ABSTRACT 

Marine and coastal biodiversity is crucial for the survival of humanity for various reasons. Accordingly, there are several international legal regulations to conserve marine biodiversity. The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) is one of the legal regulations. For the conservation of biodiversity, the Convention envisages states establishing protection areas. Marine protected areas are the reflection of the mentioned obligation for marine biodiversity. Moreover, the Conference of the Parties (COP) of the CBD introduced a concept called Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) to support the implementation of the Convention. This paper examines the relationship between marine protected areas and EBSAs in the UN Convention on Biological Diversity.

INTRODUCTION

The biodiversity of the oceans and coastal areas is vital to human existence for a variety of reasons[1]. There are several international legal instruments to conserve marine biodiversity. One of these is the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity. The Convention is a framework agreement for the conservation of all types of biodiversity, and Parties are responsible for developing national strategies to protect biodiversity. There are a number of different conservation measures that countries can choose from[2]. One of the most effective ways to conserve biodiversity is to restrict human activities in areas where biodiversity may be at risk[3]. These are called protected areas and can also be established in the oceans[4]. Accordingly, the second session of the COP identified marine protected areas as one of the five key elements for the conservation of marine and coastal biodiversity[5]. Years later, COP 9 introduced a new concept for the implementation of the Convention: Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs).[6] The aim of this paper is to examine how EBSAs could impact on marine protected areas.

I. PROTECTION OF MARINE BIODIVERSITY

“Marine biodiversity” describes the diversity of marine life and the range of organisms that comprise them.[7] About %70 of the Earth is covered by the seas[8]. Furthermore, oceans are home to millions of unique species and ecosystems[9]. Each species is vital for the survival of the whole ecosystem and all the other ecosystems are necessary for other ecosystems.[10] Humankind also benefited from the components of the ocean’s ecosystems for centuries.[11] However excessive amounts of human activities started to threaten ecosystems in the ocean and left the species in the ecosystem vulnerable to extinction.[12] For example, ocean acidification and a decrease in the oxygen levels in the sea caused by climate change pose a threat to the life in the oceans.[13]

For the first time, the protection of biodiversity is underlined by the international community in the 1972 Stockholm Declaration. Rio Declaration and Agenda 21 followed twenty years later with a special emphasis on marine biodiversity.[14] Even though these instruments were not legally binding they are soft law documents and have inspired other binding treaties and helped to establish state practice for the creation of international customary rules.[15] Accordingly, these two instruments led to the adoption of the first global treaty for the protection of biological diversity; The UN Convention on Biological Diversity.[16]

II. CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY

The UN Convention on Biological Biodiversity (CBD) is a framework agreement aiming to protect biological diversity[17]. The agreement entered into force in 1993 and has 188 parties to it, however, it was a product of years of work[18].

The process leading to the creation of the agreement started with the 1987 Governing Council decision 14/26 of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP).[19] In accordance with the decision, an Ad Hoc Working Group of Experts on Biological Diversity was created to harmonize the different conventions related to biological diversity at the time.[20] Two years later in May 1989, the Working Group gathered again to create an international legal instrument for the protection of biodiversity.[21] In February of 1991, the Working Group turned into the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee, and after seven working sessions, the agreed text of the UN Convention on Biological Diversity was formed in Nairobi Final Act of Conference for the adoption of the agreed text of the agreement. On June 1992 The Convention opened for signature.[22]

According to the first article of CBD it has three main objectives; (1) to protect biological diversity, (2) to ensure the sustainable use of its components, (3) to assure the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising from the utilization of biological resources.[23] The following article defines some of the relevant terms for CBD. Biological diversity is defined as “the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems and the ecological complexes of which they are part; this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems”.[24]

The third article addresses the balancing act the states need to make between their sovereign rights over their resources and their obligation to prevent damage to the extraterritorial area.[25] It is actually a reaffirmation of Principle 21 of the Stockholm Declaration.[26] Therefore it can be argued that the third article gives this principle a binding nature however some experts already consider this principle as a rule of international customary law, thus already binding.[27] This article further imposes the responsibility to ensure that the activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.[28]

