marine protected areas

Although many tools are used to safeguard marine ecosystems around the world, marine protected areas can be among the most useful. MPAs come in different sizes and have many uses, from protecting entire ecosystems to safeguarding particular fisheries, rare species, critical habitats, and underwater historical sites.

Benefits of marine protected areas Bigger fish – and more Throughout the world, MPAs have had remarkably similar effects. Protection from fishing simply allows exploited species to live longer, grow bigger and become more numerous. Industrial fishing usually reduces populations to only a handful of age classes, never allowing them to reach full maturity. This has happened to the northeast Atlantic cod stocks, for example. MPAs especially allow slow-maturing, long-lived species to develop natural age structures, thus increasing the number of large fertile animals that can yield more offspring. Such a population has a higher resilience when facing environmental disturbances.

The resulting rapid growth of the tourist industry has helped to transform the town from an economically depressed area with few opportunities for local employment into one of New Zealand's 'boom towns'. What are the broader benefits of MPAs? While the benefits of MPAs for fisheries are generally understood, the value of marine ecosystem services, including waste assimilation, coastal protection, flood management and provision of critical environmental requirements for fished species, is often unrecognised. Marine protected areas can help to ensure continuity and future options for those benefits by protecting the health of marine ecosystems.

Ecological offsets There is often a tension between fisheries and Protected Areas even though Marine Protected Areas provide benefits to both fisheries and conservation. Recent technical reviews have consistently identified the high potential value of MPAs, and specifically “no-take” reserves, for fisheries management purposes. Increasingly, fisheries operate in communities or seek to sell their product in markets where concern at the environmental damage they can cause and the adverse impacts on other users and interest groups is a matter of high political and economic sensitivity. One approach to this is to seek recognition that the fishery is managed in a way that is designed to be environmentally sustainable and to provide offsets so that there is provision for resilience or capacity to recover from the environmental damage caused in the fishing process. Protected Areas and particularly “no -take” reserves are increasingly being recognised as the means to identify offsets, to achieve stability and stock management benefits and to move away from the political and economic risks associated with confrontation with other user and interest groups.

Communicated by Norman Myers, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom, May 11, 2004 (received for review December 23, 2003) Declines in marine harvests, wildlife, and habitats have prompted calls at both the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development and the 2003 World Parks Congress for the establishment of a global system of marine protected areas (MPAs). MPAs that restrict fishing and other human activities conserve habitats and popula- tions and, by exporting biomass, may sustain or increase yields of nearby fisheries. Here we provide an estimate of the costs of a global MPA network, based on a survey of the running costs of 83 MPAs worldwide. Annual running costs per unit area spanned six orders of magnitude, and were higher in MPAs that were smaller, closer to coasts, and in high-cost, developed countries. Models extrapolating these findings suggest that a global MPA network meeting the World Parks Congress target of conserving 20 –30% of the world’s seas might cost between $5 billion and $19 billion annually to run and would probably create around one million jobs. Although substantial, gross network costs are less than current government expenditures on harmful subsidies to indus- trial fisheries. They also ignore potential private gains from im- proved fisheries and tourism and are dwarfed by likely social gains from increasing the sustainability of fisheries and securing vital ecosystem services.

So called ‘entrepreneurial marine protected areas’ are one way in which private actors are setting and enforcing control over spatially contiguous marine habitats. These entrepreneurs fulfil both environmental and social outcomes, providing a sustainable source of funding for conservation and restoration activities, as well as interacting with communities dependent on these resources. In doing so they contribute to the conservation of public resources. But unlike state-led management, the success of these entrepreneurs is dependent on market forces, giving them access to sources of revenue traditionally limited to private sector enterprises, whilst concurrently incurring risks from market fluctuations that potentially threaten their durability in the long term. Through three case studies from Indonesia, Belize and Tanzania this chapter explores the ways in which these actors exploit opportunities to create innovative spatially delimited private governance arrangements around marine resources, and the extent to which the state has facilitated or hindered their activities. In doing so we discuss the potential of these private actors for establishing the necessary authority for long-term conservation.

