Ocean initiatives and prospects for achieving 30 by 30 1
Hiroyuki Matsuda,
The Institute for Advanced Studies, Yokohama National University
1: Effects of marine protected areas (MPAs) and Japan's efforts
Marine protected areas (MPAs) are one of the most effective means of protecting
biological habitats, including aquatic resources. Fishermen themselves understandthis, and there are over 1,000 no-fishing areas in Japan that have been agreed uponby fishermen themselves 1 .
Figure1.

Mapofmarine

protectedareasinJapan(modifiedfromUNEP-WCMC

2023). Protected areas outside
Japan's EEZ belong to othercountries. Additionally, this map
does not show MPAs based on“designated water areas” such as
Yamato Bank, which were shownin NACSJ (2012) 2 , and the actual
MPAs are much wider.

The Aichi Biodiversity Targets 2010-2020 aim to cover 17% of land area and 10% ofmarine area as protected areas (PAs) or “other effective area-based conservation
measures” (OECMs). It was raised. Based on the Aichi Targets, each country discussed
the definition of PA. For the Aichi Targets, many countries, including Japan, used
only PA and did not use OECM. 3
Without defining PA, "other" OECMs cannot be defined. According to theInternational Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN4 ),PA includes sevenThis is a personal translation of Matsuda (2024) Forest Environment
2024 in Japanese(https://www.shinrinbunka.com/publish/shinrin/27655.html, pp.127-131)1

categories from Ia to VI (Table 1). In other words, PA itself is diverse. However,whether it is strict protection or sustainable use, PA has these as its main objectives.
was estimated to be approximately 369,000 km 2 , o r a p p r o x i m a t e l y 8. 3 % (NACS-J2012) .

In December 2020, four offshore seabed natural environment conservation
areas were added, bringing the total to approximately 13.3% and achieving the Aichi
target (Figure 1). There are 1, 6, 10, 0, 264, 79, 100, and 20 MPAs in IUCN protectedarea categories Ia , Ib , II, III, IV, V, VI, and unknown, respectively, and a total of480 including duplicates. The total area is 561,000 km2, which i s approximately 13.9%of the total sea area (including EEZ) (SCBD 2012) 5 .
Table 1 Categories of protected areas and main management objectives (from Dudley2012)

Ib

Strictly protectednature area
Wilderness area

Strict protection/mainly protection of wilderness

IINational park

Mainly ecological conservation and protection

III

Natural monument
Habitat/Species
Management Area
Terrestrial/Marine
LandscapeConservation Area
Sustainable resource
use protected area

Primarily conserving certain natural features
Conservation primarily through humanmanagement intervention

Ia

IVV
VI

Strict protection/mainly scientific research

Mainly terrestrial and marine landscapeconservation and tourism.
Mainly sustainable use of resources

2: Importance of OECM and how to use it in the sea
Japan's MPAs register joint fishing rights and fishing grounds as part of the MPA, notthe OECM. Even in the OECM, there were no problems in achieving the Aichi targets.
In the DIVERSITAS Committee during the development of the Aichi Targets, I
strongly urged that they not be limited to legal MPAs. I hope that Japan will also makeuse of OECM in the next 30 by 30 6 .
The OECMs that I had in mind when setting the Aichi Targets were the seasonal
fishing ban zone for walleye pollock in Shiretoko and the voluntary permanent notake zone for the Kyoto snow crab fishery 7 . They respectively brought the world
natural heritage registration and Asia's first Marine Stewardship Council (MSC)
certification. Neither is a legal sanctuary. However, the definition of PA is "legal orother effective means," and legal collateral is not a requirement if the primary purpose
is protection.

In the 1960s, the Kyoto snow crab fishery suffered a heavy decline in stocks, and after
discussion between fishers and a local scientist of Kyoto Prefectural Government,
fishers established a permanent protection zone where the blocks were pacified andfishing physically impossible. As stocks recover within protected areas, fishermen arewilling to open more permanent reserves, and permanent reserves are now being
created throughout the western Sea of Japan 8 .

