Running to stand still: The application of substandard OECMs in national and provincial policy in Canada

Abstract

Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measures (OECMs) were introduced in the language of the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 2011–2020 Strategic Plan for Biodiversity as a mechanism to formally recognize the contributions that areas beyond traditional protected areas can make to the effective, long-term, in-situ conservation of biodiversity. Since the international conservation community agreed to a definition of OECMs in 2018, various Parties to the CBD have begun designating these areas and they are now being reported in global and national protected and conserved area databases. Using examples from Canada, this perspective details how the designation of some OECMs is circumventing the use of established and well-known decision support tools that work to uphold conservation standards, and why these designations may result in negligible gains for biodiversity. The perspective also details how labeling OECMs as “marine refuges” and “conserved areas” is misleading and can misinform the public on conservation success. To avoid the loss of biodiversity in ‘paper parks’ and eroding public trust in the institutions charged with effectively conserving biodiversity, the paper concludes by underscoring the need for new tools to evaluate the effectiveness of OECMs and new measures to hold countries accountable to protected and conserved area targets in the CBD so that their original intent is not further compromised in the post-2020 era of conservation.