The following article sets out the jurisdictional scope of CBD According to Article 4 Contracting states need to abide by CBD for the components of biological diversity in their national jurisdiction.[29] States are further responsible for the processes and activities under their jurisdiction regardless of where the effects of it might occur.[30]

The biodiversity processes and elements that exist in regions outside of national jurisdiction (ABNJ) are not, however, protected by CBD.[31] As a result, the overall UNCLOS framework and the current array of international and regional sectoral and conservation-focused tools will now be in charge of protecting marine biodiversity in the ABNJ.[32] Article 5 of CBD encourages Contracting States to cooperate to ensure the protection of biological diversity in areas beyond national jurisdiction.[33] As mentioned, the CBD aims to conservation and the sustainable use of Earth’s biological diversity. Accordingly, Article 6 of CBD introduces the general measures for the conservation and sustainable use.[34] These measures include producing national strategies and policies for biodiversity and integrating these policies.[35] The article does not specify which species needs to be protected specifically. However, accordingly, Article 7 envisages an identification and monitoring process to identify the biological components that need conservation and address the activities that cause threats to biodiversity[36].

The following two articles introduce different measures for two separate ways to protect biological diversity. In-sıtu conservation which is focused on maintaining the ecosystem and the natural habitat of the components of biological diversity is regulated under Article 8[37]. The first 5 paragraphs of the article are devoted to the protected area system[38]. In Article 2 protected area is defined as “a geographically defined area which is designated or regulated and managed to achieve specific conservation objectives”[39].

Article 9 regulates ex-situ conservation and it can be examined that the preferred conservation method is in-situ since these types of measures are recommended for complementing in-situ conservation[40].

The Conference of the Parties adopted a principle called the ‘ecosystem approach’ to achieve a balance in the implementation of its three main objectives in its decision on 11/8 at its 4th meeting[41]. The ecosystem approach is based on the application of appropriate scientific methodologies focused on levels of biological organization, which encompasses the essential structure, processes, functions, and interactions between organisms and their environment[42]. The approach embodied three key points[43]. Firstly at the ecosystem level of organization, the management of living components should be taken into account in addition to economic and social factors as well as managing species and habitats[44]. Secondly, to achieve sustainable, equitable management of land, water, and living resources must be carried out in an integrated manner, working within natural limits and taking advantage of the natural functioning of ecosystems[45]. Thirdly, it was emphasized that the management of ecosystems was a social process[46]. Therefore the creation of effective and efficient structures and procedures for administration and decision-making must engage the numerous interested communities[47].The ecosystem approach is a further tool to support the implementation of the several issues covered by CBD such as the work on ecological networks and protected areas[48].

III. MARINE PROTECTED AREAS (MPA) IN CBD

As mentioned in the previous chapter CBD divides methods of protection measures into two; in-situ and ex-situ conservation. Establishing protected areas is one of the in-situ measures. According to Article 8 of CBD, “State Parties shall as far as appropriate and as far as possible establish a system of protected areas or areas where special measures need to be taken to conserve biological diversity[49]”.

 Protected areas are defined as “a geographically defined area which is designated or regulated and managed to achieve specific conservation objectives” in Article 2 of CBD[50]. Marine protected areas are a type of protected area. There is not a uniform definition of a marine protected area however the common elements in all of the definitions are that; (1)it needs to be established in a marine area, (2) the area needs to be restricted for some activities by law, (3) the objective to establish the area needs to be ecological protection[51]. The State Parties of the CBD’s obligation to establish marine protected areas and a network for the management of protected areas are clarified by the Conference of the Parties (COP) of CBD in its 2nd Meeting[52]. COP published a consensus called the Jakarta Mandate which focused on marine and coastal biodiversity in 1997[53]. Moreover, a year later a work program for the implementation of the mandate was published[54]. The program included five key elements for the protection of marine biodiversity and establishing marine protected areas was one of them[55]. According to the program, the purpose of marine and coastal protected areas is to support monitoring and research efforts regarding the importance of marine and coastal protected areas, or comparable restricted management areas, and their influence on the sustainable use of marine and coastal living resources[56]. In the 10th meeting of the COP of CBD evaluated the effectiveness of the program[57]. Paragraph 13 and all of its sub-paragraphs of Decision 10/29 reiterated that the Programme of Work was still in line with global priorities despite not being fully executed[58]. As a result, it urged Parties to keep implementing the program’s components and supported further guidelines for improved implementation[59]. The decision also introduced new concepts for improving the implementation of the work program[60]. One of these concepts was the identification of ecologically or biologically significant areas (EBSAs) and scientific and technical aspects relevant to environmental impact assessment in marine areas[61].

