Search

Ocean plastic is a contemporary focal point of concern for the marine environment. However, we argue there are bigger issues to address, including climate change and overfishing. Plastic has become a focus in the media and public domains partly through the draw of simple lifestyle changes, such as reusable water bottles, and partly through the potential to provide ‘quick fix’ technological solutions to plastic pollution, such as large scale marine clean-up operations and new ‘biodegradable’ plastic substitutes. As such, ocean plastic can provide a convenient truth that distracts us from the need for more radical changes to our behavioural, political and economic systems, addressing which will help address larger marine environmental issues, as well as the cause of plastic pollution, i.e. over-consumption.

Biodiversity offsetting with associated aims of no net loss of biodiversity (NNL) is an approach used to align economic development with conservation. Biodiversity offsetting may be more challenging in marine environments, with recent evidence suggesting that the current application of the approach in Australian marine environments rarely follows ‘best practice’ and is unlikely to be meeting stated policy aims. To understand how and why this deviation from best practice is taking place in marine systems, we analysed current practice in Australia through in-depth semi-structured interviews with 31 participants with professional experience in the development and implementation of associated policy. Thematic analysis of results indicated that, despite commitment to best practice in principle, practitioners recognised that operationalisation of marine biodiversity offsetting was inconsistent and unlikely to be meeting stated goals such as NNL. Participants described the central barrier to the adoption of best practice as the technical complexity of assessing and quantifying biodiversity losses and gains, and uncertainty in restoration in marine contexts. With offsetting described as an integral part of development consent for marine economic development, both these barriers and their navigation presents threats to users setting off a chain of accepted activity leading away from best practice. These threats were perceived to arise from low governmental capacity or prioritisation for environmental management, institutional needs for a social licence to operate, and overarching demands for economic growth. We conclude that marine biodiversity offsetting has come to be ambiguous in its practical definition, with a range of conflicting factors influencing its use and preventing the standardisation required to meet rigorous interpretations of best practice necessary to ensure biodiversity protection and NNL. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

Healthy marine ecosystems provide a wide range of resources and services that support life on Earth and contribute to human wellbeing. Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are accepted as an important tool for the restoration and maintenance of marine ecosystem structure, function, health and ecosystem integrity through the conservation of significant species, habitats, or entire ecosystems. In recent years there has been a rapid expansion in the area of ocean designated as an MPA. Despite this progress in spatial protection targets and the progressive knowledge of the essential interdependence between the human and the ocean system, marine biodiversity continues to decline, placing in jeopardy the range of ecosystem services benefits humans rely on. There is a need to address this shortcoming. Ambitious marine conservation: • Requires a shift from managing individual marine features within MPAs to whole-sites to enable repair and renewal of marine systems; • Reflects an ambition for sustainable livelihoods by fully integrating fisheries management with conservation (Ecosystem Based Fisheries Management) as the two are critically interdependent; • Establishes a world class and cost effective ecological and socio-economic monitoring and evaluation framework that includes the use of controls and sentinel sites to improve sustainability in marine management; and • Challenges policy makers and practitioners to be progressive by integrating MPAs into the wider seascape as critical functional components rather than a competing interest and move beyond MPAs as the only tool to underpin the benefits derived from marine ecosystems by identifying other effective area-based conservation measures (OECMs) to establish synergies with wider governance frameworks.

Biodiversity offsetting is used in diverse policy contexts to reduce, halt or reverse losses of biodiversity arising from development or other uses of the natural environment. Despite increasing interest in the concept of biodiversity offsetting, relatively little attention has been devoted to investigating its use in marine environments. This paper presents a systematic review of documents evidencing the application or inclusion of biodiversity offset principles in policy frameworks concerning the marine environment, and in marine development projects. Biodiversity offsetting policies applicable to marine environments were found to exist in six countries (US, Canada, Australia, France, Germany, Colombia) and have been actively considered in at least 27 others. Outside of these, a wide range of other approaches promoting uptake of biodiversity offsetting principles in a marine context were identified. These range from preliminary studies to identify potential compensatory habitat, to nascent biodiversity markets, and project-level application of corporate standards of no net loss. Evidence suggests that where offsetting policy is developed for specific marine application, the preferred approach is to pool financial contributions from developers into funds for strategic action for biodiversity benefit. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

1. Current international agreements call for protecting 10% of marine and coastal waters by 2020, with the intention of increasing that target to 30% by 2030. With 24% of its territorial waters protected, the UK falls short of the new expected target. 2. As well as quantitative targets, qualitative criteria have been internationally agreed for protected area designation, including minimum coverage values and characteristics that encompass effectively and equitably managed, ecologically representative and well‐connected systems of protected areas and other effective area‐based conservation measures, and integrated into the wider landscape and seascape. 3. The legal framework supporting protected area designations at sea is summarized and explained for UK territorial waters. Efforts to date to achieve current marine protected area (MPA) targets are reviewed, with emphasis on how well the existing protected area portfolio captures the qualitative criteria. Examples are given of other effective conservation measures complementary to formalized MPAs, especially with regard to achieving and promoting qualitative criteria for biodiversity conservation, including appropriate recognition of and support for areas conserved by indigenous people, local communities and private entities. 4. A precis on the governance of MPAs and other effective conservation measures in the UK and its overseas territories is presented. Whilst the UK has made exceptional progress with quantitative MPA coverage, it is still not clear whether designated areas offer effective protection. A UK‐level strategy is in place to address this; and at site level, Lyme Bay MPA illustrates the benefits of addressing qualitative criteria. Illustrated by the UK example, an urgent call is made for ongoing and future marine in situ area‐based conservation efforts to substantiate quantitative and qualitative considerations, and to ensure that MPA networks are ultimately fit for purpose.

