Mainstreaming marine biodiversity into the SDGs: The role of other effective area-based conservation measures (SDG 14.5)

Diz, Daniela; Johnson, David E.; Riddell, Michael; Rees, Siân E.; Battle, Jessica; Gjerde, Kristina M.; Hennige, Sebastian; Roberts, J. Murray

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2017.08.019

Cited by 74 publications

(66 citation statements)

References 47 publications

(105 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other effective conservation areabased measures (e.g., temporary fish closures) have emerged as an important mechanism for conservation in areas of high biodiversity value, yet their outcomes also remain uncertain (Lemieux et al, 2019), as do their broader implications for adjacent communities (see also Diz et al, 2018;Dudley et al, 2018). As reflected in the Aichi Biodiversity Targets, at least 17% of terrestrial and inland water, and 10% of coastal and marine areas are to be protected by 2020 through "…effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well-connected systems of PAs and other effective area-based conservation measures."…”

Section: Principles For Governance Of Community-centered Conservatimentioning

confidence: 99%

Governance principles for community‐centered conservation in the post‐2020 global biodiversity framework

Armitage

Mbatha

Muhl

et al. 2020

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Strategies to protect biodiversity in the face of a global crisis must be placebased and sensitive to context. A failure to consider the socioeconomic and political circumstances, as well as wellbeing needs and lived realities of those most directly reliant upon biodiversity will further undermine progress on Aichi targets and subsequent goals for the post-2020 framework. How communities experience the benefits or costs of conservation action is influenced in large measure by the principles that guide conservation governance, and the subsequent institutional structures and processes that frame conservation action (at local to global scales). In this article, we define and critically reflect on core principles of community-centered conservation governance needed to yield desirable and long-term conservation outcomes-both ecological and social (i.e., equitable and just). In doing so, we emphasize a conception of community-centered conservation that we argue is relevant to guide implementation of a post-2020 biodiversity framework, and which is based on a foundation of well-established evidence. Core principles of communitycentered conservation governance include: (a) building multilevel networks and collaborative relationships needed to coproduce conservation solutions;(b) promoting equity and recognizing the central role of women as agents of positive change in conservation efforts across scales; (c) reframing conservation action through the lens of reconciliation and redress (e.g., responding to injustices from land grabs and territorial enclosures); (d) ensuring a rightsbased approach to conservation action in which community agency, access and decision making autonomy are supported; and (e) revitalizing the customary and local institutions that provide legitimate and adaptive strategies for the stewardship of biodiversity. K E Y W O R D Sgender, governance, institutions, policy

show abstract

Section: Principles For Governance Of Community-centered Conservatimentioning

confidence: 99%

Governance principles for community‐centered conservation in the post‐2020 global biodiversity framework

Armitage

Mbatha

Muhl

et al. 2020

Conservat Sci and Prac

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Each of these organizations has identified some form of protected area-Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs) by the CBD, Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs) by the FAO, Areas of Particular Environmental Interest (APEIs) by the International Seabed Authority (ISA), and Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs) by the IMO (Diz et al, 2017). There is an understanding that we need to identify, monitor, and minimize DSTD sediment plumes, contaminants or other ecosystem alterations that are transported from the margins into national Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and international waters, especially those that may affect protected areas.…”

Section: Dstd In a Broader Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scientific Considerations for the Assessment and Management of Mine Tailings Disposal in the Deep Sea

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deep-sea tailings disposal (DSTD) and its shallow water counterpart, submarine tailings disposal (STD), are practiced in many areas of the world, whereby mining industries discharge processed mud-and rock-waste slurries (tailings) directly into the marine environment. Pipeline discharges and other land-based sources of marine pollution fall beyond the regulatory scope of the London Convention and the London Protocols (LC/LP). However, guidelines have been developed in Papua New Guinea (PNG) to improve tailings waste management frameworks in which mining companies can operate. DSTD can impact ocean ecosystems in addition to other sources of stress, such as from fishing, pollution, energy extraction, tourism, eutrophication, climate change and, potentially in the future, from deep-seabed mining. Environmental management of DSTD may be most effective when placed in a broader context, drawing expertise, data and lessons from multiple sectors (academia, government, society, industry, and regulators) and engaging with international deep-ocean observing programs, databases and stewardship consortia. Here, the challenges associated with DSTD are identified, along with possible solutions, based on the results of a number of robust scientific studies. Also highlighted are the key issues, trends of improved practice and techniques that could be used if considering DSTD (such as increased precaution if considering submarine canyon locations), likely cumulative impacts, and research needed to address current knowledge gaps.

show abstract

“…There are several potential benefits of recognising OECMs as a complement to protected areas (IUCN-WCPA, 2016a, 2016b, 2017bJuffe-Bignoli et al, 2016;Diz et al, 2017;Laffoley et al, 2017), including: increasing the potential to engage and support a range of new partners in global conservation efforts; incentivising the recognition or application of robust conservation and management measures to areas of biodiversity significance; and contributing to improved management and restoration of areas that could usefully support longterm in situ conservation of biodiversity. The latest Protected Planet Report adds to this list, stating that: "In the long term, OECMs could have the potential to contribute greatly to elements such as representativeness and connectivity, and to contribute to conservation in important places such as KBAs [key biodiversity areas], especially in cases where protected areas are not an option" (UNEP-WCMC & IUCN, 2016).…”

Section: Recognising Oecms Respecting Iccamentioning

confidence: 99%

Will 'other effective area-based conservation measures' increase recognition and support for ICCAs?

Jonas¹,

Lee²,

Jonas³

et al. 2017

Parks

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper reflects on IUCN's ongoing progress to develop technical guidance on 'other effective area-based conservation measures' (OECMs) and begins to explore under what conditions OECMs -as a new form of recognition -might make a positive contribution to territories and areas conserved by Indigenous peoples and local communities (abbreviated to 'ICCAs'). It argues that while the protected areas framework is a potentially useful means by which to recognise the biodiversity contributions of some ICCAs, it is not universally appropriate. In this context, and subject to important caveats, OECM-related frameworks offer an important opportunity to increase recognition and support for ICCAs. The paper concludes with two practical recommendations: first for the development of supplementary guidance on OECMs and ICCAs; and second, for further discussion by a wide range of interested parties on whether 'OECMs' should be referred to as 'conserved areas'.

show abstract

Mainstreaming marine biodiversity into the SDGs: The role of other effective area-based conservation measures (SDG 14.5)

Cited by 74 publications

References 47 publications

Governance principles for community‐centered conservation in the post‐2020 global biodiversity framework

Governance principles for community‐centered conservation in the post‐2020 global biodiversity framework

Scientific Considerations for the Assessment and Management of Mine Tailings Disposal in the Deep Sea

Will 'other effective area-based conservation measures' increase recognition and support for ICCAs?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About