Through the adoption of national laws, plans, and strategies, the Aichi Targets were international policies designed to accomplish the objectives of the CBD[62]. In the Aichi Biodiversity Target, the parties aimed to establish 10 percent of the marine and coastal areas as protected areas[63]. The percentage went up to 30 percent in the 2030 targets[64]. At the local, national, and international levels, protected areas are regarded as a key component of biodiversity protection initiatives[65].

IV. ECOLOGICALLY AND BIOLOGICALLY SIGNIFICANT AREAS (EBSA) IN CBD

Geographically or oceanographically distinct areas that offer significant nutrients to one or more species/populations within an ecosystem or to the ecosystem overall, in comparison to other nearby areas or areas with comparable ecological characteristics, or that otherwise satisfy the requirements listed in annex I to decision IX/20, are considered ecologically and biologically significant areas (EBSA) [66]. The scientific standards for determining EBSAs were adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity during its ninth meeting [67]. According To COP 9, EBSA criteria can also be used by other states international organizations to determine vulnerable marine areas [68]. Furthermore, COP 9 emphasized that the EBSA concept can help to prevent marine biodiversity loss in open ocean waters and deep-sea habitats, other governments [69].

There are seven criteria for determining an area as an EBSA [70]. The first criterion was uniqueness or rarity [71]. For an area to meet this requirement the species, populations or communities, and or unique, rare or distinct, habitats or ecosystems and or unique or unusual geomorphological or oceanographic features needed to be either the only one of its kind and occur only in a few locations or endemic [72].

Considering these kinds of biodiversity components were irreplaceable, the criterion was created[73]. If they were lost, diversity or a characteristic would likely permanently disappear, or diversity at any level would likely be reduced [74]. Examples of deep-sea habitats that satisfy the aforementioned condition include sea mounts, hydrothermal vents, endemic communities surrounding sunken atolls, and pseudo-abyssal depressions [75].

The second criterion is determined as special importance for the life-history stages of species which is a population’s necessary areas for survival and development [76]. The rationale behind the criterion was the fact that certain marine environments are more suited for distinct life stages and functions than others due to a variety of biotic and abiotic factors as well as species- specific physiological restrictions and preferences [77]. Examples include habitats of migratory species or locations crucial for threatened, endangered, or declining species and/or habitats, including breeding grounds, spawning grounds, nursery regions, juvenile habitats, or other areas necessary for species’ life history stages. [78] The third criterion that should be taken into account is the vulnerability, fragility, sensitivity, or slow recovery of the area. [79] The criterion can be met by regions with a comparatively high percentage of sensitive habitats, biotopes, or species that are functionally fragile (particularly vulnerable to deterioration or depletion by human activity or by natural disasters) or that recover slowly. [80] When human activities or natural events in the region or component are not adequately controlled or are pursued at an unsustainable pace, the criteria show the level of risk that will be faced. [81] The history of how species or populations in other comparable places reacted to disturbances could be used to determine a species’ vulnerability. [82] Species with low fecundity, slower development, a long time to sexual maturity, and longevity may also be included. [83]

Requirements can also apply to organisms that have structures that provide biogenic environments, such as bryozoans, sponges, and deepwater corals. [84] Furthermore, instances of habitat vulnerability include deep-sea habitats that are rendered vulnerable by ocean acidification and ice-covered regions exposed to ship-based pollution. [85]

