SPAW Protocol 1990: Caribbean Biodiversity Treaty

The Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (SPAW), adopted in Kingston on 18 January 1990 and in force since 18 June 2000, is the biodiversity instrument of the Cartagena Convention. It governs protection of habitats and species across the Gulf of Mexico, Caribbean Sea, and adjacent Atlantic waters through three annex-based listing tiers and a regional network of formally recognized protected areas spanning 19 contracting parties.

The SPAW Protocol sits within the Cartagena Convention framework, formally the Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region, which was adopted on 24 March 1983. The Cartagena Convention currently has 25 contracting parties and operates three protocols: the Oil Spills Protocol (1983), the Land-Based Sources Protocol adopted in Aruba in 1999, and the SPAW Protocol. Of the three, SPAW is the biodiversity protocol, addressing the conservation and sustainable management of threatened ecosystems and species rather than pollution control.

The Wider Caribbean Region as defined under the convention extends from the southern tip of Florida west across the Gulf of Mexico, south through the Caribbean basin to the coasts of Colombia, Venezuela, and Suriname, and east through the Lesser Antilles. This zone includes some of the world’s most biologically dense marine habitats: the Mesoamerican Barrier Reef system stretching roughly 900 kilometers from Mexico to Honduras, the Cuban archipelago sheltering the Caribbean’s largest area of intact coral, seagrass meadows that support the Caribbean’s manatee population, and the open-water pelagic zones traversed by whale sharks and all six Caribbean-occurring sea turtle species. The SPAW Protocol is the only legally binding regional instrument requiring these states to manage and protect that biological wealth cooperatively.

The Cartagena Convention framework and SPAW’s place in it

The UNEP Regional Seas Programme coordinates 18 regional agreements worldwide. The Cartagena Convention is the Regional Seas agreement for the Wider Caribbean, and its Secretariat, the Caribbean Environment Programme (CEP), operates from Kingston, Jamaica under UNEP administration. The SPAW Protocol was negotiated over several sessions of the intergovernmental meeting that developed the convention’s legal architecture, with the final plenipotentiary conference adopting the protocol’s text on 18 January 1990. Entry into force required nine ratifications; the ninth was deposited in 2000, triggering the 18 June 2000 commencement date.

The SPAW Protocol does not duplicate the convention’s pollution-control obligations. Instead, it creates a distinct legal track for biodiversity: designating areas of ecological value, listing species that require protection, and obligating parties to regulate activities that damage those areas and species. The convention’s Oil Spills and LBS Protocols address what enters the water; SPAW addresses what lives there and where it lives.

Three governance institutions manage SPAW implementation. The Conference of the Parties (COP) is the supreme decision-making body; it meets periodically to review implementation, adopt decisions on species listings, and add protected areas to the official list. The Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee (STAC) provides expert advice on species nominations, protected area applications, and management questions. The SPAW Regional Activity Centre (SPAW-RAC) in Guadeloupe provides the permanent technical secretariat. Between them, these institutions handle the full cycle from species nomination through to protected area management support.

Adoption history and negotiating context

The Caribbean basin of the late 1980s faced documented pressure from multiple directions. Commercial fisheries targeting Nassau grouper, Caribbean spiny lobster, and queen conch were depleting stocks across the region. Development along coastal mangroves was fragmenting the nursery habitat that reef fish depend on. Ship groundings on coral were a documented problem: several incidents in the Florida Keys during the 1980s had destroyed reef sections measured in square meters of live coral. The sea turtle trade, though declining under national laws in several countries, remained active across the region.

The negotiating states recognized that national action alone couldn’t protect species that cross jurisdictional boundaries. Sea turtles nesting in Trinidad feed in Venezuelan waters and migrate through the shipping lanes off the Lesser Antilles. Humpback whales calve in Dominican Republic waters and travel north. Manatees move between Colombian, Panamanian, and Costa Rican coastal habitats. The SPAW Protocol’s central contribution was creating a regional treaty framework under which states could coordinate protection of those shared populations, agree on common minimum standards, and accept binding obligations rather than relying on voluntary cooperation.

The protocol was opened for signature immediately after adoption. It took a decade to accumulate the nine ratifications needed for entry into force, reflecting the political difficulty of converting the treaty’s obligations into domestic law in states with limited regulatory infrastructure. The United States ratified in 2003, three years after entry into force, and France’s territory of Guadeloupe hosts the SPAW-RAC partly as a product of France’s ratification and hosting commitment.

The three-annex listing system

The SPAW Protocol’s species-protection architecture rests on three annexes, each carrying distinct obligations. The annexes were adopted as part of the Final Act in 1991 with initial species lists, and the COP has amended them repeatedly since, most recently at SPAW COP12 held in Aruba in October 2023, where six additional species were listed.