We agree with Avery-Gomm et al. that we should not separate out environmental issues. We also agree with them over the relative threat of plastic to our oceans. However, recent evidence on the ‘spillover effect’ of pro-environmental behaviours and on public attitudes to threats to areas such as the Great Barrier Reef suggest common consumerist and political approaches to tackle plastic pollution can cause a distraction from issues caused by climate change and biodiversity loss. We reiterate that we need political changes to address overconsumption in order to make real progress on all environmental issues.

The governance frameworks for Ningaloo Marine Park (NMP) and Shark Bay Marine Park (SBMP) are explored, employing the MPA governance analysis framework. Both face similar conflicts typical of ecotourism, particularly related to the impacts of recreational fishing and marine wildlife tourism. A high diversity of incentives is found to be used, the combination of which promotes effectiveness in achieving conservation objectives and equity in governance. Highly evolved regulations have provided for depleted spangled emperor (Lethrinus nebulosus) stocks in NMP to stabilise and begin recovery, and pink snapper (Pagrus auratus) stocks in SBMP to recover from past depletions, though there are still concerns about recreational fishing impacts. The governance frameworks for marine wildlife tourism are considered extremely good practice. Some incentives need strengthening in both cases, particularly capacity for enforcement, penalties for deterrence and cross-jurisdictional coordination. In NMP there was also a need to promote transparency in making research and monitoring results available, and to address tensions with the recreational fishing sector by building linkages to provide for their specific representation, as part of a strategy to build trust and cooperation with this sector. Both case studies represent world-leading good practice in addressing proximal impacts from local activities, but in the longer-term the foundation species of both marine parks are critically threatened by the distal impacts of climate change. A diversity of incentives has promoted resilience in the short-term, but global action to mitigate climate change is the only way to promote the long-term resilience of these iconic marine ecosystems.

This paper analyses the governance of MPAs through 28 case studies in 15 countries. Limitations of the polycentric governance concept are discussed, particularly its faith in linkages as a means of resolving conflicts and its assumption that the state should only take a passive role. The concept of coevolutionary governance is described and justified, noting that this essentially builds on polycentrism’s systematic case study analysis approach, but evolves it to move beyond its limitations. Coevolutionary governance takes a synecology perspective to analyse how incentives coevolve through their functional integration, as well as how social and ecological systems can coevolve through the feedback mechanisms of human impacts and ecological services. Drawing on the wider concept of multi-level governance, coevolutionary governance is considered to provide for synergies between governance approaches, proposing that coordination can be achieved and conflicts addressed through reconfigured roles of the state providing steer through governance in ‘the shadow of hierarchy’. The MPAG empirical framework is described and the findings of its application outlined. Drawing on these findings, some key trends within and amongst five categories of incentives are explored. These illustrate that incentives synergistically interact in a way that is analogous to synecology, providing for them to be functionally integrated as a means of combining governance approaches. As such, it is argued that these findings support the validity of the coevolutionary governance concept, as well as supporting the argument that “diversity is the key to resilience, both of species in ecosystems and incentives in governance systems”.

Isla Lobos de Tierra and Isla Lobos de Afuera are two MPAs that show the importance of history in governance. In 2009 they were designated among the Guano Islands, Islets and Capes Reserve System for wildlife conservation and sustainability, after being protected for hundreds of years to manage guano. Since their designation, governance changed on paper, but not de facto. The major driver undermining conservation is fishing, which is enhanced by pressures of the global seafood market and informality (the predominant way of thinking and acting in Peru, transgressive of order and disrespectful of values, norms and institutions). Fish productivity in the Humboldt Current Large Marine Ecosystem is the source of wildlife bounty around these small islands. Few incentives have been initiated to protect it and none looks at directly regulating fisheries. An obstacle is that the Parks Service has no authority to manage marine species. Management effectiveness requires improving cross-jurisdictional coordination with the Vice-Ministry of Fisheries, the Maritime Authority and other relevant entities to develop an integral plan where they all convene on working towards conserving these MPAs. Success will rely on an improved and diligent state participation that deeply understands the social complexities of these environments in order to address informality and potential equity issues. Despite the minimal intervention, the land ecosystem and its species remain relatively protected due to a governance legacy of strict enforcement and fraternal relationships between guardians and artisanal fishers, which highlights the importance of recognising history in conservation.

Nha Trang Bay and Cu Lao Cham Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) were established as the first two MPAs in Vietnam to protect the most diverse coral reefs against the impacts of unsustainable resource use. Emerging in a context of increasing decentralisation, the two MPAs have strongly relied on economic incentives, notably funding from donors and NGOs, to encourage behaviour changes towards achieving conservation objectives. Since donor funding ended, economic incentives used in governing the two MPAs have shifted the focus to income generated from MPA user fees. Consequently, the increasing influence of market forces, through mass tourism and incoming fishing pressures, has led to vested interests between provincial/city governments with tourism operators/developers and between local and non-local fishers. This paper stresses that without interventions from the central government or even international actors, the current MPA governance framework and incentives are insufficient to address the growing conflicts between biodiversity conservation and economic development. To improve MPA governance, strengthening legal incentives and stimulating political will from the central government are of the utmost importance. Also, given that social inequity issues are undermining local acceptance and support for MPAs, it is essential to empower local communities in decision-making over their resources by using property rights and promoting small-scale community-based development, while ensuring that such rights and development adhere to MPA conservation objectives. Moreover, tourism operators/developers need to be involved in governing MPAs in such a way that could contribute towards sustainable resource use and social equity for local communities.

