biodiversity are two-fold:
their use: lack of simple, easily

understandable methods and guidance in local
4.1.1. Accelerate efforts to reduce CO2
languages and inadequate dissemination of
emissions
such materials where they exist; training and

information on economic valuation of
Given the immense threat that global climate
biodiversity and protected areas, fund-raising
change poses to marine ecosystems and
(resource mobilization), and in GIS and
species, there is an immediate need to
mapping have been identified in particular.
accelerate local and global actions to reduce
Guidelines and similar tools are not
CO2 emissions. This is not discussed further
necessarily the best means for people to learn
in this Policy Brief, since it is well
complex activities such as MPA management
documented elsewhere, but the fact that
unless accompanied by appropriate training;
climate change is already having a noticeable
sharing of experiences through workshops and
negative impact on marine ecosystems that
exchange visits are also valuable.
provide essential goods and services is a key

argument for some of the essential political,
3.7. Low awareness: by the general public,
economic and social changes that are required.
biodiversity managers, and politicians of the
For example, it has been suggested that
importance of biodiversity conservation, and
atmospheric CO2 concentrations must be
of the requirements of the CBD;
reduced to below double pre-industrial levels

if coral reefs are to survive in something
3.8. Limited or low involvement of
resembling their current form given their
indigenous and local communities and
vulnerability to seawater warming and ocean
various stakeholders: inadequate
acidification51.
involvement of indigenous and local

communities; inadequate participation of
scientific and academic community; local
community resistance; limited public
participation;


51 Wilkinson, C., Souter, D.and Goldberg, J. 2005.
3.9. Lack of mainstreaming and integration
Status of Coral Reefs in Tsunami Affected
of biodiversity issues into other sectors.
Countries: 2005. Australian Institute of Marine
Science, Townsville, Queensland.

17
4.1.2. Accelerate efforts to address
global programme (www.icran.org), and the
immediate/local impacts in order to increase
World Bank-funded Coral Reef Targeted
resilience
Research and Capacity Building for

Management (CRTR) Programme
Given that there is evidence that healthy
(www.gefcoral.org)... There have been
marine ecosystems and communities have
numerous sets of recommendations for coral
greater resilience to some of the negative
reefs (e.g. ICRI recommendations and
impacts of global warming, there is a second
resolutions, recommendations of the GCRMN
immediate need to reduce and eliminate where
annual Status Reviews of Coral Reefs of the
possible those human activities that are
World, WRI's Reefs at Risk initiative, and
contributing to the loss of marine biodiversity.
2004 Okinawa Declaration (endorsed by
This will involve:
participants to the 10th International Coral

Reef Symposium). The following provides a
·
Improving fisheries management to
brief summary of some of the more urgent
reduce overfishing and the use of
steps to be taken:
damaging fishing methods;

·
Introducing effective integrated
1. Strengthen the impact of ICRI
catchment and coastal zone
Although it is the highest global body
management programmes and the
concerned with the future of coral reefs and
ecosystem-based approach to
their conservation and management, ICRI has
minimise the inflow of polluting
relatively poor representation of the 101
sediments and nutrients, regulate
countries with coral reefs. ICRI is not a
tourism development, and ensure
formal treaty-based mechanism which means
appropriate land use planning in
that NGOs may participate and interact
locations that have an impact on the
directly with government representatives
marine environment;
which has much value. But it also allows
·
Establishing effectively managed
members to act independently, and there is no
MPA networks;
official evaluation mechanism or requirement
·
Promoting of environmentally sound
to link with other formal processes, which
ecosystem restoration where
weakens its impact. ICRI could therefore be
appropriate.
strengthened by:


In this Policy Brief, we outline specific needs
·
Encouraging all coral reef countries to
in relation to coral reefs, MPAs, ecosystem
participate and, where appropriate,
restoration and invasive species, given the
establish a national coral reef task
particular relevance of these issues to the
force or committee as part of their
CBD.
coastal/marine management process;

coral reefs should be highlighted in
4.1.3. Protection and Management of Coral
national coastal management plans
Reefs
and, where this does not duplicate

work or detract from existing efforts,
It is essential to make use of the opportunity
national coral reef management and
provided by the designation of 2008 as the
monitoring plans should be produced
International Year of the Reef (IYOR) to push
and implemented.
forward key measures to reverse their decline.
·
Assessing progress in implementation
Several important initiatives are already
of national coral reef plans, and/or
underway and should be continued and
components of national coastal
expanded as appropriate, including the GEF
management plans relevant to coral
Lessons Learned and Best Practices Toolkit
reefs and reporting the results
which has been developed to provide guidance
regularly to the CBD via SBSTTA in
on designing and implementing coral reef
order to evaluate progress in relation
management strategies52, ICRAN and its
to the Jakarta Mandate, Millennium
Development Goals, WSSD goals etc.


52 http://gefll.reefbase.org

18
2. Reduce, and where possible remove, the
management, awareness raising, enforcement
direct pressures on coral reefs
and monitoring, and there is a need for a range
The direct pressures on coral reefs are in most
of capacity building activities (see
instances the same as those threatening other
recommendations).
marine ecosystems, and the solutions are well

known: promote integrated catchment and
4.1.4. Strengthen and expand national and
coastal management, sustainable management
regional MPA networks and improve their
of coral reef fisheries, including halting the
management
use of damaging fishing practices such as

dynamite and protecting spawning sites and
MPA network planning must start, or be
breeding stocks in no-take MPAs; and
accelerated, in all coastal countries as soon as
establishing effectively managed networks of
possible, and implementation fully addressed,
MPAs to protect and restore coral reefs.
if real progress is to be made by 2012. Lack

of funding and political will is proving to be a
3. Improve enforcement of policies and
major constraint in many countries. Parties
regulations that promote effective reef
should promote full and effective participation
management
of indigenous and local communities, in

accordance with the national legislation and
·
ensure that local user communities and
applicable international obligations, when
the private sector are aware of relevant
establishing new MPAs, taking into account,
policies and regulations and have the
as appropriate, the UN Declaration on the
skills and resources to implement them;
Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
·
promote market-based and other

