Marine World Heritage: Toward a representative, balanced and credible World Heritage List © Alex Chernikh © Steve Raymer Nat Geographic © Brian J Skerry Nat. Geographic Rath © Tony © Tim Laman Nat. Geographic Introduction

This summary is a n 1994, the World Heritage Committee launched a This summary is both an initial stock-take and an Global Strategy for a representative, balanced1 identification of a way forward. It asks three sim- preliminary stock-take of and credible2 World Heritage List. The Global Stra- ple questions: major marine gaps on I tegy aims at avoiding an overrepresentation of a the World Heritage List. small selection of regions or categories and ensuring that 1 – Do we have “the most outstanding” It illustrates how an the World Heritage List reflects the broad diversity of the marine areas? internationally world's cultural and natural areas of Outstanding Univer- 2 – Do we have a “representative” recognized and science- sal Value (OUV). Efforts to encourage nomination of pro- coverage of marine phenomena? based bio-classification perties from categories and regions currently not or 3 – Where are the major gaps? system could allows largely underrepresented on the World Heritage List are more systematic and crucial to implementing the Global Strategy. effective guidance At the heart of these three questions lies a fourth: toward new nominations To support implementation of the Global Strategy, the in ocean areas. IUCN is World Heritage Marine Programme aims at ensuring 4 – How can we build a more systema- © Emmanuelle Legros currently preparing a that all marine sites with OUV are protected effectively tic approach to answering these ques- Marine Thematic Study and cover all major marine regions and marine eco- tions? system types in a balanced, credible and representative that will elaborate on manner. An objective and consistent approach to reviewing progress will add certainty to marine gaps on the Successful global representation of exceptional marine the answers and enable a more rapid and efficient approach in using the World World Heritage List. The features on the World Heritage List requires a thorough Heritage Convention for conserving exceptional ocean places. study will be presented understanding of what is covered already and where are at the 37th session of other areas of OUV that should be added. Essentially all the World Heritage major marine regions and marine ecosystem types Committee in 2013. should be represented.

1 Balanced refers to “representativity” among bio-geographical regions or events in the history of life (Reference: WHC-96/CONF.202/INF.9) 2 Credibility of the List concerns not only the number of sites inscribed, but the representativeness of sites from the different regions of the world and stages of the Earth's history, and in particular the quality of management in designated World Heritage sites and the ability to address threats and dangers to bring them back to their normal conditions, if needed (Reference: WHC-96/CONF.202/INF.9)

2 Describing the natural world

mong the most powerful tools that can help to answer these ques- The lack of such classification for the world's ocean led a group of authors from tions are global maps that enable us to understand the pattern and academic, governmental, intergovernmental and NGO communities to develop A variation of natural phenomena. A long tradition of such biogeogra- a marine equivalent: the Marine Ecoregions of the World (MEOW) classi- phic mapping exists on land. The great explorer and naturalist Alfred fication. Their approach builds on existing research and focuses on the conti- Russell Wallace was one of the first to describe the great realms of life from sub- nental shelf (from the coastline out to depths of about 200 meters). This area, Saharan Africa to the Neotropics. His visions were converted to practical utility sometimes referred to as the , is where most marine life and pro- for modern conservation by Udvardy who, in 1974, produced a classification that ductive waters occur but also the place with the greatest interactions between is used by IUCN and others to look at progress in the efforts to conserve and people and nature. sustain life on earth. © Emmanuelle Legros

Udvardy, 1976 – Terrestrial realms

3 Describing the natural world

The MEOW classification system encompasses he MEOW classification sees the world’s near- Nested within the 12 realms are 62 provinces. These are still relatively large and continental shelf waters through a areas, often delineated by physical features (enclosed seas, basins). They too many elements of the hierarchy. There are 12 large realms. Each are rich in unique biota, but they tend to have a more unified set of habitats. Nes- World Heritage criteria, T are richly populated with a vast array of different ted within these provinces are 232 ecoregions, smaller areas that have more but most importantly habitats and with countless unique organisms, homogenous communities, perhaps lacking distinct or unique species, but ope- criteria vii, ix and x. even entire families of plants and animals that are rating in some ways as self-contained systems with a subset of habitats, often Geomorphic and found nowhere else. These realms have been isolated tightly interconnected. geological processes to varying degrees, even over geological timescales and (criteria viii), while not each is unique. The coral reefs of the Tropical Atlantic The primary focus of the MEOW classification is on biological patterns. The directly addressed Realm bear only a superficial resemblance to those of the realms, provinces and ecoregions have been defined from a rich literature that through MEOW, are Western Indo-Pacific. The salt marshes of Temperate draws on species and habitat distributions, and on the natural processes that considered as major Southern Africa may look like those of the Northern At- help to shape these patterns. In this way it is clear that the MEOW encapsulates drivers in the variation in lantic but there is barely a species in common. many elements of the World Heritage nomination criteria, but most especially vii, ocean diversity and are ix and x – natural phenomena, processes, communities, habitats and spe- intimately linked to the cies. Although not directly centred on criteria viii it is clear that - other natural criteria morphic and geological processes are major drivers of the variation in diversity and that some level of geomorphic diversity may also be captured in the use of the MEOW classification as a means of stratifying and assessing diversity.

