92
World Heritage Proceedings of the World Heritage Marine Biodiversity Workshop 4 papers
For more information contact:UNESCO World Heritage Centre
7, place de Fontenoy75352 Paris 07 SP FranceTel : 33 (0)1 45 68 18 76Fax: 33 (0)1 45 68 55 70E-mail : [email protected]://whc.unesco.org
Wor ld Her i tage
Proceedings of the WorldHeritage Marine Biodiversity
Workshop
World Her i tage papers
Co
ver
Jon
ath
an
R.
Gre
en
' 2
00
0C
ove
r d
esi
gn
ed
by
Re
cto
Ve
rso
4papers
Proceedings of the World HeritageMarine Biodiversity Workshop
HANOI, VIET NAMFEBRUARY 25 – MARCH 1, 2002
Edited by Annie Hillary, Marjaana Kokkonen and Lisa Max
1
Disclaimer
The authors are responsible for the choice and presentation of the facts contained in this publicationand for the opinions expressed therein, which are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not com-mit to the Organization The designation employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not implythe expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of anycountry, territory, city, area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers orboundaries.
Published in 2003 by UNESCO World Heritage Centre7 place de Fontenoy75352 Paris 07 SP (France)Tel: (33) 01 45 68 18 76Fax: (33) 01 45 68 55 70E-mail: [email protected]://whc.unesco.org
Lay out/design: Maria Lepeigne-CoboMaps: Timothy Green / WWF and Bernd Paulowitz / WHCPrinted in France
2
ANNEXES
TABLE OF CONTENTSForeword 5
Acknowledgements 7
List of Participants 9
Glossary - 12
Acronyms 15
Hanoi Statement 16
Background 26
Discussion of Areas by Regionand Regional Recommendations 28
Concluding Challenges and Recommendations 54
Annex 1. Threats and feasibility analysis for the highest priority sites per each region 60
Annex 2. Workshop process - 72
Annex 3 Potential World Heritage Sites of the Central Indian Ocean Region 74
Annex 4.References - 83
Map 1.World Heritage Tropical Coastal and Marine Sites - 88
3
4
For more information contact:UNESCO World Heritage Centre
7, place de Fontenoy75352 Paris 07 SP FranceTel : 33 (0)1 45 68 18 76Fax : 33 (0)1 45 68 55 70E-mail : [email protected]://whc.unesco.org
ForewordThis year we are celebrating the 30th anniversary of the World Heritage Convention. Overthis period the Convention has provided protection for numerous cultural and natural treasuresof our World, and it continues to do so. Sites deserving of World Heritage status demonstrate theflexibility and diversity embodied in the heritage concept and spirit of the Convention, for exam-ple - the Galápagos Islands, the Great Barrier Reef, the Grand Canyon, the Great Wall and Gizapyramids, among others. The World Heritage Committee, the statutory body in charge of the pro-tection of these sites, has recognized that the World Heritage List does not yet fully represent alltypes of cultural and natural heritage, which are of outstanding universal value. Therefore it hasencouraged the World Heritage Centre and other partners to take action to support the StatesParties of the Convention in nominating sites for World Heritage status that will over time ensu-re the natural and cultural treasures of the World are protected and thereby provide ecologicaland social benefits for society in perpetuity.
Coastal and marine ecosystems support most of our Planet’s functioning and provide inva-luable economic benefits, yet only about five percent of sites on the World Heritage List arenominated for coastal-marine heritage values at this time. Several reports on the state of marineecosystems and related resources give alarming indications on their condition. For example,coral reefs and associated mangrove forests and seagrass beds are severely threatened from acombination of human activities and natural influences, e.g. climate change. Urgent action isneeded to revert the decline of these globally significant diverse and productive ecosystems. Isee the World Heritage Convention as an important tool to bring attention and protection forthese unique ecosystems as they are a compelling illustration of major types of natural heritagenot sufficiently represented on the World Heritage List.
I see it as our duty, not only to make the World Heritage List more representative of dif-ferent types of heritage, but to recognize and protect extraordinary examples of marine ecosys-tems which are true expressions of global heritage. Therefore, this recent expert workshop toexamine nomination opportunities for more tropical coastal, marine and island sites is well timedand I am pleased the workshop has resulted in a clear set of concrete priority actions and areas.This guidance will enable the States Parties, the World Heritage Committee and the WorldHeritage Centre alike, to take immediate and strategic actions to address our urgent need forenhanced protection and sustainable management of tropical, coastal, marine and small islandecosystems. We at the World Heritage Centre have taken the recommendations very seriouslyand have already commenced work to promote and assist nominations of transboundary marineproperties based on the findings of this report.
In nominating marine sites, the States Parties not only benefit from the increased attentionbrought to these sites in the form of additional funding from our partners and donors, but alsofrom managing these sites in a way that can provide ongoing livelihood, food security and reve-nue streams for coastal and island societies through sustainable management of tourism and fis-heries benefits associated with these sites. For example, we now know the locations, and have abetter understanding of the functions critical breeding areas for valuable fish stocks and other
5
marine species. When breeding and spawning areas are protected, fish stocks can multiply andbe ‘seed banks’, supplying fishery resources at source as well as to many other sites dependingupon the migration cycle and pathway of the species.
The expert meeting suggested innovative World Heritage nomination mechanisms, suchas linking several marine protected areas as one serial site or transboundary nominations fromtwo or more countries sharing important areas for marine diversity. I would encourage StatesParties to consider these innovative approaches when preparing nominations of the marine eco-systems. Due to the dynamic and fluid nature of marine environment, serial and transboundaryapproaches are appropriate for delineation of marine World Heritage sites. Transboundary nomi-nations can also serve as an important peace-building instrument between different nations.
The World Heritage Convention is a valuable mechanism for conservation of marine eco-systems, but so far its full potential has not been exploited. Therefore, I see this workshop as animportant first step in rallying more attention to the Convention’s use for marine conservation. Ilook forward to receiving support and co-operation from all the workshop participants and theirorganizations as well as from our partners and naturally the States Parties themselves in imple-menting the recommendations listed in this report.
Francesco BandarinDirector
UNESCO World Heritage Centre
6
AcknowledgmentsThe workshop organizers, UNESCO World Heritage Centre and the U.S. NationalOceanic and Atmospheric Administration, wish to express deep appreciation for the assistanceand collaborations of everyone who made this workshop a success and to acknowledge the manyindividuals and organizations that provided support to make this workshop possible. Firstly, wewould like to acknowledge the generous funding from the United Nations Foundation, forwithout such support, this workshop would not have been possible. The leadership of IUCNWorld Commission on Protected Areas - Marine Theme in directing this effort must be recogni-zed along with the advisory support from the workshop Steering Committee that providedinsight in the program development.
A number of other organizations must be acknowledged for their efforts: The WorldWildlife Fund – US; The Nature Conservancy; and Conservation International who were eachinstrumental in developing the framework that outlined the biogeographic approach for identi-fying priority areas. We would like to especially acknowledge the contribution of WWF-US forassembling the datasets that were stage setting for achieving the outcomes of the workshop andled to the success of the experts in identifying and reaching final consensus on the globally signi-ficant areas for tropical marine biodiversity. UNEP-WCMC provided maps and backgroundinformation about the marine and coastal World Heritage sites already inscribed on the WorldHeritage List.
Special thanks are extended to the many members of the IUCN - The World ConservationUnion for their contribution to the project, most importantly to our host organization, IUCNVietnam Office, for their continuous support and gracious professional assistance, which allo-wed smooth running of the workshop. The valuable technical staff and support of WWF -Vietnam also contributed to the effort. The Ha Long Bay Management Authority set the stage forthe week by taking workshop participants to an informative site visit that provided the workshopparticipants with understanding of the challenges facing many World Heritage properties.
Our sincerest thanks go to all workshop participants, who supported us through the diffi-cult times following the postponement of the workshop in September 2001. Everyone workedenthusiastically during the workshop and thus enabled us to achieve the workshop goals of defi-ning priorities and recommending areas from tropical coastal, marine and small island ecosys-tems for nomination on the World Heritage List.
7
8
Ismael Al MadanyNational Commission for Wildlife ProtectionBAHRAIN
Charles BineyCSIR Water Research InstituteGHANA
Bui Thi Thu HienIUCN The World Conservation UnionVIET NAM
Lauretta BurkeWorld Resources InstituteUNITED STATES
Georgina Bustamante The Nature ConservancyUNITED STATES
Annadel CabanbanUniversity of Malaysia MALAYSIA
Tomas CamarenaNational Commission of Natural Protected Areas Ministry of the EnvironmentMEXICO
Lindsay ChongSengSeychelles Island FoundationSEYCHELLES
James CulverwellNational Directorate of Conservation AreasMinistry of TourismMOZAMBIQUE
Carlo C. CustodioRamsar Convention PHILIPPINES
Laura David University of the Philippines PHILIPPINES
Jon DayGreat Barrier Reef Marine Park AuthorityAUSTRALIA
Lyndon DevantierHon Mun MPA ProjectVIET NAM
Karen EckertWider Caribbean Sea Turtle ConservationNetwork (WIDECAST)UNITED STATES
Charles “Bud” EhlerNational Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministrationUNITED STATES
Regina FolorunshoNigerian Institute for Oceanography and MarineResearchNIGERIA
Miguel D. FortesUniversity of PhilippinesPHILIPPINES
Kristina GjerdeEnvironmental Investment PartnersPOLAND
Edmund GreenUNEP World ConservationMonitoring CentreUNITED KINGDOM
Tim GreenWorld Wildlife FundUNITED STATES
9
List of participants
Jack Stein GroveJ. S. Grove PhotographyUNITED STATES
Mireille GuillaumeMuseum National d’Histoire NaturelleFRANCE
Annie Hillary National Oceanic andAtmospheric AdministrationUNITED STATES
Andy HootenAJH Environmental ServicesUNITED STATES
Kenneth KassemWorld Wildlife Fund UNITED STATES
Benjamin KavuKenya Wildlife ServiceKENYA
Graeme KelleherIUCN - WCPAAUSTRALIA
Hugh KirkmanUNEP East Asian Seas RegionalCoordinating UnitTHAILAND
Marjaana KokkonenUNESCO World Heritage CentreFRANCE
Scotty KyleGreater St. Lucia Wetland ParkSOUTH AFRICA
Michaela LedesmaRESOLVE, Inc.UNITED STATES
Ken LindemanEnvironmental DefenseUNITED STATES
Ghislaine LlewellynWorld Wildlife Fund UNITED STATES
Lisa MaxSea Grant FellowUNITED STATES
Sheila McKennaConservation InternationalUNITED STATES
John McManusUniversity of MiamiUNITED STATES
Chou Loke MingNational University of SingaporeSINGAPORE
Peter MousThe Nature ConservancyINDONESIA
Dawn Pierre NathonielDepartment of FisheriesST. LUCIA, WEST INDIES
Nguyen Chu HoiInstitute of Fisheries Economics and PlanningVIET NAM
Nguyen Minh ThongIUCN-The World Conservation UnionVIET NAM
Nguyen Van TuanHa Long Bay Management AuthorityVIET NAM
Debra NudelmanRESOLVE, Inc.UNITED STATES
10
David OburaCoral Reef Degradation in the Indian Ocean KENYA
Jamie OliverICLARM - The World Fish CenterMALAYSIA
Arthur PatersonNational Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministrationUNITED STATES
Eileen L. PenaflorUniversity of the PhilippinesPHILIPPINES
Nicholas PilcherHelen Reef Resource Management ProjectREPUBLIC OF PALAU
Zhou QiulinThird Institute of OceanographyCHINA
Kishore RaoIUCN World Conservation Union VIET NAM
Chikambi K. RumishaMinistry of Natural Resources and TourismTANZANIA
Jorge Rodriguez Villalobos Cocos Island National ParkCOSTA RICA
Fred ShortUniversity of New HampshireUNITED STATES
Jan SteffenKEHATI - The Indonesian BiodiversityFoundationTERANGI - The Indonesian Coral ReefFoundationINDONESIA
Peter ValentineJames Cook UniversityAUSTRALIA
Vo Si TuanInstitute of OceanographyVIET NAM
Tom van’t HofMarine & Coastal Resource ManagementConsultingNETHERLANDS ANTILLES
John VeronAustralian Institute of Marine ScienceAUSTRALIA
Clive WilkinsonGlobal Coral Reef Monitoring NetworkAUSTRALIA
Meriwether WilsonUniversity of EdinburghUNITED KINGDOM
Elspeth WinghamUNESCO Apia OfficeSAMOA
Wiryanti WiryonoThe ASEAN SecretariatINDONESIA
Tim WongIUCN The World Conservation UnionTHAILAND
Kai WulfSoufriere Marine Management AreaST. LUCIA WEST INDIES
Thamasak YeeminRamkhamhaeng UniversityTHAILAND
11
Nomination terms:
Serial nomination (the word “cluster” has also been used for this in the text): any nomination,which consists of two or more physically unconnected areas, but which are related for examplebecause they belong to the same geological, geomorphological formation, the same biogeographicprovince or the same ecosystem type. The series itself should be of outstanding universal value, notnecessarily its components taken individually. Serial nominations are inscribed as a single proper-ty on the World Heritage List. The locations, size and boundaries of each component must be madeclear in the nomination (Section I of the Nomination Format).
Transboundary nomination: nomination of a property that spans an international boundary(ies).Transboundary nominations are inscribed as a single property on the World Heritage List.
Transboundary serial nomination: a combination of the two above-mentioned. The nominatedproperty should be managed jointly.
Outstanding Universal Value: in the text of the World Heritage Convention, outstanding univer-sal value is the threshold of value to be satisfied when inscribing properties on the World HeritageList. One or more of the World Heritage selection criteria as described in the OperationalGuidelines must be met.
Marine Protected Area: a Marine Protected Areas is “any area of the intertidal or subtidal terrain,together with its overlying water and associated flora, fauna, historical and cultural features, whichhas been reserved by law or other effective means to protect part or all of the enclosed environ-ment”. (World Conservation Union – IUCN 1988, Kelleher 1999)
“Tropical marine and coastal”: as defined in the UNEP-WCMC discussion paper:(i) marine components as those areas from deep ocean to areas immediately below high waterlevel;(ii) coastal components as those areas of land and brackish and fresh water immediately adjacentor in close proximity to the sea;(iii) tropical areas to include sub-tropical areas approximately within latitudes 30°N and 30°S.
Tropical marine, coastal and small island ecosystem terms:
Archipelago: a group or chain of many islands.
Atoll: a circular or horseshoe-shaped coral reef that grows upward from a submerged volcanic peakand encloses a lagoon; may support low-lying islands composed of coral debris. Common in thePacific.
12
Glossary of terms
Barrier reef: a long, narrow coral reef, roughly parallel to the shore and separated by a lagoon ofconsiderable depth and width. It may lie a great distance from a continental or island coast. It isoften interrupted by passes or channels and can emerge above the sea surface during low tide.Benthic: bottom dwelling; living on or under the sediments or other substratum.
Bleaching: the process when a coral polyp expels it’s symbiotic zooxanthellae from coral hostbody.
Community: all of the animals living in a specific area (habitat), often described by the most abun-dant or obvious organisms.
Continental or insular shelf: the submerged shelf of land that slopes gradually from the exposededges of a continent or island where drop off to the deep seafloor begins. When the shelf drops gra-dually and there is not a distinctive shelf break (usually located at 20-60m depth) the edge of theshelf is conventionally situated at 200m depth.
Coral reef: a wave resistant structure whose foundation is the result of the skeletal constructionand cementation processes of hermatypic corals, calcareous algae, and other calcium carbonatesecreting organisms. It also includes other non-carbonate organisms residing on or associated to thebuilding structure.
Ecosystem: a natural system including the sum total of all living things, the non-living environ-ment and its physical forces, and the relationships among these including processes such as preda-tion, competition, energy flow and nutrient cycling.
Estuary: a semi enclosed body of water that has a free connection with the open sea and withinwhich seawater is diluted measurably with freshwater that is derived from land drainage.
Fringing reef: a shelf reef that grows close to shore. Some develop around oceanic islands.
Habitat: place or environment where a particular species or group of organisms live.
Mangrove: tropical or subtropical trees and shrubs that are variously salt tolerant and can formdense systems of roots and branches at the land-sea interface, ultimately building land.
Mollusk: a taxonomic division of the animal kingdom that includes snails, slugs, octopuses,squids, clams, mussels, and oysters.
Monitoring: periodic measurements of the same parameters, physical or biological, designed todetect change over time.
No-take reserves: geographic areas where by law no one is allowed to fish or collect biologicalspecimens. Rules can apply to one or more species. They are also named marine reserves or fishe-ry reserves.
13
Oceanic reef: a reef that develops adjacent to deep waters, often in association with oceanicislands.Patch reef: a coral boulder or clump of corals unattached to a major reef structure.
Pelagic: life forms living in the water column.
Phylum (plural phyla): Related group within a kingdom of flora or fauna containing classes,orders, families, genera and species with similar general form.
Platform reef: a large reef of variable shape lacking a lagoon, seaward of a fringing reef and or abarrier reef, for which the width is more than half its length.
Reef: an underwater structure; something that extends up from the seafloor but does not rise abovethe surface of the water.
Reef lagoon: a warm, shallow, quiet waterway separated from the open sea by a reef crest.
Runoff: water that flows in streams, rivers, or even artificial structures (such as waterways, chan-nels, or streets) or other impervious surfaces, and reaches nearshore environments; runoff drainwater and many different natural particulate matter such as sediments and nutrient, but also pollu-tants from urban and agricultural land uses, e.g. sewage, heavy metals, fertilizers from lawns andagriculture.
Seagrass: rooted, submerged marine or estuarine macrophytes of several species (phanerogamsand algae). Habitats created by seagrass meadows are among the most diverse and productiveestuarine environments.
Species richness: the number of species in an area or biological collection.
Spur and groove reef: a coral reef formation characterized by rapid and substantial fingerlike pro-jections of coral accumulation (spurs) separated by sand (grooves) that form in the direction of pre-vailing waves.
Upwelling: the movement of cold, nutrient rich water from a specified depth to the surface.
Watershed: the area that is drained by a river or estuary and its tributaries.
Wetland: an area where saturation with water is the dominant influence on characteristics of thesoil and on the composition of the plant community.
Zooxanthellae: a group of dinoflagellate algae living in association with one variety of inverte-brate groups (e.g. corals).
14
ASEAN – Association of Southeast Asian Nations
CI – Conservation International
FAO – Food and Agricultural Organization
GEF – Global Environment Facility
ICRAN – International Coral Reef Action Network
ICRI – International Coral Reef Initiative
IMO – International Maritime Organization
IUCN – World Conservation Union
LAC – Latin America and Caribbean
NGO – Non-governmental organization
NOAA – National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
PERGSA – Red Sea and Gulf of Aden Environment Programme
PSSA – Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas
RAP - The Representative Areas Program (Australia)
ROPME – Regional Organization for the Protection of the Marine Environment
ROWA – Regional Office for West Asia
SIDS – Small Island Developing States
SPA Protocol – Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Biological Diversity
in the Mediterranean
SPAW - Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife in the Wider Caribbean Region
TNC – The Nature Conservancy
UN – United Nations
UNDP – United Nations Development Programme
UNEP – United Nations Environment Programme
UNESCO – United Nations Educational and Scientific and Cultural Organization
UNF – United Nations Foundation
WCMC – World Conservation Monitoring Centre
WCPA – Marine – World Commission on Protected Areas Marine
WHC – World Heritage Centre
WWF – World Wide Fund for Nature
WWF-US – World Wildlife Fund – US
15
Acronyms
16
The Hanoi Statement
Sixty-two coastal and marine scientificexperts attended the “World Heritage MarineBiodiversity Workshop: Filling Critical Gaps andPromoting Multi-Site Approaches to NewNominations of Tropical Coastal, Marine andSmall Island Ecosystems” held in Hanoi, Vietnamfrom 25 February to 1 March, 2002.
Workshop participants gathered to assessthe marine biodiversity of the tropical realm andidentify opportunities to expand World Heritagecoverage of areas of Outstanding Universal Value(OUV). The primary objectives of the workshopwere to:
1) Reach expert consensus on tropical coastal,marine, and small island ecosystems for potentialnomination as World Heritage sites.
2) Identify innovative opportunities for applyinga multi-site approach (serial and transboundarynominations) to pilot one or more World Heritagesite nominations.
During the workshop, internationally andregionally recognized experts worked together todevelop a scientifically-based consensus globallist of areas of outstanding universal value formarine biodiversity for further consideration byState Parties to the World Heritage Conventionand other interested entities for nominations onthe World Heritage List.
A biogeographic approach, utilizing theWorld Heritage criteria, was used to identify arepresentative set of priority areas important forbiodiversity value, with an emphasis placed onlarge-scale interconnections within the areas. TheWorkshop participants discussed use of the WorldHeritage Convention as a mechanism for conser-ving the biodiversity of outstanding marine andcoastal areas. The Workshop outcomes are direc-ted to remedy under-representation in WorldHeritage coverage of tropical coastal, marine andsmall island ecosystems. World Heritage status ishighly valued, but at the moment amongst the 730sites inscribed on the World Heritage List very
few are inscribed for their marine values.
The workshop participants concluded thatmany tropical coastal, marine, and small islandecosystems have suffered and continue to suffersubstantial environmental damage. This degrada-tion threatens the viability of important species,the existence of critical marine habitats, the func-tionality of marine systems, the livelihoods ofhundreds of millions of people, and the econo-mies of many coastal states and nations.
17
Therefore, Workshop participants recommend to the World Heritage Committee that in relationto tropical marine, coastal and small island ecosystems:
1rImmediate steps and attention must be taken to enhance global marine conservation efforts byimproving the coverage and geographic representation of tropical marine, coastal and small island eco-systems of Outstanding Universal Value (OUV) as World Heritage sites.
2rUnder-represented regions should be better represented on the World Heritage list.
3rAn ecosystem approach should be applied to develop a “network” of truly outstanding sites underWorld Heritage protection in light of the diversity and connectivity of the marine environment.
4rThe nomination process should be used as a tool to build management capabilities at areas of out-standing universal value, with an aim to meet World Heritage requirements.
5rWherever feasible, marine World Heritage sites and other marine protected areas must be largeenough to include the sources of larvae needed to replenish populations of organisms depleted by dis-turbances, to encompass important migration routes, and to fully protect viable breeding stocks of spe-cies that are endangered or crucial to ecosystem integrity.
6rRecognizing that the small jurisdictional size of individual Small Island Developing States(SIDS), such as the Lesser Antilles, may limit their competitiveness for selection as World HeritageSites, IUCN and the World Heritage Committee should take steps to ensure that SIDS are sufficientlyrepresented as natural marine sites, or mixed sites with natural marine and/or terrestrial, as well as cul-tural components. While individual criteria maybe met by these sites, it is clear that their relative com-petitiveness remains low in comparison with larger marine ecoregions. In addition, there is often insuf-ficient information for the clustering of multi-island sites, reducing their competitiveness in cluster andtrans-boundary nominations. Special attention must be given to SIDS, with reference to biodiversitythe small jurisdictional size of individual SIDS and in particular their marine components may limittheir competitiveness for World Heritage Site selection.
7rCultural and natural components of the World Heritage Convention should work more effective-ly together where applicable especially in relation to ecosystems that have both outstanding concen-trations of biodiversity and rich, traditional human cultures. It was particularly noted that traditionalownership and cultural traditions of coastal and small island communities provide a significant basisfor long-term conservation.
8rWhere shipping occurs through or near a World Heritage site, investigations should be initiated todetermine whether designation of the area as a Particularly Sensitive Sea Area by the InternationalMaritime Organization would be appropriate.
9rThe unique biodiversity attributes of areas of the high seas and threats to which they are subjectneed to be recognized by a program to identify and establish World Heritage sites that represent theseattributes.
18
10r More information about ecological components and processes, as well as about proven andeffective management practices is needed to guide the management of existing World Heritage sites.Therefore, Workshop participants suggest that support be given from the World Heritage Fund, as wellas from other donors, for applied research, monitoring on ecology, threats, and management practices,which will support effective management of World Heritage sites. The participants of the workshopwill use their networks to promote research at World Heritage sites.
11r It is essential that sites already on the World Heritage List provide for improved monitoringand effective management. Capacity building is an urgent requirement in many countries.
12r As effectively managed areas, World Heritage sites can play a key role as models for “BESTPRACTICE” in the management of marine protected areas.
13r Existing World Heritage list containing marine or coastal components deserve the State Party’sconsideration for geographic extension in order to include larger representation of marine and coastalbiodiversity, as appropriate.
14r More information about ecological components and processes is needed in areas that includepotential World Heritage sites. The workshop suggests that resources be allocated to research and moni-toring in these areas.
15r To enhance management and facilitate information exchange among existing marine and coas-tal World Heritage sites, a World Heritage marine and coastal site managers’ network should be esta-blished in collaboration with other organizations and existing networks.
16r Other mechanisms, such as Biosphere Reserves, Ramsar site designations and marine protec-ted area networks should be applied to strengthen and complement the World Heritage Convention andgive international recognition to important marine sites.
17r More adequate resources and collaboration among donors, NGO’s and government agenciesshould be provided to effectively manage and evaluate existing and potential World Heritage areas.
18r Mechanisms should be implemented to ensure the continuation of the process initiated withthis workshop in support of this objective. A meeting of World Heritage coastal and marine site mana-gers should be held in conjunction with the World Parks Congress (South Africa, September 2003) toassess the benefits and management effectiveness of World Heritage sites.
19r A similar workshop dealing with temperate seas should be conducted as soon as practicable.
19
20
A list of tropical marine, coastal, and small island areas of outstanding universal valuefor biodiversity is provided for consideration by State Parties to aid in identifying sites thatcould be nominated to the World Heritage list. The workshop identified a number of clusterand trans-border areas and the possible extension of several existing World Heritage sites.These areas were chosen based primarily on biodiversity-related criteria, given currently avai-lable information from major marine ecosystem and provinces throughout the world.
Workshop participants, as representatives of the marine science and conservation com-munity, endorse and support this initiative to develop a science-based approach to fill gaps inthe World Heritage listing of natural areas by IUCN and signatories to the World HeritageConvention to assist in the process of identifying areas of outstanding universal value for bio-diversity in the tropical coastal, marine and small island ecosystem areas of the world. It wasrecognized that this group of experts did not have sufficient knowledge of all areas within theregions, which might merit for World Heritage status. It was therefore suggested that furtherstudies be undertaken, for example, in the Western Indian Ocean in order to identify priorityareas. Annex 3 summarizes the findings from the consultative process carried out after theworkshopto determine high priority areas in the Central Indian Ocean.
Participants commend the workshop process, conclusions and recommendations andagree to communicate this concluding statement to the World Heritage Convention and othersas appropriate, externally and to their own organizations for consideration and support.
Regional Priority Areas
The group of sixty-two experts identified nearly 120 areas of importance as tropical coastal,marine and small island ecosystems that may merit consideration for World Heritage listing. Thefollowing list is based on the knowledge and expertise of the workshop participants. Where exper-tise was not available to adequately review the sites, that information is noted.
A List: Areas that the group of experts unanimously recognized to be of Outstanding UniversalValue (OUV) in terms of their tropical coastal, marine and small island biodiversity attributes. Theexperts recommend that, as a matter of high priority, the State Parties consider nominating sitesfrom these areas onto the World Heritage List.