incentives for communities and
Gaps in MPA network development at the
governments to manage their coral reefs
regional level could be reduced through
sustainably;
improved coordination between countries,
·
quantify and promote the role that
facilitated by organizations such as UNEP-
effective management of coral reef
RSP, WCPA-Marine, WWF and TNC; the
resources can play in sustainable
international organizations should also co-
development and poverty alleviation, and
ordinate closely. Where RFMOs and regional
develop supplementary livelihoods to
seas organisations already currently exist (e.g.,
reduce the need to over-exploit coral reef
in the Northeast Atlantic, where OSPAR and
resources;
the North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission
·
devolve sufficient authority to
co-exist), better cooperation and coordinated
communities to develop and run their
action regarding the establishment of MPAs is
own no-take MPAs and implement
required, both within and beyond areas of
enforcement; and develop joint
national jurisdiction. UNEP-WCMC is
enforcement mechanisms between
conducting a review of the approaches and
government and communities to enforce
coordination opportunities for implementing
coral reef related legislation;
MPAs in areas beyond national jurisdiction in
·
strengthen the judiciary, court procedures
a report to be released in 2008. IUCN WCPA-
and penalties so that community efforts
Marine is developing a regionally-based
are supported and infringements treated
coordination framework on MPAs, and an
seriously; and
expert network to assist countries in
·
recognise the role of appropriate
developing MPAs.
traditional knowledge and management

methods in coral reef conservation and
1. Expanding MPA networks
help governments harmonise these with

state and national laws.
MPA networks need to be larger, contain the

most resistant and resilient populations of
4. Improve capacity for coral reef
marine organisms, and be connected in such a
management:
way to ensure free transfer of larvae, juveniles
Many coral reef countries lack adequate
and adults to restock populations and repair
trained personnel and resources for coral reef
damage. Scientific guidance has been provided

19
for designing representative networks by the
incorporating MPAs with different levels of
CBD Expert Workshop on Ecological Criteria
protection (e.g. Cayman Islands, Socotra
and Biogeographic Classification Systems for
Island in Yemen, San Andres Archipelago in
Marine Areas in Need of Protection. Four
Colombia).
initial steps to be taken (Annex III) were

recommended for the development of such
2. Improve management effectiveness of MPAs
networks in open ocean waters and deep-sea

habitats.
Improving management effectiveness requires

capacity building and training, as well as
Regional initiatives should be supported and
better planning and implementation of
promoted, such as the regional initiative to
management plans and involving local
develop MPA networks in the East Asia
communities in the design and management of
region, led by Japan, which will host a
MPAs and enforcement of regulations.
workshop in November-December 2008, with
Increasing the area of MPAs and MPA
a series of follow-up meetings until 2010. A
networks that is closed to fishing also
framework for regional cooperation will be
improves effectiveness.
developed, and the regional MPA database

Coral Reef MPAs of East Asia and Micronesia
Another key tool is assessment of management
expanded53.
effectiveness. This determines both the

conservation impact of the MPA (i.e. what was
MPA networks must also be considered as part
achieved) and its management performance
of broader marine spatial planning (MSP) or
(i.e. how it was done), and thus helps to
ocean zoning, and as part of integrated coastal
identify where improvements are needed.
management54. MSP, which is broadly
Under the 2004 CBD POWPA (Goal 4.2) 30%
equivalent to land use planning in the
of protected areas should be assessed for their
terrestrial environment, is already an agreed
management effectiveness by 2010.
approach in several countries and regions
Assessment methods range from the detailed
including UK, Belgium, Netherlands, Canada,
indicator-based approach developed by
North Sea, China and Germany55. The South-
NOAA/WCPA-Marine, to the simple score
east Region MPA System Plan in Australia
cards developed by the World Bank, as well as
demonstrates how an MPA network can be
region-specific methods (e.g. IUCN/WIOMSA
integrated into a range of broader measures,
workbook Western Indian Ocean MPAs).
such as recovery plans for listed species,
Information on these methods and the MPAs
fishery management closures and regulations
where they have been used is available in the
for oil and gas activities. Belize demonstrates
online Protected Areas Management
how a national MPA system can be part of an
Effectiveness (PAME) Information Module
integrated coastal management plan, can link
developed by UNEP-WCMC and IUCN-
with regional systems of MPAs (in this case
WCPA and linked to the WDPA56.
through the MAR initiatve), and also

incorporate international protected area
There has been no comparative analysis of
designations (the Belize Barrier Reef World
methodologies and the various pilot
Heritage Site). On a smaller scale, waters
assessments to determine whether certain
around several islands are now fully zoned,
methods are more suitable for MPAs, and
whether MPAs have characteristics that

warrant a specific approach. There has also
53
been no review or analysis of management
http://www.icriforum.org/EastAsiaRW2008.html
effectiveness evaluations undertaken for
54 Belfiore, S., B. Cicin-Sain, and C. Ehler, Eds.
MPAs, and thus no understanding of the
2004. Incorporating Marine Protected Areas into
progress being made towards the target of
Integrated Coastal and Ocean Management:
achieving such evaluations in 30% of
Principles and Guidelines. IUCN, Gland,
protected areas by 2010. It is recommended
Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. viii + 38pp.
55
that experiences and tools in evaluation of
Establishing national and regional networks of
MPAs ­ a review of progress with lessons learned.
management effectiveness of MPAs should be
Draft report to UNEP-WCMC and UNEP Regional

Seas Programme, 2008
56 http://www.unep-wcmc.org/wdpa/me

20
shared, case studies compiled and
many parts of the world. Mangrove restoration
disseminated, and an information-sharing
is also relatively simple and large areas of new
forum established57, and that such results and
mangrove forest are being created using
experiences from all marine assessments are
volunteers and local labour, although these
pooled58.
rarely have the full complement of

biodiversity. A variety of seagrass restoration
4.1.5. Invasive species
techniques are being tested n the USA61.