The fifth criterion is biological productivity. [86] This comprises regions that are home to species, populations, or groups that have a relatively greater level of natural biological productivity. Frontal areas, upwellings, hydrothermal vents, and seamount polynyas are given as examples. The following criterion is known as biological diversity. [87] When an area has greater genetic diversity or a relatively higher diversity of ecosystems, habitats, communities, or species, it is considered eligible for the criterion. Evolution and preserving the resilience of marine organisms and ecosystems depend on biodiversity. [88] Examples include cold coral communities, seamounts, fronts and convergence zones, and deep-water sponge colonies. [89] The final criterion is naturalness [90]. It includes regions with a relatively greater level of naturalness due to the absence or minimal amount of disturbance or decline generated by humans. [91] Additionally, COP 10 underlined that, in compliance with international law, particularly the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, States and capable intergovernmental bodies are responsible for identifying EBSAs and choosing conservation and management strategies. [92]

COP 10 also underlined that the finest scientific and technological data should be used to identify EBSAs. [93] Furthermore, indigenous and local populations’ traditional, scientific, technical, and technological expertise should be incorporated into the process. [94] Additionally, the Executive Secretary was asked by COP 10 to promote the availability and interoperability of the finest data sets and information on marine and coastal biodiversity at the national, regional, and international levels. [95]

In order to determine and implement suitable measures for conservation and sustainable use in relation to EBSAs, COP 10 urged Parties, other Governments, and eligible intergovernmental organizations to work together, either jointly or on a regional or subregional basis. [96] This includes creating representative networks of marine protected areas that are founded on the most current scientific information and comply with international law, including the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and to inform the relevant UNGA processes. [97]

Application of the EBSA criteria is a scientific and technical exercise, according to COP 10. [98] Areas that meet the criteria may need more conservation and management measures, which can be accomplished through a number of methods, such as impact assessments and marine protected areas. [99] The COP also pointed out that the EBSA criteria’s application is a dynamic and open process that ought to be maintained in order to facilitate continual improvement and revision as better scientific and technical data becomes accessible in every area. [100] 15 regional EBSA workshops spanning almost the whole world’s ocean have been organized by the CBD Secretariat as of 2021. [101] These regional EBSA workshops have identified the oceanic regions that are most important to the sustainable operation of the global marine ecosystem through an inclusive, science-driven approach that involves experts from around the globe and a vast quantity of scientific data. [102]

CONCLUSION: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MPA AND EBSA

More than 500 experts from 144 countries participated in a scientific and technological process that resulted in the description of over 300 of these unique ocean habitats worldwide over the course of more than ten years. [103] The spectrum of locations that are classified as EBSAs includes both very small sites and very large oceanographic features. [104]

Although they were initially designed to assist in the protection of areas outside of national jurisdiction, EBSAs have now been described in numerous areas within territorial seas. [105]

Apart from the CBD, EBSA descriptions have been the focus of other initiatives. [106] A number of UNGA Resolutions on Oceans and the Law of the Sea discuss the CBD’s function in supplying technical and scientific data on regions that require protection, including the adoption of the EBSA criteria. [107] EBSA descriptions have been incorporated into the activities of the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), the International Maritime Organization (IMO), and regional fisheries management organizations (RFMOs). [108] The description of marine areas that satisfy the requirements for ecologically or biologically significant marine areas does not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever regarding the legal status of any nation, territory, city, or area or its authorities, or regarding the delineation of its borders or boundaries, according to the CBD COP 10. [109] Furthermore, it is solely a scientific and technical endeavor and it is has no legal value. [110] EBSA descriptions may have indirect legal consequences by offering scientific support for later legislative actions that would preserve the ecosystems, habitats, and species they describe, even though they do not by themselves have legal value. [111] They also can help to clarify the obligations of other treaties for example, the obligation in UNCLOS Article 194(5). [112] Additionally, they endorse the UNCLOS requirement for States and capable international organizations to advance international collaboration in maritime scientific research. [113]

Although COP10 promoted the protection of EBSAs, ecologically or biologically significant marine areas are not suggestions for new MPA designations. [114]