Annex I: plant protections

Annex I contains over 50 plant species found in the Wider Caribbean Region. These are species facing threat from habitat loss, collection for the ornamental trade, or both. The listing obligation is absolute at the regional level: parties must prohibit picking, gathering, uprooting, cutting, possession, and commercial trade in Annex I species. At the national level, parties have the option of regulating rather than banning, but the regional floor is total prohibition.

The practical enforcement challenge with Annex I is monitoring. Many listed plants are coastal or marine species: seagrasses, mangrove associates, and endemic island flora that are traded in specialist horticultural markets. Several parties lack the inspection capacity to intercept shipments at ports of export, and no uniform CITES-equivalent permit system operates exclusively for SPAW-listed plants. The STAC has recommended building monitoring protocols for Annex I species, but implementation has been uneven. A notable data point: no species has been added to Annex I since the annexes were first adopted in 1991, a gap that reflects both the political difficulty of plant nominations and the limited scientific monitoring capacity across the region.

Annex II: the strict protection tier

Annex II is the protocol’s most consequential tier for shipping and for international conservation law. As of the 2023 amendments, Annex II contains 117 species and three groups of species. The groups are significant: listing “all cetaceans” in Annex II means that every whale, dolphin, and porpoise species found in Caribbean waters receives the same total protection without the parties needing to enumerate each species individually. Similarly, sea turtles are listed as a group covering all six species occurring in the region: the green turtle (Chelonia mydas), hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata), loggerhead (Caretta caretta), leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea), olive ridley (Lepidochelys olivacea), and Kemp’s ridley (Lepidochelys kempii).

The 2023 amendments at SPAW COP12 added four species to Annex II on nominations from France and the Netherlands: the giant manta ray (Mobula birostris), the whale shark (Rhincodon typus), the oceanic whitetip shark (Carcharhinus longimanus), and the Lesser Antillean iguana (Iguana delicatissima). The whale shark and giant manta ray additions brought two globally significant pelagic species under the protocol’s strict-protection framework. Caribbean populations of both species face pressure from bycatch in pelagic longline fisheries and from boat strike incidents in areas with dense recreational vessel traffic.

The Annex II obligation for parties includes, to the extent possible, prohibiting disturbance during periods of biological stress. For sea turtles, that means nesting beaches cannot be subject to activities that disturb nesting females or hatchlings during the nesting season. For cetaceans, it means regulating approaches and harassment by vessels, both commercial and recreational. The phrase “to the extent possible” gives parties discretion, but does not convert the obligation into a voluntary one; COP decisions have interpreted it as requiring parties to demonstrate active steps toward meeting the standard.

Hard corals deserve separate note. The SPAW Protocol listed all hard coral species on Annex II, which means the 25-plus species of hermatypic coral building Caribbean reefs are protected at the same tier as sea turtles. That listing has direct implications for anchor damage to reefs, coral collection for the aquarium trade, and reef destruction during coastal construction. Article 5 of the protocol specifically authorizes parties to regulate ship traffic, stopping, and anchoring inside listed protected areas to prevent damage to reef-building corals and other Annex II species.

Annex III: regulated-use species

Annex III takes a different approach. Rather than prohibiting take entirely, it lists species that can be used sustainably but only with protective measures in place. Parties must adopt management tools: closed seasons, minimum size limits, regulated quotas, and trade controls. The 2023 COP12 amendments added the Caribbean reef shark (Carcharhinus perezi) and parrotfish as a species group to Annex III.

The parrotfish listing had been under discussion since the STAC’s 2018 decision to prioritize herbivorous fish evaluation. Parrotfish are ecologically critical to Caribbean reef systems because they graze algae that would otherwise overgrow coral. Overfishing of parrotfish has been shown across the region to accelerate coral decline independent of thermal bleaching. The STAC’s Species Working Group spent roughly five years building the evidence base before the COP12 vote, during which 11 of the 17 parties at the time had already implemented some form of herbivorous fish regulation at the national level, with enforcement quality varying across jurisdictions.

The species-listing amendment process

Nomination, STAC review, and the three-fourths rule

Amending the SPAW annexes follows a procedure set out in Article 11(4) of the protocol. A contracting party submits a written nomination with supporting documentation to the Secretariat. The Secretariat circulates the proposal to all parties for comment at least four months before the STAC meeting. The STAC then reviews the nomination against the agreed listing criteria and makes a recommendation to the COP. The COP takes the final decision; a three-fourths majority of contracting parties present and voting is required to adopt an amendment.

The listing criteria themselves have been revised over time. The current criteria, updated ahead of SPAW COP12, require that a nominated species meet at least one of six thresholds: IUCN Red List status of Vulnerable or above; CITES listing in Appendix I or II; qualification as a migratory species under the Convention on Migratory Species; regional depletion to a point threatening its ecological role; status as a keystone or ecosystem-structuring species; or documented relevance to the recovery of another listed species. The revised criteria explicitly include ecosystem significance, which is what allowed parrotfish (not individually Red Listed as Vulnerable at the regional level, but ecologically essential to reef systems) to qualify for Annex III under criterion five.