Increasing the size and number of marine protected areas (MPAs) is widely seen as a way to meet ambitious biodiversity and sustainable de- velopment goals. Yet, debate still exists on the effectiveness of MPAs in achieving ecological and societal objectives. Although the literature provides significant evidence of the ecological effects of MPAs within their boundaries, much remains to be learned about the ecological and social effects of MPAs on regional and seascape scales. Key to improving the effectiveness of MPAs, and ensuring that they achieve desired outcomes, will be better monitoring that includes ecological and social data collected inside and outside of MPAs. This can lead to more con- clusive evidence about what is working, what is not, and why. Eight authors were asked to write about their experiences with MPA effective- ness. The authors were instructed to clearly define “effectiveness” and discuss the degree to which they felt MPAs had achieved or failed to be effective. Essays were exchanged among authors and each was invited to write a shorter “counterpoint.” The exercise shows that, while experi- ences are diverse, many authors found common ground regarding the role of MPAs in achieving conservation targets. This exchange of per- spectives is intended to promote reflection, analysis, and dialogue as a means for improving MPA design, assessment, and integration with other conservation tools.

Abstract: With 51 100km 2 of terrestrial area and 589 000km 2 of national waters, Costa Rica is considered one of the countries with the greatest biodiversity. It has approximately 3.5% of the world marine species. In the last four decades, Costa Rica has done a considerable effort to create a representative system of Protected Areas (PA), mainly terrestrial. We present an assessment of the current situation of the Marine Protected Areas (MPA) in Costa Rica, through an historical analysis, and an evaluation of their distribution, coverage and management categories. Costa Rica has 166 protected areas covering 50% of the coastline; of these 20 are MPAs, classified as National Parks (90.6%), National Wildlife Refuges (6.6%), Wetlands (1.5%), Biological Reserves (1%), and one Absolute Natural Reserve (0.3%). According to IUCN criteria, 93.7% correspond to category II, 5% to IV and 1.3% to I. The marine protected surface is 5 296.5km 2 , corresponding to 17.5% of the territorial waters and 0.9% of the Exclusive Economic Zone. The median distance between MPAs is 22.4km in the Pacific and 32.9km along the Caribbean. The median size is close to 54km 2 . The main threats to MPAs are the lack of coordination between governmental agencies, limited economic resources, restricted patrolling and control, poor watershed management, and rampant coastal alteration. Rev. Biol. Trop. 60 (1): 129-142. Epub 2012 March 01.

PANEL 6A INTRODUCTION I.ee Kimball; Last year at the annual meeting of the Law of the Sea Institute when I was asked to organize a panel on the regional interests of the Southeastern Pacil'ic in the Law of the Sea, I tried to use it as a vehicle to address, not just the traditional LOS issues, such as national resource claims and boundary delimitation, but also emerging issues in ocean law and policy: issues that derive from the expanded obligations of States under the 19B2 Convention, in particular in off- shore areas under national jurisdiction; to protect and preserve the marine environment and to conserve living marine species. Topics considered included States' obligations to conduct environmental assessment and monitoring Articles 204-206! and to further elaborate global and regional rules for marine environmental protection. We also discussed designation of marine protected areas Article 211! and 234!, an<1 received a preview of Marty Belsky's evolving ideas on eco-

Several of these MPAs ecompass traditional fishing grounds which have fuelled opposition against the establishment of MPAs , specifically marine reserves, by some fishers, who in some cases have spearheaded strong lobbying for de-reservation of some sites. A lack of information, and subsequently the development of misconceptions, is considered to be the major factor fuelling this opposition. Recognizing the importance of an education programme to combat such a perception, the Coastal Zone Management Authority and Insti- tute and the Marine Protected Areas Working Group in 2001, designed a survey to collect data from fishers to verify if this was indeed a vastly held perception.