The open ocean and deep water areas of the globe were not classified in the MEOW maps, which consider nearshore and continental shelf waters only. These more remote waters remain poorly understood. However UNESCO's Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and others have supported the de- velopment of similar classifications for these regions further offshore. These are not considered in this summary, but provide a highly com- plementary system (see below). The 12 nearshore and continental shelf realms that make up the Marine Ecoregions of the World classification 4 A word about habitats

It is critical to scrutinize ith some exceptions World Heritage sites more directly the are far smaller than even the 232 ecore- particular habitats W gions that are the building blocks of the MEOW system. Analysis illustrates that contained within existing sites may be quite narrowly targeted toward a specific na- and proposed marine tural feature, and indeed may have been selected preci- World Heritage sites. No sely because it is unusual or unique even in its local commonly accepted setting. With this in mind it is important to provide further marine habitat scrutiny of coverage by looking more directly at the par- classification exists ticular habitats contained within existing and proposed today but a practical sites. system could be developed relatively Numerous marine scientists have devised different clas- easily and provide more sifications to describe the world’s marine habitats, ran- systematic guidance for ging from the highly simple to vastly complex. There are new marine World some commonalities between these, but never complete Heritage nominations in agreement and no globally accepted habitat classification view of a balanced and system has been devised. What is needed for the global analysis of World Heritage coverage is a comprehensive representative World but simple system, readily applied and understandable by Heritage List. public and non-expert audiences. © Mark Spalding © James ForteNat. Geographic © Clark Anderson © Yuji Takafuji © Yuji © IRD © Emmanuelle Legros © Rotjan

5 A systematic approach toward identifying gaps

he first step in assessing the coverage and many of these provinces with poor representation have a number of remarkable World Heritage marine gaps in the present World Heritage marine sites and unique features that could be of Outstanding Universal Value and gain reco- sites are found in 11 of is simply to plot the sites on a map. In addition gnition under the World Heritage Convention. the 12 marine and T to the 45 World Heritage marine sites, a further coastal realms with only 26 World Heritage sites contain important coastal features To illustrate this, we have drawn up an illustrative list from some of these unrepre- Temperate Southern and have been taken into account in this analysis to en- sented provinces with the aim of drawing attention to key issues exemplifying how Africa lacking any World sure scientific credibility of the results. On a map these a more rigorous analysis might be carried forward in view of strengthening the cre- Heritage marine site sites show a broad spread: they are found in 11 of the 12 dibility, balance and representation of the World Heritage List. representation. marine and coastal realms with only Temperate Southern preliminary analysis suggests a number of the provinces from around Africa lacking any World Heritage marine site representation. the world currently lack any World Heritage sites.

Provinces are likely the most useful level of Some of these areas have a number of remarka- investigating coverage and ble and unique features that could be of gaps. The marine provinces are Outstanding Universal Value and gain re- highly distinctive, often with many cognition under the World Heritage unique plants and animals and Convention. quite distinct ecological make- The aim with the preliminary list up. The map on the following below is both to draw attention to page shows, however, that key issues and to exemplify how there is very low representation this form of analysis might be car- of World Heritage marine sites ried forward in view of strengthening at this level – 24 provinces have the credibility, balance and represen- no World Heritage representa- tation of the World Heritage List. tion at all, while a further 22 On the next page are some examples have only one site. of the 24 MEOW marine provinces cur- Although this summary is not in- rently not covered by the World Heritage tended to be a a comprehensive re- Convention, with brief description on some of view or gap analysis, it is clear that their unique and exceptional natural features.

The global distribution of all natural and mixed World Heritage sites. Sites in red are those that are formally described as marine, or that contain significant natural marine or coastal features.