For the 2023 cycle, the STAC met virtually on 30 January to 1 February 2023. Of 24 animal species nominated by parties for consideration, the STAC recommended six for listing: four for Annex II and two for Annex III. The COP12 in October 2023 adopted all six recommendations. The full 2023 amendment to the annexes entered effect in accordance with the protocol’s amendment rules.

The US reservation at COP12

The United States entered reservations on all 21 species listings adopted at COP12. The US count of 21 includes the six new listings and 15 additional species that had been under previous consideration in the listing cycle. The reservations were entered to allow time to complete a thorough review of domestic measures required to comply with the listing requirements. The US indicated it intended to complete that review as soon as possible and then withdraw the reservations. The US position at COP12 was notable because several of the newly listed species, including the oceanic whitetip shark and the giant manta ray, were already listed under the US Endangered Species Act (ESA), but the full legal mapping of SPAW obligations against existing ESA and domestic fishery regulations required interagency review before the reservation could be dropped. The protocol allows a party to enter a reservation on an annex amendment within a specified period, preserving the party’s treaty status while the domestic review proceeds.

Dutch Caribbean implementation

The Kingdom of the Netherlands and France jointly nominated all six species added at COP12. Dutch Caribbean territories, including Aruba, Bonaire, Curaçao, Sint Maarten, Sint Eustatius, and Saba, already had national protections that exceeded the SPAW floor for several of the newly listed species. On Aruba and Bonaire, parrotfish catch had been prohibited before the SPAW Annex III listing. The Yarari Marine Mammal and Shark Sanctuary, covering the Exclusive Economic Zone of the Dutch Caribbean islands, gave full protection to all shark species before the Caribbean reef shark reached Annex III. The SPAW listings provide a regional treaty anchor for protections the Dutch Caribbean had already built domestically.

SPAW-listed protected areas: selected examples

Listing criteria and the nomination process

The SPAW Protocol’s second pillar is its protected areas network. The protocol requires parties to designate specially protected areas where rare or threatened ecosystems exist, or where critical habitats for threatened species occur. The COP maintains an official SPAW list of protected areas: sites that have been formally nominated, reviewed by the STAC, and accepted by the COP. As of the October 2025 COP18/SPAW COP13 meetings in Kingston, 37 areas were on that list, with the Parke Marino Aruba formally welcomed for inclusion as the 38th.

The listing criteria, developed by an expert working group in 2008 and updated in 2025, require that a nominated area meet ecological significance standards: the area must be ecologically representative, biologically productive, and of particular importance to species listed under the protocol’s annexes. The nomination process runs through the SPAW-RAC: a party submits a nomination file, the STAC reviews the file against the criteria, and the COP makes the final listing decision.

The benefits of SPAW listing are real but indirect. The protocol does not itself appropriate funds for listed areas. What it does provide is a recognized international status that parties can use in national management frameworks, in donor applications, and in diplomatic interactions with neighboring states whose waters or vessels may affect the listed site. SPAW-listed status is also referenced in IMO submissions for Particularly Sensitive Sea Area designation, since the ecological sensitivity of a SPAW-listed area satisfies part of the PSSA criteria.

Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary

The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary was SPAW-listed on 23 October 2012, becoming a significant early demonstration of the protocol’s application in US waters. The sanctuary covers approximately 2,900 square nautical miles off the southern tip of Florida and contains extensive living coral, seagrass, and mangrove habitat. Its SPAW listing confirmed the United States’ post-2003 ratification obligations at a specific site with documented management plans. The Florida Keys is also an IMO-designated PSSA, approved in April 2002, with three mandatory no-anchoring areas as the associated protective measures. The dual designation, SPAW-listed and PSSA-designated, makes the Florida Keys the clearest example in the Caribbean of the two frameworks operating in parallel on the same geographic area.

Saba Bank National Park

The Saba Bank National Park, covering approximately 2,500 square kilometers of submerged carbonate platform in the northeastern Caribbean, was recognized as a SPAW-listed area in September 2012. The Netherlands made the submission; the Saba Bank hosts sea turtles, migratory humpback whales, more than 200 documented fish species, and thousands of seabirds. Its SPAW listing was part of the broader Dutch Caribbean effort to bring all eligible protected areas within the Netherlands’ treaty obligations under SPAW. The Saba Bank is also the world’s 13th PSSA, approved by the IMO in October 2012. Two associated protective measures apply: a no-anchoring zone for all vessels and, from 1 June 2013, an Area To Be Avoided (ATBA) for ships of 300 gross tonnage or over. The ATBA prevents lobster and fish trap destruction by transiting vessels, which had been a documented source of what are called ghost traps: traps cut loose or crushed by ship traffic that continue fishing without recovery.

