The widespread distribution of fishing activities, the low opportunity cost of collecting sea cucumbers, and the straightforward processing into beche-de-mer pose significant global governance issues. This study investigates these challenges in Indonesia. It identifies fishing locations and species harvested, export trends, and critical management questions for the conservation and sustainable fishing of sea cucumber resources. The study confirms 31 sea cucumber fishing areas. Fishers from areas in the Central and East regions of Indonesia harvest a greater diversity of species than in areas located in Western regions. A total of 56 species are known to have been and are still being fished in Indonesia. Most areas' catches were dominated by lower-value species, raising sustainability concerns for the highest-value species. Despite the relatively stable trend in export volume from 2012 to 2021, sea cucumbers are still only classified under a single product name, 'teripang'. The study explores the effectiveness of national and local management strategies, including total allowable catch quota systems and minimum legal-size limits aligned with CITES Appendix II provisions, as well as the application of customary law, known as 'sasi', within locally managed marine areas. The study notes that the sasi system for managing the use of sea cucumbers has been implemented in 27 areas in Indonesia's Eastern region.

Sea cucumbers have been harvested and consumed by Chinese and other Asian populations for a thousand years. Fisheries captures to service Asian seafood markets progressively extended to countries in the tropical Pacific, then the Indian Ocean and more recently to the rest of the world. The tropical fisheries are mostly artisanal and multi-species focused, while temperate ones focus on fewer species and are more industrialized. The number of exploited species has increased greatly in recent decades to reach more than 80. Fisheries have often followed a 'boom-and-bust' cycle. Illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) harvesting is widespread, especially in low-income countries. Some of the highly sought-after species have been overfished to critically low densities in many localities. Conservation issues have increasingly been raised and research developed on holothuroids, both at the species level, on taxonomy, biology and ecology and at the ecosystem level, on biodiversity, fisheries, aquaculture and markets. Advances in conservation are being facilitated by the efforts of international bodies, including FAO, CITES, IUCN, as well as regional ones such as SPC and WIOMSA, and national research and fisheries administrations across the globe. Many knowledge gaps remain regarding maintaining and restoring sea cucumber population resilience, the data and information gaps, regions of interest and species at risk. Here, we propose research and steps that might help to refine and put in action the processes / instruments necessary for better conservation.

Studies on elasmobranch trade have often focused on a single commodity, shark fins. Such a narrow focus can result in an incomplete understanding of the socio-cultural importance of sharks, limiting discussion on the range and efficacy of potential management interventions. Assessments must be performed across the value chain from fisher to retail vendor to better conserve vulnerable elasmobranch species, offering a broader view of capture, use, and trade. Here, we collate insights from shark value chain assessments conducted in eight countries (Mexico, Peru, Guinea-Bissau, India, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Indonesia and Fiji) spanning five continents. Approaches and processes implemented in a shark value chain analysis (VCA) were reviewed to: (1) understand better approaches and tools and (2) collate shared experiences. Our results demonstrate that VCAs broaden the outlook of fishery and trade assessments when capturing a more comprehensive range of economic and socio-cultural aspects (e.g., livelihoods, cultural use of commodities) of trade in all shark commodities. Time invested in various components of assessments produced different outcomes, with considerable returns from stakeholder selection, survey design, and assessor/stakeholder relationship building. Contrastingly, results demonstrated that efforts in communication with stakeholder groups and policymakers could be further streamlined to focus on key results using a variety of communication formats. Outcomes from this study offer guidance to those embarking on shark VCAs, facilitating improving the assessment process and outcomes.

There is growing concern over the conservation status of sharks and relatives exposed to fishing mortality. The Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in 1999 adopted the International Plan of Action for the Conservation and Management of Sharks (IPOA), which provides nations with advice on adopting and implementing national plans. An assessment of global national and regional plans of action on sharks (NPOAs) found: most are out of date; limited use of specific, measurable and timebound objectives and activities; no outcome objectives; and few performance assessments. This makes most NPOAs inadequate for planning and assessing efficacy. Over 33% of the annual retained catch of sharks and relatives was from countries without NPOAs and less than 12% was from countries with current NPOAs. NPOAs identified fisheries management framework deficits, ecology knowledge gaps, institutional capacity and coordination shortfalls, and budget constraints as the largest obstacles to implementation and are improvement priorities. We recommend how to amend the IPOA to better support the adoption and effective design and implementation of NPOAs for evidence-informed conservation and management.