Ongoing efforts to improve ballast water
Coral reefs are much more difficult to restore
management practices (eg International
and there are few examples of successful
Maritime Organization's Ballast Water
projects. Methods are costly and require
Convention and Management Programme;
considerable skill, although there have been
http://globallast.imo.org) should be supported.
recent advances which give cause for hope,
In addition, given the role of aquaculture
particularly as a result of work undertaken
operations in marine invasions, stricter,
through the European Commission funded
industry-wide control measures should be
REEFRES project and the GEF/World Bank
developed and legal and enforcement
funded CRTR programme Working Group on
structures strengthened to restrict intentional
reef restoration. The relative aptitudes of
and accidental introductions of harmful
different coral species for nursery rearing and
species. The WWF-led initiative59 to develop
transplantation are being assessed and cost-
standards with the aquaculture industry will
effective methods developed. At present
contribute to this process.
however, active reef restoration should be

restricted to those reefs where it is essential
4.1.6. Promote marine ecosystem restoration
and for which there is a reasonable chance of
where appropriate
success62.


Most damaged marine ecosystems will recover
4.2. Improving mechanisms for assessing
naturally once a stress has been removed but
progress towards the 2010/2012 targets
this can be slow. It is tempting to try and

speed recovery through active restoration but
Uncertainties as to the present loss rate as a
this is rarely totally successful because of the
result of the paucity of coherent monitoring
difficulties involved in re-establishing full
programmes, and the difficulty in formulating
biodiversity and ecological processes.
reliable predictions about the future rate of
However, increasingly there may be certain
loss, are a major barrier to the development of
situations or conditions when active
global conservation policies. As shown
intervention is necessary or beneficial, for
earlier, in the marine environment, with a few
example where an ecosystem has particularly
exceptions, we still lack the information to
high economic value or scientific interest60.
permit a clear assessment of progress towards
Techniques for restoring coastal wetlands are
the 2010 biodiversity targets despite the large
well advanced and this is being practiced in
number of thematic and other forms of

assessment underway. The following are
57 Conclusions and recommendations of workshop
some of the key priorities:
on designing and implementing MPA management

effectiveness evaluation, International Marine

Protected Area Congress (IMPAC), 2005.

58
61
Recommendations of the 2006 TNC report:
Final Programmatic Environmental Impact
Measuring Conservation Effectiveness in the
Statement for Seagrass Restoration In the Florida
Marine Environment: a review of evaluation
Keys National Marine Sanctuary.
techniques and recommendations for moving
http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/library/fk/seagrass_fpei
forward.
s04.pdf
59
62
WWF Aquaculture Dialogues
Edwards, A.J. and Gomez, E.D. (2007). Reef
www.worldwildlife.org/aquadialogues
Restoration Concepts and Guidelines: making
60 UNEP-WCMC (2006). In the Front-line:
sensible management choices in the face of
shoreline protection and other ecosystem services
uncertainty. Coral Reef Targeted Research &
from mangroves and coral reefs. UNEP-WCMC,
Capacity Building for Management Programme: St
Cambridge, UK. 33 pp.
Lucia, Australia. 42 pp.

21
4.2.1. Establish suitable marine indicators
For some ecosystems and species, specific

needs have been identified:
The CBD is identifying a set of indicators in

relation to diversity and protected areas in
Coral reefs: Further support is needed from
general. Specific indicators for marine
appropriate UN organizations and the GEF for
diversity have not been identified at either
establishing and maintaining national coral
global or national levels and no guidance has
reef monitoring and management programs in
been given on how the general indicators
each of the 101 coral reef countries. Without a
might be applied to the marine situation.
strategy and regular tracking of coral reef
However, as suggested in the Millennium
condition, it is impossible to determine
Ecosystem Assessment, quality and extent of
whether management actions including the
certain ecosystems, such as coral reefs,
establishment of MPAs have been successful
seagrasses and mangroves, might be feasible.
in protecting a significant percentage of reefs
The UNEP-WCMC project on `Biodiversity
and biodiversity. For example, ReefCheck, the
Indicators for National Use'63 identified some
only regular standardized tracking at a
of the challenges in determining effective
regional and global scale, still has many gaps
indicators through a series of pilot initiatives;
in coverage, both geographically and
marine biodiversity indicators were tested by
temporally, although only relatively minor
the Philippines. Development of indicators
additional financial support is needed to fill
should be undertaken with reference to the
these ­ all 101 coral reef countries should be
work underway to develop process indicators
participating in GCRMN/ReefCheck. At
for ecosystem-based management.
present relatively few scientists or coral reef

monitoring programmes are contributing
4.2.2. Improve baseline data
information to ReefBase, which was set up to

be the focal point for reef information.
Although several programmes are addressing
Attention needs to be paid to improved co-
the lack of data on marine biodiversity (e.g.
ordination between the various initiatives and
CoML), all countries and relevant
organizations involved with global assessment
organizations need to increase efforts to
of coral reefs.
improve basic understanding. Inventories and
Mangroves: Both FAO and UNEP-WCMC are
baselines, with associated monitoring
monitoring trends. UNEP-WCMC has
programmes, are needed especially for seabed
reviewed the status and distribution of
habitats and marine areas known to be in need
mangroves in 7 countries in east Africa and 19
of protection, the high seas and deep oceans,
in West and Central Africa, and is planning the
developing nations and SIDs, and the Southern
production of a global mangrove atlas, based
Hemisphere. A co-ordinating mechanism for
on an earlier one produced in 1997. Support
existing programmes is also needed ­ the
for co-ordination and establishment of a single
preparation of this Policy Brief demonstrated
global monitoring programme is needed.
the lack of any central source of information

on trends in marine biodiversity, and the wide
Seagrasses: Key actions needed include the
range of organizations and information centers
development of a coherent worldwide
that have to be contacted to carry out even a
monitoring network, the development of
preliminary assessment.
quantitative models predicting the responses of

seagrasses to disturbance, and the education of
4.2.3. Strengthen marine biodiversity
the public on the functions of seagrass
monitoring and include ecological processes
meadows and the impacts of human activity64.
(e.g. recruitment, trophic interactions,

resilience)
High Seas: CBD, in collaboration with UNEP-

WCMC, has reviewed spatial databases
containing information on marine areas in

areas beyond national jurisdiction and has
63 Bubb, P., Jenkins, J., Kapos,V., (2005).