B List: Areas that were identified by experts to have significant components of OUV. The groupof experts recommends that the State Parties carry out further studies in co-operation with nationaland international experts in order to ascertain which OUV components would be of World Heritagevalue and prepare nominations as appropriate.
C List: The experts considered that the following areas may be of OUV but the information avai-lable at the meeting was not adequate to discuss them in further detail. Hence it is recommendedthat the State Parties undertake further review and analysis in co-operation with national and inter-national experts in order to determine the OUV value of these potential sites.
More detailed discussions on threats and feasibility for top-ranked sites are summarized in atable at Annex 2 at the end of this report.
21
< The Lists >(Numbers refer to regional maps)
A List:1. Raja Ampat Region (Indonesia)2. Spratlys Island Group (under dispute by 6 South China Sea nations)3. Tubbataha-Cagayan Ridge (Philippines)4. N. Borneo/ Balabac Strait/ Turtle Island Cluster (Philippines, Malaysia)5. Semporna/Tawi-tawi Chain (Malaysia)6. Berau Islands (Indonesia)7. Banda/Lucipara Cluster (Indonesia)
B-List: 8. Greater Ha Long Bay (Vietnam)9. Surin/Mergui (Thailand, Burma)10. Phuquoc/Namdu (Kampuchea and Vietnam)11.Condao/Nhatrang (Vietnam)12. Hoi An (Vietnam)13. Iriomote Island and Sekisei Lagoon (Japan)14. Batanes Island Cluster (Philippines)15. Manado/Bunaken (Indonesia)16. Wakatobi (Indonesia)17. Surigao-Siargao (Philippines)
C-List: 18. Andaman/Nicobar Island Chain (India)19. Pulau Dayang Bunting (Malaysia)20. Redang/Perhentian Island Cluster (Malaysia)21. Calamianes Cluster (Philippines)22. Zamboanga Region (Philippines)23. Teluk Cendrawasi (Indonesia)24. Alor Channels (Indonesia)25. Kimberly Islands (Australia)
A List:1. New Caledonia (France)2. Milne Bay (Papua New Guinea)3. Rock Islands Cluster (Palau)4. New Hanover and Manus Cluster (Papua New Guinea)
22
ioutheast Asia
iPacific
5. Marovo Lagoon and Arnavon Islands (Solomon Islands) 6. Pohnpei-Kosrae Island Cluster (Federated States of Micronesia)7. Line Islands Cluster (Cook Islands, Kiribati, the United States and French Polynesia)
B List:8. Austral Islands (France)9. Ha’apai Islands (Tonga)10. Kandavu / Lau Group (Fiji)11. Marquesas (France)12. NW Hawaiian Islands (US)13. Phoenix Group (Kiribati)
C List:14. Bikar, Bokaak, Wotho, Rongelap Atolls (Marshall Islands)15. Fly River and Northern Great Barrier Reef Cluster (Papua New Guinea and Australia)16. Gilbert Islands (Kiribati)17. Huon Peninsula (Papua New Guinea)18. Pitcairn and Easter Islands (UK, Chile)19. Tokelau20. Tuvalu21. Wallis and Futuna (France)22. Vanuatu23. Yadua Taba (Fiji)
A List:1. Cocos-Galapagos-Malpelo extension (Costa Rica, Ecuador and Colombia), opportunity for serialnomination2. Sea of Cortez - Gulf of California (Mexico)3. Mayan Coast Reefs – Sian Ka’an expansion– Banco Chinchorro (Mexico)4. Belize Barrier Reef System, opportunity for site expansion to include watershed and reef corridors5. Revillagigedo and Clipperton Islands (France and Mexico)6. Southern Cuba Coral Archipelago7. Southern Caribbean Island Group (The Netherlands and Venezuela)8. San Andres Archipelago (Columbia)
B List:9. Jaragua (Dominican Republic)10. Parque Nacional del Este (Dominican Republic)11. Andros Island (Bahamas)12. Exuma Cays (Bahamas)13. Peninsula Osa - Golfo Dulce (Costa Rica)14. Tortuguero-Miskitos Islands (Nicaragua)15. St. Lucia Island
23
iLatin America and Caribbean
16. Tobago Cays (St. Vincent & the Grenadines)17. Saba Island and Bank (The Netherlands)18. Guadeloupe (France)19. Reentyancias e Lencois Maranhensis (Brazil)
C List:20. Panama Bight (Panama, Colombia and Ecuador)21. Gulf of Darien (Panama and Colombia)22. NE Brazil Coast
A List:1. Niger Delta (Nigeria), opportunity for serial nomination with Cross River Barrier lagoon system2. Densu Delta, Muni, Sakumo, Songor and Keta Lagoons (Ghana), opportunity for serial nomination3. Sao Tome and Principe (Equatorial Guinea) including Annabon Island, opportunity for transboun-dary and serial nomination4. Boloma Bijagos (Guinea-Bissau)5. Skeleton Coast National Park (Namibia)
B List:6. Ascension Islands7. Great and Little Scaries Estuary (Sierra Leone)8. Grand Lahou and Ebrie Complex (Cote D’Ivorie)9. Aby, Tendo, Ehy Lagoon Complex (Cote d’ Ivorie, Ghana) opportunity for serial nomination of WestAfrica barrier lagoon systems10. Ehunli/Akpuho Lagoons and Nyile/Kpani Estuary (Ghana)11. Nokoue Lake and Porto Novo Lagoon (Benin)12. Coastal Lagoons (Gabon)13. Cross River Estuary (Nigeria, Cameroon)
C List:14. Benguela Coast (The Republic of Congo, Democratic Republic of Congo and Angola)
A List:1. Astove-Cosmoledo, extension of Aldabra World Heritage Site (Seychelles)2. Bazaruto Archipelago (Mozambique)3. Rufiji River Delta- Mafia-Songo Songo, (Tanzania), opportunity for serial nomination with KilwaKisiwani cultural World Heritage site4. Maputo Bay – Ponto do Ouro, (Mozambique), opportunity for transboundary site with Greater St.
24
iEast Africa
iWest Africa
Lucia World Heritage Site5. Mnazi Bay-Ruvuma-Quirimbas, (Tanzania, Mozambique), opportunity for transboundary and mixedsite6. Europa and Scattered islands (with Bassas de India, Juan de Nova, Glorieuses) (France), opportuni-ty for serial nomination7.Nosy Tanikely, Nosy Be (Madagascar)
B List:8. Kiunga-Lamu Archipelago (Kenya), opportunity for mixed nomination9. Pemba Island (Tanzania)10. Cargados Carajos (Mauritius) 11. Comore Archipelago (Comoros), opportunity for serial nomination with Madagascar12. Toliara – Nosy Ve (Madagascar), opportunity for serial nomination13. Zambezi Delta (Mozambique)
C List:14. Nacala- Mossuril (Mozambique)15. Primeiras-Segundos Islands (Mozambique) 16. Saya de Malha Banks (Mauritius)17. Maldive Islands18. Chagos Archipelago (United Kingdom)19. Lakshadweep Islands (India)20. Palk Strait/Gulf of Mannar (India)21. Sundarbans (Bangladesh)22. Cocos-Keeling/Christmas Island serial site (Australia)23. Ningaloo reef (Australia)
A List:1. Northeast Red Sea (Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Israel)2. Socotra Archipelago (Yemen)3. Southeast Oman4. Southern Red Sea Complex (Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Djibouti, Eritrea)5. Southern Gulf (United Arab Emirates)6. Hawar Islands (Bahrain)7. Jubail Wildlife Sanctuary (Saudi Arabia), opportunity for transboundary serial nomination withHawar Islands
B List:8. Gabal Elba Conservation Area (Egypt)9. Sangeneb Atoll (Sudan)10. Belhaf Bir Ali (Yemen)11. Heraa Protected Area (Iran)
25
iMiddle East
While the oceans comprise 70% of the ear-th’s surface, less than 1% of the marine environ-ment is within protected areas, compared withnearly 9% of the land surface. Additionally, overhalf of the global population resides within 60 kmof the shoreline, placing increasing stresses oncoastal and marine resources and the areas uponwhich they depend. (WCPA – Marine Strategy).In terms of the number of phyla, the marine realmis much richer than the terrestrial. Marine ecosys-tems contain representatives of some 43 phylawhile terrestrial environments contain only 28phyla. (World Resources Institute). Yet, the biodi-versity of the marine realm is still being discove-red and described; there are estimates of millionsof species that have not been catalogued, and newspecies are discovered every year. As the distribu-
tion of biodiversity and supporting ecosystemsbecomes better understood, those setting priori-ties must also consider the utility for conservationthrough an examination of the economic, scienti-fic, and cultural values. To ensure that coastal,marine and small island biodiversity sites are bet-ter represented on the World Heritage list, we arechallenged to consider these factors as well.
It is widely recognized that coastal, marineand small island biodiversity sites are underrepre-sented on the World Heritage list. Of the 730 (asof February 2003) cultural and natural sites inclu-ded in UNESCO’s World Heritage List (563 cul-tural, 144 natural and 23 mixed properties in 125States Parties), less than hundred sites are reco-gnized for their biodiversity value, and an even
26
Background
smaller subset, less than 10 sites, are recognizedentirely for their marine biodiversity value. Thereare about 30 tropical World Heritage Sites withmarine components; however, the majority ofsites are managed for their terrestrial biodiversity,rather than their marine biodiversity. The distribu-tion of the tropical marine, coastal and smallisland ecosystems sites currently on the WorldHeritage list is provided in Map 1.
To address this issue, the UNESCO WorldHeritage Centre, in collaboration with the IUCNand the U.S. National Oceanic and AtmosphericAdministration convened a workshop for interna-tionally and regionally recognized experts toexplore ways and means of improving the repre-sentation of tropical coastal, marine and smallisland ecosystems on the World Heritage List.The workshop was held in Hanoi, Vietnam,February 25 – March 1, 2002, with generous sup-port from the United Nations Foundation (UNF).UNF has been working with UNESCO WorldHeritage Centre since 1999 after the formal adop-tion of the Biodiversity Programme Framework,which established World Heritage biodiversitysites as one of the priorities for UNF grant sup-port. The workshop was organised as a part ofUNESCO/IUCN/UNFIP project “Filling criticalgaps and promoting multi-sites approaches tonew nominations of tropical coastal, marine andsmall island ecosystems”.
The workshop aimed to remedy the gaps inWorld Heritage tropical coastal, marine and smallisland ecosystem coverage by developing a scien-tifically based consensus list of potential areas insuch ecosystems (as summarized in RegionalPriority Areas List above). This is the first step inthe process of expanding coverage of such areasto maximize conservation of globally significantmarine biodiversity. This report provides the fin-dings of the workshop and describes the potentialWorld Heritage areas discussed by the experts.The findings represent the workshop participants’consensus on areas of regional and global signifi-cance for their biodiversity values.
The process to identify the priority siteswas based on the use of an array of overlaid data-sets and explicit criteria adapted for WorldHeritage sites building on criteria used by otherinternational conventions and organisations. Theinternationally and regionally recognized expertsused these criteria and datasets to prioritise andcomplement their own knowledge of thoseregions. The identification process is described indetail in Annex 2.
Through out the development of the works-hop and in the preparation of this report, severalshared challenges and recommendations haveemerged that are key to advancing the findings ofthe workshop summarized in this report. Theseare presented at the end concluding section of thisreport, but evolve from the regional discussions.It is also worth noting, that while the mandate ofthis workshop was for tropical areas, manyaspects of marine conservation and managementare relevant to temperate areas. Therefore, theworkshop participants encourage State Partiesfrom all nations to reflect on the findings in thisreport and put actions in place to highlight andprotect significant examples of marine heritageacross the globe.
27
28
Discussion of areas by regions
The regional overviews presented here aredrawn from information gathered at the Hanoiworkshop and from a set of reports written byexperts prior to the workshop addressing the out-standing marine biodiversity values of each tropi-cal region. The purpose of this section is to provi-de the context for the priority lists of areas selec-ted at the workshop and presented here. The bio-diversity values of the region, the threats to thosevalues and specific regional considerations arediscussed.
A discussion of the multi-site recommenda-tions from each regional group will follow eachoverview. One of the workshop goals was toinvestigate potential areas for nomination as serialand transboundary World Heritage sites.Recommendations for these areas were madewithin the overall priority lists developed by theregional working groups.
The potential multi-site nominations evol-ved from the regional discussions on priorityareas. Within each region, those areas that contai-ned interconnected or complementary marine bio-diversity values were highlighted and recommen-ded for linking through serial recommendations.Illustrations of connectivity in marine systemsdiscussed were diverse in scale and scope, butfundamental for taking a holistic approach tomarine conservation. Some recommendationsfocused on many large scale oceanographic orgeomorphologic features that can cover largeareas in marine systems that create specialisedniches for marine flora and fauna, e.g. continentalshelves, underwater trenches, offshore banks,thermoclines, currents and eddies.
It was also recognized that in many situa-tions, marine organisms are migratory for someperiod of their life cycle. For example, corals mayspawn in one place and the are taken by currentsto settle on substrate in another place; many fisheshave localised spawning or nursery areas, butmigrate elsewhere as adults; and marine megafau-na such as whales and turtles, as well as birds arerenown for traversing the globe in search of bree-
ding and nesting areas. The workshop acknowled-ged the increasingly informing role of marinescience in guiding conservation actions regardingappropriate scope, scale, size and location ofmarine areas in light of the enhanced observing,tracing, genetic and modelling tools availabletoday.
With the above perspectives in mind, theworkshop proposed that multiple sites withinbroad regional groupings could either be nomina-ted as serial and/or trans-boundary sites and aredefined as follows:
1) A serial (or cluster) of sites linked spa-tially or temporally through a thematic connec-tion;
2) Trans-boundary sites extended acrossinternational borders or contained within differentcountries and nominated as a serial site.
The regional groups used these definitions,the workshop biodiversity criteria and the WorldHeritage criteria for natural properties to developmulti-site recommendations for potential WorldHeritage nomination.
While the Hanoi Statement is a consensusstatement from the workshop, the regional discus-sions also yielded important recommendationsand raised regionally significant issues. Theserecommendations for IUCN, the World HeritageCommittee and UNESCO are listed under eachregion.
29
The area under consideration includes themarine and coastal areas of the Philippines,Indonesia, Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia,Singapore, Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia andVietnam (Association of Southeast Asian Nations- ASEAN) extending from 93°E and 141°E to21°N and 12°S. Combined, these countries have acoastline of 92,451 km, 15.8% of the world’stotal. Numerous volcanic and coral islands sepa-rate the region into seas of different sizes, withvarying degrees of embayment. The group alsoconsidered areas in China, Japan and Korea thatcontain tropical and subtropical marine systems.
Southeast East Asia is recognized as havingthe world’s richest marine biodiversity (at gene-tic, species and ecosystem levels), (IUCN/UNEP1985, Kelleher et al. 1995). It is the center of theworld’s hard coral diversity (Veron 1995), parti-cularly around eastern Indonesia, the Philippinesand South China Sea’s Spratly Islands where over70 hard coral genera have been documented.Throughout the rest of the region, over 50 hardcoral genera can be found. The reefs support ahigh diversity of associated plant and animal spe-cies, contributing to the region’s status as the glo-bal center of marine invertebrate species such as
30
Southeast Asia
mollusks and crustaceans. (Briggs 1974) Theregion also contains a high diversity of sea grassand associated flora and fauna, with 16 species ofsea grass documented (second only to Australia),in the coastal regions of the Philippines. (Fortes1995) The region contains high diversity of nears-hore fish, with over 2000 species documented(Briggs 1974), sea snakes, and marine mammals,and serves as critical habitat for four species ofsea turtle. Despite high connectivity of marinehabitats in the regions, there are many endemicspecies.
The main threats to marine biodiversity inthis region are coastal development and resourceexploitation, specifically poaching of reef fishspecies, marine turtles their eggs and destructivefishing practices. Threats from shipping andpotential oil exploration also exist.
The Southeast Asian regional group deve-loped it recommendations based on the biogeo-graphic information available at the workshop, aswell as on expert knowledge. There are two areasthat stand out within the top priority list due tohigh levels of available information on biodiver-sity values and the potential threats associatedwith lack of management. These two areas areRaja Ampat and the Spratly Islands. The groupalso recognized several areas that were data defi-cient that could not be properly assessed for theirbiodiversity value. These areas are listed in the“C” category.
Southeast Asia multi-site discussion
The Southeast Asian regional group recom-mended the Spratly Island Group, an area underjurisdictional dispute by six South China SeaStates (Brunei Darussalam, China, Malaysia,Philippines, Taiwan, and Vietnam), as a potentialtrans-boundary cluster for World HeritageListing. It can be linked with the existing WorldHeritage area at Tubbataha in the Philippines.The Spratly Islands contains at least 30 smallislands and 600 platform and atoll reefs. This
area’s outstanding universal value is due to itsrelatively pristine state, location within thehighest marine biodiversity region of East Asia(with approximately 70 genera of hard corals),importance as a potential larval source reef forfish and invertebrates, importance as a sea turtlenesting area and because of the high seabirdpopulations present. This area is highly producti-ve and an important area of connectivity for mari-ne species within the region. The major threat tothe area’s marine biodiversity is potential oil andgas exploration activities. Multinational manage-ment of the Spratly Islands has been proposed,but it is not yet endorsed by all of the nations thatclaim the area. This lack of management and ter-ritorial dispute are barriers to the area’s nomina-tion to the World Heritage List. However, it isimportant to note that many international agencieshave expressed concern over the potential degra-dation of the Spratly Islands should its statusremain unchanged; World Heritage listing couldbe a catalyst for creating a management regime.
Another multi-site recommendation is thepotential cluster that would include an expansionof the existing Tubbataha World Heritage sitewith Cagayan Ridge in the Philippines. Thisextension would increase the biodiversity valueof the existing World Heritage area by includingunique physical reef features, including atolls thatserve as sources and sinks for coral, seagrass, fishand invertebrate larvae, and by linking importantmigration routes for seabirds, turtles and fishthrough the region. In addition, the extension as awhole would be a microcosm of the region’smarine biogeography in terms of reef types. Thearea is threatened by poaching activities (turtles,giant clams, groupers and Napoleon wrasse) andpotential damage from shipping. Nomination ofthis extension is highly feasible, mainly due to thestrong support by international and nationalNGOs, universities and UNESCO for its long-term conservation.
A third multi-site recommended is thetrans-boundary cluster of North Borneo/ BalabacStrait/ Turtle Islands (Philippines, Malaysia). This
31
cluster of Malaysian and Philippine Islandswith coral reef, mangrove and sand beachescontains important nesting areas for green andhawksbill sea turtles. The Turtle Islands are anexisting ASEAN Heritage area with trans-boundary management in place for its sea turt-le populations. There is high interest in theconservation of this area, evidenced by itsinclusion as a potential management area in theICRAN framework. Given the level of nationaland international support for the conservationof this cluster, feasibility for its nomination isstrong.
The final multi-site recommended by theSoutheast Asian group is the Banda/LuciparaCluster (Indonesia), which can be combinedwith the cultural World Heritage site at Bandafor a mixed nomination. This area has highlevels of marine biodiversity with largelyundisturbed reefs, healthy seagrass beds,hawksbill sea turtle habitat and is part of animportant bird migration route. The area alsohas high geological significance; its location isthe collision area of two tectonic oceanic pla-tes, giving rise to unique reef structures such ascolonization on recent lava flows. Overall,there are low threats to this potential cluster,but there have been reports of blast fishing inthe area. The feasibility of nominatingBanda/Lucipara as a mixed natural/culturalcluster is high due to support for its long-termconservation from local authorities, a localBanda NGO, TNC, the Dutch government andUNESCO. However, there is currently nomanagement plan in place, which could hindernomination.
32
Recommendations by the Southeast Asia group:
1) Expand existing marine World Heritage sites at Tubbataha and Ha Long Bay to includeadditional areas of World Heritage value.
2) Recognize opportunities for complementary nominations in the region based on otherWorld Heritage categories e.g. World Heritage Karst and World Heritage Culture sites.
3) Recognize that all the sites identified by the Southeast Asia group have outstanding mari-ne biodiversity value. Sites with high levels of information were evaluated as possessing out-standing universal value and we recommend that similar levels of information be obtained forall sites in order to allow similar evaluations.
4) Develop a management framework for Raja Ampat to facilitate the possible nomination ofthis outstanding site.
5) Communicate our findings on the Outstanding Universal Value of the marine biodiversityvalues of the Spratlys Islands to relevant regional bodies.
6) Take steps to allow state parties to proceed with nominations for all identified SoutheastAsian sites, should they wish to. For example development of management plans and, trans-border agreements.
General Recommendation:
1) Having noted major shipping lanes near many sites of World Heritage value, we recom-mend that extra care be taken over shipping and siting of shipping lanes in this instance.
33
The area under consideration in the tropicalPacific covers approximately 29 million km≈, 1/3of the earth’s surface, the largest expanse consi-dered by any of the regional groups. It extendsfrom Palau and Papua New Guinea in the westand to Easter and Sala y Gomez Islands of Chilein the east (however, the expert group focused onthe western Pacific and did not consider EasterIsland or any areas further east). The northernboundary includes the Hawaiian Islands andWake and Johnston atolls of the United States andthe Northern Mariana Islands. The southern boun-dary lies north of the subtropical islands ofAustralia (Lord Howe and Norfolk Islands) andNew Zealand (Kermedec Island), which fallwithin the Australia/New Zealand Marine region.The area under consideration consists of 22islands countries and territories (not including
Hawaii and the islands of Chile) covering only550,000 km≈ of land with about 5.2 million inha-bitants. In contrast to the small land areas, most ofthese island states encompass enormous sea areaswithin their Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs),resulting in very small land to sea ratios.Currently there are only seven countries that areparty to the convention in this large region, Fiji,Samoa, Kiribati, the Marshall Islands, theSolomon Islands and Papua New Guinea,Vanuatu, Nine and Federated States of Micronesiaand Palau. Efforts are underway to increase thisnumber.
Almost all of the Pacific Islands have anentirely coastal character; all parts of the inlandinfluence, or are influenced by processes and acti-vities occurring on coastal lands and in coastal
34
Pacific
waters. It is believed that the Pacific islandsregion has more rare, endangered and threatenedspecies per capita than anywhere else on earth.The region’s marine environment comprises anenormous and largely unexplored resource, inclu-ding the most extensive and diverse reefs in theworld, the largest tuna fishery, the deepest ocea-nic trenches and the healthiest remaining popula-tions of many globally threatened species inclu-ding whales, sea turtles and salt water crocodiles.Its high islands support large blocks of intact rain-forests, including many unique species and com-munities of plants and animals found nowhereelse in the world. For some islands, more than80% of the species are endemic, unfortunately,about 50% of these species are reported to be atrisk. (SPREP 1999)
The main threats to biodiversity in theregion are common to island ecosystems noted fortheir fragility and susceptibility to degradation.These threats include invasive species, habitatloss or modification from development activities,marine and terrestrial resource exploitation, andclimate change.
Settled initially some 20,000 years ago,most of the habitable islands of the Pacific wereoccupied variously by Melanesian, Micronesianand Polynesian people. The cultural significanceof marine resources and their management in thePacific region is high. The group recognized thisin their assessment of marine biodiversity valueand included cultural heritage features as comple-mentary to biodiversity value throughout theirprocess.
Because the Pacific is an expansive region,it was difficult for the group to narrow down thelist of priority areas. Further, because there arelarge regions of the tropical Pacific for which litt-le or no information on marine biodiversity isavailable, it was difficult for the group to come upwith a definitive list of areas for potential listing.With additional information on both biodiversityand associated cultural importance, it is possiblethat the list would change. The regional expert
group recognized several areas that possessOutstanding Universal Value and should be pro-tected now, but they lack the necessary supportingscientific information for nomination at this point.
The Pacific regional group recognizedareas of Outstanding Universal Value, for whichthere is strong supporting scientific informationon biodiversity characteristics and which are fea-sible for nomination to the World Heritage List, ashighest priority. The two highest ranked areas inthe region are respectively Milne Bay, Papua NewGuinea and Palau. Lying at the apex of two mari-ne biogeographic provinces, Milne Bay has highmarine, coastal and island biodiversity, with thri-ving coral reef, mangrove and seagrass ecosys-tems as well as intact island forest communities.The area is virtually pristine, with few currentthreats. In addition, there is strong traditionalmanagement in place. Palau, known for its famedrock islands, contains a wealth of other marinebiodiversity attributes, including many endemicspecies in its marine lakes, high hard and softcoral, seagrass and mangrove diversity. The areais under increasing threats from tourism and deve-lopment, and traditional management of the mari-ne environment is being eroded. However,Palau’s decision to become a signatory party tothe World Heritage Convention in 2002 is a pro-mising avenue to reduce these threats to its biodi-versity.
A nomination of New Caledonia (France)is being prepared to submission to the WorldHeritage Committee. It contains one of the fewdouble barrier reefs in the world, and the secondlargest barrier reef (second in size to the GreatBarrier Reef), with high documented biodiversityof fish, mollusk and coral species. However, thisarea is highly threatened from mining activitieson the islands
35
Pacific multi-site discussion
Due in part to the expansiveness of thePacific region and to the arrangements of land-masses and associated coastal marine areas inisland clusters, all of the areas recommended astop priority can be considered as multi-sites. Withthis in mind, this discussion will focus on thethree areas that the group chose to label as poten-tial multi-site nominations, New Hanover andManus Cluster (Papua New Guinea), the LineIslands Cluster (Kiribati, Cook Islands, US) andthe Pohnpei-Kosrae Cluster (Federated States ofMicronesia). It should be noted that these areaswere not the very top priority areas that emergedfrom the group discussion, but they are on the “A”list.
The New Hanover and Manus Cluster inPapua New Guinea is a remote area in a state ofhigh naturalness. It contains forest, coral reef,mangrove and highly productive and diverse sea-grass systems. It is connected to the center of bio-diversity of the Southeast Asia region, into whichit feeds larvae. Intertwined with these biodiversi-ty attributes, there is a complex system of tradi-tional ownership that adds to its value as a poten-tial mixed natural/cultural World Heritage area.There are a number of threats, such as dynamiteand potential cyanide fishing, potential loggingon the islands and phosphate mining. However,these threats can be minimized or eliminated byconservation actions. This area may be more fea-sible to nominate as a World Heritage area thanothers in the region because Papua New Guinea isone of the few Pacific nations that is party to theConvention.
The Line Islands Serial is a trans-boundarycluster within Kiribati, Cook Islands, the US andFrench Polynesia. These pristine islands are lar-gely uninhabited and contain healthy reefs. Thearea is located in the center of a major upwelling,and is one of the world’s largest fly-ways, holdingup to 6 million birds at peak migration periods.The serial includes Kirimati atoll, the largest atoll
in the world, with hundreds of hypersaline ponds,which adds to its importance for large seabirdpopulations. The serial includes Palmyra atoll, thesecond largest US atoll. This atoll is pristine andcontains the largest population of red footed boo-bies and black noddys in the world. The area alsoincludes a green turtle breeding ground. Due tothe isolation of this serial, there are few existingthreats except those posed by introduced preda-tors on the islands. However, there is a proposedJapanese space facility and poaching may occur.The main barriers to the potential nomination ofthis cluster as a World Heritage site are the non-signatory status of the Cook Islands to theConvention.
