Debating the effectiveness of marine protected areas

Abstract

Increasing the size and number of marine protected areas (MPAs) is widely seen as a way to meet ambitious biodiversity and sustainable development goals. Yet, debate still exists on the effectiveness of MPAs in achieving ecological and societal objectives. Although the literature provides significant evidence of the ecological effects of MPAs within their boundaries, much remains to be learned about the ecological and social effects of MPAs on regional and seascape scales. Key to improving the effectiveness of MPAs, and ensuring that they achieve desired outcomes, will be better monitoring that includes ecological and social data collected inside and outside of MPAs. This can lead to more conclusive evidence about what is working, what is not, and why. Eight authors were asked to write about their experiences with MPA effectiveness. The authors were instructed to clearly define “effectiveness” and discuss the degree to which they felt MPAs had achieved or failed to be effective. Essays were exchanged among authors and each was invited to write a shorter “counterpoint.” The exercise shows that, while experiences are diverse, many authors found common ground regarding the role of MPAs in achieving conservation targets. This exchange of perspectives is intended to promote reflection, analysis, and dialogue as a means for improving MPA design, assessment, and integration with other conservation tools.

Rapid declines across Australian fishery stocks indicate global sustainability targets will not be achieved without an expanded network of ‘no‐fishing’ reserves

“…Notwithstanding the limited current extent of marine reserves, additional spatial restrictions on fishing for conservation purposes are opposed by many fisheries practitioners on the grounds that the removal of fish within well‐managed fisheries has little impact on biodiversity (Kearney, Buxton, & Farebrother, ; Pendleton et al, in press). This contention profoundly affects government policies on marine conservation in Australia, a nation that has pioneered the development of multi‐use MPAs (Day & Dobbs, ), and with a widely acknowledged global leadership role in this field.…”

“…Addressing these issues potentially involves both improved fisheries management and the application of ‘no‐take’ marine protected areas (MPAs), i.e. ‘marine reserves’ (Costello et al, ; Edgar et al, ; Hilborn, ; Pendleton et al, in press). A single marine reserve can provide insurance against population declines for hundreds of species and improved fisheries outcomes, as long as it is well designed and regulated (Edgar et al, ; Ward, ).…”

Revisiting “Success” and “Failure” of Marine Protected Areas: A Conservation Scientist Perspective

“…MPAs are expensive ventures absorbing much of the scarce resources allocated to marine conservation. Thus, identifying practices that ensure MPA effectiveness is a major issue (Pendleton et al, 2018).…”

The use of spatial management tools in rights‐based groundfish fisheries

“…There is a clear need to better define the role of spatial management in building sustainable fisheries (Pendleton et al., ). Therefore, we examine how spatial management tools are applied in fisheries managed with rights‐based harvest management.…”