The worldwide costs of marine protected areas

Abstract

T he world's oceans are in trouble. Global fish catches are declining (1), numerous populations of marine animals have collapsed (2-5), and communities and habitats have been extensively damaged or destroyed (6-10). Evidence is mounting that marine protected areas (MPAs), where fishing and other human activities are restricted or prohibited, conserve habitats and populations (1, 11-13) and, by exporting biomass, may also sustain or increase the overall yield of nearby fisheries (1, 11, 12). There has been considerable progress in identifying priority areas and efficient MPA configurations for marine conservation (14, 15). However, despite their growing significance for policy, we have virtually no data on how much MPAs cost to establish and run, how these costs vary, or whether a substantially expanded global network of MPAs could be afforded. To address these questions, we conducted the most extensive survey to date of how much MPAs cost. Our SurveyTo evaluate the costs of MPAs, we sent a questionnaire (see supporting information, which is published on the PNAS web site) to Ϸ500 individuals involved in running MPAs worldwide. We requested information on MPA area, protection type and goals, staffing, recurrent income and expenditure, and how much (if any) extra expenditure and staff were required for minimum effective protection. We supplemented questionnaire returns with information from the published and gray literature. All costs were converted to year 2000 U.S. dollars by using the local currency to U.S. dollar exchange rate for the reported year and a U.S. gross domestic product deflator index.We excluded from our analyses MPAs whose marine components covered Ͻ50% of the MPA area. In order for our calculations to overestimate, if anything, the costs of marine conservation, for all other partially terrestrial reserves, we attributed all costs to their marine sector if we did not have a more detailed cost breakdown. To be similarly conservative, we excluded five MPAs whose questionnaire returns suggested that, despite having no budget at present, they required no extra money.This left us with data for a total of 83 MPAs worldwide (12 from Africa, 12 from Asia, 10 from Australasia and Oceania, 13 from Europe, 13 from Latin America and the Caribbean, and 23 from North America), ranging in size from Ͻ0.1 km 2 to Ͼ300,000 km 2 . As well as encompassing a broad geographic and size range, our sample included a wide spectrum of management types (run by government agencies, nongovernmental organizations, and local communities; zoned and not zoned), objectives (e.g., biodiversity protection, recreation, conflict reduction, and fishery enhancement), and resources protected (e.g., coral reefs, whales, and coastal scenery). Of the 76 MPAs that reported their purpose, 75 (98.7%) listed habitat and species protection (the remaining MPA was solely for research), and protection was the primary purpose for 58 (76.5%). Therefore, our sample is broadly representative of the range of MPAs in use worldwide (16), and should produc...

Ocean zoning within a sparing versus sharing framework

“…Despite being critical to decision-making about natural resource management (Naidoo et al 2006), costs associated with establishing and managing protected areas are often poorly reported, difficult to quantify (Balmford et al 2004;Ban et al 2011), and highly contextual (Rojas-Nazar et al 2015). As a flexible way to integrate the amalgam of costs (e.g., stock assessments, ecological monitoring, staffing, enforcement, etc.)…”

Twenty thousand sterling under the sea: Estimating the value of protecting deep-sea biodiversity

“…The UN Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD;1992) triggered biodiversity conservation goals globally, so that today Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) not only exist in shallower waters, but also in the deep-sea. Aspirations of some conservation groups go as far as demanding protection for at least 20-30% of each ocean habitat (Balmford et al, 2004).…”

“…Details on how new MPAs will be implemented in future, or to what extent, did not exist by the time of survey design. For the design of the choice experiment scenarios we therefore used a conservative MPA area estimate, which remained below the maximum values that conservation organisations were proposing (20-30% of each habitat; Balmford et al, 2004). Survey participants were told that deep-sea areas of 7,500 km 2 (1.5% of Scottish waters; status quo in January 2012) are currently protected.…”

Decadal trends in marine reserves reveal differential rates of change in direct and indirect effects

“…This is an important benefit of marine reserves with respect to their function as a tool for conservation and restoration. T he current global trend to increase the number of no-take marine reserves is a phenomenon with complex ecologic, scientific, and socioeconomic dimensions (1)(2)(3). Stakeholders want to know how rapidly changes will occur after protection, even if natural variability can be large and difficult to predict.…”