Cuban protected areas

Cuba, which ratified the protocol, has listed several national parks through the SPAW process. The Sabana-Camagüey archipelago off Cuba’s north-central coast, a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve and an IMO-designated PSSA (approved September 1997, the Caribbean’s first PSSA), contains areas that fall within the SPAW framework. Cayos de San Felipe National Park, sheltering one of the Caribbean’s intact crocodilian habitats on Cuba’s southwest coast, is also among the SPAW-listed areas.

Saint-Martin

Saint-Martin, whose island is divided between French and Dutch jurisdictions, has two SPAW-listed areas: the Réserve Naturelle Nationale de Saint-Martin on the French side and Man of War Shoal Marine Park on the Dutch side. Both protect the island’s remaining coral reef and seagrass habitat and reflect the cross-jurisdictional cooperation the SPAW framework encourages. The fact that a single island contributes two separate SPAW listings, under two different parties’ submissions, is a practical demonstration of how the protocol accommodates complex sovereignty arrangements in the Caribbean.

Parke Marino Aruba

The Kingdom of the Netherlands submitted the nomination file for Parke Marino Aruba (PMA) to the STAC for review at SPAW STAC10. The Protected Areas Working Group reviewed the proposal and recommended it to the COP. At the October 2025 COP18/SPAW COP13 meetings in Kingston, parties formally welcomed Parke Marino Aruba into the SPAW list of protected areas, providing formal regional protection for the site’s reefs, mangroves, and sea turtle habitat. The designation is notable because Aruba hosts the SPAW COP12 meeting in October 2023 where the COP12 species listings were adopted; the same government advanced both the species nominations and the protected area nomination through consecutive STAC and COP cycles.

PROCARIBE+ and the MPA network programme

The most recent structured investment in SPAW protected areas is PROCARIBE+ (2025 to 2027), funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and co-executed by the CEP Secretariat. PROCARIBE+ focuses on strengthening the management effectiveness of SPAW-listed protected areas and Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs) across the Wider Caribbean. It provides technical support, training, and capacity-building to national authorities managing SPAW sites, addressing the long-standing gap between legal listing and practical field management.

The SPAW Regional Activity Centre

The SPAW-RAC was established in 2000 through a formal agreement between UNEP and the Government of France, and it has been hosted in Guadeloupe since that date, operating under the Direction de l’Environnement, de l’Aménagement et du Logement (DEAL) since January 2019. Before 2019 it operated within the framework of the National Park of Guadeloupe. The French government funds the core positions: a Director, a Senior Project Coordinator, and at least one additional staff member. Additional scientists are assigned to technical missions covering species, protected areas, marine mammal matters, and the exemption review process.

The SPAW-RAC’s operational model runs through three working groups: the Protected Areas Working Group, which handles nominations and management support; the Species Working Group, which evaluates nominations to the annexes and reviews the status of listed species; and the Exemption Working Group, which reviews requests from parties for specific exemptions from annex obligations. These working groups were reactivated in their current form during 2022, with the Protected Areas Working Group starting in May, Species Working Group in June, and Exemption Working Group in August.

The SPAW-RAC also coordinates the SPAW protected areas network by developing factsheets for listed sites, supporting parties in preparing nomination files, and facilitating technical exchanges between marine protected area managers. Its website at car-spaw-rac.org hosts the formal procedures, nomination forms, and the updated 2025 guidelines for protected area nominations.

Biannual reports from the SPAW-RAC to the STAC and COP document operations and budget. These reports show that the RAC functions on a modest budget, with French government contributions forming the core and project-specific GEF and bilateral funding supplementing it for particular initiatives. The resource constraint is a genuine operational limit: the RAC cannot station field staff at each of the SPAW-listed sites and relies on the parties’ own national authorities for day-to-day management.

COP history and major decisions

The COP has met 13 times since the protocol entered into force in 2000. SPAW COP1 was held shortly after entry into force and established the basic procedural framework. Subsequent COPs progressively built the annex species lists and the protected areas inventory. Key additions to Annex II over the protocol’s history include the original listing of all cetaceans and all sea turtles as groups, the corals listings that cover reef-building species, and the 2023 additions of manta rays and sharks.

SPAW COP12, held in Aruba in October 2023, was the most consequential recent meeting. In addition to the six species additions described in the annexes section, COP12 adopted the SPAW-RAC’s 2023 to 2028 Strategic Plan and an updated Action Plan for the Conservation of Marine Mammals in the Wider Caribbean Region (MMAP). COP12 also recommended that the Secretariat initiate a call for nominations from institutions interested in hosting a Marine Mammal Regional Activity Network (MMRAN), a proposed specialized structure to coordinate cetacean monitoring and management across the region.

SPAW COP13, held in Kingston in October 2025 as part of the Cartagena Convention COP18 cycle, welcomed the Parke Marino Aruba nomination. COP13 also determined that the compliance process under the protocol should be facilitative, nonpunitive, and cooperative, and tasked the SPAW Secretariat with drafting a concept note on an implementation and compliance mechanism for future consideration by parties. COP13 recommended approval of the Cartagena Convention Action Plan on Sargassum Inundation and established a Cartagena Convention-level Sargassum Working Group involving both SPAW and LBS Protocol parties. COP13 also continued work on the MMRAN concept, with parties agreeing that interested host institutions should submit formal proposals to the SPAW-RAC for provisional endorsement before the next round of intergovernmental meetings.

