MPAs in ABNJ: lessons from two high seas regimes
Abstract Establishing a network of marine-protected areas (MPAs) in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) is viewed as an important measure to protect marine biodiversity. To date 12 MPAs have been established: two in the Southern Ocean and 10 in the North-East Atlantic region, and more are prop...
| Published in: | ICES Journal of Marine Science |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Oxford University Press (OUP)
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsx189 http://academic.oup.com/icesjms/article-pdf/75/1/417/31237193/fsx189.pdf |
| Summary: | Abstract Establishing a network of marine-protected areas (MPAs) in areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) is viewed as an important measure to protect marine biodiversity. To date 12 MPAs have been established: two in the Southern Ocean and 10 in the North-East Atlantic region, and more are proposed. The Southern Ocean MPAs were adopted by Members of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) in a complex, slow and challenging process. The North-East Atlantic MPAs were established under the OSPAR Convention and although the MPA network was established swiftly, doubts remain about whether it was a successful institutional development for the protection of marine biodiversity or just a network of ‘paper parks’. This article analyses the planning and negotiation processes that took place in establishing the 12 current MPAs to identify lessons useful for establishing MPAs in ABNJ in the future. |
|---|