The Pohnpei-Kosrae Cluster in theFederated States of Micronesia contains highlyproductive seagrass, mangrove and coral reefs.The outer islands are in pristine condition. Thisarea is an ideal candidate for a mixedcultural/natural nomination, as it meets the cultu-ral World Heritage criteria. There are importantmegalithic ruins on both islands, which are froma little known, highly industrious culture thatmoved massive basalt columns to create elabora-te complexes of temples, housing and burial sitesin marine and coastal areas. There are a number ofthreats to the area from increasing developmentpressure on Pohnpei and its reefs as well as offs-hore areas that are heavily harvested. The live fishtrade is also increasing in the region. TheFederated States of Micronesia has recently rati-fied the World Heritage Convention, whichincreases the feasibility of nomination to theWorld Heritage list. This feasibility is enhancedby NGO support for conservation efforts.
36
Recommendations by the Pacific group:
The group requests recognition of the immense importance of the Pacific for the pro-tection of the World’s biodiversity, yet the current level of marine protection (with BiosphereReserves serving as other Protected Areas) is very low. Therefore, the group requests that theWorld Heritage Committee give high priority to increased assistance (funding, aid, capacitybuilding) to ensure better marine protection.
1) Increased attention given to identifyingsuitable high seas areas for protection underthe World Heritage Convention and to deve-loping the legal/political basis for establis-hing them, recognizing the great importanceof biodiversity in the high seas of the Pacificin sea mounts, hydrothermal vents and otherdeepwater areas.
2) Identify areas requiring more scientificsurveys to provide baseline or more recentinformation to identify additional areas ofOutstanding Universal Value and to ensurebetter representation of the Pacific Regionbased on scientific knowledge and futureWorld Heritage nomination.
3) Include cultural experts to identify areas of Outstanding Universal Value at the proposedregional meeting. These areas and the surrounding land and marine environments should beconsidered for opportunities under the World Heritage “mixed” or “cultural” landscape cate-gories.
4) Support management capacity building for marine, coastal and small island areas throu-ghout the Pacific. This process should occur in parallel with the creation of a World Heritagearea. Also, best practices and management information should be freely communicated to theareas.
5) Recognize that while there are areas of Outstanding Universal Value for which the scien-tific knowledge may be limited, such areas need to be protected as soon as possible. (e.g.World Heritage, Biosphere Reserve or other).
6) Initiate a regular monitoring system for the Pacific Region with adequate intensity todemonstrate the health of major ecosystems and indicator species (e.g. coral reefs, mangroves,seagrasses, cetaceans, dugongs, turtles and seabirds).
37
The area under consideration consists ofboth the Atlantic and Pacific tropical and subtro-pical coasts of Latin America, including theCaribbean Sea, Sea of Cortez and Gulf of Mexico.It extends on the Atlantic side from Palm Beach,Florida (USA) south to Cabo Frio, Brazil andextends on the Pacific side from the Sea ofCortez, Mexico to Cabo Corrientes, Mexico southto Peninsula Illescas, Peru. The area also includesthe oceanic islands of Clipperton andRevillagigedo (Mexico), Cocos (Costa Rica) andthe Galapagos (Ecuador). The group decided toinclude the Sea of Cortez, considered a warm-temperate biogeographic province (SullivanSealey and Bustamante 1999), because it contains
subtropical fauna of high biodiversity value andrepresents an important transition zone betweenthe warm temperate Northeast Pacific and theEast Tropical Pacific. It contains approximately12,120,328 km≈ of Exclusive Economic Zonefrom 44 counties and territories, 27 of which areislands nations or territories, 23 of these are mem-bers of the World Heritage Convention.
Overall the region includes numerous offs-hore and nearshore islands, keys and banks, andextensive deep ocean basins. The main coastalecosystems in this region include mangrove(dominated by continental and island forest),coral reef, sea grass, mixed (large shallow banks
38
Latin America and the Caribbean
and islands, coral, sea grass and mangroves),beach, upwelling and rocky platform systems.
The threats to marine biodiversity in thislarge region vary but include marine resourceexploitation and coastal development.Overfishing, sewage and agricultural runoff,deforestation, loss of wetlands, irresponsible boa-ting /diving and destructive fishing are the maincauses of biodiversity loss and habitat degrada-tion.
The LAC working group based theirassessment of biodiversity value in part on thebiogeographic classification work done by TNC(Sullivan Sealey and Bustamante 1999), as wellas the other meta-databases provided at theworkshop. The experts added their knowledge,notably on megafaunal distribution and migra-tion, to the information provided. They concludedthat the areas to focus on for further considerationshould be those that coincided with the highestbiodiversity value on the three major meta-data-bases (TNC, CI hotspots and WWF 200): theMesoamerican Reef, the Sea of Cortez and theGulf of Darien. The regional group recognized theimportance of considering the Sea of Cortez as awhole, but realized the political difficulty ofnominating the entirety as a World Heritage area.Secondarily, the group considered areas that coin-cided as highest biodiversity value on two of thethree metadatabases: Panama Bight, GalapagosIslands, Greater Antilles, Northeastern Brazil,“Humboldt Zone” and CaribbeanColombia/Venezuela. The resultant priority areas(both multi-site and single area recommenda-tions) are included in the overall table of areas inAnnex 1.
There was consensus among the workinggroup members that the World Heritage Siteprocess may not be the best platform for protec-ting sea turtle critical habitat (nesting, foraging,migration) in the region because critical zonesare vast and involve large numbers of range sta-tes. The exceptions - where critical sea turtlehabitat coincides with other World Heritage
values - are areas that have already been identi-fied during the workshop as priority areas, such asthe Mexico/ Belize reefs, South Cuba Reefs, andthe Sea of Cortez.
Latin America and Caribbean multi-site dis-cussion
The group recommended four potentialmulti-site nominations, two trans-boundary andtwo cluster nominations. The two trans-boundaryrecommendations are the Cocos Islands /Galapagos Islands/Malpelo Island oceanic corri-dor and the Southern Caribbean Island Group.The two cluster recommendations are SianKa’an/Banco Chinchorro (an expansion of theexisting Sian Kan’an World Heritage area), andthe South Cuba Reefs.
First, and potentially the strongest potentialnomination, is the Cocos Island/GalapagosIslands/Malpelo Island trans-boundary area. Thestrength of this potential nomination lies in itscurrent management framework and the consti-tuent governments’ (Ecuador, Costa Rica andColumbia) interest in protecting this large area.There is an existing Presidential level agreementbetween the three countries for its joint stewards-hip. This agreement presents a unique and favora-ble window of political opportunity for a WorldHeritage. The importance of this area’s biodiver-sity is based on high endemism, population scaleecological attributes, and the importance of thearea for large pelagics (namely sharks), whalesand sea birds.
39
The second trans-boundary area, the“Southern Caribbean Island Group” unites theNetherlands Antilles with Venezuela, potentiallybuilding on bilateral agreements these twogovernments have in other marine-related areas.It includes the islands of Bonaire and Curacao(the Netherlands Antilles), and the Los Roquesarchipelago and Las Aves (Venezuela). The LACregional group views this continental shelf clusteras highly important in terms of its biodiversityvalue, as well as a potential tool to increaseVenezuela’s involvement in the World Heritageprogram. The area’s biodiversity importance liesin its high coral diversity relative to other areas inthe region, population scale ecological attributes,and the particular qualities of Los Roques. LosRoques harbors the most important and well-conserved coral reef/sea grass/mangrove complexof the South American Caribbean coast, and itssignificant populations of threatened commercialfish species, like groupers and queen conch,which make it a likely larval source area for theregion.
The cluster recommendation, Sian Ka’an/Banco Chinchorro is an extension of the existing,highly successful World Heritage area at SianKa’an (which is also a Man in the BiosphereReserve). The extension of this existing areawould increase the coverage of biodiversity andrepresentative watershed to reef corridors. BancoChinchorro is a well managed and protected mul-tiple use area that includes the largest Caribbean
atoll. By incorporating it in the recommendation,connectivity and a larval pump to the Gulf ofMexico and South Eastern United States, (impor-tant nursery areas), would be preserved.
The other cluster recommendation, theSouth Cuba Reefs, includes the areas ofArchipélago Los Canarreos throughGuanahacabibes. This coastal and marine habitatcorridor is one of the least impacted in theCaribbean region, and contains extensive reef, seagrass and mangrove habitats, as well as large ooli-te bank formations. The high biodiversity of coraland reef-associated species in the cluster is well-represented, as are the presence of several reeffish spawning aggregations. In addition, severalendangered species are present, including seaturtles (green and hawksbill), crocodiles,Antillean manatee and sea bird species.
40
41
Recommendations by the Latin America and Caribbean group:
The Latin American and Caribbean working group developed a resolution to put forthto the World Heritage Committee and UNESCO related to Small Island Developing States(SIDS)
“We would like to call attention to the special case of Small Island Developing States (SIDS),such as in the Lesser Antilles, and note that with reference to biodiversity the small jurisdic-tional size of individual SIDS (and in particular their marine components) may limit their com-petitiveness for World Heritage Site selection. While these sites may meet individual criteria,it is clear that their relative competitiveness remains low in comparison with larger marineecoregions. n addition, there is often insufficient information for the clustering of multi-islandsites, reducing their competitiveness in clustering and transboundary proposals.
Therefore, we propose that IUCN and the World Heritage Committee examine the spe-cial case of these islands; specifically, their outstanding value as integrated coastal, cultural,and aesthetic landscapes. We ask that IUCN and the World Heritage Committee consider stepsto ensure that SIDS are sufficiently represented for their unique contributions to the WorldHeritage portfolio of sites.”
The group also emphasized the need to use the ecosystem approach to marine conser-vation, which often requires co-operation amongst neighbouring countries. The group notedthe few encouraging initiatives in the Latin American region such as the Meso-American ReefInitiative, the Belize-Guatemala-Honduras tri-national agreement as well as the marine peaceparks, the sister-parks movement, and others that can be applied to other regions to promotethis approach.
42
West Africa
The area under consideration includes thecoastline of West Africa from Senegal to theCongo, between 16°N and 5°S; approximately7000 km. Throughout most of the region, thecontinental shelf is narrow; ranging between 15and 105 km. (GEF/UNEP 2001). Twelve of thesixteen nations in this region are signatory partiesto the World Heritage Convention.
The west coast of Africa is stronglyinfluenced by river basin drainage, oceanic cur-rents, upwelling, and climate (wet and dry sea-sons) and contains a wide variety of wetlands,including tidal swamps and seasonal marshlandsassociated with river deltas and estuaries as wellas extensive coastal lagoons. The lagoon systemextends over 800 km between Cote d’Ivoire andeastern Nigeria, covering over 400,000 hectaresof open water. Mangrove ecosystems exist throu-ghout the West African coast, with extensiveforests occurring along the coasts of Guinea andGuinea Bissau, the Gambia, Senegal, SierraLeone, the Niger Delta and Cross River Estuary.These wetland systems comprise part of the WestAfrican Flyway, a major migratory bird route thatprovides year round habitat for many bird species.The region is rich in living marine resources thatsupport fishing industries for pelagic and demer-sal fish species and provides livelihoods andforeign exchange for many coastal communities.Four species of marine turtles, Atlantic green,hawksbill, leatherback and olive ridley, are foundin the Gulf of Guinea. There are several marinemammal species that inhabit the waters of theGulf of Guinea including the Atlantic humpbac-ked dolphin (listed as highly endangered underCITES) and the African manatee (listed as vulne-rable under CITES).
The most significant threats to biodiversityin the coastal zone of the region are habitat degra-dation, pollution of coastal waters, coastal ero-sion, overexploitation of resources and invasiveaquatic plant species. Urbanization and develop-ment in the region increases pressures on marineresources - many of which are poorly managedopen access resources. To a great extent, indus-
trial and domestic sewage is discharged untreatedinto creeks, estuaries, lagoons and immediate ins-hore areas, representing major contaminationsources to the marine environment. Constructionand development activities such as dams, sandwining, construction of coastal structures andupstream forestry practices, have also hastenedcoastal erosion processes. Notably, in areas ofGabon and Nigeria and Cameroon where there areincreasing numbers of oil wells and refineries andassociated port development, interference withcoastal sediment accretion processes has led toincreased storm water damage, flooding andshore recession.
The West African regional group used thebiogeographic information provided and expertknowledge to determine the recommendations forpotential World Heritage listing. The lack ofscientific studies of the coastal and marineregions of West Africa limited the informationavailable for this exercise. However, the bestavailable knowledge is represented in the recom-mendations of this regional group.
West African multi-site discussion
The West African regional group includedtwo multi-site recommendations in its list of prio-rity areas for potential World Heritage listing.These two are the islands of Sao Tome andPrincipe and Equatorial Guinea (includingAnnabon Island), and the cluster of the Dense,Muni, Sakumo, Songor and Keta Lagoons ofGhana.
The highest ranked multi-site recommen-dation from the group was the islands of SaoTome and Principe and Equatorial Guinea inclu-ding Annabon Island. This trans-boundary clusterof four islands is in an important upwelling areawith high marine productivity. Relative to otherareas in this region, there is a high level of ende-mism and species richness among coral and fishspecies. These areas are managed, but there issparse information on management practices.
43
The largest impediment to the nomination of thiscluster is that neither Sao Tome and Principe norEquatorial Guinea is a signatory party to theWorld Heritage Convention.
The next highest ranked multi-site recom-mendation is the cluster of the Densu Delta,Muni, Sakumo, Songor and Keta Lagoons inGhana. These five lagoons have a high level ofspecies richness as a cluster. They are all highlyimportant for large populations of migratorybirds, with Keta Lagoon being the most importantseabird site along the Ghana coast, with 72 spe-cies of birds present (Ntiamoa-Baidu and Gordon1991), including 60% of the Ghana’s wading bird
population (Ntiamoa-Baidu and Hepburn 1988).These lagoons also harbor endangered species,including leatherback and green sea turtles. TheKeta Lagoon is the only extensive mangrove sys-tem in Ghana. The major threats to these lagoonsare waste disposal from industrial and agriculturalactivities, overexploitation of mangrove and fis-hery resources, and impacts from upstream dams(namely in the Keta and Songor Lagoons). Thesefive lagoons are managed under the Ghana’sCoastal Wetlands Management Project and are allmaintained as Ramsar sites. There are no majorconstraints to the nomination of this lagoon clus-ter as a World Heritage area.
44
Recommendations by the West Africa group:
World Heritage sites must demonstrate ecosystem integrity and for West Africa this maybe a significant challenge to listing sites under the Convention definitions. While much of themarine and coastal areas of West Africa are highly urbanized and resources fragmented, res-toration of resources at a regional level may be a vital component for further consideration ofsites for World Heritage. From a regional perspective there are coastal and marine areas thatmerit consideration and the World Heritage Convention offers an opportunity to make politi-cal links with State Parties to pursue discussions for transboundary and serial nominations, andto promote the utilization of Man and Biosphere approach as well as the Ramsar Conventionfor regional conservation of these resources.
The Global Program of Action for Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-based Activities (West and Central Africa) can serve as a focal point to strengthen the dialo-gue and promote discussions for a unified management and restoration of these resources,especially in promoting multi-site nominations.
Several sites that were reviewed by the regional experts lacked sufficient data for ana-lysis. The participants recommend that additional studies are needed to update information onpotential sites, particularly in Angola, Namibia and offshore areas.
45
The areas under consideration in EastAfrica include the mainland countries of Somalia,Kenya, Tanzania, Mozambique and northernSouth Africa and the island states of Madagascar,Mauritius, Reunion, Comoros, Mayotte (gover-ned by France) and the Seychelles. The continen-tal shelves of the region are narrow (15-25 km),and drop off to depths greater than 4000m in theIndian Ocean – except for the banks and isletsassociated with the island states. Oceanic currentsand how they are affected by the monsoon sea-sons have major influence on the biogeography ofthe region. It is a unique subdivision of the worl-d’s largest biogeographic province, the tropicalIndo-Pacific, based on biogeographic patterns ofcorals and other species, which show a clear sepa-
ration of the Indian Ocean beyond the Sri-Lanka-Chagos Line (Sheppard, 1987 and 2000). Theregion contains two marine World Heritage sites,Aldabra atoll, and Greater St Lucia Wetland Parkin South Africa.
The main coastal habitats in this region arecoral reefs and communities, mangroves and seagrass beds. Overall for the region, there is a mini-mum of 10,627 shallow water macrofaunal spe-cies, of which 10-20% are endemic (Richmond1997 and 1999). Species diversity in the regiontends to fall from east to west and with increasinglatitude both north and south of the equatorialzone (Sheppard 2000). The marine habitats andassociated species in the region have changed
46
East Africa
drastically over the past few decades, most nota-bly due to coral bleaching, including the 1998event that caused 70-99% coral mortality and thedecline of the dugong.
The main threats to marine biodiversity inthe region are: overexploitation of living marineresources, destructive fishing methods and asso-ciated habitat degradation, land and marine basedpollution, siltation, habitat conversion for agricul-ture, tourism and, to a lesser extent, maricultureand climate change.
The East African group used the biogeo-graphic information provided in addition toexpert knowledge to develop their potential listsof World Heritage nominations. There were seve-ral sites in the central and western Indian Oceanthat were discussed, but not ranked or prioritizedby the group due to lack of information andexpertise available at the workshop. These areasincluded: the Maldive Islands, ChagosArchipelago, Lakshadweep Islands, PalkStrait/Gulf of Mannar, Bangladesh Sundarbans,Cocos-Keeling/Christmas Island serial site, andNingaloo reef. These areas are currently beingaddressed through additional regional discussionsbetween experts in the central and western IndianOcean region. It was clear from the expertise pre-sent at the workshop, and is presented in the ove-rall workshop recommendations, that these areasmerit this additional consideration.
East African multi-site discussion
The East African regional group includedfive multi-site recommendations on their highpriority list (A List) of potential World HeritageAreas, including clusters, trans-boundary clustersand a serial recommendation. These areas includethe Astove-Cosmeldo-Aldabra cluster, Seychelles(extension of Aldabra World Heritage Area), theRufiji River Delta – Mafia Island-Songo Songocluster, United Republic of Tanzania (linked toexisting cultural World Heritage area, the Ruinsof Kilwas Kisiwani and Ruins of Songo Mnara),Maputo Bay-Ponto do Ouro, Mozambique trans-
boundary cluster (with the existing WorldHeritage site, the Greater St. Lucia Wetland Park,South Africa), Mnazi Bay-Ruvuma-Quirimbastrans-boundary area, Tanzania and Mozambique,and the Europa and Scattered islands (with Bassade India, Juan de Nova and Glorieuses) serial,France.
In addition there were three multi-siterecommendations on the second level priority list(B List). These areas are the Kiunga Lamu, Kenyamixed natural/cultural cluster, the ComoreArchipelago, Comoros trans-boundary cluster andthe Pemba Island, Kenya with Tanga-Shimoni,Tanzania cluster.
The highest ranking multi-site recommen-dation from the East African regional group wasthe extension to the existing World Heritage siteat Aldabra, Seychelles – the Astove-Cosmeldo-Aldabra cluster. These isolated, uninhabited atollscontain intact marine ecosystems, including pris-tine lagoons and coral reefs with high fish diver-sity, large fish and large seabird colonies.Clustering Astove and Cosmeledo atolls, whichhave more diverse marine habitats than Aldabra,with the existing World Heritage area will increa-se the sustainability of marine protection in theregion. The feasibility of this nomination is highdue to the existence of government institutionsthat support protection, low population in the areaand low levels of stakeholder conflict. There is apotential for environmentally beneficial interac-tions with ship based eco-tourism to increase fun-ding, monitoring and enforcement. Currently, thethreats to the area include vulnerability to fishingpressure and poaching as well as invasive species,sea level rise, coral bleaching and oil spills. WorldHeritage listing and the benefits it brings couldincrease the funding for enforcing fishing restric-tions.
The second ranked multi-site recommen-ded by the East African group was the RufijiRiver Delta- Mafia Island-Songo Songo cluster inthe United Republic of Tanzania, which would belinked to an existing cultural World Heritage site,the Ruins of Kilwa Kisiwani and Ruins of Songo
47
Mnara. This cluster contains extensive high diver-sity coral reefs, sea grass beds and riverine anddeltaic mangrove systems. The mangrove areasare important breeding habitat for many speciesof fish and prawn, and are nesting and breedinghabitat for waterfowl. There is an abundance ofmarine megafauna, including crocodiles, sea turt-les and dugong. The feasibility of this nominationis high due to strong institutional structures,which provide for effective protected area mana-gement and monitoring. In addition there is strongstakeholder support among resident communitiesas well as in the private sector.
The third ranked multi-site recommendedby the East African group was the trans-boundarycluster of Maputo Bay – Ponto do Ouro,Mozambique, linked to the existing WorldHeritage site, the Greater St. Lucia Wetland Park
in South Africa. This area contains the southern-most coral communities in East Africa, has highendemism of soft corals, fish and plant species,unique sabellerid reef communities, and containsimportant feeding areas for sea turtles, dugong,whales, white and whale sharks. Coelecanth isalso present in this area. The feasibility of nomi-nating this multi-site is high due in part to a trans-frontier protocol between Mozambique and SouthAfrica on conservation and resource use thatwould link this cluster with the Greater St. LuciaWetland Park in South Africa. However, the pro-tection of marine resources in the area will bethreatened if the potential port construction atPonta Dobela is actualized. This port wouldincrease development and immigration into thearea. This region is also threatened by increasingtourism development and localized overfishing.
48
Recommendations by the East African group:
The East Africa working group noted that while the region has taken a lead in the desi-gnation of Marine Protected Areas, there are still large areas of the marine environment thatare not effectively protected and managed, and call on the World Heritage Committee to pro-mote conservation in the region by expansion of existing World Heritage sites to improve theirvalue and status, as well as by designation of new sites of Outstanding Universal Value.
The group also noted that the highest priority sites contain multiple environments, sitesof ecological and cultural value, and cover large areas of sea and adjacent coastlines. We the-refore call on World Heritage Committee to promote the nomination of such large heteroge-neous units as cluster (and trans-boundary, where appropriate) sites.
We therefore recommend that:
1) The East African region poses numerous opportunities for nominations of mixed sites thatcontain both natural and cultural values. It is recommended that those opportunities be active-ly sought. This can also enhance the eligibility of a number of candidate sites. These sitescould include Toliara (Madagascar), Rufiji River Delta-Mafia-Songo Songo (Tanzania) (com-bined with listed Kilwa cultural site) and Kiunga-Lamu (with listed cultural World Heritagesite at Lamu).
2) Priority sites in the East African region already contain areas for designated as MarineProtected Areas, which can provide a seed for nominating the larger areas in which they arefound for World Heritage designation.
3) In many East African countries the legislation need to be updated so that marine protectedareas can have sufficient size and legal status to meet the World Heritage requirements.
4) Often in East Africa little is known of theeffectiveness of site management. Adaptivemanagement tools need to be developed toassess management effectiveness.
5) Proactive approaches should be taken tolink the World Heritage Convention withother global and regional conventions andinitiatives in order to provide for more detai-led guidelines for site identification andencouragement for work to identify potentialWorld Heritage sites in the region.
6) Development of a network of WorldHeritage sites should be considered to rein-force their conservation.
49
The geographic area under considerationincludes the Red Sea and its adjacent twin Gulfsof Suez and Aqaba, the Gulf of Aden, the ArabianSea and the Gulf sub-regions (the term Gulf isnow the commonly accepted name for the body ofwater previously known as the Arabian Gulf,Persian Gulf, Inner Gulf or RegionalOrganization for the Protection of the MarineEnvironment (ROPME) Sea Area, and will beused henceforth). It includes the coastlines of 15countries, six of which are World HeritageConvention member states. The region extendsfrom approximately 10º N; 32º E to 30º N; 65 Eº,and encompasses various distinctly marine andcoastal habitats, containing complex and uniquetropical marine ecosystems, especially coralreefs, with high biological diversity and manyendemic species.
Within the region are found the world’s lar-gest loggerhead turtle population, the WesternIndian Ocean’s largest hawksbill turtle rookery,an isolated humpback whale population, a unique,biogeographically isolated coral community, theworld’s second largest aggregations of endange-red dugong, large manta ray aggregations, and ahost of other marine mega- and micro- fauna.
The coastal habitats are surrounded bysome of the driest land in the world, such thatcontinental influences are limited, but the watersare major shipping lanes due to regional petro-leum reserves, with high-risk bottlenecks at thenarrow Straits of Hormuz, the Bab Al-Mandab,and the Gulf of Suez. While parts of the region arestill in a pristine state, environmental threats fromhabitat destruction, over-exploitation and pollu-
50
Middle East
tion are increasing rapidly, requiring immediateaction to protect the region’s coastal and marineenvironment. The political instability of theregion is a constraint to environmental conserva-tion.
Middle East multi-site discussion
The Middle East working group includedtwo trans-boundary cluster recommendations intheir priority list of potential World Heritagenominations and one trans-boundary area.Respectively, they are, the Gulf Complex –(SaudiArabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain),the Southern Red Sea Complex –(Saudi Arabia,Yemen, Djibouti, and Eritrea) and the NortheastRed Sea and Gulf of Aqaba –(Egypt and SaudiArabia).
The Gulf Complex is composed of threesingle areas of outstanding universal value, whichshare interconnected species gene pools. In theGulf there is unique adaptation among corals andother reef-associated species to temperatureextremes - with important implications for main-tenance of global biodiversity in an era of clima-te change. In addition, the Gulf contains univer-sally important endemism and evolutionary signi-ficance for tropical marine species. There areimportant, unique populations of marine mam-mals (cetaceans and dugong) and turtles in thisregion that require protection as a cluster or net-work of areas for their long-term conservation.The areas included in the Gulf cluster are alsoproposed individually on the working group’s“A” list because of their high biodiversity signifi-cance and are the Southern Gulf which includesthe areas of Murawah Island and Bu Tini Shoalsin the United Arab Emirates, the Hawar Islands ofBahrain and the Jubail Wildlife Sanctuary inSaudi Arabia.
The Southern Gulf area contains extensiveseagrass beds, which is key habitat for dugongs. Itis under low threats, but may be difficult to imple-ment as a World Heritage area because of inter-
Emirate disputes and a lack of protected arealegislation in the United Arab Emirates. However,the nation recently became signatory to the WorldHeritage Convention. Hawar Islands of Bahrainare pristine island ecosystems just offshore ofQuatar. The area contains dugongs and is veryimportant for bird populations, harboring the lar-gest nesting population of the endangered Socotracormorant in the world. There are low threats tothis area, and a management plan is currentlybeing written. Bahrain is a signatory to the WorldHeritage Convention, and the government sup-ports the conservation of Hawar Islands, whichwould make the nomination of this area highlyfeasible. The Jubail Wildlife Sanctuary containsdiverse reef and seagrass habitats with coral spe-cies that have high tolerance for salinity and tem-perature extremes. The area is a key bird winte-ring site and flyway and is the nesting site forhundreds of thousands of terns. It is also the lar-gest green and hawksbill turtle rookery in theGulf, from which turtles migrate to Oman, theUnited Arab Emirates and Iran. Threats to thisarea include nearby oil extraction operations andshipping. Extensive bleaching damaged coralsinshore, but had little effect on offshore corals.The feasibility of nominating this area to theWorld Heritage list is unclear. It is currently a defacto protected area awaiting royal declaration,but there are no NGOs lobbying for its long-termprotection. Saudi Arabia is a signatory to theWorld Heritage Convention.