“Scotland’s responsibility for 61% of UK seas means we have a vital interest in coordinated action to effect marine ecological recovery. We all benefit from the sea: from the beauty and biodiversity of our West coast sea lochs to the potential abundance of the North Sea. And yet the life within them continues to suffer unsustainable damage. Our seas now need to heal. In 50 years this must be seen as a turning point, when scientific evidence emboldened political will to meet this urgent challenge of global ocean stewardship, and actually recover our damaged seas. A well-managed network of Marine Protected Areas has to be our shared contribution to that legacy.”

Iceland, an island nation bordering the Arctic circle, is economically and traditionally dependent on marine resources. Generally efforts to create marine protected areas are resisted by marine nations in the Arctic. Nevertheless, in 1995, by special legislation, Iceland established the Breiðafjörður Conservation Area, a marine bay in West Iceland. Management objectives are to conserve the many ecological and cultural features, accommodate sustainable use such as fisheries, tourism and algal extraction, and maintain traditional uses. Currently there are few conflicts and no perceptible over-exploitation although the regulatory regime, still under development, may mean imposing some restrictions, including for fisheries. Local communities have been directly involved since the outset and are represented on a multi-stakeholder Committee that oversees the project, assesses development proposals and makes recommendations to the Minister for the Environment. To date, impacts of designation seem positive. It has facilitated scientific study, raised awareness of the biological, geological and economic values of the area, heightened interest in the cultural heritage and is spurring development of the tourism industry, including whale-watching. One reason is that the area aims for a balance between the needs of the natural environment and the needs of Icelanders for sustainable, long-term economic security consistent with their traditional use and dependency on the marine environment.

Research Levels and drivers of fishers’ compliance with marine protected areas Adrian Arias 1 , Joshua E. Cinner 1 , Rhondda E. Jones 2,3 and Robert L. Pressey 1 ABSTRACT. Effective conservation depends largely on people’s compliance with regulations. We investigate compliance through the lens of fishers’ compliance with marine protected areas (MPAs). MPAs are widely used tools for marine conservation and fisheries management. Studies show that compliance alone is a strong predictor of fish biomass within MPAs. Hence, fishers’ compliance is critical for MPA effectiveness. However, there are few empirical studies showing what factors influence fishers’ compliance with MPAs.

Marine ecosystems provide a variety of benefits to humans, including nature-based tourism, food production, and livelihoods for local people. Protected areas have been considered one of the most important tools to conserve biodiversity and ecosystem services. Under the Convention on Biological Diversity, state parties have pledged to establish comprehensive, representative and effective systems of marine protected areas (MPAs) by 2020. Over the past decades, Tasmania has made some progress in establishing a system of MPAs. However, in 2009 the process stalled following the contentious designation of MPAs in the Bruny Bioregion. The Tasmanian MPA system today covers almost six per cent of Tasmanian State Waters, but over half surrounds subantarctic Macquarie Island. Many Tasmanian marine bioregions are not adequately represented in the reserve system, and four bioregions have no MPAs. Governance plays a key role in the success of MPA designation and implementation. The aim of this thesis was to understand how MPA governance could be improved to enhance marine conservation in Tasmania. The specific research objectives were:

To date, bionomic and diagnostic cartographic approaches have been commonly used to support decision-making in the selection, zoning and management of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), with a range of practical tools developed for this purpose. In addition to these, new and emerging technologies have the potential for generating better information for scientists, managers and other stakeholders alike, such as underwater survey tools, three dimensional (3D) visualization systems and interactive web platforms. These new methodologies allow taking into consideration the spatial heterogeneity and temporal variability of the marine environment to be managed for conservation. This paper reviews emerging and innovative technologies for marine mapping and marine spatial planning with a special focus on their use in MPAs management. These include the generation and use of benthic cartography, scientific visualization of ecosystem analyses, web-based GIS platforms and their final use as decision-support tools. Seafloor mapping technology has improved and become more affordable for small-scale MPA management purposes.