Biodiversity Indicators for National Use:
64 Duarte, C.M. 2002. The future of seagrass
Experience and Guidance. UNEP-WCMC,
meadows. Environmental Conservation 29: 192-
Cambridge, UK.
206

22
developed an Interactive Map (IMap) for
approaches (e.g. to what extent these
viewing these65. As UNEP-WCMC
terms imply connectivity and
redevelops and builds the interactive
ecological relationships between
capabilities of the new WDPA, access to these
sites).
spatial databases will be enhanced. As

reflected in the recommendations of the 13th
2. Establish criteria to identify priority areas
meeting of the CBD SBSTTA66, CBD and
for protection and indicators to measure
UNEP-WCMC need to further collaborate
progress
with the International Maritime Organization

(IMO) and other organizations to promote the
Many Governments and some regional
use of the IMap and continue to update it,
organizations have criteria to identify sites for
incorporating information on ecosystem
MPAs within national waters and regional
functions and connectivity, threats and habitats
seas. Scientific criteria for identifying
in the water column.
ecologically or biologically significant marine

areas in need of protection, in open ocean
4.2.4. Strengthen reporting on MPA progress
waters and deep sea habitats have been

developed as a result of work carried out in
This requires clarification of terminology, the
two workshops (Workshop on Criteria for
development of indicators and criteria,
Identifying Ecologically or Biologically
harmonised biogeographical classifications
Significant Areas beyond National
and improved data collection.
Jurisdiction, December, 2005 in Ottawa, and

the CBD Expert Workshop67 on Ecological
1. Clarify terminology and definitions for
Criteria and Biogeographic Classification
MPAs
Systems for Marine Areas in Need of

Protection, October 2007, Azores, Portugal).
Clarification of the terminology used in
Seven criteria have been suggested:
developing MPA networks is needed to

improve communication and to facilitate
(i)
uniqueness or rarity;
measurement of progress and comparison
(ii)
special importance for life history
between national and regional initiatives. The
stages of species;
UNEP Southeast Pacific RSP has
(iii)
importance for threatened,
recommended that clear definitions and
endangered or declining species
standardised nomenclature for concepts such
and/or habitats;
as MCPAs, MPAs, and networks should be
(iv)
vulnerability, fragility, sensitivity
produced and put forward as a global
or slow recovery;
recommendation. Some discussions have
(v)
biological productivity;
already taken place (e.g. at the IUCN
(vi)
biological diversity; and
Categories Summit) but identified priorities
(vii)
naturalness.
include:


The WSSD and CBD targets and indicators in
· A definition of the term `coastal' in
place for measuring progress in protected area
the context of the CBD's terminology
establishment are adequate for measuring
for MCPAs (i.e. what types of
progress in terms of area coverage, but there
protected areas qualify as `coastal'
are no globally agreed indicators for assessing
rather than `marine');
progress in the establishment of protected area
·
systems that are fully representative, resilient
Consideration of the need to define
and connected. WCPA-Marine has developed
no-take areas as a sub-type of MPA;
a self-assessment checklist for MPA networks
and
·
which provides a preliminary tool that could
Clarification of the meaning and use
be built on68.
of the terms `network' and `system',
and how these relate to broader MSP

67 UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/13/INF/14

68 Day, J.C, & Laffoley, D.d'A., 2006. Self-
65 UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/13/INF/12
assessment checklist for building networks
66 UNEP/CBD/COP/9/3
of MPAs. WCPA IUCN.

23
3. Harmonise biogeographical classifications
Marine, LMEs and WWF ecoregions can be

linked to the global classifications.
Without well-tested and accepted

biogeographic and habitat classifications at
4. Improve data collection on MPAs
appropriate scales, it will not be possible to

ensure that MPA networks are ecologically
At present, national and regional data-
representative. The `Marine Ecosystems of
gathering efforts are largely scattered and ad
the World (MEOW)' classification69 is a key
hoc which presents a challenge for the
tool for MPA system planning at a range of
development and maintenance of a global
levels and is increasingly being adopted for
database and assessment of the 2012 MPA
global assessment purposes and is considered
target. A more structured national and regional
a useful tool by the CBD. It is restricted to the
approach is needed particularly in terms of
coast and shelf areas. An expert group drawn
measuring how much of the marine biome,
from workshops held over the preceding 18
and of each ecosystem within it, is protected.
months in Ottawa, Mexico City70 and the
The recording of accurate information on the
Azores71 has compiled a draft bioregional
name of each MPA, its total area, area of
classification for global open-ocean and
intertidal and subtidal habitat, biogeographic
deep-sea areas (GOODS). This
region and ocean or sea, designation,
biogeographical classification is based on a
legislation and governance, and presence and
physiognomic approach, which uses
area of no-take zones is essential. This will
geophysical characteristics of the benthic and
help in both measuring the number of MPAs
pelagic environments to select homogeneous
and the area of subtidal and intertidal water
regions of similar habitat and associated
that is protected and thus be a valuable
biological community characteristics. Where
contribution to gap analysis activities, as well
independent national or subnational
as to measuring progress towards targets. The
classifications have been compiled and are
recording of mangrove forest reserves, Ramsar
being used, these should be reviewed to
sites and other designated areas over which
determine how they relate to these higher level
there is some question as to whether they
global classifications. As reflected in the
fulfill the definition of a protected area needs
recommendations of the 13th meeting of the
resolving. IUCN WCPA-Marine is developing
CBD SBSTTA, further work is needed to
a "wet list," and providing a web portal for
develop technical guidance on the use of
MPA-related information. UNEP-WCMC is
global biogeographic classifications of ocean
developing a mechanism for integrating
regions, and on how regional and subregional
existing MPA global databases, including
classifications, currently available or under
MPAGlobal and covering important high seas
development, can be aligned and nested within
areas; this will help to centralize the
the global classifications. For example, there
management and dissemination of global
is a need to examine how the geographical
marine data so it is more accessible to users.
boundaries of regions defined under
With the redevelopment of the WDPA, to be
programmes including UNEP-RSP, WCPA-
launched at the World Conservation Congress

in 2008, there will be greater interactive
69
capacity for countries and sites to enter their
Spalding M, Fox H, Allen, GR., Davidson N,
Ferdana Z, Finlayson M, Halpern B, Jorge M,
MPA data directly, improved access to marine
Lombana A, Lourie S, Martin K, McManus E,
data, and an increase in the quantity and
Molnar J, Newman K, Recchia C, and Robertson J.
quality of the information available for
2007. Marine Ecoregions of the World: a
analyses. The UNEP Regional Seas
Bioregionalization of coastal and shelf areas.
Programmes could play a role in gathering
BioScience 57(7): 573-583
data at the regional level.
70 Workshop on Biogeographic Classification

