Summary of the report: The project analyzed the potential for implementing other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) in Trondheim municipality to contribute to the 30x30 target, as OECMs have not yet been implemented in Norway. Through the assessment of three consideration areas—Ladehalvøya, Leirelva, and Hårstadmarka—the study found that all areas meet key CBD criteria and have high potential for OECM recognition based on their support for biodiversity (such as rare species, important spawning grounds, and underrepresented ecosystems).

However, interviews revealed significant concerns, including the risk of greenwashing, political instability, and a lack of clear legal frameworks and long-term commitments, particularly because the municipal consideration zones, which form the basis for the areas, are reviewed every four years.

The conclusion is that although Trondheim has the ecological potential and administrative capacity to contribute to biodiversity through OECMs, formal recognition and permanent status require the establishment of a clearer legal framework, cross-sectoral coordination, and a structured process at both the municipal and national levels to ensure long-term conservation results.

Summary by NotebookLM quality assured by PAREUS researcher Engen
 

Area-based conservation in the 21st century has moved from a large focus on state governed protected areas towards more inclusive approaches involving non-state actors and efforts occurring beyond protected areas (Jonas et al. 2021). Aligning biodiversity goals with local values, needs and governance can be challenging and protected areas have failed to deliver effective and equitable conservation in some context (Gurney et al. 2021). 

Other effective area-based conservation measures (OECM) is a conservation designation for areas that are achieving the effective in-situ conservation of biodiversity outside protected areas (IUCN WCPA Task Force on OECMs 2019). OECMs complement protected areas through sustained, positive conservation outcomes, even though they may be managed primarily for other reasons. It is a relatively new conservation policy tool that provides a way for countries to count managed areas other than protected areas towards their commitments under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). 

What is an OECM? 

An OECMs is defined as “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, socio–economic, and other locally relevant values”. (CBD Decision 14/8, 2018)

• New conservation policy tool
• Recognizes areas outside protected areas that contribute to in situ biodiversity conservation
• Biodiversity outcomes myst be documented
• Promotes inclusive and socially just conservation
• Important for 30X30 foal of the Kunming agreement

What are some examples of OECMs?

Different types of land management/governance arrangements can count as OECMs as long as they conserve biodiversity in an efficient and equitable way. Examples include Indigenous managed areas, locally managed areas, private conservation, military areas, sacred areas. 
For Norway, the only official assessment of potential OECMs are for marine areas, specifically Norwegian fishery regulations (link to report). The Institute for Marine Research has carried out expert assessments of Norwegian fisheries regulations and determined whether they fulfill OECM criteria (i.e., not a protected area, governed, contributing to long-term conservation, support ecosystem functions and services). 
The main conclusion of the report is “a number of regulations in Norwegian fisheries contribute to the conservation of nature and biodiversity by limiting the impact of fisheries on nature”. 

Potential OECMs (i.e., areas that fulfill OECM criteria):
i)    Strictly regulated lobster protection areas, 
ii)    Parts of the fishery protection area on Svalbard that is not protected through traditional means and is not included in traditional fishing areas
iii)    Coral reef prohibition area
iv)    Reference areas for kelp
v)    Protection of vulnerable benthic habitat

Areas that could count as OECMs if regulations are strengthened:
i)    Lobster conservation areas – Tvedestrand
ii)    Prohibition against harvesting flat oyster Sørlandsheia
iii)    Certain costal cod regulations (e.g., “fjordlinjer”, “Henningsværboksen», spawning areas)
iv)    Prohibition against trawling within 12 nm
v)    Prohibition against fishing in Borgundfjorden

References: 
Gurney, Georgina G., Emily S. Darling, Gabby N. Ahmadia, Vera N. Agostini, Natalie C. Ban, Jessica Blythe, Joachim Claudet, Graham Epstein, Estradivari, Amber Himes-Cornell, Harry D. Jonas, Derek Armitage, Stuart J. Campbell, Courtney Cox, Whitney. R. Friedman, David Gill, Peni Lestari, Sangeeta Mangubhai, Elizabeth McLeod, Nyawira A. Muthiga, Josheena Naggea, Ravaka Ranaivoson, Amelia Wenger, Irfan Yulianto, and Stacy D. Jupiter. 2021. “Biodiversity Needs Every Tool in the Box: Use OECMs.” Nature 595(7869):646–49. doi: 10.1038/d41586-021-02041-4.

IUCN WCPA Task Force on OECMs. 2019. Recognising and Reporting Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures. IUCN, International Union for Conservation of Nature.

Jonas, H. D., G. N. Ahmadia, H. C. Bingham, J. Briggs, S. H. M. Butchart, J. Cariño, O. Chassot, S. Chaudhary, E. Darling, A. Degemmis, N. Dudley, J. E. Fa, J. Fitzsimons, S. Garnett, J. Geldmann, R. Golden Kroner, G. G. Gurney, A. R. Harrington, A. Himes‐cornell, M. Hockings, H. C. Jonas, S. Jupiter, N. Kingston, E. Lee, S. Lieberman, S. Mangubhai, D. Marnewick, C. L. Matallana‐tobón, S. L. Maxwell, F. Nelson, J. Parrish, R. Ranaivoson, M. Rao, M. Santamaría, O. Venter, P. Visconti, J. Waithaka, K. W. Painemilla, J. E. M. Watson, and C. von Weizsäcker. 2021. “Equitable and Effective Area‐based Conservation: Towards the Conserved Areas Paradigm.” Parks 27(1):71–84.