A participatory, criteria-based workflow to identify promising marine peri artisanal OECMs in Cameroon and the implications for national reporting and governance

A participatory, criteria-based workflow to identify promising marine peri artisanal OECMs in Cameroon and the implications for national reporting and governance | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article A participatory, criteria-based workflow to identify promising marine peri artisanal OECMs in Cameroon and the implications for national reporting and governance Felix Besack, Audry Constant Mbock Nemba, Leonard Usongo, Xavier Ndoungteng Ndjamo, and 8 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9166498/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract In Cameroon, like other coastal countries of the world, marine species are declining at a faster rate than terrestrial and or freshwater species. In order to build capacities for improving the effective management that promote community surveillance, combating illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing in its territorial waters, a participatory intervention is required to ensure the long-term outcomes of in situ conservation of resources. The objective of this work was to identify Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) in Cameroon and bring out guidelines for their implementation as Marine Peri-Artisanal OECMs. To achieve this objective, a methodology, consisting of meetings, seminars, workshops, data collection and data analysis was spanned out from march 2023 to april 2024. These events were organized by the Cameroon Wild life Conservation Society (CWCS) and six (06) grassroots NGOs selected based on their conservation actions. Other stakeholders like the government, community representatives, Conservators of Marine protected Areas (MPAs) were also invited. A total of forty-six (46) candidate sites were identified. Most of them highlighted community-based (51%) management, followed by the traditional or ancestral (15%) methods. After screening and hedonistic analysis, the results showed that, in the Rio Ntem zone, sites like the Ntem estuary and Bahondo with less suitable management, have the highest species diversity. In the Tiko and Douala-Edea area, the sites with a better management are Bona’Anja and Manoka. The commentators also agreed at 100% that the setting up of OECMs in Cameroon is a voluntary participatory process and the 3 steps guiding their identification and declaration are (i) prior identification (ii) Categorization and (iii) governance and management. To conclude, the total surface area likely to be protected by other effective area-based conservation measures is 435.33km 2 and account for about 5.1% of the territorial waters rising conservation estate to 28% that best fit the 30 by 30 objective of the biodiversity convention. IUU fishing OECMs Marine Peri-Artisanal hedonistic analysis Territorial waters and Cameroon’s coastal zone Figures Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Figure 7 Figure 8 Figure 9 Figure 10 Figure 11 Figure 12 Figure 13 1. Introduction Protected areas (PAs) have long been the cornerstone of national and international biodiversity conservation strategies, supported by governments and global initiatives such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (Dudley, 2008 ). PAs safeguard endangered species, bolster essential ecosystem services, assist in climate change mitigation, and frequently shield human communities alongside culturally or spiritually significant locations (Watson et al., 2014 ). However, numerous studies indicate that PAs alone are unable to prevent biodiversity loss due to ongoing deficiencies in ecological coverage and management efficacy (Maxwell et al., 2020 ; Nature, 2016 ). Recognizing the necessity for supplementary conservation strategies beyond the PAs, CBD Aichi Target 11 (2010) explicitly mandated the conservation of a minimum of 17% of terrestrial and 10% of marine areas via effectively managed protected areas and "Other Effective area-based Conservation Measures" (OECMs), incorporated into the wider landscape and seascape (CBD, 2010 ; Dobson, 2005 ; Smith et al., 2010 ). In 2018, the Parties to the CBD established a formal definition of OECMs as geographically delineated areas external to the formal protected area network, which are governed and managed to achieve positive and enduring sustainable outcomes for in situ biodiversity conservation, along with associated ecosystem functions and services, and, where relevant, cultural or socio-economic values (CBD, 2018 ; Jonas et al., 2018 ; Marnewick et al., 2021 ; Timpte et al., 2018 ). The Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, established in 2022, enhances the significance of OECMs by instituting a "30 by 30" objective to safeguard 30% of terrestrial and marine environments by 2030, encouraging nations to broaden conservation efforts beyond official APs (Belote & Wilson, 2020 ; Paterson, 2024 , 2025 ). OECMs, as a novel paradigm, have garnered heightened worldwide attention (Alves-Pinto et al., 2021 ; Paterson, 2022 , 2023 ), particularly during discussions around the post-2020 global biodiversity framework. Research indicates that adequate acknowledgment and assistance for OECMs can engage local stakeholders and complement networks of APs by fostering connectivity, enhancing ecosystem management, and securing enduring conservation results (Borrini-Feyerabend et al., 2010 ; Diz et al., 2018 ; Juffe-Bignoli et al., 2016 ; Timpte et al., 2018 ). Nonetheless, despite the increasing global interest, the implementation of OECMs in various nations continues to pose challenges. The international conservation community has established criteria for the identification, monitoring, and reporting of OECMs to promote adoption (CBD, 2018 ; IUCN, 2022 ; Lemieux, 2025 ; Paterson, 2023 ; Stevens et al., 2024 ; Timpte et al., 2018 ). Nevertheless, numerous barriers persist that impede their practical implementation (Bingham et al., 2017 ; Bingham et al., 2021 ; Mitchell et al., 2018 ). The absence of formal acknowledgment and explicit reporting protocols (Jonas et al., 2014 ), ambiguities in governance and management duties, along with apprehensions that the acknowledgment of a OECM might result in more stringent regulations akin to a de facto protected area, have engendered hesitance among certain stakeholders (Jonas et al., 2017 ; MacKinnon et al., 2015 ). Securing the enduring safety and effectiveness of OECMs is difficult in the absence of sufficient legal and institutional backing (Bingham et al., 2021 ; Mwamidi et al., 2018 ). At the national level, Cameroon has demonstrated its commitment to marine conservation by creating new Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in recent years. Douala-Edea National Park was designated in 2018 (≈ 262,900 ha, including a coastal and marine section) and Manyange Na Elombo-Campo National Marine Park in 2021 (110,300 ha), and a third site, the proposed Ndongoré Marine National Park (≈ 121,600 ha), is in the process of being registered in the official gazette. However, these government-designated MPAs alone cannot protect all marine biodiversity (Geldmann et al., 2019 ). Cameroon's coastline is also home to many areas under local or sectoral management that contribute to conservation, such as community-managed mangroves, artisanal fishing areas, sacred coastal sites, militarily restricted areas, and seasonal fishing areas without harvesting (Sonkoué et al., 2019 ). These areas could potentially qualify as OECMs, but they currently lack formal recognition and support within the national conservation framework. At the same time, Cameroon's marine and coastal resources are under great pressure due to unsustainable use. Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) industrial fishing, poaching of protected species (class A and B species under national law) as well as habitat destruction through pollution and coastal development all threaten marine biodiversity (Mbevo Fendoung et al., 2022 ). These pressures have pushed small-scale fisheries to the limits of sustainability, undermining both ecosystem health and local livelihoods (Richard, 2023 ). While community-led conservation initiatives can help address these threats, the lack of clear criteria and legal guidelines to recognize and manage OECMs has so far hampered their implementation. Cameroon has yet to grant formal status to potential OECM sites, and the OECM concept remains poorly understood by many stakeholders due to its recent introduction (Paterson, 2023 ). No specific policies or regulations currently exist to determine how to identify or support OECMs, and existing frameworks do not sufficiently consider the property rights of local or private communities in conservation areas (Jonas et al., 2017 ; MacKinnon et al., 2015 ; Mwamidi et al., 2018 ). In this context, our study aims to address these gaps by (1) conducting a diagnostic assessment to identify and characterize potential marine MCO sites in Cameroon, (2) developing harmonized criteria for the selection of marine MCOs, and (3) proposing legal guidelines to support the implementation and long-term monitoring of MCOs in the country's coastal and marine waters. 2. Material and method The coastal zone of Cameroon extends from the Rio Del Rey estuary to the Ntem estuary near Equatorial Guinea, passing through the Cameroon Estuary complex in the littoral zone (Fig. 1 ). The Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of this country covers about 16,547 km 2 . The Rio del Rey estate is located in the northern part of the Cameroonian coast and stretches from the border with Nigeria to Njangassa, including the islands off the estuary. This area is administratively located in the South-West region of Cameroon. The Tiko and Douala-Edea zone includes the Wouri estuary, the maritime area of the Sanaga delta and the Tiko region. This area is drained by the estuaries of the Sanaga, Kwakwa, Dibamba, Wauri and Moungo rivers. It is also described as the sandy coast. Finally, the Rio Ntem estate is located in the southern part of the Cameroonian coast. This is the area that has alternating rocky, sandy and muddy beaches. From a hydrological point of view, it is watered by the estuaries of the Ntem, Lobé, Kienké, Lokoundjé and Nyong rivers. This region is characterized by a Guinean-type equatorial climate and a Cameroonian coastal subtype (humid and hot) composed of two seasons: a long rainy season from March to October and a short dry season from November to February (Nei & Takahata, 1993 ). Temperatures vary between 23°C and 33.5°C with a monthly average of around 28°C. The main species are mangroves such as Rhizophora racemosa , which occupy about 90% of the forest floor. Other species present are R. mangle and R. harrisonii , Avicennia germinans (Acanthaceae), and inland are Laguncularia racemosa and Conocarpus erectus (both Combretaceae) (Ajonina et al., 2008 ; Ajonina, 2008 ; Mama et al., 2024 ). The most permanent fish species include pseudolithus, caranx, pomadasy, sardinella, illisha, galeoides, Palinurus and Peneaus, ethmalosa, tilapia, T. guineensis, liza, mugil, elops, cynoglossus, clams, etc. Other species of special interest found in the area include: African Manatee (Vulnerable), Goliath Frog (Endangered), Scalloped Shell Hammerhead Shark (Critically Endangered), Angel Shark (Critically Endangered), Atlantic Humpback Dolphin (Critically Endangered), Green Tutle (Endangered), Leatherback Sea Turtle (vulnerable), Hawksbill ( critically endangered), Olive ridley turtle (vulnerable) (Gilbert et al., 2025 ; IUCN-WCPA, 2023 ; IUCN, 2022 ) To achieve this objective, a methodology was developed taking into account office work, meetings, seminars, workshops and fieldwork (Fig. 2 ). These events were organized to design the scope of OECMs, prepare field activities, validate OECMs candidate sites after data collection and analysis to present them as future management measures in Cameroon. Various non-governmental organizations (CWCS, AJESH, PEW, TUBE-AWU, CAMECO, WTG and ASCON) have been actively involved in the implementation activities. These grassroots NGOs were selected based on their involvement in conservation activities in their areas of work (the applicants' sites). They consolidated the knowledge of local stakeholders and other partners such as municipal councils and administrative authorities. Figure 2 below summarize the methodology used and the different steps for the identification and selection of OECMs from candidate sites. 2.1. Processing of marine peri-artisanal Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) in Cameroon Several workshops were held after the awareness-raising and launch ceremony. These workshops consisted of three types: introductory workshops (stages 1 and 2), that took place before the field phases (stages 3–6) and validation workshops (stage 7) to validate the results obtained (Fig. 3 ). The introductory phase aimed to introduce the concept of OECMs to the population (stage 1) and the Government (stage 2). It ends up by an acceptance letter from the ministry in charge of conservation and protected areas in Cameroon. Stages 3 to 6 facilitated the design of the input mask, encompassing all pertinent data for the characterization of the OECMs; the testing of these masks under actual field conditions; the rectification of biases and adaptation of the input mask to local contexts; and the processing and analysis of data gathered by the relevant organizations. In stage 7, it was necessary to present all the results to the expert groups, administrative and governmental authorities, as well as the relevant third parties. 2.1.1. Introductory workshops After the launching ceremony, the first workshop (introductory workshop) was organized in Nkolafamba-Yaoundé from 8 to 11 March 2023 to introduce OECM in Cameroon. This workshop was overseen by the Ministry of Forest and Wildlife Conservation (MINFOF) and the Cameroon Wildlife Conservation Society (CWCS) as leading NGOs. Other participants included coastal and marine stakeholders such as grassroots NGOs, MPA conservators, Merchant marine/Navy, coastal community representatives, universities, administrative authorities, fishermen representatives and other government entities working in coastal and marine areas. It concluded with awareness raising, framing and strengthening research on other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). This workshop led to the signing and publication of Ministerial Decision No. 0365/MINFOF/SETAT/SG/DFAP/CJ/SDCF/SAIF/IMO of 26 April 2023 of the Ministry of Wildlife Conservation (MINFOF, Ministry in charge of protected areas in Cameroon) implementing the resolutions of the workshop, thus recognizing the extension of the Douala-Edea axis to the entire seascape and the importance of marine resources and OECMs in Cameroon. In addition, this ministerial decision resulted in a high-level cross-sectoral awareness-raising and capacity-building workshop on marine OECMs in Cameroon, on 30 April 2023 in Yaoundé (Nkolafamba), with the participation of local NGOs, academia and conservation experts. The decision taken by the Minister was the approval of the implementation of the process of identification, selection and management of OECMs in Cameroon. This required a pre-testing process, fieldwork activities/data collection, analysis (screening and mapping) and validation of candidate sites as well as a report of the results of the final findings on the OECM in Cameroon. 2.1.2. Pre-testing field workshop To accelerate the identification, selection, mapping and reporting of marine peri-artisanal OECMs in Cameroon, the different participants met several times and developed a specific methodology for the identification and selection of candidate sites based on the guidelines provided by IUCN (2018) (IUCN-WCPA, 2018 ; Leung et al., 2018 ). It started with a previous workshop (from 17 to 18 August 2023, step 3) in the city of Edea, near Douala (the economic capital of Cameroon). It was an awareness and capacity building on the inventory of OECMs, the identification of indicators and the harmonization of data collection sheets were the main focus of this workshop. The participants of this workshop were, CWCS staff and local NGO partners, three (03) consultants, four (04) NGOs associated with the OECMs, the two (02) conservators of the two marine protected areas (MPAs) already gazatted, as well as six (06) universities experts. At the end of this field-pre-testing workshop (step 03), a data collection sheet was consolidated and validated, the timeline of the pre-test activities was harmonized, and the data sampling techniques were setup by the CWCS data quality control team. This culminated in the testing activities in the vicinity of Edea. The trial began by separating participants into 4 groups, each of which began by reviewing all indicators and categories of OECMs. A series of brainstorming sessions with experts in collaboration with the experienced University of EXETER in England (coaching) was also organized to consolidate the information. The critical results of these pre-tests were (i) the classification of potential sites into three (03) groups (inland, coastal and marine OECMs) and each group could be classified into different categories: primary, secondary and ancillary according to IUCN-WCPA, ( 2019 ) and Stevens et al., ( 2024 ) criteria and guidelines. Other outputs were (ii) validation and consolidation of a data collection sheet, (iii) development of explanatory notes as well as (4) a data collection methodology. 2.1.3. Field testing activities The field-testing activities took place during the month of October 2023. The various NGOs in the field and partner associations were deployed in their different areas of action to identify and consolidate potential candidate sites for the OECM. The planning of the fieldwork was carried out under the technical guidance of the CWCS data quality control team to harmonize data collection. Information on the location of candidate sites, area, type of management and management measure, species diversity, species richness and IUCN species were collected using the data collection sheet. 2.1.4. Post-field-testing workshop The results of the field-testing work were presented at another workshop held between 13 and 14 November 2023. All difficulties were reported and some adjustments were made to prepare future field activities. Due to the complexity of field measurements in some potential OECMs sites and the need for GPS manipulations, the field test workshop was immediately followed by a training workshop on data collecting techniques, the use of GPS and aerial drones (photogrammetry) that took place on the 15th and 16th November 2023. These two workshops were entitled " Workshop to raise awareness and strengthen surveys carried out by local marine and coastal partners on other effective area-based conservation measures in Cameroon ". The pre-testing, field testing and post-field-testing workshops helped to familiarized the local actors (stakeholders) to the concept of OECMs, identification of criteria, the mapping of sites and the collection the data related to biodiversity. 2.1.5. Field activities and data collection Since the implementation of Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECM) encounters challenges such as their identification, monitoring and mapping, ensuring equitable governance and addressing potential risks such as misapplication or neglecting cumulative threats to biodiversity. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in order to gather in-depth insights and challenges regarding each OECM to facilitate decision-making based on various elements. These semi-structured interviews were useful for eliciting perceptions, judgments, and sensitive information from a wide range of actors (Newing et al., 2011 ). Interviews were conducted between experts and stakeholders directly or indirectly involved in the OECMs candidate sites. A total of 46 candidate sites were examined separately and at least 30% of the stakeholders in each candidate site were interviewed using a stratified sampling technique. These interviews were conducted between November 1, 2023 and January 30, 2024. In addition to the perception studies, other data were collected over a period of 2 months (November 20, 2023 to January 31, 2024). The data collected were grouped according to the type and category of the site, the management measure, the management authority, the level of urbanization, the surface area of the site, the nature of the boundaries, the land ownership and the biodiversity (relative abundance, species richness and proportion of threatened species). While the level of urbanization was observed through direct observation, the management authority inventory was done using the data collection sheet and interviews. Also, the participatory mapping was done using GPS of brand GARMIN 64 to move round each site. To monitor the fish diversity, fish samples were collected from the local fishing ground in each site. The species were identified using identification keys as performed by Nemba et al. ( 2022 ). The parameters studied in this methodology included Equitability, Effective management, cultural and spiritual believed, policy and legal framework, degree of effectiveness, local communities right and worries (Table 1 ). This information is crucial in the characterization of the sites and the screening process that enables the identification and future monitoring of sites and well as describing their governance model. Table 1 Summary of the different parameters investigated in the candidates for the sites of the Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs). Parameter studied Reason Explaination Equitability Governance OECMs should promote equitable governance, effective management, and positive conservation outcomes, including engaging with a diverse range of rights-holders and stakeholders. Effective Management Operational questions like costs and benefits, spatial dimensions of OECM management, and the role of OECMs in ecosystem-based approaches to fisheries need to be addressed. Cultural and Spiritual Beliefs The diverse cultural and spiritual beliefs, complex forms of governance, and management types in different OECMs might unfold in diverse conservation outcomes. Policy and Legal framework Strong policy and legal frameworks at national and sectoral levels are essential for supporting OECM implementation. level effectiveness Identification and Monitoring There's uncertainty in how effectiveness an OECMs is, measuring effectiveness with tools that need to demonstrate effectiveness long-term. Burden on Local Communities Ensuring that the burden to prove effectiveness does not fall to already under-resourced local and Indigenous communities. Data and Resources Accurately identifying and monitoring OECMs can be challenging due to the newness of the concept and inadequate resources in some countries. 2.1.6. Verification and validation On 15 January 2024, an internal validation of the OECMs interim report was carried out by various organizations, partner NGOs, representatives of local communities, administrative staffs and consultants. The results and methodology were also shared during an international validation process of the Marine and Coastal Conservation Programme in Gambia, West Africa, from 27 April 2024 (Fig. 3 , stage 7). After this, a second national validation was then carried out in June 2024. This brought together a wider spectrum of actors, including representatives of local stakeholders, civil society actors, NGOs, ministries and other sectoral actors of the introductory ceremony. 2.2. Data analysis After the field work and methodology mentioned above, all the datasets from the different organizations were subjected to a quality control and harmonization (units verification/scaling, coding of the qualitative data into alpha numerical etc). A descriptive statistic (frequence, mean and standard deviation) was performed using the software XLSTAT 2017version. This step was followed by a hedonic analysis, done by quoting different levels or intensity of a given criteria with numbers ranging from 1 to 5 (Fig. 4 ), represented in the explanatory notes as absent (1), low (less than 3), medium (3–4) and high (5) as shown in multi criteria analysis (Saarty et al., 1985). This qualitative analysis as absent, low, medium, high and very high was defined by the explanatory notes of the data collection sheet. The species diversity was computed as the number of species present in each site compared to the total number of species registered brought to percentages and converted to qualitative appreciation (absent, low, high etc) (Fig. 4 ). This analysis enables the classification of sites based on their importance with respect to the description of the parameter investigated. The radar graphics computed from the above values helped to compare two or more sites including an ideal site (A virtual site with best performance of the variables studied) introduced as a reference site to scale the monitoring process. 2.2.1. Selection (first screening) of marine and coastal OECMs sites in Cameroon The selection of candidate OECMs consisted of choosing the OECMs from the candidate sites according to the criteria developed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and the World Commission on Protected Areas (IUCN-WCPA, 2019 ; IUCN, 2022 ; Murphy et al., 2023 ). However, these criteria do not take into account the aspect of land ownership and title, which are important parameters in the long-term management of coastal zones in Cameroon. Here, specific criteria and guidelines for the long-term benefits of selected OECMs should be drafted and supported by an agreement between the parties concerned and the administrative authority (territorial administration) to resolve land ownership disputes. This led to a modification and adaptation of the IUCN (IUCN, 2022 ; Murphy et al., 2023 ) criteria for OECMs screening in Cameroon. The modified criteria are presented in Table 2 below. Table 2 Screening criteria for the selection of Marine Peri-Artisanal Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) in Cameroon. Criteria Explaination Criterion 1 Ensure that the area is not already registered as a protected area or as part of a protected area (the area is not recognized as a protected area). This is the first criterion essential for qualifying an area as an OECM. An area can be declared an OECM if it has not been recognized as a protected area in any of the six IUCN categories; Criterion 2 Ensure that the area has the essential conservation characteristics with effective conservation, favorable governance and management (i.e the area is governed and managed) Criterion 3 Ensure that conservation outcomes can be sustained in the long term, e.g. through legal/other effective means (long-term sustained in situ conservation of biodiversity) Criterion 4 Ensure that the objective of in situ area-based conservation, rather than sustainable use, is an appropriate priority (associated ecosystem functions and services). Criterion 5 Ensure that land ownership or land owner (s) is (are) in accordance with the long-term conservation actions and will not overlaps the land uses over a given period of time that will be defined in the management plan of the site (signing of conservation agreements between land owner and management/conservation authority (some time NGOs or associations) in the presence of the administrative authorities as the legal guaranty). 2.2.2. Multi-criteria visualization for site assessment and merging To support the screening, prioritization and merging of candidate OECMs, a multi-criteria assessment framework was developed. This framework was based on data collected during semi-structured interviews (see section 2.1.5 ), field observations and expert validation workshops (section 2.1.6 ). Each candidate site was evaluated along three dimensions: Governance (including community participation, transparency and accountability), Socio-economics (local livelihood benefits, equity and resource dependence) and Biophysics (species richness, presence of threatened species and habitat integrity). Scores for each dimension were assigned on a five-point scale (1 = very low, 5 = very high) following the explanatory notes of the data collection sheet. This approach aligns with established methodologies for the identification and evaluation of OECMs, which emphasize the integration of ecological, social and governance criteria (Hockings et al., 2019 ; Lemieux et al., 2022 ; Saaty, 2008 ). Two complementary visualisation tools were used to facilitate decision-making. First, a cross-matrix scoring approach was applied to compare candidate sites across governance-related indicators and perceived effects on biodiversity and fisheries. The resulting matrix (Fig. 11 ) allows a rapid identification of sites where strong governance co-occurs with positive conservation outcomes, as well as sites where governance gaps may compromise long-term effectiveness. Such matrix-based approaches are widely used in conservation planning to synthesize qualitative and semi-quantitative data (Addison et al., 2018 ; Jonas, 2021 ). Second, radar diagrams (also known as spider or polar charts) were generated to provide a multidimensional profile of each conservation category identified during the pre-screening phase. Radar charts are increasingly recommended for visualizing trade-offs and synergies among multiple criteria in area-based conservation assessments (IUCN-WCPA, 2019 ; Kukkala & Moilanen, 2017 ). Each axis in the radar diagram (Fig. 12 ) corresponds to one of the three evaluation dimensions (Governance, Socio-economics, Biophysics). The plots enable a quick visual comparison of strengths and weaknesses across categories, which is particularly useful for the merging process (Table 3 ) and for validating the consistency of scores assigned in the cross-matrix (Fig. 11 ). Categories that showed complementary profiles were considered for merging, while categories with consistently low scores across all dimensions were either excluded or subjected to further field verification. 