However, they can be utilized to build area-based conservation as well as to reallocate human activities through the marine spatial planning process. [115] A demand for more efficient conservation in regions outside of national jurisdiction served as a trigger for the CBD to create the EBSA criteria. [116] The formation of representative MPA networks is another component of this. [117] Nonetheless, there has been a continuous discussion on the best way to set up and operate such a network. [118] The Azores workshop’s strategy of separating site-level EBSA criteria from network-level MPA criteria has made it possible to distinguish between the MPA establishment process and the process of characterizing ecologically significant places. [119] EBSAs and potential future MPAs are related when the EBSAs support network objectives or when designating an MPA, which is a preferable method of delivering the necessary improved management. [120]

Several regional workshops keep highlighting worries regarding the dangers of interpreting all EBSA descriptions as a starting point for requests for the area to be designated as an MPA. [121] WSSD 2002, UNGA Resolution 57/141, and the CBD Aichi Target are only a few of the numerous offers given to establish MPAs in areas outside of national jurisdiction, even though the CBD cannot serve as the platform for their establishment. [122] Accordingly, the UNGA needs to determine a method to effectively propose, create, and oversee MPAs in regions outside of national authority in order to fulfill these policy commitments and the underlying ecological criteria. [123] This will also help to facilitate maritime spatial planning in general. [124]

[1] < https://www.cbd.int/marine/important.shtmll> s.e.t. 24 December 2024.

[2] Convention on Biological Diversity (adopted 5 June 1992, entered into force 29 December 1993) 1760 UNTS 79, art 8,9.

[3] Graeme Kelleher, Guidelines for Marine Protected Areas (IUCN, Gland and Cambridge 1999), xvii.

[4] ibid.

[5] Ardea Miljö, The Jakarta Mandate – From Global Consensus to Global Work: Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversity (Risbergs, Sweden, May 2000), 11,12,.

[6] Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, ‘Scientific Guidance for Selecting Areas to Establish a Representative Network of Marine Protected Areas, Including in Open Ocean Waters and Deep-Sea Habitats’ (Annex II, 19–30 May 2008, Bonn) UN Doc UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/IX/20

[7] Rosemary Rayfuse, Aline Jaeckel, and Natalie Klein, Research Handbook on International Marine Environmental Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2023) https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789909081, 311.

[8] < https://www.cbd.int/marine/intro.shtml> s.e.t. 24 December 2024.

[9] Ibid.

[10] < https://www.cbd.int/marine/important.shtmll> s.e.t. 24 December 2024.

[11] < https://oceanliteracy.unesco.org/ocean-biodiversity/>s.e.t. 24.December 2024.

[12] Rajamani L and Peel J (eds), The Oxford Handbook of International Environmental Law (2nd edn, Oxford University Press 2021) 530.

[13] ‘Editorial: Marine Biodiversity under Global Climate Change’ (2024) 202 Journal of Sea Research 102555 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1385110124000881 accessed 27 December 2024.

[14] Tanaka Y, The International Law of the Sea (4th edn, Cambridge University Press 2023)314.

[15] Jakobsen IU, Marine Protected Areas in International Law (Brill, Nijhoff 2016) https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004324084 accessed 24 December 2024, 76.

[16] 16 Tanaka Y, The International Law of the Sea (4th edn, Cambridge University Press 2023)314.

[17] Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Handbook of the Convention on Biological Diversity Including its Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (3rd edn, Montreal, 2005) ,xxiii.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Sandrine Maljean-Dubois, International Biodiversity Law (Brill | Nijhoff 2024) https://brill.com/view/title/70948

[20] Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Handbook of the Convention on Biological Diversity Including its Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety (3rd edn, Montreal, 2005) ,xxiii.

[21] Ibid.

[22] Ibid.

[23] Convention on Biological Diversity (adopted 5 June 1992, entered into force 29 December 1993) 1760 UNTS 79, art 1.

[24] Ibid, art 2.

[25] Ibid, art 3.

[26] Bronwyn H Arthur, A Commentary on the Convention on Biological Diversity (LLM Research Paper, Environment (Laws 539), Victoria University of Wellington, 1993), 28.

[27] Ibid, 29.

[28] Ibid.

[29] Ibid

[30] Convention on Biological Diversity (adopted 5 June 1992, entered into force 29 December 1993) 1760 UNTS 79, art 4.

[31] Rosemary Rayfuse, Aline Jaeckel, and Natalie Klein, Research Handbook on International Marine Environmental Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2023) https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789909081, 313.