This paper employs the Marine Protected Area Governance (MPAG) analysis framework to explore the effectiveness of governance of Soufriere Marine Management Area (SMMA), Saint Lucia in fulfilling its objectives. The SMMA has been established for 22 years and although initially heralded as a success at resolving user conflicts and conserving biodiversity, drivers and conflicts in the area have since changed, and there are concerns that the self-sufficient SMMA has not adapted to these changes. Contemporary driving forces include a growing tourism industry and climate change. The SMMA is struggling to tackle these issues due to poor law enforcement, a weak legal system and a lack of political will. Although the SMMA on paper adopts a co-management governance approach, results from the analysis suggest the government remains highly influential. Financial constraint is also a huge challenge for the SMMA and, unable to provide benefits to the community, socioeconomic objectives are being undermined. The future focus should be on improving the financial situation by raising funds through ensuring all user fees are being collected. An equal ratio of government members to non-government stakeholders on the Board would help to re-engage the co-management approach, aiding the SMMA in again achieving its conservation objectives.

The Marine Protected Area Governance (MPAG) framework is applied to critically assess the governance of the Sainte Luce Locally Managed Marine Area (LMMA), southeast Madagascar. Madagascar experiences rapid population growth, widespread poverty, corruption and political instability, which hinders natural resource governance. Community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) has been repeatedly employed to circumvent the lack of state capacity. This includes the LMMA model, which has rapidly proliferated, represented by MIHARI, Madagascar's LMMA network. The lobster fishing is the primary source of income for households in the impoverished community of Sainte Luce, one of the key landing sites in the regional export industry. However, fishers, industry actors and available data suggest a significant decline of local and regional stocks, likely due to over-exploitation driven by poverty and migration. In 2013, SEED Madagascar a UK NGO, worked to establish community-based fishery management in Sainte Luce, setting up a local management committee, which introduced a periodic no take zone (NTZ). Despite the community's efforts and some significant achievements, the efficacy of management is limited. To date, limited state support and the lack of engagement by actors throughout the value chain have hampered effective governance. The study reinforces the finding that resilient governance relies on a diversity of actors and the incentives they collectively employ. Here and elsewhere, there is a limit to what can be achieved by bottom-up approaches in isolation. Resilient management of marine resources in Madagascar relies on improving the capacity of community, state, NGO and industry actors to collectively govern resources.

The ongoing negotiations towards a new implementing agreement to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) regarding conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (henceforth, ‘BBNJ Agreement’) present a unique opportunity to begin a new chapter in ocean governance. This paper draws on expert interviews to consider how such an agreement could establish a strengthened governance framework for areas beyond national jurisdiction (ABNJ) and the potential implications for the governance and effectiveness of high seas marine protected areas (MPAs) designated thereunder. The results support calls for a BBNJ Agreement to establish a global body, with a mandate and mechanism for MPA establishment and oversight of the currently fragmented ocean governance landscape, but within a model that also incorporates bottom-up approaches including a degree of decentralisation to regional organisations and engagement with coastal communities, with conditions attached. In applying the guidance of the MPA Governance (MPAG) framework, this paper concludes that enshrining a global model along these lines would provide a strengthened basis for effective, resilient MPAs in ABNJ by adding and strengthening governance incentives across five key incentive categories. The paper concludes by looking to the final round of negotiations, where states must take ambitious stances in addressing remaining weaknesses in the draft Agreement to ensure the potential for an improved ocean governance framework is delivered upon.

The Marine Protected Area Governance (MPAG) framework can be used to analyse MPA governance by moving away from conceptual discussions to focus on particular governance approaches leading to effectiveness. The framework was applied to the Lyme Bay MPA, southwest England, the site of a controversial fisheries closure, which has subsequently been proposed as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC), as well the location for an NGO-led project focusing on stakeholder engagement. This paper examines a broad range of perspectives on the governance of this MPA, via semi-structured interviews with representatives of different interest groups and document analyses. The MPAG framework found a governance structure with a diversity of incentives, providing for bottom-up stakeholder engagement and awareness-raising coupled with strong top-down legislative structures. Although the fisheries closure and subsequent SAC restrictions have provided the main mechanisms for protecting biodiversity, an NGO-led project has provided a complement to the legislative framework and helped to facilitate a mechanism for adaptive co-management. However, the site is predicted to be subject to external pressures from changes in legislation, state resource restrictions and reduced NGO involvement, which will test the resilience of the structure and whether such a diversity of incentives provides sufficient resilience to maintain MPA effectiveness in the face of these pressures.

The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certification is the market-leading seafood eco-label, including in deep-sea fisheries, about which there are growing concerns around sustainability. Greenland is economically dependent on deep-sea fisheries, including for Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides). The offshore halibut fishery, which employs demersal trawls (800–1,400 m), obtained MSC certification in 2017. This provides an opportunity to critically assess the governance of deep-sea resources, with reference to the MSC certification. The Marine Protected Area Governance (MPAG) framework, originally designed to analyse MPAs and adapted for this study, finds an effective system of state-led governance, supported by scientific, certification and industry actors. Arising from its socio-economic importance, the industry's considerable influence is used to align management with the MSC certification. Outcomes directly attributable to engagement with the MSC certification include the introduction of a management plan and new benthic research programmes. However, questions are raised about the certification, providing case study examples of existing criticisms. Assessments are weak with respect to benthic habitats and over-reliant on the definitive, expert judgement of Conformity Assessment Bodies (CABs), whose independence is questioned. Separate MSC assessments of Greenlandic and German vessels in the fleet provided an opportunity to consider the consistency and robustness of the process, which raised serious concerns. Two different CABs found the benthic impact of vessels using the same gear in the same area to be sustainable, by employing fundamentally different and conflicting logic. This represents a serious failing of certification process, undermining the assurance it is intended to provide.

