Economic development, marine protected areas and gendered access to fishing resources in a Polynesian lagoon

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

“…Larger scale commercial fisheries, too, may benefit from the creation of no take zones; however, since spillover tends to occur at smaller spatial scales (on average up to 800 m from MPA boundaries) the provision of benefits to larger commercial fisheries would most likely require creation of larger MPAs or extensive networks [31,45]. However, fisheries benefits may be unequally shared among groups within and between communities [52,53]. Though MPAs may benefit local fisheries in the long term, in the short term compensation or alternative livelihood options need to be considered since displacement of rights to access the resource can lead to short-term hardships [50,54,55].…”

“…Adaptive management reflects a shift away from a linear view of the world and recognizes that MPAs are part of a dynamic, non-linear, and complex system [199]. Integrative research stemming from various social and natural science methods and tools in combination with local and traditional knowledge should also inform both broader integration and adaptive management frameworks [40,45,53,73,79,122,143,144]. Drew [200], for example, reviews various examples of how folk taxonomy and systematics and local knowledge of populations and ecological relationships can be used to augment western science in MPA management.…”

“…Ecological services, such as coastal protection, may also lead to reduced vulnerability and improved household security. Yet MPAs and related developments can also lead to contrary socio-economic outcomes, including increased conflict and political struggle, exacerbated vulnerabilities, negative sociocultural change, increased restrictions, decreased levels of power and alienation in natural resource management processes, forced migration, loss of assets, increased social tension, loss of social and educational facilities, inequitable distribution of benefits, further marginalization of marginalized groups, loss of tenure, as well as decreased food security in the short term and for some groups [10,16,41,43,50,53,54,65,69,[72][73][74][75]88,89,91,93,[95][96][97][98][99][100]. In short, livelihood and socio-economic outcomes from MPAs vary widely and can range from very positive to very negative depending on the context and inputs.…”

“…Conservation and development programs should address the needs of potentially marginalized groups. Incorporating gender considerations, for example, into design of development programs and women's resource use patterns into MPA design can lead to greater benefits for households and the larger community [53,78,93].…”

“…MPAs must be "adapted to the exigencies of local situations, recognizing that each location has its unique social, cultural, and ecological contexts that influence the trajectory of MPA implementation and impact" [10]. Traditional knowledge and management mechanisms (such as species taboos, gear restrictions, and closures), customary tenure, local norms and rules of use, and traditional and current resource use patterns should be incorporated into MPA design and implementation [40,45,53,73,79,[143][144][145] when it is determined that they are effective and sustainable [140,146]. Through incorporation of these factors, MPAs can result in the strengthening and reinvigoration of traditional mechanisms and cultures [132].…”