1 Coastal Oceans Research and Development in the Indian Ocean (CORDIO) East Africa, Mombasa, Kenya, 2 University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, United States of America, 3 Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT of the CGIAR/EAT Forum, Montpellier, France, 4 Independent Biodiversity Consultant; South African National Biodiversity Institute, Cape Town, South Africa, 5 South African National Parks, Pretoria, South Africa, 6 Nelson Mandela University, Port Elizabeth, South Africa, 7 Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA), Trondheim, Norway, 8 United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Rome, Italy, 9 The University of Western Australia Oceans Institute, Crawley, Australia, 10 MARBEC (Univ. Montpellier, Ifremer, IRD, CNRS), Sète, France, 11 Instituto de Investigaciones en Recursos Naturales, Agroecologı́a y Desarrollo Rural (UNRNCONICET), Rı́o Negro, Argentina, 12 Institute for Enhanced Livelihoods (IEL), Montreal, Canada, 13 TRAFFIC, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 14 IUCN SSC/CEESP Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialist Group, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 15 International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), London, United Kingdom

In 2010, the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted the Aichi Biodiversity Target 11, calling for conserving 10% of the ocean through marine protected areas (MPAs) and “ other effective area-based conservation measures ” (OECMs), explicitly recognizing that other types of spatial conservation measures beyond areas designated as MPAs may also achieve biodiversity gains. Eight years later, CBD Parties adopted a definition and criteria for OECMs, and by early 2022, only a few OECMs had been reported. The OECM definition clearly requires that the measures be area-based and likely to contribute to conservation. However, conservation need not be their primary objective. Guidance on the extent and limits of what these “area measures” might include is needed. Clarity would assist countries in delivering on the CBD’s Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, with decadal goals incorporating an area-based conservation target, in which OECMs will play a crucial role. To achieve greater recognition of OECMs, countries require sector-specific guidance to guide recognition, listing, and ongoing implementation of OECMs. Here, we evaluate how well area-based fisheries management measures meet the OECM criteria as well as sustainable use principles, broader ecosystem management objectives, and more general biodiversity conservation goals. We systematically review case studies across a broad range of spatial management approaches to provide evidence of correspondence with the OECM criteria, arguing that many with primary objectives related to fisheries sustainability provide co-benefits for biodiversity, and hence biodiversity conservation and sustainable development. This review highlights how fisheries measures can help achieve a number of Sustainable Development Goals alongside the global targets for biodiversity of CBD.

Importance Recent CDC COVID-19 isolation guidance for non-immunocompromised individuals with asymptomatic or mild infection allows ending isolation after 5 days if asymptomatic or afebrile with improving symptoms. The role of rapid antigen testing in further characterizing the risk of viral transmission to others is unclear. Objective Understand rates of rapid antigen test (RAT) positivity after day 5 from a positive COVID-19 test and the relationship of this result to symptoms and viral culture. Design In this single center, observational cohort study, ambulatory individuals newly testing SARS-CoV-2 positive completed daily symptom logs, and RAT self-testing starting day 6 until negative. Anterior nasal and oral swabs were collected on a subset for viral culture. Main Outcomes and Measures Day 6 SARS-CoV-2 RAT result, symptoms and viral culture. Results 40 individuals enrolled between January 5 and February 11, 2022 with a mean age of 32 years (range 22 to 57). 23 (58%) were women and 17 (42%) men. All were vaccinated. 33 (83%) were symptomatic. Ten (25%) tested RAT negative on day 6. 61 of 90 (68%) RATs performed on asymptomatic individuals after day 5 were positive. Day 6 viral cultures were positive in 6 (35%) of 17 individuals. A negative RAT or being asymptomatic on day 6 were 100% and 78% predictive respectively for negative culture, while improving symptoms was 69% predictive. A positive RAT was 50% predictive of positive culture. Conclusion and Relevance RATs are suboptimal in predicting viral culture results on day 6. Use of routine RATs to guide end of COVID-19 isolation could result in significant numbers of culture negative, potentially non-infectious individuals undergoing prolonged isolation. However, a negative RAT was highly predictive of being culture negative. Complete absence of symptoms was inferior to a negative RAT in predicting a negative culture result, but performed better than improving symptoms. If a positive viral culture is a proxy for infectiousness, these data may help further refine a safer strategy for ending isolation.