A second cluster recommended by theMiddle East group is the Southern Red SeaComplex. This complex is composed of Farasan(Saudi Arabia) /Dahlak (Eritrea), Belhaf Bir Ali(Yemen), Sept Freres Islands/Ras Siyan and Babal Mandab (Djbouti). Farasan, an existing MPA,has the most extensive mangroves in SaudiArabia, a diverse range of coral and algal reefs,intertidal flats and seagrass beds, high fish diver-sity and contains dugongs, sea turtles and 4 spe-cies of cetacean. Dahlak is considered a larvalreservoir that feeds Farasan. Belhaf Bir Ali hasthe highest diversity of reef fish communities inthe region, has extensive high cover coral reef
51
communities that result from its volcanic history,and contains a unique saltwater crater with frin-ging mangrove forests. Sept Freres Islands/RasSiyan and Bab al Mandab contain diverse coralreef and associated faunal assemblages and areimportant seabird nesting areas. Ras Siyancontains an important shark nursery area. Thereare a number of threats to this cluster of areas.They lie close to major shipping lanes and portsand are impacted by coastal development activi-ties and nearby oil drilling activities in Yemen.Also, the areas are near or are contained withinmajor fishing grounds in the Red Sea. The feasi-bility of nominating this cluster to the WorldHeritage list is intermediate to low, mainly due topolitical constraints, namely border disputes bet-ween Saudi Arabia and Yemen, and the fact thatEritrea is not in the Arab League. It is promisingthat PERSGA (Programme for the Environmentof the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden) intends to linkits MPAs into a regional network, which wouldinclude some of the areas in this cluster. All of thenations involved in this potential cluster aresignatories to the Convention, with the exceptionof Djibouti.
The Northeast Red Sea and Gulf of Aqabatrans-boundary area consists of Ras Mohammed,Al Wejh bank (Saudi Arabia), and Gabal Elba
(Eygpt). Ras Mohammed has high oceanographicimportance because of its unusual geological pro-cesses and an upwelling area that facilitateslarvaltransport. It contains the northernmost mangrovesin the region and is known for its diverse coralreefs. The area is also an important turtle foragingsite. Al Wejh Bank contains extensive coral reefsand is an existing Marine Protected Area. GabalElba has fringing reefs rich with fish and marinemammals, seagrass beds and mangroves, whichserve as an important breeding habitat for birds.Together, these areas contain important upwel-lings, diverse coral reefs and associated species,mangrove areas, marine turtles, dugongs. Threatsto the trans-boundary area are oils spills, landreclamation, sedimentation and significant anchordamage from irresponsible recreational divingpractices. Threats may be increased by extensivefishing in the area. Feasibility for establishmentof this site is enhanced by the existence of the AlWejh Bank MPA, some current managementplans and initiatives in place in both Egyptian andSaudi to develop further management plans.
52
Recommendations by the Middle East group:
The Middle East regional working group put forth the following recommendations:
1) Protect sites representative of the Middle East region’s unique and Outstanding UniversalValue as World Heritage sites, recognizing that the Middle East region has no World Heritagesites selected for their marine biodiversity value.
2) Give high priority to increased assistance (funding, aid, capacity building) to ensure bettermarine protection in the Middle East region.
3) Recognize that coral and other reef associated species in the Gulf region are adapted to awide variety of temperature variations and thus may play a role in mitigating climate change.Recommend that the World Heritage Committee list areas such as the Jubail WildlifeSanctuary - Hawar Islands – Southern Gulf cluster, that safeguard the long-term protection ofmarine biodiversity.
4) Recognize the importance of the unique subpopulations of marine mammals and marineturtle species that exist in the Middle East region, and enhance the protection of their habitatby listing areas in which they exist as World Heritage sites.
5) Recognize that the Middle East region contains universally important endemic species andhas evolutionary significance for tropical marine species.
6) Protect important migration and genetic exchange, via international coordination of siteselection when necessary.
53
54
CONCLUDING
CHALLENGES
&
RECOMMENDATIONS
As illustrated in the area-specific proposalsabove, World Heritage designation has the poten-tial to be a highly appropriate mechanism forconserving significant marine features of varioustypes and scales. However, the regional expertdiscussions also highlighted several importantshared challenges to adding areas to the WorldHeritage List and their long-term conservation ingeneral. Workshop participants and organizersthought that both the challenges and recommen-dations for moving forward must be communica-ted to UNESCO, IUCN and the States Parties toensure realistic progress. The conservation of therecommended areas for their importance to mari-ne biodiversity is critical and must be pursued,whenever feasible, by State Parties working withothers. This chapter first highlights the challen-ging issues, which must be given careful conside-ration in future efforts to nominate these areas.The report closes with a suite of recommenda-tions that evolve from the report findings, whichcan be used to catalyse strategic action that willprofile and protect the World’s globally signifi-cant repositories of marine heritage.
Shared challenges:
1) Loss of pristine areas: Pristine areas areabsent from most regions. Impacts from humanpressures are posing an increasing threat to thelong-term survival of tropical coastal and marineecosystems and biodiversity. Many human pres-sures, such as destructive fishing practices, loss ofvital habitats including coral reefs, mangrovesand seagrasses continue to place many tropicalcoastal, small island ecosystems and resources atrisk.
2) Loss of ecological integrity and social cohe-sion: The long-term integrity of these areas needsto be maintained, which requires monitoring ofnatural and social variables that influence integri-ty. Monitoring the values upon which the site isinscribed on the World Heritage List presents canbe difficult to translate the general criteria intospecific and measurable environmental and socio-
economic indicators. Simply tracking traditionalenvironmental indicators, such as species rich-ness, population sizes and levels of endemism arenot adequate in most cases. There are no currenttropical marine Natural World Heritage areas thattrack social variables in association with environ-mental variables. Even simple, traditional indica-tors are not always monitored in World Heritageareas, due to management’s lack of skills, timeand/or funding. Monitoring is not always a priori-ty making it very difficult to understand how thearea’s integrity changes over time.
3) Information gaps: In many regions theassessment of coastal and marine biodiversityvalues is hindered by the existence of areas forwhich little or no information relevant to conser-vation has been gathered. With the use of aGeographic Information System (GIS) as a tool,these areas can easily be overlooked because theyappear to have few or no values associated withthem, while areas that are well studied can appearto be more important simply because of availableinformation. Among the regional groups, theregion that contains the largest expanse of unstu-died areas is the Pacific. This lack of informationimpeded a complete assessment of priority areasfor marine conservation in this region. Otherregions, such as the Middle East and West Africa,though less expansive than the Pacific, alsocontain large areas that have been minimally stu-died. In these cases, civil wars and political obs-tacles hinder research. Comparatively, the regionsof the Caribbean and Latin America, SoutheastAsia and East Africa are more data rich. However,even areas within these regions exist for whichlittle information is available.
4) Limited management capacity: Many areasproposed by the regional experts groups lackedany management capacity or had managementcapacity inadequate to support proper environ-mental protection. Several of these areas appearedas the top priorities for protection in the regions.For example, in the Southeast Asian region, bothRaja Ampat (Indonesia) and the Spratly Islands(disputed), the region’s top two candidates for
55
potential World Heritage listing are currentlyunmanaged. Lack of management is a constraintto World Heritage Listing. According to theconditions of integrity for Natural Heritage pro-perties, as defined in the Operational Guidelines,an area cannot be nominated if it does not have amanagement plan or clear evidence of intent todevelop one. Every effort must be made to ensurethat a management plan is developed for thesesites in order to maintain their long-term sustaina-bility. Another challenge to the managementrequirements of the Convention is traditionalresource management regimes, which do not usea formal management plan. In the Pacific region,many of the proposed areas are managed throughtraditional regimes, which are gaining acceptanceunder World Heritage.
5) Lack of integration of cultural and naturalvalues: Where appropriate, cultural heritagevalues need to be recognised along with naturalheritage values. Due to this recognition at the out-set of the workshop, the participants agreed to usean additional cultural heritage criterion alongsidewith the workshop’s biodiversity criteria, whereapplicable to the assessment of potential WorldHeritage areas. This issue was central to the regio-
nal expert discussions in the Pacific regionalgroup, and came up throughout the other regionaldiscussions. In the Pacific, there are many tradi-tional cultures that integrate natural resource useand protection into their social structures, whichmakes consideration of biodiversity values aloneinappropriate.
6) Political instability: Political instabilitiessuch as civil wars or ethnic unrest hinder bothresearch and conservation of these areas thusmaking the World Heritage nomination difficultto achieve. In both the West Africa and MiddleEast region, political situations are major barriersto World Heritage nominations as well as forconducting basic research.
The above issues must receive attention as wemove forward to listing the areas recommended inthis report as World Heritage sites. If State Partiesare to embrace these areas for their biodiversityvalues, we must also value their importance foraesthetics, scientific, and economic contributions.Every effort must be taken to recognize theirimportance among World Heritage and to ensuretheir long-term sustainability as representatives ofbiodiversity value in the tropical marine realm.
56
Recommendations for World Marine Heritage Conservation
Implementation of the World Heritage Convention over the next 30 years is an opportunity to fillgaps and to establish a system of globally representative marine and coastal World Heritage sites.Through a strategic approach for nominating marine and coastal sites, State Parties are encouraged tomove forward with the areas recommended in this report and conduct further evaluation to not onlyaddress the serious gaps in the present coverage of marine sites, but concurrently better manage sitesalready on the list through monitoring and evaluation of management effectiveness. As noted in thestart of this report, the workshop mandate was to focus on issues and opportunities for tropical areas.However, many of the report findings and recommendations also apply to temperate systems, and StateParties from all countries are encouraged to consider World Heritage status as possible mechanism forconserving their marine heritage.
Transboundary and serial site nominations must be encouraged as an appropriate mechanism tobest represent World Heritage values within the marine realm and as a way to establish dialogues bet-ween State Parties and different partners to determine the appropriate mechanisms to protect signifi-cant marine and coastal ecosystems. Therefore in filling the gaps in marine biodiversity among theWorld Heritage List the experts concluded that the following recommendations be considered whenestablishing and/or extending World Heritage sites.
Coverage and Representation:
Ecoregional representation - All ecoregions must have sites to ensure the protection and represen-tation of core areas of outstanding universal value.
Habitat representation - Transboundary or serial sites must include all essential types of habitatsand with such environmental quality so as to allow organisms and populations to perform their basicbiological processes (growth, feeding, reproduction, recruitment), and the biological communities toestablish fundamental ecological links across habitats.
Expansion of existing sites - Consider the expansion of existing sites to ensure adequate size andinclusion of marine resources in existing natural and cultural sites where appropriate.
57
Ecosystem Function, Scale And Integrity:
Connectivity and scale – Areas need to be large enough to embrace whole ecosystem functioning.For example, the importance of ocean currents in dispersing larvae, sites need to be located up-anddownstream of ocean currents to maximize the protection of sources and sinks of larvae.
Recovery - Wise multiple use management should be applied to restore functionality of damagedecosystems. The few remaining pristine areas should be strictly managed so that they can serve as rege-neration areas and as seed banks.
Terrestrial & marine linkages – Where appropriate, include terrestrial habitats that have ecologicallinks with marine areas, e.g. the importance of watershed quality in the conservation of coastal areas.
Human and ecological integrity links - Biodiversity value and the integrity of a site must take intoaccount the degree of human alteration at the site, as well as regional socio-economic influences.
Information Needs, Research and Monitoring:
Baseline data needs – Information gaps hinder proper analysis of biodiversity and there is a need forscientific and socio-economic surveys in many regions.
Sustained research and monitoring – Regular monitoring that corresponds to appropriate ecologi-cal temporal and spatial variables, as well as social influences is needed to improve management effec-tiveness and adaptability.
58
Management and Capacity Building:
Nomination process – The steps involved in preparing a nomination to World Heritage can be usedidentify strengths and weaknesses of a site and require that effective management tools are put intoplace.
Maintain financing and support levels – World Heritage sites must be recognized as high priorityconservation areas for funding and collaboration both nationally and internationally. These areas repre-sent both national and international heritage, whose maintenance is a shared global responsibility.
Best practise – World Heritage sites should be developed for and gain recognition as models of bestpractise for management of protected areas.
Strategic Planning and Governance:
Foster transboundary opportunities - A number of conservation initiatives conducted by severalorganizations emphasize the ecosystem approach to marine conservation. This advanced scheme ofplanning and implementing biodiversity protection is still evolving and must be strengthened in orderto promote trans-border conservation initiatives.
High seas – Legal opportunities for extending World Heritage sites to include high seas areas shouldbe studied in future as they contain various species and habitats of World Heritage value. For exam-ple, designate World Heritage sites and areas in their vicinity as Particularly Sensitive Areas underInternational Maritime Organisation to help mitigate threat of oil spills and other accidents.
Small island developing states – Transboundary and serial nominations should be encouraged tomeet the conditions of integrity for marine sites. The special needs and limitations of small islands needto be taken into account.
Complementary international and national instruments - World Heritage site considerationshould be done in concert with other international (e.g. Ramsar, Man and Biosphere) and nationalmechanisms (national parks) to ensure match appropriateness of the tool and conservation managementgoals.
Global strategic development - World Heritage marine sites should be viewed as contribution to abroader global network of marine heritage, including tropical and temperate ecosystems. As such, acomplementary strategic assessment of temperate marine heritage opportunities should be encouraged,working towards a Global Marine World Heritage Strategy.
59
60
Fe
asib
ility
of
no
min
atio
n
Lac
k of
man
agem
ent i
s a
cons
trai
nt
Supp
ort e
xist
s by
sev
eral
larg
e na
tio-
nal a
nd in
tern
atio
nal i
nstit
utio
ns to
dev
e-
lop
and
impl
emen
t lon
g te
rm c
onse
rva-
tion
mea
sure
s, w
ith n
atio
nal g
over
nmen
t
Low
due
to d
ispu
te o
ver
owne
rshi
p of
area H
igh
stak
ehol
der
invo
lvem
ent i
n
cons
erva
tion
in th
is a
rea
from
nat
iona
l
and
inte
rnat
iona
l NG
Os,
uni
vers
ities
and
UN
ESC
O
Maj
or
thre
ats
Low
thre
ats
exce
pt
for
som
e th
reat
s fr
om
fish
ing
(hab
itat d
estr
uc-
tion) Po
tent
ial o
il an
d ga
s
expl
orat
ion
activ
ities
Nea
r m
ajor
shi
ppin
g
chan
nels
Poac
hing
for
turt
les,
gian
t cla
ms,
gro
uper
s,
Nap
oleo
n w
rass
e
Ou
tsta
nd
ing
Un
ive
rsal
Bio
div
ers
ity
Val
ue
s
Wor
ld’s
hig
hest
cor
al d
iver
sity
Wor
ld’s
larg
est l
eath
erba
ck tu
rtle
nes
-
ting
site
Rel
ativ
ely
pris
tine
with
inta
ct is
land
habi
tats
With
in h
ighe
st b
iodi
vers
ity r
egio
n of
Eas
t Asi
a se
as r
egio
n w
ith a
ppro
xim
atel
y
70 g
ener
a of
scl
erac
tinia
n co
ral
Stud
ies
sugg
est p
oten
tial s
ourc
e re
ef
for
fish
and
inve
rteb
rate
s
Con
nect
ivity
Hig
h pr
oduc
tivity
Mar
ine
turt
le n
estin
g si
te
Hig
h se
abir
d po
pula
tion
Uni
que
phys
ical
rid
ge f
eatu
res
Hig
h bi
odiv
ersi
ty
Ato
lls s
ervi
ng a
s so
urce
and
sin
k of
cora
l, se
agra
ss f
ish
and
inve
rteb
rate
pro
-
pagu
les
Mic
roco
sm o
f th
e re
gion
’s m
arin
e bi
o-
geog
raph
y in
term
s of
ree
f ty
pes
Impo
rtan
t mig
ratio
n ro
ute
for
bird
s,
turt
les,
fis
h
Tran
s-b
ou
nd
ary
/Se
rial
?
Tra
nsbo
unda
ry
and
Seri
al
Seri
al w
ithex
istin
gW
orld
Her
itage
site
at T
ubba
taha
Site
s in
clu
-d
ed
wit
hin
App
roxi
mat
ely
30 s
mal
l isl
ands
and
600
plat
-fo
rm a
nd a
toll
reef
s
Bas
tera
and
Bea
zley
ree
fs
Nam
e o
fsi
te -
cou
n-
try
Raj
a A
mpa
tR
egio
n(I
ndon
esia
)
Spra
tly I
slan
dG
roup
(un
der
disp
ute
by 6
Sout
h C
hina
Sea
natio
ns –
Bru
nei
Dar
ussa
lam
,C
hina
, Mal
aysi
a,Ph
ilipp
ines
,Ta
iwan
,V
ietn
am)
Tub
bata
ha-
Cag
ayan
Rid
ge(P
hilip
pine
s)
SOUTH
EAST
ASIA
Annex 1. Threats and feasibility analysis
61
Nor
th B
orne
o: p
ropo
sed
MPA
likel
y to
be f
unde
d by
UN
EP,
pot
entia
l tar
get s
ite
for
man
agem
ent i
n th
e fr
amew
ork
of
ICR
AN
, str
ong
supp
ort b
y ce
ntra
l gov
ern-
men
t
Tur
tle I
slan
ds is
an
exis
ting
ASE
AN
Her
itage
site
. The
re is
a m
anag
emen
t pla
n
and
join
t man
agem
ent c
omm
ittee
:
Min
istr
y of
Env
iron
men
t and
Sab
ah P
arks
(Mal
aysi
a), P
arks
and
Wild
life
Bur
eau/
WW
F (P
hilip
pine
s si
de)
Has
pri
vate
sec
tor,
tour
ism
, gov
ern-
men
t sup
port
; sup
port
of
inte
rnat
iona
l
cons
erva
tion
grou
ps (
WW
F, T
NC
, etc
)
In in
itial
sta
ges
of c
omm
unity
-bas
ed
fish
erie
s m
anag
emen
t; al
tern
ativ
e so
ur-
ces
of in
com
e ar
e in
pla
ce (
e.g.
gia
nt
clam
far
min
g)
Loc
al a
utho
ritie
s in
str
ong
supp
ort o
f
inte
rnat
iona
l sta
tus,
loca
l NG
O s
uppo
r-
ted
by T
NC
, Ter
angi
, UN
ESC
O in
volv
ed
in d
ata
colle
ctio
n an
d in
itial
man
agem
ent
actio
ns
Stro
ng s
take
hold
er in
volv
emen
t
Tur
tle c
aptu
re a
nd e
gg
harv
estin
g
Pote
ntia
l fut
ure
thre
at
from
logg
ing
and
palm
oil p
lant
atio
n de
velo
p-
men
t Bla
st f
ishi
ng in
som
e
area
s
Futu
re im
pact
of
port
deve
lopm
ent
Som
e re
porte
d bl
ast f
is-
hing
Impo
rtan
t nes
ting
site
for
gre
en a
nd
haw
ksbi
ll tu
rtle
s
Mig
ratio
n co
rrid
or
Man
grov
e, c
oral
ree
fs a
nd s
and
beac
hes
Hig
h di
vers
ity o
f fi
sh a
nd in
vert
ebra
-
tes Im
port
ant s
ea tu
rtle
hab
itat
Inta
ct a
nd e
xten
sive
man
grov
e ar
ea
with
pro
bosc
is m
onke
y
Hig
h m
arin
e sp
ecie
s di
vers
ity o
ffsh
ore
Kak
aban
lake
– e
ndem
ic je
llyfi
sh,
fish
, cru
stac
eans
Lar
ge g
reen
turt
le n
estin
g si
te
Hig
h m
arin
e bi
odiv
ersi
ty w
ith la
rgel
y
undi
stur
bed
reef
s
Hea
lthy
seag
rass
bed
s
764
ench
inod
erm
spe
cies
Haw
ksbi
ll tu
rtle
s
Impo
rtan
t bir
d m
igra
tion
rout
e
Col
lisio
n ar
ea o
f tw
o te
cton
ic a
nf tw
o
ocea
nic
plat
es –
impo
rtan
t geo
logi
cal
sign
ific
ance
(al
so g
ives
ris
e to
uni
que
reef
str
uctu
res
– h
igh
colo
niza
tion
on
rece
nt la
va f
low
s
Tra
nsbo
unda
ryan
d Se
rial
Seri
al a
ndca
n be
com
-bi
ned
with
pote
ntia
l cul
-tu
ral W
orld
Her
itage
site
at B
anda
Tur
tle I
slan
ds –
3 M
alay
sia
and
6Ph
ilipp
ine
isla
nds
in th
eSu
lu S
ea
N. B
orne
o/B
alab
ac S
trai
t/T
urtle
Isl
ands
Clu
ster
(Phi
lippi
nes,
Mal
aysi
a)
Sem
porn
a/Ta
wi-
taw
i Cha
in(M
alay
sia)
Ber
au I
slan
ds(I
ndon
esia
)
Ban
da/L
ucip
ara
Clu
ster
(Ind
ones
ia)
sis for the highest priority sites per each region
62
Fe
asib
ility
of
no
min
atio
n
Fren
ch G
over
nmen
t pre
pari
ngno
min
atio
n
Low
loca
l cap
acity
Stro
ng tr
aditi
onal
man
agem
ent i
npl
ace
Maj
or c
onse
rvat
ion
proj
ects
pla
n-ne
d PNG
has
rat
ifie
d W
orld
Her
itage
Con
vent
ion
Com
plex
gov
ernm
ent -
Sta
te &
Nat
iona
lC
ompl
ex tr
aditi
onal
ow
ners
hip
Tra
ditio
nal m
anag
emen
t bei
nger
oded
Rat
ifie
d W
orld
Her
itage
Con
vent
ion
in 2
002
Rec
ogni
sed
wor
ld-w
ide
- ‘a
nat
u-ra
l won
der
of th
e w
orld
’M
ajor
con
serv
atio
n pr
ojec
tsun
derw
ay (
NG
Os,
PIC
RC
, GC
RM
N)
Maj
or
thre
ats
Hig
h th
reat
s fr
om m
inin
g ac
tivi-
ties
on la
nd
Ove
rall
low
thre
ats
- V
irtu
ally
pris
tine
now
Pote
ntia
l sed
imen
tatio
n fr
omlo
ggin
g
Rap
id d
evel
opm
ent o
n m
ain
isla
nd Tour
ism
exp
andi
ng r
apid
lySe
dim
enta
tion
from
roa
ds, l
og-
ging Po
rt im
pact
s -
sew
age
Ove
r ex
ploi
tatio
n of
fis
heri
esD
estr
uctio
n of
spa
wni
ng a
ggre
-ga
tions
Col
lect
ion
of h
awks
bills
and
cora
lsH
arve
st o
f Acr
opor
a as
lim
e fo
rch
ewin
g be
tlenu
t
Ou
tsta
nd
ing
Un
ive
rsal
Bio
div
ers
ity
Val
ue
s
One
of
few
dou
ble
barr
ier
reef
s an
d 2n
d la
r-ge
st b
arri
er r
eef
in th
e w
orld
(40
,000
km≈)
Hig
h ge
olog
ical
div
ersi
ty in
ree
f ty
pes
Cor
als,
man
grov
es, s
eagr
asse
s, G
reen
turt
les,
dugo
ng, h
igh
spec
ies
rich
ness
(ap
prox
300
cora
ls, 5
,500
mol
lusc
s, 1
800
fish
, 17
rept
ile s
pe-
cies
)M
any
ende
mic
mol
lusc
sC
onta
ins
maj
or n
estin
g si
te f
or g
reen
turt
le
Ape
x of
2 p
rovi
nces
– h
ybri
d ce
nter
Fore
sts,
man
grov
es, s
eagr
asse
s, c
oral
s, d
eep-
wat
er Maj
or n
estin
g lo
catio
nM
ajor
bio
dive
rsity
– m
any
hybr
id s
peci
esT
hrea
tene
d sp
ecie
s (t
urtle
s, d
ugon
g, e
tc.)
Vir
tual
ly p
rist
ine
Mar
ine
lake
s w
ith e
ndem
ic s
peci
esO
nly
haw
ksbi
ll tu
rtle
bre
edin
g si
te in
Mic
rone
sia
Hig
h di
vers
ity o
f ha
rd a
nd s
oft c
oral
s, s
ea-
gras
s, m
angr
oves
etc
.
