Global conservation outcomes depend on marine protected areas with five key features

Clicks: 255
ID: 271474
2014
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Steady

Ranked #137 of 375 articles by views in Nature

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 375 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Marine protected areas (MPAs) are an important and increasing component of marine conservation strategy, but their effectiveness is variable and debated; now a study has assembled data from a global sample of MPAs and demonstrates that effectiveness depends on five key properties: whether any fishing is allowed, enforcement levels, age, size and degree of isolation. Marine protected areas are an important and increasing component of marine conservation strategy, but their effectiveness is variable and much debated. These authors assemble data from a global sample of fished regions and 87 marine protected areas and demonstrate that the effectiveness of a protected area depends on five key properties: how much fishing is allowed, enforcement levels, how long protection has been in place, area and degree of isolation. Conservation is assured only when all five of these boxes have been ticked. In line with global targets agreed under the Convention on Biological Diversity, the number of marine protected areas (MPAs) is increasing rapidly, yet socio-economic benefits generated by MPAs remain difficult to predict and under debate1,2. MPAs often fail to reach their full potential as a consequence of factors such as illegal harvesting, regulations that legally allow detrimental harvesting, or emigration of animals outside boundaries because of continuous habitat or inadequate size of reserve3,4,5. Here we show that the conservation benefits of 87 MPAs investigated worldwide increase exponentially with the accumulation of five key features: no take, well enforced, old (>10 years), large (>100 km2), and isolated by deep water or sand. Using effective MPAs with four or five key features as an unfished standard, comparisons of underwater survey data from effective MPAs with predictions based on survey data from fished coasts indicate that total fish biomass has declined about two-thirds from historical baselines as a result of fishing. Effective MPAs also had twice as many large (>250 mm total length) fish species per transect, five times more large fish biomass, and fourteen times more shark biomass than fished areas. Most (59%) of the MPAs studied had only one or two key features and were not ecologically distinguishable from fished sites. Our results show that global conservation targets based on area alone will not optimize protection of marine biodiversity. More emphasis is needed on better MPA design, durable management and compliance to ensure that MPAs achieve their desired conservation value.
Reference Key
j.2014natureglobal1 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Edgar, Graham J.;Stuart-Smith, Rick D.;Willis, Trevor J.;Kininmonth, Stuart;Baker, Susan C.;Banks, Stuart;Barrett, Neville S.;Becerro, Mikel A.;Bernard, Anthony T. F.;Berkhout, Just;Buxton, Colin D.;Campbell, Stuart J.;Cooper, Antonia T.;Davey, Marlene;Edgar, Sophie C.;Försterra, Günter;Galván, David E.;Irigoyen, Alejo J.;Kushner, David J.;Moura, Rodrigo;Parnell, P. Ed;Shears, Nick T.;Soler, German;Strain, Elisabeth M. A.;Thomson, Russell J.;Edgar, Graham J.;Stuart-Smith, Rick D.;Willis, Trevor J.;Kininmonth, Stuart;Baker, Susan C.;Banks, Stuart;Barrett, Neville S.;Becerro, Mikel A.;Bernard, Anthony T. F.;Berkhout, Just;Buxton, Colin D.;Campbell, Stuart J.;Cooper, Antonia T.;Davey, Marlene;Edgar, Sophie C.;Försterra, Günter;Galván, David E.;Irigoyen, Alejo J.;Kushner, David J.;Moura, Rodrigo;Parnell, P. Ed;Shears, Nick T.;Soler, German;Strain, Elisabeth M. A.;Thomson, Russell J.;
Journal Nature
Year 2014
DOI
doi:10.1038/nature13022
URL
https://www.nature.com/articles/nature13022.epdf?no_publisher_access=1&r3_referer=nature
Keywords
environmental sciences macroecology conservation biology

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.