Many types of guidance documents inform conservation by providing practical recommendations for the management of species and habitats. To ensure effective decisions are made, such guidance should be based upon relevant and up‐to‐date evidence. We reviewed conservation guidance for mitigation and management of species and habitats in the United Kingdom and Ireland, identifying 301 examples produced by over 50 organizations. Of these, only 29% provided a reference list, of which only 32% provided reference(s) relevant to justify the recommended actions (9% of the total). Furthermore, even this guidance was often outdated, lacked a methodology for production, or did not highlight uncertainty in the key evidence that supported the recommendations. These deficiencies can lead to misguided and ineffective conservation practices, policies, and decisions, and a waste of resources. Based on this review and co‐design by experts from 14 organizations, we present a set of principles for ensuring sufficient and relevant evidence is transparently incorporated into future conservation guidance. Producing evidence‐based guidance in line with these principles would enable more effective conservation outcomes.

Several sea cucumber species (Echinodermata: Holothuroidea) are fished, mostly for export of the dried product for Oriental consumers. Previous studies had analysed the historical trends at the world-scale until 2014. In the Western Indian Ocean (WIO) holothurian fisheries have a long history and several programmes have tried to ameliorate their management. Information has been recently gathered through a questionnaire and access to the most recent, yet unpublished available data (2015 to 2021) from different countries, through the evaluation of catches and/or processed product, present management systems, the imports of beche de mer and other products from Indian Ocean (IO) countries into the major market hub of Hong Kong SAR, and the Food and Agricuture Organisation (FAO) yearly statistics. The results are first presented for WIO countries, highlighting recent improvements in management. Imports from 16 WIO countries into the Hong Kong market (2017-2020 data) indicate the importance of the hub. The FAO world statistics are used to present the changes for the last few years, concentrating on the WIO countries. The recent trends show that demand for holothurians is still very high. Inconsistencies in the unit used in the reported statistics (fresh or dry weight) exist, and this needs to be addressed. The national data should be collected at the species level, to be able to follow the changes and the stock status. A regional approach is needed to encourage use of comparable management tools and follow future trends.

The ‘Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measure’ (OECM) concept was first introduced in 2010, by the Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD COP) in the CBD Strategic Plan for Biodiversity conservation 2011–2020. The concept acknowledged that a range of spatial measures other than protected areas were appropriate for reaching Aichi Target 11 spatial conservation coverage. The OECM definition was adopted in 2018 in CBD COP Decision 14/8, which calls on States to mainstream OECMs into economic sectors, to recognize the current biodiversity conservation benefits and co-benefits from their area-based management measures and enhance them as much as possible. In the marine capture fisheries sector, the identification of OECMs is a work in progress and the issues addressed in this paper are key implementation issues that States and fisheries authorities are or will be encountering regarding their governance, management, and biodiversity outcomes. The purpose of the paper is to draw attention to some key OECM implementation issues arising in marine capture fisheries and to suggest possible approaches to address them. The governance issues addressed relate to enabling frameworks, industrial fisheries, legitimate authorities, long-term commitments, cross-sectoral coordination and planning, and contribution to the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework of the CBD. The management issues considered relate to effectiveness in achieving expected outcomes, costs and benefits of OECMs, spatial relations between OECMs and fisheries, and the role of OECMs in the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries (EAF). Regarding the significant positive biodiversity outcomes expected from OECMs, issues relate to the type of outcomes expected, their current or intended nature, the level of evidence required, and their relationship to area-based conservation standards.