Figure 2. Voluntary seasonal fishing ban area for walleye pollock (almost the entire
area on this map is MPA . Modified from a map provided by Rausu Fisheries
Cooperative Association) 9 .
Shiretoko is said to be the southernmost region in the northern hemisphere thatexperiences seasonal sea ice, and was the first in Japan to aim to be designated as aWorld Natural Heritage Site that includes a sea area. However, the sea area is a set
net fishing area, and fishers are subject to stricter regulations in the future due to theWorld Heritage status. The fishers made the government promise not to do so.
However, during the review process, it was recommended that the protection level ofthe marine area be improved. However, they originally established voluntary seasonal
fishing ban areas and worked to ensure sustainable use. Registration was achieved notthrough legal restrictions, but by expanding the seasonal fishing ban area (Figure 2. ) .
3: OECM is the key to achieving 30by30 and mainstreaming bioregulation
In 30by30, a PA is an area whose primary purpose is nature conservation, and an
OECM is an area whose purpose is other than conservation, but which contributes tonature conservation, where conservation is a secondary purpose, or where the area

does not profess to be protecting 10 . Voluntary fishing ban areas without legal
regulations could invite poaching by outsiders if made public. Since protection is not
the main purpose of OECM, it is necessary to objectively verify whether it is actuallyeffective for protection. Land managers/owners themselves must apply for natural
symbiotic sites in Japan, but “places that they do not wish to publicly protect” will
not apply on their own. Instead of a declaration system, OECM certification based on
government ratings should also be considered. However, the problem is how toregister the locations. In principle, information should be made public, but thelocation information of some endangered species is not made public in the first place.
It will be difficult to achieve 30% through MPAs alone, and the use of OECM willbe essential in many countries. If we can encourage the cooperation of stakeholders
whose primary purpose is not conservation, we can help mainstream biodiversity. It
will make a big contribution.
In other words, the mainstreaming strategy for biodiversity envisioned by the OECM
is not to increase the number of people who consider conservation as their primaryobjective, but to encourage people who do not consider conservation as their primaryobjective to care conservation. By linking with ESG investment (investment based on
corporate ratings based on environmental, social, and corporate governance) andTNFD (Task Force on Nature-Related Financial Disclosures) for evaluation,companies will actively care nature conservation. There is a possibility of utilizing
OECM registration as a means. This is true both on land and at sea.
It may be a taboo phrase, but future discussions will be more consistent if mostdesignated sea areas (fishing grounds) in Japan are repositioned as OECMs rather thanMPAs. The definition of OECM was not yet established in 2010, and this was before
the Japan’s Fisheries Act was revised 1 1 , so this redefinition has legitimacy. Under
the Fisheries Act, which was revised in 2018, appropriate resource management canbe considered a condition for the continuation of fishing rights. Rather thanautomatically registering all joint fishing rights fishing grounds, it would be better toset certain additional criteria, examine their main purpose, and redefine fishinggrounds as MPAs, OECMs, and other areas under the revised Fisheries Act. good.
Since the main purpose is to promote sustainable fishing, it is not necessarily
necessary to meet the OECM conditions.
The Aichi Target achieved MPA for 10% of the total sea area, including coastal andoffshore areas . Achievement levels are calculated both in territorial waters andshallow waters of 200 m or less (233,000 km 2 ) and in other areas (423.7 km 2 ) 12 .
As of the end of 2020, 72.1% of the former area was designated 13 as MPAs, andcoastal MPAs will be difficult to achieve 30% of the total sea area. There are nosurface MPAs offshore, and seabed MPAs account for only 4.5 % of the total sea area .
It will be difficult to achieve 30% in marine areas unless widespread offshore areas
are designated as MPAs or OECMs.
The offshore surface layer and the offshore seabed account for 24.3% and 19.7% ofthe area considered important from the perspective of biodiversity, evolutionary andbiologically significant areas (EBSA), respectively. EBSA also includes spawning
grounds for aquatic fish species

14 .

However , EBSA is neither a necessary nor

sufficient condition for MPA or OECM . If many offshore fishing grounds, including
those other than EBSA, required some kind of consideration for biodiversity, such asmeasures against bycatch, and if many offshore fishers agree, it would be possible toachieve 30% of the sea area .
In addition, there are 197,000 km 2 of sea areas within Japan's territorial waters thatare at least 200 meters deep, that is, offshore according to the above definition (4.6%of the offshore area). There EBSA is 12km 2 1 4 . There are probably even more fishinggrounds. These can also be candidates for MPA or OECM.
Location of offshore wind power generation can also be candidates for OECM if
environmental considerations are taken into account 1 5 . The key to achieving 30 by
30 is to increase the number of marine areas where protection is not the main purpose,but to increase the number of people who care nature conservation. However, theformer is not a means to the latter. On the contrary, 30by30 should be considered asa means to promote mainstreaming of the former.
Literature Cited (endnotes are not listed in the published version)
Dudley, N. (2 012) Guidelines for appli cation of prote cte d are a m ana gementca te gories.

https:// portal s.iucn. org/library/sites/lib rary/ file s/do cuments/ PAPS-016 -Ja. pdf

UNEP-W CMC (20 23). Protected Area Profile for Ja pan fro m the Wo rld DatabaseonProtectedAreas,Octob er

202 3.

