Browsing by Author "Claudet, Joachim"
Now showing 1 - 10 of 10
Results Per Page
Sort Options
- Assessments of expected MPA outcomes can inform and improve biodiversity conservation: Case studies using The MPA GuidePublication . Sullivan-Stack, Jenna; Ahmadia, Gabby N.; Andradi-Brown, Dominic A; Barron, Alexandra; Brooks, Cassandra M.; Claudet, Joachim; Horta e Costa, Barbara; Estradivari, null; Field, Laurel C.; Giakoumi, Sylvaine; Gonçalves, Emanuel; Groulx, Natalie; Harris, Jean; Jessen, Sabine; Johnson, Steven Mana'oakamai; MacCarthy, Jessica; Maricato, Guilherme; Morgan, Lance; Nalven, Katharine Bear; Nocito, Emily S.; Pike, Elizabeth P; Sala, Enric; Tardin, Rodrigo; Villagomez, Angelo; Wright, Kendyl; Grorud-Colvert, KirstenGlobal, regional, and national targets have been set to protect and conserve at least 30 % of the ocean by 2030, in recognition of the important benefits of healthy ocean ecosystems, including for human well-being. Many of these targets recognize the importance of the quality, not just quantity, of areas that are included in the 30 %, such as marine protected areas (MPAs). For example, the Convention on Biological Diversity’s Global Biodiversity Framework Target 3 calls for areas to be effectively conserved and managed, ecologically representative, well-connected, and equitably governed. Protecting a percent area is not the sole goal – protection must be effective and equitable. To better understand the quality of biodiversity conservation afforded, in addition to the quantity of area protected, we looked at MPAs across 13 studies that used The MPA Guide and related tools to track Stage of Establishment and Level of Protection as measures of expected biodiversity conservation outcomes across diverse locations, scales, and cultural, political, and conservation contexts. We show that standardized assessments of MPA quality can help to (1) evaluate and improve existing MPAs; (2) plan new MPAs; (3) compare the quality of MPA protection across various scales; (4) track MPA quality, including progress towards coverage targets; (5) enable clear communication and collaboration, and (6) inform actions needed to achieve policy targets and their underlying environmental and social goals, among others. We share common opportunities, challenges, and recommendations for tracking MPA quality at various scales, and using these quality assessments to measure progress towards global targets.
- Marine partially protected areas: drivers of ecological effectivenessPublication . Zupan, Mirta; Fragkopoulou, Eliza; Claudet, Joachim; Erzini, Karim; Costa, Bárbara Horta e; Gonçalves, Emanuel João
- Marine protected areas stage of establishment and level of protection are good predictors of their conservation outcomesPublication . Horta e Costa, Barbara; Benito-Abelló, Carmela de; Pike, Elizabeth; Turnbull, John; MacCarthy, Jessica; Harasta, Nikki; Fragkopoulou, Eliza; Roessger, Julia; Sullivan-Stack, Jenna; Grorud-Colvert, Kirsten; Gill, David; Morgan, Lance; Gonçalves, Emanuel J.; Zupan, Mirta; Gonçalves, Jorge M.S.; Claudet, JoachimDespite the importance of active management and strong protection in driving marine protected areas (MPA) performance, coverage area remains the sole indicator for global targets. To assess whether conservation quality lags behind quantity, we conducted a global meta-analysis of 123 MPAs. We show that MPAs’ Levels of Protection and Stages of Establishment are reliable proxies for MPAs’ ecological outcomes; hence, they are good candidates for tracking MPA quality. Actively managed MPAs have significantly higher fish density and biomass than non-protected surrounding areas, while MPAs that are only implemented do not. The effectiveness of actively managed MPAs can be maximized if they are fully or highly protected. Lightly and minimally protected areas that are only implemented can deliver negative outcomes. Our findings highlight the important interplay between stages and levels as developed in the MPA Guide and support the need to include both in conservation targets to track not only MPA quantity but also quality.