Tran
s-b
ou
nd
ary
/Se
rial
?Se
rial
Seri
al
Seri
al
Site
sin
clu
de
dw
ith
in
Nam
e o
f si
te -
cou
ntr
y
New
Cal
edon
ia(F
ranc
e)
Miln
e B
ay (
Papu
aN
ew G
uine
a)
Pala
u
PACIFIC
63
Com
plex
trad
ition
al o
wne
rshi
pV
ery
rem
ote
Maj
or c
onse
rvat
ion
oppo
rtun
ities
alon
g w
ith tr
aditi
onal
con
serv
atio
n
Com
plex
laye
rs o
f go
vern
men
tT
radi
tiona
l ow
ners
hip
Eth
nic
unre
st a
nd p
oliti
cal i
nsta
bi-
lity So
lom
on I
slan
ds a
lrea
dy h
as o
neW
orld
Her
itage
site
, Eas
t Ren
nell
Mee
ts c
ultu
ral c
rite
ria
for
a m
ixed
site
(N
an M
odal
& K
osra
e)L
ow c
apac
ity f
or c
omm
uniti
es to
man
age
larg
e pr
ojec
ts·
Com
plex
gov
ernm
ent s
truc
ture
Som
e un
reso
lved
ow
ners
hip
issu
esL
ocal
com
mun
ities
sup
port
ive
Goo
d N
GO
par
ticip
atio
nFS
M in
pro
cess
of
ratif
ying
Wor
ldH
erita
ge C
onve
ntio
n
No
trad
ition
al p
opul
atio
n so
littl
ecu
ltura
l her
itage
Litt
le a
cces
s -
very
rem
ote
Dif
ficu
lt to
man
age
due
to is
ola-
tion C
ook
Isla
nds
is n
ot a
Sta
te P
arty
of
the
Wor
ld H
erita
ge C
onve
ntio
nFr
ench
Pol
ynes
ia c
ould
be
incl
u-de
d in
the
seri
al
Ree
fs s
erio
usly
thre
aten
ed b
ydy
nam
ite f
ishi
ngPo
tent
ial t
arge
t for
cya
nide
fis
hing
Pote
ntia
l for
for
estr
y im
pact
sPh
osph
ate
min
ing
on s
eabi
rdis
land
s (M
anus
com
plex
)
Dev
elop
men
t pre
ssur
es in
are
asof
hig
h po
pula
tion
Log
ging
, min
ing
& d
omes
ticw
aste
are
pro
blem
s·O
ver
expl
oita
tion
of f
ishe
ries
,es
pec.
on
loca
l sca
le (
bech
e de
mer
& T
roch
us)
Dev
elop
men
t pre
ssur
es o
nPo
hnpe
i e.g
. lea
ding
to s
edim
enta
-tio
n Was
te m
anag
emen
t·L
ive
food
fis
h tr
ade
incr
easi
ng·
Hea
vy h
arve
stin
g of
ree
f fl
at &
offs
hore
fis
heri
es
Sign
ific
ant p
reda
tor
prob
lem
s(c
ats,
rat
s, d
ogs)
Japa
nese
spa
ce la
unch
ing
faci
lity
prop
osed
Poac
hing
Hig
h se
agra
ss p
rodu
ctiv
ity &
div
ersi
tyFo
rest
s, c
oral
s, m
angr
oves
, sea
gras
ses
Feed
s la
rvae
into
the
“cen
tre
of m
arin
e bi
odi-
vers
ity”
Hig
h de
gree
of
natu
raln
ess
– vi
rtua
lly in
tact
Lar
gest
dou
ble
barr
ier
reef
in th
e w
orld
(Mor
ovo)
, lag
oon
surr
ound
ed b
y ra
ised
bar
rier
reef
sC
oral
s, s
eagr
ass,
man
grov
e, le
athe
rbac
k tu
rt-
le n
estin
g
Hig
h pr
oduc
tivity
for
sea
gras
ses,
man
grov
esan
d co
rals
(K
osra
e)C
oral
s, r
eefs
, sea
gras
ses
& m
angr
oves
Out
er is
land
s in
pri
stin
e co
nditi
onM
ajor
hab
itat d
iver
sity
Cen
tre
of m
ajor
upw
ellin
g; h
ence
maj
or s
ea-
bird
num
bers
One
of
wor
ld’s
larg
est f
ly-w
ays
Hig
h se
abir
d nu
mbe
rs (
up to
6 m
illio
n at
peak
)G
reen
turt
le b
reed
ing
area
Hea
lthy
reef
sU
ninh
abite
dSe
rial
nom
inat
ion
ensu
res
suff
icie
nt s
ize
Incl
udes
Kir
imat
i ato
ll –
larg
est i
n w
orld
,m
ostly
und
istu
rbed
, hun
dred
s of
hyp
ersa
line
pond
s, im
port
ant f
or s
eabi
rds
Incl
udes
Pal
myr
a at
oll–
2nd
larg
est U
S at
oll,
pris
tine,
fis
h an
d w
ildlif
e un
dist
urbe
d, la
rges
tpo
pula
tion
of r
ed f
oote
d bo
obie
s an
d bl
ack
nodd
ies
in th
e w
orld
Seri
al
Seri
al
Seri
al
Tra
nsbo
unda
ryan
d se
rial
Incl
udes
Kir
imat
i ato
ll(C
hris
tmas
isla
nd),
Palm
yra
atol
l,K
ingm
an r
eef,
Tera
ina,
Tabu
aera
n
New
Han
over
and
Man
us C
lust
er (
Papu
aN
ew G
uine
a)
Solo
mon
Isl
ands
(inc
ludi
ng M
orov
oan
d A
rnav
onL
agoo
ns)
Pohn
pei-
Kos
rae
Clu
ster
(Fe
dera
ted
Stat
es o
f M
icro
nesi
a)
Lin
e Is
land
s Se
rial
(Kir
ibat
i, C
ook
Isla
nds,
the
Uni
ted
Stat
es a
nd F
renc
hPo
lyne
sia)
64
Fe
asib
ility
of
no
min
atio
n
Sign
ed a
gree
men
t am
ong
Pres
iden
ts o
f C
osta
Ric
a, E
cuad
or,
Col
ombi
a an
d Pa
nam
a to
pur
sue
join
t man
agem
ent i
nitia
tives
; str
ong
loca
l/int
erna
tiona
l NG
O p
rese
nce
Unk
now
n
MPA
s al
read
y pr
esen
t or
form
ing
(sev
eral
stil
l lac
k m
anag
emen
t
plan
s); C
uba
has
stro
ng P
rote
cted
Are
as p
rogr
am
Cub
a is
sig
nato
ry to
Wor
ld
Her
itage
con
vent
ion;
hig
h re
sear
ch
capa
city
Maj
or
thre
ats
Ove
rfis
hing
Tour
ism
Gen
eral
ly lo
w, n
o
coas
tal d
evel
opm
ent
Inte
nsiv
e fi
shin
g
Thr
eats
cur
rent
ly
low
, but
will
incr
ease
rapi
dly
with
tim
e
(coa
stal
dev
elop
men
t,
tour
ism
like
ly to
grow
in C
uba)
Rel
ativ
ely
high
fis
-
hing
pre
ssur
e ov
er
fish
and
lobs
ter
reso
urce
s in
mos
t
area
s
Ou
tsta
nd
ing
Un
ive
rsal
Bio
div
ers
ity
Val
ue
s
One
of
the
Wor
ld’s
mos
t bio
logi
cally
div
erse
geo
grap
hica
l
prov
ince
Hig
h en
dem
ism
on
land
and
sea
; bio
logi
cal c
orri
dor
Mig
rato
ry s
peci
es, s
hark
s, w
hale
s, s
eabi
rds,
impo
rtan
t fis
-
heri
es
Geo
logi
cal h
otsp
ot
Bio
geog
raph
y an
d en
dem
ism
Cha
rism
atic
meg
a-fa
una
The
onl
y E
aste
rn P
acif
ic a
toll
The
ste
ppin
g st
one
in m
igra
tion
of c
oast
al m
arin
e sp
ecie
s
from
the
wes
tern
to e
aste
rn P
acif
ic
Hig
hly
inta
ct m
arin
e ec
osys
tem
s
Hig
h bi
odiv
ersi
ty (
gree
n an
d ha
wks
bill
turt
le n
estin
g,
repr
esen
tativ
e m
ajor
hab
itat c
orri
dors
; maj
or s
piny
lobs
ter
and
quee
n co
nch
popu
latio
ns
One
of
leas
t im
pact
ed a
reas
of
Car
ibbe
an
Lar
gest
and
mos
t hab
itat d
iver
se s
helf
are
as in
insu
lar
Car
ibbe
an (
barr
ier
and
patc
h re
efs,
isla
nds,
man
grov
es f
ores
ts
(ext
ensi
ve in
Zap
ata
Swam
p) a
nd e
xten
sive
sea
gra
ss b
eds
Uni
que
Ocu
lina
dom
inat
ed r
ing-
shap
ed m
uddy
bot
tom
lyin
g co
ral r
eefs
End
ange
red
spec
ies
croc
odile
s, tu
rtle
s, b
irds
Incl
udes
sev
eral
ree
f fi
sh s
paw
ning
site
s
Ext
ensi
ve s
ea g
rass
bed
s, a
nd m
angr
oves
(Z
apat
a Sw
amp)
One
of
4 pl
aces
in w
orld
with
ext
ensi
ve o
olite
ban
k fo
rma-
tion
(CaC
O3
prec
ipita
tion)
Tran
s-b
ou
nd
ary
/Se
rial
?T
rans
boun
dary
and
seri
al
Tra
nsbo
unda
ryan
d se
rial
Seri
al
Site
s in
clu
-d
ed
wit
hin
Isla
del
Coc
oN
atio
nal P
ark
Wor
ld H
erita
ge s
ite,
Gal
apag
os N
atio
nal
Park
and
Mar
ine
Res
erve
Wor
ldH
erita
ge s
ite,
Mal
pelo
Isl
and
and
Coi
ba I
slan
d
Los
Can
arre
osA
rchi
pela
goth
roug
h Pu
nta
Gua
naha
cabi
bes,
Arc
hipi
élag
oJa
rdin
es d
e la
Rei
na; s
ever
al e
xis-
ting
and
prop
osed
MPA
s, w
ildlif
ere
fuge
s an
d bi
o-sp
here
res
erve
sin
clud
ed
Nam
e o
fsi
te -
cou
n-
try
Coc
os-
Gal
apag
os-
Mal
pelo
Tri
angl
e(C
osta
Ric
a,E
cuad
or,
Col
ombi
a an
dPa
nam
a)
Clip
pert
on-
Rev
illag
iged
o(F
ranc
e an
dM
exic
o)
Sout
hern
Cub
aC
oral
Arc
hipe
lago
s
LATIN
AMERICA
&
CARIBBEAN
65
Goo
d m
anag
emen
t str
uctu
re a
nd
NG
O p
rese
nce;
MA
B s
ite, o
ngoi
ng
MPA
initi
ativ
e
Loc
al, n
atio
nal a
nd in
tern
atio
nal
focu
s, in
clud
ing
the
Mes
oAm
eric
an
Ree
f Sy
stem
GE
F pr
ojec
t
Exi
stin
g W
orld
Her
itage
Site
stro
ng g
over
nmen
t and
NG
O p
rese
n-
ce; h
igh
rese
arch
cap
acity
Exp
ansi
on o
f ex
istin
g W
orld
Her
itage
Site
, mar
ine-
terr
estr
ial c
or-
rido
r; e
xist
ing
MPA
s, M
BR
S la
rger
cont
ext;
loca
l, na
tiona
l and
inte
rna-
tiona
l foc
us (
incl
udin
g th
e M
BR
S
GE
F pr
ojec
t); s
tron
g in
tern
atio
nal
rese
arch
pre
senc
e
Ven
ezue
la a
nd N
ethe
rlan
ds
Ant
illes
hav
e go
od p
rece
dent
s in
bila
tera
l man
agem
ent;
NG
Os
pre-
sent
; exi
stin
g M
PAs;
wel
l man
aged
Bon
aire
Nat
iona
l Par
k; s
ome
rese
arch
cap
acity
Exi
stin
g M
exic
an N
atio
nal P
arks
and
Wor
ld H
erita
ge S
ite
Lar
ge N
GO
(lo
cal/
inte
rnat
iona
l)
pres
ence
Prio
rity
con
serv
atio
n ar
eas
exer
ci-
se u
nder
way
Ext
rem
ely
high
hum
an d
ensi
ty in
San
And
res
Fish
ing,
inva
sive
spec
ies
Maj
or c
oast
al d
eve-
lopm
ent p
rogr
am
plan
ned
for
sout
hern
Qui
ntan
a R
oo, i
nclu
-
ding
cru
ise
ship
s,
man
y as
soci
ated
impa
cts
Loc
ally
con
cent
ra-
ted,
riv
er d
isch
arge
s,
tour
ism
Hig
hly
vari
able
Tour
ism
Ove
rexp
loita
tion
of
som
e sp
ecie
s
Loc
ally
con
cent
ra-
ted
land
impa
cts
cur-
rent
ly a
nd o
verf
ishi
ng
Plan
for
Esc
aler
a
Nau
tica
(mas
sive
mar
ina
proj
ects
and
land
cha
nges
)
Con
nect
ivity
bet
wee
n So
uthe
rn a
nd N
orth
ern
Car
ibbe
an
Bas
ins,
bio
geog
raph
y
Hig
h bi
odiv
ersi
ty, e
ndan
gere
d sp
ecie
s
Hig
h bi
odiv
ersi
ty a
nd r
epre
sent
ativ
e w
ater
shed
/ree
f co
rri-
dors
.
Ban
co C
hinc
horr
o- la
rges
t of
Car
ibbe
an a
tolls
, exc
elle
nt
mul
ti-us
e zo
ned
MPA
Con
nect
ivity
and
larv
al p
ump
to G
ulf
of M
exic
o an
d
Sout
h-E
ast U
S, im
port
ant n
urse
ry a
rea
for
man
y sp
ecie
s
Rep
rese
ntat
ive
wat
ersh
ed/r
eef
corr
idor
s
Maj
or r
eef
fish
spa
wni
ng s
ites;
wha
le s
hark
agg
rega
tions
.
Con
nect
ivity
and
pos
sibl
e la
rval
pum
p to
G o
f M
exic
o an
d
SE U
S
Cor
al d
iver
sity
, isl
and
faun
a
Los
Roq
ues
cont
ains
the
mos
t im
port
ant a
nd w
ell c
onse
r-
ved
cora
l ree
f-se
a gr
ass-
man
grov
e co
mpl
ex o
f th
e So
uth
Am
eric
an C
arib
bean
coa
st
Los
Roq
ues
harb
ors
sign
ific
ant p
opul
atio
ns o
f th
reat
ened
com
mer
cial
fis
h sp
ecie
s (g
roup
ers,
que
en c
onch
) an
d is
like
ly
a la
rvae
sou
rce
area
Wha
les
and
pinn
iped
s, o
ther
end
ange
red
spec
ies,
rep
rese
n-
tativ
e ha
bita
ts, b
iodi
vers
ity
Bio
geog
raph
ical
ly n
ovel
, hig
h en
dem
ism
, pop
ulat
ion-
scal
e
ecol
ogic
al a
ttrib
utes
Seri
al
Seri
al
Seri
al
Tra
nsbo
unda
ryan
d Se
rial
Seri
al
Incl
udes
San
And
res,
Prov
iden
cia
and
neig
hbor
ing
isla
nds
Incl
udes
the
Sian
Ka’
an B
iosp
here
Res
erve
(a
Wor
ldH
erita
ge s
ite)
and
the
Ban
coC
hinc
horr
o B
.R.
Incl
udes
the
exis
-tin
g W
orld
Her
itage
Site
plu
s ot
her
rece
ntly
est
ablis
hed
prot
ecte
d ar
eas
Los
Roq
ues,
Las
Ave
s (V
enez
uela
),B
onai
re, C
urac
ao(N
ethe
rlan
dsA
ntill
es)
San
And
res
Arc
hipe
lago
(Col
ombi
a)
Sian
Ka’
an -
Ban
coC
hinc
horr
o(M
exic
o)
Bel
ize
Bar
rier
Ree
f Sy
stem
Sout
hern
Car
ibbe
anIs
land
s (T
heN
ethe
rlan
ds a
ndV
enez
uela
)
Gul
f of
Cal
ifor
nia
(Mex
ico)
66
Fe
asib
ility
of
no
min
atio
n
Nee
ds a
dequ
ate
auth
oriti
es a
nd
man
agem
ent·
Loc
al a
nd tr
aditi
onal
kno
wle
dge
curr
ently
inco
rpor
ated
into
mar
ine
cons
erva
tion·
Low
leve
ls o
f st
akeh
olde
r in
volv
e-
men
t; co
nflic
t bet
wee
n et
hnic
gro
ups
hind
er c
onse
rvat
ion·
Man
grov
e an
d as
soci
ated
pri
ma-
tes,
turt
le n
estin
g an
d fi
sher
y re
sour
-
ces
shou
ld b
e tr
acke
d
Den
su D
elta
and
Mun
i and
Saku
mo
Lag
oons
are
exi
stin
g
Ram
sar
site
s
Song
or a
nd K
eta
Lag
oons
are
pro
-
pose
d R
amsa
r si
tes
Exi
stin
g m
arin
e pr
otec
ted
area
alth
ough
man
agem
ent a
dequ
acy
is
unkn
own
Hig
h in
corp
orat
ion
of lo
cal a
nd
trad
ition
al k
now
ledg
e fo
r m
arin
e
cons
erva
tion
assu
med
Gui
nea
Bis
sau
is n
ot a
sig
nato
ry to
the
Wor
ld H
erita
ge C
onve
ntio
n
Maj
or
thre
ats
Hig
h th
reat
s fr
om c
onsu
mpt
ive
use,
coa
stal
ero
sion
and
clim
ate
chan
ge
Med
ium
thre
ats
from
mar
ine
pollu
tion
Low
thre
ats
from
coa
stal
dev
e-
lopm
ent a
nd la
nd-b
ased
act
iviti
es
Hig
h th
reat
s fr
om c
onsu
mpt
ive
use
and
clim
ate
chan
ge
Med
ium
thre
ats
from
land
-bas
ed
activ
ities
and
wat
er q
ualit
y
Low
thre
ats
from
coa
stal
dev
e-
lopm
ent,
mar
ine
pollu
tion
and
tou-
rism M
ediu
m th
reat
s fr
om c
onsu
mp-
tive
use
(e.g
. fis
hing
, man
grov
e
depl
etio
n)
Low
thre
ats
from
coa
stal
dev
e-
lopm
ent,
land
-bas
ed a
ctiv
ities
,
mar
ine
pollu
tion,
wat
er q
ualit
y
and
clim
ate
chan
ge
Ou
tsta
nd
ing
Un
ive
rsal
Bio
div
ers
ity
Val
ue
s
Lar
gest
man
grov
e ec
osys
tem
in A
fric
a
Com
pris
es 3
5% o
f th
e to
tal m
angr
ove
fore
st in
Wes
t Afr
ica
Impo
rtan
t for
larg
e po
pula
tions
of
mig
rato
ry
bird
s
End
ange
red
spec
ies
incl
udin
g le
athe
rbac
k tu
rt-
le, m
anat
ees,
and
pri
mat
es·
Hig
h en
dem
ism
Impo
rtan
t for
larg
e po
pula
tions
of
mig
rato
ry
bird
s (a
ll la
goon
s)
End
ange
red
spec
ies
incl
udin
g le
athe
rbac
k
Ket
a L
agoo
n is
the
only
ext
ensi
ve m
angr
ove
syst
em in
Gha
na
Hig
h sp
ecie
s ri
chne
ss a
s a
clus
ter
site
Part
of
seco
nd m
ost i
mpo
rtan
t man
grov
e ar
ea
in W
est A
fric
a
Hig
h m
arin
e pr
oduc
tivity
·
Mor
e th
an 1
mill
ion
mig
rato
ry b
irds
Not
ed f
or s
ea-g
oing
hip
pos,
5 m
arin
e tu
rtle
spec
ies
and
dolp
hins
Cor
al c
omm
uniti
es
Tran
s-b
ou
nd
ary
/Se
rial
?
Seri
al
Site
s in
clu
-d
ed
wit
hin
Incl
udes
the
5la
goon
s lis
ted
tole
ft
Nam
e o
f si
te-c
ou
ntr
y
Nig
er D
elta
(Nig
eria
)
Den
su D
elta
,M
uni,
Saku
mo,
Song
or a
nd K
eta
Lag
oons
(G
hana
)
Bol
oma
Bija
gos
(Gui
nea-
Bis
sau)
WEST
AFRICA
67
Hig
h le
vel o
f lo
cal a
nd tr
aditi
onal
know
ledg
e in
corp
orat
ed in
mar
ine
reso
urce
use
Lac
k of
info
rmat
ion
abou
t aut
hori
-
ties,
man
agem
ent,
and
stak
ehol
ders
Nei
ther
of
the
two
stat
es is
a s
igna
-
tory
to th
e W
orld
Her
itage
Con
vent
ion
Maj
ority
of
area
exi
stin
g na
tiona
l
park
; man
agem
ent a
nd a
utho
rity
likel
y to
be
adeq
uate
Nam
ibia
is a
sig
nato
ry to
the
Wor
ld H
erita
ge C
onve
ntio
n
Hig
h th
reat
s fr
om la
nd-b
ased
activ
ities
, con
sum
ptiv
e us
e (e
.g.
man
grov
es f
or f
ish
pres
erva
tion)
,
clim
ate
chan
ge
Med
ium
thre
ats
from
coa
stal
deve
lopm
ent a
nd in
crea
sing
pop
u-
latio
n pr
essu
re (
caus
ed b
y m
igra
-
tion
to o
il-re
late
d jo
bs)
Low
thre
ats
from
off
shor
e oi
l
activ
ities
Hig
h th
reat
s fr
om c
onsu
mpt
ive
use L
ow th
reat
s fr
om c
oast
al d
eve-
lopm
ent,
land
-bas
ed a
ctiv
ities
and
mar
ine
pollu
tion
Impo
rtan
t upw
ellin
g ar
ea
Fish
and
cor
al c
omm
uniti
es
Hig
h m
arin
e pr
oduc
tivity
(sh
rim
ps, l
obst
ers
and
larg
e pe
lagi
c po
pula
tions
)
Rar
e co
asta
l lic
hens
80%
of
wor
ld p
opul
atio
n of
cap
e fu
r se
als
(at
Cap
e C
ross
)
Frag
ile c
oast
al d
eser
t eco
syst
em
Are
a of
upw
ellin
g
Tra
nsbo
unda
ryan
d Se
rial
Tra
nsbo
unda
ry a
ndC
lust
er s
ite c
ompr
i-se
d of
fou
r is
land
s
Sao
Tom
e an
dPr
inci
pe a
ndE
quat
oria
l Gui
nea
incl
udin
g A
nnab
onIs
land
Skel
eton
Coa
st(N
amib
ia)
68
Fe
asib
ility
of
no
min
atio
n
Exp
ansi
on o
f ex
istin
g W
orld
Her
itage
Site
Exi
sten
ce o
f go
vern
men
t ins
titu-
tions
that
sup
port
pro
tect
ion
The
re is
low
pop
ulat
ion,
and
few
conf
lictin
g st
akeh
olde
rs
Pote
ntia
l for
ben
efic
ial i
nter
actio
n
with
shi
p-ba
sed
eco-
tour
ism
for
fun
-
ding
, mon
itori
ng a
nd e
nfor
cem
ent
Stro
ng g
over
nmen
t and
don
or
stru
ctur
es, e
xist
ing
man
agem
ent a
nd
mon
itori
ng p
rogr
ams
and
tour
ism
pote
ntia
l.
Hig
hly
feas
ible
if p
ort d
evel
op-
men
t doe
s no
t pro
ceed
Tra
ns-F
ront
ier
Prot
ocol
bet
wee
n
Moz
ambi
que
and
Sout
h A
fric
a on
cons
erva
tion
and
reso
urce
use
alr
ea-
dy s
igne
d, w
hich
wou
ld li
nk s
ite
with
Gre
ater
St.
