Browse
Submit Data
Databases
API
Help

Dataset Information

34 Views

0 Connections

0 Citations

0 Reanalyses

0 Downloads

Omics score: 0

Establishing marine protected areas in Sweden: Internal resistance versus global influence.

ABSTRACT: In the past decade, marine protected areas (MPAs) have become an increasingly used tool for science-based conservation and adaptive management of marine biodiversity and related natural resources. In this review paper, we report on rather complete time-course series (55 years uninterrupted) focusing on comparison of the strong difference, in number and area, in establishing marine (56 MNRs) and terrestrial (4284 TNRs) nature reserves in Sweden versus marine (7001 MPAs) and terrestrial (132742 TPAs) protected areas globally. Sweden appears to follow the overall global time trends. The large backlog of MPAs in relation to TPAs is due to several possible reasons, such as (i) unclear marine jurisdiction, (ii) marine conservation policies and programs developed later than terrestrial, (iii) higher costs for marine conservation management, (iv) conflicts in marine conservation, especially the fishery, and (v) the general public's historically weak awareness of the status of the marine environment.

SUBMITTER: Grip K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5709261 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Json Xml

Publications

Establishing marine protected areas in Sweden: Internal resistance versus global influence.

Grip Kjell K Blomqvist Sven S

Ambio 20170729 1

In the past decade, marine protected areas (MPAs) have become an increasingly used tool for science-based conservation and adaptive management of marine biodiversity and related natural resources. In this review paper, we report on rather complete time-course series (55 years uninterrupted) focusing on comparison of the strong difference, in number and area, in establishing marine (56 MNRs) and terrestrial (4284 TNRs) nature reserves in Sweden versus marine (7001 MPAs) and terrestrial (132742 TP ...[more]

PMID: 28756565

Similar Datasets

A global network of marine protected areas for food.

Project description:Marine protected areas (MPAs) are conservation tools that are increasingly implemented, with growing national commitments for MPA expansion. Perhaps the greatest challenge to expanded use of MPAs is the perceived trade-off between protection and food production. Since MPAs can benefit both conservation and fisheries in areas experiencing overfishing and since overfishing is common in many coastal nations, we ask how MPAs can be designed specifically to improve fisheries yields. We assembled distribution, life history, and fisheries exploitation data for 1,338 commercially important stocks to derive an optimized network of MPAs globally. We show that strategically expanding the existing global MPA network to protect an additional 5% of the ocean could increase future catch by at least 20% via spillover, generating 9 to 12 million metric tons more food annually than in a business-as-usual world with no additional protection. Our results demonstrate how food provisioning can be a central driver of MPA design, offering a pathway to strategically conserve ocean areas while securing seafood for the future.

| S-EPMC7668080 | biostudies-literature

Determining the feasibility of establishing new multiple-use marine protected areas in Chile.

Project description:This paper evaluates the feasibility of establishing a multiple-use marine protected area. The methodology was applied to evaluate three proposed sites in Chile with diverse conservation needs, social stress and poverty levels, and different economic activities (small-scale fishing, heavy industry, and mining activities). We use two broad categories for the evaluation: socio-economic and political-institutional. The methodology uses a combination of secondary data with personal interviews, workshops, and focus groups with stakeholders (e.g., fishermen, unions, politicians, social organizations) from different political, social, and economic backgrounds to characterize current and potential natural and social resources and to evaluate in an ordinal scale the feasibility of establishing the protected area. The methodology allows us to correctly identify the challenges faced in each site and can be used to develop appropriate strategies for balancing economic, social, and environmental objectives. This methodology can be replicated to evaluate the feasibility of other marine or terrestrial protected areas.

| S-EPMC3824878 | biostudies-literature

Marine protected areas do not buffer corals from bleaching under global warming.