This paper examines the governance of Con Dao National Park (CDNP), through applying the marine protected area governance (MPAG) analysis framework. CDNP was one of the first protected areas in Vietnam for which biodiversity conservation was recognised as being of international importance. It is emerging in a context of increasing economic liberalisation and delegation of decision-making power to province/district-level governments, yet under the tight control of Vietnam's Communist Party. Accordingly, the governance approach that CDNP has adopted is state-led with increasing decentralisation of responsibilities to local governments, with a focus on terrestrial protected area components. Like other protected areas in Vietnam, the governance of CDNP, especially of conservation activities, has significantly benefited from international donor and NGO funding, along with technical support. Key challenges in governing CDNP include a lack of capacity for enforcement under an unclear legal framework, lack of transparency, accountability and fairness, limited coordination among local government agencies, limited community participation, harmful linkages between certain user groups and local authorities, a lack of conditions attached to property/use rights, and weak leadership. With remarkable achievements in socio-economic development over the past three decades, Vietnam arguably has sufficient capacity to adopt more effective and realistic solutions to address such challenges. However, as many of the potential solutions are contradictory to Vietnam's political direction, improving MPA governance will significantly depend on whether the Communist Party's leaders have sufficient political will to put forth conservation initiatives.

The aim of this paper is to explore the governance effectiveness of St Anne Marine National Park, Seychelles. By collecting qualitative data through interviews and ethnographic observations from different constituencies in May and June 2018, the Marine Protected Area Governance (MPAG) analysis framework was applied. This case study revealed that the site is governed by a parastatal organisation (SNPA) and its Board through a largely ineffective top-down, government-led approach. The primary threats to the success of the park that fall within the purview of MPA (marine protected area) governance, are poaching, coastal development and unsustainable tourism, with a clear lack of state capacity, political will and capacity for enforcement as the key drivers undermining equitable and effective governance. Additionally, the study revealed a lack of community involvement in decision-making processes, resulting in a lack of sufficient participation and knowledge incentives, which reflects the need for the inclusion of more bottom-up governance approaches. This study contributes to the broader conceptual framework by supporting the understanding that a combination of governance approaches are needed to achieve MPA objectives and resilience. The governance structure coupled with the identified conflicts and many additional driving forces and constraints discussed throughout, are obstructing the achievement of strategic MPA objectives and severely undermining effectiveness. Suggestions for improvement are therefore explored as significant governance modifications are clearly needed. Since the completion of this research, significant advances have been made to the governance of SAMNP and where relevant these have been noted briefly throughout the paper.

This viewpoint article argues that relatively recent increases in the designation of remote, very large marine protected areas (VLMPAs) around the world threaten to undermine the very purpose and objectives of the Aichi biodiversity targets they are aiming to address. Questions are raised about the effectiveness, representativeness, and potential for connectivity of these remote VLMPAs as well as whether they are equitably managed. In addition, it is argued that the push for such designations in countries’ overseas territories deflects attention and effort from the challenge of designating and effectively managing MPAs closer to home. In the run-up to the 2016 IUCN World Conservation Congress and Conference of Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), it is important for countries to recognize that remote VLMPAs are but one type of MPA, requiring significant investment in monitoring and enforcement in order to effectively achieve conservation objectives, and that achieving the Aichi MPA coverage target largely through such designations will undermine the aims of this target. To better meet the MPA network criteria set out by the CBD, a range of types of MPAs must be implemented, including smaller MPAs in more intensely used ‘metropolitan seas’, and social justice considerations must be better integrated in conservation planning. It is important that the race towards remote VLMPAs does not divert attention, resources and political will away from the other types of MPA that are necessary for effectively fulfilling marine conservation targets.

This paper explores the realities of marine spatial planning (MSP’ing), drawing on 12 case studies around Europe, employing a structured qualitative empirical approach. The findings indicate that (1) MSP’ing is often focused on achieving specific sectoral objectives, related to nationally important strategic priorities, and might better be termed ‘strategic sectoral planning’. (2) MSP’ing processes tend to be complex, fragmented and emergent on an ad hoc basis, rather than cyclical, adaptive and prescribed on an a priori basis. (3) Top-down processes tend to dominate, more participative platforms tending to be ‘disconnected by design’ from executive decision-making. (4) Blue growth is the dominant overall priority, often aligned with strategic sectoral priorities, despite growing indications that the target for Good Environmental Status (GES) by 2020 is unlikely to be met. This is consistent with growing concerns about the tensions between the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the Directive Establishing a Framework for Maritime Spatial Planning. It is concluded that the realities of how MSP’ing is working contrast with widely recognised concepts and ideals as to how MSP’ing should work, as integrated-use MSP’ing based on political expedience and blue growth priorities is diverging from and potentially competing with ecosystem-based MSP’ing, including marine protected area networks, based on GES priorities. It is argued that a more empirical approach should be taken to MSP’ing research, whereby conceptual approaches which integrate sustainable blue growth and GES co-evolve with marine spatial planning practices through critical analyses of whether the realities of MSP’ing are consistent with these concepts.

There is an on-going process to establish Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) in England, to form part of a coherent and representative network of marine protected areas under national and EU legislation. From 2009 to 2011, the MCZ process included strong participatory elements. Four regional multi-sector stakeholder groups developed MCZ recommendations collaboratively, in line with ecological guidance provided by the Government's nature conservation advisers. This guidance was based on Government policy principles, including that MCZs should be designated based on ‘best available evidence’. This paper analyses the multi-dimensional conflicts that emerged within the stakeholder group in south-west England, which were magnified by uncertainty about future MCZ management. In September 2011, after working through these conflicts through trade-offs and negotiations, the stakeholder groups jointly recommended 127 MCZs to Government. The process subsequently shifted to a top-down approach, with further stakeholder engagement limited to bilateral consultation. There was a concurrent shift in policy, from a broad-scale network-level focus towards single-feature conservation. A lengthy series of evidence reviews concluded that the existing evidence at the time was insufficient to progress with the designation of most sites, marking a clear departure from the policy principle of proceeding with the designation of a representative network based on ‘best available evidence’, and effectively undermining the work carried out by stakeholder groups. Though MCZ designation was originally timetabled for 2012, in November 2013 just 27 of the recommended 127 MCZs were designated in a first tranche. At the time, no clear timetable was in place for subsequent tranches.

