Biodiversity Governance Outside Protected Areas in the Context of Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs): A Systematic Review

Indicators keep progress honest: A call to track both the quantity and quality of protected areas

To Achieve Big Wins for Terrestrial Conservation, Prioritize Protection of Ecoregions Closest to Meeting Targets

In 2010, the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity adopted the Aichi Biodiversity Targets as part of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020.Target 11 calls for 'at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water areas and 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas' to be conserved by way of 'well-connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures'.Yet four years after their adoption, parties to the CBD and other rights-and stakeholders have not received guidance about either what kinds of arrangements do and do not constitute 'other effective area-based conservation measures', or how best to appropriately recognise and support them.The paper argues that without clear guidance on the issue, conservation law and policy will continue to inappropriately and/or inadequately recognise the great diversity of forms of conservation and sustainable use of ecosystems and their constituent elements across landscapes and seascapes, including by Indigenous peoples and local communities.In this context, and in line with calls from the Convention on Biological Diversity and the IUCN, it proposes the establishment of an IUCN Task Force to further explore the issues with a view to developing clear guidance on 'other effective area-based conservation measures' as a means to effectively and equitably achieve Aichi Biodiversity Target 11.

Integrated spatial planning for biodiversity conservation and food production

The Protected Areas Working Group of the IUCN National Committee for the UK assessed 23 types of designation of land and sea for biodiversity conservation against IUCN definitions of 'protected area' and 'other effective area-based conservation measures'. This assessment supersedes Statements of Compliance published in 2014, reassigns several categories on the basis of new information and understanding, and provides guidance to UK and devolved governments, and their agencies, on which types of sites should be incorporated within the Global Biodiversity Framework Target 3 total. There is a need for urgent investment in improving the management effectiveness of all sites considered to ensure they can all effectively contribute to the achievement of UK's 30x30 target.

A renewed global agenda to address biodiversity loss was sanctioned by adoption of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011-2020 and the 20 Aichi Biodiversity Targets in 2010 by Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity. However, Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 contained a significant policy and reporting challenge, conceding that both protected areas (PAs) and 'other effective area-based conservation measures' (OEABCMs) could be used to meet national targets of protecting 17 and 10 % of terrestrial and marine areas, respectively. We report on a consensus-based approach used to (1) operationalize OEABCMs in the Canadian context and (2) develop a decision-screening tool to assess sites for inclusion in Canada's Aichi Target 11 commitment. Participants in workshops determined that for OEABCMs to be effective, they must share a core set of traits with PAs, consistent with the intent of Target 11. (1) Criteria for inclusion of OEABCMs in the Target 11 commitment should be consistent with the overall intent of PAs, with the exception that they may be governed by regimes not previously recognized by reporting agencies. (2) These areas should have an expressed objective to conserve nature, be long-term, generate effective nature conservation outcomes, and have governance regimes that ensure effective management. A decision-screening tool was devel- oped that can reduce the risk that areas with limited conservation value are included in national accounting. The findings are relevant to jurisdictions where the debate on what can count is distracting Parties to the Convention from reaching conservation goals.

In 2018, the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted a decision on protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). It contains the definition of an OECM and related scientific and technical advice that has broadened the scope of governance authorities and areas that can be engaged and recognised in global conservation efforts. The voluntary guidance on OECMs and protected areas, also included in the decision, promotes the use of diverse, effective and equitable governance models, the integration of protected areas and OECMs into wider landscapes and seascapes, and mainstreaming of biodiversity conservation across sectors. Taken as a whole, the advice and voluntary guidance provides further clarity about the CBD Parties’ understanding of what constitutes equitable and effective area-based conservation measures within and beyond protected areas and provides standardised criteria with which to measure and report areas’ attributes and performance. This policy perspective suggests that this CBD decision represents further evidence of the evolution from the ‘new paradigm for protected areas’ to a broader ‘conserved areas paradigm’ that embodies good governance, equity and effective conservation outcomes and is inclusive of a diversity of contributions to conservation within and beyond protected areas.

