Frequently Asked Questions

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) defines Other Effective area-based Conservation Measures (OECMs) as follows¹:

“a geographically defined area other than a Protected Area, which is governed and managed in ways that achieve positive and sustained long-term outcomes for the in situ conservation of biodiversity, with associated ecosystem functions and services and, where applicable, cultural, spiritual, socioeconomic, and other locally relevant values.”

The aim of OECMs is to recognize management practices that contribute effectively to the long term conservation of biodiversity, even if these efforts do not have conservation as their primary goal. Unlike protected areas, the main objective of a site recognized as an AMCE does not need to be conservation, but there must be a direct causal link between the goal(s) and management of the area and the long-term in situ² conservation of biodiversity.

This recognition seeks to ensure the continuation of beneficial practices for long-term in situ conservation of biodiversity. OECMs count toward the achievement of the international and national target of conserving 30% of land, inland waters, and coastal and marine ecosystems by 2030. Both Quebec and Canada are committed to this goal from the Kunming-Montreal Global biodiversity framework.

---

¹ The guidelines for OECMs in Quebec are based on recommendations issued by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and adapted to reflect the province’s particular circumstances.

² On-site conservation, as opposed to ex situ conservation, where species are protected off-site, outside their natural territory, as in a zoo, for example.

The difference between an OECM and a protected area resides in the site’s objectives, approach to governance, and management system. The following table highlights the main differences between these two conservation tools:

Protected Area	OECM
The primary objective is always biodiversity conservation	Conservation can be the primary, secondary, or ancillary objective. In every case, efficient biodiversity conservation must be secured through active management for the site to be recognized
The site’s system of governance and management practices are established based on the conservation objectives	The site’s system of governance and management practices are already in place prior to its recognition as an OECM
A more robust designation process	A more accessible and flexible recognition process
Produces positive results for in situ1 biodiversity conservation in the long term

The primary objective of a protected area is always biodiversity conservation. The area to be protected is therefore defined in terms of this objective, and a management system is developed thereafter. Thus, protected areas are created to achieve conservation objectives from the outset.

What distinguishes an OECM, by contrast, is a governance and management system that, intentionally or not, brings about positive results for biodiversity and will continue to do so over the long term. While conservation can be the primary purpose of an OECM, it can also be an (intentional) secondary objective, or simply the (unintended) outcome of a different aim.

Although both cases produce comparable results for biodiversity conservation, a protected area is a more robust designation with legal protection, while an OECM offers more flexibility and allows for the recognition of areas that do not qualify as protected areas. They therefore constitute complementary tools for biodiversity conservation.

---

¹ On-site conservation, as opposed to ex situ conservation, where species are protected off-site, outside their natural territory, as in a zoo, for example.

OECMs do not replace protected areas; rather, the two are complementary tools for biodiversity conservation (see previous question). There are several circumstances that can warrant choosing an OECM over a protected area:

• If a given site does not fully meet the criteria for a protected area designation, but does meet those of an OECM, it could obtain recognition as an OECM.
• If the site meets the criteria for both an OECM and a protected area, then it is up to the governing authorities to choose the option that best suits their needs.
• A site recognized as an OECM may ultimately become a protected area, provided that the governing authorities and management methods are aligned with the requirements for protected areas (e.g., by making biodiversity conservation the site’s primary objective).

They make it possible to recognize the role of a wider range of conservation initiatives, particularly on private lands, because they emphasize the long-term results stemming from the application of the management objectives for the site, rather than on the precise formulation of those management objectives. However, protected areas remain essential, in conjunction with OECMs, for the purposes of achieving the 30% target by 2030.

The four criteria for recognizing OECMs established by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) are laid out in the document “Recognising and reporting other effective area-based conservation measures” (available on our website). What follows is a brief summary.

The site is not currently recognized as a protected area

A protected area cannot be recognized as an OECM. An area without status may be eligible for recognition as either a protected area or an OECM, but cannot receive both statuses at once. It is up to the authority responsible for the site to decide which status to pursue. However, it is technically possible for an OECM to ultimately become a protected area.

