Contributions of marine area-based management tools to the UN sustainable development goals

Gissi, Elena; Maes, Frank; Kyriazi, Zacharoula; Ruiz‐Frau, Ana; Santos, Catarina Frazão; Neumann, Barbara; Quintela, Adriano; Alves, Fátima L.; Borg, Simone; Chen, Wenting; Fernandes, Maria da Luz; Hadjimichael, Maria; Manea, Elisabetta; Marques, Márcia; Platjouw, Froukje Maria; Portman, Michelle Ε.; Sousa, Lisa; Bolognini, Luca; Flannery, Wesley; Grati, Fabio; Pita, Cristina; Văidianu, Natașa; Stojanov, Robert; Tatenhove, J.P.M. van; Micheli, Fiorenza; Hornidge, Anna‐Katharina; Unger, Sebastian

doi:10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129910

Cited by 37 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Nonetheless, the SM allowed us to highlight the low occurrence of protection and conservation measures including volcanic-associated ecosystems in the Mediterranean Sea. Despite almost 30% of the observations falls within 28 Area-Based Management Tools (ABMTs) for conservation ( i.e ., instruments that manage areas by imposing stringent regulations delivered by a management authority to achieve high-level protection goals, Gissi et al, 2022 ), such as Marine Protected Areas, Nature Reserves or Parks, Special Areas for Conservation, Zone of Special Protection, Site of Community Importance, most of them are not protected by the ABMTs. All the ABMTs that enclose volcanic-associated ecosystems in Mediterranean Sea, have been established by European countries and are mainly located in shallow water in the central-western area of the Mediterranean Sea between Italy, Malta, France, Spain and Monaco, while the rest are located in Greece.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Volcanic-associated ecosystems of the Mediterranean Sea: a systematic map and an interactive tool to support their conservation

Costa

Sciutteri

Consoli

et al. 2023

PeerJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Hydrothermal vents, cold seeps, pockmarks and seamounts are widely distributed on the ocean floor. Over the last fifty years, the knowledge about these volcanic-associated marine ecosystems has notably increased, yet available information is still limited, scattered, and unsuitable to support decision-making processes for the conservation and management of the marine environment. Methods Here we searched the Scopus database and the platform Web of Science to collect the scientific information available for these ecosystems in the Mediterranean Sea. The collected literature and the bio-geographic and population variables extracted are provided into a systematic map as an online tool that includes an updated database searchable through a user-friendly R-shiny app. Results The 433 literature items with almost one thousand observations provided evidence of more than 100 different volcanic-associated marine ecosystem sites, mostly distributed in the shallow waters of the Mediterranean Sea. Less than 30% of these sites are currently included in protected or regulated areas. The updated database available in the R-shiny app is a tool that could guide the implementation of more effective protection measures for volcanic-associated marine ecosystems in the Mediterranean Sea within existing management instruments under the EU Habitats Directive. Moreover, the information provided in this study could aid policymakers in defining the priorities for the future protection measures needed to achieve the targets of the UN Agenda 2030.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Volcanic-associated ecosystems of the Mediterranean Sea: a systematic map and an interactive tool to support their conservation

Costa

Sciutteri

Consoli

et al. 2023

PeerJ

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Navigating these dialogues and decisions requires attention to whether and how goals can align across different area types (see Box 1). OECMs in particular may incentivize cooperation between sectors, bringing new voices into conservation decision-making (Laffoley et al, 2017a;Gurney et al, 2021;Gissi et al, 2022), for example by giving OECM recognition to areas that are managed for fisheries or renewable energy and also provide meaningful outcomes for biodiversity conservation. The "effectiveness" criterion is critical for identifying OECMs (Laffoley et al, 2017;Gurney et al, 2021).…”

Section: Other Sectorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Scientific Synthesis of Marine Protected Areas in the United States: Status and Recommendations

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are a key tool for achieving goals for biodiversity conservation and human well-being, including improving climate resilience and equitable access to nature. At a national level, they are central components in the U.S. commitment to conserve at least 30% of U.S. waters by 2030. By definition, the primary goal of an MPA is the long-term conservation of nature; however, not all MPAs provide the same ecological and social benefits. A U.S. system of MPAs that is equitable, well-managed, representative and connected, and includes areas at a level of protection that can deliver desired outcomes is best positioned to support national goals. We used a new MPA framework, The MPA Guide, to assess the level of protection and stage of establishment of the 50 largest U.S. MPAs, which make up 99.7% of the total U.S. MPA area (3.19 million km2). Over 96% of this area, including 99% of that which is fully or highly protected against extractive or destructive human activities, is in the central Pacific ocean. Total MPA area in other regions is sparse – only 1.9% of the U.S. ocean excluding the central Pacific is protected in any kind of MPA (120,976 km2). Over three quarters of the non-central Pacific MPA area is lightly or minimally protected against extractive or destructive human activities. These results highlight an urgent need to improve the quality, quantity, and representativeness of MPA protection in U.S. waters to bring benefits to human and marine communities. We identify and review the state of the science, including focal areas for achieving desired MPA outcomes and lessons learned from places where sound ecological and social design principles come together in MPAs that are set up to achieve national goals for equity, climate resilience, and biodiversity conservation. We recommend key opportunities for action specific to the U.S. context, including increasing funding, research, equity, and protection level for new and existing U.S. MPAs.

show abstract

“…MSP has roots in marine conservation, with early spatial planning focused on marine protected area site selection and zoning (Agardy, 2010; Vaughan & Agardy, 2020). However, in the last 15 years, MSP has gone beyond conservation, aspiring to become a multi‐objective approach that balances ecological and socio‐economic goals while delivering conservation outcomes (Shabtay et al, 2019; Gissi et al, 2022). When MSP recognizes ecological systems as multiple interacting elements, it rests on the principles of ecosystem based management (EBM).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Link marine restoration to marine spatial planning through ecosystem‐based management to maximize ocean regeneration

Manea

Agardy²,

Bongiorni

2023

Aquatic Conservation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The speed at which marine and coastal ecosystems are being degraded due to cumulative impacts limits the effectiveness of conservation strategies. To abate ocean degradation and allow ocean regeneration, conservation planning needs to be improved and ecological restoration will be needed. This study explores the potential of incorporating restoration into marine spatial planning (MSP) anchored to ecosystem‐based management (EBM), termed EB‐MSP, for maximizing ocean regeneration. This perspective explicitly brings both passive and active restorations into EB‐MSP in a broad and holistic framework for achieving the recovery of ocean ecosystems, their functions and their valuable services. By proposing a restoration‐focused EB‐MSP framework, we highlight the co‐benefits of interlinking MSP and marine restoration through the EBM core principles. Such benefits include a scaling‐up of restoration effectiveness, a greater guarantee that sustainability and conservation goals will be met and improvements in MSP as an integrated planning tool with the potential to address climate change. Together, this will promote ocean regeneration alongside management for sustainable use to prevent further degradation and to allow much‐needed ecological recovery.

show abstract

Contributions of marine area-based management tools to the UN sustainable development goals

Cited by 37 publications

References 64 publications

Volcanic-associated ecosystems of the Mediterranean Sea: a systematic map and an interactive tool to support their conservation

Volcanic-associated ecosystems of the Mediterranean Sea: a systematic map and an interactive tool to support their conservation

A Scientific Synthesis of Marine Protected Areas in the United States: Status and Recommendations

Link marine restoration to marine spatial planning through ecosystem‐based management to maximize ocean regeneration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About