Systems in Open Ocean and Deep Seabed Areas
4.2.5. Strengthen periodic reporting
beyond National Jurisdiction, January 2007
procedures to cover marine biodiversity more
71 Draft report on Global Open Oceans and Deep
effectively
Sea-habitats (GOODS) bioregional classification.
UNEP/CBD/SBSTTA/13/INF/19. 11 February

2008
A `Regular Process' for producing a Global

Marine Assessment (GMA), that would look at

24
the ocean system as a whole, was proposed at
and coastal biodiversity undertaken
the WSSD in 2002. In December 2006, the
as part of its Biodiversity Country
61st session of UNGA adopted a new
Study);
resolution (A/RES/61/222), and agreed that a
·
16% of responding Parties reported
start up phase, or Assessment of Assessments
that management plans for important
should be undertaken. This will look at gaps
components of marine and coastal
in data availability, geographic coverage of
ecosystems are in place, including
existing assessments and thematic coverage,
Israel (rare and threatened
issues for which further research is needed, the
ecosystems identified, including
extent to which goods and services are
aquatic ecosystems and the sand and
provided by marine ecosystems, anthropogenic
kurkar rocks along the Mediterranean
threats, and the effectiveness of existing
shoreline).
policies and interventions. UNEP has

identified 130 relevant assessments and related
It will be important to ensure that the
activities undertaken by 73 organisations, of
production of the GMA does not lead to
which 56 are global and 65 regional72. Some
duplication of activities and the development
countries have felt that the Regular Process
of parallel processes; key needs at present are
should be restricted to pollution and physical
for:
degradation and not concern living resources,

but there is now broad recognition that marine
·
Better harmonization of the many
biodiversity, including fisheries and ecosystem
reports, reviews and assessments that
issues, is fundamental to an effective global
are being produced by international
assessment. There is widespread recognition
organizations such as UNEP, FAO,
that an assessment of the oceans is needed that
IUCN, the Global Forum and the
will have the impact and status of the IPCC
CBD.
report on climate change.
·
Improved reporting by Parties to the

CBD in their periodic national
Some countries are undertaking national
reports, so that more comprehensive,
assessments of the marine environment that
standardised information is provided
include biodiversity data, and these will make
that can be used for global
important contributions to global assessments.
assessments.
Thus according to the CBD 3rd reports:



·
20% of responding Parties reported
that they are planning comprehensive
5. Conclusions and
assessments of marine and coastal
Recommendations
ecosystems

·
22% of responding Parties report that
This overview of progress in meeting the
comprehensive assessments are in
WSSD commitments on conserving marine
progress, including Brazil and China
biodiversity and establishing MPAs reveals a
(initiated monitoring of national
mixed picture. There would appear to be a
offshore marine ecology in 2004, and
growing recognition of the value and
established 15 ecological monitoring
importance of conserving marine biodiversity,
areas);
evidenced perhaps by the number of initiatives
·
31% of responding Parties have
in recent years on MPAs and their networks as
identified critical ecosystem
well as work on marine management and
components including India
assessment, although the base starting point
(assessment of critical habitats
was low. In some countries a framework for
completed and databases developed),
action is in place that facilitates country level
and Lebanon (assessment of marine
actions; there are also regional frameworks

such as the Regional Seas conventions and
72
initiatives such as the Caribbean and
UNEP (2007) Global Marine Assessments: A
survey of global and regional assessments and
Micronesia Challenges; and the CBD with its
related activities of the marine environment.
marine and coastal programme provides the
UNEP/UNESCO-IOC/UNEP-WCMC.
overall global framework, with thematic

25
conventions such as CITES and the
needed. A recent publication by the CBD73
Convention on Migratory Species.
highlighted the socio-economic benefits of

MPAs in terms of improved fish catches and
At the same time, the fundamental problem
bigger fish, new jobs, better local governance,
remains of adequately mainstreaming
improved public health, and empowered
biodiversity issues into investment and
women. WRI is assisting the ICRI secretariat
planning decisions by countries and thus into
to compile information, references, and good
key sectors such as water, agriculture, fisheries
examples of economic valuation in practice,
and tourism. In fact, in some countries
with an emphasis on coral reefs. Regional
reversals have occurred such as in the
initiatives are also underway such as a
Dominican Republic where an MPA was
research study commissioned by the Western
reduced in size to make way for commercial
Indian Ocean Marine Science Association to
development. There would also appear to be a
assess the goods and services provided by
particular need for improved research,
coastal and marine ecosystems in this region.
knowledge and assessment of marine
Successful initiatives that demonstrate the
biodiversity. Conservation of marine
value of marine biodiversity conservation also
biodiversity in areas beyond national
need highlighting, such as MPAs that have
jurisdiction presents a further and to some
brought local and national benefits in terms of
extent different set of problems and
alternative livelihoods and strengthening
challenges.
economic growth, and protection of

vulnerable coastal communities that is
Until the underpinning value of marine
contributing to adaptation to climate change.
biodiversity to these and other sectors is

understood and explicitly valued, then it is
Increase financial support for marine
unlikley that the rate of decline in marine
biodiversity conservation
biodiversity can be reduced. The various

initiatives on MPAs can be seen as a vehicle
As the financial mechanism of the CBD, the
towards changing this perception, even if such
GEF has a central role to play in providing
initiatives also need to be placed within wider
international funding support for the POW.
management frameworks, such as integrated
Since the 1990s, over US$600 million of GEF
coastal zone management and ecosystem
funds have been invested in projects at varying
management generally. The value of these
action and technical levels to improve the
MPA initiatives is that as well as providing a
management of coastal and marine projects,
direct mechanism to address biodiversity
with US$320 million being spent on coral reef,
protection, they provide a vehicle for
seagrass and mangrove habitats. Other funding
engagement on biodiversity issues with a wide
agencies, particularly bilateral donor agencies,
range of sectors.
will need to provide significant additional

funding for marine biodiversity, in particular
Key recommendations
MPAs (for example, there has been a

movement to establish trust funds to pay for
Make marine biodiversity relevant to
the set up and operation of networks of
individuals, governments and the private
MPAs). An on-going donor forum is required
sector by demonstrating its economic and
to further strengthen the implementation of
social value
relevant programme of works under the CBD.

