No abstract

This paper examines the potential relationships between the ecosystem services provided by the coastal and marine environment and the designation of marine protected areas. The hypothesis is that relationships exist between the provision of ecosystem services and the features protected by marine protected areas. It is considered that protection will maintain these features in good ecological condition and in some cases will restore ecological functioning with positive effects on the delivery of ecosystem services, as pressures upon the protected features are reduced. As the number of marine protected area designations grows, system-wide effects to communities from improvements in delivery of a range of ecosystem services may be realised. This paper provides a comparative analysis of the jurisdictional marine protected area policies proposed by the English, Welsh and Scottish Governments. It presents structured assessment matrices developed from the literature and expert opinion, of ecosystem service provision by marine protected habitats and species and applies the findings to a range of existing UK marine protected areas to demonstrate its relevance. The approach and case study findings are discussed within the wider context of marine ecosystem services and marine protected area management.

Aim  Ecologists seeking to describe patterns at ever larger scales require compilations of data on the global abundance and distribution of species. Comparable compilations of biological data are needed to elucidate the mechanisms behind these patterns, but have received far less attention. We assess the availability of biological data across an entire assemblage: the well‐documented demersal marine fauna of the United Kingdom. We also test whether data availability for a species depends on its taxonomic group, maximum body size, the number of times it has been recorded in a global biogeographic database, or its commercial and conservation importance. Location  Seas of the United Kingdom. Methods  We defined a demersal marine fauna of 973 species from 15 phyla and 40 classes using five extensive surveys around the British Isles. We then quantified the availability of data on eight key biological traits (termed biological knowledge) for each species from online databases. Relationships between biological knowledge and our predictors were tested with generalized linear models. Results  Full data on eight fundamental biological traits exist for only 9% (n= 88) of the UK demersal marine fauna, and 20% of species completely lack data. Clear trends in our knowledge exist: fish (median biological knowledge score = six traits) are much better known than invertebrates (one trait). Biological knowledge increases with biogeographic knowledge and (to a lesser extent) with body size, and is greater in species that are commercially exploited or of conservation concern. Main conclusions  Our analysis reveals deep ignorance of the basic biology of a well‐studied fauna, highlighting the need for far greater efforts to compile biological trait data. Clear biases in our knowledge, relating to how well sampled or ‘important’ species are suggests that caution is required in extrapolating small subsets of biologically well‐known species to ecosystem‐level studies.

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) Aichi Target 11 states that, "by 2020, at least 17 per cent of terrestrial and inland water, and 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, especially areas of particular importance for biodiversity and ecosystem services, are conserved through effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well-connected systems of protected areas and other effective area-based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscapes and seascapes". There has been rapid progress to meet the quantitative goal (the 10% target). However, the qualitative aspects of Aichi target 11 are less well described. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 14 to "conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development" reaffirms the quantitative element of Aichi target 11, and, through the described sub-targets, places further emphasis on the economic and social context of global development. The complexity of the language from Aichi target 11 is not mirrored in SDG 14, leading to a potential scenario where the knowledge and progress towards Aichi Target 11 will be diluted as the focus shifts to the SDGs. This paper presents current knowledge and implementation of the qualitative elements of Aichi Target 11 and highlights gaps in knowledge. We conclude that the progress made so far on describing and implementing the qualitative goals of Aichi Target 11 should be integrated into SDG 14 in order to strengthen global efforts for marine biodiversity conservation and support the broader vision for sustainable development that will "transform our world".

No abstract