Project description:BackgroundThe rising temperature of the oceans has been identified as the primary driver of mass coral reef declines via coral bleaching (expulsion of photosynthetic endosymbionts). Marine protected areas (MPAs) have been implemented throughout the oceans with the aim of mitigating the impact of local stressors, enhancing fish biomass, and sustaining biodiversity overall. In coral reef regions specifically, protection from local stressors and the enhanced ecosystem function contributed by MPAs are expected to increase coral resistance to global-scale stressors such as marine heatwaves. However, MPAs still suffer from limitations in design, or fail to be adequately enforced, potentially reducing their intended efficacy. Here, we address the hypothesis that the local-scale benefits resulting from MPAs moderate coral bleaching under global warming related stress.ResultsBayesian analyses reveal that bleaching is expected to occur in both larger and older MPAs when corals are under thermal stress from marine heatwaves (quantified as Degree Heating Weeks, DHW), but this is partially moderated in comparison to the effects of DHW alone. Further analyses failed to identify differences in bleaching prevalence in MPAs relative to non-MPAs for coral reefs experiencing different levels of thermal stress. Finally, no difference in temperatures where bleaching occurs between MPA and non-MPA sites was found.ConclusionsOur findings suggest that bleaching is likely to occur under global warming regardless of protected status. Thus, while protected areas have key roles for maintaining ecosystem function and local livelihoods, combatting the source of global warming remains the best way to prevent the decline of coral reefs via coral bleaching.

| S-EPMC9066861 | biostudies-literature

Global correlates of terrestrial and marine coverage by protected areas on islands.

Project description:Many islands are biodiversity hotspots but also extinction epicenters. In addition to strong cultural connections to nature, islanders derive a significant part of their economy and broader wellbeing from this biodiversity. Islands are thus considered as the socio-ecosystems most vulnerable to species and habitat loss. Yet, the extent and key correlates of protected area coverage on islands is still unknown. Here we assess the relative influence of climate, geography, habitat diversity, culture, resource capacity, and human footprint on terrestrial and marine protected area coverage across 2323 inhabited islands globally. We show that, on average, 22% of terrestrial and 13% of marine island areas are under protection status, but that half of all islands have no protected areas. Climate, diversity of languages, human population density and development are strongly associated with differences observed in protected area coverage among islands. Our study suggests that economic development and population growth may critically limit the amount of protection on islands.

| S-EPMC7477099 | biostudies-literature

A global analysis of the effectiveness of marine protected areas in preventing coral loss.

Project description:BACKGROUND: A variety of human activities have led to the recent global decline of reef-building corals. The ecological, social, and economic value of coral reefs has made them an international conservation priority. The success of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in restoring fish populations has led to optimism that they could also benefit corals by indirectly reducing threats like overfishing, which cause coral degradation and mortality. However, the general efficacy of MPAs in increasing coral reef resilience has never been tested. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We compiled a global database of 8534 live coral cover surveys from 1969-2006 to compare annual changes in coral cover inside 310 MPAs to unprotected areas. We found that on average, coral cover within MPAs remained constant, while coral cover on unprotected reefs declined. Although the short-term differences between unprotected and protected reefs are modest, they could be significant over the long-term if the effects are temporally consistent. Our results also suggest that older MPAs were generally more effective in preventing coral loss. Initially, coral cover continued to decrease after MPA establishment. Several years later, however, rates of coral cover decline slowed and then stabilized so that further losses stopped. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: These findings suggest that MPAs can be a useful tool not only for fisheries management, but also for maintaining coral cover. Furthermore, the benefits of MPAs appear to increase with the number of years since MPA establishment. Given the time needed to maximize MPA benefits, there should be increased emphasis on implementing new MPAs and strengthening the enforcement of existing MPAs.

| S-EPMC2822846 | biostudies-literature

The worldwide costs of marine protected areas.

Project description:Declines in marine harvests, wildlife, and habitats have prompted calls at both the 2002 World Summit on Sustainable Development and the 2003 World Parks Congress for the establishment of a global system of marine protected areas (MPAs). MPAs that restrict fishing and other human activities conserve habitats and populations and, by exporting biomass, may sustain or increase yields of nearby fisheries. Here we provide an estimate of the costs of a global MPA network, based on a survey of the running costs of 83 MPAs worldwide. Annual running costs per unit area spanned six orders of magnitude, and were higher in MPAs that were smaller, closer to coasts, and in high-cost, developed countries. Models extrapolating these findings suggest that a global MPA network meeting the World Parks Congress target of conserving 20-30% of the world's seas might cost between 5 billion and 19 billion US dollars annually to run and would probably create around one million jobs. Although substantial, gross network costs are less than current government expenditures on harmful subsidies to industrial fisheries. They also ignore potential private gains from improved fisheries and tourism and are dwarfed by likely social gains from increasing the sustainability of fisheries and securing vital ecosystem services.

| S-EPMC470737 | biostudies-literature

Global marine protected areas do not secure the evolutionary history of tropical corals and fishes.