In the private sector, the tourism industry is a
Quantifying the economic and social values of
natural partner in establishing and maintaining
marine biodiversity and marine ecosystem
MPAs, and industries may be able to
goods and services is essential if politicians
and government officials are to be convinced
of the need for their protection and
management. There are still relatively few

73
examples of such studies, and there is
Mulongoy, K.J. and S.B. Gidda (2008). The
Value of Nature: Ecological, Economic, Cultural
widespread recognition that further work is
and Social Benefits of Protected Areas. Secretariat
of the Convention on Biological Diversity,
Montreal, 30 pages.

26
contribute in various ways74. Building strong
pro-actively. TNC is playing a lead
partnerships among governments, donors,
role in this through its `Marine
international NGOs and the private sector will
Learning Group' comprising some 30
increase opportunities to create synergies in
representatives of MPAs around the
addressing funding constraints through
world. Further training work of this
concerted efforts. Adequate and long-term
nature is needed on a global scale.
financial and logistic resources for developing

countries are needed to undertake long-term
·
Networks of MPA practitioners
management programmes, rather than the 3 to
should be set up to facilitate the
5 year funding cycle of projects.
sharing of experiences, challenges

and successes amongst regions.
Build capacity by increasing access to
Technical support networks involving
suitable tools, guidelines, and lessons
a group of individuals and
learned
organizations committed to sharing

information and peer-reviewing their
Effective implementation of global
progress on a specific theme or
commitments on marine biodiversity and MPA
objective over time. For example,
networks requires mobilization of adequate
IUCN-WCPA with over 8000
technical support, in terms of tools, guidelines,
protected area practitioners in
knowledge and experiences, and human
different regions can play an
capacity. Sub-regional capacity building
important role in coordinating
workshops convened in 2007 by the CBD
regional technical support networks.
Secretariat and POWPA Friends identified
Such networks can be instrumental in
some useful ways of providing technical
providing technical support, making
support that may be relevant in the marine
tools and guidance available, sharing
context, including:
information and knowledge in

achieving targets for marine
·
Direct exchange of experts and
biodiversity and networks of MPAs.
officials for short-term period to learn
While there is considerable progress
specific tools and approaches; use
in developing available tools and
train-the-trainers and peer-to-peer
guidelines on key activities and
exchanges as low cost mechanisms to
principles, such as ecosystem-based
ensure that capacity building is self
approach or integrated coastal
sustaining.
management, the accessibility to

these available tools are limited as
·
Practitioner clinics that bring in
most of them exist only in English.
various experts on a specific topic to
Thus, in addition to continuous
help address key challenges and
efforts to develop new tools and
obstacles, and to provide direct
guidelines, better organization and
training; Increased awareness of the
accessibility of existing tools in a
benefits of and rationale for MPA
range of languages are urgently
systems is needed in order to gain
needed.
support from all stakeholders,

including MPA practitioners, policy
According to the CBD 3rd national reports, 25
makers, international organizations,
countries are providing training and career
NGOs, research institutes and the
opportunities for marine taxonomists and
public. Lessons learned in developing
ecologists. There is a need for all countries
MPA systems should be shared
and relevant organizations to collaborate to
between regions and countries, and
build the capacity necessary to monitor,
existing guidelines and advice should
manage for sustainable use and where
be disseminated more widely and
appropriate protect marine biodiversity; this

may require specialized training, participation
74 Protected Areas in Today's World: Their Values
in research, and regional and subregional
and Benefits for the Welfare of the Planet. CBD
collaborative initiatives.
Technical Series 36


27
Mainstream the marine biodiversity agenda
·
Support the implementation of POW
into all coastal and ocean plans by
on marine and coastal biodiversity
establishing Friends of the Jakarta
·
Contribute to the preparation of in-
Mandate
depth review of Marine and Coastal

POW by providing necessary
As has been indicated by Parties to the CBD,
expertise, information, and resources
mainstreaming the biodiversity agenda into
·
Assist Parties in building capacity
sectoral (e.g. fishery, shipping, other maritime
·
Promote and market marine
industries) and integrated (e.g. coastal area
biodiversity value
development plans) development planning
·
Facilitate building effective reporting
initiatives is still a key challenge, given the
and monitoring framework
complexity and cross-sectoral nature of ocean

and coastal management. Strong political
Such a consortium could help to strengthen the
leadership and commitment are critical for
national reporting mechanism for CBD and
effective mainstreaming. In turn, political
other international bodies that helps Parties to
commitments can be greatly enhanced through
contribute data on marine biodiversity trends
continuous and systematic efforts to raise
and MPA status to the global centers and
public awareness of the value of marine and
databases (e.g. WDPA, WCPA-Marine,
coastal ecosystem and biodiversity
ReefBase, GCRMN) for analysis, and that
components. There is a real need to bring
ensures good dissemination of the results and
together national economic planners, tourism
benefits to all those involved from provision of
planners and other leaders from different
better data on trends. It could also promote
oceans sectors to exchange information on
partnership work on key issues (e.g. coral reef
how to create economic growth while
and mangrove monitoring and management
fostering marine biodiversity conservation,
through organizations such as Reef
and in so doing raise the need for integrated
Check/GCMRN) and support opportunities
marine and coastal management planning, as
and funding for activities that increase the
well as the work of the Regional Seas
exchange of information and lessons learned
conventions
among the marine conservation community so

that progress toward the 2010 biodiversity
One option might be to establish an informal
/2012 MPA targets accelerates.
partnership mechanism for the implementation

of the Jakarta Mandate ("Friends of the Jakarta

Mandate") in association with the Global

Forum. This could be used to renew the
Acknowledgements
commitments made by global leaders at the

2002 WSSD to implement the 1995 Jakarta
The authors of this brief are very grateful to
Mandate on the Conservation and Sustainable
the following individuals who provided
Use of Marine and Coastal Biological
specific input and comment on the text:
Diversity of the CBD by mobilizing

partnerships. The informal consortium
Chris Tompkins, Gregor Hodgson
established for POWPA - POWPA Friends -
(ReefCheck), Clive Wilkinson (GCRMN),
provides an example of how such partnerships
Yvonne Sadovy (IUCN/SSC), Nicholas
can create significant impacts within a short
Pilcher (IUCN/SSC Marine Turtle Specialist
period of time. Friends of Jakarta Mandate
Group), James Hardcastle and Alan White
could:
(TNC), Colleen Corrigan (UNEP-WCMC),

Kristian Teleki (ICRAN).