The objective of this paper was to analyse the challenges and prospects of regional MPA networks as an effective tool for the protection of wide-ranging cetaceans, focusing on the potential of the Specially Protected Areas of Mediterranean Importance (SPAMI) network initiative to contribute to the conservation of the Mediterranean fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus). One of the main threats to this vulnerable population is mortalities through ship strikes. It is argued that a SPAMI network does not have the potential to effectively reduce the threat of ship strikes on a firm legal, scientific and political basis, particularly given uncertainty over fin whale seasonal movements. Instead, an alternative sectoral approach to landscape-scale protection is discussed. Building on examples from North America, it is proposed that a wider spatial scale threat-based approach should be adopted, and that a regional network of restrictions of shipping activities through the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) will more effectively reduce the risk of ship–whale strikes. This is also more consistent with the ecosystem approach, since the emphasis is on ecological scales that cross administrative boundaries, even though it is within a single sector. It is concluded that mechanisms exist to address the challenges of implementing such an approach, and that sectoral measures through the IMO represent an important way forward for improving the conservation prospects for Mediterranean fin whales.

With the drive for greater numbers and areas of MPAs to be put in place to meet national and international targets, challenges have emerged in both the establishment and development of sustainable governance of the networks of sites that are emerging. Using 12 presentations given in a workshop on ‘Improving participation for better governance of MPAs’ at the 3rd International Marine Protected Areas Congress in October 2013, this paper reviews a range of top-down, bottom-up and collaborative approaches to governance, looking at all phases in the process from design of an MPA network to its implementation, as well as considering individual MPAs. Designation of MPA networks requires significant investment of resources to engage local stakeholders in discussions over potential site location and management measures. Scaling-up from individual MPAs to networks of MPAs will often also require a scaling-up of governance approaches, including top-down approaches. Balancing the need to provide for the participation of local users in each constituent MPA with the need to address a variety of challenges, whilst achieving wider-scale objectives through the inclusion of top-down governance approaches is an important but neglected challenge in discussions concerning MPA networks. These case studies indicate that there are various ways in which this challenge can be addressed in different contexts and point to potential ‘good practice’ for other MPAs in similar scenarios. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This paper examines the nature of the management and governance structures underpinning the North East Kent European Marine Site (NEKEMS). It tells the story of how a strong and effective partnership has been built over the last 15 years, overcoming historical disputes between proponents of economic development and conservation. It explores a range of techniques used to encourage community engagement with marine conservation and looks at an innovative approach to community consultation. The development of social capital is identified as a central factor in the success of the partnership. Furthermore, the concept is also used as an analytical tool for evaluating the effectiveness of the partnership.

Debates surrounding governance strategies for marine protected areas (MPAs) have to date largely focused on top-down, bottom-up or market-based approaches. Whilst co-management approaches for governing MPAs are widely accepted as a way forward for combining these three strategies, many interpretations of this concept exist and it is applied in many different ways in MPAs in different contexts. This study aimed to explore governance through a case-study approach based on a specifically developed empirical framework – the marine protected area governance (MPAG) analysis framework – to increase understanding of how to combine the three governance approaches. A dialogue with MPA practitioners in 20 case studies helped shape the MPAG analysis framework as it developed, and an international workshop was held on ‘Governing MPAs’, bringing the practitioners together to compare results and further develop the framework. This paper provides an overview of the topic and research methodology and briefly introduces the case studies further explored in this special issue.

The Galapagos Marine Reserve (GMR) has faced major governance challenges since its designation in 1998, largely due to the driving forces of immigration from the mainland; a heterogeneous population that has a mainland rather than an island identity; increasing demand for marine resources from global seafood markets; and the rapid growth of tourism. Until recently, the pressures related to these driving forces had challenged measures to promote the effectiveness of the GMR. Decisions taken through the participatory management structure were often undermined by a combination of civil unrest, illegal activities and lack of enforcement. A recent period of relative political stability, coupled with several new measures to address these driving forces, has improved the potential effectiveness of the governance framework. These measures include controls on immigration, the use of remote surveillance technologies to enforce fishing restrictions and a system for the improved management of tourism vessels. Whilst participative and economic incentives will continue to be important, increasing political will to promote long-term sustainability and related improvements in the use of legal incentives, including enforcement technologies and effective prosecutions for those who breach restrictions, are likely to be key elements of the governance framework. It is argued that these measures, coupled with the emergence of a more marine-aware generation of Galapagos citizens, should pave the way for major improvements in the effectiveness of the GMR, hopefully sufficiently strengthening the governance framework to withstand the major driving forces that could otherwise perturb it.

Marine protected areas (MPAs) worldwide are facing increasing driving forces, which represent a major and increasing challenge for MPA governance. The Marine Protected Area Governance (MPAG) project examined a range of different incentives – economic, interpretative, knowledge, legal and participative – employed to address the driving forces and promote effectiveness in 20 case studies across the globe. This paper argues that, regardless of the MPA governance approach adopted (i.e., government-led, decentralised, private or community-led), resilience in MPA governance systems derives from employing a diversity of inter-connected incentives. The significance of institutional diversity to governance systems parallels that of species diversity to ecosystems, conferring resilience to the overall socio–ecological system. The paper concludes that, in the face of strong driving forces, rather than relying on particular types of incentives and institutions, it is important to recognise that the key to resilience is diversity, both of species in ecosystems and of institutions in governance systems.

This paper provides an overview of the emerging policy landscape for marine spatial planning in the European Union, which consists of four main categories of policy drivers: environmental legislation, legislation on marine renewable energy, fisheries regulations and the Integrated Maritime Policy. The weak links between these categories of policy drivers, underpinned by a lack of clarity regarding the vision for sustainability, pose major challenges for the emergence of ecosystem-based and integrated marine spatial planning in Europe. In addition, there is still uncertainty arising from on-going reform of the Common Fisheries Policy, and discussions on the need for a new marine spatial planning directive. This paper concludes with the view that better integration of environmental concerns into the Common Fisheries Policy is needed to strengthen the link between environmental legislation and fisheries regulations, and that the existing policy landscape, particularly the Marine Strategic Framework Directive, already provides a legal framework for ecosystem-based marine spatial planning. Such a framework is consistent with the recognition that ecosystem conservation underpins other pillars of sustainable development and provides the foundation for cross-sectoral marine planning and management.