- Ocean protection quality is lagging behind quantity: Applying a scientific framework to assess real marine protected area progress against the 30 by 30 targetPublication . Pike, Elizabeth P; MacCarthy, Jessica; Hameed, Sarah; Harasta, Nikki; Grorud-Colvert, Kirsten; Sullivan-Stack, Jenna; Claudet, Joachim; Horta e Costa, Barbara; Gonçalves, Emanuel J.; Villagomez, Angelo; Morgan, LanceThe international community set a global conservation target to protect at least 30% of the ocean by 2030 (“30 × 30”) to reverse biodiversity loss, including through marine protected areas (MPAs). However, varied MPAs result in significantly different conservation outcomes, making MPA coverage alone an inadequate metric.We used TheMPA Guide framework to assess the the world’s largest 100 MPAs by area, representing nearly 90% of reported global MPA coverage and 7.3% of the global ocean area, and analyzed the distribution of MPA quality across political and ecological regions. A quarter of the assessed MPA coverage is not implemented, and one-third is incompatible with the conservation of nature. Two factors contribute to this outcome: (1) many reported MPAs lack regulations or management, and (2) some MPAs allow high-impact activities. Fully and highly protected MPAs account for one-third of the assessed area but are unevenly distributed across ecoregions in part because some nations have designated large, highly protected MPAs in their overseas or remote territories. Indicators of MPA quality, not only coverage, are needed to ensure a global network of MPAs that covers at least 30% of the ocean and effectively safeguards representative marine ecosystems from destructive human activities.
- Ocean protection quality is lagging behind quantity: Applying a scientific framework to assess real marine protected area progress against the 30 by 30 targetPublication . Pike, Elizabeth P; MacCarthy, Jessica M. C.; Hameed, Sarah; Harasta, Nikki; Grorud-Colvert, Kirsten; Sullivan-Stack, Jenna; Claudet, Joachim; Horta e Costa, Barbara; Gonçalves, E.J.; Villagomez, Angelo; Morgan, LanceThe international community set a global conservation target to protect at least30% of the ocean by 2030 (“30 × 30”) to reverse biodiversity loss, includingthrough marine protected areas (MPAs). However, varied MPAs result in sig-nificantly different conservation outcomes, making MPA coverage alone aninadequate metric. We used The MPA Guide framework to assess the the world’slargest 100 MPAs by area, representing nearly 90% of reported global MPA cov-erage and 7.3% of the global ocean area, and analyzed the distribution of MPAquality across political and ecological regions. A quarter of the assessed MPAcoverage is not implemented, and one-third is incompatible with the conserva-tion of nature. Two factors contribute to this outcome: (1) many reported MPAslack regulations or management, and (2) some MPAs allow high-impact activi-ties. Fully and highly protected MPAs account for one-third of the assessed areabut are unevenly distributed across ecoregions in part because some nations havedesignated large, highly protected MPAs in their overseas or remote territories.Indicators of MPA quality, not only coverage, are needed to ensure a global net-work of MPAs that covers at least 30% of the ocean and effectively safeguardsrepresentative marine ecosystems from destructive human activities
- Ocean protection quality is lagging behind quantity: Applying a scientific framework to assess real marine protected area progress against the 30 by 30 targetPublication . Pike, Elizabeth P; MacCarthy, Jessica; Hameed, Sarah; Harasta, Nikki; Grorud‐Colvert, Kirsten; Sullivan‐Stack, Jenna; Claudet, Joachim; Horta e Costa, Barbara; Gonçalves, Emanuel J.; Villagomez, Angelo; Morgan, LanceThe international community set a global conservation target to protect at least 30% of the ocean by 2030 (“30 × 30”) to reverse biodiversity loss, including through marine protected areas (MPAs). However, varied MPAs result in significantly different conservation outcomes, making MPA coverage alone an inadequate metric.We used TheMPA Guide framework to assess the the world’s largest 100 MPAs by area, representing nearly 90% of reported global MPA coverage and 7.3% of the global ocean area, and analyzed the distribution of MPA quality across political and ecological regions. A quarter of the assessed MPA coverage is not implemented, and one-third is incompatible with the conservation of nature. Two factors contribute to this outcome: (1) many reported MPAs lack regulations or management, and (2) some MPAs allow high-impact activities. Fully and highly protected MPAs account for one-third of the assessed area but are unevenly distributed across ecoregions in part because some nations have designated large, highly protected MPAs in their overseas or remote territories. Indicators of MPA quality, not only coverage, are needed to ensure a global network of MPAs that covers at least 30% of the ocean and effectively safeguards representative marine ecosystems from destructive human activities.
- A regulation-based classification system for marine protected areas (MPAs)Publication . Costa, Bárbara Horta e; Claudet, Joachim; Franco, Gustavo; Erzini, Karim; Caro, Anthony; Gonçalves, Emanuel JoãoMarine protected areas (MPAs) are a global conservation and management tool to enhance the resilience of linked social-ecological systems with the aim of conserving biodiversity and providing ecosystem services for sustainable use. However, MPAs implemented worldwide include a large variety of zoning and management schemes from single to multiple-zoning and from no-take to multiple-use areas. The current IUCN categorisation of MPAs is based on management objectives which many times have a significant mismatch to regulations causing a strong uncertainty when evaluating global MPAs effectiveness. A novel global classification system for MPAs based on regulations of uses as an alternative or complementing, the current IUCN system of categories is presented. Scores for uses weighted by their potential impact on biodiversity were built. Each zone within a MPA was scored and an MPA index integrates the zone scores. This system classifies MPAs as well as each MPA zone individually, is globally applicable and unambiguously discriminates the impacts of uses.