2.2.3. Merging (second screening) of selected Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) sites and refresh processes The potential OECMs sites were grouped or merged to facilitate future conservation management (materialization, monitoring, surveillance and other support). The merging process was conducted with respect to the following criteria (Table 3 ). Figure 4 below presents the generalized local Criteria Based Assessment pathway of marine peri-artisanal OECMs in Cameroon. It is clear from this flowchart that, sites were either selected or pre-rejected after screening. In the context of the country, pre rejected sites were subjected to either improve governance, enhance participation of the community and support or capacity building to reevaluate the site. The reselected and initially selected sites were further analyzed with a multi criteria tool for final classification of OECMs in Cameroon (Table 4 ). Table 3 Criteria for merging certain Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) sites. Criteria Explanation Criteria 1 The sites were merged if they were very close (less than 5km separation) Criteria 2 When several sites were close to each other (less than 5 km apart), merging priority was given to those with the same management measures and/or system; Criteria 3 A site not initially selected could be refreshed if it is located between two or more selected sites; Criteria 4 Sites of touristic interest having a conservation objective (private OECMs) were also considered as OECMs only if they have a minimum surface of 1hectare with a guaranty of long-term conservation of resources 3. Results and discussions The results of the final report gave rise to guidelines and directives on Marine-Peri-Artisanal OECMs in Cameroon. 3.1 Characterization of the candidates OECMs sites There are many forms of area-based management that provide conservation value but do not fit within the MPA framework because they may not have conservation as their primary objective and therefore, have not traditionally been considered to contribute to direct conservation (Jonas et al., 2018 ). Such sites were recognized as OECMs based on specific criteria (management measures and management objectives, urbanization level, biodiversity etc) as documented by (CBD, 2018 ). In this study, a total of fourty-six (46) candidate OECMs sites were identified and reported by the various organizations based on these criteria. Each criterion was analyses base on the data collected and the results of the characterization presented as below. 3.1.1 Management measures and management Authorities During this investigation, four (04) management measures were identified within the 46 candidates marine OECM sites. The most encountered management measure is community-based (51%), followed by the traditional or ancesttral (15%). The rest of the sites were shared between hybrid or mixed (12%), private (8%), government or state management (10%) (Fig. 5 ). 3.1.2 Typology of OECMs based on the management objective The candidates OECMs identified during the field work (phase 2 of OECM processing) are of three (3) types depending on the primary objectives of the site management (Fig. 6 ). Their descriptive analysis revealed that 76.1% of the prospective OECM sites had conservation objectives as their principal goal yet have not been designated as protected areas. They could be described as primary or category 1 OECMs. Similarly, 10% of the sites has biodiversity outcomes as a by-product of the cultural and spiritual management objective (Ancillary or type 3 OECMs). These sites could also be recognized as category 3 OECMs and included, tomes sites, sacred sites etc. Some of the sites (14%) did not declare any cultural, spiritual or conservation objective and includes harbor zones, presidency sites, fishing camps, landing sites and conflicts zones. They could be regarded as type 2 OECMs. 3.1.3 Biodiversity (Species richness, Relative abundance and threatened species) The results on biodiversity revealed that, most of these potential OECMs (46%) have very high species richness. Similarly, 26% of the sites presented a high species richness. On the other hand, the low and medium specie richness were represented by 13% and 15% of sites respectively (Fig. 7 A). The Red List IUCN species encountered in the candidates’ sites were mostly composed of fish species (63%) like Torpedo bauchotae, Rhinobatos rhinobatos, Carcharhinus limbatus and Sphyrna lewini . Sea turtles like Lepidochelys olivacea represents only 3%, while formed of shrimps and aquatic birds are respectively represented by 17% and 8% (Fig. 7 B). The classification of these Red LIST species revealed that, 41% of the species are threatened at low level. Similarly, the medium, high and very high level of threatened species highlighted proportions of 19%, 7% and 7% respectively. In the same way, 26% of species did not define the status of their burden with respect to IUCN Red list (Fig. 7 C). 3.1.4 Level of urbanization along the sites The level of urbanization within or in the proximity of a site is also an important indicator in the selection of OECMs. A site that is degraded or destroyed without a restoration process is not appropriate to be consider as OECM. This also means that an ecosystem in highly threatened area and/or with high value for agriculture and development is expected to have no or little protection and hence conservation outcomes. Concluding, it will not be considered as an OECM. Looking at Urbanization level in this way (Fig. 8 ), this study revealed that only 9% of the 46 candidates (potential) sites were heavily built-up (high level urbanization) and could be disqualified following this criterion. Similarly, 11% of the sites revealed a moderate urbanization and were equally subjected to a rejection. Inversely, 39% of the sites presented a low level of urbanization and hence suitable for OECM declaration. This value increased to 41% for sites without urbanization. These sites could also be declared as highly suitable for OECM declaration since they are natural and free from any modification. 3.2. Inventory of identified Marine Peri-Artisanal OECMs in Cameroon 3.2.1. Size and Management measure After the first screening (Table 3 ), a total of 31 sites were selected via the procedures developed by IUCN ( 2022 ). A description of these sites is presented in Table 4 together with their administrative locations along the coastal regions. The sizes of the selected OECMs were investigated to have a view of the surface area to be protected with respect to the 30 by 30 convention on biodiversity. Table 4 below presents the sites eligible as OECMs along the Cameroon coast. Also, the results of this inventory show that, the selected sites have an average surface area of ​​1104 ± 1938 hectares (Table 5 ). This value ranged from 3.48 hectares (smallest) to 8940.16 hectares (largest). In other words, the total surface area of OECMs selected is 435.326 km 2 and represent about 5.1% of the Cameroon’s territorial waters (8534 km 2 ). Consequently, the surface area conserved through MPAs (23%) and OECMs (5.1%) in Cameroon will be shift to about 28.1%, which nearer to the 30% of the 30 by 30 CBD objective. Table 4 Description of Marine peri- Artisanal OECMs selected. No Name of site Region Areas (hectares) Areas (km2) Conservation Measure and Important Attribute 1 Nature of font (funge domot) South West 213.91 2.14 Community management in which the entire community participates in decision-making 2 Mangrove reserve (romussa) South West 192.92 1.93 Community management in which the entire community participates in decision-making 3 Marine spiritual worship area (mututu 1 $ 2) South West 702.7 7.03 Community management in which the entire community participates in decision-making 4 Ndongore Forest Reserve South West 50.5 0.51 Community management in which the entire community participates in decision-making 5 Community reserve (Ekondo titi beach) South West 107.26 1.07 Community management in which the entire community participates in decision-making 6 Estuary (godgift) South West 295 2.95 Community management in which the entire community participates in decision-making 7 Gold Coast South West 651.72 6.52 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 8 Barrack South West 6287.91 62.88 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 9 New Jerusalem South West 758.05 7.58 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 10 Koborkoh (nyaekan) South West 363.18 3.63 Community management in which the entire community participates in decision-making 11 Okoh Creek South West 779.34 7.79 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 12 Isu South West 2344 23.44 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 13 Ngosso South West 577.25 5.77 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 14 Makoli South West 878.2 8.78 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 15 Black bush (community reserve) South West 129.38 129.38 Community management in which the entire community participates in decision-making 16 Community reserve (Nyanga domot) South West 158.26 158.26 Community management in which the entire community participates in decision-making 17 Ntem estuary South 3.48 3.48 Community management in which the entire community participates in decision-making 18 Bamusso South West 1046.66 1046.66 Community management in which the entire community participates in decision-making 19 Liongo South West 446.16 446.16 Community management in which the entire community participates in decision-making 20 Bikiri beach South West 540.65 540.65 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 21 Kangue French Littoral 1415.72 1415.72 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 22 Cap Cameroon Littoral 361.02 361.02 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 23 Manoka Littoral 1306.79 1306.79 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 24 Eboundja South 103.43 103.43 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 25 Mpolongwe South 48.37 48.37 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 26 Londji South 66.23 66.23 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 27 Lokoundje South 8940.16 8940.16 Community management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage 28 Bahondo South 3250.07 3250.07 The chief is the traditional authority; but there is no well-established management measure 29 Mpalla South 103.2 103.2 Hybrid community management jointly managed between MINFOF and CWCS 30 Bona'anja Littoral 1013 1013 Hybrid community management jointly managed between local populations and state authorities 31 Mouanko Littoral 4400 4400 Community management Regarding management actions, it should be noted that most of the selected sites carry out community activities to manage (conserve) biodiversity. Some of them (45% of the sites identified) are managed by a chief or a traditional ruler who takes the major decision. Other management measures encounter that are related to decisions making included community committee and hybrid or mixed type management measures (Table 4 ). They account for the remaining 55%. 3.3. Distribution of OECMs in Cameroon after merging of selected sites The selected OECMs sites are found to be deployed in the three coastal zones along the Cameroon coast (Fig. 9 ). The Western coast, near the ungazetted Ndogore Marine Parc (A), is the most inundated with nineteen (19) sites selected as OECM (Table 4 ). The south, with its Manyangue Na Elombo campo marine parc (C) comprises of seven (07) sites and the littoral, connected to the Douala-Edea marine parc (B) having only five (05) sites selected (Fig. 9 ). At the end of the screening analysis, the selected sites were merged (second screening) as presented in Table 5 below. In the southern coast (zone C), Londji, Mpolongwe and Mpalla saw their OECMs grouped together to give a larger site LM-Mpalla, with connectivity areas. Thus, reducing the number of OECMs in the southern part (Rio Ntem domain) to four (04) instead of seven (07). Similarly, the number of OECMs in the Tiko and Douala Édéa domain (zone B) decreased from five (05) to four (04) after the nomination of K-Cap Cameroun (merging of the Cap Cameroun and Kangue French sites). Table 5 Presentation of the Marine Peri-Artisanal OECMs in Cameroon after merging. Site No. Site Code/Name Latitude Longitude Surface area (ha) Area (km 2 ) Northwest Coast / Rio del Rey Estate 1 FNGR_Makoli 4.752280 8.811288 1630.53 16.31 2 NKN_Okoh creek 4.651716 8.775725 2477.82 24.78 3 NBE_Mututu 4.670510 8.956130 1097.6 10.98 4 B_Isu 4.606420 8.833224 8631.91 86.32 5 BB_Liongo 4.457600 8.903434 1496.3 14.96 North Coast / Tiko and Douala-Edea area 6 Manoka 1 3.946944 9.734333 12192.49 121.92 7 Bona'anja 4.271234 9.805210 1013 10.13 8 K_Cap Cameroon 3.902995 9.470462 601.21 6.01 9 Mouanko 3.631606 9.782772 404 4.04 South Coast /Rio Ntem Estate 10 Bahondo 3.315800 10.026800 3250.07 32.50 11 Lokoundje 3.254300 9.982800 8940.16 89.40 12 LM_Mpalla 3.084190 9.946850 217.8 2.18 13 Eboundja 2.794760 9.895600 103.43 1.03 14 Manyange na elombo 2.631021 9.839278 523.83 5.24 15 Ntem estuary 2.343875 9.827130 952.8 9.53 Total /////////// /////////// /////////// 43532.95 435,329 Average /////////// /////////// /////////// 2902,196 29,0219 Standard deviation /////////// /////////// /////////// 3801,766 38,0176 In Rio del Rey (zone C), several similar clusters were done, decreasing the number of selected sites from nineteen (19) to five (05). The new large sites presented in this area are as follows; B-Isu (Barrack and Isu), NBE-Mututu (merging Nyanga domot, Black bush, Ekondo titi beach and Mututu), BB-Liongo (integration between Bamusso, Bekumu and Liongo), NKN-Okoh creek (grouping of Ngosso, Koborkoh, New-jerusalem and Okoh creek) and FNGR-Makoli (merger between Fungue domot, Ndongere forest, Godgift estuary, Romussa and Makalli) (Fig. 9 ). At the end of this merging process (grouping), fifteen (15) OECMs were definitively identified (Table 5 ). A descriptive analysis of the 15 OECMs selected shows that their total surface area remains 435.33km 2 (Table 5 ). This total area represents a proportion of 5.1% of the territorial waters of Cameroon (8534 km 2 ). 3.4. Description of identified Marine-Peri-Artisanal OECMs in Cameroon After the selection of prospective sites, the promising Marine-Peri-Artisanal OECMs along the Cameroon coast were analyzed using the multi criteria analysis of Saarty et al (1985) and presented under radar graphic (Fig. 10 ). This was done using four (04) variables (management level, Boundaries, Red List and species diversity). The results showed that, in the Rio Ntem zone (Fig. 9 A), the Ntem estuary and Bahondo with the less suitable management level have the highest species diversity (specific index/number of species appearing). Similarly, Ntem estuary revealed the highest number of Red List IUCN species and suitable boundaries compared to the other OECMs. In the Tiko and Douala-Edea (Fig. 9 ), the sites with a better management are Bona’Anja and Manoka However they have the least suitable boundaries. While the highest number of Red List species are located in Cap Cameroon and Manoka. It is also noticed that, all the sites of this zone have a very high species diversity. The Radar graphics also highlight that; the Rio del Rey sites are all better managed except for MBE Matutu (Fig. 9 C). Again, the species diversity here is highest in the NKN Okoh Creek. The Red list specie number is in equilibrium in all the sites of this zone. 3.5. Multi-criteria comparison of candidate sites and conservation categories 3.5.1. Correspondence between retained OECMs and conservation categories Five conservation categories (A to E) were identified through the multi criteria assessment correspond directly to the 15 OECMs retained after the merging process (Table 5 ). The group A or Category A reflects strong governance and positive conservation outcomes and are presented as Site A in the matrix (Fig. 11 ). In the same way, category B represents moderate governance and moderate outcomes (Site B). Category C corresponds to the highest governance and outcome scores (Site C). Category D captures sites with very low governance and outcome scores (Site D), while Category E groups sites with intermediate scores (Site E). (Table 6 ) presents the grouping of the fifteen (15) promising OECMs in to five categories, based on their characterization (sections 3.1.1–3.1.4). This categorization provides a transparent framework for prioritizing management interventions and for monitoring the long-term effectiveness of individual OECMs. Table 6 Grouping of the 15 retained OECMs to conservation categories (A–E) Category/ site Merged OECM sites Justification A Bona’Anja, Manoka 1 Mixed governance (community + state) well established; high biodiversity; significant socio-economic benefits (tourism, fisheries). B NKN_Okoh creek, B_Isu BB_Liongo, NBE_Mututu Strong community-based management but moderate biodiversity and moderate participation, moderate effects. C Ntem estuary, FNGR_Makoli, Eboundja Highly structured community governance; very high biodiversity; strong socio-economic benefits (highest scores in all dimensions). D K_Cap Cameroon, Mouanko, LM_Mpalla High biophysical value but shared or ill-defined boundaries; weak governance. E Lokoundje, Bahondo, Manyange na elombo High biophysical value but informal governance (chief-led without formal committee) and intermediate governance. 3.5.2. Cross-matrix analysis of governance and perceived conservation outcomes The multi-criteria assessment, based on semi-structured interviews and field observations, yielded scores for each candidate site along the three evaluation dimensions (Governance, Socio-economics, Biophysics). The cross-matrix scoring (Fig. 11 ) compared six representative candidate sites across governance indicators and perceived effects on biodiversity and fisheries. Sites C and A exhibited the highest levels of community participation (4.8 and 4.5) and transparency (4.5 and 4.0), which corresponded to the highest perceived impacts on biodiversity (4.9 and 4.6) and fisheries (4.7 and 4.3). In contrast, Sites B and D showed lower participation (3.2 and 2.1) and transparency (4.0 and 2.5), associated with lower perceived outcomes for biodiversity (3.0 and 2.2) and fisheries (2.9 and 2.0). These results suggest a positive correlation between participatory governance structures and locally perceived conservation outcomes, a pattern consistent with findings from other OECM studies (Dudley et al., 2018 ; Gurney et al., 2021 ; Jonas, 2021 ). 3.5.2. Radar diagram analysis of multidimensional site categories The radar diagrams (Fig. 12 ) provided a multidimensional comparison of the five conservation categories (A to E) identified during the pre-screening phase. Category C exhibited the most balanced profile, with high scores across Governance (4.5), Socio-economics (4.2) and Biophysics (4.7), indicating that sites in this category combine effective management, tangible local benefits and high ecological value. Category A showed strong biophysical performance (4.8) but moderate governance (3.5) and socio-economic scores (3.2), suggesting that while these sites harbour important biodiversity, their long-term conservation may be compromised without governance strengthening a risk highlighted in previous analyses of OECM durability (Bingham et al., 2021 ; Timpte et al., 2018 ). Category E presented the lowest scores in all three dimensions (Governance 2.0, Socio-economics 2.5, Biophysics 2.8), leading to its exclusion from the final OECM list. The complementary profiles observed between Category B (high governance: 4.2, moderate biophysics: 3.5) and Category D (moderate governance: 3.0, high biophysics: 4.0) supported their merging into a single management unit, as recommended by the merging criteria (Table 3 ). This illustrates how the radar analysis directly informed the site consolidation process and validated the consistency of scores assigned in the cross-matrix (Fig. 11 ). The use of such comparative tools is consistent with best practices for the identification and reporting of OECMs, which emphasize transparent and participatory evaluation frameworks (IUCN-WCPA, 2019 ; Stevens et al., 2024 ). 3.6 Guidelines and Directives on Promising Marine-Peri-Artisanal OECMs in Cameroon ` In this work, the commentators of the workshop leading to this result agreed that the guidelines for the reporting of OECMs should be focus on the declaration (step by step process), registration, evaluation, validation, categorization (IUCN, 2022 ) and governance model as shown in Fig. 13 below. This graph illustrates the process, categorization of OECMs according to IUCM and the level of governance applied to classified promising OECMs in the Cameroon legal framework. 3.6.1 Step by step process of Declaration and registration of OECMs in Cameroon During this process, a joint and participatory local management committee should be set up by the competent administrative authority of the region after a demand of site declaration. This Management Committee brings together all the relevant sectors at local level in a series of workshops and meetings. The established committee will have to decide on the OECM Type, Category, management entity and objective. During the validation of marine peri-artisanal OECMs in Cameroon (workshops 6 and 7 from Fig. 3 ), the commentators decided at 100% that the declaration up of OECMs in Cameroon is a voluntary participatory process of identification, recognition, securing and monitoring of a geographical area located outside a protected zones with a view of long term in situ conservation and protection of biodiversity. The declaration of an OECM is carried out in accordance with the following steps: Prior identification/Characterization : The promising OECM site should undergo a Pre-identification study. This initial assessment takes into account the following criteria: (i) ensure that potential sites are not protected areas (PAs), (ii) ensure that potential sites contain important biodiversity values, (iii) ensure that potential sites are geographically delimited areas, (iv) Make sure that potential sites have management structures or bodies capable of ensuring their conservation or management operation and (v) ensure the site has governance and management arrangements that take into account equity considerations. Comprehensive consensual and participatory evaluation After the prior investigation by the local community willing to declare the prospected OECM, a consensual investigation should be conducted on the probable OECM site. This survey will (i) carry out participatory mapping of the potential site and a socio-economic evaluation, (ii) confirm the important biodiversity values and carry out its thorough evaluation, (iii) confirm and describe the institutions or mechanisms that govern and manage the potential site, (iv) describe the management level and governance type that enables the in situ conservation biodiversity in the site and (v) give a classification/typology of the site (OECM) base on the management and operating procedures with respect to equity, collaboration, participation and co-management. Restitution and validation This latter step occurs after the two (02) steps above ( steps one and two). It is a validation and registration step that allow the site to be readily recognized as a marine Per-Artisanal OECM through the signing of a ministerial decision after a management plan and a validated report. 3.6.2 Categorization OECMs encompass a wide variety of land uses and governance structures from Indigenous lands to military installations, whose different management practices could dramatically influence biodiversity (Giglio et al., 2018 ). The commentators of the verification and validation workshops also agreed that marine peri-artisanal OECMs identified after prior investigation were all under the 3 categories (Fig. 13 ). This categorization of marine and coastal OECMs was done on the basis of precise criteria determined according to the way the OECM concretely fulfilled or deliver the effective and enduring in situ conservation of Biodiversity (IUCN, 2022 ). The encountered categories and associated criteria are similar to those provided by IUCN/WCPA (2022). They include: Category 1 or primary OECMs; These are OECMs that meet conservation criteria but are not registered as protected areas. They may have one or more of the following characteristics objectives: ensure the conservation and connectivity of marine ecosystems; ensure the sustainable development of certain resources for populations; reconciliate the traditional uses with conservation. The following examples are considered to be category 1 OECMs: estuaries, river mouths, mangroves, spawning areas in general, fish aggregation devices, areas with high fisheries conservation values. Specifically, some examples of marine peri-artsanal OECMs of this type for Cameroon are Ntem estuary, Eboundja, Bona’Anja, FNGR Makoli etc. Category 2 OECMs They are also regarded as secondary OECMs since conservation outcomes is a secondary management objective. Their characteristics are (i) ensure the sustainable management of fisheries resources and contribute to improve the socio-economic well-being of the populations; (ii) reconcile traditional uses with conservation; (iii) contribute to biological connectivity between classic marine or terrestrial Protected Areas and areas allocated to other uses. The following are considered to be category 2 marine and coastal OECMs: Military reserve, enclaves, fishing areas, communal mangrove forests, marine tourist sites. Specific examples are Gold coast, Okoh creek etc. Category 3 OECMs : Ancillary conservation or category 3 sites are those areas where conservation is a by-product of a certain management objective (that contribute to the promotion of local values ​​and knowledge with conservation being a derivative and added value product). The following are considered to be category 3 marine and coastal OECMs: sacred sites, shipwrecks area, battle and war sites and areas of religious worshiping. A good example of category 3 OECMs is the spiritual worship area in Bona’Anja. 3.6.3 Governance and Management promotion During the validation workshops of marine peri-artisanal OECMs in Cameroon, the commentators focus on the fact that, governance and management of OECMs should provide benefits in terms of biodiversity conservation as it is the case at international level. They provided that, OECMs should be managed based on a spatial consideration as Type 1 (those under Regional Governance Authority), Type 2 (those under municipal governance or authority) and Type 3 (those under local governance authority). The management authority in any of the above types depends on the conservation objectives of the populations and land owners of the site. Depending on their classification, the commentators equally provide that OECMs should be governed by a main management Authority (MA), or are co-managed within two or more (CMAs). According to them, the management authority of Marine-Peri-Artisanal OECMs along the Cameroon’s coastal zones should have the competence and legal instruments to make and implement decisions that provide benefits in terms of biodiversity conservation. These authorities recognize and respect ancestral rights and those arising from international treaties and agreements. They should also mobilize local communities and stakeholders to take their views into account in governance decision-making and adapt the governance approach according to the specific needs and context of the OECMs under consideration. However, before the action of the community committee or indigenous management authority model, the administrative territorially authority, in collaboration with the various stakeholders, draws up a simple development plan for marine/coastal OECMs (Marin Peri-Artisanal) and coordinates its implementation. OECMs in Cameroon operate on the basis of this Simple Management Plan, in accordance with specified Guidelines (directives for OECMs in Cameroon). 4 Discussions 4.1 Description of Governance and Management model of OECMs in Cameroon OECMs may need to be recognized and managed with adaptation to climate change in mind (Cross et al., 2016 ). Looking at the objective, most of the OECMs sites (86%) of the promising sites revealed either a conservation measure/objective (76%) or a cultural objective (10%), aligning with the definition of OECMs given by IUCN ( 2022 ). Similarly, the management measures investigated within the forty-six (46) candidates marine peri-artisanal OECMs sites in Cameroon revealed that the community-based management measure was the most observed (67%). The different management authority or entity encountered were; (1) management by Private individuals (consultants, companies moral and physical person), (2) Community and indigenous (Chief, pastors, lamidos, spiritual guards, council, village committee), (3) Mixed management (Chief, pastor, government entity including universities and NGOs) and (4) Government management (Mainly sectorial ministries likes the defense and their military bases, ministry of transport and their harbors). Further analysis highlighted showed that 45% of the marine peri-artisanal OECMs investigated have village chief as the management authority. Equally, 50% of the sites have the entire community as management authority. According to the findings of Dudley et al. ( 2018 ), OECMs managed by local communities or indigenous peoples are more likely to reach conservation targets compare to other forms of managements. This corroborates with the argument of Dudley et al. ( 2018 ), that OECMs contribute to conservation, while respecting human rights and a diversity of worldviews and governance approaches. However, the above value is far greater than the 2% obtained by Jones et al. ( 2024 ) working on 679 OECMs sites in nine countries in the world. This difference could be explained from the varied implication level of chiefs, their considerations in the government structure and equivalence in the various traditional or ancestral managements models. A furthermore analysis spotlighted that, except for the governmental management, the management authorities (community, mixed and private) encounter in Cameroon are similar to those underlines in Indonesia Estradivari et al. ( 2022 ) revealing that OECMs are ancestral and community-based management worldwide. These results also confirm the finding of Gurney et al. ( 2021 ) and Brodie et al. ( 2025 ) that showed that, management decisions that are made at local scales are ideal for OECMs, since this can lead to opportunistic OECMs network that deliver meaningful conservation gains. The absence of government entities in the candidates (46 sites) marines OECMs sites during this study could be explained by lack of information in the restricted zones like military based (naval), presidential residence, harbor zones that are highly protected by the army. Looking at the categories of OECM, this study highlighted that the sites identified were either primary, secondary or tertiary OECMs with either conservation or cultural practices that could influence biodiversity. Similar findings have been obtained by Donald et al. ( 2019 ) aligning with the IUCN ( 2022 ) categorization of OECMs. 