28
Acronyms

CBD
Convention
on
Biological
Diversity
CoML

Census of Marine Life
CI
Conservation
International
COP

Conference of the Parties
GCRMN

Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network
GMA
Global
Marine
Assessment
GMSA

Global Marine Species Assessment
HSMPA

High Seas Marine Protected Area
ICRAN

International Coral Reef Action Network
ICRI
International
Coral
Reef
Initiative
IUCN

International Union for the Conservation of Nature
LME
Large
Marine
Ecosystem
MPA
Marine
protected
area
POW
Programme
of
Work
SBSTTA

Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical and Technological Advice
SSC
Species
Survival
Commission
TNC

The Nature Conservancy
UNEP-WCMC
UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC)
UNEP RSP

UNEP Regional Seas Programme
UNGA

United Nations General Assembly
WCPA

World Commission on Protected Areas
WDPA

World Database of Protected Areas
WRI
World
Resources
Institute
WSSD

World Summit on Sustainable Development

29

Steering Committee, Global Forum on Oceans, Coasts, and Islands
CO-CHAIRS
Magnus Ngoile, Team Leader, Marine
Diane Quarless, Chief, Small Island
Gregor Hodgson, Director, Reef Check
and Coastal Environmental Management
Developing States Unit, UNDESA
Paul Holthus, Executive Director, World
Biliana Cicin-Sain, Director, Gerard J.
Project (MACEMP), Ministry of Natural
John Richardson, Head, Maritime
Ocean Council
Mangone Center for Marine Policy,
Resources and Tourism
Policy Task Force, European
University of Delaware (also Head of
Gunnar Kullenberg, Independent
Rolph Payet, Advisor to the President,
Commission
Secretariat, Global Forum)
Consultant and former Executive
Seychelles
Anne Rogers, United Nations
Secretary, Intergovernmental
Patricio A. Bernal, Executive-Secretary,
Lori Ridgeway, Director-General,
Department of Economic and Social
Oceanographic Commission (IOC)
Intergovernmental Oceanographic
International Coordination and Policy
Affairs (UNDESA)
Commission, UNESCO, Paris, France
Dan Laffoley, World Commission on
Analysis, Department of Fisheries and
Eduard Sarukhanian, Director, World-
Protected Areas-Marine, IUCN
Veerle Vandeweerd, Director,
Oceans, Canada, and Camille Mageau,
Weather-Watch-Applications, World
Environment and Energy Group, United
Carl Lundin, Head, IUCN Marine
Director, Marine Ecosystems
Meteorological Organization (WMO),
Nations Development Programme
Programme
Conservation Branch, Department of
Switzerland
(UNDP)
Fisheries and Oceans, Canada
Dawn Martin, President, Sea Web, USA
Dann Sklarew, Director and Chief
Gerald Miles, The Nature Conservancy,
GOVERNMENTAL
Mario Ruivo, Intersectoral
Technical Advisor, GEF, IW:LEARN
Oceanographic Commission, Ministry
Pacific Region, Brisbane, Australia
Asterio Takesy, Director, Secretariat for
David Balton, Deputy Assistant
of Science, Technology, and Higher
Iouri Oliounine, Executive Director,
the Pacific Regional Environment
Secretary for Oceans and Fisheries,
Education, Portugal
International Ocean Institute, Malta
Programme
Bureau of Oceans, U.S. Department
Indroyono Soesilo, Chairman,
Pietro Parravano, President,
of State
Khulood Tubaishat, Advisor,
Agency for Marine and Fisheries
Institute for Fisheries Resources,
The Regional Organization for the
Phil Burgess, Director, Cetacean
Research, Department of Marine Affairs
World Fisheries Forum
Conservation of the Environment of the
Policy and Recovery, Department of the
and Fisheries, Indonesia
Red Sea and Gulf of Aden (PERSGA)
Sian Pullen, Independent Consultant,
Environment and Water Resources,
Ambassador Enele S. Sopoaga, Tuvalu,
New Zealand, and former Head of
Australia
Marjo Vierros, Visiting Professor,
Former Vice-Chair, Alliance of Small
European and Middle East Marine
Institute of Advanced Studies, United
Nguyen Chu Hoi, Director, Institute
Island Developing States (AOSIS)
Program, WWF International, UK
Nations University, Vancouver
of Fisheries Economics and Planning,
Victoria Radchenko, Director,
Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
INTERGOVERNMENTAL
Eugenio Yunis, Chief, Sustainable
International Ocean Institute, Ukraine
Development, Vietnam
Development of Tourism World Tourism
Salvatore Arico, Programme Specialist,
Organization
Tony Ribbink, Director, Sustainable
Torkil J. Clausen, Managing Director,
Ecological Sciences, UNESCO
Seas Trust
DHI Water Policy and Senior Adviser,
A.H. Zakri, Director, Institute of
Julian Barbiere and Stefano Belfiore,
Evelia Rivera-Arriaga, Centro de
Global Water Partnership
Advanced Studies, United Nations
Intergovernmental Oceanographic
University, Yokohama
Ecologia, Pesquerias y Oceanographia
Aldo Cosentino, Director-General,
Commission, France
del Golfo de Mexico (EPOMEX), Mexico
Directorate for Nature Protection, Sea
Chua Thia-Eng, Partnership in
NONGOVERNMENTAL
Nirmal Jivan Shah, Chief Executive,
Protection, Ministry for Environment
Environmental Management for the
Nature Seychelles
and Protection of the Territory, Italy
Milton Asmus, International
Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA),
Alan Simcock, former Executive
Margaret Davidson, Director, Coastal
Representative, Brazilian Agency for
IMO/UNDP/GEF, Philippines
Director, OSPAR, and former Co-Chair,
