2.0 Methods
2.1 Defining and identifying key biodiversity areas and features
During this stage of the New Zealand Marine Ecoregion Initiative WWF-New Zealand sought the expertise of people involved with the gathering of formal information about the marine environment. Formal information originates from systematic, replicable research, while informal information comes from the accumulated experience and observations of people who interact regularly with the sea (Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment 1999).
WWF-New Zealand sought to assemble an expert group that collectively held formal specialist knowledge across the wide range of marine organisms and habitats in New Zealand. The 22 participants had expertise in taxonomy, ecology, oceanography, and conservation, and were recognised as experts on New Zealand's marine biodiversity based on their academic qualifications, their publications, or their work in the field. Most participants worked for institutions with marine science capacity, but others were independent. Participants were asked to represent their own expertise rather than the views of the institution for which they worked.
Expertise in some taxonomic groups and habitats was not well represented at the workshop. For example, squid, echinoderms, bivalves, polychaetes, and hydrothermal vent communities were not the main areas of specialisation of any of the workshop participants. Although WWF endeavoured to cover all of the taxonomic areas at the workshop, some experts chose not to be involved, or were unable to attend. Substitute experts were generally not available because taxonomic expertise in New Zealand is in serious decline, resulting in only one, or in some cases no, expert available for some taxonomic groups.
A workshop format was preferred over other methods, such as surveys, to elicit information from experts. Workshops are interactive and may yield results that are superior to single step surveys, in terms of the quantity and quality of ideas produced (Gunton 2002). A potential flow-on benefit of workshops is the dialogue and knowledge sharing that they can foster among expert participants. Furthermore, the workshop approach is relatively inexpensive, can be conducted in a short time frame, and is a tool used by WWF in other ecoregions for gathering expert input on biodiversity.
A vulnerability of the workshop approach, however, is the potential for certain personalities to dominate, thus overshadowing the input of other experts. To minimise the risk of this, a professional facilitator with experience in marine issues conducted the workshop and encouraged feedback from all of the participants. Participants also had the opportunity to independently revise their input after the workshop through a review process.
The workshop was convened at the offices of WWF-New Zealand in Wellington, New Zealand on 27-28 May 2003. The workshop began with resentations that reviewed the ecoregion concept and planning process and a participant discussion about how to best proceed with the assessment. The experts first developed a list of primarily biological criteria that could inform the delineation of key biodiversity areas and habitats. The following criteria contributed to the selection of key areas or habitats for biodiversity:
- Species diversity
- Species richness
- Endemism
- Dependency for other species
- Trophic/functional diversity
- Representation (i.e. across physical types)
- Conservation status/threat classification both nationally and globally
- Cultural values
- Extremities of range and adaptation to environment
- Degree of disturbance
- Special conditions and specialised organisms
- Species with a global distribution but New Zealand is a stronghold/significant
- Seasonal/migratory importance
- Unusual degree/proportion of biomass
- Aggregations
- Special phylogenetic grouping
- Relict/genetic lineages (i.e. "living fossils")
- Habitat complexity/diversity
- Meeting ground - overlap between biological regions (at national and global regions level)
- Links to global patterns
Some of the criteria were difficult to apply for some groups. For example, it is difficult to characterise many invertebrates as endemic because scientific sampling of this group is incomplete.
After developing the criteria the participants decided to break into three subgroups that roughly corresponded with the types of biota for which they had specialist knowledge. The oceanographers worked separately to report on the physical features of New Zealand's marine environment. The three biotic subgroups were:
- cetaceans, seals, and seabirds;
- fish; and
- benthic invertebrates, algae, and plants.
The experts from each subgroup worked through consensus to delineate key areas for biodiversity on bathymetric maps of the New Zealand region (see maps in results section for extent of the area) and recorded the justification for their selection on a standard form (Appendix 3). Selection and delineation of the areas was an iterative process that involved considerable deliberation. Each area identified was coupled with a description of its physical and biological attributes, the state of information, and references to the literature. Some biodiversity features of New Zealand's marine environment do not lend themselves readily to discrete geographic representation (i.e. special habitats, for which geographic locations are not comprehensively known). In such cases the information was recorded, but is not illustrated on the maps. At the end of the first day all of the workshop participants reconvened and a spokesperson from each group reported on their progress.
The morning of the second day was dedicated to further subgroup work. The participants then reunited for a final session to review the outputs of the workshop and discuss a way forward. During the afternoon the three spokespersons presented the maps from each subgroup to all workshop participants. The participants then superimposed the three maps to reveal the key biodiversity areas they had in common. A discussion ensued about the meaning and usefulness of this approach. Ultimately, participants decided that distillation of key areas across the three groups did not add value to the outcomes of the workshop. The general consensus among participants was that overlap between the identified areas was not sufficient reason to assign greater importance to the biodiversity of such locations.
Following the workshop WWF-New Zealand staff digitised the maps using geographic information systems (GIS) software and transcribed the notes made by participants about the attributes of the key biodiversity areas and features. The process of capturing this data included detailed verification with workshop participants to ensure that the end result matched the material generated during the workshop. The content of the workshop also underwent external review by other marine scientists in New Zealand who were recommended by the workshop participants.
2.2 Identifying information gaps and other obstacles to assessing marine biodiversity
During the afternoon session participants underscored the recognition that although they had contributed their best knowledge to the workshop, most of New Zealand's marine environment has not been sampled and remains unknown. The participants, based on their understanding of the literature, outlined gaps in the knowledge base both in terms of spatial distributions of organisms and the processes and interactions between them. The potential to fill these information gaps was a topic of concern among participants. They reported that the number of taxonomic experts who are able to interpret and catalogue marine biodiversity in New Zealand, and indeed globally, is diminishing rapidly.
2.3 Identifying future steps for the assessment and conservation of biodiversity; and formulating a statement from the workshop participants
The workshop concluded by generating
suggestions from the experts on actions
needed to proceed with further assessment
and conservation of New Zealand’s marine
biodiversity. The participants endorsed the
development of a statement of concern for
New Zealand’s marine environment. Several
scientists volunteered to draft such a statement,
which was circulated among participants
for approval after the workshop.