Datasets can be mapped in a GIS and evaluated as spatial layers which helps visual interpretation of candidate EBSA criteria. Candidate EBSAs can be identified by meeting a single criterion, but it is likely that an impracticably large number of areas on the High Seas would be identified using this approach. Combining a number of criteria is more practical, particularly when candidate EBSAs are being considered for protection as part of a wider MPA network (i.e. when decisions have to be made about which areas are more worthy of protection, and which areas have properties that make them particularly suitable to include in a network). There are many ways in which the seven

EBSA criteria can be combined, depending upon the objective/s of the identification process. The most appropriate combination of criteria can be determined a priori, selleck chemicals or the results of different multi-criteria RNA Synthesis inhibitor combinations can be assessed to see how well each combination meets the objective of the identification process. (4) Identify and assess candidate EBSAs Identification of candidate EBSA areas will, in many cases, be based on an evaluation of several or all

criteria. Whether a particular area meets all or just a few of the criteria is a simple way to contribute to assessing the relative value or worth of a potential EBSA candidate. The relative contribution of each criterion can also be compared. For example, one area might have much higher levels of biological diversity than another area which also exceeds Fludarabine concentration the threshold to satisfy this criterion. Once identified, there is an established process for formally submitting candidate EBSAs to the CBD, and for their ratification. Candidate EBSAs (and associated data and metadata) are

submitted to the EBSA Repository via Regional Workshops; then submissions undergo an initial validation by the SBSTTA which submits a report detailing EBSA recommendations to the Conference Of Parties (COP), which can endorse the recommendation and pass it to the UNGA Ad Hoc Open-ended Informal Working Group on Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction for ratification (Dunn et al., 2011). Following the development of the four-step method described above, we conducted a practical test of the method using data on seamounts in the South Pacific Ocean. The area to be examined was defined as the High Seas in the South Pacific Ocean, from the boundaries of the Australian EEZ to the Chilean EEZ and latitudes 20° S to 60° S. This region was selected for the practical test because the majority of the GOBI-CenSeam workshop participants were familiar with the seamounts and biota of this region. Yesson et al. (2011) predict a total of 3412 seamounts in this region with summit depths ranging from 52 to 4995 m. The seamounts within this region are found within 5 lower bathyal and 4 abyssal biogeographic provinces (Watling et al., 2013) (Fig. 2). Section 2.