Services Center, National Oceanic and
Coastal Management
Anjan Datta, Global Programme for the
UN Informal Consultative Process on
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
Awni Behnam, President, International
Protection of the Marine Environment
Ocean Affairs and Law of the Sea
USA
Ocean Institute, Malta
from Land-Based Activities, The Hague
Nancy Targett, Dean, University of
Antonio Diaz de Leon, Director-
Charles A. Buchanan, Administrator
Ahmed Djoghlaf, Executive Secretary,
Delaware College of Marine and Earth
General, Environmental, Regional
Luso-American Development
Convention on Biological Diversity
Studies
Integration and Sectoral Policy,
Foundation, Portugal
Environment and Natural Resources
Al Duda, Senior Advisor, International
Kristian Teleki, International Coral Reef
Simon Cripps, Director, Global Marine
Ministry (SEMARNAT), Mexico
Waters, Global Environment Facility
Action Network, Switzerland
Programme, World Wide Fund For
(GEF)
Ambassador Angus Friday, Chair,
Nature (WWF) International
Hiroshi Terashima, Executive Director,
Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS),
Marea E. Hatziolos, Senior Coastal and
Institute for Ocean Policy, Ocean Policy
Richard Delaney, Executive Director,
Permanent Representative of Grenada to
Marine Specialist, Environment
Research Foundation, Japan
Center for Coastal Studies,
the United Nations
Department, The World Bank
Provincetown, Massachusetts, USA
Chris Tompkins, Independent
Gi-Jun Han, Ministry of Maritime
Indumathie Hewawasam, Consultant
Consultant and formerly DEFRA, UK
Annick de Marffy, former Director of
Affairs and Fisheries, Republic of Korea
to The World Bank
Division of Ocean Affairs and Law of the
Grant Trebble, African Marine and
Elie Jarmache, Chargé de Mission,
Andrew Hudson, Principal Technical
Sea (UNDOALOS), United Nations
Coastal Resource Over-exploitation
Secrétariat Général de la Mer, France
Advisor, International Waters,
International Consultant
Prevention Strategy (AMCROPS),
UNDP/GEF
South Africa
Magnus Johannesson, Secretary-
Sylvia Earle, Chair, Deep Ocean
General, Ministry for the Environment,
David Johnson, Executive Secretary,
Exploration and Research (DOER), and
Philippe Vallette and Manuel Cira,
Iceland
OSPAR Convention, London
Explorer-in-Residence, National
NAUSICAA, France, and the World
Ocean Network
Ambassador Jagdish Koonjul,
Vladimir Mamaev, GEF Regional
Geographic Society
Mauritius, former Chair, Alliance of
Technical Advisor, UNDP, Europe and
Charles Ehler, Consultant to UNESCO
David VanderZwaag, IUCN Specialist
Small Island States (AOSIS)
the CIS, Slovak Republic
Group on Ocean Law and Governance
Julius Francis, Executive Secretary,
Trust
Gerhard Kuska, Associate Director
Franklin McDonald, Adviser, UNEP
Western Indian Ocean Marine Science
and Director of Ocean and Coastal
Caribbean Environment Programme
Association, Tanzania
* Please note: Members of the Steering
Policy, White House Council on
(UNEP/CEP), and former Director,
Serge Garcia, Independent Consultant,
Committee participate in their individual
Environmental Quality, USA
National Environmental Policy Agency,
and Former Director, Marine Fisheries
capacities.
Jamaica
Tom Laughlin, Deputy Director,
Resources Division, Food and
International Affairs Office, National
Vaclav Mikulka, Director, UN Division
Agriculture Organization (FAO)
Oceanic and Atmospheric
for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea
Matthew Gianni, Political Advisor,
Administration (NOAA), USA
Ali Mohamed, Coordinator, Coastal and
Deep Sea Conservation Coalition,
Haiqing Li, Deputy Director-General,
Marine Secretariat, New Partnership for
Netherlands
State Oceanic Administration (SOA),
Africa's Development (NEPAD), Kenya
Vladimir Golitsyn, Professor of
China
Satya Nandan, Secretary-General,
International Law, Moscow State
John Low, Adviser to the Minister of
International Seabed Authority, Jamaica
University of International Relations
Marine Resources for the Cook Islands
Tiago Pitta e Cunha, Member, Cabinet
Lynne Hale, Director, Marine Strategy,
Rejoice Mabudafhasi, Deputy Minister
of Fisheries and Maritime
The Nature Conservancy
of Environmental Affairs and Tourism,
Commissioner, European Commission
Art Hanson, former Ministerial Ocean
South Africa
Mary Power, Director, Resource
Ambassador, Department of Fisheries
Jan Mees, Director, Flanders Marine
Mobilization Office, World
and Oceans, Canada, member of the
Institute, Belgium
Meteorological Association
Canadian Foundation for Innovation
Guillermo Garcia Montero, President,
Cristelle Pratt, Director, South Pacific
(CFI)
National Aquarium, Havana, Cuba
Applied Geoscience Commission
(SOPAC), Fiji



Global Forum on Oceans,
Coasts, and Islands
Gerard J. Mangone Center for
Marine Policy
301 Robinson Hall, University of Delaware
Newark, Delaware 19716 USA
Telephone: +1-302-831-8086
Fax: +1-302-831-3668
www.globaloceans.org
See coverage of 2008 Global Oceans Conference at:
World Ocean Observatory
http://www.thew2o.net/goc2008/goc2008.htm
Global Oceans Conference 2008 YouTube Channel
http://www.thew2o.net/goc2008/goc2008.htm
International Institute for Sustainable Development
­ Reporting Services (IISD-RS)
http://www.iisd.ca/ymb/sdoh4/

Document Outline