Published in

MDPI, Sustainability, 1(12), p. 130, 2019

DOI: 10.3390/su12010130

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

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

Journal article published in 2019 by Hao Huang, Dongmei Tang, Bin Chen, Weiwen Li, Danyun Ou, Lei Wang ORCID, Lina An
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

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.