4.2. Depiction of Marine-Peri-Artisanal OECMs along the coast of Cameroon The analysis of selected marine-peri-artisanal OECMs along the Cameroon coast showed that, in the Rio Ntem zone, sites like the Ntem estuary and Bahondo with less suitable management presented the highest species diversity. This finding could be explained from a number of factors; (i) the Ntem estuary OECM is open to the atlantic ocean, (ii) it is limited in the west by an international boundary with Equatorial Guinea, according to Kark et al. ( 2015 ) ross-boundary collaboration is the key to the conservation puzzle, (iii) the presence of military camps along the boundary restricted access to these areas and hence enhance conservation outcomes, (iv) these sites are characterized by a variety of landscape and seascape that are suitable nursery ground for most fish species and (v) there is a high connectivity between the ecosystems of these sites and this will enhance species conservation (Brodie et al., 2025 ). Similarly, the Ntem estuary revealed the highest number of IUCN red list species and suitable boundaries compared to other OECMs. The presence of these well-known boundaries is attributed not only to the presence of a cross border between Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea along the Ntem estuary but also the presence of the national park of Campo Ma’an (Cameroon) and Rio Campo part (Equatorial Guinea). In the Tiko and Douala-Edea area, the sites with a better management are Bona’Anja and Manoka. This could be attributed to the fact that, they are managed primarily for tourism, which also include areas of conservation interest (Bona’Anja) and for sustainable extraction of marine products (Manoka). These management models have shown their efficiencies in the management of OECMs (Day et al., 2012 ). These sites are also characterized by large mangroves forest and are either connected to the atlantic ocean (Manoka) or provide connectivity between fresh and marine (brackish) water as the case in Bona’Anja. This latter is a nursery ground for most fish species encounter between the Nkan river and the Wouri estuary (Besack et al., 2021 ). This zone has also been document by Essome et al. ( 2020 ) as the second pool of clams in Cameroon and bears many endemics species. However, the correct boundaries of this latter site are not well determined because of the multiscale tidal variations causing flooding conditions in this region (Besack et al., 2025 ). The results of these findings also highlighted that the highest number of Red List species are located in Cap Cameroon and Manoka. This could be explained by the connectivity of these sites to the Atlantic Ocean couple to the Cameroon estuary that drain large amount of nutrients necessary for photosynthesis and hence phytoplankton abundance. The analysis of the species diversity of this area underline that, all the sites of this zone have a very high species diversity as a result of their connection to the Atlantic Ocean or a river network draining nutrients into the coastal water to enhance photosynthesis and hence primary productivity (Besack et al., 2021 ). The Rio del Rey sites are all better managed except for MBE Matutu. In this part of the coast, the species diversity is highest in the NKN Okoh Creek because of its position inside the mangrove forest. The Red list specie number is in equilibrium in all the sites of this area, as a result of the relative proximity of these sites to each other. 4.3 Contribution of promising Marine Peri-artisanal OECMs to the kumming-Montreal 30 × 30 Target on Biodiversity The kunming-Montreal Target 3 of the CBD 2020 states that ‘At least 30% of marine and terrestrial including inland waters should be protected by 2030. In Cameroon, PAs account for about 23% protection of EEZ. A descriptive analysis of promising OECMs shows that the total area likely to be protected by other effective conservation measures is 435.33km 2 . This total area represents a proportion of about 5.1% of the territorial waters of Cameroon, bringing conservation estate to about 28%. The inclusion of restricted sites like military bases, harbors zones and presidential residence will also contribute to meet the target 3. This result show that, the 30 by 30 target can be made possible in Cameroon by investing in existing and established mechanisms of protection and conservation as stated by Fitzsimons et al. ( 2023 ) when working with NGOs to investigate the achievement of the 30 by 30 target 3 in Australia. The OECMs were merged after screening procedures. This merging is an essential step in creating connectivity of landscape and seascape, that are very important for ensuring genetic flow and species migration in response to climate change and anthropogenic pollution (Brodie et al., 2025 ). This result is in line with the UN-CBD (2022), that stipulates that, protected areas including OECMs network must be well connected. Similar results were obtained by Brodie et al. ( 2025 ) when comparing OECMs in south Africa, Philippines and Colombia. According to this author, OECMs in South Africa tended to be better aligned with key biodiversity and connectivity priorities, potentially suggesting stronger strategic integration or more mature processes for identification and reporting. In contrast, Colombia and Philippines showed limited alignment with this study, potentially reflecting earlier-stage or more locally driven OECMs recognition process with limitations in connectivity. 4.4 Contribution of OECMs in biodiversity conservation along the Cameroon coast The fishing sector of Cameroon is heavily impacted as a consequence of the increased in demands of marine resources with the associated coastal environment and the limit in sustainability of artisanal fisheries catching juveniles and mother fish. This illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing is common with industrial trawling. Other threads include, (1) Poaching of class A and B species, (2) Presence of a population dependent on forest and fishing resources on the outskirts of the park and (3) destruction of habitat (pollution, overexploitation, structural projects, etc.). Many studies have shown that OECMs are hopeful tools for the conservation and sustainability of resources (Brodie et al., 2025 ; Gurney et al., 2021 ). Following the definition of OECMs (CBD, 2018 ; IUCN-WCPA, 2019 ), these areas should demonstrate a significant biodiversity value. Most of the candidate sites (46%) have high species richness, 26% of the potential sites presented a very high species richness (more than 50% of the species composition caught in Cameroon), indicating that, these sites may not be under a pressure or stress (due to Human action and climate change) that could affect their resources. These findings corroborate with those of Watson et al. ( 2023 ) who concluded that, OECMs should be located in areas with high biodiversity (sample representative of the country or regional biodiversity) with limited pollution (degradation). According to Brodie et al. ( 2022 ), this situation may enhance the conservation achievement of the 30 by 30 goal (conserving at least 30% of the biodiversity). Regarding the red list species, 41% of the sites have low amount of red list species, while only 7% of them presented a high amount of red list. This situation could be explained by the fact that, Red list specie are species under threats (climate changes with a consequence on the pH of water, pollution and anthropic pressure) and cannot be found in normal quantities in their various habitats (Schaffelke et al., 2012 ). Furthermore, the grouping of the red list species revealed that 63% of them were classified as fish species. This group is followed by aquatic birds (17%) and shrimps (8%) respectively. Equally, marine turtles represented only 3% of the red list species encountered in the marine-peri-artisanal OECMs along the Cameroon coastal zone. These proportions in red list species could be explained not only through their various abundance, distribution, life cycles and migratory habits but also their high commercial values. According to Alves-Pinto et al. ( 2021 ) and Jonas et al. ( 2018 ), recognizing an area as an OECM might deliver appropriate support to this area in terms of increasing biodiversity leading to increased pride and empowerment within local communities. The recognition and declaration of sites could also encourage managers to maintain their current conservations practices over the long-term (Alves-Pinto et al., 2021 ). Many authors reported that the recognition and declaration of OECMs could help engage a diversity of stakeholders in local and international conservation processes (Diz et al., 2018 ; Kremen & Merenlender, 2018 ). Furthermore, the diverse cultural and spiritual beliefs, complex forms of governance, and management types in different OECMs might be unfold in diverse conservation outcomes (Jonas et al., 2017 ) and improve linkages between equitable conservation and effective conservation outcomes (Hill, 2015 ). The recognition of a site as OECMs may also help accelerate the identification of other OECMs, that will depend largely on whether landowners, managers, civil society and governments are interested in reporting or having their sites reported as OECMs. Again, OECMs could also cover species and ecosystems that are not well conserved inside formal PA. For example, the Manatee species (African manatee) in Bona’Anja are declared vulnrable with a very high risk of extinction but are found outside the Douala-Edea MPA. OECMs can also serve the purposes of protecting high-threat regions and improving ecological benefits. Finally, the study of Alves-Pinto et al. ( 2021 ) showed that OECM could be a solution for those communities that do not want the area they govern to become a PA but nevertheless, want recognition and/or tenure security. This author revealed that the consequences of recognizing areas as OECMs, will increase the sense of responsibility in conservation and management processes, increase equitability in level of intervention and maintain the entire systems with its associate ecological structures in integrity. 4.5. Implications of multi-criteria analysis for the operationalization of OECMs in Cameroon The multi-criteria visualisation tools employed in this study (Fig. 11 & Fig. 12 ) provide novel insights into the relationships between governance, socio-economic context and biophysical attributes in candidate OECMs. The cross-matrix analysis revealed a positive association between participatory governance (community participation and transparency) and locally perceived conservation outcomes, reinforcing the view that inclusive management structures are critical for the legitimacy and long-term effectiveness of area-based conservation (Dudley et al., 2018 ; Gurney et al., 2021 ). This finding echoes recent OECM literature, which emphasises that recognition of local governance arrangements can enhance both ecological outcomes and social equity (Jonas, 2021 ). The radar diagrams further demonstrated that not all conservation categories are equally suited to OECM status: categories with balance &ed profiles across governance, socio-economics and biophysics (e.g., Category C) exhibited the greatest potential for sustainable conservation, whereas categories with high biophysical value but weak governance (Category A) may require targeted capacity-building interventions before formal recognition. The merging of complementary categories (B and D) based on their radar profiles illustrates how such visual tools can operationalise the merging criteria (Table 3 ) by identifying synergies that enhance ecological connectivity and management coherence (Brodie et al., 2025 ; Kukkala & Moilanen, 2017 ). From a policy perspective, these results underscore the need for flexible, context-specific evaluation frameworks that go beyond simple ecological metrics and explicitly consider governance and socio-economic dimensions during the identification and reporting of OECMs (IUCN-WCPA, 2019 ; Stevens et al., 2024 ). Failure to address governance weaknesses in high-biodiversity sites may undermine the durability of conservation outcomes, a risk already highlighted in the OECM literature (Bingham et al., 2021 ; Timpte et al., 2018 ). As Cameroon moves towards operationalising the 30×30 target, such diagnostic tools can help prioritise investments and ensure that newly recognised OECMs are both ecologically valuable and institutionally sustainable. 4.6 Guidance on OECMs declaration and creation in Cameroon The Cameroon Government and communities need to formally integrate OECMs into the local policy to ease their declaration, approbation, monitoring and adaptation in the context of climate changes and their specificities. This consist of submitting data on OECMs (prior studies on the candidate site and participative evaluation). While the prior study is conducted by the local Community management team, the participative comprehensive and consensual investigation is conducted by the representatives of all the stakeholders including government entities under the supervision of the administrative authority and Ministry in charge of Wild life conservation in Cameroon (MINFOF). This process is similar to that adopted by the Australian government (Fitzsimons et al., 2024 ), where the data on OECMs are submitted to an equivalent collaborative Australian Protected Areas Database (CAPAD) after evaluation. Currently, the identification and declaration of OECMs in many countries is driven by local entities decisions to apply for OECM status (Gurney et al., 2021 ). This was the case in the coastal zones of Cameroon following the results of this investigation. 4.6 Perspectives and Challenges of OECMs implementation in Cameroon The monitoring of Biodiversity including the Red List Index (RLI) for each OECM should be conducted. The action responding to biodiversity crisis requires an understanding of how many and which species are being driven near to extinction, the rate of extinction and trends in extinction risk, as well as where to focus the conservation efforts, which threats need to be mitigated, and whether interventions are successful (Butchart et al., 2025 ). This index will also serve as a base line for further investigations on Red List species and or OECMs declaration outcomes. Another limitation of this work is that, it has not considered deep and global inventory of biodiversity. Whereas an inventory of birds, fish, shrimps, crabs, mangroves forests etc, is necessary for the evaluation of the performance (efficiency) of OECMs sites in conservation. An important way to build the assessment of OECM effectiveness at temporal scales also include a better understanding on how different types of OECMs are developed, management practices, and anthropogenic impacts affecting conservation outcomes. An effective OECM assessment tool should be developed. An important way to do our assessment of OECM effectiveness at spatial and temporal scales include developing a better understanding of how different types of OECMs, management practices, and anthropogenic impacts affect conservation outcomes over time. This should be done after investigating the physical aspects of the water (tides, currents, depth, physical and chemical properties of water) 5. Conclusion In Cameroon, PAs account for about 23% protection of the territorial waters. In order to build capacity to improve the effective management of the network of MPAs and marine OECMs that promote community surveillance combating illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) industrial fishing and to promote a transparent peach in Cameroonian territorial waters, an evaluation of Other Effective Area base Conservation Measures was conducted in coastal regions. This study represents the first identification, typology and institutional framework at the national level of marine peri-artisanal OECMs in Cameroon. A methodology, including field work, seminars and workshop was adopted and the data collected were subjected to Hedonistic analysis and merging procedures. Through participatory assessment and governance analysis, 31 candidate sites were validated and consolidated into 15 spatially coherent marine OECMs. Together, these sites represent a promising contribution of 5.1% to Cameroon's territorial waters and provide a solid foundation for achieving the global conservation target 30×30. In marine-peri-artisanal OECMs, management systems encountered mostly concerns (i) community areas managed primarily for sustainable extraction of marine resources (ii) fishery management areas with no wider stated conservation aims and (iii) marine or coastal management systems, managed primarily for ecotourism, which also include areas of conservation interest. Also, two mechanisms are recognized to secure biodiversity in Cameroon through OECMs. They are (i) declaration of the protected area or registering the area as conservation-based area (OECM) and (ii) Securing the biodiversity site through the preparation of a biodiversity management plan. To strengthen the long-term sustainability of this network, we recommend that decision-makers integrate OECMs into marine spatial planning, establish national monitoring protocols, and support capacity building of local management committees. Lessons learned from Cameroon offer valuable insights for other coastal nations seeking pragmatic and inclusive strategies to bring conservation and community livelihoods closer beyond conventional protected areas. Declarations Funding Declaration This work was sponsored by OCEAN 5 under the project entitled strengthen capacities to enhance effective management of the network of MPA and marine OECMs that promote community surveillance combating illegal industrial fishing and illicit, unreported and illegal (IUU) fishing. Author Contribution The contributing authors share collective responsibility and accountability for the results. Contributions by each author are as follows: B.F (Conceiving the ideas, interpreted the data, Participated in the active execution of the study and Wrote the manuscript), X.N.N and A.C.M.N (Analyzed data, prepared figures, interpreted results of the data and Wrote the manuscript), J.T.M and L. N.M (Participated in the active execution of the study, Analyzing and interpreting the data), L.U and F.B (Conceiving the ideas and design of the experiment) Ebonji Seth Rodrigue (Participating in the active execution of the study and Writing the manuscript), J.W, B.S and E.N.M (Conceived the ideas and designed the experiment, Participated in the active data collection and Writing the manuscript). All authors reviewed the manuscript before submission Acknowledgement The authors acknowledge late Dr Gordon Ajonina, the past National Coordinator of the Cameroon Wildlife Conservation Society (CWCS) and founder of this projet. He introduced the concept of OECM as a new paradigm to fight againts illegal, unregulated and unreported industrial fishing after the FOA yellow card to Cameroon in 2024. May his soul rest in peace References Addison P, Carbone G, McCormick N (2018) The development and use of biodiversity indicators. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN Ajonina G, Diamé A, Kairo J (2008) Current status and conservation of mangroves in Africa: An overview. World Rainfor Mov Bull 133:1–6 Ajonina GN (2008) Inventory and modelling mangrove forest stand dynamics following different levels of wood exploitation pressures in the Douala-Edea Atlantic coast of Cameroon, Central Africa. Mitteilungen der Abteilungen für Forstliche Biometrie, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg , 2 Alves-Pinto H, Geldmann J, Jonas H, Maioli V, Balmford A, Latawiec AE, Crouzeilles R, Strassburg B (2021) Opportunities and challenges of other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) for biodiversity conservation. Perspect Ecol Conserv 19(2):115–120 Belote RT, Wilson MB (2020) Delineating greater ecosystems around protected areas to guide conservation. Conserv Sci Pract, 2(6), e196 Besack F, Mbang LE, Tchogom JM, Ajonina G, Ebonji SR, Onguene R, Tomedi ME, Dada O (2025) Change in Hydrological Signature of Tropical River-Estuaries During Extreme Flood Conditions: A Case Study of the Wouri-Nkam River Estuary (Cameroon) During the August 2020 Flood Event. Estuaries Coasts 48(6):163 Besack F, Rodrigue E, Nwutih A, Dieudonné E, Willy S, Brice N, Junior M, Michel-Remi H, Raphael O, Minette T (2021) Spatial and temporal variation of the hydrological parameters in the Wouri-Nkam section of the Cameroon estuary, Central African Atlantic coast. Open J Mar Sci 11(4):129–156 Bingham H, Fitzsimons J, Redford KH, Mitchell BA, Bezaury-Creel J, Cumming TL (2017) Privately protected areas: advances and challenges in guidance, policy and documentation Bingham HC, Fitzsimons JA, Mitchell BA, Redford KH, Stolton S (2021) Privately protected areas: Missing pieces of the global conservation puzzle. Front Conserv Sci 2:748127 Borrini-Feyerabend G, Chatelain C, Hosch G (2010) En gouvernance partagée! un guide pratique pour les aires marines protégées en Afrique de l’Ouest. IUCN Brodie JF, Freeman BG, Mannion PD, Hargreaves AL (2025) Shifting, expanding, or contracting? Range movement consequences for biodiversity. Trends in Ecology & Evolution Brodie S, Smith JA, Muhling BA, Barnett LA, Carroll G, Fiedler P, Bograd SJ, Hazen EL, Jacox MG, Andrews KS (2022) Recommendations for quantifying and reducing uncertainty in climate projections of species distributions. Glob Change Biol 28(22):6586–6601 Butchart SH, Akçakaya HR, Berryman AJ, Brooks TM, Burfield IJ, Chanson J, Dias MP, Donaldson JS, Hermes C, Hilton-Taylor C (2025) Measuring trends in extinction risk: a review of two decades of development and application of the Red List Index. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences , 380 (1917) CBD (2010) Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020’ in Decisions Adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity at its Tenth Meeting CBD (2018) Decision Adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity 14/8. Protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, Convention on Biological Diversity, Egypt, 2018 Cross D, Shaw T, Hadwen K, Cardoso P, Slee P, Roberts C, Thomas L, Barnes A (2016) Longitudinal impact of the Cyber Friendly Schools program on adolescents’ cyberbullying behavior. Aggressive Behav 42(2):166–180 Day J, Dudley N, Hockings M, Holmes G, Laffoley DdA, Stolton S, Wells SM (2012) Guidelines for applying the IUCN protected area management categories to marine protected areas. IUCN Diz D, Johnson D, Riddell M, Rees S, Battle J, Gjerde K, Hennige S, Roberts JM (2018) Mainstreaming marine biodiversity into the SDGs: the role of other effective area-based conservation measures (SDG 14.5). Mar Policy 93:251–261 Dobson A (2005) Monitoring global rates of biodiversity change: challenges that arise in meeting the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 2010 goals. Philosophical Trans Royal Soc B: Biol Sci 360(1454):229–241 Donald PF, Buchanan GM, Balmford A, Bingham H, Couturier AR, de la Rosa GE Jr, Gacheru P, Herzog SK, Jathar G, Kingston N (2019) The prevalence, characteristics and effectiveness of Aichi Target 11′ s other effective area-based conservation measures(OECMs) in Key Biodiversity Areas. Conserv Lett 12(5):e12659 Dudley N (2008) Guidelines for applying protected area management categories. Iucn Dudley N, Jonas H, Nelson F, Parrish J, Pyhälä A, Stolton S, Watson JE (2018) The essential role of other effective area-based conservation measures in achieving big bold conservation targets. Global Ecol Conserv 15:e00424 Essome H, Egbe TO, Halle GE, Nana TN, Boten M, Tocki GT, Foumane P (2020) Epidemiology of ectopic pregnancy at Laquintinie Douala hospital (Cameroon): prevalence survey, clinical profile, therapeutic and transfusion issues. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol 10(1):44 Estradivari E, Agung M, Adhuri DS, Ferse SC, Sualia I, Brown DAA, Campbell SJ, Iqbal M, Jonas HD, Lazuardi ME (2022) Marine conservation beyond MPAs: Towards the recognition of other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) in Indonesia. Mar Policy 137:12 Fitzsimons J, Picone A, Partridge T, Cornish M (2023) Protecting Australia’s Nature: Pathways to protecting 30 per cent of land by 2030 Fitzsimons JA, Partridge T, Keen R (2024) Other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) in Australia: key considerations for assessment and implementation. Conservation 4(2):176–200 Geldmann J, Manica A, Burgess ND, Coad L, Balmford A (2019) A global-level assessment of the effectiveness of protected areas at resisting anthropogenic pressures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences , 116 (46), 23209–23215 Giglio VJ, Pinheiro HT, Bender MG, Bonaldo RM, Costa-Lotufo LV, Ferreira CE, Floeter SR, Freire A, Gasparini JL, Joyeux J-C (2018) Large and remote marine protected areas in the South Atlantic Ocean are flawed and raise concerns: Comments on Soares and Lucas (2018). Marine Policy , 96 , 13–17 Gilbert JA, Peixoto RS, Scholz AH, Bello D, Korsten MG, Berg L, Singh G, Boetius B, Wang A, F., Greening C (2025) Launching the IUCN Microbial Conservation Specialist Group as a global safeguard for microbial biodiversity. Nat Microbiol 10(10):2359–2360 Gurney GG, Mangubhai S, Fox M, Kim MK, Agrawal A (2021) Equity in environmental governance: perceived fairness of distributional justice principles in marine co-management. Environ Sci Policy 124:23–32 Hill NE (2015) Including fathers in the picture: A meta-analysis of parental involvement and students’ academic achievement. J Educ Psychol 107(4):919 Hockings M, Hardcastle J, Woodley S, Sandwith T, Wilson J, Bammert M, Valenzuela S, Chataigner B, Lefebvre T, Leverington F (2019) The IUCN Green List of Protected and Conserved Areas: Setting the standard for effective area-based conservation. Parks 25(252):57–66 IUCN-WCPA (2018) Guidelines for recognising and protecting other effective based-area conservation measures IUCN-WCPA (2019) Task Force on AMCEZs, Recognising and reporting other effective area- based conservation measures, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, 2019 IUCN-WCPA (2023) Site-level tool for identifying other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). IUCN IUCN I-C (2022) Unified Classification of Direct Threats. In Jonas HD (2021) Contesting and reconstituting conservation in space, time and law. University of East Anglia] Jonas HD, Barbuto V, Jonas HC, Kothari A, Nelson F (2014) New steps of change: looking beyond protected areas to consider other effective area-based conservation measures. Parks 20(2):111–128 Jonas HD, Lee E, Jonas HC, Matallana-Tobon C, Wright KS, Nelson F, Enns E (2017) Will other effective area-based conservation measures increase recognition and support for ICCAs. Parks 23(2):63–78 Jonas HD, MacKinnon K, Dudley N, Hockings M, Jessen S, MacKinnon D, Matallana-Tobón CL, Sandwith T, Waithaka J, Woodley S (2018) Editorial essay: other effective area-based conservation measures: from Aichi Target 11 to the Post-2020 Biodiversity Framework. Parks: Int J Protected Areas Conserv 24(Special issue):9–16 Jones MW, Veraverbeke S, Andela N, Doerr SH, Kolden C, Mataveli G, Pettinari ML, Le Quéré C, Rosan TM, van der Werf GR (2024) Global rise in forest fire emissions linked to climate change in the extratropics. Science 386(6719):eadl5889 Juffe-Bignoli D, Brooks TM, Butchart SH, Jenkins RB, Boe K, Hoffmann M, Angulo A, Bachman S, Böhm M, Brummitt N (2016) Assessing the cost of global biodiversity and conservation knowledge. PLoS ONE 11(8):e0160640 Kark R, Katz-Navon T, Delegach M (2015) The dual effects of leading for safety: The mediating role of employee regulatory focus. J Appl Psychol 100(5):1332 Kremen C, Merenlender AM (2018) Landscapes that work for biodiversity and people. Science 362(6412):eaau6020 Kukkala AS, Moilanen A (2017) Ecosystem services and connectivity in spatial conservation prioritization. Landscape Ecol 32(1):5–14 Lemieux CJ (2025) IUCN WCPA Technical Note No. 21: Utilizing Protected and Conserved Areas for Human Health and Well-being. A Technical and Methodological Framework Lemieux CJ, Beazley KF, MacKinnon D, Wright P, Kraus D, Pither R, Crawford L, Jacob AL, Hilty J (2022) Transformational changes for achieving the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework ecological connectivity goals. Facets Leung Y-F, Spenceley A, Hvenegaard G, Buckley R, Groves C (2018) Tourism and visitor management in protected areas: Guidelines for sustainability, vol 27. IuCN Gland, Switzerland MacKinnon D, Lemieux C, Beazley K, Woodley S, Helie R, Perron J, Elliott J, Haas C, Langlois J, Lazaruk H (2015) Canada and Aichi Biodiversity Target 11: understanding ‘other effective area-based conservation measures’ in the context of the broader target. Biodivers Conserv 24(14):3559–3581 Mama A, Chougong D, Dingong G, Bessa A, Dicka E, Ajonina G, Ndam J (2024) Dendrometrical Structure and Physicochemical Analysis of Mangrove Sediments from the Nyong River Estuary (Cameroon, Atlantic Coast). Water Resour Ocean Sci 13:23–41 Marnewick D, Stevens CM, Jonas H, Antrobus-Wuth R, Wilson N, Theron N (2021) Assessing the extent and contribution of OECMs in South Africa. Parks 27(1):57–70 Maxwell SL, Cazalis V, Dudley N, Hoffmann M, Rodrigues AS, Stolton S, Visconti P, Woodley S, Kingston N, Lewis E (2020) Area-based conservation in the twenty-first century. Nature 586(7828):217–227 Mbevo Fendoung P, Tchindjang M, Hubert-Ferrari A (2022) Weakening of coastlines and coastal erosion in the Gulf of Guinea: the case of the Kribi coast in Cameroon. Land 11(9):1557 Mitchell BA, Fitzsimons J, Stevens CM, Wright DR (2018) PPA or OECM? Differentiating between privately protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures on private land Murphy B, Onana J-M, van der Burgt X, Ngansop ET, Williams J, Tchiengue B, Cheek M (2023) Important plant areas of Cameroon. