Short Comments on the Application of Criteria for Identifying Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs)

Hao Huang, Dongmei Tang, Bin Chen, Weiwen Li, Danyun Ou, Lei Wang and Lina An
Additional contact information
Hao Huang: Laboratory of Marine Biology and Ecology, Third Institute of Oceanography, Ministry of Natural Resources, Xiamen 361005, Fujian, China
Dongmei Tang: Institute of South-South Cooperation and Development, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China
Bin Chen: Laboratory of Marine Biology and Ecology, Third Institute of Oceanography, Ministry of Natural Resources, Xiamen 361005, Fujian, China
Weiwen Li: Laboratory of Marine Biology and Ecology, Third Institute of Oceanography, Ministry of Natural Resources, Xiamen 361005, Fujian, China
Danyun Ou: Laboratory of Marine Biology and Ecology, Third Institute of Oceanography, Ministry of Natural Resources, Xiamen 361005, Fujian, China
Lei Wang: Laboratory of Marine Biology and Ecology, Third Institute of Oceanography, Ministry of Natural Resources, Xiamen 361005, Fujian, China
Lina An: Laboratory of Marine Biology and Ecology, Third Institute of Oceanography, Ministry of Natural Resources, Xiamen 361005, Fujian, China

Sustainability, 2019, vol. 12, issue 1, 1-13

Abstract: In 2008, the Convention on Biological Diversity adopted seven criteria for identifying ecologically or biologically significant marine areas (EBSAs) for biodiversity conservation. Nine international workshops were held in which 209 areas and 38 potential areas were identified as meeting the EBSA criteria. This study analyzes the 209 identified areas and reveals that the use of the seven criteria in different workshops differed, so their scores are therefore not quantifiable. Furthermore, descriptions specific to criteria regarding areas having “special importance for the life-history stages of species” accounted for only 1.44% of the overall descriptions. Most descriptions regarding “vulnerability, fragility, sensitivity, or slow recovery” were almost contributed by the “importance of threatened, endangered, or declining species and/or habitats”. These three criteria were based on scientific evidences and have been widely accepted by the public. Therefore, we would suggest the criteria of “special importance for the life-history stages of species” and the criteria of “vulnerability, fragility, sensitivity, or slow recovery” need further investigation for biodiversity conservation.

Keywords: ecologically or biologically significant marine areas (EBSAs); criteria; Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: O13 Q Q0 Q2 Q3 Q5 Q56 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/130/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/1/130/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2019:i:1:p:130-:d:301075

Access Statistics for this article

Sustainability is currently edited by Ms. Alexandra Wu

More articles in Sustainability from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().