The study provides a comprehensive and detailed analysis of the existing key policies and considerations in Taiwan's Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs), with the objective of providing useful evidence-based insights for formulating new effective environmental-friendly policies and promoting the existing policies. The study adopts a mixed research methodology that entails the combination of qualitative and quantitative research methodological frameworks. The primary source of the quantitative data for the study is the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) which provides variable data on OECMs and a component of databases of the Protected Planet Initiative (PPI) which is the joint product of UNEP and IUCN, managed by UNEP-WCMC and the IUCN working with governments, communities and collaborating partners. The qualitative methodological framework for the research adopted a technical systematic review approach based on the three-step framework for systematic reviews that involved planning, conducting and reporting the review. The review was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The sources that were included in the review included scientific research materials that focused on the policies related to OECMs. Taiwan has a total of 92 individual areas that are designated as national protected areas (PAs) and OECMs and formally recognized by the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA). Out of the 92 designated areas, only seven are managed by the Construction and Planning Agency while the remaining 85 areas are managed by the Forestry Bureau. In terms of designation, 37 areas are designated as major wildlife habitats, 21 areas are designated as nature reserves, 20 areas are designated as wildlife refuges, eight areas are designated as national parks and six areas are designated as forest reserves. The primary themes that were identified were associated with marine spatial planning, environmental impact assessment (EIA) and marine scientific research and included biodiversity, protected area consideration, geographically defined areas, coastal resources and marine ecosystems. Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) have not been widely implemented yet, but most countries, including Taiwan, are increasingly aligning their existing policies with the strategies outlined in the OECMs policies to achieve large area-based conservation targets and reduce biodiversity loss.

Other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) are sites outside of protected areas that deliver the effective, long-term conservation of biodiversity. Both protected areas and OECMs contribute to the implementation of the Global Biodiversity Framework’s Target 3, which calls for the conservation of 30% of marine, terrestrial and inland water areas by 2030. This paper provides the first global assessment of the contribution of OECMs to GBF Target 3. Between 2019 and 2023, 820 sites in nine countries and territories were reported to the World Database on OECMs, covering 1.9 million km2 of the Earth’s surface and, in the terrestrial realm, contributing over 1% to the 30% coverage target. Notably, over 50% of reported OECMs are under governance by governments and less than 2% are governed by Indigenous peoples and local communities. In countries and territories that have reported OECMs, a far greater proportion of OECMs than protected areas are under shared governance (40.9% compared to 2.5%), and collaborative governance is the most common governance sub-type among reported OECMs. This paper finds that almost 30% of the 820 reported OECMs overlap with identified Key Biodiversity Areas, which are one global classification of areas of particular importance for biodiversity. With Target 3’s pressing deadline of 2030, there is an urgent need to scale up understanding and local to national engagement with the OECM framework, ensuring that it fulfills its potential to recognize diverse forms of equitable governance and effective conservation.

Protected areas (PAs) are pivotal to biodiversity conservation, yet their efficacy is compromised by insufficient funding and management. So-called other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) present a paradigm shift and address PA limitations. Such measures can expand conservation areas, enhance connectivity, and improve the existing system. To assess the conservation status of biodiversity in Tibetan cultural areas in China, we investigated the spatial distribution of wildlife vulnerable to human disturbance (large- and medium-sized mammals and terrestrial birds) in Xinlong, a traditional Tibetan cultural area. In particular, we compared a PA (Xionglongxi Nature Reserve) and OECMs targeting species conservation. We also investigated the relationship of wildlife with human temporal and spatial activities. The OECMs complemented areas not covered by PA, especially in rich understory biodiversity regions. More species in OECMs tolerated human presence than species in the PA. Existing biodiversity reserves failed to cover areas of high conservation value in Tibet and offered limited protection capacity. Expanding PAs and identifying OECMs improved Xinlong's system by covering most biodiversity hotspots. Building on the tradition of wildlife conservation in Tibet, harnessing OECMs may be an effective means of augmenting biodiversity conservation capacity. We recommend further evaluation of OECMs effectiveness and coverage in Tibetan area as a way to enhance the current PA system.