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew London Mwamidi DM, Renom JG, Llamazares AF, Burgas D, Domínguez P, Cabeza M (2018) Contemporary pastoral commons in East Africa as OECMs: a case study from Daasanach community. Parks , 24 (special issue), 49–58 Nature I (2016) U. f. C. o. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016.3 Nei M, Takahata N (1993) Effective population size, genetic diversity, and coalescence time in subdivided populations. J Mol Evol 37(3):240–244 Nemba ACM, De La Croix K, Eyango MT-T, David G (2022) À la rencontre des espaces halieutiques sur le littoral camerounais: comparaison entre les régions Littoral et Sud côtier. Annales de géographie Newing H, Eagle C, Puri RK, Watson C (2011) Conducting research in conservation, vol 775. Routledge Oxfordshire Paterson A (2022) Scoping the Potential Influence of Law on Terrestrially Located Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures. Law Env't Dev J 18:33 Paterson A (2023) Other effective area-based conservation measures, biodiversity stewardship and statutory intervention–A South African perspective. Potchefstroom Electron Law Journal/Potchefstroomse Elektroniese Regsblad 26(1):1–31 Paterson A (2024) Learning from Protected Areas—Distilling Lessons for A Potential Future OECM Statutory Framework in South Africa. Stellenbosch Law Rev 2024(2):115–143 Paterson A (2025) The Judiciary's Contribution to Preventing Protected Area Downgrading, Downsizing, and Degazettement: Mining and Environmental Justice Community of South Africa v MEC for Agriculture, Rural Development Land and Environmental Affairs (1322/2021)[2024] ZAMPMBHC 48 (18 July 2024). Potchefstroom Electron Law J (PELJ) 28(1):1–28 Richard N (2023) Fishery-based Livelihoods in a Changing and Complex Fish Food Environment in Cameroon, Central Africa. University of Guelph] Saaty TL (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1(1):83–98 Schaffelke B, Carleton J, Skuza M, Zagorskis I, Furnas MJ (2012) Water quality in the inshore Great Barrier Reef lagoon: Implications for long-term monitoring and management. Mar Pollut Bull 65(4–9):249–260 Smith J, Mapendembe A, Vega A, Hernandez Morcillo M, Walpole M, Herkenrath P (2010) Linking the thematic programmes of work of the convention on biological diversity (CBD) to poverty reduction. Biodiversity for Development: New Approaches for National Biodiversity Strategies. CBD Secretariat, Montreal Sonkoué D, Monkam D, Fotso-Nguemo TC, Yepdo ZD, Vondou DA (2019) Evaluation and projected changes in daily rainfall characteristics over Central Africa based on a multi-model ensemble mean of CMIP5 simulations. Theoret Appl Climatol 137(3):2167–2186 Stevens S, Hay-Edie T, Larrea CM, Ramos A, Broome NP, Eghenter C, Fitzsimons J, Goradze I, Ironside J, Mellis C (2024) Recognising territories and areas conserved by Indigenous peoples and local communities (ICCAs) overlapped by protected areas. IUCN WCPA Good Pract Guidelines Ser (34). Timpte M, Marquard E, Paulsch C (2018) Analysis of the Strategic Plan 2011–2020 of the Convention on Biological Biodiversity (CBD) and first discussions of resulting recommendations for a post-2020 CBD framework. Institute for Biodiversity—Network (IBN): Regensburg, Germany Watson JE, Dudley N, Segan DB, Hockings M (2014) The performance and potential of protected areas. Nature 515(7525):67–73 Watson JE, Venegas-Li R, Grantham H, Dudley N, Stolton S, Rao M, Woodley S, Hockings M, Burkart K, Simmonds JS (2023) Priorities for protected area expansion so nations can meet their Kunming‐Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework commitments. Integr Conserv 2(3):140–155 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Posted Version 1 posted You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9166498","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":627690918,"identity":"df7060f6-7622-45a7-b25d-b44f0b557a0c","order_by":0,"name":"Felix Besack","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Douala","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Felix","middleName":"","lastName":"Besack","suffix":""},{"id":627690919,"identity":"69067d89-cf42-4b37-8a86-e7439afc6e0c","order_by":1,"name":"Audry Constant Mbock Nemba","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Douala","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Audry","middleName":"Constant Mbock","lastName":"Nemba","suffix":""},{"id":627690920,"identity":"8cd33dd6-9cfa-436b-a391-033cc7faafee","order_by":2,"name":"Leonard Usongo","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Cameroon wildlife Conservation Society","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Leonard","middleName":"","lastName":"Usongo","suffix":""},{"id":627690922,"identity":"fcb0921f-d01c-4212-8079-ead75f55631a","order_by":3,"name":"Xavier Ndoungteng Ndjamo","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"TUBE AWU","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Xavier","middleName":"Ndoungteng","lastName":"Ndjamo","suffix":""},{"id":627690924,"identity":"81585515-c7aa-4304-9194-a6055ec495fb","order_by":4,"name":"Harrison Nnoko","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Ajemalebu self help","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Harrison","middleName":"","lastName":"Nnoko","suffix":""},{"id":627690926,"identity":"08d730a9-efc6-4e2b-9cbd-056963180993","order_by":5,"name":"Benjamin Shufai","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Peopleearthwise","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Benjamin","middleName":"","lastName":"Shufai","suffix":""},{"id":627690927,"identity":"9ce6930b-31bb-4c2f-9655-9fd103fd826e","order_by":6,"name":"Eugene Diyouke Mibog","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Cameroon wildlife Conservation Society","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Eugene","middleName":"Diyouke","lastName":"Mibog","suffix":""},{"id":627690928,"identity":"53efbf52-9c99-430c-9ad2-aea2aae0f348","order_by":7,"name":"Lizette Ndelle Messame","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Cameroon wildlife Conservation Society","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Lizette","middleName":"Ndelle","lastName":"Messame","suffix":""},{"id":627690929,"identity":"509f2475-7609-4639-8ae7-3f39ce5d0846","order_by":8,"name":"Josue Tchougom Manga","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Shanghai Ocean University","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Josue","middleName":"Tchougom","lastName":"Manga","suffix":""},{"id":627690931,"identity":"e1548807-3463-4fd3-9220-7f725ec4336c","order_by":9,"name":"Joel Wamba","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"TUBE AWU","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Joel","middleName":"","lastName":"Wamba","suffix":""},{"id":627690933,"identity":"9b798e8f-1695-435c-ab77-8b58be00b1cf","order_by":10,"name":"Etienne Ngue Massoume","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Douala","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Etienne","middleName":"Ngue","lastName":"Massoume","suffix":""},{"id":627690937,"identity":"308871ba-8145-4438-adbb-1e1b96919f33","order_by":11,"name":"Beatrice Fongue","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"University of Buea","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Beatrice","middleName":"","lastName":"Fongue","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-03-19 07:53:25","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9166498/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9166498/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":108490696,"identity":"6d8e3157-dfd2-43f9-92a3-755645c0f44f","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-05 09:46:30","extension":"jpeg","order_by":1,"title":"Figure 1","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":87476,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLocation of Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) candidates from previous surveys of local communities and grassroots NGOs. A) Rio del Rey, B) Tiko and Douala Edea area and C) the Rio Ntem estate.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image1.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/2e287c935eeb94f3213d6e0d.jpeg"},{"id":107712543,"identity":"99c6355c-035c-42ca-8529-6fe286c8c1e0","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-24 09:49:14","extension":"png","order_by":2,"title":"Figure 2","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":41140,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOrganizational chart of the implementation of Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) in Cameroon using participatory community bases.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image2.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/5eaa53999429548b1df6295a.png"},{"id":107711266,"identity":"120a8784-e856-4b3e-808b-8b81c41a89c3","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-24 09:44:51","extension":"jpeg","order_by":3,"title":"Figure 3","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":109644,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOperational framework for Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) identification in the logic of resilience in Cameroon.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image3.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/e996de3ec8b842f14c74b878.jpeg"},{"id":107713667,"identity":"efe709f5-5540-408f-83c3-2df38d5281b9","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-24 09:53:23","extension":"png","order_by":4,"title":"Figure 4","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":824870,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLocal Criteria-Based Assessment Pathway of Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (Marine-peri-artisanal OECMs) in Cameroon.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image4.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/acfffeba446855975b878efd.png"},{"id":107711204,"identity":"1cef6c78-5d9e-4a1b-a154-14c32f5b2996","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-24 09:44:33","extension":"jpeg","order_by":5,"title":"Figure 5","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":40335,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eManagement measures for potential Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) in Cameroon.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image5.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/b791a160de9d10d5754b6f4e.jpeg"},{"id":107711211,"identity":"c8c3aff3-bfe5-488c-95f1-5693d61be435","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-24 09:44:41","extension":"jpeg","order_by":6,"title":"Figure 6","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":24609,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eTypology or Category of OECMs based on the conservation objectives.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image6.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/8e93c9c6ce716feadc3f6a57.jpeg"},{"id":107711230,"identity":"f7f599dc-7524-4e4b-9bbc-7b2389beca9e","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-24 09:44:48","extension":"jpeg","order_by":7,"title":"Figure 7","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":87091,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eBiodiversity status in selected potential OECMS in Cameroon, represented by species richness (a), rate of threatened species (b) and classification of Red List threaterned /endangered species (c).\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image7.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/de265c20176286f517d6dabe.jpeg"},{"id":107711268,"identity":"b6894752-a4ff-44db-a69b-d7befd4a5671","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-24 09:44:51","extension":"jpeg","order_by":8,"title":"Figure 8","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":29496,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eLevel of urbanization near potential OECMs sites.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image8.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/67875331f5112d0fea296e30.jpeg"},{"id":107711294,"identity":"89fc2e8e-01c4-4f6d-b8d1-ca3eb1aa86e1","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-24 09:45:03","extension":"jpeg","order_by":9,"title":"Figure 9","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":242247,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003ePresentation of merged OECMs along the Cameroon Coast.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image9.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/520901dd8bc31df9d6a90623.jpeg"},{"id":107712581,"identity":"b4f344ed-209c-4c01-a303-1541fd539cfb","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-24 09:49:30","extension":"jpeg","order_by":10,"title":"Figure 10","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":146199,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eAnalysis of promising Marine Peri-artisanal OECMs along the Cameroon coast. A) sites of the Rio Ntem coastal zone, B) sites of the Tiko and Douala-Edea coastal zone and C) sites along the Rio del Rey Coastal zone.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image10.jpeg","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/1c7c1d31992e319fcbe0bfa1.jpeg"},{"id":107712664,"identity":"43bdd02c-68fe-4d7a-834f-7700996e0ccc","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-24 09:49:58","extension":"png","order_by":11,"title":"Figure 11","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":169359,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eCross matrix scoring of governance and perceived effectiveness indicators for candidate OECMs. Scores range from 1 (very low) to 5 (very high) and are derived from semi structured interviews and expert validation workshops.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image11.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/bf9a69aad980d4e0c18c9af9.png"},{"id":107711198,"identity":"f862802c-891c-4187-840d-0038bc9a4755","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-24 09:44:32","extension":"png","order_by":12,"title":"Figure 12","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":270402,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eRadar diagram comparing conservation categories (A to E) across governance, socio economics and biophysics dimensions. Each axis is scored from 1 (very low) to 5 (very high). Categories represent distinct levels of conservation status, management type or governance model identified during the pre-screening phase.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image12.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/f433ea9f52217e58ae7750f1.png"},{"id":107711265,"identity":"9a0350ce-189e-44cf-ae73-491f45aa72a4","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-04-24 09:44:51","extension":"png","order_by":13,"title":"Figure 13","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"figure","size":908219,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"\u003cp\u003e\u003cstrong\u003eOverview of the legal framework and governance model for the reporting of probable Marine peri-artisanal OECMs in Cameroon.\u003c/strong\u003e\u003c/p\u003e","description":"","filename":"image13.png","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/900c888808710d2d8eb9c9b1.png"},{"id":108494350,"identity":"07a0bd9d-cf39-42c1-9715-a022e4c20d27","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-05 10:04:04","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":3528993,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9166498/v1/4d1d6891-d389-4a78-b5d0-9605b9b17d25.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"A participatory, criteria-based workflow to identify promising marine peri artisanal OECMs in Cameroon and the implications for national reporting and governance","fulltext":[{"header":"1. Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eProtected areas (PAs) have long been the cornerstone of national and international biodiversity conservation strategies, supported by governments and global initiatives such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) (Dudley, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e). PAs safeguard endangered species, bolster essential ecosystem services, assist in climate change mitigation, and frequently shield human communities alongside culturally or spiritually significant locations (Watson et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR72\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e). However, numerous studies indicate that PAs alone are unable to prevent biodiversity loss due to ongoing deficiencies in ecological coverage and management efficacy (Maxwell et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR52\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Nature, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR57\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Recognizing the necessity for supplementary conservation strategies beyond the PAs, CBD Aichi Target 11 (2010) explicitly mandated the conservation of a minimum of 17% of terrestrial and 10% of marine areas via effectively managed protected areas and \"Other Effective area-based Conservation Measures\" (OECMs), incorporated into the wider landscape and seascape (CBD, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Dobson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2005\u003c/span\u003e; Smith et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR68\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e). In 2018, the Parties to the CBD established a formal definition of OECMs as geographically delineated areas external to the formal protected area network, which are governed and managed to achieve positive and enduring sustainable outcomes for in situ biodiversity conservation, along with associated ecosystem functions and services, and, where relevant, cultural or socio-economic values (CBD, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Jonas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Marnewick et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR51\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Timpte et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Kunming Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, established in 2022, enhances the significance of OECMs by instituting a \"30 by 30\" objective to safeguard 30% of terrestrial and marine environments by 2030, encouraging nations to broaden conservation efforts beyond official APs (Belote \u0026amp; Wilson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e; Paterson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR63\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR64\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). OECMs, as a novel paradigm, have garnered heightened worldwide attention (Alves-Pinto et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Paterson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR61\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e), particularly during discussions around the post-2020 global biodiversity framework. Research indicates that adequate acknowledgment and assistance for OECMs can engage local stakeholders and complement networks of APs by fostering connectivity, enhancing ecosystem management, and securing enduring conservation results (Borrini-Feyerabend et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2010\u003c/span\u003e; Diz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Juffe-Bignoli et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR42\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Timpte et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eNonetheless, despite the increasing global interest, the implementation of OECMs in various nations continues to pose challenges. The international conservation community has established criteria for the identification, monitoring, and reporting of OECMs to promote adoption (CBD, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; IUCN, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Lemieux, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR46\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Paterson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Stevens et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Timpte et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Nevertheless, numerous barriers persist that impede their practical implementation (Bingham et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Bingham et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Mitchell et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR54\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The absence of formal acknowledgment and explicit reporting protocols (Jonas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2014\u003c/span\u003e), ambiguities in governance and management duties, along with apprehensions that the acknowledgment of a OECM might result in more stringent regulations akin to a de facto protected area, have engendered hesitance among certain stakeholders (Jonas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; MacKinnon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). Securing the enduring safety and effectiveness of OECMs is difficult in the absence of sufficient legal and institutional backing (Bingham et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Mwamidi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAt the national level, Cameroon has demonstrated its commitment to marine conservation by creating new Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in recent years. Douala-Edea National Park was designated in 2018 (\u0026asymp;\u0026thinsp;262,900 ha, including a coastal and marine section) and Manyange Na Elombo-Campo National Marine Park in 2021 (110,300 ha), and a third site, the proposed Ndongor\u0026eacute; Marine National Park (\u0026asymp;\u0026thinsp;121,600 ha), is in the process of being registered in the official gazette. However, these government-designated MPAs alone cannot protect all marine biodiversity (Geldmann et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). Cameroon's coastline is also home to many areas under local or sectoral management that contribute to conservation, such as community-managed mangroves, artisanal fishing areas, sacred coastal sites, militarily restricted areas, and seasonal fishing areas without harvesting (Sonkou\u0026eacute; et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR69\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e). These areas could potentially qualify as OECMs, but they currently lack formal recognition and support within the national conservation framework.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAt the same time, Cameroon's marine and coastal resources are under great pressure due to unsustainable use. Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) industrial fishing, poaching of protected species (class A and B species under national law) as well as habitat destruction through pollution and coastal development all threaten marine biodiversity (Mbevo Fendoung et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR53\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). These pressures have pushed small-scale fisheries to the limits of sustainability, undermining both ecosystem health and local livelihoods (Richard, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR65\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). While community-led conservation initiatives can help address these threats, the lack of clear criteria and legal guidelines to recognize and manage OECMs has so far hampered their implementation. Cameroon has yet to grant formal status to potential OECM sites, and the OECM concept remains poorly understood by many stakeholders due to its recent introduction (Paterson, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR62\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). No specific policies or regulations currently exist to determine how to identify or support OECMs, and existing frameworks do not sufficiently consider the property rights of local or private communities in conservation areas (Jonas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; MacKinnon et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR49\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Mwamidi et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR56\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn this context, our study aims to address these gaps by (1) conducting a diagnostic assessment to identify and characterize potential marine MCO sites in Cameroon, (2) developing harmonized criteria for the selection of marine MCOs, and (3) proposing legal guidelines to support the implementation and long-term monitoring of MCOs in the country's coastal and marine waters.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2. Material and method","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe coastal zone of Cameroon extends from the Rio Del Rey estuary to the Ntem estuary near Equatorial Guinea, passing through the Cameroon Estuary complex in the littoral zone (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). The Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of this country covers about 16,547 km\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e. The Rio del Rey estate is located in the northern part of the Cameroonian coast and stretches from the border with Nigeria to Njangassa, including the islands off the estuary. This area is administratively located in the South-West region of Cameroon. The Tiko and Douala-Edea zone includes the Wouri estuary, the maritime area of the Sanaga delta and the Tiko region. This area is drained by the estuaries of the Sanaga, Kwakwa, Dibamba, Wauri and Moungo rivers. It is also described as the sandy coast. Finally, the Rio Ntem estate is located in the southern part of the Cameroonian coast. This is the area that has alternating rocky, sandy and muddy beaches. From a hydrological point of view, it is watered by the estuaries of the Ntem, Lob\u0026eacute;, Kienk\u0026eacute;, Lokoundj\u0026eacute; and Nyong rivers. This region is characterized by a Guinean-type equatorial climate and a Cameroonian coastal subtype (humid and hot) composed of two seasons: a long rainy season from March to October and a short dry season from November to February (Nei \u0026amp; Takahata, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR58\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e1993\u003c/span\u003e). Temperatures vary between 23\u0026deg;C and 33.5\u0026deg;C with a monthly average of around 28\u0026deg;C. The main species are mangroves such as \u003cem\u003eRhizophora racemosa\u003c/em\u003e, which occupy about 90% of the forest floor. Other species present are \u003cem\u003eR. mangle\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eR. harrisonii\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003eAvicennia germinans\u003c/em\u003e (Acanthaceae), and inland are \u003cem\u003eLaguncularia racemosa\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003eConocarpus erectus\u003c/em\u003e (both Combretaceae) (Ajonina et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Ajonina, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e; Mama et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR50\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). The most permanent fish species include \u003cem\u003epseudolithus, caranx, pomadasy, sardinella, illisha, galeoides, Palinurus\u003c/em\u003e and \u003cem\u003ePeneaus, ethmalosa, tilapia, T. guineensis, liza, mugil, elops, cynoglossus, clams, etc.\u003c/em\u003e Other species of special interest found in the area include: \u003cem\u003eAfrican Manatee\u003c/em\u003e (Vulnerable), \u003cem\u003eGoliath Frog\u003c/em\u003e (Endangered), \u003cem\u003eScalloped Shell Hammerhead Shark\u003c/em\u003e (Critically Endangered), \u003cem\u003eAngel Shark\u003c/em\u003e (Critically Endangered), \u003cem\u003eAtlantic Humpback Dolphin\u003c/em\u003e (Critically Endangered), \u003cem\u003eGreen Tutle\u003c/em\u003e (Endangered), \u003cem\u003eLeatherback Sea Turtle\u003c/em\u003e (vulnerable), \u003cem\u003eHawksbill (\u003c/em\u003ecritically endangered), \u003cem\u003eOlive ridley turtle\u003c/em\u003e (vulnerable) (Gilbert et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; IUCN-WCPA, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; IUCN, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo achieve this objective, a methodology was developed taking into account office work, meetings, seminars, workshops and fieldwork (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). These events were organized to design the scope of OECMs, prepare field activities, validate OECMs candidate sites after data collection and analysis to present them as future management measures in Cameroon. Various non-governmental organizations (CWCS, AJESH, PEW, TUBE-AWU, CAMECO, WTG and ASCON) have been actively involved in the implementation activities. These grassroots NGOs were selected based on their involvement in conservation activities in their areas of work (the applicants' sites). They consolidated the knowledge of local stakeholders and other partners such as municipal councils and administrative authorities. Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e below summarize the methodology used and the different steps for the identification and selection of OECMs from candidate sites.