When it comes to the elements of the package, the definition of an MPA
75 could
build on the definition of protected area, also contained in Article 2 of the CBD. The
process for designing and establishing MPAs could also rely on the Ecologically or
Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs) as source of inspiration.
76 EBSAs,
launched by the CBD in 2005, aim for the designation of “geographically or
oceanographically discrete areas that provide important services to one or more
species/populations of an ecosystem or to the ecosystem as a whole, compared to
other surrounding areas or areas of similar ecological characteristics, or otherwise
meet [certain] criteria”.
77 Such designation can lead to protective measures.
Although the designation process, based on several criteria,
78 is scientifically and
technically driven, it has, for now, not achieved broad acceptance nor legal value.
79
By relying on the EBSA process to develop the ILBI, the goal would not be to fasttrack a designated EBSA into an ABMT/MPA under the ILBI; this process could
however serve as a starting point for the development of ABMT designation procedures under the ILBI.
80
In regards to EIAs, the activities addressed by such assessments under the ILBI
could be harmonized with the ones having an impact on ABNJ in accordance with
the content of Article 14 of the CBD, i.e. projects likely to have significant adverse
effects on biological diversity.
81 Whether to include strategic environmental assessments (SEAs) in the ILBI has also been discussed.
82 In order to develop the EIA
processes under the ILBI, including their conduct but also the threshold and criteria
relied upon, the CBD Voluntary guidelines on biodiversity-inclusive impact assessment,
83 as well as the CBD Revised Voluntary Guidelines for the Consideration of
Biodiversity in EIAs and SEAs in Marine and Coastal Areas,
84 could be of assistance. Small-island developing States have also reiterated the need to incorporate
traditional knowledge in the assessments, by building upon the CBD Akwé:Kon
Guidelines on socio-cultural and environmental assessments.
85
Regarding the question of access and benefit sharing of MGRs, the Nagoya
Protocol could be relied upon to develop a list of benefits, as well as for establishing
75 DOALOS (2017a), pp. 8–9; IISD (2018), pp. 6–7, 9.
76 DOALOS (2017a), pp. 41, 44, 48, 66, 95; IISD (2018), p. 6.
77 CBD COP Dec XI/17 (2012). See also Ardron et al. (2013), p. 11; Gjerde et al. (2013), p. 546.
78 The criteria are uniqueness or rarity, special importance for life history stages of species,
importance for threatened, endangered or declining species and/or habitats, vulnerability, fragility,
sensitivity or slow recovery, biological productivity, biological diversity, and naturalness.
79 See, e.g., Freestone (2016), pp. 248 and 264.
80 Id., p. 248.
81 IISD (2017), pp. 12–13.
82 IGC (2018b), p. 12; IISD (2018), pp. 11–12.
83 CBD COP Dec VIII/28 (2006). IGC (2019), pp. 33 and 35.
84 IISD (2018), p. 16.
85 CBD COP Dec VII/16 (2004); IISD (2017), p. 8.
364
C. Blanchard et al.
75 could
build on the definition of protected area, also contained in Article 2 of the CBD. The
process for designing and establishing MPAs could also rely on the Ecologically or
Biologically Significant Marine Areas (EBSAs) as source of inspiration.
76 EBSAs,
launched by the CBD in 2005, aim for the designation of “geographically or
oceanographically discrete areas that provide important services to one or more
species/populations of an ecosystem or to the ecosystem as a whole, compared to
other surrounding areas or areas of similar ecological characteristics, or otherwise
meet [certain] criteria”.
77 Such designation can lead to protective measures.
Although the designation process, based on several criteria,
78 is scientifically and
technically driven, it has, for now, not achieved broad acceptance nor legal value.
79
By relying on the EBSA process to develop the ILBI, the goal would not be to fasttrack a designated EBSA into an ABMT/MPA under the ILBI; this process could
however serve as a starting point for the development of ABMT designation procedures under the ILBI.
80
In regards to EIAs, the activities addressed by such assessments under the ILBI
could be harmonized with the ones having an impact on ABNJ in accordance with
the content of Article 14 of the CBD, i.e. projects likely to have significant adverse
effects on biological diversity.
81 Whether to include strategic environmental assessments (SEAs) in the ILBI has also been discussed.
82 In order to develop the EIA
processes under the ILBI, including their conduct but also the threshold and criteria
relied upon, the CBD Voluntary guidelines on biodiversity-inclusive impact assessment,
83 as well as the CBD Revised Voluntary Guidelines for the Consideration of
Biodiversity in EIAs and SEAs in Marine and Coastal Areas,
84 could be of assistance. Small-island developing States have also reiterated the need to incorporate
traditional knowledge in the assessments, by building upon the CBD Akwé:Kon
Guidelines on socio-cultural and environmental assessments.
85
Regarding the question of access and benefit sharing of MGRs, the Nagoya
Protocol could be relied upon to develop a list of benefits, as well as for establishing
75 DOALOS (2017a), pp. 8–9; IISD (2018), pp. 6–7, 9.
76 DOALOS (2017a), pp. 41, 44, 48, 66, 95; IISD (2018), p. 6.
77 CBD COP Dec XI/17 (2012). See also Ardron et al. (2013), p. 11; Gjerde et al. (2013), p. 546.
78 The criteria are uniqueness or rarity, special importance for life history stages of species,
importance for threatened, endangered or declining species and/or habitats, vulnerability, fragility,
sensitivity or slow recovery, biological productivity, biological diversity, and naturalness.
79 See, e.g., Freestone (2016), pp. 248 and 264.
80 Id., p. 248.
81 IISD (2017), pp. 12–13.
82 IGC (2018b), p. 12; IISD (2018), pp. 11–12.
83 CBD COP Dec VIII/28 (2006). IGC (2019), pp. 33 and 35.
84 IISD (2018), p. 16.
85 CBD COP Dec VII/16 (2004); IISD (2017), p. 8.
364
C. Blanchard et al.