Table 3. Correspondence between the different proposed conservation plans. Values above the diagonal (marked by empty cells) are the overall correspondence between pairs of proposals.
| WWF | Fisheries | GreenPeace | ACCOBAMS | EBSA | Vulnerable habitats | Sea Birds | CIESM | OCEANA | Cumulative impacts | Conservatio Concern | Fish biodiversity | |
| WWF | 35% | 59% | 74% | 69% | 70% | 64% | 69% | 70% | 71% | 76% | 72% | |
| Fisheries | −23% | 37% | 40% | 44% | 44% | 25% | 38% | 48% | 42% | 35% | 32% | |
| GreenPeace | 22% | −28% | 56% | 50% | 47% | 59% | 50% | 47% | 46% | 56% | 53% | |
| ACCOBAMS | 20% | −12% | 18% | 78% | 81% | 68% | 68% | 81% | 82% | 81% | 78% | |
| EBSA | 15% | −6% | 4% | 27% | 85% | 64% | 63% | 75% | 77% | 70% | 73% | |
| Vuln. habitats | 1% | −3% | 2% | 11% | 46% | 61% | 69% | 86% | 87% | 78% | 80% | |
| Sea Birds | 21% | −47% | 20% | 26% | 20% | 9% | 59% | 57% | 60% | 68% | 67% | |
| CIESM | 22% | −20% | 4% | 8% | 5% | 8% | 12% | 68% | 71% | 67% | 68% | |
| OCEANA | −3% | 4% | 1% | −2% | 5% | 11% | −1% | 1% | 88% | 80% | 80% | |
| Cum. impacts | 0% | −6% | 1% | 1% | 9% | 7% | 5% | 9% | 0% | 82% | 86% | |
| Cons. concern | 25% | −21% | 17% | 18% | 0% | −7% | 26% | 7% | −6% | 1% | 82% | |
| Fish biodiv. | 12% | −26% | 12% | 4% | 9% | 2% | 23% | 7% | −5% | 16% | 21% | |
| Av. overall accuracy | 66% | 38% | 51% | 72% | 68% | 72% | 59% | 63% | 71% | 72% | 70% | 70% |
| Av. kappa index of agreement | 10% | −17% | 6% | 11% | 12% | 8% | 10% | 6% | 1% | 4% | 7% | 7% |
Values below the diagonal are the kappa index of agreement (see Methods).