Marine ecosystems have been used, impacted by, and managed by human populations for millennia. As ecosystem degradation has been a common outcome of these activities, marine management increasingly considers ecosystem restoration. Currently, there is no coherent data recording format or framework for marine restoration projects. As a result, data are inconsistently recorded and it is difficult to universally track progress, assess restoration's global effectiveness, reduce reporting bias, collect a holistic suite of metrics, and share information. Barriers to developing a unified system for reporting marine restoration outcomes include: reaching agreement on a framework that meets the needs of all users, funding its development and maintenance, balancing the need for 'ease of use' and detail, and demonstrating the value of using the framework. However, there are opportunities to leverage arising from the United Nation Decades of Ecosystem Restoration and Science for Sustainable Development and with existing processes already developed by restoration groups (e.g. Global Mangrove Alliance, Society for Ecological Restoration). Here we provide guidelines and a roadmap for how such a framework could be developed and the potential benefits of such an endeavor. We call on practitioners to collaborate to develop such a framework and on governing bodies to commit to making detailed reporting a requirement for restoration project funding. Using a standardized marine restoration monitoring framework would enable the application of adaptive management when projects are not progressing as expected, advance our understanding of the state of worldwide marine restoration, and generate knowledge to advance restoration methodologies.

This paper contrasts seven spatial biodiversity conservation area designations by six different bodies: Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs), and the Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); the Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs) of the Food And Agriculture Organization (FAO); the Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) under criteria developed by the IUCN; the Areas of Particular Environmental Interest (APEIs) of the International Seabed Authority (ISA); the Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs) of the International Maritime Organization (IMO); and the Locally Managed Marine Areas (LMMAs) used by small island States in the Pacific Ocean; on five themes: biological and ecological features, functions served by areas receiving these labels, governance, threats and pressures, and other considerations. The seven different labels for such areas were generally similar in the biologically and ecological criteria to be met, and the functions typically served by these areas. Differences among the labels increased when considering governance, threat and pressures, and other considerations. Implications of these similarities and differences for policy development and outcomes are discussed. Performance reviews of the various labels under these themes could provide insight into both the effectiveness of the provisions in the Agreements and Decisions and how evidence is acquired and used to inform their application, allowing improvements to each approach to learn from experiences with other labels.

Abstract Recognizing two decades of failure to achieve global goals and targets, parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity are in the final phase of negotiating a Post‐2020 Global Biodiversity Framework for the conservation, sustainable use and benefit sharing of biodiversity. The framework attempts to set out pathways, goals and targets for the next decade to achieve positive biodiversity change. This perspective intends to help that framework set people firmly as part of nature, not apart from it. Despite work done so far through four meetings, new thinking and focus is still needed on ‘what’ changes must be conceptualized and implemented, and ‘how’ those changes are to be delivered. To help achieve that new thinking, as a broad range of people, many with a focus on aquatic systems, we highlight six key foci that offer potential to strengthen delivery of the framework and break the ‘business as usual’ logjam. These foci are as follows: (i) a reframing of the narrative of ‘people's relationship with the rest of nature’ and emphasize the crucial role of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities in delivering positive biodiversity change; (ii) moving beyond a focus on species and places by prioritizing ecosystem function and resilience; (iii) supporting a diversity of top‐down and bottom‐up governance processes; (iv) embracing new technologies to make and measure progress; (v) linking business more effectively with biodiversity and (vi) leveraging the power of international agencies and programmes. Given they are linked to a greater or lesser degree, implementing these six foci together will lead to a much‐needed broadening of the framework, especially those of business and broader urban civil society, as well as those of Indigenous Peoples and Local Communities. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

Research into public perceptions of wildlife conservation and management can identify misunderstanding or bias and provide data needed to effectively target outreach with the goal of improving policy outcomes. This study identifies gaps and bias in media coverage of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), an international agreement regulating trade in flora and fauna that attracts a significant amount of public attention, and that has in recent years increasingly incorporated protections for commercially exploited marine species. To examine one contributor to public understanding of processes and outcomes for marine species conservation at CITES, we performed a media content and discourse analysis for popular press articles from English-speaking newspapers worldwide (N = 102). Our analysis focused on how, and how often, marine species issues are discussed in the media, which experts are interviewed, which perspectives are highlighted, and whether important details and nuances known to experts are presented accurately (or at all). We show that proposals to list marine species on CITES appendices are discussed less often than proposals to list charismatic terrestrial species (e.g., elephants), and these proposals for trade controls on marine species are framed differently. Discussions centering on sharks and rays as a homogeneous group far exceed discussions of individual species, despite notably distinct risk profiles for different species. Extinction is rarely discussed and is poorly explained in the context of marine species. The contribution of marine species exploitation to local and global food security issues and fisher livelihoods is not discussed at all. Advocates from environmental non-profit groups dominate the list of interviewed experts, with alternative perspectives from groups linked to sustainable management like UNFAO (the United Nations agency with a fisheries mandate) and academics, rarely mentioned. Additionally, the fishing industry’s perspective on issues surrounding the conservation of commercially exploited marine species is rarely represented. Recommendations for both follow-up research and practical steps to ensure a more balanced inclusion of the perspectives of key stakeholders are included.