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec3\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1. Processing of marine peri-artisanal Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) in Cameroon\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSeveral workshops were held after the awareness-raising and launch ceremony. These workshops consisted of three types: introductory workshops (stages 1 and 2), that took place before the field phases (stages 3\u0026ndash;6) and validation workshops (stage 7) to validate the results obtained (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). The introductory phase aimed to introduce the concept of OECMs to the population (stage 1) and the Government (stage 2). It ends up by an acceptance letter from the ministry in charge of conservation and protected areas in Cameroon. Stages 3 to 6 facilitated the design of the input mask, encompassing all pertinent data for the characterization of the OECMs; the testing of these masks under actual field conditions; the rectification of biases and adaptation of the input mask to local contexts; and the processing and analysis of data gathered by the relevant organizations. In stage 7, it was necessary to present all the results to the expert groups, administrative and governmental authorities, as well as the relevant third parties.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1.1. Introductory workshops\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter the launching ceremony, the first workshop (introductory workshop) was organized in Nkolafamba-Yaound\u0026eacute; from 8 to 11 March 2023 to introduce OECM in Cameroon. This workshop was overseen by the Ministry of Forest and Wildlife Conservation (MINFOF) and the Cameroon Wildlife Conservation Society (CWCS) as leading NGOs. Other participants included coastal and marine stakeholders such as grassroots NGOs, MPA conservators, Merchant marine/Navy, coastal community representatives, universities, administrative authorities, fishermen representatives and other government entities working in coastal and marine areas. It concluded with awareness raising, framing and strengthening research on other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). This workshop led to the signing and publication of Ministerial Decision No. 0365/MINFOF/SETAT/SG/DFAP/CJ/SDCF/SAIF/IMO of 26 April 2023 of the Ministry of Wildlife Conservation (MINFOF, Ministry in charge of protected areas in Cameroon) implementing the resolutions of the workshop, thus recognizing the extension of the Douala-Edea axis to the entire seascape and the importance of marine resources and OECMs in Cameroon. In addition, this ministerial decision resulted in a high-level cross-sectoral awareness-raising and capacity-building workshop on marine OECMs in Cameroon, on 30 April 2023 in Yaound\u0026eacute; (Nkolafamba), with the participation of local NGOs, academia and conservation experts. The decision taken by the Minister was the approval of the implementation of the process of identification, selection and management of OECMs in Cameroon. This required a pre-testing process, fieldwork activities/data collection, analysis (screening and mapping) and validation of candidate sites as well as a report of the results of the final findings on the OECM in Cameroon.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1.2. Pre-testing field workshop\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo accelerate the identification, selection, mapping and reporting of marine peri-artisanal OECMs in Cameroon, the different participants met several times and developed a specific methodology for the identification and selection of candidate sites based on the guidelines provided by IUCN (2018) (IUCN-WCPA, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Leung et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR48\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). It started with a previous workshop (from 17 to 18 August 2023, step 3) in the city of Edea, near Douala (the economic capital of Cameroon). It was an awareness and capacity building on the inventory of OECMs, the identification of indicators and the harmonization of data collection sheets were the main focus of this workshop. The participants of this workshop were, CWCS staff and local NGO partners, three (03) consultants, four (04) NGOs associated with the OECMs, the two (02) conservators of the two marine protected areas (MPAs) already gazatted, as well as six (06) universities experts. At the end of this field-pre-testing workshop (step 03), a data collection sheet was consolidated and validated, the timeline of the pre-test activities was harmonized, and the data sampling techniques were setup by the CWCS data quality control team. This culminated in the testing activities in the vicinity of Edea.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe trial began by separating participants into 4 groups, each of which began by reviewing all indicators and categories of OECMs. A series of brainstorming sessions with experts in collaboration with the experienced University of EXETER in England (coaching) was also organized to consolidate the information. The critical results of these pre-tests were (i) the classification of potential sites into three (03) groups (inland, coastal and marine OECMs) and each group could be classified into different categories: primary, secondary and ancillary according to IUCN-WCPA, (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) and Stevens et al., (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) criteria and guidelines. Other outputs were (ii) validation and consolidation of a data collection sheet, (iii) development of explanatory notes as well as (4) a data collection methodology.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec6\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1.3. Field testing activities\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe field-testing activities took place during the month of October 2023. The various NGOs in the field and partner associations were deployed in their different areas of action to identify and consolidate potential candidate sites for the OECM. The planning of the fieldwork was carried out under the technical guidance of the CWCS data quality control team to harmonize data collection. Information on the location of candidate sites, area, type of management and management measure, species diversity, species richness and IUCN species were collected using the data collection sheet.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1.4. Post-field-testing workshop\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results of the field-testing work were presented at another workshop held between 13 and 14 November 2023. All difficulties were reported and some adjustments were made to prepare future field activities. Due to the complexity of field measurements in some potential OECMs sites and the need for GPS manipulations, the field test workshop was immediately followed by a training workshop on data collecting techniques, the use of GPS and aerial drones (photogrammetry) that took place on the 15th and 16th November 2023. These two workshops were entitled \"\u003cem\u003eWorkshop to raise awareness and strengthen surveys carried out by local marine and coastal partners on other effective area-based conservation measures in Cameroon\u003c/em\u003e\". The pre-testing, field testing and post-field-testing workshops helped to familiarized the local actors (stakeholders) to the concept of OECMs, identification of criteria, the mapping of sites and the collection the data related to biodiversity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1.5. Field activities and data collection\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eSince the implementation of Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECM) encounters challenges such as their identification, monitoring and mapping, ensuring equitable governance and addressing potential risks such as misapplication or neglecting cumulative threats to biodiversity. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in order to gather in-depth insights and challenges regarding each OECM to facilitate decision-making based on various elements. These semi-structured interviews were useful for eliciting perceptions, judgments, and sensitive information from a wide range of actors (Newing et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR60\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2011\u003c/span\u003e). Interviews were conducted between experts and stakeholders directly or indirectly involved in the OECMs candidate sites. A total of 46 candidate sites were examined separately and at least 30% of the stakeholders in each candidate site were interviewed using a stratified sampling technique. These interviews were conducted between November 1, 2023 and January 30, 2024. In addition to the perception studies, other data were collected over a period of 2 months (November 20, 2023 to January 31, 2024). The data collected were grouped according to the type and category of the site, the management measure, the management authority, the level of urbanization, the surface area of the site, the nature of the boundaries, the land ownership and the biodiversity (relative abundance, species richness and proportion of threatened species). While the level of urbanization was observed through direct observation, the management authority inventory was done using the data collection sheet and interviews. Also, the participatory mapping was done using GPS of brand GARMIN 64 to move round each site. To monitor the fish diversity, fish samples were collected from the local fishing ground in each site. The species were identified using identification keys as performed by Nemba et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR59\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The parameters studied in this methodology included Equitability, Effective management, cultural and spiritual believed, policy and legal framework, degree of effectiveness, local communities right and worries (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). This information is crucial in the characterization of the sites and the screening process that enables the identification and future monitoring of sites and well as describing their governance model.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSummary of the different parameters investigated in the candidates for the sites of the Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParameter studied\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eReason\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExplaination\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEquitability\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"3\" rowspan=\"4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGovernance\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOECMs should promote equitable governance, effective management, and positive conservation outcomes, including engaging with a diverse range of rights-holders and stakeholders.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEffective Management\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOperational questions like costs and benefits, spatial dimensions of OECM management, and the role of OECMs in ecosystem-based approaches to fisheries need to be addressed.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCultural and Spiritual Beliefs\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe diverse cultural and spiritual beliefs, complex forms of governance, and management types in different OECMs might unfold in diverse conservation outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePolicy and Legal framework\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrong policy and legal frameworks at national and sectoral levels are essential for supporting OECM implementation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003elevel effectiveness\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\" morerows=\"2\" rowspan=\"3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIdentification and Monitoring\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere's uncertainty in how effectiveness an OECMs is, measuring effectiveness with tools that need to demonstrate effectiveness long-term.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBurden on Local Communities\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnsuring that the burden to prove effectiveness does not fall to already under-resourced local and Indigenous communities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eData and Resources\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccurately identifying and monitoring OECMs can be challenging due to the newness of the concept and inadequate resources in some countries.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.1.6. Verification and validation\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOn 15 January 2024, an internal validation of the OECMs interim report was carried out by various organizations, partner NGOs, representatives of local communities, administrative staffs and consultants. The results and methodology were also shared during an international validation process of the Marine and Coastal Conservation Programme in Gambia, West Africa, from 27 April 2024 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e, stage 7). After this, a second national validation was then carried out in June 2024. This brought together a wider spectrum of actors, including representatives of local stakeholders, civil society actors, NGOs, ministries and other sectoral actors of the introductory ceremony.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2. Data analysis\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter the field work and methodology mentioned above, all the datasets from the different organizations were subjected to a quality control and harmonization (units verification/scaling, coding of the qualitative data into alpha numerical etc). A descriptive statistic (frequence, mean and standard deviation) was performed using the software XLSTAT 2017version. This step was followed by a hedonic analysis, done by quoting different levels or intensity of a given criteria with numbers ranging from 1 to 5 (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e), represented in the explanatory notes as absent (1), low (less than 3), medium (3\u0026ndash;4) and high (5) as shown in multi criteria analysis (Saarty et al., 1985). This qualitative analysis as absent, low, medium, high and very high was defined by the explanatory notes of the data collection sheet. The species diversity was computed as the number of species present in each site compared to the total number of species registered brought to percentages and converted to qualitative appreciation (absent, low, high etc) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). This analysis enables the classification of sites based on their importance with respect to the description of the parameter investigated. The radar graphics computed from the above values helped to compare two or more sites including an ideal site (A virtual site with best performance of the variables studied) introduced as a reference site to scale the monitoring process.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2.1. Selection (first screening) of marine and coastal OECMs sites in Cameroon\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe selection of candidate OECMs consisted of choosing the OECMs from the candidate sites according to the criteria developed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature and the World Commission on Protected Areas (IUCN-WCPA, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; IUCN, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Murphy et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). However, these criteria do not take into account the aspect of land ownership and title, which are important parameters in the long-term management of coastal zones in Cameroon. Here, specific criteria and guidelines for the long-term benefits of selected OECMs should be drafted and supported by an agreement between the parties concerned and the administrative authority (territorial administration) to resolve land ownership disputes. This led to a modification and adaptation of the IUCN (IUCN, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Murphy et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR55\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) criteria for OECMs screening in Cameroon. The modified criteria are presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e below.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eScreening criteria for the selection of Marine Peri-Artisanal Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) in Cameroon.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriteria\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExplaination\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriterion 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnsure that the area is not already registered as a protected area or as part of a protected area (the area is not recognized as a protected area). This is the first criterion essential for qualifying an area as an OECM. An area can be declared an OECM if it has not been recognized as a protected area in any of the six IUCN categories;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriterion 2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnsure that the area has the essential conservation characteristics with effective conservation, favorable governance and management (i.e the area is governed and managed)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriterion 3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnsure that conservation outcomes can be sustained in the long term, e.g. through legal/other effective means (long-term sustained in situ conservation of biodiversity)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriterion 4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnsure that the objective of in situ area-based conservation, rather than sustainable use, is an appropriate priority (associated ecosystem functions and services).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriterion 5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEnsure that land ownership or land owner (s) is (are) in accordance with the long-term conservation actions and will not overlaps the land uses over a given period of time that will be defined in the management plan of the site (signing of conservation agreements between land owner and management/conservation authority (some time NGOs or associations) in the presence of the administrative authorities as the legal guaranty).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec12\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2.2. Multi-criteria visualization for site assessment and merging\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo support the screening, prioritization and merging of candidate OECMs, a multi-criteria assessment framework was developed. This framework was based on data collected during semi-structured interviews (see section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2.1.5\u003c/span\u003e), field observations and expert validation workshops (section \u003cspan refid=\"Sec9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2.1.6\u003c/span\u003e). Each candidate site was evaluated along three dimensions: \u003cb\u003eGovernance\u003c/b\u003e (including community participation, transparency and accountability), \u003cb\u003eSocio-economics\u003c/b\u003e (local livelihood benefits, equity and resource dependence) and \u003cb\u003eBiophysics\u003c/b\u003e (species richness, presence of threatened species and habitat integrity). Scores for each dimension were assigned on a five-point scale (1\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;very low, 5\u0026thinsp;=\u0026thinsp;very high) following the explanatory notes of the data collection sheet. This approach aligns with established methodologies for the identification and evaluation of OECMs, which emphasize the integration of ecological, social and governance criteria (Hockings et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Lemieux et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR47\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e; Saaty, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR66\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2008\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTwo complementary visualisation tools were used to facilitate decision-making. First, a \u003cb\u003ecross-matrix scoring\u003c/b\u003e approach was applied to compare candidate sites across governance-related indicators and perceived effects on biodiversity and fisheries. The resulting matrix (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig11\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e) allows a rapid identification of sites where strong governance co-occurs with positive conservation outcomes, as well as sites where governance gaps may compromise long-term effectiveness. Such matrix-based approaches are widely used in conservation planning to synthesize qualitative and semi-quantitative data (Addison et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Jonas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSecond, \u003cb\u003eradar diagrams\u003c/b\u003e (also known as spider or polar charts) were generated to provide a multidimensional profile of each conservation category identified during the pre-screening phase. Radar charts are increasingly recommended for visualizing trade-offs and synergies among multiple criteria in area-based conservation assessments (IUCN-WCPA, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Kukkala \u0026amp; Moilanen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). Each axis in the radar diagram (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig12\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e) corresponds to one of the three evaluation dimensions (Governance, Socio-economics, Biophysics). The plots enable a quick visual comparison of strengths and weaknesses across categories, which is particularly useful for the merging process (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) and for validating the consistency of scores assigned in the cross-matrix (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig11\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e). Categories that showed complementary profiles were considered for merging, while categories with consistently low scores across all dimensions were either excluded or subjected to further field verification.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec13\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e2.2.3. Merging (second screening) of selected Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) sites and refresh processes\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe potential OECMs sites were grouped or merged to facilitate future conservation management (materialization, monitoring, surveillance and other support). The merging process was conducted with respect to the following criteria (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). Figure\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e below presents the generalized local Criteria Based Assessment pathway of marine peri-artisanal OECMs in Cameroon. It is clear from this flowchart that, sites were either selected or pre-rejected after screening. In the context of the country, pre rejected sites were subjected to either improve governance, enhance participation of the community and support or capacity building to reevaluate the site. The reselected and initially selected sites were further analyzed with a multi criteria tool for final classification of OECMs in Cameroon (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriteria for merging certain Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) sites.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriteria\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eExplanation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriteria 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe sites were merged if they were very close (less than 5km separation)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriteria 2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWhen several sites were close to each other (less than 5 km apart), merging priority was given to those with the same management measures and/or system;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriteria 3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA site not initially selected could be refreshed if it is located between two or more selected sites;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCriteria 4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSites of touristic interest having a conservation objective (private OECMs) were also considered as OECMs only if they have a minimum surface of 1hectare with a guaranty of long-term conservation of resources\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"3. Results and discussions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThe results of the final report gave rise to guidelines and directives on Marine-Peri-Artisanal OECMs in Cameroon.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec15\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Characterization of the candidates OECMs sites\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThere are many forms of area-based management that provide conservation value but do not fit within the MPA framework because they may not have conservation as their primary objective and therefore, have not traditionally been considered to contribute to direct conservation (Jonas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Such sites were recognized as OECMs based on specific criteria (management measures and management objectives, urbanization level, biodiversity etc) as documented by (CBD, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). In this study, a total of fourty-six (46) candidate OECMs sites were identified and reported by the various organizations based on these criteria. Each criterion was analyses base on the data collected and the results of the characterization presented as below.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec16\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.1 Management measures and management Authorities\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring this investigation, four (04) management measures were identified within the 46 candidates marine OECM sites. The most encountered management measure is community-based (51%), followed by the traditional or ancesttral (15%). The rest of the sites were shared between hybrid or mixed (12%), private (8%), government or state management (10%) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec17\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.2 Typology of OECMs based on the management objective\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe candidates OECMs identified during the field work (phase 2 of OECM processing) are of three (3) types depending on the primary objectives of the site management (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e). Their descriptive analysis revealed that 76.1% of the prospective OECM sites had conservation objectives as their principal goal yet have not been designated as protected areas. They could be described as primary or category 1 OECMs. Similarly, 10% of the sites has biodiversity outcomes as a by-product of the cultural and spiritual management objective (Ancillary or type 3 OECMs). These sites could also be recognized as category 3 OECMs and included, tomes sites, sacred sites etc. Some of the sites (14%) did not declare any cultural, spiritual or conservation objective and includes harbor zones, presidency sites, fishing camps, landing sites and conflicts zones. They could be regarded as type 2 OECMs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec18\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.3 Biodiversity (Species richness, Relative abundance and threatened species)\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe results on biodiversity revealed that, most of these potential OECMs (46%) have very high species richness. Similarly, 26% of the sites presented a high species richness. On the other hand, the low and medium specie richness were represented by 13% and 15% of sites respectively (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003eA). The Red List IUCN species encountered in the candidates\u0026rsquo; sites were mostly composed of fish species (63%) like \u003cem\u003eTorpedo bauchotae, Rhinobatos rhinobatos, Carcharhinus limbatus and Sphyrna lewini\u003c/em\u003e. Sea turtles like \u003cem\u003eLepidochelys olivacea\u003c/em\u003e represents only 3%, while formed of shrimps and aquatic birds are respectively represented by 17% and 8% (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003eB).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe classification of these Red LIST species revealed that, 41% of the species are threatened at low level. Similarly, the medium, high and very high level of threatened species highlighted proportions of 19%, 7% and 7% respectively. In the same way, 26% of species did not define the status of their burden with respect to IUCN Red list (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig7\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e7\u003c/span\u003eC).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec19\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1.4 Level of urbanization along the sites\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe level of urbanization within or in the proximity of a site is also an important indicator in the selection of OECMs. A site that is degraded or destroyed without a restoration process is not appropriate to be consider as OECM. This also means that an ecosystem in highly threatened area and/or with high value for agriculture and development is expected to have no or little protection and hence conservation outcomes. Concluding, it will not be considered as an OECM. Looking at Urbanization level in this way (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig8\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e8\u003c/span\u003e), this study revealed that only 9% of the 46 candidates (potential) sites were heavily built-up (high level urbanization) and could be disqualified following this criterion. Similarly, 11% of the sites revealed a moderate urbanization and were equally subjected to a rejection. Inversely, 39% of the sites presented a low level of urbanization and hence suitable for OECM declaration.