[32] Ibid

[33] Convention on Biological Diversity (adopted 5 June 1992, entered into force 29 December 1993) 1760 UNTS 79, art 5.

[34] Ibid, art 6.

[35] Ibid.

[36] Ibid, art 7.

[37] Ibid, art 2, 8.

[38] Ibid, art 8.

[39] Ibid, art 2.

[40] Ibid, art 9.

[41] Ibid.

[42] Ibid.

[43] Convention on Biological Diversity, ‘Introduction to the Ecosystem Approach’<https://www.cbd.int/ecosystem/background.shtm>l accessed 24 December 2024.

[44] Ibid.

[45] Ibid.

[46] Ibid.

[47] Ibid.

[48] Ibid.

[49] Convention on Biological Diversity (adopted 5 June 1992, entered into force 29 December 1993) 1760 UNTS 79, art 8.

[50] Ibid, art 2.

[51] von Rebay A, The Designation of Marine Protected Areas: A Legal Obligation (Springer Nature Switzerland 2023) https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=XnjAEAAAQBAJ accessed 27 December 2024, 59.

[52] UNEP/CBD/COP/2/19, Decision II/10: Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversity, 16.

[53] Ibid.

[54] Ardea Miljö, The Jakarta Mandate – From Global Consensus to Global Work: Conservation and Sustainable Use of Marine and Coastal Biological Diversity (Risbergs, Sweden, May 2000)11.

[55] Ibid.

[56] Ibid.

[57] Convention on Biological Diversity, ‘Marine and Coastal Biodiversity: Decisions’ https://www.cbd.int/marine/decisions.shtml accessed 24 December 2024.

[58] Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, ‘Decision Adopted at Its Tenth Meeting: X/29 Marine and Coastal Biodiversity’ (18–29 October 2010, Nagoya) UN Doc UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/2.

[59] Ibid.

[60] Ibid.

[61] <https://www.cbd.int/ebsa/resources>s.e.t. 27 December 2024.

[62] M C Eritja and T F Castillo, Biological Diversity and International Law: Challenges for the Post 2020 Scenario (Springer International Publishing 2021) https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=OvI4EAAAQBAJ, 17.

[63] < https://www.cbd.int/sp/targets> s.e.t. 27 December 2024.

[64] Ibid.

[65] < https://www.cbd.int/gbf/targets/3> s.e.t. 27 December 2024.

[66] Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, ‘Scientific Guidance for Selecting Areas to Establish a Representative Network of Marine Protected Areas, Including in Open Ocean Waters and Deep-Sea Habitats’ (Annex II, 19–30 May 2008, Bonn) UN Doc UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/IX/20

[67] Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, ‘Decision Adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity at Its Ninth Meeting: IX/20 Marine and Coastal Biodiversity’ (19–30 May 2008, Bonn) UN Doc UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/IX/20

[68] Ibid.

[69] Ibid.

[70] Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, ‘Scientific Criteria for Identifying Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas in Need of Protection in Open-Ocean Waters and Deep-Sea Habitats’ (Annex I, 19–30 May 2008, Bonn) UN Doc UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/IX/20

[71] Ibid.

[72] <https://gobi.org/ebsas/natural/> s.e.t. 27 December 202.

[73] CBD Secretariat, Azores Scientific Criteria and Guidance for Identifying Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas and Designing Representative Networks of Marine Protected Areas in Open Ocean Waters and Deep Sea Habitats (2009)

[74] Ibid.

[75] Ibid.

[76] Takehisa Yamakita and others, ‘Identification of Important Marine Areas Using Ecologically or Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) Criteria in the East to Southeast Asia Region and Comparison with Existing Registered Areas for the Purpose of Conservation’ (2017) 81 Marine Policy 273 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2017.03.040, 5.

[77] Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, ‘Scientific Criteria for Identifying Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas in Need of Protection in Open-Ocean Waters and Deep-Sea Habitats’ (Annex I, 19–30 May 2008, Bonn) UN Doc UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/IX/20

[78] Ibid.

[79] <https://gobi.org/ebsas/vulnerable/> se.t. 27 December 2024.