6 A systematic approach toward identifying gaps

The Arctic Realm Warm Temperate Warm Temperate Southeastern Pacific : might be of special Northwest At- The Humboldt Current, the most productive interest. Nearly no lantic: This marine upwelling region in the world, World Heritage sites province supporting 15% of the global fish exist anywhere along is domi- catch, and rich coastal communities the vast and distinct nated including birds and marine mam- by the mals. Arctic coastlines but Hum- Benguela: Nutrient rich upwel- contain many boldt ling in this province produces exceptional Current, highly productive nearshore wa- marine the most ters, in stark contrast to the desert features. productive margins of the adjacent the Skeleton marine upwelling in the world, sup- . In shallow rocky areas there are porting 15% of the global fish catch, unique southern kelp communities. and rich coastal communities of birds and Agulhas: This province hosts the specta- marine mammals. cular annual “sardine run” migration with feeding of Guinea: Hosting some of the largest sin- by gannets, penguins, seals, dolphins and sharks gle mangrove tracts in the world, the Gulf of Gui- Easter : This is one of a series of highly isola- nea Province is also home to intact coastal ted island provinces, including extensive submerged The 62 marine provinces defined under the MEOW classification, systems where African savannah and rainforest annotated by the number of World Heritage marine sites within each ridges and seamounts, as well as shallow waters, with grade into mangroves, coastal , tur- region. Note that this map only represents presence of sites, not the remarkable levels of endemism (43% of fish and 50% tle nesting and offshore breeding proportion of the province covered by these sites, which is highly variable. of invertebrates in this area are found nowhere else). grounds for humpback whales. Such areas tell an important story of evolutionary origins and contemporary ma- Somali/Arabian: This area is the best example in the world where tropical co- rine processes. astal upwelling systems enable seasonal macroalgae to grow alongside coral Scotia Sea : This area contains some of the most diverse marine life in the Sou- systems in an unique combination thern Ocean both on the Antarctic and the adjacent island groups. Central Indian Ocean : These include the largest coral in the The entire realm is rich in endemic families of fish life, rich and highly productive world and among the only extensive coral reefs in the Western Indo-Pacific realm bird and marine mammal faunas, entire ecosystems with no parallel elsewhere that remain in good health. in the world.

7 A word about areas beyond national jurisdiction

ven provinces with only a single About 60% of the ocean lies beyond E World Heritage site may national jurisdiction and is not contain major gaps and it covered under the 1972 World is worth drawing attention to Heritage Convention. The the Arctic Realm where World Heritage Marine the MEOW classification Programme, in collabora- has not yet classified tion with IUCN's Global distinct provinces. No Ocean Biodiversity World Heritage sites Initiative (GOBI), is exist anywhere along starting a new initiative the extensive Cana- dian, United States of that will study applica- America, or European tion of the concept of Arctic coastlines. Outstanding Universal The focus of this work is Value to High Seas areas. on nearshore and conti- This work is done in response nental shelf waters. A similar to the recommendations of approach could, however, be the 2011 Global Strategy Evalua- used to devise a classification for tion and could greatly enhance High open seas using the new pelagic pro- Seas conservation through global vinces of the world classification designed in agreements such as the 2002 Convention on by UNESCO's Intergovernmental Oceanogra- Biological Diversity. phic Commission and others. At the present time only seven of the 37 pelagic provinces Only 10 of the existing World Heritage sites have significant off-shelf marine coverage – Heard and McDonald Islands, Brazilian Atlantic of the world have any significant marine Islands: Fernando de Noronha and Atol das Rocas Reserves, Galápagos Islands, Great Barrier Reef, Cocos Island National Park, Malpelo Fauna and Flora Sanctuary, Macquarie Island, Phoenix Islands Protected Area, New Zealand Sub-Antarctic Islands, Papah naumoku kea. ā ā World Heritage presence. Background shading shows the pelagic provinces of the world that occur in the deep sea parts of the ocean.

8 Future steps

MEOW is a globally he Marine Ecoregions of the World (MEOW) recognized classification classification has been adopted as a global- system, adopted by the T scale classification for assessing representative 1971 Ramsar Convention coverage of marine and coastal sites by the and used as a framework 1971 Ramsar Convention on Wetlands. This same system for marine conservation has also been used for the assessment and reporting of progress in marine protection by the IUCN. As such, it assessment by IUCN and provides an already proven tool and its use by the World others. Its use by the Heritage Convention would present a highly parsimonious World Heritage approach, allowing comparison with these other assess- Convention would ments. Such adoption should be advisory, rather than present a practical, mandatory. In parallel it would be valuable to encourage inexpensive approach, the use of the new classifications for pelagic and deep allowing comparison sea marine environments alongside the MEOW. with these other assessments. More work is needed, but simple synthetic classifications of habitats, geological and geomorphological systems would provide a useful further tool that might be used © Emmanuel Pivard

alongside the biogeographic analysis to give further strength to review marine gaps on the World Heritage List and provide adequate guidance and support to States Parties. Any future assessment would benefit not only from a refined and agreed habitat classification, but also further consideration of priorities within such a framework, bearing in mind the considerable variation in abundance of different habitats. Every World Heritage marine site contains a broad mix of habitats, and the pre- sence of the same habitat in multiple sites does not necessarily reflect repetition (any more than “cathedrals” might represent repetition among cultural World Heritage). © Bobby Haas Nat. Geographic