Project description:Although coral reefs support the largest concentrations of marine biodiversity worldwide, the extent to which the global system of marine-protected areas (MPAs) represents individual species and the breadth of evolutionary history across the Tree of Life has never been quantified. Here we show that only 5.7% of scleractinian coral species and 21.7% of labrid fish species reach the minimum protection target of 10% of their geographic ranges within MPAs. We also estimate that the current global MPA system secures only 1.7% of the Tree of Life for corals, and 17.6% for fishes. Regionally, the Atlantic and Eastern Pacific show the greatest deficit of protection for corals while for fishes this deficit is located primarily in the Western Indian Ocean and in the Central Pacific. Our results call for a global coordinated expansion of current conservation efforts to fully secure the Tree of Life on coral reefs.

| S-EPMC4729959 | biostudies-literature

Addressing Criticisms of Large-Scale Marine Protected Areas.

Project description:Designated large-scale marine protected areas (LSMPAs, 100,000 or more square kilometers) constitute over two-thirds of the approximately 6.6% of the ocean and approximately 14.5% of the exclusive economic zones within marine protected areas. Although LSMPAs have received support among scientists and conservation bodies for wilderness protection, regional ecological connectivity, and improving resilience to climate change, there are also concerns. We identified 10 common criticisms of LSMPAs along three themes: (1) placement, governance, and management; (2) political expediency; and (3) social-ecological value and cost. Through critical evaluation of scientific evidence, we discuss the value, achievements, challenges, and potential of LSMPAs in these arenas. We conclude that although some criticisms are valid and need addressing, none pertain exclusively to LSMPAs, and many involve challenges ubiquitous in management. We argue that LSMPAs are an important component of a diversified management portfolio that tempers potential losses, hedges against uncertainty, and enhances the probability of achieving sustainably managed oceans.

| S-EPMC5925769 | biostudies-literature

Assessing trade-offs in large marine protected areas.

Project description:Large marine protected areas (LMPAs) are increasingly being established and have a high profile in marine conservation. LMPAs are expected to achieve multiple objectives, and because of their size are postulated to avoid trade-offs that are common in smaller MPAs. However, evaluations across multiple outcomes are lacking. We used a systematic approach to code several social and ecological outcomes of 12 LMPAs. We found evidence of three types of trade-offs: trade-offs between different ecological resources (supply trade-offs); trade-offs between ecological resource conditions and the well-being of resource users (supply-demand trade-offs); and trade-offs between the well-being outcomes of different resource users (demand trade-offs). We also found several divergent outcomes that were attributed to influences beyond the scope of the LMPA. We suggest that despite their size, trade-offs can develop in LMPAs and should be considered in planning and design. LMPAs may improve their performance across multiple social and ecological objectives if integrated with larger-scale conservation efforts.

| S-EPMC5905982 | biostudies-literature

Placing marine protected areas onto the ecosystem-based management seascape.

Project description:The rapid increase in the science and implementation of marine protected areas (MPAs) around the world in the past 15 years is now being followed by similar increases in the science and application of marine ecosystem-based management (EBM). Despite important overlaps and some common goals, these two approaches have remained either separated in the literature and in conservation and management efforts or treated as if they are one and the same. In the cases when connections are acknowledged, there is often little assessment of if or how well MPAs can achieve specific EBM goals. Here we start by critically evaluating commonalities and differences between MPAs and EBM. Next, we use global analyses to show where and how much no-take marine reserves can be expected to contribute to EBM goals, specifically by reducing the cumulative impacts of stressors on ocean ecosystems. These analyses revealed large stretches of coastal oceans where reserves can play a major role in reducing cumulative impacts and thus improving overall ocean condition, at the same time highlighting the limitations of marine reserves as a single tool to achieve comprehensive EBM. Ultimately, better synergies between these two burgeoning approaches provide opportunities to greatly benefit ocean health.

| S-EPMC2972932 | biostudies-other

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

OmicsDI is an Elixir interoperability service. Learn more ›

Tweets

OmicsDI Databases

PRIDE
PeptideAtlas
MassIVE
JPOST Repository
Physiome Model Repository

EGA
EVA
ENA
LINCS
PAXDB
Cell Collective

MetaboLights
Metabolomics Workbench
MetabolomeExpress
GNPS
BioModels
FAIRDOMHub

ArrayExpress
dbGaP
ExpressionAtlas
GEO
NODE

Information

Databases
Help
API
Contact us
Code on GitHub
Terms of use
Submit Data