Luc
ia W
etla
nds
Park
Maj
or
thre
ats
Vul
nera
ble
to f
ishi
ng p
oach
ing,
inva
sive
alie
n sp
ecie
s, s
ea le
vel
rise
, cor
al b
leac
hing
and
oil
spill
s
Imm
edia
te th
reat
: lar
ge s
cale
tour
ism
dev
elop
men
t
Hig
h fi
shin
g pr
essu
re (
shar
ks,
sea
cucu
mbe
r, cl
am, r
eef
fish
),
also
har
d tu
rtle
s an
d du
gong
s (b
ut
this
is b
eing
am
elio
rate
d w
ith c
ur-
rent
man
agem
ent)
Cor
al b
leac
hing
Sing
le la
rges
t thr
eat i
s po
ssib
le
port
dev
elop
men
t and
rel
ated
imm
igra
tion
Unc
ontr
olle
d to
uris
m d
evel
op-
men
t
Loc
aliz
ed o
verf
ishi
ng
Ou
tsta
nd
ing
Un
ive
rsal
Bio
div
ers
ity
Val
ue
s
Hig
hly
isol
ated
, int
act m
arin
e ec
osys
tem
s,
incl
udin
g pr
istin
e la
goon
s an
d co
ral r
eefs
with
high
fis
h di
vers
ity a
nd la
rge
fish
, lar
ge s
eabi
rd
colo
nies
Clu
ster
ing
Ast
ove
and
Cos
mol
edo
atol
ls
(whi
ch h
ave
mor
e di
vers
e m
arin
e ha
bita
ts th
en
Ald
abra
) w
ith th
e ex
istin
g A
ldab
ra W
orld
Her
itage
Site
incr
ease
s th
e su
stai
nabi
lity
of m
ari-
ne p
rote
ctio
n in
the
area
Las
t via
ble
dugo
ng p
opul
atio
n in
reg
ion
Div
erse
cor
al c
omm
uniti
es
4 sp
ecie
s of
sea
turt
le, 3
spe
cies
wha
le, 4
spe
-
cies
sha
rk
Hig
h en
dem
ism
like
ly (
incl
udin
g 6
mol
lusc
spec
ies)
Ext
ensi
ve a
nd d
iver
se s
ea g
rass
bed
s an
d
inte
rtid
al h
abita
t
Mos
t sou
ther
ly c
oral
com
mun
ities
in r
egio
n
Hig
h en
dem
ism
of
soft
cor
als,
end
emis
m o
f
fish
and
pla
nt s
peci
es
Uni
que
sabe
lleri
d an
d co
ral c
omm
uniti
es
Impo
rtan
t fee
ding
are
a fo
r tu
rtle
s, d
ugon
g,
wha
les,
whi
te s
hark
, wha
le s
hark
Coe
leca
nth
pres
ent
Tran
s-b
ou
nd
ary
/Se
rial
?Se
rial
with
exis
ting
Wor
ldH
erita
ge s
ite
Tra
nsbo
unda
ryan
d se
rial
pos
-si
ble
with
exi
s-tin
g G
reat
er S
t.L
ucia
Wor
ldH
erita
ge s
ite
Site
s in
clu
-d
ed
wit
hin
Ast
ove
and
Cos
mel
edo
atol
ls
Nam
e o
f si
te-c
ou
ntr
y
Ast
ove-
Cos
mol
edo,
Ext
ensi
on o
fA
ldab
ra W
orld
Her
itage
site
(Sey
chel
les)
Baz
arut
oA
rchi
pela
go(M
ozam
biqu
e)
Map
uto
Bay
–Po
nto
do O
uro
(Moz
ambi
que)
EAST
AFRICA
69
Stro
ng d
evel
opm
ent o
f in
stitu
tiona
l
and
man
agem
ent s
truc
ture
s, in
clud
ing
Inte
grat
ed C
oast
al M
anag
emen
t in
both
Tan
zani
a an
d M
ozam
biqu
e
Com
mun
ity a
nd p
riva
te s
ecto
r
invo
lvem
ent
Low
pop
ulat
ion
pres
sure
impr
oves
feas
ibili
ty f
or c
onse
rvat
ion
man
age-
men
t Stro
ng in
stitu
tiona
l, m
anag
emen
t
and
mon
itori
ng s
truc
ture
, with
goo
d
stak
ehol
der
supp
ort (
com
mun
ity a
nd
priv
ate
sect
or)
Stro
ng m
anag
emen
t pos
sibl
e
thro
ugh
gove
rnm
ent a
genc
ies
and
join
t sur
veill
ance
and
mon
itori
ng
usin
g bo
at-b
ased
tour
ism
and
rese
arch
exp
editi
ons
Hig
h bi
olog
ical
val
ue a
nd s
tron
g
com
mun
ity c
omm
itmen
t, bu
t unp
re-
dict
able
pol
itica
l clim
ate
and
unce
r-
tain
inst
itutio
nal r
elat
ions
hips
Ove
rexp
loita
tion
of f
ishe
ries
at
nort
h an
d so
uth
ends
, and
rep
orts
of
high
exp
loita
tion
in Q
uiri
mba
s. S
ea
cucu
mbe
r ov
erex
ploi
ted
Cor
al b
leac
hing
Pote
ntia
l tou
rism
dev
elop
men
t
Con
flic
ting
land
and
res
ourc
e
uses
, par
ticul
arly
fis
hing
, tou
rism
and
subs
iste
nce
agri
cultu
re
Pote
ntia
l fut
ure
impa
cts
from
Ruf
iji r
iver
wat
ersh
ed
Cur
rent
ly lo
w th
reat
s be
caus
e
isla
nds
are
isol
ated
, with
low
popu
latio
n de
nsity
with
min
imal
ongo
ing
hum
an p
ress
ures
Not
hig
hly
thre
aten
ed
Pote
ntia
l hig
h fi
shin
g pr
essu
re –
curr
ently
ther
e is
hig
h le
vel o
f
subs
iste
nce
fish
ing
(inc
ludi
ng
nom
adic
fis
hers
)
Unc
ontr
olle
d to
uris
m d
evel
op-
men
t
Agr
icul
tura
l run
off
and
solid
was
te
Ext
ensi
ve r
eef
com
plex
with
hig
h co
ral d
iver
si-
ty (
>55
gene
ra)
Ext
ensi
ve a
nd d
iver
se s
eagr
ass
beds
Impo
rtan
t tur
tle f
eedi
ng a
nd n
urse
ry s
ite
Ext
ensi
ve, h
igh
dive
rsity
cor
al r
eefs
with
hig
h
cora
l cov
er a
nd >
49 c
oral
gen
era
Div
erse
sea
gras
s be
ds
Ext
ensi
ve r
iver
and
del
taic
man
grov
es w
hich
are
impo
rtan
t bre
edin
g ha
bita
t for
pra
wns
, fis
h,
and
nest
ing
and
bree
ding
hab
itat f
or w
ater
fow
l
Abu
ndan
ce o
f to
p pr
edat
ors,
incl
udin
g cr
oco-
dile
s Impo
rtan
t fee
ding
hab
itat f
or tu
rtle
s an
d
dugo
ng
Con
tain
s m
ost i
mpo
rtan
t nes
ting
site
in I
ndia
n
Oce
an f
or g
reen
turt
le
Mos
t pri
stin
e re
ef a
rea
in M
adag
asca
r, w
ith
little
run
-off
infl
uenc
e an
d hi
gh d
iver
sity
cor
al
reef
s
Den
se m
angr
ove
fore
sts
Poss
ible
ser
ial o
f2
site
s w
ith o
netr
ansb
ound
ary
site
for
Mna
ziB
ay a
ndR
uvum
a co
m-
plex Seri
al
Seri
al
Pote
ntia
l mix
edno
min
atio
n w
ithK
ilwa
cultu
ral
Wor
ld H
erita
gesi
te
Mna
zi B
ay-
Ruv
uma-
Qui
rim
bas,
(Tan
zani
a,M
ozam
biqu
e)
Ruf
iji R
iver
Del
ta-
Maf
ia-S
ongo
Song
o, (
Tanz
ania
)
Eur
opa
and
Scat
tere
d is
land
s(w
/ Bas
sas
deIn
dia,
Jua
n de
Nov
a, G
lori
euse
s)(F
ranc
e)
NW
Mad
agas
car
–N
osy
Tani
kely
,N
osy
Be
70
Fe
asib
ility
of
no
min
atio
n
Al W
ejh
bank
is a
n ex
istin
g M
PA
Egy
ptia
n an
d Sa
udi m
anag
emen
t
initi
ativ
es e
xist
, man
agem
ent p
lans
exis
t or
are
bein
g de
velo
ped
Ras
Moh
amm
ed n
omin
atio
n pr
e-
pare
d
Exi
stin
g pr
otec
ted
area
with
man
a-
gem
ent p
lan
Loc
al c
omm
unity
(in
clud
ing
tra-
ditio
nal a
nd c
omm
erci
al f
ishe
rs)
sup-
port
and
wor
k to
war
ds p
rote
ctio
n
Om
an’s
gre
at r
ecor
d of
env
iron
-
men
tal p
rote
ctio
n (r
ecog
nize
d by
UN
EP)
Poss
ible
MA
B s
tatu
s
Adj
acen
t to
exis
ting
Ara
bian
Ory
x
rese
rve,
nat
ural
Wor
ld H
erita
ge s
ite
Maj
or
thre
ats
Gab
al E
lba:
Oil
spill
s, la
nd r
ecla
ma-
tion,
sed
imen
tatio
n, r
ecre
a-
tion
divi
ng im
pact
s (a
ncho
r
dam
age
sign
ific
ant)
, ext
en-
sive
fis
hing
Incr
easi
ng in
dust
rial
fis
-
hery
pre
ssur
e
Pote
ntia
l for
rap
id d
eve-
lopm
ent (
plan
s fo
r po
rt
deve
lopm
ent a
nd to
uris
m
infr
astr
uctu
re)
Low
thre
ats
Ou
tsta
nd
ing
Un
ive
rsal
Bio
div
ers
ity
Val
ue
s
Ras
Moh
amm
ed
Hig
h oc
eano
grap
hic
impo
rtan
ce, l
arva
l tra
nspo
rt,
unus
ual g
eolo
gica
l pro
cess
es
Nor
ther
nmos
t man
grov
es in
reg
ion
Div
erse
cor
al r
eefs
, tur
tle f
orag
ing
site
s
Al W
ejh
Ban
k
Ext
ensi
ve c
oral
ree
fs
Gab
al E
lba
Ext
ensi
ve f
ring
ing
reef
s, m
angr
oves
(im
port
ant b
ird
bree
ding
hab
itat)
, sea
gras
s, f
ish
and
mar
ine
mam
mal
s
Gen
etic
cro
ss r
oads
in th
e re
gion
due
in p
art t
o th
e
Som
ali u
pwel
ling
and
Soco
tra
gyre
, giv
ing
rise
to h
igh
dive
rsity
of
mar
ine
habi
tat r
angi
ng f
rom
Wes
t Ind
ian
to
Ara
bian
fau
nal a
ssem
blag
es
One
of
the
high
est d
iver
sity
of
cora
l ree
fs in
the
W
Indi
an O
cean
(24
0 st
ony
cora
l spe
cies
rec
orde
d)
Sea
turt
les
Sea
bird
s –
only
bre
edin
g si
te f
or c
erta
in p
opul
atio
ns
Terr
estr
ial p
lant
& a
nim
al e
ndem
ism
Mas
irah
Isl
and,
Bar
al H
ickm
an
Lar
gest
logg
erhe
ad tu
rtle
nes
ting
grou
nds
in w
orld
(>30
,000
turt
les/
yr)
Impo
rtan
t fee
ding
gro
und
for
gree
n tu
rtle
22 c
etac
ean
spec
ies
(and
two
poss
ible
end
emic
spe
-
cies
)
Ras
Al H
add
One
of
the
larg
est g
reen
turt
le n
estin
g si
tes
in w
orld
(mos
t im
port
ant n
estin
g si
te in
Ind
ian
Oce
an)
(>20
,000
turt
les/
yr)
Tran
s-b
ou
nd
ary
/Se
rial
?T
rans
boun
dary
and
Seri
al
Seri
al
Site
s in
clu
-d
ed
wit
hin
Ras
Moh
amm
ed,
Al W
ejh
Ban
k,G
abal
Elb
a
Lar
gely
pri
stin
eis
land
s an
d m
arin
een
viro
nmen
t
Mas
irah
Isl
and,
Bar
al H
ickm
an, R
as A
lH
add
Nam
e o
fsi
te -
cou
n-
try
Nor
thea
st R
edSe
a an
d G
ulf
ofA
qaba
(Sa
udi
Ara
bia,
Egy
pt)
Soco
tra
Arc
hipe
lago
(Yem
en)
Sout
heas
t Om
an
MIDDLE
EAST
71
PER
SGA
inte
nds
to li
nk u
p its
MPA
s in
to a
reg
iona
l net
wor
k
Polit
ical
con
stra
ints
: Eri
trea
is n
ot
in th
e A
rab
Lea
gue,
Yem
en v
ery
inde
-
pend
ent,
disp
utes
ove
r Y
emen
/Sau
di
Ara
bia
bord
er
Fara
san
is a
n ex
istin
g M
PA(1
996)
No
auth
ority
that
man
ages
coa
stal
zone
in Y
emen
and
lack
of
fund
s fo
r
cons
erva
tion
Djib
outi
is n
ot a
sig
nato
ry to
Wor
ld
Her
itage
con
vent
ion
Lac
k of
pro
tect
ed a
rea
legi
slat
ion
in U
AE
Inte
r-E
mir
ate
disp
utes
·
UA
E is
sig
nato
ry to
Wor
ld
Her
itage
con
vent
ion
Prep
arin
g m
anag
emen
t pla
n
Nom
inat
ion
prep
ared
alr
eady
De
fact
o pr
otec
ted
area
, aw
aitin
g
roya
l dec
lara
tion
No
NG
Os
in S
audi
Ara
bia
to a
dd-
ress
this
nom
inat
ion
Saud
i Ara
bia
is s
igna
tory
to W
orld
Her
itage
Con
vent
ion
Nea
r m
ajor
shi
ppin
g la
nes
and
maj
or p
orts
(m
arin
e po
l-
lutio
n, g
roun
ding
s et
c)
Coa
stal
dev
elop
men
t·
Nea
rby
oil d
rilli
ng in
Yem
en
Maj
or f
ishi
ng g
roun
ds in
Red
Sea
Low
thre
ats
Low
thre
ats
(lar
gely
pri
s-
tine,
isol
ated
are
a)
Nea
rby
all m
ajor
oil
fiel
ds, h
eavy
shi
ppin
g, s
olid
and
liqui
d di
scha
rges
·
Ext
ensi
ve b
leac
hing
kille
d co
rals
insh
ore,
littl
e
effe
ct o
ffsh
ore
Fara
san
Mos
t ext
ensi
ve m
angr
oves
in S
audi
Ara
bia
Div
erse
ran
ge o
f co
ral a
nd a
lgal
ree
fs, i
nter
tidal
fla
ts
and
seag
rass
bed
s
Hig
h fi
sh d
iver
sity
Dug
ongs
, tur
tles,
4 s
peci
es o
f ce
tace
an
Dah
lak
Con
side
red
a la
rval
res
ervo
ir c
onne
cted
to F
aras
an
Bel
haf
Bir
Ali
Con
tain
s un
ique
sal
t wat
er c
rate
r w
ith f
ring
ing
man
-
grov
es
Vol
cani
c hi
stor
y, r
esul
ting
in e
xten
sive
, hig
h co
ver
cora
l com
mun
ities
(ra
re in
Ara
bian
Sea
)
Hig
hest
div
ersi
ty r
eef
fish
com
mun
ities
in A
rabi
a
Sept
Fre
res
Isla
nds/
Ras
Siy
an a
nd B
ab a
l Man
dab
Div
erse
cor
al r
eefs
and
ree
f fa
unal
ass
embl
ages
Hig
h se
abir
d ne
stin
g
Impo
rtan
t mig
rato
ry r
oute
for
sea
bird
s
Impo
rtan
t sha
rk n
urse
ry in
Ras
Siy
an
Ext
ensi
ve s
eagr
ass
beds
Key
hab
itat f
or d
ugon
gs
Dug
ongs
Lar
gest
nes
ting
popu
latio
n of
the
enda
nger
ed S
ocot
ra
corm
oran
t in
the
wor
ld
Cor
al s
peci
es w
ith h
igh
tole
ranc
e fo
r sa
linity
and
tem
pera
ture
ext
rem
es
Div
erse
ree
f an
d se
agra
ss h
abita
ts
Key
bir
d w
inte
ring
site
and
fly
way
, nes
ting
site
for
hund
reds
of
thou
sand
s of
tern
s
Lar
gest
gre
en a
nd h
awks
bill
turt
le r
ooke
ry in
the
Gul
f (f
rom
whi
ch tu
rtle
s m
igra
te to
Om
an, U
AE
, Ira
n)
Tra
nsbo
unda
ryan
d se
rial
Part
of
Gul
fC
ompl
ex
Part
of
Gul
fC
ompl
ex
Part
of
Gul
fC
ompl
ex
Fara
san
(Sau
diA
rabi
a) /D
ahla
k(E
ritr
ea),
Bel
haf
Bir
Ali
(Yem
en),
Sep
tFr
eres
Isl
ands
/Ras
Siya
n an
d B
ab a
lM
anda
b (D
jibou
ti)
Mur
awah
Isl
and
–B
u T
ini S
hoal
s
Pris
tine
isla
nds
near
Qat
ar
Sout
hern
Red
Sea
Com
plex
(Sa
udi
Ara
bia,
Yem
en,
Djib
outi,
Eri
trea
)
Sout
hern
Gul
f(U
nite
d A
rab
Em
irat
es)
Haw
ar I
slan
ds(B
ahra
in)
Juba
il W
ildlif
eSa
nctu
ary
(Sau
diA
rabi
a)
To reach consensus the participants used abiogeographic approach to conduct the analysisduring the workshop. It was based in part on aparticipatory framework developed by organiza-tions such as World Wildlife Fund (WWF),Conservation International (CI) and The NatureConservancy (TNC), among others. The approachemployed sets of explicit criteria that emphasizedregional and global marine biodiversity value. Italso considered the threats to these values and thefeasibility of protection. Background research onmarine protected area (and general protected area)criteria was conducted prior to the workshop, andincluded investigations into criteria used in otherinternational and programmes (such as RAM-SAR, Man and Biosphere (MAB), Convention onMigratory Species, The Baltic Convention, theInternational Maritime Organization’s (IMO) cri-teria for Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs)and the Regional Seas agreements such as theSpecially Protected Areas and Wildlife in theWider Caribbean Region (SPAW) and theProtocol Concerning Specially Protected Areasand Biological Diversity in the Mediterranean(SPA Protocol), IUCN criteria (developed byKelleher et al. 1995), national level criteria(Representative Areas Program, Australia) andfinally criteria used by international conservationNGOs (WWF, TNC and CI). The overall list ofcriteria was circulated prior to the workshop andthe expert participants concurred on their use atthe start of the workshop. The participants alsoagreed to consider cultural heritage as a criterionalongside the biodiversity criteria where applicable.
With the aid of an array of physical, biolo-gical and sociological datasets in GIS format, theexperts began the site selection process in theirregional groups by identifying broad areas contai-ning regionally and globally significant biodiver-sity values, using the workshop’s criteria as astandard set of guidelines across working groups.The criteria were not ranked relative to one ano-ther, as their priority may be different among
regions. The criteria used are as follows:
1) Sites important for the maintenance of essen-tial ecological processes or life-support systems,including sites of important geological, ecologi-cal, and oceanographic processes (high primaryand secondary production, important upwellings,eddies etc.);2) Sites of uniqueness, containing importanthabitat for rare, vulnerable or endangered spe-cies;3) Sites of high endemism;4) Sites of high species richness;5) Sites representative of biogeographicallyimportant species assemblages or communitytypes;6) Sites important for shared populations, inclu-ding areas significant as migrating, congregating,breeding, and/or feeding grounds, sites importantfor replenishment and maintenance, sites thatcontain key habitat for the various life historyphases of these species;7) Sites significantly large, in a state of natural-ness, containing a variety of intact habitats andspecies assemblages (e.g. wetlands, islands,coastal zones such as watersheds, estuaries andreef systems) to maintain the integrity and sus-tainability of marine ecosystems and speciespopulations;8) Sites that also satisfy the cultural category ofWorld Heritage.
Once the initial broad areas were identifiedusing these criteria, smaller areas of outstandinguniversal biodiversity values within them werechosen for more detailed inspection. In thissecond stage, the proposal of multi-site areas wasencouraged, including cluster, serial and trans-boundary areas. It is important to highlight thatthe regional groups discussed and recommendedpotential areas rich in their marine biodiversity,not sites. It is a task of the State Parties to the
72
Annex 2. Introduction to workshop process
Convention to delineate appropriate sites withinthese general areas for nomination as WorldHeritage. Conservation organizations and othernon-governmental groups also are encouragedrecommend sites, based on their expertise, for aState Party or multiple State Parties for theirconsideration.
Following, the threats to A-list areas wereexamined and the feasibility to be nominated as aWorld Heritage site assessed, using a standardi-zed threats and feasibility assessment. Threatswere examined in the following broad categoriesthat each working group detailed according tothose most prevalent in their region; threats fromcoastal development, threats from land based acti-vities, marine pollution, consumptive use and cli-mate change. Feasibility was determined byassessing how the area is protected and managed,whether or not traditional/local knowledge isincorporated into management practices, the levelof stakeholder involvement and support for long-term conservation, and coverage the area undermultilateral or bilateral agreements or internatio-nal conventions. Additional information thatcontributed to a more complete understanding ofthe threats to biodiversity value and the feasibili-ty for World Heritage listing was noted and consi-dered in the final assessment of priority areas.This flexibility allowed the final list to expressmore regionally tailored priorities.
After the threats and feasibility assessment,the regional groups revisited the World Heritagecriteria for Natural Heritage properties. Thesewere factored into the biodiversity criteria andthreats and feasibility assessment, as the finallayer in this priority setting exercise. The NaturalWorld Heritage Criteria state that to be nomina-ted, areas must be one or more of the following:
1) Be outstanding examples representing majorstages of earth’s history, including the record oflife, significant on-going geological processes inthe development of landforms, or significantgeomorphic or physiographic features; or2) Be outstanding examples representing signi-
ficant on-going ecological and biological proces-ses in the evolution and development of terres-trial, fresh water, coastal and marine ecosystemsand communities of plants and animals; or
3) Contain superlative natural phenomena orareas of exceptional natural beauty and aestheticimportance; or
4) Contain the most important and significantnatural habitats for in-situ conservation of biolo-gical diversity, including those containing threa-tened species of outstanding universal valuefrom the point of view of science or conserva-tion.
In addition to these criteria, the conditionsof integrity for natural World Heritage areas wereconsidered, but were addressed more fully in thethreats and feasibility assessment discussedabove.
The final list of potential World Heritageareas recommended by each regional group is arepresentation of what the experts believe to be ofoutstanding universal value, as well as feasiblefor World Heritage nomination. The overall listsof recommended sites were discussed in the ple-nary, and the participants reached consensus ontheir presentation to the World HeritageCommittee and State Parties to the Convention.
The final list of identified areas is presen-ted in the Hanoi Statement. Detailed descriptionson threats and feasibilities of each of the highestpriority areas are given in a table in Annex 1. Theimportant biodiversity values contained in eachtropical marine region were also discussed. Thesummary of those regional discussions is presen-ted under Discussions of areas by region.
73
A report “Potential World Heritage Sites ofthe Central and Indian Ocean Region” was prepa-red by Dr. Trevor J Ward, University of WesternAustralia, Perth, Australia as a supplementalcontribution to complement the consultative pro-cess conducted during the Hanoi workshop. Atthe Hanoi workshop only a few specialists hadexperience on the central Indian Ocean region,and it was determined that a regional reportshould be prepared to determine the high priorityareas. This annex summarises the findings of thereport. Much of the information developed in thatreport. However, the final interpretations andconclusions developed for this summary reportare those of the editors of the workshop report andnot all of the findings are reported in this summa-ry. The full paper is available on the workshopwebsite (http://international.nos.noaa.gov/heri-tage).
The following individuals contributed tothe Indian Ocean report: Channa Bambaradeniya,IUCN, Sri Lanka; Anouk Ilangakoon, WCPA, SriLanka; Jamie Oliver, ICLARM, Malaysia;Adrian Phillips, Senior Advisor, World Heritage:World Commission on Protected Areas, IUCN,UK; Rajendra Prasad ; PAD, India: T. RaviShankar, M. S. Swaminathan ResearchFoundation, Kakinada, India; Charles Sheppard,University of Warwick, Coventry, UK; and K.Venkataraman, Zoological Survey of India,Chennai, India.
Regional Context
The region of focus for this assessment isthe tropical and oceanic systems of the centralIndian Ocean. The region comprises the IndianOcean Rim countries and island nations broadlybetween 70°E and 100°E, including Myanmar,Bangladesh, India, Sri Lanka, Maldives, Chagos
(UK), and the Cocos Keeling islands (Australia).A characteristic of the Central Indian Oceanregion is that its biodiversity is poorly unders-tood, and the grounds for determining WorldHeritage status are therefore less robust than inmany other tropical ocean areas. The highest prio-rity sites are likely to be those that are determinedto be least disturbed.
*The region comprises five distinct bio-geomorphic sub-systems:
1) the monsoon-dominated northern Bay ofBengal;2) the low energy east coast of the Indian sub-continent;3) the high energy west coast of the Indian sub-continent;4) oceanic atolls of the Chagos-LaccadivesPlateau;5) the continental islands and fringing reef sys-tems.
More than a quarter of the world’s popula-tion lives in the countries bordering the Bay ofBengal and the broader central Indian Oceanregion, and many of these people subsist at orbelow the poverty level. Economic marine acti-vities in the region include fishing, tourism, andthe mining of coral and sand for use as construc-tion materials, and the region is one of the worl-d’s busiest marine transportation corridors. Thecoastal fisheries are of major socio-economicimportance to all the countries as they providedirect employment for more than 2 million fis-hers. The coastal areas also support significantaquaculture production of shrimp and fish. In1994, production was estimated to be 141,975million tons, and utilised the work of 200,000 fishfarmers in the Bay of Bengal area, and interest inaquaculture has continued to rapidly rise in theregion.
74
Potential World Heritages Sites ofthe Central Indian Ocean Region
Annex 3.
The Indian Ocean is the smallest of thethree ‘great’ oceans and much of its area is geolo-gically ‘young’. The boundaries can be definedas: Western limits—the meridian of Cape Agulhasto Antarctica; Eastern limits—south of Australia,Bass Strait, Cape Grim, Tasmania to Antarctica;north of Australia, Torres Strait; Northern limit—the Asian landmass. Marginal seas of the IndianOcean include the Red Sea, Gulf of Aden, PersianGulf, Gulf of Oman, Arabian Sea, Laccadive Sea,Bay of Bengal, Andaman Sea, Malacca Straitsand Singapore Straits. The area covered by theIndian Ocean (excluding Arafura Sea) is74,917,000 km≈, with a mean depth of 387 m.The maximum depth recorded is 7,437 m (24,444feet).
The marine ecosystems and habitats rangefrom the vast areas of deltaic mangroves and shal-low turbid waters at the head of the Bay of Bengalto the oceanic trenches of the Indian Ocean pro-per. The Indian sub-continent separates the nor-thern part of the Indian Ocean into two very dif-ferent regions—the Bay of Bengal to the east andthe Arabian Sea to the west. Both are monsoonal,but in the Arabian Sea evaporation exceeds rain-fall and runoff, generating seasonal high salinitywaters, whereas the Bay of Bengal is seasonallyof low salinity, being strongly influenced by mon-soonal rainfall and runoff from the five majorrivers in its catchment. The northern part of theBay of Bengal (India, Bangladesh, Myanmar) isdominated by soft substrate ecosystems and tur-bid, productive waters. The Sundarbans (India,Bangladesh) at the head of the Bay of Bengal isthe world’s largest mangrove wetland complex,and parts are now inscribed in World Heritage.Much of the east coast of India is gently slopingwith deltas, beaches lagoons and marshes, whilethe west coast is exposed with rocky shores, head-lands and heavy surf beaches.
The Lakshadweeps (India), Maldives andChagos (UK) comprise a natural a chain of ocea-nic atolls, commencing to the west of India andextending south from about 12°N to about 8°S.
These atolls rise from deep ocean trenches to thesea surface, and form small lagoon systems rin-ged by barely emergent sand cays and lowislands. Many support well developed stands ofvegetation even though the islands are only justabove sea level, because they are largely out ofthe influence of cyclones which otherwise woulddestroy the plant communities. Although littlestudied, the Chagos Archipelago is considered tohave one of the highest levels of coral diversity inthe Indian Ocean.
In contrast to the atolls,the islands of the Andamans andNicobar group (India) and SriLanka are continental, and arelined with fringing coral reefsoverlying sandstone and volca-nic rock substrata. These formdifferent ecosystems, ofteninfluenced by freshwater runofffrom the islands and are associa-ted with other hard substratemarine communities. TheMergui Islands (Myanmar), acomplex string of at least 800continental islands that arethought to be still mainly fores-ted, are biologically similar tothose of the adjacent islands inThailand waters. The MerguiIslands have long been closed tohuman access, and are thoughtto be largely free from commer-cial fishing, industrial develop-ment, and, with only limitedtourism and other visitation, tohave retained many of theirisland and marine ecosystems in near pristinecondition.
With the exception of Chagos and MerguiArchipelago, all the marine and island ecosystemsin the region have come under heavy pressurefrom fishing, and from one or more of coastaldevelopment, sand mining, sedimentation andcatchment pollution. The situation in Mergui
75
Islands is not clear, although it is assumed thatbecause of their limited resident populations andcontrols on visitation, their environments are in amuch healthier condition.
Without exception, all the corals in thisregion have suffered from coral bleaching episo-des that have ranged from moderate to very seve-re, and some have so far failed to recover from therepeated bleaching events in the late 1990s. Theimpact on coral ecosystems has been widespreadand intense; for example in Chagos: “Mortalitywas near-total to 15 m deep in northern atolls, andto > 35 m in central and southern atolls”(Sheppard et al. 2002). Similar bleaching impactsoccurred in the Maldives, and in 2001 recoverywas insignificant across large areas of the nor-
thern Maldivian atolls.The coral reefs in the region (other than at
Chagos) are intensively fished, commonly for baitfish for the widespread tuna fisheries, and manyare still fished using destructive fishing practices(such as cyanide). Also, there is an increasing fis-hery for live fish throughout the region, both forhuman consumption and as specimen fish for theaquarium trade. However, across the entireregion considered here, the real impact of thesehuman uses on the biodiversity has been poorlydocumented, but is likely to be substantial. Someareas are obviously degraded because of poorland management practice and overfishing, butstudies of biodiversity are limited to a few localsituations, and the impact of human use can, inmost cases, only be assumed.