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis value increased to 41% for sites without urbanization. These sites could also be declared as highly suitable for OECM declaration since they are natural and free from any modification.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec20\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2. Inventory of identified Marine Peri-Artisanal OECMs in Cameroon\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec21\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2.1. Size and Management measure\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter the first screening (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), a total of 31 sites were selected via the procedures developed by IUCN (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). A description of these sites is presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e together with their administrative locations along the coastal regions. The sizes of the selected OECMs were investigated to have a view of the surface area to be protected with respect to the 30 by 30 convention on biodiversity. Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e below presents the sites eligible as OECMs along the Cameroon coast. Also, the results of this inventory show that, the selected sites have an average surface area of ​​1104\u0026thinsp;\u0026plusmn;\u0026thinsp;1938 hectares (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). This value ranged from 3.48 hectares (smallest) to 8940.16 hectares (largest). In other words, the total surface area of OECMs selected is 435.326 km\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e and represent about 5.1% of the Cameroon\u0026rsquo;s territorial waters (8534 km\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e). Consequently, the surface area conserved through MPAs (23%) and OECMs (5.1%) in Cameroon will be shift to about 28.1%, which nearer to the 30% of the 30 by 30 CBD objective.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab4\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 4\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDescription of Marine peri- Artisanal OECMs selected.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eName of site\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegion\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAreas (hectares)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAreas (km2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eConservation Measure and Important Attribute\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNature of font (funge domot)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e213.91\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the entire community participates in decision-making\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMangrove reserve (romussa)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e192.92\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.93\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the entire community participates in decision-making\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMarine spiritual worship area (mututu 1 \u003cspan\u003e$\u003c/span\u003e 2)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e702.7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the entire community participates in decision-making\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNdongore Forest Reserve\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e50.5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e0.51\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the entire community participates in decision-making\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity reserve (Ekondo titi beach)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e107.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the entire community participates in decision-making\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEstuary (godgift)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e295\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.95\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the entire community participates in decision-making\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGold Coast\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e651.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.52\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBarrack\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6287.91\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e62.88\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNew Jerusalem\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e758.05\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.58\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKoborkoh (nyaekan)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e363.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.63\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the entire community participates in decision-making\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOkoh Creek\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e779.34\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7.79\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eIsu\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2344\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23.44\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNgosso\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e577.25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.77\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMakoli\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e878.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.78\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBlack bush (community reserve)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e129.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e129.38\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the entire community participates in decision-making\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity reserve (Nyanga domot)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e158.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e158.26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the entire community participates in decision-making\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e17\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNtem estuary\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.48\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the entire community participates in decision-making\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBamusso\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1046.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1046.66\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the entire community participates in decision-making\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e19\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLiongo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e446.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e446.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the entire community participates in decision-making\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e20\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBikiri beach\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth West\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e540.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e540.65\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eKangue French\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLittoral\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1415.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1415.72\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e22\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCap Cameroon\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLittoral\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e361.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e361.02\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eManoka\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLittoral\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1306.79\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1306.79\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEboundja\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e103.43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e103.43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e25\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMpolongwe\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e48.37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e48.37\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e26\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLondji\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e66.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e66.23\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e27\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLokoundje\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8940.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8940.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management in which the leader is the guarantor of the heritage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e28\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBahondo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3250.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3250.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe chief is the traditional authority; but there is no well-established management measure\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMpalla\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e103.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e103.2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHybrid community management jointly managed between MINFOF and CWCS\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e30\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBona'anja\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLittoral\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1013\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1013\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHybrid community management jointly managed between local populations and state authorities\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMouanko\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLittoral\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4400\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4400\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity management\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding management actions, it should be noted that most of the selected sites carry out community activities to manage (conserve) biodiversity. Some of them (45% of the sites identified) are managed by a chief or a traditional ruler who takes the major decision. Other management measures encounter that are related to decisions making included community committee and hybrid or mixed type management measures (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). They account for the remaining 55%.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec22\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.3. Distribution of OECMs in Cameroon after merging of selected sites\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe selected OECMs sites are found to be deployed in the three coastal zones along the Cameroon coast (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e). The Western coast, near the ungazetted Ndogore Marine Parc (A), is the most inundated with nineteen (19) sites selected as OECM (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab4\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e4\u003c/span\u003e). The south, with its Manyangue Na Elombo campo marine parc (C) comprises of seven (07) sites and the littoral, connected to the Douala-Edea marine parc (B) having only five (05) sites selected (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAt the end of the screening analysis, the selected sites were merged (second screening) as presented in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e below. In the southern coast (zone C), Londji, Mpolongwe and Mpalla saw their OECMs grouped together to give a larger site LM-Mpalla, with connectivity areas. Thus, reducing the number of OECMs in the southern part (Rio Ntem domain) to four (04) instead of seven (07). Similarly, the number of OECMs in the Tiko and Douala \u0026Eacute;d\u0026eacute;a domain (zone B) decreased from five (05) to four (04) after the nomination of K-Cap Cameroun (merging of the Cap Cameroun and Kangue French sites).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab5\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 5\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePresentation of the Marine Peri-Artisanal OECMs in Cameroon after merging.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"6\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c6\" colnum=\"6\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSite No.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSite Code/Name\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLatitude\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLongitude\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSurface area (ha)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eArea (km\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"6\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNorthwest Coast / Rio del Rey Estate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFNGR_Makoli\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.752280\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.811288\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1630.53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e16.31\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNKN_Okoh creek\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.651716\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.775725\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2477.82\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e24.78\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNBE_Mututu\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.670510\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.956130\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1097.6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.98\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eB_Isu\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.606420\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.833224\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8631.91\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e86.32\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBB_Liongo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.457600\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8.903434\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1496.3\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14.96\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"6\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNorth Coast / Tiko and Douala-Edea area\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eManoka 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.946944\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.734333\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12192.49\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e121.92\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e7\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBona'anja\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.271234\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.805210\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1013\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eK_Cap Cameroon\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.902995\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.470462\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e601.21\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e6.01\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMouanko\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.631606\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.782772\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e404\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e4.04\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colspan=\"6\" nameend=\"c6\" namest=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSouth Coast /Rio Ntem Estate\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBahondo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.315800\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e10.026800\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3250.07\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e32.50\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e11\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLokoundje\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.254300\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.982800\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e8940.16\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e89.40\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e12\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLM_Mpalla\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3.084190\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.946850\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e217.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.18\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e13\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eEboundja\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.794760\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.895600\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e103.43\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e1.03\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e14\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eManyange na elombo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.631021\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.839278\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e523.83\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.24\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e15\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNtem estuary\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2.343875\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.827130\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e952.8\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e9.53\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTotal\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e///////////\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e///////////\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e///////////\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e43532.95\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e435,329\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAverage\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e///////////\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e///////////\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e///////////\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e2902,196\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e29,0219\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStandard deviation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e///////////\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e///////////\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e\u003cb\u003e///////////\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e3801,766\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c6\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e38,0176\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Rio del Rey (zone C), several similar clusters were done, decreasing the number of selected sites from nineteen (19) to five (05). The new large sites presented in this area are as follows; B-Isu (Barrack and Isu), NBE-Mututu (merging Nyanga domot, Black bush, Ekondo titi beach and Mututu), BB-Liongo (integration between Bamusso, Bekumu and Liongo), NKN-Okoh creek (grouping of Ngosso, Koborkoh, New-jerusalem and Okoh creek) and FNGR-Makoli (merger between Fungue domot, Ndongere forest, Godgift estuary, Romussa and Makalli) (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e). At the end of this merging process (grouping), fifteen (15) OECMs were definitively identified (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA descriptive analysis of the 15 OECMs selected shows that their total surface area remains 435.33km\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). This total area represents a proportion of 5.1% of the territorial waters of Cameroon (8534 km\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec23\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.4. Description of identified Marine-Peri-Artisanal OECMs in Cameroon\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter the selection of prospective sites, the promising Marine-Peri-Artisanal OECMs along the Cameroon coast were analyzed using the multi criteria analysis of Saarty et al (1985) and presented under radar graphic (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig10\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e10\u003c/span\u003e). This was done using four (04) variables (management level, Boundaries, Red List and species diversity). The results showed that, in the Rio Ntem zone (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003eA), the Ntem estuary and Bahondo with the less suitable management level have the highest species diversity (specific index/number of species appearing). Similarly, Ntem estuary revealed the highest number of Red List IUCN species and suitable boundaries compared to the other OECMs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the Tiko and Douala-Edea (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003e), the sites with a better management are Bona\u0026rsquo;Anja and Manoka However they have the least suitable boundaries. While the highest number of Red List species are located in Cap Cameroon and Manoka. It is also noticed that, all the sites of this zone have a very high species diversity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Radar graphics also highlight that; the Rio del Rey sites are all better managed except for MBE Matutu (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig9\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e9\u003c/span\u003eC). Again, the species diversity here is highest in the NKN Okoh Creek. The Red list specie number is in equilibrium in all the sites of this zone.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec24\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.5. Multi-criteria comparison of candidate sites and conservation categories\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec25\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.5.1. Correspondence between retained OECMs and conservation categories\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eFive conservation categories (A to E) were identified through the multi criteria assessment correspond directly to the 15 OECMs retained after the merging process (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab5\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e5\u003c/span\u003e). The group A or Category A reflects strong governance and positive conservation outcomes and are presented as Site A in the matrix (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig11\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e). In the same way, category B represents moderate governance and moderate outcomes (Site B). Category C corresponds to the highest governance and outcome scores (Site C). Category D captures sites with very low governance and outcome scores (Site D), while Category E groups sites with intermediate scores (Site E). (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab6\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e6\u003c/span\u003e) presents the grouping of the fifteen (15) promising OECMs in to five categories, based on their characterization (sections 3.1.1\u0026ndash;3.1.4). This categorization provides a transparent framework for prioritizing management interventions and for monitoring the long-term effectiveness of individual OECMs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab6\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 6\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGrouping of the 15 retained OECMs to conservation categories (A\u0026ndash;E)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"3\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCategory/ site\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMerged OECM sites\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eJustification\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eA\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBona\u0026rsquo;Anja, Manoka 1\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMixed governance (community\u0026thinsp;+\u0026thinsp;state) well established; high biodiversity; significant socio-economic benefits (tourism, fisheries).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eB\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNKN_Okoh creek, B_Isu BB_Liongo, NBE_Mututu\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStrong community-based management but moderate biodiversity and moderate participation, moderate effects.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eC\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eNtem estuary, FNGR_Makoli, Eboundja\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHighly structured community governance; very high biodiversity; strong socio-economic benefits (highest scores in all dimensions).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eD\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eK_Cap Cameroon, Mouanko, LM_Mpalla\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh biophysical value but shared or ill-defined boundaries; weak governance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eE\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLokoundje, Bahondo, Manyange na elombo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh biophysical value but informal governance (chief-led without formal committee) and intermediate governance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec26\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.5.2. Cross-matrix analysis of governance and perceived conservation outcomes\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe multi-criteria assessment, based on semi-structured interviews and field observations, yielded scores for each candidate site along the three evaluation dimensions (Governance, Socio-economics, Biophysics). The cross-matrix scoring (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig11\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e) compared six representative candidate sites across governance indicators and perceived effects on biodiversity and fisheries. Sites C and A exhibited the highest levels of community participation (4.8 and 4.5) and transparency (4.5 and 4.0), which corresponded to the highest perceived impacts on biodiversity (4.9 and 4.6) and fisheries (4.7 and 4.3). In contrast, Sites B and D showed lower participation (3.2 and 2.1) and transparency (4.0 and 2.5), associated with lower perceived outcomes for biodiversity (3.0 and 2.2) and fisheries (2.9 and 2.0). These results suggest a positive correlation between participatory governance structures and locally perceived conservation outcomes, a pattern consistent with findings from other OECM studies (Dudley et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Gurney et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Jonas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec27\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.5.2. Radar diagram analysis of multidimensional site categories\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe radar diagrams (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig12\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e) provided a multidimensional comparison of the five \u003cb\u003econservation categories\u003c/b\u003e (A to E) identified during the pre-screening phase. Category C exhibited the most balanced profile, with high scores across Governance (4.5), Socio-economics (4.2) and Biophysics (4.7), indicating that sites in this category combine effective management, tangible local benefits and high ecological value. Category A showed strong biophysical performance (4.8) but moderate governance (3.5) and socio-economic scores (3.2), suggesting that while these sites harbour important biodiversity, their long-term conservation may be compromised without governance strengthening a risk highlighted in previous analyses of OECM durability (Bingham et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Timpte et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Category E presented the lowest scores in all three dimensions (Governance 2.0, Socio-economics 2.5, Biophysics 2.8), leading to its exclusion from the final OECM list.