Ava ilable

a t:

https:// www. protectedplanet.net/ country/J PN

NACS-J [ Nature Conservat ion Society of Japan ] (2012): T h e st ate o f Jap an 's marin e
protected areas - To promot e biodiversity conservati on - Reco mmen d ation s o f th e Co astal
Area Conservation M anagement Study Group , Nature Conservat ion So ci ety o f Jap an Rep ort
No . 99 , 2012.

SCBD [ S ecret ariat of the Convent ion on Biol ogi cal Diversity ] (202 2 ) Aich i Biodiv ersity
Target11Count ry

Dossier:JAPAN.

https:// www.cbd.int/p a/d o c/do ssiers/j ap an-ab t11-coun try-dossier2021.pdf

Yagi , N., Takagi, AP, Takada, Y., & Kurokura, H. (2010). Marine protected areas inJapan: Institutional background and management framework. Marine Policy , 34 (6),1300-1306.
2 NACS-J (2012) Japan’s Marine protected areas: to promote biodiversity
conservation. NACS-J Report 99, 25pp (in Japanese). https://what-wedo.nacsj.or.jp/files/katsudo/wetland/pdf/20120517mpateigensyo.pdf
3World Database on Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures(WD-OECM) https://www.protectedplanet.net/en/thematic-areas/oecms
4
Forestry Agency Expert Meeting on Protected Forest System, etc. August 2014
Material 5
https://www.rinya.maff.go.jp/j/kokuyu_rinya/sizen_kankyo/attach/pdf/hogorin_seido46.pdf
5SCBD (2022) Aichi Biodiversity Target 11 Country Dossier: JAPAN.
https://www.cbd.int/pa/doc/dossiers/japan-abt11-country-dossier2021.pdf
6Hiroyuki Matsuda (2010) Concerns at the 10th Conference of the Parties to theConvention on Biological Diversity. Biological Sciences. 62:46-48.
7Hiroyuki Matsuda. (2008). Why protect the ecosystem? (Vol. 7). NTT Publishing.
8
Yasushi Ito, Hiroshi Miura, & Tatsumi Sawada. (2014). Conservation effects andbiodiversity of snow crab sanctuaries . Journal of the Japan Society of Fisheries
Engineering , 50 (3), 199-207.
9Matsuda, H., Makino, M., & Tomiyama, M. (2012). Biodiversity and fisheries
1resource management in the Satoumi. Global environmental research , 16 (2), 181-187.
10Agung, MF, Adhuri, DS, Ferse, SC, Sualia, I., Andradi-Brown, DA, Campbell, SJ, ...
& Ahmadia, GN (2022). Marine conservation beyond MPAs: Towards the recognition ofother effective areas -bas ed conservation measures (OECMs) in Indonesia. Marine
Policy , 137 , 104939.
11Prime Minister's Office (2020) Study Group (SG) report on further expansion andmanagement of marine protected areas.
https://www.kantei.go.jp/jp/singi/kaiyou/sanyo/dai49/shiryou2_9.pdf
12
Ministry of the Environment “Study group for establishing marine protected areas inoffshore areas” (2nd meeting) August 2018 Related materials 1
https://www.env.go.jp/nature/naturebiodic/kaiyo-hogoku.html
13Central Environment Council Natural Environment Subcommittee (35th meeting) May
2018. Material 2-4 https://www.env.go.jp/council/12nature/35_1.html
14
Ministry of the Environment's "Study Committee on Areas of High Importance fromthe Perspective of Biodiversity." December 2011 Material 3
https://www.env.go.jp/nature/biodic/kaiyo-hozen/ima.html
15Japan Ocean Policy Society volunteers (2022) Opinion paper on the next national
biodiversity strategy https://oceanpolicy.jp/activities/proposal