Terms of Reference

Guidance on “Representative” Marine Protected Areas for Network Planning

National Peer Review, National Capital Region

October 2, 2012
Montreal, Quebec

Chairperson: Eddy Kennedy

Context

Canada has both domestic and international commitments to establish a national network of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). Towards this goal, Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) is working with federal, provincial and territorial partners to design and establish the Canadian network of MPAs in accordance to Decision IX/20 of the Convention on Biological Diversity (UNEP 2008). The required network properties and components identified in Annex II of the CBD Decision, amongst others, include Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) and “representativity”.

In 2004, Science provided advice on the identification of EBSAs (DFO 2004). This advice was reviewed and updated in 2011 (DFO 2011). Further to this advice, Science hosted two advisory processes in 2009 that laid much of the foundation for how Canada can proceed to establish its representative network of MPAs. The first advisory process addressed the identification of Canada’s marine biogeographic units and guidance on factors to consider in the next level(s) of subdivision (DFO 2009). The second advisory process provided general guidance on the necessary properties of networks of marine protected areas, including representative areas (DFO 2010).

However, the science advice from the 2009 meetings (DFO 2009 and 2010) did not provide a framework that could be followed to ensure consistency in the selection of the scale (level of subdivisions) at which “representativity” must be achieved within the network, nor regarding how an area would be considered to be representative or what ecological functions are to be served by representative areas. Thus, there is a need to develop a nationally consistent interpretation of “representativity” and to provide guidance for MPA network practitioners on the identification of “representative” areas within a biogeographic unit (bioregion).

Objectives

The objectives of this peer review process are to develop a nationally consistent interpretation of “representativity” in the context of Canada’s network of marine protected areas, and to provide specific guidance on:

The ecological functions that are to be served by “representative” areas within an MPA network, as well as the required properties to ensure those functions are sustained;
The appropriate factors to consider in selecting the scale (level of subdivision) to produce units that need to be represented in the network.

The following working papers will provide the basis for discussion and advice:

Objective 1: Rice, J., Houston, K. 2011. Representativity and networks of Marine Protected Areas. Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 21: 649-657.

Objective 2: Two working papers will be presented, the first will present a review of international approaches to scale selection for representativity, and the second one will present a coastal classification system used in the DFO Maritimes Region.