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe complementary profiles observed between Category B (high governance: 4.2, moderate biophysics: 3.5) and Category D (moderate governance: 3.0, high biophysics: 4.0) supported their merging into a single management unit, as recommended by the merging criteria (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e). This illustrates how the radar analysis directly informed the site consolidation process and validated the consistency of scores assigned in the cross-matrix (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig11\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e). The use of such comparative tools is consistent with best practices for the identification and reporting of OECMs, which emphasize transparent and participatory evaluation frameworks (IUCN-WCPA, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Stevens et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec28\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.6 Guidelines and Directives on Promising Marine-Peri-Artisanal OECMs in Cameroon\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003e` In this work, the commentators of the workshop leading to this result agreed that the guidelines for the reporting of OECMs should be focus on the declaration (step by step process), registration, evaluation, validation, categorization (IUCN, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) and governance model as shown in Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig13\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e below. This graph illustrates the process, categorization of OECMs according to IUCM and the level of governance applied to classified promising OECMs in the Cameroon legal framework.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec29\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.6.1 Step by step process of Declaration and registration of OECMs in Cameroon\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring this process, a joint and participatory local management committee should be set up by the competent administrative authority of the region after a demand of site declaration. This Management Committee brings together all the relevant sectors at local level in a series of workshops and meetings. The established committee will have to decide on the OECM Type, Category, management entity and objective. During the validation of marine peri-artisanal OECMs in Cameroon (workshops 6 and 7 from Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e), the commentators decided at 100% that the declaration up of OECMs in Cameroon is a voluntary participatory process of identification, recognition, securing and monitoring of a geographical area located outside a protected zones with a view of long term in situ conservation and protection of biodiversity. The declaration of an OECM is carried out in accordance with the following steps:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003ePrior identification/Characterization\u003c/b\u003e: The promising OECM site should undergo a Pre-identification study. This initial assessment takes into account the following criteria: (i) ensure that potential sites are not protected areas (PAs), (ii) ensure that potential sites contain important biodiversity values, (iii) ensure that potential sites are geographically delimited areas, (iv) Make sure that potential sites have management structures or bodies capable of ensuring their conservation or management operation and (v) ensure the site has governance and management arrangements that take into account equity considerations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eComprehensive consensual and participatory evaluation\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter the prior investigation by the local community willing to declare the prospected OECM, a consensual investigation should be conducted on the probable OECM site. This survey will (i) carry out participatory mapping of the potential site and a socio-economic evaluation, (ii) confirm the important biodiversity values and carry out its thorough evaluation, (iii) confirm and describe the institutions or mechanisms that govern and manage the potential site, (iv) describe the management level and governance type that enables the in situ conservation biodiversity in the site and (v) give a classification/typology of the site (OECM) base on the management and operating procedures with respect to equity, collaboration, participation and co-management.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eRestitution and validation\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis latter step \u003cb\u003eoccurs\u003c/b\u003e after the two (02) steps above \u003cb\u003e(\u003c/b\u003esteps one and two). It is a validation and registration step that allow the site to be readily recognized as a marine Per-Artisanal OECM through the signing of a ministerial decision after a management plan and a validated report.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec30\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.6.2 Categorization\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOECMs encompass a wide variety of land uses and governance structures from Indigenous\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003elands to military installations, whose different management practices could dramatically influence biodiversity (Giglio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). The commentators of the verification and validation workshops also agreed that marine peri-artisanal OECMs identified after prior investigation were all under the 3 categories (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig13\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e13\u003c/span\u003e). This categorization of marine and coastal OECMs was done on the basis of precise criteria determined according to the way the OECM concretely fulfilled or deliver the effective and enduring in situ conservation of Biodiversity (IUCN, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The encountered categories and associated criteria are similar to those provided by IUCN/WCPA (2022). They include:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eCategory 1 or primary OECMs;\u003c/b\u003e These are OECMs that meet conservation criteria but are not registered as protected areas. They may have one or more of the following characteristics objectives:\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cul\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eensure the conservation and connectivity of marine ecosystems;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003eensure the sustainable development of certain resources for populations;\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e \u003cp\u003ereconciliate the traditional uses with conservation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/li\u003e \u003c/ul\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe following examples are considered to be category 1 OECMs: estuaries, river mouths, mangroves, spawning areas in general, fish aggregation devices, areas with high fisheries conservation values. Specifically, some examples of marine peri-artsanal OECMs of this type for Cameroon are Ntem estuary, Eboundja, Bona\u0026rsquo;Anja, FNGR Makoli etc.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cstrong\u003eCategory 2 OECMs\u003c/strong\u003e \u003cp\u003eThey are also regarded as secondary OECMs since conservation outcomes is a secondary management objective. Their characteristics are\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e (i) ensure the sustainable management of fisheries resources and contribute to improve the socio-economic well-being of the populations;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(ii) reconcile traditional uses with conservation;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e(iii) contribute to biological connectivity between classic marine or terrestrial Protected Areas and areas allocated to other uses.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe following are considered to be category 2 marine and coastal OECMs: Military reserve, enclaves, fishing areas, communal mangrove forests, marine tourist sites. Specific examples are Gold coast, Okoh creek etc.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cb\u003eCategory 3 OECMs\u003c/b\u003e: Ancillary conservation or category 3 sites are those areas where conservation is a by-product of a certain management objective (that contribute to the promotion of local values ​​and knowledge with conservation being a derivative and added value product). The following are considered to be category 3 marine and coastal OECMs: sacred sites, shipwrecks area, battle and war sites and areas of religious worshiping. A good example of category 3 OECMs is the spiritual worship area in Bona\u0026rsquo;Anja.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec31\" class=\"Section3\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.6.3 Governance and Management promotion\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring the validation workshops of marine peri-artisanal OECMs in Cameroon, the commentators focus on the fact that, governance and management of OECMs should provide benefits in terms of biodiversity conservation as it is the case at international level. They provided that, OECMs should be managed based on a spatial consideration as Type 1 (those under Regional Governance Authority), Type 2 (those under municipal governance or authority) and Type 3 (those under local governance authority). The management authority in any of the above types depends on the conservation objectives of the populations and land owners of the site. Depending on their classification, the commentators equally provide that OECMs should be governed by a main management Authority (MA), or are co-managed within two or more (CMAs). According to them, the management authority of Marine-Peri-Artisanal OECMs along the Cameroon\u0026rsquo;s coastal zones should have the competence and legal instruments to make and implement decisions that provide benefits in terms of biodiversity conservation. These authorities recognize and respect ancestral rights and those arising from international treaties and agreements. They should also mobilize local communities and stakeholders to take their views into account in governance decision-making and adapt the governance approach according to the specific needs and context of the OECMs under consideration. However, before the action of the community committee or indigenous management authority model, the administrative territorially authority, in collaboration with the various stakeholders, draws up a simple development plan for marine/coastal OECMs (Marin Peri-Artisanal) and coordinates its implementation. OECMs in Cameroon operate on the basis of this Simple Management Plan, in accordance with specified Guidelines (directives for OECMs in Cameroon).\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4 Discussions","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec33\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1 Description of Governance and Management model of OECMs in Cameroon\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOECMs may need to be recognized and managed with adaptation to climate change in mind (Cross et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). Looking at the objective, most of the OECMs sites (86%) of the promising sites revealed either a conservation measure/objective (76%) or a cultural objective (10%), aligning with the definition of OECMs given by IUCN (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Similarly, the management measures investigated within the forty-six (46) candidates marine peri-artisanal OECMs sites in Cameroon revealed that the community-based management measure was the most observed (67%). The different management authority or entity encountered were; (1) management by Private individuals (consultants, companies moral and physical person), (2) Community and indigenous (Chief, pastors, lamidos, spiritual guards, council, village committee), (3) Mixed management (Chief, pastor, government entity including universities and NGOs) and (4) Government management (Mainly sectorial ministries likes the defense and their military bases, ministry of transport and their harbors). Further analysis highlighted showed that 45% of the marine peri-artisanal OECMs investigated have village chief as the management authority. Equally, 50% of the sites have the entire community as management authority. According to the findings of Dudley et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), OECMs managed by local communities or indigenous peoples are more likely to reach conservation targets compare to other forms of managements. This corroborates with the argument of Dudley et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), that OECMs contribute to conservation, while respecting human rights and a diversity of worldviews and governance approaches. However, the above value is far greater than the 2% obtained by Jones et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR41\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) working on 679 OECMs sites in nine countries in the world. This difference could be explained from the varied implication level of chiefs, their considerations in the government structure and equivalence in the various traditional or ancestral managements models. A furthermore analysis spotlighted that, except for the governmental management, the management authorities (community, mixed and private) encounter in Cameroon are similar to those underlines in Indonesia Estradivari et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) revealing that OECMs are ancestral and community-based management worldwide. These results also confirm the finding of Gurney et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) and Brodie et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) that showed that, management decisions that are made at local scales are ideal for OECMs, since this can lead to opportunistic OECMs network that deliver meaningful conservation gains. The absence of government entities in the candidates (46 sites) marines OECMs sites during this study could be explained by lack of information in the restricted zones like military based (naval), presidential residence, harbor zones that are highly protected by the army. Looking at the categories of OECM, this study highlighted that the sites identified were either primary, secondary or tertiary OECMs with either conservation or cultural practices that could influence biodiversity. Similar findings have been obtained by Donald et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) aligning with the IUCN (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) categorization of OECMs.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec34\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2. Depiction of Marine-Peri-Artisanal OECMs along the coast of Cameroon\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe analysis of selected marine-peri-artisanal OECMs along the Cameroon coast showed that, in the Rio Ntem zone, sites like the Ntem estuary and Bahondo with less suitable management presented the highest species diversity. This finding could be explained from a number of factors; (i) the Ntem estuary OECM is open to the atlantic ocean, (ii) it is limited in the west by an international boundary with Equatorial Guinea, according to Kark et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR43\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e) ross-boundary collaboration is the key to the conservation puzzle, (iii) the presence of military camps along the boundary restricted access to these areas and hence enhance conservation outcomes, (iv) these sites are characterized by a variety of landscape and seascape that are suitable nursery ground for most fish species and (v) there is a high connectivity between the ecosystems of these sites and this will enhance species conservation (Brodie et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Similarly, the Ntem estuary revealed the highest number of IUCN red list species and suitable boundaries compared to other OECMs. The presence of these well-known boundaries is attributed not only to the presence of a cross border between Cameroon and Equatorial Guinea along the Ntem estuary but also the presence of the national park of Campo Ma\u0026rsquo;an (Cameroon) and Rio Campo part (Equatorial Guinea).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn the Tiko and Douala-Edea area, the sites with a better management are Bona\u0026rsquo;Anja and Manoka. This could be attributed to the fact that, they are managed primarily for tourism, which also include areas of conservation interest (Bona\u0026rsquo;Anja) and for sustainable extraction of marine products (Manoka). These management models have shown their efficiencies in the management of OECMs (Day et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). These sites are also characterized by large mangroves forest and are either connected to the atlantic ocean (Manoka) or provide connectivity between fresh and marine (brackish) water as the case in Bona\u0026rsquo;Anja. This latter is a nursery ground for most fish species encounter between the Nkan river and the Wouri estuary (Besack et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). This zone has also been document by Essome et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) as the second pool of clams in Cameroon and bears many endemics species. However, the correct boundaries of this latter site are not well determined because of the multiscale tidal variations causing flooding conditions in this region (Besack et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). The results of these findings also highlighted that the highest number of Red List species are located in Cap Cameroon and Manoka. This could be explained by the connectivity of these sites to the Atlantic Ocean couple to the Cameroon estuary that drain large amount of nutrients necessary for photosynthesis and hence phytoplankton abundance. The analysis of the species diversity of this area underline that, all the sites of this zone have a very high species diversity as a result of their connection to the Atlantic Ocean or a river network draining nutrients into the coastal water to enhance photosynthesis and hence primary productivity (Besack et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Rio del Rey sites are all better managed except for MBE Matutu. In this part of the coast, the species diversity is highest in the NKN Okoh Creek because of its position inside the mangrove forest. The Red list specie number is in equilibrium in all the sites of this area, as a result of the relative proximity of these sites to each other.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec35\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3 Contribution of promising Marine Peri-artisanal OECMs to the kumming-Montreal 30 \u0026times; 30 Target on Biodiversity\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe kunming-Montreal Target 3 of the CBD 2020 states that \u0026lsquo;At least 30% of marine and terrestrial including inland waters should be protected by 2030. In Cameroon, PAs account for about 23% protection of EEZ. A descriptive analysis of promising OECMs shows that the total area likely to be protected by other effective conservation measures is 435.33km\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e. This total area represents a proportion of about 5.1% of the territorial waters of Cameroon, bringing conservation estate to about 28%. The inclusion of restricted sites like military bases, harbors zones and presidential residence will also contribute to meet the target 3. This result show that, the 30 by 30 target can be made possible in Cameroon by investing in existing and established mechanisms of protection and conservation as stated by Fitzsimons et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) when working with NGOs to investigate the achievement of the 30 by 30 target 3 in Australia.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe OECMs were merged after screening procedures. This merging is an essential step in creating connectivity of landscape and seascape, that are very important for ensuring genetic flow and species migration in response to climate change and anthropogenic pollution (Brodie et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). This result is in line with the UN-CBD (2022), that stipulates that, protected areas including OECMs network must be well connected. Similar results were obtained by Brodie et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e) when comparing OECMs in south Africa, Philippines and Colombia. According to this author, OECMs in South Africa tended to be better aligned with key biodiversity and connectivity priorities, potentially suggesting stronger strategic integration or more mature processes for identification and reporting. In contrast, Colombia and Philippines showed limited alignment with this study, potentially reflecting earlier-stage or more locally driven OECMs recognition process with limitations in connectivity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec36\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.4 Contribution of OECMs in biodiversity conservation along the Cameroon coast\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe fishing sector of Cameroon is heavily impacted as a consequence of the increased in demands of marine resources with the associated coastal environment and the limit in sustainability of artisanal fisheries catching juveniles and mother fish. This illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing is common with industrial trawling. Other threads include, (1) Poaching of class A and B species, (2) Presence of a population dependent on forest and fishing resources on the outskirts of the park and (3) destruction of habitat (pollution, overexploitation, structural projects, etc.). Many studies have shown that OECMs are hopeful tools for the conservation and sustainability of resources (Brodie et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Gurney et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Following the definition of OECMs (CBD, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; IUCN-WCPA, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), these areas should demonstrate a significant biodiversity value. Most of the candidate sites (46%) have high species richness, 26% of the potential sites presented a very high species richness (more than 50% of the species composition caught in Cameroon), indicating that, these sites may not be under a pressure or stress (due to Human action and climate change) that could affect their resources. These findings corroborate with those of Watson et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR73\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e) who concluded that, OECMs should be located in areas with high biodiversity (sample representative of the country or regional biodiversity) with limited pollution (degradation). According to Brodie et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), this situation may enhance the conservation achievement of the 30 by 30 goal (conserving at least 30% of the biodiversity).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRegarding the red list species, 41% of the sites have low amount of red list species, while only 7% of them presented a high amount of red list. This situation could be explained by the fact that, Red list specie are species under threats (climate changes with a consequence on the pH of water, pollution and anthropic pressure) and cannot be found in normal quantities in their various habitats (Schaffelke et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR67\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2012\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, the grouping of the red list species revealed that 63% of them were classified as fish species. This group is followed by aquatic birds (17%) and shrimps (8%) respectively. Equally, marine turtles represented only 3% of the red list species encountered in the marine-peri-artisanal OECMs along the Cameroon coastal zone. These proportions in red list species could be explained not only through their various abundance, distribution, life cycles and migratory habits but also their high commercial values.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAccording to Alves-Pinto et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) and Jonas et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e), recognizing an area as an OECM might deliver appropriate support to this area in terms of increasing biodiversity leading to increased pride and empowerment within local communities. The recognition and declaration of sites could also encourage managers to maintain their current conservations practices over the long-term (Alves-Pinto et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Many authors reported that the recognition and declaration of OECMs could help engage a diversity of stakeholders in local and international conservation processes (Diz et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Kremen \u0026amp; Merenlender, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR44\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). Furthermore, the diverse cultural and spiritual beliefs, complex forms of governance, and management types in different OECMs might be unfold in diverse conservation outcomes (Jonas et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e) and improve linkages between equitable conservation and effective conservation outcomes (Hill, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e). The recognition of a site as OECMs may also help accelerate the identification of other OECMs, that will depend largely on whether landowners, managers, civil society and governments are interested in reporting or having their sites reported as OECMs. Again, OECMs could also cover species and ecosystems that are not well conserved inside formal PA. For example, the Manatee species (African manatee) in Bona\u0026rsquo;Anja are declared vulnrable with a very high risk of extinction but are found outside the Douala-Edea MPA. OECMs can also serve the purposes of protecting high-threat regions and improving ecological benefits. Finally, the study of Alves-Pinto et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) showed that OECM could be a solution for those communities that do not want the area they govern to become a PA but nevertheless, want recognition and/or tenure security. This author revealed that the consequences of recognizing areas as OECMs, will increase the sense of responsibility in conservation and management processes, increase equitability in level of intervention and maintain the entire systems with its associate ecological structures in integrity.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec37\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e\u003cb\u003e4.5.\u003c/b\u003e Implications \u003cb\u003eof multi-criteria analysis for the operationalization of OECMs in Cameroon\u003c/b\u003e\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe multi-criteria visualisation tools employed in this study (Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig11\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e11\u003c/span\u003e \u0026amp; Fig.\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Fig12\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e12\u003c/span\u003e) provide novel insights into the relationships between governance, socio-economic context and biophysical attributes in candidate OECMs. The cross-matrix analysis revealed a positive association between participatory governance (community participation and transparency) and locally perceived conservation outcomes, reinforcing the view that inclusive management structures are critical for the legitimacy and long-term effectiveness of area-based conservation (Dudley et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Gurney et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). This finding echoes recent OECM literature, which emphasises that recognition of local governance arrangements can enhance both ecological outcomes and social equity (Jonas, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). The radar diagrams further demonstrated that not all conservation categories are equally suited to OECM status: categories with balance \u0026amp;ed profiles across governance, socio-economics and biophysics (e.g., Category C) exhibited the greatest potential for sustainable conservation, whereas categories with high biophysical value but weak governance (Category A) may require targeted capacity-building interventions before formal recognition. The merging of complementary categories (B and D) based on their radar profiles illustrates how such visual tools can operationalise the merging criteria (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e) by identifying synergies that enhance ecological connectivity and management coherence (Brodie et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e; Kukkala \u0026amp; Moilanen, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR45\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). From a policy perspective, these results underscore the need for flexible, context-specific evaluation frameworks that go beyond simple ecological metrics and explicitly consider governance and socio-economic dimensions during the identification and reporting of OECMs (IUCN-WCPA, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e; Stevens et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR70\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Failure to address governance weaknesses in high-biodiversity sites may undermine the durability of conservation outcomes, a risk already highlighted in the OECM literature (Bingham et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Timpte et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR71\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e). As Cameroon moves towards operationalising the 30\u0026times;30 target, such diagnostic tools can help prioritise investments and ensure that newly recognised OECMs are both ecologically valuable and institutionally sustainable.