Katsanevakis, Stelios ... et al.-- 16 pages, 2 figures, Cumulative human impacts have led to the degradation of marine ecosystems and the decline of biodiversity in the European and contiguous seas. Effective conservation measures are urgently needed to reverse these trends. Conservation must entail societal choices, underpinned by human values and worldviews that differ between the countries bordering these seas. Social, economic and political heterogeneity adds to the challenge of balancing conservation with sustainable use of the seas. Comprehensive macro-regional coordination is needed to ensure effective conservation of marine ecosystems and biodiversity of this region. Under the European Union Horizon 2020 framework programme, the MarCons COST action aims to promote collaborative research to support marine management, conservation planning and policy development. This will be achieved by developing novel methods and tools to close knowledge gaps and advance marine conservation science. This action will provide support for the development of macro-regional and national policies through six key actions: to develop tools to analyse cumulative human impacts; to identify critical scientific and technical gaps in conservation efforts; to improve the resilience of the marine environment to global change and biological invasions; to develop frameworks for integrated conservation planning across terrestrial, freshwater, and marine environments; to coordinate marine conservation policy across national boundaries; and to identify effective governance approaches for marine protected area management. Achieving the objectives of these actions will facilitate the integration of marine conservation policy into macro-regional maritime spatial planning agendas for the European and contiguous seas, thereby offsetting the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services in this region, This article is based upon work from COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) Action 15121 ‘Advancing marine conservation in the European and contiguous seas (MarCons) - supported by the Horizon 2020 framework programme for research and innovation

Biodiversity offsets are increasingly used in policy frameworks to regulate the environmental impacts of development including projects located in marine environments. Scientific knowledge gaps and other practical challenges have necessitated flexibility concerning the manner in which key offsetting principles are implemented in policy frameworks relevant to such environments. The potential trade-off of such flexibility is that consequent marine offsetting practice may not be compatible with the ultimate objective of no net loss of biodiversity. Here we present a systematic review of marine and coastal development projects in Australia, examining how offsetting is being implemented in practice. Forty-two (42) projects were assessed, predominantly located in Queensland and Western Australia and associated with the development and operation of ports. We find that application of key biodiversity offsetting principles (e.g. ecological equivalence) was frequently incomplete or absent. For approximately 50% of reviewed projects we were unable to identify public information concerning how offsetting requirements were established. The current environmental outcomes of marine biodiversity offsetting in Australia are unclear but there are indications that it is unlikely to achieve no net loss of biodiversity. Refereed/Peer-reviewed

SUMMARYThis review outlines the policy frameworks for marine conservation zones (MCZs) and marine special areas of conservation (SACs), which are the main components of the emerging UK marine protected area (MPA) network. If current recommendations are implemented, the coverage of MPAs in English seas could rise to 27%. The governance challenges that this will raise are explored through case studies of MPA initiatives in south-west England. Whilst the initial processes by which MCZ recommendations have been developed provided for stakeholder participation (bottom-up), the main steer has been from central government (top-down). The subsequent designation and implementation of MCZs is likely to be more top-down. Marine SAC processes have, by contrast, been top-down from the outset. The fishing industry fears that more MPAs will lead to increasing restrictions, whilst conservationists fear that MPAs will not be sufficiently protected, potentially becoming paper MPAs. Both argue that the burden of proof should be placed on the other party. Such combinations of top-down (central government-led) and bottom-up (community and user-led) approaches and the related conflicts are typical of government-led MPAs in temperate countries that have higher governance capacities. Top-down approaches tend to dominate, but this does not mean that they cannot be combined with bottom-up approaches.

The statutory closure of 60 square miles of Lyme Bay to towed fishing gear in 2008 marked the culmination of nearly 20 years of discussions between conservationists and fishermen. Prior to the 2008 decision, voluntary, bottom–up led agreements resulted in inadequate protection of the bay's biological resources and significant erosion of social capital. Lyme Bay provides an excellent case study of the challenges likely to be posed by wider stakeholder involvement imposed under the new Marine Act. This paper examines a broad range of perspectives in relation to the Lyme Bay consultation and subsequent closure, via semi-structured interviews with 25 representatives of different interest groups in Lyme Bay. All respondents acknowledged significant flaws in the process leading to the Lyme Bay decision and felt the Marine Act was well placed to tackle many of these criticisms. However, while the Marine Act should provide a framework for resolving conflicts, it will not prevent them. Success will depend on collaboration between different marine interests, and also on the government acknowledging that outcomes are unlikely to favour everyone in the short-term and that top-down interventions are inevitable.

The Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 is now enacted into law. This paper looks at predictions made about new law by one of the authors, Peter Jones, in his paper The Marine Bill: Cornucopia or Pandora's Box [1] and assesses how successful the Act has been in turning aspirations into law. The paper focuses on the following areas: ecosystem protection, stakeholder engagement, marine spatial planning and the provision of a network of highly protected marine reserves, and raises concerns that the ecosystem approach has progressively been dropped in the drafting process of the legislation. Concerns are raised that the new Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authorities have similar inherent conflicts of interest to those exhibited by Sea Fisheries Committees, which they sought to replace. The effectiveness of marine planning is questioned, as there appear to be inbuilt loopholes for public authorities to avoid complying with the marine plans. The draft marine policy statement (MPS), published in July 2010, includes appropriate environmental safeguards, but the MPS has not yet been formally adopted. The absence of a concrete target for highly protected marine reserves means there is a danger that designations under the Act may have little effect on the ground. In conclusion the Act provides some new mechanisms for marine protection, but arguably does not yet provide a framework for implementing the ecosystem approach and is not an end in itself.

