Frequently asked questions (FAQs)

No, not at all. Identification of EBSAs has been conducted to make clear which areas are prioritized and to enhance the effective conservation from a precautionary point of view, in order to contribute to promoting conservation of marine biodiversity and sustainable use.

Accordingly, these areas have been selected solely from the perspective of effectively promoting conservation measures. This does not mean that an area not selected as an EBSA is unimportant.

Not necessarily. Selection of EBSAs is intended to contribute to promoting conservation of marine biodiversity and sustainable use. As such, it is conducted from ecological and biological perspectives based on Principle 1, and criteria were also established from ecological and biological perspectives to identify areas.

For this reason, although physical environmental conditions such as terrain and ocean currents which are indirectly related to biodiversity were taken into account in some cases in identifying EBSAs, an area will not be chosen as an EBSA solely from the perspective of terrain, no matter how unique the terrain characteristic they have.

Not necessarily. Selection of EBSAs is conducted from ecological and biological perspectives without consideration for social, economical, or cultural importance. Selection was conducted by establishing criteria from ecological and biological perspectives and was based on data such as species or habitat distribution related to each criterion.

While it is true that the presence of a conservation area such as a National Park suggests some kind of importance, the establishment of a conservation area itself is a social act and does not directly indicate ecological or biological importance.

Not necessarily. Selection of EBSAs is conducted from ecological and biological perspectives without consideration for degree of endangerment, such as habitat loss or fragmentation due to anthropogenic load factors.

While it is true that EBSAs are intended to conserve marine biodiversity, they are basic pieces of information that enhance effective conservation based on data from ecological and biological perspectives, and do not directly indicate areas that should be subject to conservation measures such as protected areas.

No, it could not. EBSAs are selected scientifically and objectively through a selection process based on scientific data. For this reason, EBSAs are identified based on objective criteria, by collecting scientific data indicating the elements of each criterion, and analyzing these data through certain methods.
It is true that there might be some areas that would appear to satisfy the criteria but unfortunately could not be identified as EBSAs because of the unavailability of evidentiary data (also see Q6).

Yes, there were. First, analytical results of EBSAs were prepared, in which boundaries were automatically grouped units of grids evaluated as important by analysis. Then, opinions were collected from numerous scientific experts against that draft to fill in the gaps, and these opinions were used to revise the analytical results (see details here).
Further, reviewing EBSA identification will be conducted after roughly 10 years to include future advances in knowledge.

Not necessarily. EBSAs are selected as the basic information for conservation measures, and they are relatively important areas that highly satisfy the criterion(s). For this reason, areas selected are those assessed to be important from the perspectives of high satisfaction of multiple criteria or degree of irreplaceability, through the analytical methods.

For example, some areas that include elements of the criteria such as sea turtle nesting habitat, endangered species habitats, or seaweed beds/tidal flats were not necessarily selected, because they could not be assessed to be highly important for that reason alone.

No. While it is true that EBSAs are intended to be used as basic information for marine biodiversity conservation measures such as establishing protected areas, an EBSA itself will not directly become the marine protected area that is associated with restrictions. In the future, it is expected that measures such as conservation and management will advance through taking into account the social, economic, and other information based on this basic information (EBSAs).

A: Yes, they will. Plans call for revising them after roughly ten years in light of expectations of changes to the marine environment, including habitat distribution and future advances in knowledge. When doing so, the newest habitat or species data will be requested to be provided from various sectors and scientists.