76
77
Fe
asib
ility
of
no
min
a-ti
on
Wou
ld r
equi
re a
spe
cifi
c an
dbi
late
ral e
ngag
emen
t W
ould
req
uire
add
ition
al s
tudy
Spec
ific
pri
ority
are
as/is
land
ses
tabl
ishe
d by
BC
PPSt
rate
gica
lly im
port
ant a
rea
for
natio
nal s
ecur
ity
Maj
or
thre
ats
56%
of
reef
s ar
eth
reat
ened
, mai
nly
by o
verf
ishi
ng,
dest
ruct
ive
fis-
hing
, coa
stal
dev
e-lo
pmen
t, se
dim
en-
tatio
n an
d m
arin
e-ba
sed
pollu
tion
Som
e ar
eas
degr
aded
by
hum
an a
ctiv
ities
,bu
t mos
tly in
goo
dco
nditi
on
Aff
ecte
d by
rece
nt c
oral
ble
a-ch
ing
even
ts a
ndst
orm
dam
age
Ou
tsta
nd
ing
Un
ive
rsal
Bio
div
ers
ity
Val
ue
s
Rep
rese
nts
the
cont
inen
tal i
slan
d ec
osys
tem
s co
mpl
ex, n
atur
alra
nge
of a
ssoc
iate
d tr
opic
al h
abita
ts, i
nclu
ding
terr
estr
ial c
omm
uni-
ties
and
adja
cent
mar
ine
reef
sys
tem
s in
ver
y go
od c
ondi
tion
Impo
rtan
t cul
tura
l val
ues
of tr
aditi
onal
sub
sist
ence
fis
hing
, hun
-tin
g an
d ag
ricu
ltura
l pra
ctic
esA
bout
900
for
este
d is
land
s, r
ange
of
size
s, c
over
ing
30,0
00 k
m≈
Impo
rtan
t ran
ge o
f co
mpl
ex m
arin
e an
d te
rres
tria
l hab
itats
; maj
orba
rrie
r re
ef e
cosy
stem
(32
0km
)R
egio
nally
and
glo
bally
impo
rtan
t are
a fo
r le
athe
rbac
k, g
reen
,ol
ive
ridl
ey a
nd h
awke
sbill
turt
les;
dug
ong;
hos
t to
salt
wat
er c
roco
-di
le Cor
al r
eefs
, sea
gras
s as
sem
blag
es, m
angr
oves
– a
ll bi
ogeo
grap
hi-
cally
impo
rtan
t rep
rese
ntat
ives
of
Indi
an O
cean
ass
embl
ages
ingo
od c
ondi
tion
Cor
als-
139
spec
ies,
79 g
ener
a, s
eagr
ass-
9 sp
ecie
s79
5 km
≈ co
ral r
eefs
; isl
ands
for
este
d
Hig
h pr
imar
y an
d se
cond
ary
prod
uctiv
ity, n
utri
ent r
ich
ecos
yste
mIm
port
ant f
eedi
ng g
roun
d fo
r se
a bi
rds,
wha
le s
hark
s an
d la
rge
wha
les,
incl
udin
g bl
ue w
hale
, Bry
de’s
wha
le a
nd s
perm
wha
leB
reed
ing
grou
nd f
or s
perm
wha
les
and
larg
e ag
greg
atio
ns o
fsm
all c
etac
eans
Rel
ativ
ely
inta
ct m
angr
ove
and
reef
sys
tem
s as
wel
l as
a di
vers
eas
sem
blag
e of
isla
nds
unin
habi
ted
by h
uman
s T
he te
rres
tria
l are
a of
Pig
eon
Isla
nd h
as a
lrea
dy b
een
affo
rded
prot
ecte
d st
atus
und
er n
atio
nal l
egis
latio
n bu
t not
the
surr
ound
ing
reef
sT
rinc
omal
ee B
ay is
an
anci
ent h
arbo
ur (
> 25
00 y
ears
old
) an
d a
mar
ine
arch
aeol
ogic
al s
ite c
onta
inin
g m
any
ship
wre
cks
of im
por-
tanc
e
Tran
s-b
ou
nd
ary
/Se
rial
?C
ould
be
cons
i-de
red
as p
art o
fan
And
aman
Sea
Isla
ndtr
ansb
ound
ary
nom
inat
ion
Cou
ld b
e co
nsi-
dere
d as
par
t of
an A
ndam
anSe
a Is
land
tran
sbou
ndar
yno
min
atio
n
Site
s in
clu
de
dw
ith
in
Bay
of
Ben
gal a
ndth
e A
ndam
an S
ea
Wes
tern
Bou
ndar
yof
And
aman
Sea
Mah
awel
i Riv
er(d
rain
s th
e hi
gh-
land
s of
sou
ther
nSr
i Lan
ka)
Nam
e o
fsi
te -
cou
n-
try
Mer
gui
Arc
hipe
lago
,M
yanm
ar
And
aman
and
Nic
obar
Isl
ands
,In
dia
Tri
ncom
alee
Bay
and
Pige
ons
Isla
nds,
Sri
Lan
ka
78
Fe
asib
ility
of
no
min
a-ti
on
Exi
stin
g pr
otec
ted
area
with
man
agem
ent p
lan
Loc
al c
omm
unity
(in
clud
ing
tra-
ditio
nal a
nd c
omm
erci
al f
ishe
rs)
supp
ort a
nd w
ork
tow
ards
pro
tect
ion
Maj
or
thre
ats
Out
side
of
the
Nat
iona
l
Park
ther
e is
con
side
rabl
e
hum
an p
ress
ure
on th
e
isla
nds,
and
min
ing
of c
oral
,
dred
ging
and
sed
imen
tatio
n
of c
oral
s ar
e on
goin
g is
sues
Incr
easi
ng in
dust
rial
fis
-
hery
pre
ssur
e
Pote
ntia
l for
rap
id d
eve-
lopm
ent (
plan
s fo
r po
rt
deve
lopm
ent a
nd to
uris
m
infr
astr
uctu
re)
Ou
tsta
nd
ing
Un
ive
rsal
Bio
div
ers
ity
Val
ue
s
Mar
ine
biod
iver
sity
is a
bund
ant a
nd s
pect
acul
ar w
ith
man
y ch
arac
teri
stic
spe
cies
, end
ange
red
mar
ine
faun
a,
luxu
rian
t cor
al a
ssem
blag
es—
abou
t 105
cor
al s
peci
es
belo
ngin
g to
37
gene
ra h
ave
been
rec
orde
d, 1
14 s
peci
es
of s
ea w
eeds
and
6 s
peci
es o
f se
a gr
asse
s, 4
pel
agic
spec
ies
of s
ea b
irds
- S
ooty
Ter
n , N
oddy
Ter
n, L
arge
Cre
sted
Ter
n , a
nd B
row
nwin
ged
Tern
, ne
st a
nd r
oost
in la
rge
colo
nies
, par
ticul
arly
on
Pitti
Isl
and
Fish
com
pris
es 6
03 s
peci
es, o
f w
hich
hal
f ar
e ‘o
rna-
men
tal’
vari
etie
s; S
kipj
ack
Tun
a fo
rms
the
maj
or f
ishe
-
ry o
f th
e is
land
s
Four
spe
cies
of
turt
le, t
he O
live
Rid
ley,
the
Lea
ther
back
, Haw
ksbi
ll, a
nd G
reen
Tur
tle o
ccur
in th
e
Lak
shad
wee
ps
One
dec
lare
d N
atio
nal P
ark,
and
vis
itatio
n ap
pear
s
wel
l con
trol
led
Hig
h ec
olog
ical
sig
nifi
canc
e
19 s
peci
es o
f en
dem
ic p
lant
s, a
nd 8
nat
iona
lly t
hrea
-
tene
d pl
ant
spec
ies
(ie,
Lum
nitz
era
litto
rea
– a
thre
ate-
ned
man
grov
e sp
ecie
s, th
e on
ly lo
catio
n in
Sri
Lan
ka)
20 s
peci
es o
f en
dem
ic v
erte
brat
es,
and
30 s
peci
es o
f
natio
nally
thre
aten
ed v
erte
brat
es
13 s
peci
es o
f m
igra
tory
bir
ds
< 10
00 h
a, b
ut in
a s
tate
of
natu
raln
ess,
with
a v
arie
ty
of in
tact
hab
itats
and
veg
etat
ion
type
s
Bio
-cul
tura
l lan
dsca
pe
Tran
s-b
ou
nd
ary
/Se
rial
?C
ould
be
cons
i-de
red
as p
art o
fan
Ind
ian
Oce
ans
Ato
llsse
rial
nom
ina-
tion
Site
s in
clu
-d
ed
wit
hin
36 is
land
s an
dla
goon
s (i
nclu
ding
11 m
ajor
one
s) f
our
larg
e su
bmer
ged
reef
s, a
nd f
ive
larg
esu
bmer
ged
shal
low
wat
er b
anks
Nam
e o
fsi
te -
cou
n-
try
Lak
shad
wee
ps,
Indi
a
Mad
ugan
gaE
stua
ry, S
riL
anka
79
The
Gul
f of
Man
nar
was
dec
lare
d
a B
iosp
here
Res
erve
in 1
989
for
its
outs
tand
ing
natu
ral v
alue
Res
ourc
e m
anag
emen
t sys
tem
s
deve
lope
d to
impr
ove
the
cons
erva
-
tion
and
envi
ronm
enta
l man
agem
ent
of th
e ar
ea
Com
mitm
ent o
f lo
cal a
nd n
atio
nal
gove
rnm
ent a
nd c
omm
unity
to d
eve-
lop
and
impl
emen
t the
Bio
sphe
re
Res
erve
indi
cate
s th
at W
orld
Her
itage
insc
ript
ion
may
be
feas
ible
Aus
tral
ia h
as a
str
ong
com
mit-
men
t to
Wor
ld H
erita
ge, a
rea
coul
d
be s
uppo
rted
for
insc
ript
ion
for
mul
ti-si
te li
stin
g
Evi
denc
e of
200
spe
cies
bein
g co
mm
erci
ally
exp
loi-
ted
and
123
spec
ies
whi
ch
are
belie
ved
to b
e vu
lner
a-
ble
or e
ndan
gere
d
Som
e re
efs
and
surr
oun-
ding
coa
stal
eco
syst
ems
are
in d
eclin
e be
caus
e of
cor
al
blea
chin
g, c
oral
min
ing,
dest
ruct
ive
fish
ing,
ove
r
expl
oita
tion,
land
bas
ed p
ol-
lutio
n
Fis
h,
clam
s an
d ot
her
mar
ine
reso
urce
s ha
ve b
een
heav
ily
expl
oite
d by
th
e
loca
l po
pula
tion
, bu
t th
e
impa
ct o
f th
is o
n th
e m
arin
e
habi
tats
is u
nkno
wn
The
ter
rest
rial
veg
etat
ion
of
Sou
th
Kee
ling
Is
land
s
have
bee
n he
avily
im
pact
ed
by
hum
an
occu
patio
n,
and
ther
e ar
e a
num
ber
of i
ntro
-
duce
d pl
ants
an
d an
imal
s
that
, to
geth
er w
ith c
ocon
ut
plan
tati
ons,
ha
ve
grea
tly
chan
ged
the
isla
nd f
lora
and
faun
a
3 m
ajor
mar
ine
habi
tat
type
s—co
ral
reef
s, s
eagr
asse
s
and
man
grov
es, r
ecog
nize
d fo
r its
bio
dive
rsity
128
spec
ies
of c
oral
, 12
spec
ies
of s
eagr
ass,
9 s
peci
es
of m
angr
oves
and
man
y m
ore
spec
ies
of a
ssoc
iate
d fl
ora
and
faun
a
Hab
itat f
or d
ugon
g an
d ce
tace
ans
Spec
ies
rich
ness
: 55
0 sp
ecie
s of
fis
h an
d 99
spe
cies
of c
oral
s ar
e re
cord
ed f
rom
the
mar
ine
habi
tats
, of
the
99 c
oral
spe
cies
, tw
o ar
e po
ssib
ly e
ndem
ic s
peci
es, a
nd
all b
ut 1
2 ar
e al
so f
ound
in W
este
rn A
ustr
alia
Cou
ld b
e co
nsi-
dere
d as
par
t of
an I
ndia
nO
cean
s A
tolls
seri
al n
omin
a-tio
n
21 u
ninh
abite
dis
land
s
20 is
land
s
Gul
f of
Man
nar,
Indi
a
Coc
os K
eelin
gIs
land
s, A
ustr
alia
80
Fe
asib
ility
of
no
min
a-ti
on
The
lack
of
gove
rnm
ent c
omm
it-
men
t to
impl
emen
t eff
ectiv
e m
arin
e
cons
erva
tion
to d
ate
indi
cate
s th
at
desp
ite th
e gl
obal
bio
dive
rsity
sig
ni-
fica
nce,
it is
unl
ikel
y th
at th
e
Mal
dive
s w
ill b
e re
cept
ive
to W
orld
Her
itage
insc
ript
ion
that
req
uire
s
prot
ectio
n of
nat
ural
mar
ine
valu
es
in th
e at
olls
Maj
or
thre
ats
No
prot
ecte
d is
land
are
as,
or a
reas
of
mar
ine
habi
tat,
that
exi
st to
sam
ple
the
Mal
dive
s ec
osys
tem
s fo
r
cons
erva
tion
purp
oses
Des
truc
tive
fish
ing
prac
ti-
ces,
littl
e ef
fect
ive
com
-
plia
nce
for
spec
ies
prot
ec-
tion
in f
ishe
ries
Ou
tsta
nd
ing
Un
ive
rsal
Bio
div
ers
ity
Val
ue
s
One
of
the
mos
t spe
cies
ric
h m
arin
e ar
eas
with
in th
e
regi
on
500
spec
ies
of te
rres
tria
l hig
her
plan
ts, o
f w
hich
mor
e th
an 3
00 a
re u
sed
in tr
aditi
onal
med
icin
al p
ract
i-
ce, a
nd m
ore
than
70
are
ende
mic
to th
e M
aldi
ves
Anu
mbe
r of
the
atol
ls h
ave
isla
nds
with
maj
or n
atu-
ral f
resh
wat
er la
kes
and
wet
land
s, th
at a
re r
efug
es f
or a
rang
e of
bir
ds
Cor
al r
eefs
con
tain
sig
nifi
cant
gen
etic
and
bio
chem
i-
cal r
esou
rces
Det
aile
d bi
odiv
ersi
ty in
vent
ory
has
not b
een
unde
rta-
ken,
it is
est
imat
ed th
at th
ere
are
abou
t 250
spe
cies
of
scle
ract
inia
n co
rals
, a to
tal o
f 55
gen
era
of h
erm
atyp
ic
cora
ls h
ave
been
rec
orde
d in
the
sout
h an
d 41
gen
era
from
the
nort
h of
the
arch
ipel
ago
Fish
pop
ulat
ions
are
bot
h di
vers
e an
d ex
trem
ely
abun
dant
, ove
r 12
00 f
ish
spec
ies
have
bee
n re
cord
ed
for
the
reef
s an
d su
rrou
ndin
g ar
eas
Inve
rteb
rate
fau
na is
larg
ely
undo
cum
ente
d bu
t pro
-
visi
onal
est
imat
es in
dica
te th
at th
ere
are
betw
een
100-
200
spon
ges,
ove
r 10
00 c
rust
acea
, 500
mol
lusc
s an
d
100
echi
node
rms
Five
spe
cies
of
turt
le a
nd a
num
ber
of o
ther
glo
bally
and
loca
lly th
reat
ened
mar
ine
spec
ies
such
as
wha
les
and
wha
le s
hark
s, b
lack
cor
al, d
olph
ins,
pea
rl o
yste
rs,
ston
y co
rals
, eel
s, s
kate
s an
d ra
ys, p
arro
t fis
h, b
ait f
ish,
troc
hus
shel
ls, t
rito
n sh
ells
, and
puf
fer
fish
hav
e be
en
decl
ared
as
prot
ecte
d sp
ecie
s
23 s
peci
es o
f bi
rds
have
bee
n de
clar
ed a
s pr
otec
ted
spec
ies
15 s
mal
l mar
ine
prot
ecte
d ar
eas,
whe
re f
ishi
ng is
proh
ibite
d
Tran
s-b
ou
nd
ary
/Se
rial
?C
ould
be
cons
i-de
red
as p
art o
fan
Ind
ian
Oce
ans
Ato
llsse
rial
nom
ina-
tion
Site
s in
clu
-d
ed
wit
hin
Seri
es o
f 26
arc
he-
typa
l Ind
ian
Oce
anat
olls
Nam
e o
fsi
te -
cou
n-
try
Mal
dive
s
81
Man
aged
by
Bri
tish
Indi
an O
cean
Terr
itori
es (
UK
), w
ith in
tent
ion
to
achi
eve
high
leve
ls o
f co
nser
vatio
n;
subs
tant
ial s
take
hold
er in
tere
st in
Wor
ld H
erita
ge n
omin
atio
n, b
ut
stro
ng in
tera
ctio
n w
ith r
egio
nal
secu
rity
act
iviti
es c
urre
ntly
pre
clu-
des
a no
min
atio
n
Exc
essi
ve f
ishi
ng (
step
s
are
now
bei
ng ta
ken
to r
edu-
ce) L
ittle
exi
stin
g m
anag
e-
men
t of
the
arch
ipel
ago
othe
r th
an o
f D
iego
Gar
cia
Hig
hest
rec
orde
d di
vers
ity o
f co
rals
(ab
out 2
20 s
pe-
cies
in 5
8 ge
nera
) in
the
cent
ral I
ndia
n O
cean
, and
has
seve
ral e
ndem
ic c
oral
spe
cies
, fis
h di
vers
ity is
doc
u-
men
ted
as 7
84 s
peci
es, w
ith 3
spe
cies
end
emic
to
Cha
gos,
and
a f
urth
er 4
5 sp
ecie
s re
pres
entin
g sp
ecie
s
conf
ined
to th
e In
dian
Oce
an
Glo
bally
impo
rtan
t for
sea
bird
s, tu
rtle
s an
d ot
her
mar
ine
spec
ies
17 p
an-t
ropi
cal I
ndia
n O
cean
sea
bird
s, m
ost d
iver
se
bree
ding
sea
bird
com
mun
ity in
the
regi
on, (
may
be
of
cruc
ial s
igni
fica
nce
to th
e fi
shin
g co
mm
uniti
es o
f
Mal
dive
s an
d Se
yche
lles)
Bea
ches
sig
nifi
cant
nes
ting
site
s fo
r bo
th g
reen
and
haw
ksbi
ll tu
rtle
s
Cou
ld b
e co
nsi-
dere
d as
par
t of
an I
ndia
nO
cean
s A
tolls
seri
al n
omin
a-tio
n
5 em
erge
nt a
tolls
Cha
gos
Arc
hipe
lago
,B
ritis
h In
dian
Oce
an T
erri
tory
(UK
)
82
Potential Multi-site Listings
Indian Ocean Atolls Chagos (UK)
Lakshadweeps (India)
Maldives, Cocos Keeling (Australia)
The atolls of the central Indian Ocean arethe archetypal atolls, and Chagos, Lakshadweeps,and Cocos Keeling are good representative exam-ples of 3 different aspects of the ecology, geo-morphology, evolutionary development and sub-sistence uses of this important global ecosystemtype. Charles Darwin formulated his ideas of atolldevelopment from his visit in the Beagle to theCocos Keeling Islands. The marine ecosystemsof Cocos Keeling and Chagos are in excellentcondition, and represent very important aspects ofglobal coral and other marine and terrestrial taxadiversity in the Indian Ocean. The subsistenceuse of atoll resources are well demonstrated bycommunities in the Lakshadweeps and theMaldives. A recent analysis identified this area(‘North Indian Ocean’)as a crucial global centreof multi-taxon endemism for tropical reef systems(Roberts et al. 2002). These atolls, as a group,also contain an important representation of amajor atoll-based cultural landscape, particularlytraditional subsistence fishing and subsistenceatoll-based agricultural practices.
These atolls, as expressions of the globallyunique biodiversity, geomorphic form and evolu-tion patterns of Indian Ocean atolls, would satisfyall of the natural and cultural criteria for WorldHeritage inscription.
Andaman Sea Islands: Mergui Islands(Myanmar)
Mu Ko Similan NationalPark and Mu KoSurin National Park (Thailand)
Similan and Surin are about 50 km off thecoast of Thailand in the Andaman Sea, and havebeen consistently identified as of high regionalpriority for biodiversity conservation. This groupof islands are part of a semi-continuous complexof more than 1,000 islands that lie to the west ofthe Malay Peninsula, off Myanmar and Thailand.While there is little available knowledge of thebiodiversity of the Mergui Archipelago(Myanmar), pressures on the biodiversity up untilrecently are thought to have been limited,although now are beginning to increase as visita-tion is increasing, and so these islands are presu-med to be in good condition. Anecdotal reportsfrom dive tourists support this assumption. Whilethe biodiversity is largely unknown, the intactvegetation on such an array of islands, with asso-ciated marine habitats and spectacular geomor-phology, is likely to be of high global biodiversi-ty significance. The biodiversity values of this setof forested continental islands, and the limitedprotection afforded such coastal islands elsewhe-re in the region, indicates that they are likely to beof global priority and form a potentially importanttransboundary World Heritage inscription.
83
References South East Asia:
Abbot, R.T. 1960. The genus Strombus inthe Indo-Pacific. Indo-Pacific Mollusca,1(2):33-146.
Allen, G.R. 1985. Butterfly and angelfishesof the world. Vol. 2. Mergus Publishers,Melle. 217p.
Barber,P.H., Palumbi, S.R., Erdmann, M.V.& Moosa, M.K. 2000. A marine Wallace’sline? Nature, 406: 682-683.
Briggs, J.C. 1974. Marine zoogeography.McGraw-Hill, N.Y.
Chou, L.M., Paphavasit, N., Kastoro, W.W.,Narcorda, H.M.E., Othman, B.H.R., Loo,M.G.K. & Soedibjo, B.S. 1994. Soft-bottommacrobenthic communities of the ASEANregion and the influence of associated mari-ne ecosystems. In: Wilkinson, C.R., Sudara,S. & Chou, L.M. (Eds.), Proceedings, ThirdASEAN-Australia Symposium on LivingCoastal Resources, 16-20 May 1994,Bangkok. Australian Institute of MarineScience, Townsville. Pp. 325-331.
Erdmann, M.V. & Moosa, M.K. 1999. Anew discovered home for “old fourlegs”: thediscovery of an Indonesian living coela-canth. Pesisir dan Lautan, 2(1): 31-35.
Fortes, M.D. 1995. Seagrasses of East Asia:environmental and management perspecti-ves. RCU/EAS Technical Resports Series.No. 6. United Nations EnvironmentProgramme, Bangkok. 81 p.
IUCN/UNEP 1985. Management andconservation of renewable marine resourcesin the East Asian Seas region. UNEPRegional Seas Reports and Studies No. 65.United Nations Environment Programme.86 p.
Japar, S.B. 1994. Mangrove plant resourcesin the ASEAN region. In: Wilkinson, C.R.,Sudara, S. & Chou, L.M. (Eds.),Proceedings, Third ASEAN-AustraliaSymposium on Living Coastal Resources,16-20 May, 1994, Bangkok. AustralianInstitute of Marine Science, Townsville. Pp.123-138.
Kelleher, G., Bleakley, C. & Wells, S. (Eds.).1995. A global representative system ofmarine protected areas. Vol. 3, Central
Indian Ocean, Arabian Seas, East Africa andEast Asian Seas. The World Bank,Washington, D.C. 147p.
Kiswara, W. 1994. A review: seagrass eco-system studies in Indonesian waters. In:Wilkinson, C.R., Sudara, S. & Chou, L.M.(Eds.), Proceedings, Third ASEAN-Australia Symposium on Living CoastalResources, 16-20 May 1994, Bangkok.Australian Institute of Marine Science,Townsville. Pp. 259-281.
Low, J.K.Y., Arshad, A. & Lim, K.H. 1994.Mangroves as a habitat for endangered spe-cies and biodiversity conservation. In:Wilkinson, C.R., Sudara, S. & Chou, L.M.(Eds.), Proceedings, Third ASEAN-Australia Symposium on Living CoastalResources, 16-20 May 1994, Bangkok.Australian Institute of Marine Science,Townsville. Pp. 157-169.
McManus, J.W. 1992. The Spratley Islands:a marine park alternative. NAGA, TheICLARM Quarterly (July): 4-8.
Myers, R.F. 1991. Micronesian reef fishes: apractical guide to the identification of theinshore marine fishes of the tropical centraland western Pacific. Second edition. CoralGraphics, Guam. 301p.
Pet, J.S. & Yeager, C. (Editors). 25 YearMaster Plan for Management, 2000-2025,Komodo National Park. Books 1-3. KomodoNational Park’s Authority, Indonesia.
Rosewater, J.1972. The family Littorinidaein the Indo-Pacific. Part ll. The subfamiliesTectariinae and Echininae. Indo-PacificMollusca, 2(12): 507-534.
Singh, H.R., Chong, V.C., Sasekumar, A. &Lim, K.H. 1994. Value of mangroves as nur-sery and feeding grounds. In: Wilkinson,C.R., Sudara, S. & Chou, L.M. (Eds.),Proceedings, Third ASEAN-AustraliaSymposium on Living Coastal Resources,16-20 May 1994, Bangkok. AustralianInstitute of Marine Science, Townsville. Pp.105-116.
Sudara, S., Nateekarnjanalarp, S.,Thanrongnawasawat, S, Satumanaptan, S. &Chindonnirat, W. 1991. Survey of faunaassociated with the seagrass community onAow Khung Krabane, Chantaburi, Thailand.In: Alcala, A.C. (Ed.), Proceedings of theRegional Symposium on Living Resources
in Coastal Areas, Manila. University of thePhilippines, Manila. Pp. 347-362.
UNEP. 1996. Report of the workshop on thebiology and conservation of small cetaceansand dugongs of Southeast Asia.UNEP(W)/EAS WG. 1/2. United NationsEnvironment Programme, Bangkok. 101p.
Veron, J.E.N. 1995. Corals in space andtime: biogeography and evolution of theScleractinia. UNSW Press, Sydney. 321p.
Voris, H.K. 1972. The role of sea snakes(Hydrophiidae) in the trophic structure ofcoastal ocean communities. Journal of theMarine Biological Association ofIndia,14(2):429-442.
Wallace, C.C. 1994. New species and a newspecies-group of the coral Genus Acropora(Scleractinia: Astrocoeniina: Acroporidae)from Indo-Pacific locations. InvertebrateTaxonomy, 8: 961-988.
References Pacific:
Birkeland, C. and H. Manner (eds) (1989).Resource Survey of the Ngerukewid IslandsWildlife Preserve, Republic of Palau. SouthPacific Regional Environment Programme,Noumea, 193pp.
Cassell, J., H. Adelbai, and D.Otobed.(1992). Comprehensive ConservationStrategy for the Republic of Palau.
Dahl, A. 1986. Review of the ProtectedAreas System in Oceania. UNEP/IUCN,Gland Switzerland. 239pp.
Freifeld, H. and D. Otobed. (1997).’ A preli-minary Wildlife Management Plan for theRepublic of Palau. Vertebrates’. Bureau ofNatural Resources and Development..138pp.
IUCN. 1991. IIUCN Directory of ProtectedAreas in Oceania. Prepared by the WorldConservation Monitoring Centre. IUCN,Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.Xxii+447p.Kelleher, G. Bleakey, C, and Wells, S. 1995.(principal eds.). A Global RepresentativeSystem of Marine Protected Areas. Vol. IV.
Leary. T. 1991. “Regional marine turtleconservation program (Progress report –Solomon Islands Nov. 1990 – Aug. 1991)”,
Annex 4. References
84
Unpublished report Environment andConservation Division, MNR, Honiara.
Maragos, J.E., C. Birkeland, C Cook, K. DesRochers, R. Di Rosa, T.J. Donaldson, S.H.Geermans, M Guilbeaux, H. Hirsh,L.Honigman, N, Idechong, P.S. Lobel,E.Matthews, K.J.McDermid, K.Z. Meier, R.Myers, D.Otobed, R.H.Richmond, B.Smith,R.Smith, (1994). Marine and Coastal AreaSurvey of the Main Palau Islands: Part 2Rapid Ecological Assessment Synthesisreport. CORIAL, Honolulu, and The NatureConservancy, Pacific Region.
Merlin, M.; Taulung, R. & Juvik,J., SahkKap ac Kain in Can Kosrae: Plants andEnvironments of Kosrae. East-West Center,Honolulu Hawaii. 1993.
Messel, H. and F.W.King (1991). Survey ofcrocodile populations of the Republic ofPalau, Caroline Islands, Pacific Ocean, 8 –24 June 1991. Report to the Government ofthe Republic of Palau. 21pp.
Perry, R. and M. Garnett. 1998. TheEnvironment of Christmas Island. BirdLifeInternational. Cambridge UK. 36pp.
Pratt, H.D., Bruner, P.L. and Berrett,D.G.1987. A field guide to the birds of Hawaiiand the tropical Pacific. PrincetonUniversity Press, Princeton.
Sesega, S. 1998. Kiritimati AtollConservation Area Project – CommunityConsultation Report. Unpublished report.SPREP. 12pp.
Shea, Eileen.L. 2001. Preparing for aChanging Climate. A report of the PacificIslands Regional Assessment Group. East-West Center. 101pp.
SPREP. 1996. Kiritimati Atoll ConservationArea – Preparatory Project Document.SPREP. 93pp.
Thaman, R.R., Clarke, W.C., Eritaia, B.Tebano,T.and Taniera, T. 1995. NorthTarawa Conservation Area ProjectPreparatory Document. Environment Unit,Mministry of Environment and SocialDevelopment, Tarawa. Unpl. Report. 93pp.
Thaman, R. 1999. “Pacific IslandsBiodiversity on the Eve of the 21st Century:Current Status and Challenges for itsConservation and Sustainable Use.” Paperpresented at the XIX Pacific ScienceCongress on “Science for Pacific Posterity:Environments, Resources and Welfare ofPacific Peoples.” Sydney, Australia, 4 – 9July 1999.
Thorsell, J. (1989). “Threatened Spaces andMissing Links: Protecting the Biodiversity
of Oceania”. Proceedings of the FourthSouth Pacific Conference on NatureConservation and Protected Areas. Vol II:Papers – keynotes, Themes and CaseStudies. SPREP. 1990.