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are spatially defined marine units in which one or more human activities—particularly fishing—are restricted or prohibited. They represent a precautionary and ecosystem-based approach to ocean management (Mangel 2000; Pikitch et al. 2004; Jones 2006). The 1992 Convention for Biological Diversity set a target for 10% of the global marine area to be designated as MPAs by 2010. Progress with designating MPAs is, however, slow, MPAs covering just 1.3% of the marine area and 3.2% of marine areas under national jurisdiction. Consequently, the deadline was recently extended to 2020. Nonetheless, in the past two decades there has been a rapid increase in MPA research and implementation throughout the world. If the governance of MPAs is improved in ways we describe here, MPAs and other place-based approaches will continue to be important tools for the management of marine resources.

Conventional sectoral management and piecemeal governance are considered less and less appropriate in pursuit of sustainable development. Ecosystem based marine spatial management (EB-MSM) is an approach that recognizes the full array of interactions within an ecosystem, including human uses, rather than considering single issues, species, or ecosystem services in isolation. Marine spatial planning and ocean zoning are emerging concepts that can support EB-MSM. EB-MSM is driven by high-level goals that managers aim to achieve through the implementation of measures. High-level goals and objectives need to be translated into more operational objectives before specific targets, limits and measures can be elaborated. Monitoring, evaluation and adaptation are necessary to ensure that marine management measures are both effective and efficient. Solid monitoring frameworks are the foundation of adaptive management, as they provide the necessary information to evaluate performance and the effectiveness of management actions. Marine protected areas (MPAs) - possibly set up in networks - constitute a key component in EB-MSM policies and practises and have been applied as a cornerstone in conservation of marine biodiversity, management of fish populations, development of coastal tourism, etc. Moreover, MPA experiences have provided methods and concepts (such as zoning) to a wider EB-MSM context. The assignment of values to biophysical features of the marine environment allows the direct assessment of related management choices and may assist EB-MSM. A range of monetary valuation techniques have been proposed to reduce attributes of goods and services to a single metric. However, in the marine environment such an approach is often over simplistic, and thus less reductive techniques may be necessary. Rather than producing a single metric, the results of non-monetary assessments guide policy allowing weight to be given as necessary to potential areas of conflict and consensus. Strategies to take into account climate change effects and geohazard risks in EB-MSM have been applied or proposed worldwide. EB-MSM regimes must be alert to such risks and flexible to account for changes.

In the face of growing calls for no-take marine protected areas (NTMPAs) and the development of a UK legal framework for them, fishing industry and related perspectives on the equity, justice and power issues raised by such designations are explored. Whilst these reveal growing concerns about the political and geographical marginalisation of the fishing industry, they also reveal a significant potential for the constructive participation of industry representatives in discussions and decisions concerning NTMPAs. These findings support the argument that this potential should be realised, as the environmental coherence of our seas need not be achieved through the social and economic isolation of our fishing industry.

Against a background of international commitments to establish ecologically coherent and representative MPA networks, and the UK Marine Bill which aims to implement these commitments, the larval dispersal potential of 31 rare/scare benthic invertebrates is investigated and it is found that over half have a low dispersal potential (

Since the 1980s, there have been continuous increases in the coverage of marine protected areas (MPAs) in China, and a total of 158 MPAs have been declared. The MPA system in China is characterized by (1) decentralised designation and management with reduced control from the central government; (2) a dominance of de jure fully protected MPAs that are often implemented as de facto multiple-use areas; and (3) a lack of objective evaluation processes. To improve China's MPA system requires an appropriate integration of fully protected and multiple-use MPAs, and an approach that balances the advantages of top-down and bottom-up approaches.

This article examines the state of current approaches to the governance of common pool resources (CPRs), the impacts of the recent emergence of the partnership paradigm, and the consequences for the management of CPRs. These issues are explored through a case study of the Wash European Marine Site partnership, where a Public Inquiry recently upheld the refusal of the conservation agency to grant mussel cultivators permission to scare eider ducks off their lays using sonic bird-scaring devices. As a result, the relationship between the conservation agency and the mussel cultivators has been severely damaged, causing a “fracturing” of the partnership. Through this case study the article explores the contradictions involved in statutory partnerships and asks if it is possible to use partnerships to empower local communities while the state remains in overall control.

This manuscript discusses the role of fishers' Local Ecological Knowledge (LEK) in the management of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in Brazil. Semi-structured interviews were undertaken at nine MPAs to investigate MPA managers' (n = 9) and higher governmental level authorities' (n = 5) perceptions on these. Varying levels of MPA governance approaches were assessed, from government-led centralized top-down (e.g. marine biological reserves) to community-based bottom-up MPA categories (e.g. marine extractive reserves). The use of fishers' LEK was found to be an essential means of achieving a broader and more diverse knowledge basis for MPA management, though most of the management current in place is still science-driven in Brazil. The full engagement of local knowledge can also be regarded as a means of empowering local communities and promoting responsibility, but only if a more inclusive praxis of participation is put to work. Different meanings for ‘Local Knowledge Use’ in MPA management were outlined and described for different management approaches (top-down vs. bottom-up). It was noted that each of these meanings brings different outcomes in terms of stakeholder participation and empowerment. It is also suggested that MPA co-management schemes might benefit from the adoption of a ‘knowledge-building’ instead of ‘knowledge-using’ approach during a ‘problem-solving’ instead of ‘decision-making’ management process. Finally, it is concluded that it will be an enormous challenge to put LEK to work in the benefit of MPAs in the country amidst so many priority actions brought by the problems affecting the Brazilian National System of MPAs. Government must open up the agenda to deliberatively discuss the roles of local knowledge in MPA management, whilst local communities organise themselves and increase the demand for participation with responsibility.