The growth of the party count to 19 contracting parties by 2025 shows steady expansion. Saint Kitts and Nevis acceded at the 2025 meetings, bringing the total to 19. Jamaica, which signed in 1990 but has not ratified, reaffirmed at COP18 in October 2025 that it was preparing to ratify pending a final amendment to its Wildlife Protection Act; as of early 2026 that legislative step had not yet been completed. The complete list of parties includes: The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Colombia, Cuba, Dominican Republic, France, Grenada, Guyana, Honduras, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, Panama, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Trinidad and Tobago, the United States of America, and Venezuela.

The Marine Mammal Action Plan for the Wider Caribbean

The Action Plan for the Conservation of Marine Mammals (MMAP) in the Wider Caribbean Region was first adopted by the SPAW contracting parties in 2008. It is the operational document that translates the Annex II cetacean listing into specific conservation priorities, country-level obligations, and monitoring targets.

Scope and threat categories

The MMAP addresses the full suite of cetacean species occurring in the Wider Caribbean, plus the West Indian manatee (Trichechus manatus). Its technical assessments, most recently updated in 2021 and revised again for COP12, identify 11 categorical threats to marine mammals in the region:

1. Fisheries interactions: bycatch mortality from gillnets, longlines, and purse seines
2. Direct harvest: targeted hunting, which continues in a small number of jurisdictions for certain dolphin and small whale species
3. Vessel strike: collision mortality affecting humpback whales, sperm whales, and manatees
4. Habitat degradation and coastal development: mangrove loss, seagrass decline, and reef deterioration affecting prey availability
5. Pollution: organochlorine and heavy metal contamination documented in Caribbean cetaceans
6. Marine debris and entanglement: ghost gear and plastic ingestion
7. Underwater noise and acoustic disturbance: seismic surveys, naval exercises, and vessel traffic noise
8. Captivity: wild capture for commercial display, addressed through the Annex II prohibition
9. Emerging diseases and harmful algal blooms
10. Invasive species affecting prey communities
11. Climate change impacts: range shifts, prey redistribution, and coral habitat loss affecting prey fish stocks

The Silver Bank Humpback Whale Sanctuary north of the Dominican Republic is one of the North Atlantic humpback population’s primary calving grounds. Documented aggregations of several hundred whales use the sanctuary during winter months. The Dominican Republic’s party status under SPAW means the Annex II obligation applies directly; the MMAP identifies vessel speed restrictions in Silver Bank as a priority action for reducing collision risk.

COP12 MMAP update

The updated MMAP adopted at COP12 in October 2023 incorporated new data from the 2021 implementation review, which assessed progress across all contracting parties over the 13 years since the original plan’s adoption. The review found that bycatch and vessel strike remained the two most pressing threats, that captivity was a third area where treaty obligations and commercial practice were in tension, and that acoustic disturbance from seismic exploration had grown as a concern since 2008. The updated plan added specific targets for vessel speed management in cetacean aggregation areas and called for parties to develop national cetacean monitoring programs with standardized survey protocols to allow regional trend assessment.

The MMRAN proposal

The Marine Mammal Regional Activity Network proposed at COP12 is designed to fill a gap the MMAP identified: the SPAW-RAC in Guadeloupe has a marine mammal coordinator, but the region lacks the dedicated institution that coordinates cetacean stranding response, entanglement rescue, survey standardization, and captivity policy across 19 parties. The MMRAN would be a network of institutions rather than a single new body. At COP13 in October 2025, parties requested that interested host institutions submit formal proposals to the SPAW-RAC. The MMRAN had not been established as of early 2026; the selection process was ongoing.

Relationship to global conservation instruments

CITES

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) regulates international trade in wildlife through its Appendix I, II, and III system. SPAW and CITES cover overlapping species but operate through fundamentally different legal mechanisms. CITES controls trade at the point of import and export; SPAW imposes habitat protection and take prohibition obligations on contracting parties within their jurisdictions.

The SPAW listing criteria explicitly treat CITES status as one qualifying criterion for Annex II listing. A species listed on CITES Appendix I or II qualifies for SPAW consideration under criterion two, which is why the whale shark (Appendix II) and oceanic whitetip shark (Appendix II) moved through the COP12 nomination process: they already met the CITES criterion, and the STAC’s review focused on documenting the Caribbean-specific threat context. A legal assessment commissioned by the SPAW Secretariat examined the “compatibility” between the two conventions and confirmed that the treaty texts do not conflict: Article 22(5) of the SPAW Protocol explicitly states that nothing in the protocol shall be interpreted to affect the rights and obligations of parties under CITES. The two regimes reinforce rather than duplicate each other. A SPAW Annex II listing imposes a strict Caribbean-region take prohibition that is broader than CITES trade regulation: a species can be CITES Appendix II (meaning trade is regulated but not banned) while being SPAW Annex II (meaning all take and possession within parties’ jurisdictions is prohibited).