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec38\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.6 Guidance on OECMs declaration and creation in Cameroon\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe Cameroon Government and communities need to formally integrate OECMs into the local policy to ease their declaration, approbation, monitoring and adaptation in the context of climate changes and their specificities. This consist of submitting data on OECMs (prior studies on the candidate site and participative evaluation). While the prior study is conducted by the local Community management team, the participative comprehensive and consensual investigation is conducted by the representatives of all the stakeholders including government entities under the supervision of the administrative authority and Ministry in charge of Wild life conservation in Cameroon (MINFOF). This process is similar to that adopted by the Australian government (Fitzsimons et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), where the data on OECMs are submitted to an equivalent collaborative Australian Protected Areas Database (CAPAD) after evaluation. Currently, the identification and declaration of OECMs in many countries is driven by local entities decisions to apply for OECM status (Gurney et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). This was the case in the coastal zones of Cameroon following the results of this investigation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec39\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.6 Perspectives and Challenges of OECMs implementation in Cameroon\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe monitoring of Biodiversity including the Red List Index (RLI) for each OECM should be conducted. The action responding to biodiversity crisis requires an understanding of how many and which species are being driven near to extinction, the rate of extinction and trends in extinction risk, as well as where to focus the conservation efforts, which threats need to be mitigated, and whether interventions are successful (Butchart et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). This index will also serve as a base line for further investigations on Red List species and or OECMs declaration outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAnother limitation of this work is that, it has not considered deep and global inventory of biodiversity. Whereas an inventory of birds, fish, shrimps, crabs, mangroves forests etc, is necessary for the evaluation of the performance (efficiency) of OECMs sites in conservation. An important way to build the assessment of OECM effectiveness at temporal scales also include a better understanding on how different types of OECMs are developed, management practices, and anthropogenic impacts affecting conservation outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAn effective OECM assessment tool should be developed. An important way to do our assessment of OECM effectiveness at spatial and temporal scales include developing a better understanding of how different types of OECMs, management practices, and anthropogenic impacts affect conservation outcomes over time. This should be done after investigating the physical aspects of the water (tides, currents, depth, physical and chemical properties of water)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5. Conclusion","content":"\u003cp\u003eIn Cameroon, PAs account for about 23% protection of the territorial waters. In order to build capacity to improve the effective management of the network of MPAs and marine OECMs that promote community surveillance combating illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) industrial fishing and to promote a transparent peach in Cameroonian territorial waters, an evaluation of Other Effective Area base Conservation Measures was conducted in coastal regions. This study represents the first identification, typology and institutional framework at the national level of marine peri-artisanal OECMs in Cameroon. A methodology, including field work, seminars and workshop was adopted and the data collected were subjected to Hedonistic analysis and merging procedures. Through participatory assessment and governance analysis, 31 candidate sites were validated and consolidated into 15 spatially coherent marine OECMs. Together, these sites represent a promising contribution of 5.1% to Cameroon's territorial waters and provide a solid foundation for achieving the global conservation target 30\u0026times;30. In marine-peri-artisanal OECMs, management systems encountered mostly concerns (i) community areas managed primarily for sustainable extraction of marine resources (ii) fishery management areas with no wider stated conservation aims and (iii) marine or coastal management systems, managed primarily for ecotourism, which also include areas of conservation interest. Also, two mechanisms are recognized to secure biodiversity in Cameroon through OECMs. They are (i) declaration of the protected area or registering the area as conservation-based area (OECM) and (ii) Securing the biodiversity site through the preparation of a biodiversity management plan. To strengthen the long-term sustainability of this network, we recommend that decision-makers integrate OECMs into marine spatial planning, establish national monitoring protocols, and support capacity building of local management committees. Lessons learned from Cameroon offer valuable insights for other coastal nations seeking pragmatic and inclusive strategies to bring conservation and community livelihoods closer beyond conventional protected areas.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eDeclaration\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis work was sponsored by OCEAN 5 under the project entitled strengthen capacities to enhance effective management of the network of MPA and marine OECMs that promote community surveillance combating illegal industrial fishing and illicit, unreported and illegal (IUU) fishing.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe contributing authors share collective responsibility and accountability for the results. Contributions by each author are as follows: B.F (Conceiving the ideas, interpreted the data, Participated in the active execution of the study and Wrote the manuscript), X.N.N and A.C.M.N (Analyzed data, prepared figures, interpreted results of the data and Wrote the manuscript), J.T.M and L. N.M (Participated in the active execution of the study, Analyzing and interpreting the data), L.U and F.B (Conceiving the ideas and design of the experiment) Ebonji Seth Rodrigue (Participating in the active execution of the study and Writing the manuscript), J.W, B.S and E.N.M (Conceived the ideas and designed the experiment, Participated in the active data collection and Writing the manuscript). All authors reviewed the manuscript before submission\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAcknowledgement\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe authors acknowledge late Dr Gordon Ajonina, the past National Coordinator of the Cameroon Wildlife Conservation Society (CWCS) and founder of this projet. He introduced the concept of OECM as a new paradigm to fight againts illegal, unregulated and unreported industrial fishing after the FOA yellow card to Cameroon in 2024. May his soul rest in peace\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAddison P, Carbone G, McCormick N (2018) The development and use of biodiversity indicators. \u003cem\u003eGland, Switzerland: IUCN\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAjonina G, Diam\u0026eacute; A, Kairo J (2008) Current status and conservation of mangroves in Africa: An overview. World Rainfor Mov Bull 133:1\u0026ndash;6\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAjonina GN (2008) Inventory and modelling mangrove forest stand dynamics following different levels of wood exploitation pressures in the Douala-Edea Atlantic coast of Cameroon, Central Africa. \u003cem\u003eMitteilungen der Abteilungen f\u0026uuml;r Forstliche Biometrie, Albert-Ludwigs-Universit\u0026auml;t Freiburg\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e2\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAlves-Pinto H, Geldmann J, Jonas H, Maioli V, Balmford A, Latawiec AE, Crouzeilles R, Strassburg B (2021) Opportunities and challenges of other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) for biodiversity conservation. Perspect Ecol Conserv 19(2):115\u0026ndash;120\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBelote RT, Wilson MB (2020) Delineating greater ecosystems around protected areas to guide conservation. Conserv Sci Pract, 2(6), e196\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBesack F, Mbang LE, Tchogom JM, Ajonina G, Ebonji SR, Onguene R, Tomedi ME, Dada O (2025) Change in Hydrological Signature of Tropical River-Estuaries During Extreme Flood Conditions: A Case Study of the Wouri-Nkam River Estuary (Cameroon) During the August 2020 Flood Event. Estuaries Coasts 48(6):163\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBesack F, Rodrigue E, Nwutih A, Dieudonn\u0026eacute; E, Willy S, Brice N, Junior M, Michel-Remi H, Raphael O, Minette T (2021) Spatial and temporal variation of the hydrological parameters in the Wouri-Nkam section of the Cameroon estuary, Central African Atlantic coast. Open J Mar Sci 11(4):129\u0026ndash;156\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBingham H, Fitzsimons J, Redford KH, Mitchell BA, Bezaury-Creel J, Cumming TL (2017) Privately protected areas: advances and challenges in guidance, policy and documentation\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBingham HC, Fitzsimons JA, Mitchell BA, Redford KH, Stolton S (2021) Privately protected areas: Missing pieces of the global conservation puzzle. Front Conserv Sci 2:748127\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBorrini-Feyerabend G, Chatelain C, Hosch G (2010) En gouvernance partag\u0026eacute;e! un guide pratique pour les aires marines prot\u0026eacute;g\u0026eacute;es en Afrique de l\u0026rsquo;Ouest. IUCN\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrodie JF, Freeman BG, Mannion PD, Hargreaves AL (2025) Shifting, expanding, or contracting? Range movement consequences for biodiversity. Trends in Ecology \u0026amp; Evolution\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBrodie S, Smith JA, Muhling BA, Barnett LA, Carroll G, Fiedler P, Bograd SJ, Hazen EL, Jacox MG, Andrews KS (2022) Recommendations for quantifying and reducing uncertainty in climate projections of species distributions. Glob Change Biol 28(22):6586\u0026ndash;6601\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eButchart SH, Ak\u0026ccedil;akaya HR, Berryman AJ, Brooks TM, Burfield IJ, Chanson J, Dias MP, Donaldson JS, Hermes C, Hilton-Taylor C (2025) Measuring trends in extinction risk: a review of two decades of development and application of the Red List Index. \u003cem\u003ePhilosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e380\u003c/em\u003e(1917)\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCBD (2010) Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011\u0026ndash;2020\u0026rsquo; in Decisions Adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity at its Tenth Meeting\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCBD (2018) Decision Adopted by the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity 14/8. Protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, Convention on Biological Diversity, Egypt, 2018\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCross D, Shaw T, Hadwen K, Cardoso P, Slee P, Roberts C, Thomas L, Barnes A (2016) Longitudinal impact of the Cyber Friendly Schools program on adolescents\u0026rsquo; cyberbullying behavior. Aggressive Behav 42(2):166\u0026ndash;180\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDay J, Dudley N, Hockings M, Holmes G, Laffoley DdA, Stolton S, Wells SM (2012) Guidelines for applying the IUCN protected area management categories to marine protected areas. IUCN\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDiz D, Johnson D, Riddell M, Rees S, Battle J, Gjerde K, Hennige S, Roberts JM (2018) Mainstreaming marine biodiversity into the SDGs: the role of other effective area-based conservation measures (SDG 14.5). Mar Policy 93:251\u0026ndash;261\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDobson A (2005) Monitoring global rates of biodiversity change: challenges that arise in meeting the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) 2010 goals. Philosophical Trans Royal Soc B: Biol Sci 360(1454):229\u0026ndash;241\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDonald PF, Buchanan GM, Balmford A, Bingham H, Couturier AR, de la Rosa GE Jr, Gacheru P, Herzog SK, Jathar G, Kingston N (2019) The prevalence, characteristics and effectiveness of Aichi Target 11\u0026prime; s other effective area-based conservation measures(OECMs) in Key Biodiversity Areas. Conserv Lett 12(5):e12659\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDudley N (2008) Guidelines for applying protected area management categories. Iucn\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDudley N, Jonas H, Nelson F, Parrish J, Pyh\u0026auml;l\u0026auml; A, Stolton S, Watson JE (2018) The essential role of other effective area-based conservation measures in achieving big bold conservation targets. Global Ecol Conserv 15:e00424\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEssome H, Egbe TO, Halle GE, Nana TN, Boten M, Tocki GT, Foumane P (2020) Epidemiology of ectopic pregnancy at Laquintinie Douala hospital (Cameroon): prevalence survey, clinical profile, therapeutic and transfusion issues. Int J Reprod Contracept Obstet Gynecol 10(1):44\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eEstradivari E, Agung M, Adhuri DS, Ferse SC, Sualia I, Brown DAA, Campbell SJ, Iqbal M, Jonas HD, Lazuardi ME (2022) Marine conservation beyond MPAs: Towards the recognition of other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) in Indonesia. Mar Policy 137:12\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFitzsimons J, Picone A, Partridge T, Cornish M (2023) Protecting Australia\u0026rsquo;s Nature: Pathways to protecting 30 per cent of land by 2030\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFitzsimons JA, Partridge T, Keen R (2024) Other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) in Australia: key considerations for assessment and implementation. Conservation 4(2):176\u0026ndash;200\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGeldmann J, Manica A, Burgess ND, Coad L, Balmford A (2019) A global-level assessment of the effectiveness of protected areas at resisting anthropogenic pressures. \u003cem\u003eProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e116\u003c/em\u003e(46), 23209\u0026ndash;23215\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGiglio VJ, Pinheiro HT, Bender MG, Bonaldo RM, Costa-Lotufo LV, Ferreira CE, Floeter SR, Freire A, Gasparini JL, Joyeux J-C (2018) Large and remote marine protected areas in the South Atlantic Ocean are flawed and raise concerns: Comments on Soares and Lucas (2018). \u003cem\u003eMarine Policy\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e96\u003c/em\u003e, 13\u0026ndash;17\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGilbert JA, Peixoto RS, Scholz AH, Bello D, Korsten MG, Berg L, Singh G, Boetius B, Wang A, F., Greening C (2025) Launching the IUCN Microbial Conservation Specialist Group as a global safeguard for microbial biodiversity. Nat Microbiol 10(10):2359\u0026ndash;2360\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGurney GG, Mangubhai S, Fox M, Kim MK, Agrawal A (2021) Equity in environmental governance: perceived fairness of distributional justice principles in marine co-management. Environ Sci Policy 124:23\u0026ndash;32\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHill NE (2015) Including fathers in the picture: A meta-analysis of parental involvement and students\u0026rsquo; academic achievement. J Educ Psychol 107(4):919\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHockings M, Hardcastle J, Woodley S, Sandwith T, Wilson J, Bammert M, Valenzuela S, Chataigner B, Lefebvre T, Leverington F (2019) The IUCN Green List of Protected and Conserved Areas: Setting the standard for effective area-based conservation. Parks 25(252):57\u0026ndash;66\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIUCN-WCPA (2018) Guidelines for recognising and protecting other effective based-area conservation measures\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIUCN-WCPA (2019) Task Force on AMCEZs, Recognising and reporting other effective area- based conservation measures, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, 2019\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIUCN-WCPA (2023) Site-level tool for identifying other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs). IUCN\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIUCN I-C (2022) Unified Classification of Direct Threats. In\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJonas HD (2021) Contesting and reconstituting conservation in space, time and law. University of East Anglia]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJonas HD, Barbuto V, Jonas HC, Kothari A, Nelson F (2014) New steps of change: looking beyond protected areas to consider other effective area-based conservation measures. Parks 20(2):111\u0026ndash;128\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJonas HD, Lee E, Jonas HC, Matallana-Tobon C, Wright KS, Nelson F, Enns E (2017) Will other effective area-based conservation measures increase recognition and support for ICCAs. Parks 23(2):63\u0026ndash;78\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJonas HD, MacKinnon K, Dudley N, Hockings M, Jessen S, MacKinnon D, Matallana-Tob\u0026oacute;n CL, Sandwith T, Waithaka J, Woodley S (2018) Editorial essay: other effective area-based conservation measures: from Aichi Target 11 to the Post-2020 Biodiversity Framework. Parks: Int J Protected Areas Conserv 24(Special issue):9\u0026ndash;16\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJones MW, Veraverbeke S, Andela N, Doerr SH, Kolden C, Mataveli G, Pettinari ML, Le Qu\u0026eacute;r\u0026eacute; C, Rosan TM, van der Werf GR (2024) Global rise in forest fire emissions linked to climate change in the extratropics. Science 386(6719):eadl5889\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eJuffe-Bignoli D, Brooks TM, Butchart SH, Jenkins RB, Boe K, Hoffmann M, Angulo A, Bachman S, B\u0026ouml;hm M, Brummitt N (2016) Assessing the cost of global biodiversity and conservation knowledge. PLoS ONE 11(8):e0160640\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKark R, Katz-Navon T, Delegach M (2015) The dual effects of leading for safety: The mediating role of employee regulatory focus. J Appl Psychol 100(5):1332\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKremen C, Merenlender AM (2018) Landscapes that work for biodiversity and people. Science 362(6412):eaau6020\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eKukkala AS, Moilanen A (2017) Ecosystem services and connectivity in spatial conservation prioritization. Landscape Ecol 32(1):5\u0026ndash;14\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLemieux CJ (2025) IUCN WCPA Technical Note No. 21: Utilizing Protected and Conserved Areas for Human Health and Well-being. A Technical and Methodological Framework\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLemieux CJ, Beazley KF, MacKinnon D, Wright P, Kraus D, Pither R, Crawford L, Jacob AL, Hilty J (2022) Transformational changes for achieving the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework ecological connectivity goals. \u003cem\u003eFacets\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLeung Y-F, Spenceley A, Hvenegaard G, Buckley R, Groves C (2018) Tourism and visitor management in protected areas: Guidelines for sustainability, vol 27. IuCN Gland, Switzerland\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMacKinnon D, Lemieux C, Beazley K, Woodley S, Helie R, Perron J, Elliott J, Haas C, Langlois J, Lazaruk H (2015) Canada and Aichi Biodiversity Target 11: understanding \u0026lsquo;other effective area-based conservation measures\u0026rsquo; in the context of the broader target. Biodivers Conserv 24(14):3559\u0026ndash;3581\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMama A, Chougong D, Dingong G, Bessa A, Dicka E, Ajonina G, Ndam J (2024) Dendrometrical Structure and Physicochemical Analysis of Mangrove Sediments from the Nyong River Estuary (Cameroon, Atlantic Coast). Water Resour Ocean Sci 13:23\u0026ndash;41\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMarnewick D, Stevens CM, Jonas H, Antrobus-Wuth R, Wilson N, Theron N (2021) Assessing the extent and contribution of OECMs in South Africa. Parks 27(1):57\u0026ndash;70\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMaxwell SL, Cazalis V, Dudley N, Hoffmann M, Rodrigues AS, Stolton S, Visconti P, Woodley S, Kingston N, Lewis E (2020) Area-based conservation in the twenty-first century. Nature 586(7828):217\u0026ndash;227\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMbevo Fendoung P, Tchindjang M, Hubert-Ferrari A (2022) Weakening of coastlines and coastal erosion in the Gulf of Guinea: the case of the Kribi coast in Cameroon. Land 11(9):1557\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMitchell BA, Fitzsimons J, Stevens CM, Wright DR (2018) PPA or OECM? Differentiating between privately protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures on private land\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMurphy B, Onana J-M, van der Burgt X, Ngansop ET, Williams J, Tchiengue B, Cheek M (2023) Important plant areas of Cameroon. Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew London\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMwamidi DM, Renom JG, Llamazares AF, Burgas D, Dom\u0026iacute;nguez P, Cabeza M (2018) Contemporary pastoral commons in East Africa as OECMs: a case study from Daasanach community. \u003cem\u003eParks\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e24\u003c/em\u003e(special issue), 49\u0026ndash;58\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNature I (2016) U. f. C. o. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016.3\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNei M, Takahata N (1993) Effective population size, genetic diversity, and coalescence time in subdivided populations. J Mol Evol 37(3):240\u0026ndash;244\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNemba ACM, De La Croix K, Eyango MT-T, David G (2022) \u0026Agrave; la rencontre des espaces halieutiques sur le littoral camerounais: comparaison entre les r\u0026eacute;gions Littoral et Sud c\u0026ocirc;tier. Annales de g\u0026eacute;ographie\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNewing H, Eagle C, Puri RK, Watson C (2011) Conducting research in conservation, vol 775. Routledge Oxfordshire\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePaterson A (2022) Scoping the Potential Influence of Law on Terrestrially Located Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures. Law Env't Dev J 18:33\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePaterson A (2023) Other effective area-based conservation measures, biodiversity stewardship and statutory intervention\u0026ndash;A South African perspective. Potchefstroom Electron Law Journal/Potchefstroomse Elektroniese Regsblad 26(1):1\u0026ndash;31\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePaterson A (2024) Learning from Protected Areas\u0026mdash;Distilling Lessons for A Potential Future OECM Statutory Framework in South Africa. Stellenbosch Law Rev 2024(2):115\u0026ndash;143\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePaterson A (2025) The Judiciary's Contribution to Preventing Protected Area Downgrading, Downsizing, and Degazettement: Mining and Environmental Justice Community of South Africa v MEC for Agriculture, Rural Development Land and Environmental Affairs (1322/2021)[2024] ZAMPMBHC 48 (18 July 2024). Potchefstroom Electron Law J (PELJ) 28(1):1\u0026ndash;28\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRichard N (2023) Fishery-based Livelihoods in a Changing and Complex Fish Food Environment in Cameroon, Central Africa. University of Guelph]\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSaaty TL (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1(1):83\u0026ndash;98\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSchaffelke B, Carleton J, Skuza M, Zagorskis I, Furnas MJ (2012) Water quality in the inshore Great Barrier Reef lagoon: Implications for long-term monitoring and management. Mar Pollut Bull 65(4\u0026ndash;9):249\u0026ndash;260\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSmith J, Mapendembe A, Vega A, Hernandez Morcillo M, Walpole M, Herkenrath P (2010) Linking the thematic programmes of work of the convention on biological diversity (CBD) to poverty reduction. Biodiversity for Development: New Approaches for National Biodiversity Strategies. CBD Secretariat, Montreal\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSonkou\u0026eacute; D, Monkam D, Fotso-Nguemo TC, Yepdo ZD, Vondou DA (2019) Evaluation and projected changes in daily rainfall characteristics over Central Africa based on a multi-model ensemble mean of CMIP5 simulations. Theoret Appl Climatol 137(3):2167\u0026ndash;2186\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eStevens S, Hay-Edie T, Larrea CM, Ramos A, Broome NP, Eghenter C, Fitzsimons J, Goradze I, Ironside J, Mellis C (2024) Recognising territories and areas conserved by Indigenous peoples and local communities (ICCAs) overlapped by protected areas. IUCN WCPA Good Pract Guidelines Ser (34).\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eTimpte M, Marquard E, Paulsch C (2018) Analysis of the Strategic Plan 2011\u0026ndash;2020 of the Convention on Biological Biodiversity (CBD) and first discussions of resulting recommendations for a post-2020 CBD framework. \u003cem\u003eInstitute for Biodiversity\u0026mdash;Network (IBN): Regensburg, Germany\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWatson JE, Dudley N, Segan DB, Hockings M (2014) The performance and potential of protected areas. Nature 515(7525):67\u0026ndash;73\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWatson JE, Venegas-Li R, Grantham H, Dudley N, Stolton S, Rao M, Woodley S, Hockings M, Burkart K, Simmonds JS (2023) Priorities for protected area expansion so nations can meet their Kunming‐Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework commitments. Integr Conserv 2(3):140\u0026ndash;155\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":true,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true},"keywords":"IUU fishing, OECMs, Marine Peri-Artisanal, hedonistic analysis, Territorial waters and Cameroon’s coastal zone","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9166498/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9166498/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eIn Cameroon, like other coastal countries of the world, marine species are declining at a faster rate than terrestrial and or freshwater species. In order to build capacities for improving the effective management that promote community surveillance, combating illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing in its territorial waters, a participatory intervention is required to ensure the long-term outcomes of in situ conservation of resources. The objective of this work was to identify Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) in Cameroon and bring out guidelines for their implementation as Marine Peri-Artisanal OECMs. To achieve this objective, a methodology, consisting of meetings, seminars, workshops, data collection and data analysis was spanned out from march 2023 to april 2024. These events were organized by the Cameroon Wild life Conservation Society (CWCS) and six (06) grassroots NGOs selected based on their conservation actions. Other stakeholders like the government, community representatives, Conservators of Marine protected Areas (MPAs) were also invited. A total of forty-six (46) candidate sites were identified. Most of them highlighted community-based (51%) management, followed by the traditional or ancestral (15%) methods. After screening and hedonistic analysis, the results showed that, in the Rio Ntem zone, sites like the Ntem estuary and Bahondo with less suitable management, have the highest species diversity. In the Tiko and Douala-Edea area, the sites with a better management are Bona\u0026rsquo;Anja and Manoka. The commentators also agreed at 100% that the setting up of OECMs in Cameroon is a voluntary participatory process and the 3 steps guiding their identification and declaration are (i) prior identification (ii) Categorization and (iii) governance and management. To conclude, the total surface area likely to be protected by other effective area-based conservation measures is 435.33km\u003csup\u003e2\u003c/sup\u003e and account for about 5.1% of the territorial waters rising conservation estate to 28% that best fit the 30 by 30 objective of the biodiversity convention.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"A participatory, criteria-based workflow to identify promising marine peri artisanal OECMs in Cameroon and the implications for national reporting and governance","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-04-24 09:25:40","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9166498/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"researchsquare","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":true,"externalIdentity":"","sideBox":"","snPcode":"","submissionUrl":"/submission","title":"Research Square","twitterHandle":"researchsquare","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":false,"editorialSystem":"","reportingPortfolio":"","inReviewEnabled":false,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":true}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"6b11940e-b739-4760-a8ee-8ffdaf22188e","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 24th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"posted","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-24T09:25:41+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-04-24 09:25:40","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9166498","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9166498","identity":"rs-9166498","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}