In the face of growing calls for no-take marine protected areas (NTMPAs), the views of fishing industry representatives in south-west (SW) England on related issues are analysed. Only 23% thought NTMPAs were the way forward and a range of concerns were expressed, e.g. that the ‘terrestrial’ protected areas approach and related biodiversity conservation objectives will be extended to the seas, and that fish yield reductions from the loss of access to NTMPAs are very unlikely to be compensated for through spillover/export. Some interesting approaches to ameliorating these concerns emerged, such as being open and honest that NTMPAs are primarily intended to achieve biodiversity conservation benefits, reducing uncertainty concerning the potential for any secondary fisheries spillover/export benefits, justifying NTMPAs on an objective, rational basis rather than on a subjective, precautionary basis, and the quid pro quo streamlining of wider fisheries management approaches. This research reveals a more diverse range of perspectives amongst fishing industry representatives on the issues raised by NTMPA proposals than is often assumed.

An inherent tension exists between legal approaches to nature conservation and fisheries management in the European Union, as the former remains the remit of Member States while the latter is under the exclusive legislative jurisdiction of the European Community (EC). This tension is of particular importance when addressing the conservation of habitats or species that are under threat from fishing activities. This article examines recent developments in offshore marine conservation in the North-East Atlantic in light of the legislative developments and political frameworks that are currently evolving. By analysing the emergency closure of the Darwin Mounds area of cold-water corals and the UK pair-trawl ban, it becomes evident that the precautionary principle is a key factor in the tension between fisheries management and marine nature conservation, and is not always taken into account. (c) 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

"This paper reports the findings of a preliminary analysis of fifteen case studies of inshore marine protected areas in the UK. It draws on the common-pool resource (CPR) literature and is premised on the thesis that building partnership capacity amongst relevant authorities and resource users provides a critical basis for overcoming collective action problems (CAPs), through the development of incentive structures and social capital, in order to achieve strategic objectives. Particular attention is paid to the influence of statutory marine biodiversity conservation obligations to the European Commission for marine special areas of conservation (MSACs), as these are an important external contextual factor. The risks of imposition and parochialism are outlined and the challenges of taking a balanced approach are discussed. The challenges posed by the attributes of the marine environment are considered, as are those posed by the policy framework for MSACs. The findings are discussed in relation to three questions: (i) which partnership models appear to have the potential to overcome the CAPs posed by inshore MSACs? (ii) what CAPs had to be addressed during the early phase of development of the MSAC co-management regimes? (iii) what are the likely future CAPs for the collaborative management of MSACs that each partnership will need to address? These preliminary findings will form the basis for future studies to analyse the outcomes of these fifteen initiatives, in order to assess the strengths, in various contexts, of different approaches for building resilient and balanced, thereby effective, institutions for the co-management of MSACs in the UK."

Findings are reported of the VALCOAST project that had as one of its research objectives to ascertain: (a) stakeholder willingness to participate and cooperate in coastal management (CM), given local and national CM practices; and (b) stakeholder assessment of the "accessibility" and "friendliness" of current CM processes. The project involved case studies and stakeholder interviews in Belgium, Greece, Spain, and the UK. Major findings include: (1) most stakeholders are willing to cooperate in three out of the four case areas, but not to the same extent; (2) the participating "officials" in the case studies are expecting the stakeholders to be less willing to cooperate than the latter indicate; (3) stakeholders in all case studies do not expect to be heard by those responsible for CM, find it difficult to learn about the relevant institutional arrangements, and consider the communication of the objectives and anticipated impacts of CM policies to be inadequate. It is concluded that the strong evidence of ...

The world's largest no-take Marine Protected Area in Chagos is examined in light of the Convention on Biological Diversity's provisions on Access and Benefit Sharing, as well as terrestrial experiences with fortress conservation. It is acknowledged that this closure presents a unique opportunity to preserve an ecologically 'pristine' area. However, the means by which the political process unfolded are brought into question. In particular, the fact that the UK proceeded with designating the area whilst the European Court of Human Rights was deliberating the right of native Chagossians to return to the island is questioned. In addition it is argued that the scale of the area poses significant management and enforcement challenges, which are not necessarily taken into consideration in the rush for large, no-take Marine Protected Areas.

There has been a dramatic increase in recentyears in the number of papers, reports, etc.,which have been published concerning MarineProtected Areas (MPAs). This overview of theobjectives, selection, design and management ofMPAs aims to provide a basis for discussionregarding possible ways forward by identifyingemerging issues, convergences and divergences. Whilst the attributes of the marine environmentmay limit the effectiveness of site-specificinitiatives such as MPAs, it is argued that itwould be defeatist in the extreme to abandonMPAs in the face of these limitations. Ten keyobjectives for MPAs are discussed, includingthat of harvest refugia, and it is argued thatwhilst these objectives may be justifiable froma preservationist perspective, they may beobjected to from a resource exploitationperspective. MPAs generate both internal(between uses) and basic (between use andconservation) conflicts, and it is argued thatthese conflicts may be exacerbated whenscientific arguments for MPAs are motivated bypreservationist concerns. It is reported thata minority of MPAs are achieving theirmanagement objectives, and that for themajority insufficient information was availablefor such effectiveness evaluations. Structureand process-oriented perspectives on marineconservation are discussed. It is argued thatthere are two divergent stances concerningoptimal MPA management approaches: top-down,characterized as being government-led andscience-based, with a greater emphasis onset-aside; and bottom-up, characterized asbeing community-based and science-guided, witha greater emphasis on multiple-use. Given thedivergent values of different stakeholders, thehigh degree of scientific uncertainty, and thehigh marine resource management decisionstakes, it is concluded that a key challenge isto adopt a ``middle-ground'' approach whichcombines top-down and bottom-up approaches, andwhich is consistent with the post-normalscientific approach.