The global costs and benefits of expanding Marine Protected Areas

Most fish stocks world‐wide are fished at maximum sustainable yield (MSY) or overfished, as many fisheries management strategies have failed to achieve sustainable fishing. Identifying effective fisheries management strategies has now become urgent. Here, we developed a spatially explicit metapopulation model accounting for population connectivity in the north‐western Mediterranean Sea, and parameterized it for three ecologically and economically important coastal fish species: the white seabream Diplodus sargus, the two‐banded seabream Diplodus vulgaris and the dusky grouper Epinephelus marginatus. We used the model to assess how stock biomass and catches respond to changes in fishing mortality rate (F) and in the size of fully protected areas within the existing system of multiple‐use marine protected areas (MPAs). For each species, we estimated MSY and the corresponding values of stock biomass (BMSY) and fishing mortality rate (FMSY), providing crucial reference points for the assessment of fisheries management. Diplodus sargus is currently in low overfishing, while D. vulgaris and E. marginatus are in high overfishing. Stock recovery to BMSY for the last two species requires a reduction of current F around 50%. This would guarantee an increase in both stock biomass (around 50% and 75% for D. vulgaris and E. marginatus respectively) and catch (around 15% and 30%) after a transient time of ~15–30 years. Alternatively, doubling the size of fully protected areas over fishable areas within the existing network of MPAs would lead to positive conservation effects for all three species without substantially affecting the overall productivity of the fishery and the total economic value of the catch. Synthesis and applications. We provide the first assessment of stock status for three coastal species in the north‐western Mediterranean and evaluate the ecological and fisheries outcomes of different management strategies. Extending full protection inside existing multiple‐use marine protected areas or reducing fishing effort outside can deliver both conservation and fisheries benefits.

show abstract

“…From the economic viewpoint, a recent analysis by Brander et al. (2020) has shown that the global benefits of expanding MPAs exceed their costs.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extending full protection inside existing marine protected areas, or reducing fishing effort outside, can reconcile conservation and fisheries goals

Belharet

Franco

Calò

et al. 2020

Journal of Applied Ecology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The latter is progressively and strongly dependent on the capacity to go beyond the classical bedrock and mobilize, articulate and provide diverse and innovative financial sources and mechanisms. It also includes the coordination of complementary elements, components and projects, and the involvement of diverse stakeholders (Brander et al, ; Bos et al, ; Watson et al, ). There are several possibilities for alternative and additional sources of funding for federal marine protected areas.…”

Section: Building a New Strategymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Establishing and managing protected areas is not inexpensive, and this is particularly true for marine protected areas. A cost of US $45–47 billion has been estimated for achieving 10% global ocean protection between 2015 and 2050 (Brander et al, ). In several cases, countries and national agencies might not be able to dedicate enough attention, strengthen integration among governmental and private sectors and provide adequate enough staff and budget (Bos, Pressey, & Stoeckl, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In several cases, countries and national agencies might not be able to dedicate enough attention, strengthen integration among governmental and private sectors and provide adequate enough staff and budget (Bos, Pressey, & Stoeckl, ). Nevertheless, the benefits from a global network of marine protected areas could amount to 20 times the estimated cost (Brander et al, ). Protected areas need stronger support from society, as they serve its social, economic and cultural interests.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In any case, instead of conflicting categories and types, it is important to consider the value of a gradation in the protection levels, as well as crucial social engagement of various kinds. Also, instead of managing protected areas of different sizes and locations, it is very important to manage systems and networks of integrated protected areas (Ban et al, 2012;Brander et al, 2015;IUCN WCPA, 2018a;Lubchenco & Grorud-Colvert, 2015).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Marine and coastal protected and conserved areas strategy in Brazil: Context, lessons, challenges, finance, participation, new management models, and first results

Maretti

Leão

Prates

et al. 2019

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the last two decades, Brazil has advanced significantly with the expansion and improvement of its national system of protected areas. Until recently most of the expansion was concentrated in the Amazon region (with useful lessons). It also had an uneven ecological representation of coastal and marine ecosystems, concentrated in coastal waters. Despite significant advances, the levels of funding, staff and stakeholders' engagement remain relatively low for such a vast system. Within the past few years, key elements of a new strategy for protection of coastal and marine areas have started to emerge, combined with some participatory processes and a focus on expansion of the total area protected (from <1.5% protection of the country's marine area). These included: a renewed focus on priority areas for conservation; attention to national and international commitments and targets; clarity about the need for partnerships and funding; better engagement of Brazilian society and stakeholders; new, and more collaborative, models of protected areas management and conservation; and openness in the relationships with wider society. Significant results of this effort have started to appear: new large mosaics of oceanic protected areas were created; Amazon mangroves were recognized by the Ramsar Convention; new mangrove protected areas were created, besides other ones proposed; project proposals are under development with partners for better funding and sharing of responsibility; and there is a better engagement with stakeholders. The building of the Brazilian Blue Initiative is underway. The implementation of the proposed 15‐year marine strategy is at its onset: partnerships need to be strengthened and substantial funding is required. It will only be possible to manage the larger system of protected areas if there are more collaborative and innovative models for protected areas and conservation management. These should include partnerships with civil society, local and traditional communities and the private sector, as well as greater engagement of scientists and research institutions, stronger and more qualified tourism, volunteer work, etc. Further innovative funding mechanisms will also be needed along the way.

show abstract

Identification of priority cetacean areas in the north‐east Atlantic using systematic conservation planning

Giménez,

Waggitt,

Jessopp

2023

Aquatic Conservation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mobile marine protected areas have been proposed for the conservation of highly seasonal or mobile marine megafauna. However, seasonal data on the distribution of marine wildlife to inform protected areas are generally scarce worldwide, especially for cetaceans, which makes dynamic solutions difficult to implement. Furthermore, conservation objectives are often set at the level of individual species rather than at the community level, despite many species having similar or overlapping habitat requirements, and a comparison of the effectiveness of mobile vs. static Marine Protected Areas options has rarely been done. Systematic conservation planning was used to identify priority areas of cetacean biodiversity in the north‐east Atlantic accounting for seasonal changes in distribution. Consistent hotspots across seasons at a community level, in particular along the shelf edge, suggest that fixed priority areas for cetacean biodiversity may be appropriate. The area required for protection to meet conservation targets (i.e. 20% of a population occurring within a protected area) is minimized when considering populations at basin scale rather than national level. Highly mobile megafauna normally exploit persistent and predictable oceanographic features, so a habitat suitability rather than a jurisdiction‐based approach is more appropriate.

show abstract

The global costs and benefits of expanding Marine Protected Areas

Cited by 53 publications

References 62 publications

Extending full protection inside existing marine protected areas, or reducing fishing effort outside, can reconcile conservation and fisheries goals

Extending full protection inside existing marine protected areas, or reducing fishing effort outside, can reconcile conservation and fisheries goals

Marine and coastal protected and conserved areas strategy in Brazil: Context, lessons, challenges, finance, participation, new management models, and first results

Identification of priority cetacean areas in the north‐east Atlantic using systematic conservation planning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About