[80] CBD Secretariat, Azores Scientific Criteria and Guidance for Identifying Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas and Designing Representative Networks of Marine Protected Areas in Open Ocean Waters and Deep Sea Habitats (2009), 11.

[81] Ibid.

[82] Ibid.

[83] Ibid.

[84] Ibid.

[85] Ibid.

[86] <https://gobi.org/ebsas/productive/> s.e.t. 27 December 2024.

[87] <https://gobi.org/ebsas/diverse/> s.e.t. 27 December 2024.

[88] CBD Secretariat, Azores Scientific Criteria and Guidance for Identifying Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas and Designing Representative Networks of Marine Protected Areas in Open Ocean Waters and Deep Sea Habitats (2009), 12.

[89] Ibid.

[90] < https://gobi.org/ebsas/natural/> s.e.t. 27 December 2024.

[91] CBD Secretariat, Azores Scientific Criteria and Guidance for Identifying Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas and Designing Representative Networks of Marine Protected Areas in Open Ocean Waters and Deep Sea Habitats (2009)

[92] Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, ‘Decision Adopted at Its Tenth Meeting: X/29 Marine and Coastal Biodiversity’ (18–29 October 2010, Nagoya) UN Doc UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/X/2.

[93] Ibid.

[94] Ibid.

[95] Ibid.

[96] Ibid.

[97] Ibid.

[98] Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Special Places in the Ocean: A Decade of Describing Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (2021), 13-14.

[99] Ibid.

[100] Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, ‘Decision Adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity at Its Ninth Meeting: IX/20 Marine and Coastal Biodiversity’ (19–30 May 2008, Bonn) UN Doc UNEP/CBD/COP/DEC/IX/20

[101] Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Special Places in the Ocean: A Decade of Describing Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (2021), 13.

[102] Ibid.

[103] Ibid.

[104] Rosemary Rayfuse, Aline Jaeckel, and Natalie Klein, Research Handbook on International Marine Environmental Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2023) https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789909081, 329.

[105] Nicholas J Bax and others, ‘Results of Efforts by the Convention on Biological Diversity to Describe Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas’ (2016) 30(3) Conservation Biology 580.

[106] Christian Prip, ‘Identifying and Describing Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs): A Key Tool for the Protection of Ocean Biodiversity in Dispute’ (2022) 13 Arctic Review on Law and Politics 174.

[107] Ibid.

[108] Ibid.

[109] Ibid, 175.

[110] Rosemary Rayfuse, Aline Jaeckel, and Natalie Klein, Research Handbook on International Marine Environmental Law (Edward Elgar Publishing 2023) https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789909081, 329.

[111] Nicholas J Bax and others, ‘Results of Efforts by the Convention on Biological Diversity to Describe Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas’ (2016) 30(3) Conservation Biology 580.

[112] Christian Prip, ‘Identifying and Describing Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs): A Key Tool for the Protection of Ocean Biodiversity in Dispute’ (2022) 13 Arctic Review on Law and Politics 174.

[113] Daniel C Dunn and others, ‘The Convention on Biological Diversity’s Ecologically or Biologically Significant Areas: Origins, Development, and Current Status’ (2014) 49 Marine Policy 137 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2013.12.002, 143.

[114] C R McManis and B Ong, Routledge Handbook of Biodiversity and the Law (Taylor & Francis 2017) https://books.google.com.tr/books?id=nW5ADwAAQBAJ

[115] Daniel C Dunn and others, ‘The Convention on Biological Diversity’s Ecologically or Biologically Significant Areas: Origins, Development, and Current Status’ (2014) 49 Marine Policy 137 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2013.12.002, 143.

[116] Ibid.

[117] Christian Prip, ‘Identifying and Describing Ecologically or Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs): A Key Tool for the Protection of Ocean Biodiversity in Dispute’ (2022) 13 Arctic Review on Law and Politics 174.

[118] Daniel C Dunn and others, ‘The Convention on Biological Diversity’s Ecologically or Biologically Significant Areas: Origins, Development, and Current Status’ (2014) 49 Marine Policy 137 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2013.12.002, 143.

[119] Ibid.

[120] Ibid.

[121] Ibid.

[122] Ibid.

[123] Ibid.

[124] Ibid.