The practical implication for shipping operations: cargo manifests for Atlantic/Caribbean voyages carrying specimens of CITES-listed wildlife must comply with both CITES permit requirements and the absolute prohibition on take and commercial trade that SPAW Annex II imposes. The SPAW prohibition applies regardless of whether valid CITES permits exist; within SPAW parties’ jurisdictions, a CITES permit does not authorize take of an Annex II species.

CBD and SBSTTA

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) sets global biodiversity objectives, and its subsidiary body SBSTTA (the Subsidiary Body on Scientific, Technical, and Technological Advice) coordinates technical work on species and habitat status. A 2001 UNEP document examined the relationship between the SPAW Protocol STAC and the CBD SBSTTA work programme, finding substantial overlap in technical mandates and recommending coordination to avoid duplication. The relationship is collaborative rather than hierarchical: the SPAW STAC operates under the SPAW COP, not under the CBD; its species assessments are independent of CBD assessments even when the species are the same.

The CBD’s Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, adopted in December 2022, set targets including the 30x30 goal: protect 30 percent of land and ocean by 2030. SPAW-listed areas and OECMs documented under the PROCARIBE+ programme contribute to Caribbean parties’ progress toward the 30x30 target. The STAC has discussed how the SPAW protected areas list can be aligned with CBD target reporting, since both the SPAW Protocol and the CBD Aichi/Kunming targets use ecologically representative, well-connected protected area networks as the framework for marine conservation.

IMO PSSA and ATBA framework

The IMO Particularly Sensitive Sea Area designation, operated through the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) under guidelines originally adopted as MEPC resolution A.927(22) and updated by MEPC.267(68), provides the shipping-regulation counterpart to SPAW’s biodiversity obligations. A PSSA can have associated protective measures adopted by the IMO: mandatory ship reporting systems, Areas To Be Avoided, mandatory pilotage, speed restrictions, or special discharge standards.

Three Caribbean areas hold both SPAW recognition and IMO PSSA status. The Sabana-Camagüey Archipelago (PSSA approved September 1997) was the Caribbean’s first PSSA; it contains reef corals, sea turtles, and manatees that are all Annex II-listed species under SPAW. The Florida Keys (PSSA approved April 2002) holds SPAW-listed status from October 2012, with three mandatory no-anchoring areas as its associated protective measures. The Saba Bank (PSSA approved October 2012) carries both the no-anchor zone and the 300 GT-or-over ATBA, with the SPAW listing from September 2012.

The pathway from SPAW listing to PSSA designation is not automatic. A party or coalition must submit a separate proposal to the MEPC demonstrating that the area meets the PSSA criteria under the IMO guidelines. SPAW listing provides documented ecological significance and an established management framework, both of which strengthen a PSSA proposal, but the MEPC conducts its own assessment. Conversely, PSSA designation generates ship-specific protective measures, such as no-anchor zones and ATBAs, that the SPAW Protocol alone cannot compel: SPAW authorizes parties to implement such measures under Article 5, but IMO PSSA associated protective measures carry flag-state force that a unilateral port-state measure under Article 5 may not.

Shipping, vessel traffic, and protected area management

The SPAW Protocol is not a shipping convention, but it directly intersects with vessel operations in several ways. Article 5 of the protocol authorizes parties to regulate, and where necessary prohibit, ship traffic, anchoring, and other vessel activities inside listed specially protected areas. This authority operates without prejudice to the rights of innocent passage, transit passage, archipelagic sea lanes passage, and freedom of navigation under international law. In practice, the provision means that a party can establish no-anchor zones over coral reefs inside a SPAW-listed area, require ships to use designated channels, and prohibit dumping within protected area boundaries.

These measures operate alongside, and sometimes in coordination with, IMO instruments. The MARPOL Annex V garbage discharge requirements apply in designated Special Areas, and several Caribbean areas have MARPOL Special Area designation. The pssa-overview framework operated by the IMO provides another mechanism: areas designated as PSSAs can have Associated Protective Measures adopted by the IMO that restrict vessel routing, mandate pilotage, or control discharge.

The interaction between SPAW-listed status and PSSA designation is not automatic. A SPAW-listed area doesn’t become a PSSA by operation of law; a party or group of parties must submit a separate proposal to the IMO’s Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC). But SPAW listing provides documented evidence of ecological significance that strengthens a PSSA proposal. Conversely, PSSA designation provides shipping-specific protective measures that the SPAW Protocol alone cannot compel at the IMO level.