The area is subject to a governance and management system that ensures conservation

The area must be a geographically defined area that is regulated and managed in such a way as to produce tangible results for biodiversity conservation. While there is no minimum size, the area should be sufficiently large to allow for in situ conservation (i.e., in its natural habitat) of biodiversity over the long term (specific to the site’s ecological profile).

Biodiversity conservation need not be the primary purpose of an OECM, but it must at least produce positive results for biodiversity. There must be a clear and identifiable link between management measures and biodiversity conservation outcomes. Competent authorities, rights-holders and stakeholders must all be involved in the active management of the site.

The area makes a lasting and effective contribution to the in situ conservation of biological diversity

Effective management must lead to the conservation of nature as a whole, rather than targeting particular species to the detriment of the entire ecosystem. This includes registering a net positive change in biodiversity or in biodiversity loss prevention as a direct result of the approach to governance and management of the site.

Related ecosystem functions and services and locally relevant cultural, spiritual, socio-economic and other values.

Ecosystem services (including socio-cultural services) can serve as part of the rationale for an OECM, but efforts to enhance one service in particular must not have an overall negative impact on biodiversity. Benefits for ecosystem functions and services should be attendant on positive biodiversity conservation outcomes.

If you aren’t sure whether your site is eligible, please don’t hesitate to contact us or fill in the support form, and we’ll be happy to assist you!

Potential OECM	OECM Candidate	OECM Confirmation	Recognized OECM
Initial proposal submission Preliminary assessment	Obtainment of the governing authorities’ consent as well as information required for analysis Consultation of relevant ministries for OECMs located on public lands	Full assessment of the proposal Opinion from the network of specialists, if necessary Strengthening of OECM proposals that do not fully meet the criteria	Listing on the Quebec registry Announcement letter issued by the Minister Submission to federal and international databases

There are four phases involved in having a site officially recognized as an OECM by the Quebec government:

1. Potential OECM

In this first phase, an initial proposal is submitted and a preliminary assessment of the site is conducted. Nature Québec can assist you with this assessment, simply fill out our support form.

2. Candidate OECM

If the site meets the basic criteria for an OECM, the next step is to secure the consent of the governing authorities and obtain the information required to undertake a comprehensive analysis. For candidate OECMs located on public lands, the relevant ministries will also need to be consulted.

3. Confirmed OECM

Once all the information has been collected, we conduct an in-depth assessment using the MELCCFP decision support tool. Nature Québec can call upon its network of experts as needed to assess certain proposals. In cases where sites do not fully meet the criteria for an OECM, it may be possible to build a stronger case for their eligibility.

4. Recognized OECM

The OECM is now officially recognized by the MELCCFP and listed in the Quebec registry. A letter reporting the new OECM will be issued by the Minister, along with a certificate of recognition. The OECM will then be added to federal and international databases.

Yes, however you will need formal consent from the site’s governing authorities to officially recognized the site as an OECM, if eligible. The application will need to be made in conjunction with those governing authorities, so you will have to work jointly with them to move the process forward. Depending on the structure of the site’s governing authorities, some cases can be a little more complex than others. We can help you identify the governing authorities of a potential site.

Not at the present time, but the Quebec government is in the process of developing the relevant guidelines.

When owners obtain OECM recognition for their site, they make a commitment to maintain the approach to management that produces benefits for biodiversity conservation, on which basis the site was granted OECM recognition. 

OECMs recognized in Quebec on public lands must be recognized based on the intention for the AMCE to be conserved in perpetuity, whereas on private lands, the mechanism in place must ensure the conservation of the area for at least 25 years, with the intention to conserve it in perpetuity.

It is expected that owners will uphold their commitments and demonstrate, through their management practices, their desire and ability to conserve their site. A self-assessment should be conducted every five years to report any changes in management methods or activities, and any threats to the site.

On public lands, recognition is valid in perpetuity, whereas on private lands, there is a minimum term of 25 years. However, it must be clear that the intention behind seeking OECM recognition is to conserve the site in perpetuity.

For as long as the site is a recognized OECM, it must be clearly demonstrated that governance and management practices are delivering the desired results for biodiversity, and that there are measures in place to anticipate and respond to potential threats.

For monitoring purposes, the site’s governing authorities should complete a self-assessment form every five years to advise the MELCCFP of any changes in management practices or activities on the site, and flag any potential or actual threats to biodiversity.