- A regulation-based classification system for marine protected areas: A response to Dudley et al. [9]Publication . Costa, Bárbara Horta e; Claudet, Joachim; Franco, Gustavo; Erzini, Karim; Caro, Anthony; Gonçalves, Emanuel JoãoDudley et al. [9] commented on our paper [11], arguing that the current IUCN objective-based categorization of protected areas, which is also used in marine protected areas (MPAs), should not be abandoned and replaced by the new regulation-based classification system [11]. Here we clarify that we do not advocate replacing the current IUCN categories, but highlight the benefits of using both the objective-based IUCN categories and the new regulation-based classification when applied to MPAs. With an increasing number of MPA types being implemented, most of them multiple-use areas zoned for various purposes, assessing ecological and socioeconomic benefits is key for advancing conservation targets and policy objectives. Although the IUCN categories can be used both in terrestrial and marine systems, they were not designed to follow a gradient of impacts and there is often a mismatch between stated objectives and implemented regulations. The new regulation-based classification system addresses these problems by linking impacts of activities in marine systems with MPA and zone classes in a simple and globally applicable way. Applying both the IUCN categories and the regulationbased classes will increase transparency when assessing marine conservation goals.
- Soft-bottom fishes and spatial protection: findings from a temperate marine protected areaPublication . Sousa, Inês; Gonçalves, Jorge M. S.; Claudet, Joachim; Coelho, Rui; Gonçalves, Emanuel João; Erzini, KarimNumerous studies over the last decades have focused on marine protected areas (MPAs) and their effects on fish communities. However, there is a knowledge gap regarding how species that live associated with soft-substrates (e.g., sand, mud) respond to spatial protection. We analyzed abundance, biomass and total lengths of the soft-bottom fishes in a multiple-use MPA in the north-eastern Atlantic, the Luiz Saldanha Marine Park (Portugal), during and after the implementation of its management plan. Data were collected by experimental fishing in areas with three different levels of protection, during the implementation period and for three years after full implementation of the MPA. Univariate analysis detected significant biomass increases between the two periods. Fish assemblages were mainly structured by depth and substrate, followed by protection level. Community composition analyses revealed significant differences between protection levels and between the two periods. Species exhibited a broad variation in their response to protection, and we hypothesize that factors such as species habitat preferences, body size and late maturity might be underlying determinants. Overall, this study provides some evidence of protection effectiveness in soft-bottom fish communities, supported by the significant increase in biomass in the protected areas and the positive trends of some species.
- The science of european marine reserves: Status, efficacy, and future needsPublication . Fenberg, Phillip B.; Caselle, Jennifer E.; Claudet, Joachim; Clemence, Michaela; Gaines, Steven D.; García-Charton, Jose Antonio; Gonçalves, Emanuel João; Grorud-Colvert, Kirsten; Guidetti, Paolo; Jenkins, Stuart R.; Jones, Peter J. S.; Lester, Sarah E; McAllen, Rob; Moland, Even; Planes, Serge; Sorensen, Thomas K.The ecologically and socio-economically important marine ecosystems of Europe are facing severe threats from a variety of human impacts. To mitigate and potentially reverse some of these impacts, the European Union (EU) has mandated the implementation of the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) in order to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) in EU waters by 2020. The primary initiative for achieving GES is the implementation of coherent networks of marine protected areas (MPAs). Marine reserves are an important type of MPA in which no extraction is allowed, but their usefulness depends upon a number of ecological, management, and political factors. This paper provides a synthesis of the ecological effects of existing European marine reserves and the factors (social and ecological) underlying their effectiveness. Results show that existing European marine reserves foster significant positive increases in key biological variables (density, biomass, body size, and species richness) compared with areas receiving less protection, a pattern mirrored by marine reserves around the globe. For marine reserves to achieve their ecological and social goals, however, they must be designed, managed, and enforced properly. In addition, identifying whether protected areas are ecologically connected as a network, as well as where new MPAs should be established according to the MSFD, requires information on the connectivity of populations across large areas. The adoption of the MSFD demonstrates willingness to achieve the long-term protection of Europe’s marine ecosystems, but whether the political will (local, regional, and continent wide) is strong enough to see its mandates through remains to be seen. Although the MSFD does not explicitly require marine reserves, an important step towards the protection of Europe’s marine ecosystems is the establishment of marine reserves within wider-use MPAs as connected networks across large spatial scales.