The concept of ‘long-term’ is a key part of the definitions of both protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). Draft principles for OECMs in Australia developed by the Australian Government propose a minimum period for OECMs of 25 years, where a landholder is not able to commit to in-perpetuity conservation. The proposal suggests this is consistent with IUCN Guidelines for Privately Protected Areas. As authors of the Guidelines for Privately Protected Areas we contend however that Australia’s proposed OECM guideline suggesting 25 years of “intention” to deliver biodiversity outcomes is ‘long-term’ is not supported by IUCN guidelines. Furthermore for protected areas, Australia has a long-established definition of ‘long-term’ – specifically a minimum timeframe of 99 years is required if permanent protection is not possible – embedded in both national policy and legal agreements. As national governments rapidly seek to define OECMs in response to the raised ambitions of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, there will be increasing interest in what counts towards Target 3. Ultimately, more land managed for conservation is good and all forms of area-based conservation should be encouraged. However, not all forms of area-based conservation qualify for inclusion in Target 3. Long-term intent and outcomes are fundamental, as outlined in the definitions of protected areas and OECMs.

Medicinal plant species are crucial biological resources, and yet their conservation in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia remains insufficiently studied. This study conducts a comprehensive gap analysis of 74 priority medicinal plant species in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia to assess their spatial distribution, identify conservation gaps and propose strategic recommendations. Occurrence records were collected from field surveys and global biodiversity databases, followed by ecogeographical land characterization and conservation gap analyses using the CAPFITOGEN3 tools. The results reveal significant disparities in in situ and ex situ conservation efforts, with two biodiversity hotspots, Asir and Jazan, containing the highest species diversity. While 66 species occur within protected areas, seven species are currently only recorded outside protected areas, indicating opportunities for expanding conservation efforts. Complementarity analysis identified 13 optimal protected areas for priority medicinal plants’ conservation, alongside 20 potential sites outside protected areas that could serve as other effective area-based conservation measures. Ex situ conservation remains critically limited for many species, with only 10 represented in genebanks and all accessions currently stored internationally, although some medicinal plant species may have broader global distributions. To bring about improved outcomes of conservation, the expansion of in situ conservation coverage, integration of other effective area-based conservation measures, strengthening of national genebanks and leverage of biotechnology and geospatial tools is recommended by this study. The findings of this study can be used to develop a more systematic and sustainable approach to the conservation of medicinal plants in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) are important to stop the global decline in biodiversity. Systematic site-based monitoring of the state of biodiversity and conservation outcomes is necessary for evidence-based adaptive management in protected areas and OECMs. Biodiversity monitoring is also important to inform managers if they are meeting their conservation goals. The framework described in this publication will help managers and site planners to consider all relevant details to develop effective biodiversity monitoring programmes for improved management outcomes.

The concept of 'long-term' is a key part of the definitions of both protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). Draft principles for OECMs in Australia developed by the Australian Government propose a minimum period for OECMs of 25 years, where a landholder is not able to commit to in-perpetuity conservation. The proposal suggests this is consistent with IUCN Guidelines for Privately Protected Areas. As authors of the Guidelines for Privately Protected Areas we contend however that Australia's proposed OECM guideline suggesting 25 years of "intention" to deliver biodiversity outcomes is 'long-term' is not supported by IUCN guidelines. Furthermore for protected areas, Australia has a long-established definition of 'long-term' - specifically a minimum timeframe of 99 years is required if permanent protection is not possible - embedded in both national policy and legal agreements. As national governments rapidly seek to define OECMs in response to the raised ambitions of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, there will be increasing interest in what counts towards Target 3. Ultimately, more land managed for conservation is good and all forms of area-based conservation should be encouraged. However, not all forms of area-based conservation qualify for inclusion in Target 3. Long-term intent and outcomes are fundamental, as outlined in the definitions of protected areas and OECMs.

The essential role of other effective area-based conservation measures in achieving big bold conservation targets