9 Future steps

quick overview of the current Representation of system suggests that for cer- marine geological A tain, widely accepted, habitat features is challenging classes there is already a great diver- because of the lack of gence of representation. systematic guidance at Thus mangroves, coral reefs present. A quick review and saltmarshes are relatively of the World Heritage well represented in the network List illustrated that sea to date (29, 25 and 12 sites res- cliffs, dunes and pectively) while macroalgae are well (kelp forest) and shellfish reef habitats are very poorly covered © Barry Peters represented, but major © Tim Laman Nat. Geographic upwelling systems and (3 and 2 sites). polynyas are not. Geological diversity (as opposed to biodiversity) presents an The MEOW classification could assist States Parties by providing even greater challenge, but one that again may be tractable context for future site nominations. Such framework could, for example, greatly with some further effort. It may be advisable that geological and geomorphological aide States Parties with the comparison among sites already inscribed classifications be kept separate. It would be advisable that oceanographic features on the World Heritage List and facilitate the identification of truly such as currents and gyres, upwellings, exposure, tidal settings, ice, and thermal unique ocean features. patterns might also form part of this approach. It is noteworthy that the existing At the same time, States Parties could further refine the framework by building MEOW classification and indeed most existing marine habitat classifications are in assessments of habitat, geological and geomorphological diversity as these strongly influenced by geological and geomorphological features. Oceanic islands become available through other marine conservation analysis in respective coun- and seamounts, semi-enclosed seas, and major embayments are all featured in tries or regions. It would be equally valuable to review existing sites in a more the MEOW classification, while many habitats are described by their dominant comprehensive manner, and consider the result in view of streamlining Tentative geomorphological features such as, for example, sandy , rocky benthos, Lists. volcanic vents, reefs, dunes, deltas, lagoons and barrier islands. While these do Application of a MEOW classification could greatly strengthen the process of not provide a comprehensive classification of geodiversity at least some elements identifying new sites of potential Outstanding Universal Value and ultimately lead may be captured and can already be assessed. Thus, in a rapid review, we can to a balanced and credible collection of marine sites that fully represents our see that sea cliffs, dunes and estuaries are well represented (21, 21, and 15 sites ocean's World Heritage -- areas for which distinction would be an irreplaceable respectively), but major upwelling systems and polynyas are not (2 and zero). loss to humanity.

10 About this publication References

This publication has been made possible through the generous Spalding, M., Agostini, V., Grant, S., and Rice, J. 2012. Pelagic provinces support of the Government of Flanders to the World Heritage Marine of the world: a biogeographic classification of the world’s surface pelagic Programme. waters. Ocean and . Vol. 90, pp. 19-30.

Spalding, M., et al. 2007. Marine Ecoregions of the World: a Preparatory work was supported by the German Federal Agency bioregionalization of coast and shelf areas. BioScience. Vol. 57, pp. 573- for Nature Conservation (BfN) who hosted a first expert meeting on 583. this subject in Vilm, Germany, in July 2010. Udvardy, M. D. F. 1975. A Classification of the Biogeographic Provinces of the World. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural The World Heritage Centre is grateful for the ongoing support to its Resources. IUCN Occasional Paper. Morges, Switzerland. 49 p. marine programme by the Tides of Time partners: UNESCO. 2009. Global Open Oceans and Deep Seabed (GOODS) – Biogeographic Classification. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission, UNESCO. Paris. 87 p.

The World Heritage Centre cooperated with The Nature Wallace, A. R.. 1876. The Geographical Distribution of Animals. With a Conservancy and IUCN for the development of this brochure: study of the relations of living and extinct faunas as elucidating the past changes of the earth's surface. London, Macmillan, 1110 p.

For further information contact: The publication should be referenced as: Fanny Douvere Spalding, Mark. 2012. Marine World Heritage: Toward a Marine Programme representative, balanced and credible World Heritage List. World Heritage Centre World Heritage Centre. UNESCO, Paris. UNESCO Email: [email protected]

11 © Cat Haloway

NIO M O UN M D RI T IA

A L

• P

•

W

L

O

A I

R

D L D N

H O E M R I E T IN AG O E • PATRIM United Nations World Educational, Scientific and Heritage Cultural Organization Convention

UNESCO World Heritage Centre 7 place Fontenoy 75007 PARIS