Vessel strike of marine mammals is an enforcement challenge that bridges both frameworks. Whale strikes are documented in Caribbean waters, particularly affecting humpback whales in the Silver Bank area north of the Dominican Republic. All cetaceans are Annex II-listed species under SPAW, but the protocol’s enforcement is the responsibility of individual parties acting within their jurisdictions. Speed restrictions or routing measures that could reduce vessel strike risk require separate IMO action, which the Dominican Republic and other regional parties could pursue through MEPC.

Ballast water exchange and invasive species introduction is another intersection. The SPAW Protocol obligates parties to prevent the introduction of non-indigenous species that could alter the ecosystem of a specially protected area. This aligns with the Ballast Water Management Convention’s regime, though the SPAW obligation extends beyond ballast water to any pathway of non-indigenous species introduction, including hull fouling and deliberate release.

Enforcement and compliance: architecture and gaps

The facilitative model

Enforcement of SPAW obligations operates through the parties’ own national legal systems. The protocol has no independent enforcement authority, no regional court with jurisdiction over violations, and no financial penalty mechanism operating at the treaty level. A party that fails to protect an Annex II species within its jurisdiction faces the political consequences of non-compliance identified through COP review, but not a direct legal sanction imposed by the treaty body.

That enforcement model places significant weight on national implementation. Parties are required to report to the COP on measures taken, and the Secretariat compiles those reports into implementation reviews. The STAC assesses whether the measures reported are consistent with the obligations. When a party reports that it has regulations in place but enforcement is limited by resource constraints, the COP response is typically technical assistance rather than sanction. COP13 in October 2025 confirmed this approach explicitly: parties agreed the compliance process should remain “facilitative, nonpunitive, and cooperative” and directed the Secretariat to draft a concept note on a formal compliance mechanism, which had not yet been finalized as of early 2026.

Caribbean Wildlife Enforcement Network (CAR-WEN)

One practical response to enforcement gaps is the Caribbean Wildlife Enforcement Network, known as CAR-WEN. Established as a working group led by representatives from Trinidad and Tobago and the Bahamas, CAR-WEN is designed to coordinate wildlife law enforcement across the region: sharing intelligence, standardizing enforcement protocols, and building the inter-agency linkages that small-island jurisdictions lack individually. The network operates with facilitation from the Sustainable Innovation Initiatives’ Nurture Nature Campaign and has developed a four-phase strategic plan.

CAR-WEN’s formal connection to the SPAW framework was advanced at SPAW COP13 in October 2025, where a briefing paper and draft Memorandum of Understanding were presented. A UNODC-supported regional workshop planned to refine the MOU design was cancelled due to shifts in US foreign aid priorities; the MOU was being prepared for signature by Caribbean governments with a view to opening it in 2026. CAR-WEN does not have enforcement authority of its own; it functions as a coordination and capacity-building network, not a regional enforcement body.

Documented compliance gaps

Several documented enforcement challenges persist across the region. Illegal take of hawksbill turtle eggs and nesting females continues in some party jurisdictions despite Annex II listing. Nassau grouper populations remain depleted across most of their range despite that species’ Annex II status. The STAC has acknowledged these gaps and has recommended strengthened monitoring and reporting, but the gap between listed status and observed population recovery for Nassau grouper illustrates the distance between a treaty obligation and its real-world outcome.

The 11 of 17 parties that had implemented herbivorous fish regulations nationally by the time parrotfish reached Annex III in 2023 represents a positive indicator: national regulations had preceded and, in a sense, driven the treaty listing rather than the treaty listing driving national action. That sequential pattern, where regional scientific consensus builds to a point where listing becomes politically feasible, is how SPAW amendments have worked in practice.

SPAW Consortium

The SPAW Consortium is a coalition of NGOs established to support protocol implementation. Recognized by parties at COP18/SPAW COP13 in October 2025, the Consortium channels civil society capacity into monitoring, outreach, and enforcement assistance in jurisdictions where government capacity is limited. The COP18 resolution requested continued engagement with the Consortium, acknowledging its role in building the implementation network that the treaty body itself cannot fund directly.

The STAC and species review process

The Scientific and Technical Advisory Committee is the protocol’s scientific backbone. It reviews species nominations submitted by parties against criteria that consider: the species’ conservation status, the adequacy of evidence for the listing tier proposed, the potential for the listing to contribute to recovery, and any conflicts with existing national uses that the listing would require to be curtailed.

The Species Working Group of the STAC does the detailed technical assessment before each COP. For the 2023 parrotfish nomination, the working group examined fisheries data across the region, compared parrotfish biomass trends with reef condition indicators, and assessed the feasibility of regulated harvest versus strict protection. That analysis supported an Annex III rather than Annex II listing: the evidence for Caribbean reef shark and parrotfish supported a regulated-use regime rather than total prohibition. The distinction matters practically because Annex III allows traditional and subsistence fishing to continue under management, whereas Annex II would have required parties to prohibit all take including by small-scale artisanal fishers.