While unfortunate, the tension between protecting the coastal ecosystem and accommodating resource development exists and is extremely polarizing. 4 The OCSLA procedures addressed below demonstrate that extreme care and detailed analysis is required to minimize environmental harm while maximizing resource extraction. 5 However, the National System, specifically Section 5, will negatively impact the efficacy of oil and gas leasing in this country by changing the focus from the OCS to MPAs. Section II of this paper will discuss the OCSLA procedural requirements. Section III will focus on the National System of Marine Protected Areas, specifically, on the Section 5 of the Executive Order and the procedure for nomination and inclusion in the System. Section IV will outline the OCSLA requirements for the 5- Year Program and the impact of recent case law. Section V will examine the potential influence the National Program will have on the 5-Year Plan and will contain references to recently filed comments that will avoid these problems.

Access: BlueSeeds – Darwin Ecosystem 87 Quai des Queyries 33100 Bordeaux France - www.blueseeds.org Acknowledgments: Special thanks to the MAVA Foundation for its kind support, and to Ambre Diazabakana, Marie Laustriat, Sara Hernandez, Vertigo Lab, MedPAN, SPA/RAC and WWF Mediterranean for their work carried out in 2015 on which this guide is based (Binet et al. 2015a and 2015b). The Business Plan Tool referred to throughout this guide is an updated version of the MedPLAN Tool (http://medpan.org/marine-protected-areas/themes-2/sustainable-financing/), developed by VertigoLab, with the financial support of MedPAN, SPA/RAC and WWF Mediterranean in 2015 (Binet et al. 2015b). Thank you also to Kalli De Meyer, Wijnand De Wolf, Ramón de León, Jelena Basta, Sandro Dujmovic, Marno Milotic, Houssine Nibani and Chris Ranford for their testimonies on their respective experiences.

OSPAR Recommendation 2003/3 on a network of marine protected areas (MPAs) has the purpose of establishing a network of MPAs in the OSPAR maritime area that by 2010 should be ecologically coherent and well managed. The Recommendation sets out that each Contracting Party should consider whether areas within its jurisdiction justify selection as MPAs under the criteria set out in the OSPAR guidelines on identification and selection (OSPAR agreement 2003017) and report to the OSPAR Commission the areas that it has selected as components of the network. For each area selected in this way Contracting Parties should develop a management plan, in accordance with OSPAR guidelines for the Management of MPAs (OSPAR agreement 2003-18), to achieve the aims for which the area has been selected. The Recommendation also embodies linkages to the EU‘s Natura 2000 network.

(Received 4 September 2006; revised 16 July 2007) Abstract Marine Protected Areas (mpas) are an emerging tool for man- aging marine resources. Many of the benefits associated with mpas have been widely investigated and the field is an active area of re- search in theoretical ecology. One benefit of mpas that has remained largely overlooked is their value as a tool for learning about the pop- ulation dynamics of a fishery. We investigate the economic optimality of implementing an mpa, purely for the purpose of obtaining more informative data about a fish population, thereby allowing a better management strategy. A stochastic dynamic programming framework for finding optimal management strategies in this scenario is devel- oped. A simple example is investigated using this framework, with the results illustrating that in some situations the knowledge gained from mpas can be sufficient to make their creation economically op- timal. This establishes an additional benefit of mpas that should be considered further by fishery managers.

v Abstract Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are one of the most widely used protection methods for vulnerable marine species and ecosystems. An indirect drawback of many MPAs is that they often attract large numbers of people to the MPAs and its surrounds, which increases the potential for detrimental human-mediated impacts. The introduction of non-indigenous species to terrestrial protected areas is a well established hazard directly associated with increased human visitation rates. Similarly, an increased human visitation rate to islands is correlated with higher levels of coastal invasions.