Collaboration, Legitimacy, and Awareness in Puget Sound MPAs

Hard, Clara H.; Hoelting, Kristin; Christie, Patrick; Pollnac, Richard Β.

doi:10.1080/08920753.2012.677640

“…Formal social survey techniques on MPAs built upon prior research (Hard et al, 2012;Hoelting et al, 2013) and were conducted to answer the following general questions. (1) What are the conditions and processes that lead to successful MPA implementation in diverse contexts?…”

Section: Mpa Research: Approach and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most questions had been used in prior studies involving authors (Hard et al, 2012;Hoelting et al, 2013). General public and resource users were questioned along the shoreline or at their homes within the vicinity of MPAs.…”

Section: Mpa Research: Approach and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy pivot in Puget Sound: Lessons learned from marine protected areas and tribally-led estuarine restoration

Christie

¹

,

Fluharty

²

,

Kennard

³

et al. 2018

Ocean & Coastal Management

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental change amplifies the challenge of protecting and restoring Puget Sound. As rising pressures from population growth, development, unsustainable resource use, climate impacts and other factors alter this urbanizing basin, efforts to recover salmon and ecosystem health and to enhance climate resilience face unprecedented social complexities and intensifying competition for space. A multi-method study of citizen and practitioner perspectives on protection and restoration suggests that capacity to manage under these conditions can be improved through strengthening an approach that has already become central in restoration practice: multiple-benefit planning. In this research, we examine and compare planning approaches used to develop marine protected areas (MPA) and estuary restoration (ER) projects in Puget Sound. Surveying non-tribal public attitudes toward these projects, we found limited knowledge concerning existing MPAs but support for wider use of such protections. We find that initiatives pursuing conservation, protection, restoration and resilience can gain advantage from (a) broadly inclusive and collaborative planning; (b) recognition of tribal treaty rights, management authorities, and leadership; (c) careful consideration and mitigation of project impacts on affected people (e.g. especially tribal and non-tribal fisheries for MPAs; farm interests and landowners for restoration projects). We note that "no-take" MPA designation has stalled, while ER efforts are overcoming sharp objections and controversies by crafting projects to deliver multiple social-ecological benefits: improved flood control and drainage, salmon recovery, recreational enjoyment, and resilience to climate change. Comparable strategies have not yet evolved in designation of "no-take" MPAs in Puget Sound. We offer conclusions and recommendations for accelerating conservation and resilience initiatives to keep pace with a changing environment. A key human dimensions research-based recommendation is that increasing environmental pressures intensify the need to strengthen collaborative and sustained planning and implementation processes.

show abstract

“…They found that 43% of citizen-informants knew of these MPA's, but few were aware of specific MPA goals, regulations, and impacts. Multivariate statistical analysis of social surveys demonstrated that collaborative MPA planning and implementation processes varied widely between sites (from low to high levels of collaboration), and this explained a significant portion of informants' perception of MPA legitimacy and success (Hard et al, 2012;Hoelting et al, 2013). Based on surveys conducted near 12 MPAs (4 of which overlap with the 2009 sites in Hard et al, 2012;Hoelting et al, 2013) it appears that public awareness of MPAs remains low, with 52% of general public respondents (of 904 total "grocery store parking lot" informants) unaware of a nearby MPA despite their proximity to a site.…”

Section: Awareness and Support For Puget Sound Mpasmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The design and implementation process has not consistently reached the standards described in Gunderson et al (2008), including consistent monitoring and enforcement, engaging relevant stakeholder and communities in allocation decisions, and implementing educational programs. Hard et al (2012) report on the social surveys of 156 MPA leaders and resource users and 936 citizens near nine MPA sites. They found that 43% of citizen-informants knew of these MPA's, but few were aware of specific MPA goals, regulations, and impacts.…”

Section: Awareness and Support For Puget Sound Mpasmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policy pivot in Puget Sound: Lessons learned from marine protected areas and tribally-led estuarine restoration

Christie¹,

Fluharty²,

Kennard³

et al. 2018

Preprint

Self Cite

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Environmental change amplifies the challenge of protecting and restoring Puget Sound. As rising pressures from population growth, development, unsustainable resource use, climate impacts and other factors alter this urbanizing basin, efforts to recover salmon and ecosystem health and to enhance climate resilience face unprecedented social complexities and intensifying competition for space. A multi-method study of citizen and practitioner perspectives on protection and restoration suggests that capacity to manage under these conditions can be improved through strengthening an approach that has already become central in restoration practice: multiple-benefit planning. In this research, we examine and compare planning approaches used to develop marine protected areas (MPA) and estuary restoration (ER) projects in Puget Sound. Surveying non-tribal public attitudes toward these projects, we found limited knowledge concerning existing MPAs but support for wider use of such protections. We find that initiatives pursuing conservation, protection, restoration and resilience can gain advantage from (a) broadly inclusive and collaborative planning; (b) recognition of tribal treaty rights, management authorities, and leadership; (c) careful consideration and mitigation of project impacts on affected people (e.g. especially tribal and non-tribal fisheries for MPAs; farm interests and landowners for restoration projects). We note that "no-take" MPA designation has stalled, while ER efforts are overcoming sharp objections and controversies by crafting projects to deliver multiple social-ecological benefits: improved flood control and drainage, salmon recovery, recreational enjoyment, and resilience to climate change. Comparable strategies have not yet evolved in designation of "no-take" MPAs in Puget Sound. We offer conclusions and recommendations for accelerating conservation and resilience initiatives to keep pace with a changing environment. A key human dimensions research-based recommendation is that increasing environmental pressures intensify the need to strengthen collaborative and sustained planning and implementation processes.

show abstract

“…The rapid onset of enforcement of regulations at the inception of an MPA might increase resistence and noncompliance so enforcement might be implemented gradually or at later stages in MPA management [186]. Pro-active actions, such as clearly delineating boundaries, are also important ways to encourage compliance [187].…”

Section: Management Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

From measuring outcomes to providing inputs: Governance, management, and local development for more effective marine protected areas

Bennett¹,

Dearden²

2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marine protected areas (MPAs) have the potential to conserve marine resources as well as provide social and economic benefits to local communities. Yet the percentage of MPAs that might be considered “successful” or effective on ecological and/or socio-economic accounts is debatable. Measurement of biophysical and socio-economic outcome indicators has become de rigeur for examining MPA management effectiveness so that adaptive feedback loops can stimulate new management actions. Scholars and practitioners alike have suggested that more attention should be given to the inputs that are likely to lead to successful MPA outcomes. This paper briefly discusses the potential ecological and socio-economic outcomes of MPAs then reviews the literature on three categories of inputs – governance, management, and local development – that lead to effective MPAs. In conclusion, the paper presents a novel inputs framework that incorporates indicators for governance, management and development to be used in the design and analysis of MPAs.

show abstract

Collaboration, Legitimacy, and Awareness in Puget Sound MPAs

Cited by 20 publications

References 18 publications

Policy pivot in Puget Sound: Lessons learned from marine protected areas and tribally-led estuarine restoration

Policy pivot in Puget Sound: Lessons learned from marine protected areas and tribally-led estuarine restoration

Policy pivot in Puget Sound: Lessons learned from marine protected areas and tribally-led estuarine restoration

From measuring outcomes to providing inputs: Governance, management, and local development for more effective marine protected areas

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About