The exemption process managed by the SPAW-RAC’s Exemption Working Group handles cases where a party needs to authorize an activity that would otherwise be prohibited under an annex listing. Scientific research, for example, sometimes requires collecting specimens of Annex II-listed species. Parties submit exemption requests that the working group reviews on a case-by-case basis, and the SPAW-RAC maintains a record of approved exemptions to build a consistent regional practice.

Marine mammals and the Caribbean cetacean situation

All cetaceans are listed on SPAW Annex II, making the Caribbean a treaty zone of strict protection for every whale, dolphin, and porpoise species that occurs there. The Silver Bank Humpback Whale Sanctuary north of the Dominican Republic is one of the North Atlantic humpback population’s primary calving grounds, with documented aggregations of several hundred whales during the winter months. The sanctuary is within Dominican Republic jurisdiction, and the country’s party status under SPAW means the Annex II obligation applies directly.

The manatee (Trichechus manatus, the West Indian manatee) is Annex II-listed. Its Caribbean distribution spans coastal waters from Mexico through Central America, Colombia, and Trinidad. Manatee populations face pressure from boat strike: propeller injuries are documented across the region, and speed restriction enforcement in manatee habitat is an ongoing challenge for national agencies. The SPAW listing requires parties to prohibit intentional take and disturbance, but propeller strikes resulting from unregulated vessel speeds are a harder management target than deliberate hunting.

Cetacean captivity raised a distinct legal question that UNEP CEP addressed in a published analysis. The SPAW Protocol’s prohibition on “take” of Annex II species extends to capture for captive display. Several Caribbean jurisdictions operate dolphin-interaction facilities using wild-captured cetaceans, and the protocol’s Annex II listing of all cetaceans creates a conflict between those commercial operations and the parties’ treaty obligations. The STAC has examined this question, and the protocol’s text supports the position that captive facilities using wild-captured cetaceans conflict with the Annex II prohibition unless an exemption has been granted through the formal SPAW process.

Limitations

Several structural limits constrain the SPAW Protocol’s effectiveness in practice.

The party count is 19 out of 25 Cartagena Convention parties. Six states party to the parent convention have not ratified SPAW and therefore carry no binding obligation under it. Several key maritime nations in the region fall into this group. Species and habitats protected under SPAW in one party’s waters can be harvested legally in a neighboring non-party jurisdiction, reducing the conservation effect. Jamaica, a Cartagena Convention party that hosted the very meeting at which the SPAW Protocol was adopted in 1990, had still not ratified as of early 2026.

The protocol’s annexes cover species, not ecosystem processes. Ocean warming and bleaching events have devastated Caribbean coral populations since the 1990s. The staghorn and elkhorn corals listed on Annex II were listed partly because of bleaching pressure, but the SPAW Protocol cannot regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Between 1977 and 2002, the Caribbean lost an estimated 80 percent of its coral cover. The SPAW listing of hard corals didn’t arrest that trend because the primary driver is outside the protocol’s scope.

Annex I plant species and their monitoring remain poorly resourced. The 50-plus plant listings require parties to prohibit collection and trade, but few parties have built the systematic monitoring programs needed to detect illegal collection or to assess whether populations are recovering under protection. The contrast with the sea turtle monitoring networks, which have decades of documented nesting beach data across the region, illustrates the disparity in monitoring investment between vertebrate fauna and flora. No new Annex I plant species have been added since 1991.

Enforcement capacity disparities across the 19 parties are substantial. A SPAW-listed area administered by a small island developing state with limited patrol capacity receives a very different level of practical protection from one managed by a national park authority in a larger state. The STAC has recommended capacity-building as a priority, and PROCARIBE+ addresses part of this gap, but the underlying resource disparity is a structural feature of a treaty with 19 parties at very different stages of administrative capacity.

The protocol’s relationship to shipping is authorization rather than mandate. It allows parties to regulate vessel traffic in listed areas but does not require them to do so, and it cannot impose regulations on flag-state vessels not calling at that party’s ports. Actual implementation of vessel traffic controls inside SPAW-listed areas depends on the party’s national authority and willingness to act, and enforcement against vessels of other flag states requires the kind of flag-state cooperation that is difficult to secure without a dedicated regional maritime enforcement body.

The time between species listing and observed recovery varies enormously. Sea turtles listed at the protocol’s outset have shown measurable population increases at several nesting beaches where beach protection has been consistently enforced. Nassau grouper, despite Annex II listing, has not recovered to pre-depletion levels across most of its range, partly because fishing pressure occurs in non-party jurisdictions and partly because the species’ recovery timescale (full sexual maturity at 4 to 7 years, lifespan up to 30 years) means that even total protection delivers slow visible results.

See also

• Cartagena Convention 1983
• Wider Caribbean Region
• UNEP Regional Seas Programme
• PSSA Overview
• PSSA Sabana-Camagüey
• Ramsar Convention
• MARPOL Annex V
• Ballast Water Management Convention