Page 27 - ebsaws-2014-03

Page 26

global marine biodiversity through conservation and protection of its components in a
biogeographically representative network of ecologically coherent sites”), the Azores meeting
suggested that the coherence of such network “can be attained by diverse mechanisms that
promote the genetic flow, through connectivity, among populations of marine organisms with
planktonic life history phases. Amongst others are ocean currents providing homogeneity within a
dispersal area and geographical distance and barriers that promote isolation and associated
biological diversity.” All of the above considered, the Azores meeting recommended following four
initial steps:

• Identify an initial set of ecologically or biologically significant areas, using the criteria listed
under 1 above, considering the best scientific information available, and applying the
precautionary approach.

• Develop/choose a biogeographic habitat and/or community classification system, to reflect
the scale of the application and address the key ecological features of the area (most likely,
this will entail a separation between the pelagic and benthic realms).

• Drawing upon the two steps above, iteratively use qualitative and/or quantitative techniques
to identify sites to include in a network. Selection should reflect recognised ecological
importance, vulnerability, and address the requirements of ecological coherence through
representativity, connectivity and replication.

• Finally, assess the adequacy and viability of the selected sites as functional MPAs based
on considerations of size, shape, buffering and management feasibility.

Table 2 in the CBD 2008 report (page 55 and following) provides helpful details on the required
network criteria (ecologically and biologically significant areas, representativity, connectivity,
replicated ecological features, and adequate & viable sites), including definitions and examples of
applicable site-specific considerations.

3.1.3 Other criteria

Although the most relevant and useful for the task, the CBD criteria are not the only criteria that
were examined in the effort of updating and complementing the applicability of the SPA Protocol
criteria to the identification of Mediterranean EBSAs. Other relevant tools examined include:

• Four natural criteria for the identification of marine sites having outstanding universal value
within the framework of UNESCOS’ World Heritage Convention (UNESCO 2008);

• Site selection criteria listed in the EU Habitats Directive (Anon. 2006);

• The criteria for Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs) developed by IMO (International
Maritime Organisation 2006).

Considering the intensity of shipping in the Mediterranean Sea, which makes this region
particularly vulnerable to impact from maritime transport, a special attention was attributed to the
“ecological, socio-economic, or scientific criteria for the identification of a Particularly Sensitive Sea
Area” (International Maritime Organisation 2006), which relate to PSSAs within and beyond the
limits of territorial seas.