Q 33 - What are the environmental legislation/criteria guidance for MPA designation including socio-economic criteria (Commission’s SWD, EU Directives, IUCN, new criteria UNCLOS?)#

Broader “Question”
Related sites

Answers#

skinparam classFontColor automatic skinparam componentStyle rectangle skinparam roundCorner 15 scale 4/5 hide stereotype <style> element { MaximumWidth 150 MinimumWidth 150 HorizontalAlignment center } .ety { MinimumWidth 20 BackGroundColor #00000000 FontColor #00000000 LineColor #00000000 FontSize 1 Padding 0 Margin 0 } </style> package Practices { [Scoping] as p1 [[/elements/practices/practice1]] #ADD1B2 [Data collection and presentation] as p2 [[/elements/practices/practice2]] #DDDDDD [Analysis and diagnosis] as p3 [[/elements/practices/practice3]] #DDDDDD [Prioritisation and designation] as p4 [[/elements/practices/practice4]] #DDDDDD [Implementation and management] as p5 [[/elements/practices/practice5]] #DDDDDD [Monitoring and evaluation] as p6 [[/elements/practices/practice6]] #DDDDDD (E1) <<ety>> (E2) <<ety>> (E3) <<ety>> (E4) <<ety>> (E5) <<ety>> (E6) <<ety>> (E7) <<ety>> (E8) <<ety>> p1 -[thickness=5]-> p2 p2 -[thickness=5]-> p3 p3 -[thickness=5]-> p4 p4 -[thickness=5]-> p5 p5 -[thickness=5]-> p6 }

ESE1 - Ecological toolkit#

Practices: Scoping Data collection and presentation Analysis and diagnosis Prioritisation and designation
Spatial scales: Transboundary / sea basin National Regional / local
Protection regimes: Strict protection Non-strict protection
Marine zones: Coastal zone Deep sea Offshore zone

Implementation details

A component of the aswer to this question might relate with Climate Change elements- In this regards, a synthesis of up-to-date criteria to define climate-smart MPA was performed in the MSP4BIO guidance. This list of criteria should be regularly revised but represent a good basis on a ecological point of view. Deliverable 2.2 categorizes 4 Types of Criteria Lists based on their purpose and the ones deemed relevant to the question are listed below. Type 3 is particularly relevant to this question. This information may provide guidance to answering this question on environmental legislation/criteria guidance for the designation of an MPA, however with regards to socioeconomic criteria this is more appropriately answered by the other ESE modules. Type 1: Lists used for the identification of significant areas for conservation e.g. Important Bird and Biodiversity Area, Cetacean Critical Habitat and Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs)), which can inform decision making for the identification of areas to be protected. Type 2: Lists used for the identification of significant ecological features for conservation, including lists of species and habitats for conservation purposes. For example, the IUCN developed criteria to decide which species or other ecological features should be on their red list. These lists, such as the IUCN red list and the conservation status categories they defined with criteria lists, inform the identification of significant areas or the designation of ABMTs. Type 3: Lists used for the designation of suitable areas for implementing area-based management tools (ABMTs). These lists are used to delineate an area for which conservation measures will be implemented through officially recognized MPAs, as well as OECMs. For example, criteria used to inform the designation of Natura 2000 sites, or criteria for suitable areas for designating Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas, an OECM managed by the International Maritime Organisation (IMO).

For further information on the criteria lists used for the designation of suitable areas for implementing area-based management tools (ABMTs), you will find examples at Global, European and Regional level on page 27 of D2.2.

References

  • Withouck I., De Raedemaecker F., Georgiou P., Gutierrez D., Calado H., Costa A.C., Pegorelli C., Garcia Sanábria J., Garcia Onetti J., de Andres M., Stancheva M., Stanchev, H., Spinu A., Bongiorni, L., Bekaert, M., Conversi, A., Cambra, E., Barbanti A., Randone M., Markovic, M., Boilevin, V., Barboza, F. R., Pınarbaşı K., Stojanovic I., Lukic I., (2023) Summary report of existing criteria, species and habitat lists used in conservation and restoration initiatives (Deliverable – D2.2., under the WP2 of MSP4BIO project (GA n° 101060707))

  • Bongiorni L., Bekaert M., Jusufovski D., Bocci M., Gissi E., Magaldi M., Sciascia R., Rombouts I., Costa A., Barbanti A., Pınarbaşı K., Withouck I., Kotta J., Whatley L., Barboza F.R. (2023) Portfolio of improved ecological criteria to be applied in biodiversity protection and restoration for project testing sites. Deliverable – D3.2., under the WP3 of MSP4BIO project (GA n° 101060707)

ESE2 - Criteria for the representation of the social and economic dimension of MPAs#

Practices: Scoping Data collection and presentation Analysis and diagnosis Prioritisation and designation
Spatial scales: Transboundary / sea basin National Regional / local
Protection regimes: Strict protection Non-strict protection
Marine zones: Coastal zone Deep sea Offshore zone

Criteria classes: 5.2 Governance criteria

Criteria

Implementation details

Deliverable 4.1 defines socioeconomic and governance criteria for prioritizing proposals related to new areas, boundary adjustments, area relocations, and network corridors within marine management approaches. The study also focuses on identifying Ecosystem Services (ES) that encompass the social dimensions of various spatial management approaches in the marine realm. This method allows quantifying nature’s significance to human communities, bridging the gap between human activities and the services provided by ecosystems. The objectives of this study are centred on defining essential socio-economic and governance criteria, identifying the corresponding ecosystem services, and assessing their societal values within the socio-ecological system of a specific area, thus enhancing the effectiveness of different marine management processes (e.g., Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) and Marine Protected Area (MPA)). One of the main conclusions of this deliverable is that policy solutions have to be tailored to the socioeconomic context in which this solution is pretended to be applied. In this sense, MPAs have to consider socioeconomic criteria, and not only ecological, when are being designed.

References

  • Criteria for the representation of the social and economic dimension of MPAs. Deliverable – D4.1., under the WP4 of MSP4BIO project (GA n° 101060707)).

    This report presents preliminary results from a methodology aimed at defining socio-economic and governance criteria for prioritizing proposals related to new areas, boundary adjustments, area relocations, and network corridors within marine management approaches. The study also focuses on identifying Ecosystem Services (ES) that encompass the social dimensions of various spatial management approaches in the marine realm. This method allows quantifying nature’s significance to human communities, bridging the gap between human activities and the services provided by ecosystems. The objectives of this study are centred on defining essential socio-economic and governance criteria, identifying the corresponding ecosystem services, and assessing their societal values within the socio-ecological system of a specific area, thus enhancing the effectiveness of different marine management processes (e.g., Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) and Marine Protected Area (MPA)).