International trade in vulnerable marine species is regulated once they are listed in CITES Appendices (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora). Parties to the Convention submit proposal(s) 150 days prior to the CITES Conference for voting on the inclusion of new species in Appendices I and II, making a case for why CITES listing criteria are met in each case. Before the vote, Parties receive advice from (a) the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, (b) the International Union for Conservation of Nature-TRAFFIC and (c) the CITES Secretariat, among others. This paper offers an expert review of listing processes, which are the subject of much debate in fishery and environment-protection communities, looking at two specific cases: silky shark (Carcharhinus falciformis, Carcharhinidae) and bigeye thresher shark (Alopias superciliosus, Alopiidae). The reviewers determine that the evidence made available to voting Parties is substantial, but suffers from non-standard presentation across assessments. The best available data are not always presented or described transparently in relation to CITES criteria. An extension of the assessment period, as well as the opportunity to refute evidence, has been suggested as ways to support more informed and effective decision-making by CITES Parties, whose composition of delegations varies greatly in their experience of marine species management and trade. Experts welcomed a greater coherence of advice between fishery and non-fishery sources in the long term, and proposed a range of suggested improvements for the delivery of information and advice to CITES Parties.

Advancing our understanding of ocean biogeochemistry, biology, and ecosystems relies on the ability to make observations both in the ocean and at the critical boundaries between the ocean and other earth systems at relevant spatial and temporal scales. After decades of advancement in ocean observing technologies, one of the key remaining challenges is how to cost-effectively make measurements at the increased resolution necessary for illuminating complex system processes and rapidly evolving changes. In recent years, biogeochemical in situ sensors have been emerging that are threefold or more lower in cost than established technologies; the cost reduction for many biological in situ sensors has also been significant, although the absolute costs are still relatively high. Cost savings in these advancements has been driven by miniaturization, new methods of packaging, and lower-cost mass-produced components such as electronics and materials. Recently, field projects have demonstrated the potential for science-quality data collection via large-scale deployments using cost-effective sensors and deployment strategies. In the coming decade, it is envisioned that ocean biogeochemistry and biology observations will be revolutionized by continued innovation in sensors with increasingly low price points and the scale-up of deployments of these in situ sensor technologies. The goal of this study is therefore to: (1) provide a review of existing sensor technologies that are already achieving cost-effectiveness compared with traditional instrumentation, (2) present case studies of cost-effective in situ deployments that can provide insight into methods for bridging observational gaps, (3) identify key challenge areas where progress in cost reduction is lagging, and (4) present a number of potentially transformative directions for future ocean biogeochemical and biological studies using cost-effective technologies and deployment strategies.

Biodiversity mainstreaming, the consideration of biodiversity across fisheries and the range of actions taken by both fisheries and conservation governance streams is the subject of this paper. Evidence is presented that the global fishery community incrementally adopted sustainable development principles from both before and after the 1992 adoption of the Convention on Biological Diversity, integrating a broader set of ecosystems goals into fisheries. Actions taken by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and regional and national fishery agencies to fulfil their mandate are discussed, in addition to objectives for more sustainable fisheries that have led to significant expansions in legal frameworks, policies and practices in terms of biodiversity conservation. The paper also highlights the growing importance of cross-sectoral cooperation in the resolution of historical disagreements between fisheries and environmental interests, in spite of the various sectoral interests. In this evolution, despite many target stocks not yet being sustainably managed, fisheries approaches are progressively focusing on a broader range of biodiversity considerations, whereas conservation interests are increasingly adopting more socially inclusive approaches. Looking ahead to the future, biodiversity conservation will continue to be of growing importance in fisheries, and presented here, are examples of how past and on-going developments in fisheries challenge the pessimistic picture promoted by some environment-focused advocacy papers. To continue this successful mainstreaming, greater implementation efforts are needed to deliver outcomes at all scales, requiring greater capacity, particularly in developing countries and strengthening of investment in integrated partnerships between fisheries and environment sectors.