Toloa, F. Personal Communication reAleipata IUCN/World Bank MarineProtected Area Project. Feb, 2002.
Vaughn. P.C.M. 1981. “Marine turtles: areview of their status and management in theSolomon Islands.” Fisheries Division,MNR, Honiara.
Watling. D. 1999. Review of the Status ofAvifauna Conservation – Kiritimati Atoll,Kiribati. Unpl. Report. Environmentalconsultants Fiji. 53pp.
Wells, Susan. & Jenkins, Martin D. ‘CoralReefs of the World : Volume 3 - Central andWestern Pacific’, UNEP/IUCN, NairobiKenya, 1988.
References Latin America and theCaribbean:
Bezaury J, García G, Gutiérrez D, Lara Mand Loreto R. M. 1992-2000 . Mapas deldiagnostico integrado de la costa deQuintana Roo. 1992-2000.
Bezaury, J.E. , R. Macias Ordoñez, G.García Beltran, G. Castillo Arenas, N. PardoCaicedo, R. Ibarra Navarro, A. LoretoViruel.1998. International Coral ReefInitiative: the status of coral reefs inMerxico and the U.S. Gulf of Mexico (geo-graphy, ecology, management, legislation,monitoring and bibliography).Amigos deSian Ka’an, Cancun, Mexico.
Chiappone, M. (ed.) 2001a. FisheriesInvestigations and ManagementImplications in Marine Protected Areas ofthe Caribbean. A case study of ParqueNacional del Este, Dominican Republic.Part 1 of 3 in a series on science tools formarine park management. Publications forCapacity Building, The NatureConservancy, 144 pp. + A-I annexes.
Chiappone, M. (ed.) 2001 b. Water QualityConservation in Marine Protected Areas. Acase study of Parque Nacional del Este,Dominican Republic. Part 2 of a series of 3science tools for marine park management.Publications for Capacity Building, TheNature Conservancy 135 pages, + A-Hannexes.
Chiappone, M. (ed.) 2001 c. Coral Reefconservation in Marine Protected Areas. Acase study of Parque Nacional del Este,Dominican Republic. Publications forCapacity Building, The Nature
Conservancy. Part 3 of a series of 3 sciencetools for marine park management.
Green, E. 2001. A Global Overview ofTropical Marine, Coastal and Small IslandEcosystems and the World Heritage List.Review paper.
Heyman, W. and B. Kjerfve. 2001. The Gulfof Honduras. In Coastal marine ecosystemsof Latin America. Ecol. Studies, 144: 17-32.
IUCN 1998. 1997 United Nations List ofProtected Areas. Prepared by UNEP-WCMC and WCPA. IUCN, Gland,Switzerland. 1xii + 412pp.
IUCN. 1997. A global overview of wetlandand marine protected areas on the worldheritage list. A contribution to the GlobalTheme Study of World Heritage NaturalSites, Natural Heritage Programme, IUCN,Gland, Switzerland. September 1997.
IUCN. 1997. A global overview of wetlandand marine protected areas on the worldheritage list. A contribution to the GlobalTheme Study of World Heritage NaturalSites, Natural Heritage Programme, IUCN,Gland, Switzerland. September 1997.
Kramer, P.A. and P.R. Kramer (ed. MMcField). 2002. Ecoregional conservationPlanning for the Mesoamerica CaribbeanReef. Washington D.C., World WildlifeFund, 140pp.
Roberts C. M., C.J. McClean, J.E.N. Veron,J. P. Hawkins, G. R. Allen, D. E. McAllister,C. G. Mittermeier, F. W. Schueler, M.Spalding, F. Wells, C. Vynne, T. B. Werner.2001. Marine biodiversity hotspots andconservation priorities for tropical reefs.Science, 295: 1280-1284
Roberts, C.M., J.A. Bohnsack, F. Gell, J.P.Hawkins, R. Goodridge. 2000. Effects ofmarine reserves on adjacent fisheries.Science, 294: 1920-1922
Spalding M.D., C. Ravilious C and E.P.Green. 2001. World Atlas of Coral Reefs.Prepared at the UNEP-World ConservationMonitoring Centre. University of CaliforniaPress, Berkeley, USA (2001). World Atlas ofCoral Reefs. Prepared at the UNEP-WorldConservation Monitoring Centre. Universityof California Press, Berkeley, USA
Sullivan Sealey, K. and G. Bustamante.1999. Setting geographic priorities for mari-ne conservation in Latin America and theCaribbean. The Nature Conservancy,Arlington, Virginia, 125pp.
The UNEP-WCMC/WCPA World Databaseon Protected Areas UNEP-WCMC Natural site datasheets for
85
the World Heritage Conventionhttp://www.unesco.org/whc/nwhc/pages/sites/main.htm
UNEP-WCMC Natural site datasheets forthe World Heritage Convention.http://www.unesco.org/whc/nwhc/pages/sites/main.htmNovember 2000.WWF. Global 200: a blueprint for living pla-nethttp://www.panda.org/resources/program-mes/global200/pages/terra.htm
Individual sources of information for diffe-rent sites: Van’t Hoff, T. (Saba), TimTurnbull (Andros Island, The Bahamas);Patricia Montero Cunningham (Brazil);Reinaldo Estrada and Arsenio Areces(Cuba); Sixto Inchaustegui and Ivonne Arias(Parque Jaragua, Dominican Republic); JuanBezaury (Mexico), Robin Mahon (St.Vincent and The Grenadines), Juan C.Fernandez and Juan Posada (Los Roques,Venezuela), William Heyman and JanetGibson (Belize).
References West Africa:
Allersma, E. and Tilmans, W. K., 1993.Coastal conditions in West Africa – Areview. Ocean and Coastal Mangt. 19, 199-240.
Awosika, L. F. and Ibe, A. C., 1998. Coastalcirculation dynamics in the Gulf of Guinea:Important subsets of the Large marineEcosystem Project. In: Ibe and Zabi (eds),State of the Coastal and marine Environmentof the Gulf of Guinea. UNIDO/GEF GOG-LME Project, pp 111-118.
Biney, C. A., de Graft-Johnson, K. A. A. andOpoku, A. A. The State of Wetlands inGhana. Institute of Aquatic Biology, Ghana,Tech. Rep. 144, 79pp. A Report for Friendsof the Earth, Ghana.
Elder, D. and Pernetta, J., 1991. Oceans: AMitchell-Beazley World Conservation Atlas.The World Conservation Union, Mitchell-Beazley Publishers, London, UK.
FAO, 2000. FISHTAT Plus. A PC System forthe Extended Time Series of Global Catches.FAO FisheriesDepartment, Rome, Italy.
Global Environmental Facility/Unitednations Environment Programme, 2001. TheGuinea Current Large MarineEcosystem – Review of ExistingInformation and recommendations onTransboundary Priority Issues (Draft), 93pp.
Green, E., 2001. A Global Overview ofTropical Marine, Coastal and Small IslandEcosystems and the World Heritage List.UNEP-WCMC, 48pp.
Ibe A. C. and Quelennac, 1989.Methodology for Assessment and Conrol ofCoastal Erosion in West and Central Africa.UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies,No. 107.
IUCN, 1986.The IUCN Red List ofThreatened Animals. The IUCNConservation Monitoring Centre,Cambridge, UK.
Kouassi, A. M. and Biney, C. A., 1999.Overview of the marine environment pro-blems of the West and Central Africanregion. Ocean and Coastal Mangt. 42, 71-76.
Mahe, G., 1998. Freshwater yields to theAtlantic Ocean: Local and regional varia-tions from Senegal to Angola. CEOSWorkshop on Global versus Local Changesin Upwelling Systems. Monterey,California, USA.
Ntiamoah-Baidu, Y. and Hepburn, I. R.,1988. Wintering Waders in Coastal Ghana.RSPB Cons. Rev. 24, 46-62.
Ntiamoah-Baidu, Y. and Gordon, C., 1991.Coastal Wetlands Management Plans:Ghana. Environmental Protection Council,Ghana and World Bank.
Piersma, T. and Ntiamoah-Baidu, Y.. 1995.Waterbird Ecology and the management ofCoastal Wetlands in Ghana. Ghana CoastalWetlands Management project, NetherlandsInstitute for Sea Research. NIO Report1995-6.
Ricerca e Cooperazione, 2000. Coastal zoneRestoration and Management Project,Princess Town and Aketekye.Summary Report: Biodiversity Assessmentand Baseline Studies on pollution. Accra,Ghana. 33pp.World Bank, 1994. Africa: A Framework forIntegrated Coastal Zone management, 139pp.
World Bank, 1995. Defining anEnvironmental Strategy for the Niger DeltaVol. 1, 150 pp.
References East Africa:
CEC. 1992. Mangroves of Africa andMadagascar. Brussels: Directorate-Generalfor Development, Commission of theEuropean Communities (CEC), ECSCC-EEC-EAEC.
Alusa, A.L. and Ogallo, L.J. (1992)
Implications of expected climate change inthe East African Coastal Region: An over-view. UNEP Regional Seas Reports andStudies 149. Nairobi.
Briggs, J.C. 1974. Marine biogeography.New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Cooke, A. J., 1996. Les ilôts. Définition etdélimitation des zones sensibles et lignesdirectrices pour la préparation des étudesd’impact environnemental. Knowledge andEffective Policies for EnvironmentalManagement (KEPEM). Report No. 39d,November 1996. 41 pp, maps + islandinventory.
Dutton, P. 1994. Past and present status ofthe Dugong, Dugong dugon in the BazarutoArchipelago and other known habitats on theMozambique coast. Paper presented at theFirst International Manatee and DugongResearch Conference. Gainsville, FL.
Dutton, P. and Zolho, R. 1989. Conservationmaster plan for the sustainable developmentof the Bazaruto Archipelago, Republic ofMozambique. Report for the Ministry ofAgriculture, Mozambique. 96 pp.
Engdahl, S. & Motta, H, 2000, (ed)Proceedings from the Regional Workshopon the Nomination of Word Natural HeritageSites, UNESCO/ MICOA 14
Fatouma, A.A., Bicarima, A. and Ahamada,S. 2000 Report on the state of managementof protected marine areas in Comoros.Unpublished Report.
Fisher, P, and Spalding, M.D. 1993.Protected areas with mangrove habitat.Unpublished report to World ConservationMonitoring Centre, U.K.
GBRMPA/WB/IUCN. 1995 A global repre-sentative system of marine protected areas.Vol. III. Central Indian Ocean, Arabian Seas,East Africa and East Asian Seas. GreatBarrier Reef Marine Park Authority, WorldBank and IUCN. Environmental DepartmentWorld Bank, 1818 H Street, N.W.,Washington D.C. 20433, USA.
GEF. 1992. Seychelles: BiodiversityConservation and Marine PollutionAbatement Project. Washington, D.C:Worldbank.
Harmelin-Vivien, M.L. 1977. Ecologicaldistribution of fishes on the outer slope ofTulear reef (Madagascar). Proc. Of 3rdInternational Coral Reef Symposium,Miami.
IUCN/UNEP. 1984a. Marine and coastalconservation in the East African region.UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies
86
39. Gland, Switzerland.IUCN/UNEP. 1984b. Marine and coastalconservation in the East African region:National reports. UNEP Regional SeasReports and Studies 50. Gland, Switzerland.
IUCN/UNEP. 1985. Management andconservation of renewable marine resourcesin the Eastern African region. UNEPRegional Seas Reports and Studies 66.Gland, Switzerland.
IUCN/UNEP. 2001. Conservation of Coastaland Marine Biodiversity in the EasternAfrica Region: Progress in Implementationof the Jakarta Mandate. IUCN EasternAfrica Regional Office, P.O. Box 68200,Nairobi, Kenya. Email: [email protected]
Linden, O. and Sporring N. 1999. CoralReef Degradation in the Indian Ocean:Status Reports and Presentations 1999.CORDIO/SAREC Marine Science Program,Stockholm. 108pp.
Lutjeharms, J. R. E., Wedepohl, P. M. andMeeuwis, J. M., 2000. On the surface driftof the East Madagascar and theMozambique Currents. South AfricanJournal of Science, 96(3):141-147.
Mauge, L.A. (1967). Contribution prelimi-naire a l’inventaire ichtyologique de laregion de Tulear. Rec. Trav. Sta. Ma.Endoume. Marseille. Fasc. Hors. Ser.,Suppl. 7:101-132.
McCallister, D.E., Schueler, F.W., Roberts,C.M. and Hawkins, J.P. 1993. Mapping andGIS analysis of the global distribution ofcoral reef fishes on an equal area grid. In R.Miller, ed., Mapping the Diversity ofNature. London: Chapman and Hall.
McClanahan, T.R., Sheppard C.R.C, OburaD.O. 2000. eds., Coral Reefs of the IndianOcean their Ecology and Conservation.Oxford University Press. 525pp. ISBN 0-19-512596-7.
Nain, O., Cuet, C. and Mangar, V. 2000 TheMascarene Islands. In T.R. McClanahan,C.R.C. Sheppard, D. O. Obura, eds., CoralReefs of the Indian Ocean their ecology andConservation. Oxford University Press.525pp. ISBN 0-19-512596-7.
National Strategy and Action Plan for theConservation of Biological Diversity,December 2000, Minister of Production andEnvironment. Comoros.
Polunin, N.V.C and J.G. Frazier. 1974.Diving reconnaissance of twenty seven wes-tern Indian Ocean coral reefs.Environmental Conservation 1(1): 71-2.
Quod, J-P, Naim, O. and Abdourazi, F.,2000. The Comoros Archipelago. In: Seas atthe Millennium : An EnvironmentalEvaluation. Ed. C. Sheppard. Vol II. pp 243-252. Pergamon Press (Elsevier Science),Oxford.
Richmond, M.D. (ed.) 1997. A Guide to theSeashores of Eastern Africa and the westernIndian Ocean Islands. Sida/Department forResearch Cooperation, SAREC. 448 pp.Richmond, M.D. 1999. The Biodiversity andBiogeography of shallow-water flora andfauna of the western Indian Ocean with spe-cial reference to the Polychaeta, Molluscaand Echinodermata.
Richmond, M. D., 2001. The marine biodi-versity of the western Indian Ocean and itsbiogeography. How much do we know? pp241-262 in: Marine Science Development inEastern Africa. Proceedings of the 20thAnniversary Conference on Marine Sciencein Tanzania 28 June – 1 July 2001.Richmond, M. D. and J. Francis, eds.Institute of Marine Sciences / WesternIndian Ocean Marine Science Association(WIOMSA), Zanzibar, Tanzania. 569 pp.
Rodrigues, M-J., Motta, H., Whittington,M.W., and Schleyer, M. 2000. Coral Reefsof Mozambique. In T.R. McClanahan,C.R.C. Sheppard, D. O. Obura, eds., CoralReefs of the Indian Ocean their ecology andConservation. Oxford University Press.525pp. ISBN 0- 19-512596-7.
Salm, R.V. 1976. The structure and succes-sional status of three coral reefs atMauritius. Proc. Royal Society of Arts andSciences of Mauritius 3(2):227-240.
Samoilys, M. 1988a. A survey of the coralreef fish communities on the Kenyan coast.WWF Project 3797 Kenya. TechnicalReport prepared for the Ministry of Tourismand Wildlife.
Samoilys, M. 1988b. Abundance and speciesrichness of coral reef fish communities onthe Kenyan coast: the effects of protectivemanagement and fishing. Proceedings of the6th International Coral Reef Symposium,Australia. Schleyer, M.H. 2000. SouthAfrican Coral Communities. In T.R.McClanahan, C.R.C.
Sheppard, D. O. Obura, eds., Coral Reefs ofthe Indian Ocean their ecology andConservation. Oxford University Press.525pp. ISBN 0-19-512596-7.
Sheppard, C.R.C. 1987. Biodiversity, pro-ductivity and system integrity. MarinePollution Bulletin 34:680-681
Sheppard, C.R.C. 2000. Coral reefs of theWestern Indian Ocean: An overview. In T.R.
McClanahan, C.R.C. Sheppard, D. O.Obura, eds., Coral Reefs of the Indian Oceantheir ecology and Conservation. OxfordUniversity Press. 525pp. ISBN 0-19-512596-7.
Shumway, C. A. 1999 Forgotten waters:Freshwater and marine ecosystems inAfrica. Strategies for biodiversity conserva-tion and sustainable development. BostonUniversity, Boston, USA.
UNEP/IUCN 1988. Coral Reefs of theWorld: Vol. 2 Indian Ocean, Red Sea andGulf. UNEP Regional Seas Directories andBibliographies, Gland, Switzerland andCambridge, U.K.:IUCN; Nairobi: UNEP.
Wilkinson, C.R., Linden, O., Cesar, H.,Hodgson, G., Rubens, J. and Strong, A.E.1999. Ecological and socio-economicimpacts of 1998 coral mortality in the IndianOcean: an ENSO impact and a warning forfuture change? Ambio 28: 188-196.
References Middle East:
Baldwin, R. and V.G. Cockcroft, 1997. Aredugongs, Dugon dugon, in the Arabian Gulfsafe? Aquatic Mammals 23(2): 73-74.
Basson, P., J. Burchard, J. Hardy & A. Price,1977. Biotopes of the western Arabian Gulf.,Aramco, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia: 284 p.
DeVantier, L., E. Turak, K. Al-Shaikh & G.De’ath, 2000. Coral communities of the cen-tral-northern Saudi Arabian Red Sea. Faunaof Arabia 18: 23-66.
Gladstone, W & P. R Fisher, 2000. Statusand ecology of cetaceans in the FarasanIslands Marine Protected Area. Fauna ofArabia 18: 385-396.
Gladstone, W., 2000. The ecological andsocial basis for management of a Red Seamarine protected area. Ocean & CoastalManagement 43(2000): 1015-1032.
Gladstone, W., N. Tawfiq, D. Nasr, I.Andersen, C. Cheung, H. Drammeh, F.Krupp & S. Lintner, 1999. Sustainable useof renewable resources and conservation inthe Red Sea and Gulf of Aden: issues, needsand strategic actions. Ocean & CoastalManagement 42(1999): 671-697.
Kemp, J. & F. Benzoni, 2000. A preliminarystudy of coral communities in the northernGulf of Aden. Fauna of Arabia 18: 67-86.
Kemp, J., 2000. Hybridisation of the marineangelfishes Pomacanthus maculosus and P.semicirculatus in the Gulf of Aden. Fauna ofArabia 18: 357-367.
87
Krupp, F., A.A. Abuzinada & I.A. Nader,(eds) 1996. A marine wildlife sanctuary forthe Arabian Gulf.Enviornmental research and conservationfollowing the 1991 Gulf War oil spill.NCWCD , Riyadh andSengkenberg Research Institute, FrankfurtaM. 511 pp.
Miller, J.D., 1989. Marine Turtles, Volume1: An assessment of the conservation statusof Marine Turtles in the Kingdom of SaudiArabia. MEPA, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.Report No. 9, 289 pp.
Pilcher, N.J. & A. Alsuhaibany, 2000. Thestatus of coral reefs in the Red Sea and Gulfof Aden 2000. In:Global Status of Coral Reefs (C. Wilkinsoned.). Australian Institute of Marine Sciences,Townsville: 35-54.
Pilcher, N.J. & Saad, M.A. 2000. Sea turtlesurvey. Conservation and Sustainable Use ofBiodiversity of Socotra Archipelago. MarineHabitat, Biodiversity and Fisheries Surveysand Management. Senckenberg ResearchInstitute, Frankfurt a.M. Report of Phase II:83-95.
Pilcher, N.J. S. Wilson, S. Alhazeem & M.Shokry, 2000. The status of coral reefs in theArabian Gulf andArabian Sea 2000. In: Global Status of CoralReefs (C. Wilkinson ed.). AustralianInstitute of MarineSciences, Townsville: 55-64.
Preen, A., 1989 Dugongs, Volume 1: Thestatus and conservation of dugonds in theArabian region. MEPA, Jeddah, SaudiArabia. Report No. 10, 200 pp.
ROPME, 1999. Regional Report of the Stateof the Marine Environment (SOMER).Regional Organization for the Protection ofthe Marine Environment, Safat, Kuwait. 220pp.
Sheppard, C., A. Price & C. Roberts, 1992.Marine ecology of the Arabian region.Academic Press, London: 359 pp.
Sheppard, C.R.C. & A.L.S. Sheppard, 1991.Corals of Arabia. Fauna of Saudi Arabia 12:3-170.
References Central Indian Ocean:
Bambaradeniya, C.N.B., S.P. Ekanayake,L.D.C.B. Kekulandala, R.H.S.S. Fernando,V.A.P. Samarawickrema and T.G.M.Priyadharshana 2002 An Assessment of the status of biodiversityin the Maduganga mangrove estuary.Occasional Papers IUCN Sri Lanka 1, 49pp.
Bambaradeniya, C.N.B., S.P. Ekanayake,R.H.S.S. Fernando, W.P.N. Perera and R.Somaweera 2002A Biodiversity Status Profile of BundalaNational Park – A Ramsar Wetland in SriLanka. Occasional Papers IUCN Sri Lanka2, 40pp.
Bay of Bengal Programme web site<www.fao.org/fi/bobp>
Biodiversity Conservation Priority Project,India <www.bcpp-india.org>
Bunce P. 1988The Cocos (Keeling) Islands. AustralianAtolls in the Indian Ocean. Jacaranda Press,Brisbane.
Ecology of the Chagos Archipelago 1999Editors C. Sheppard and M. Seaward.Linnean Society Occasional Publications 2.Linnean Society of London.
Everaarts J., K. Booij, C. Fischer, Y. Maas,& J. Nieuwenhuize 1999 Assessment of the environmental health ofthe Chagos Archipelago. In: Ecology of theChagos Archipelago; Editors C. Sheppardand M. Seaward. Linnean SocietyOccasional Publications 2. Linnean Societyof London. Pp 305-326.
Global Representative System of MarineProtected Areas, Volume III. 1995GBRMPA, The World Bank, IUCN.
Ilangakoon A. 2002 Whales and Dolphins of Sri Lanka. WildlifeHeritage Trust, Sri Lanka.
IUCN Sri Lanka 2002 Conservation of Coral Reefs around PigeonsIsland – Trincomalee. (Unpublished report).
Roberts C., C. McClean, J. Veron, J.Hawkins, G. Allen, D. McAllister, CMittermeier, F. Scheuler, M. Spalding, F.Wells, C. Vynne and T. Werner 2002Marine biodiversity hotpsots and conserva-tion priorities for tropical reefs. Science295, 1280-1284.
Sheppard, C., M. Seaward, R. Klaus & J.Topp 2002The Chagos Archipelago: an introduction.In: Ecology of the Chagos Archipelago;Editors C. Sheppard and M. Seaward.Linnean Society Occasional Publications 2.Linnean Society of London. Pp 1-20.
Sheppard, C., M. Spalding, C. Bradshaw, &S. Wilson 2002Erosion vs. recovery of coral reefs after1998 El nino: Chagos reefs, Indian Ocean.AMBIO, 31 (1): 40-48 Feb 2002.
Rajasuriya, M.H. Maniku, B.R.
Subramanian, J. Rubens 1998South Asia: a review of progress in imple-mentation of management actions for theconservation and sustainable developmentof coral reef ecosystems in South Asia.ITMEMS Proceedings 1998; 86-113.
Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 1998Australian Institute of Marine Sciences.
Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 2002Australian Institute of Marine Sciences.
Turner, J.R., Vousden, D., Klaus, R.,Satyanarayana, C., Fenner, D.,Venkataraman, K., Rajan, P.T. and SubbaRao, N.V. 2001Report of Phase I: Remote sensing andRapid Site Assessment Survey, April 2001.Coral Reef systems of the Andaman Islands.Government of India and United NationsDevelopment Programme, GlobalEnvironment Facility. 76pp, 8 Apps, 55 Figsand Plates.
Veron J. 1994Hermatypic corals of the Cocos (Keeling)Islands: a summary. Atoll Research Bulletin399-414. Smithsonian Institution,Washington DC.
Wells F. 1994Marine molluscs of the Cocos (Keeling)Islands. Atoll Research Bulletin 399-414.Smithsonian Institution, Washington DC.
Woodroffe C. and P. Berry 1994Scientific studies in the Cocos (Keeling)Islands: an introduction. Atoll ResearchBulletin 399-414. Smithsonian Institution,Washington DC.
General references:
Convention Concerning the Protection ofthe World Cultural and Natural Heritage,UNESCO 1972.
Operational Guidelines for theImplementation of the World HeritageConvention. Provisional Revision July2002.
Phillips A. (2002) The World HeritageConvention and its Application to Marineand Coastal Sites.
88
Photocreditsp.4 Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
p.16 Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
p.17 Chris Huss / Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
Harold Hudson / Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
James P. McVey
p.21
Jonathan R.Green
p.26
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
Manta Ray / Mary Lou Frost
Squid / Mary Lou Frost
p.28
Aerial / Oliver, James
Giant Clam / Chuck Savall
Anthony R. Picciolo
Paige Gill / Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
Mohammed Al Momany, Aqaba, Jordan
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
Nudibranch / Chuck Savall
Mohammed Al Momany, Aqaba, Jordan
p.30
Mabul / Steve Turek
Sea turtle / Steve Turek
Nudibranchs/Malaysia / Jeff Dawson
Nudibranch/Malaysia / Jeff Dawson
p.32
Clownfish / Steve Turek
John Veron
Gorgonian Soft Corals on Sea Fan / Mary Lou Frost
p.34
Atoll / Mark J. Rauzon
Yellowtail snapper / Anthony R. Picciolo
Reefscape / Chuck Savall
p.36
Anemonefish / Chuck Savall
p.38
Reefscape / Chuck Savall
Coral / Chuck Savall
Shark / Chuck Savall
Butterflyfish / Steve Turek
p.39
Ta Ngoc
p.40
Joshua Finegold / Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
Angelfish / Chuck Savall
p.42
Jonathan R. Green
Angelfish / David F. Colvard
p.44
Sunset / John Bortniak
Masked butterflyfish / Mary Lou Frost
Sea Fan / Jeff Dawson
Squirrelfish / Mary Lou Frost
p.46
Wrasse / Steve Turek
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
John Veron
Chris Huss / Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
p.48
Clownfish / Steve Turek
p.50
Mohammed Al Momany, Aqaba, Jordan
Mohammed Al Momany, Aqaba, Jordan
Red Sea wall / Mary Lou Frost
p.52
Mohammed Al Momany, Aqaba, Jordan
The Coral Kingdom Collection
p.54
Paige Gill / Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
Coral Spawning/Chuck Savall
Sponge / Jeff Dawson
Sea Star / Chuck Savall
Soft Coral / Chuck Savall
p.56
Aerial / Oliver, James
Roger, Dominique
p.58
Paige Gill / Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
p.75
Beach / Steve Turek
Reef Wall / Chuck Savall
p.76
Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary
Photo resources provided by http://www.photolib.noaa.gov
and http://www.coralreef.org/tools as well as by Dr. John
Veron and Mark J. Rauzon are gratefully acknowledged.
89
90
For more information contact:UNESCO World Heritage Centre
7, place de Fontenoy75352 Paris 07 SP FranceTel : 33 (0)1 45 68 18 76Fax: 33 (0)1 45 68 55 70E-mail : [email protected]://whc.unesco.org
Wor ld Her i tage
Proceedings of the WorldHeritage Marine Biodiversity
Workshop
World Her i tage papers
Co
ver
Jon
ath
an
R.
Gre
en
' 2
00
0C
ove
r d
esi
gn
ed
by
Re
cto
Ve
rso
4papers
