Improving fisheries co-management through ecosystem-based spatial management: The Galapagos Marine Reserve

Abstract

a b s t r a c tEcosystem-based spatial management (EBSM) can provide a mechanism for a strategic and integrated plan-based approach to managing human activities in the marine environment. An EBSM approach was adopted in the Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) at the end of the 1990s with the adoption of marine zoning. The latter was created under a co-management regime to reduce conflicts among users arising over incompatible demands for ocean space, to mitigate the impact of human activities on sensitive ecological areas, and to contribute to the sustainability of Galapagos fisheries. Unfortunately, the promise of an EBSM approach in the GMR has not been matched by effectiveness in practice, in achieving the established management objectives. The aim of this paper is to evaluate the shortcomings and lessons learned related to planning, implementation, monitoring, evaluation and adaptation of the GMR's marine zoning scheme, and to provide recommendations to better realize the potential value of the EBSM approach to co-managing the shellfisheries of the GMR.

Impacts of Climate Variability on Latin American Small-scale Fisheries

“…The recognition of spatial patterns in population demography and dynamics is of utmost importance for marine spatial planning and management of stocks exploited by SSFs in Latin America (Defeo andCastilla 2005, Castrejón andCharles 2013). In this context, matching spatial property rights and size of the management units with scales of dispersal is urgently needed to achieve management success (Castilla and Defeo 2001, McCay and Jones 2011, White and Costello 2011.…”

Evaluation of No-Take Zones in the Galapagos Marine Reserve, Zoning Plan 2000

“…Of course, zoning confusion and use conflicts are not the only reasons for the lack of compliance. Law enforcement, the lack of strong fishing regulations, financial stress of public institutions, patrolling and surveillance capacity, have all been identified as challenges faced by the GMR (Castrejón and Charles, 2013;Timpe, 2016). However, thanks to this spatial analysis, management policies could be translated to the real, on-site space, allowing for a more precise, logic, objective, reproducible, and unambiguous spatial interpretation of the management policies.…”

“…Because the GMR has outstanding natural values, there was a need to develop a spatial plan to guarantee the conservation of its natural resources as well as allowing an organized use of some of its areas, including the extractive use of seafood. The first zoning plan of the GMR was declared in 2000 following a consensus of the Participatory Management Board and later physically demarcated in 2006 (Castrejón and Charles, 2013). The aim of the zoning was to reduce conflicts between uses, protect marine biodiversity, and promote sustainable uses (Heylings et al, 2002).…”

“…Zone 3-port zones. Zone 2 had four management subzones: 2.1 Comparison and Protection (conservation subzone), 2.2 Conservation and NonExtractive Use (tourism subzone), 2.3 Conservation and Extractive (fishing subzone) and NonExtractive Use (tourism subzone), and 2.4 Areas of Special Temporal Management, located in the vicinity of ports and harbors which are conceived for experimental and recovery purposes in case of an anthropogenic or natural disaster (see Heylings et al, 2002 andCastrejón andCharles, 2013 for a thorough revision of the history of marine zoning in the Galapagos Marine Reserve).…”

Interactions of tuna fisheries with the Galápagos marine reserve

“…It provides a valuable case study because it meets at least 4 of the 5 key so-called NEOLI features (sensu Edgar et al 2014) that best predict protected area effectiveness worldwide, specifically no-take regulations (industrialized fisheries are banned inside the Galápagos Marine Reserve; artisanal fisheries are allowed), age (18 yr of protection), large size (~133 000 km 2 ), and isolation from the mainland (Edgar et al 2014). The fifth key feature (enforcement) was weak at the time of reserve implementation in 1998, but im proved after 2002 (Castrejón & Charles 2013, Kliffen & Berkes 2015. Examining interactions between the Galápagos Marine Reserve and associated tuna purse seine fishery prior and subsequent to reserve enforcement represents an unparalleled opportunity to empirically document changes in tuna fisheries associated with a largescale MPA.…”