Incorporating Conservation Zone Effectiveness for Protecting Biodiversity in Marine Planning

被引:17
作者
Makino, Azusa [1 ]
Klein, Carissa J. [1 ]
Beger, Maria [1 ]
Jupiter, Stacy D. [2 ]
Possingham, Hugh P. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Queensland, Sch Biol Sci, Australian Res Council, Ctr Excellence Environm Decis, Brisbane, Qld, Australia
[2] Wildlife Conservat Soc, Fiji Country Program, Suva, Fiji
[3] Imperial Coll London, Dept Life Sci, Ascot, Berks, England
基金
澳大利亚研究理事会;
关键词
GREAT-BARRIER-REEF; RESERVES; AREAS; MANAGEMENT; FISHERIES; COSTS; PHILIPPINES; NETWORKS; DESIGN; MODEL;
D O I
10.1371/journal.pone.0078986
中图分类号
O [数理科学和化学]; P [天文学、地球科学]; Q [生物科学]; N [自然科学总论];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
Establishing different types of conservation zones is becoming commonplace. However, spatial prioritization methods that can accommodate multiple zones are poorly understood in theory and application. It is typically assumed that management regulations across zones have differential levels of effectiveness ("zone effectiveness") for biodiversity protection, but the influence of zone effectiveness on achieving conservation targets has not yet been explored. Here, we consider the zone effectiveness of three zones: permanent closure, partial protection, and open, for planning for the protection of five different marine habitats in the Vatu-i-Ra Seascape, Fiji. We explore the impact of differential zone effectiveness on the location and costs of conservation priorities. We assume that permanent closure zones are fully effective at protecting all habitats, open zones do not contribute towards the conservation targets and partial protection zones lie between these two extremes. We use four different estimates for zone effectiveness and three different estimates for zone cost of the partial protection zone. To enhance the practical utility of the approach, we also explore how much of each traditional fishing ground can remain open for fishing while still achieving conservation targets. Our results show that all of the high priority areas for permanent closure zones would not be a high priority when the zone effectiveness of the partial protection zone is equal to that of permanent closure zones. When differential zone effectiveness and costs are considered, the resulting marine protected area network consequently increases in size, with more area allocated to permanent closure zones to meet conservation targets. By distributing the loss of fishing opportunity equitably among local communities, we find that 84-88% of each traditional fishing ground can be left open while still meeting conservation targets. Finally, we summarize the steps for developing marine zoning that accounts for zone effectiveness.
引用
收藏
页数:9
相关论文
共 57 条
[1]   Improving social acceptability of marine protected area networks: A method for estimating opportunity costs to multiple gear types in both fished and currently unfished areas [J].
Adams, Vanessa M. ;
Mills, Morena ;
Jupiter, Stacy D. ;
Pressey, Robert L. .
BIOLOGICAL CONSERVATION, 2011, 144 (01) :350-361
[2]   Dangerous targets? Unresolved issues and ideological clashes around marine protected areas [J].
Agardy, T ;
Bridgewater, P ;
Crosby, MP ;
Day, J ;
Dayton, PK ;
Kenchington, R ;
Laffoley, D ;
McConney, P ;
Murray, PA ;
Parks, JE ;
Peau, L .
AQUATIC CONSERVATION-MARINE AND FRESHWATER ECOSYSTEMS, 2003, 13 (04) :353-367
[3]  
Agostini V.N., 2010, Marine Zoning in Saint Kitts and Nevis: A path towards sustainable management of marine resources
[4]   No-take marine reserves and reef fisheries management in the Philippines: A new people power revolution [J].
Alcala, Angel C. ;
Russ, Garry R. .
AMBIO, 2006, 35 (05) :245-254
[5]  
[Anonymous], 2012, Technical Report No. 597
[6]   Decadal trends in marine reserves reveal differential rates of change in direct and indirect effects [J].
Babcock, R. C. ;
Shears, N. T. ;
Alcala, A. C. ;
Barrett, N. S. ;
Edgar, G. J. ;
Lafferty, K. D. ;
McClanahan, T. R. ;
Russ, G. R. .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2010, 107 (43) :18256-18261
[7]   The worldwide costs of marine protected areas [J].
Balmford, A ;
Gravestock, P ;
Hockley, N ;
McClean, CJ ;
Roberts, CM .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2004, 101 (26) :9694-9697
[8]   Spatial socioeconomic data as a cost in systematic marine conservation planning [J].
Ban, Natalie Corinna ;
Klein, Carissa Joy .
CONSERVATION LETTERS, 2009, 2 (05) :206-215
[9]   Comparison of Outcomes of Permanently Closed and Periodically Harvested Coral Reef Reserves [J].
Bartlett, C. Y. ;
Manua, C. ;
Cinner, J. ;
Sutton, S. ;
Jimmy, R. ;
South, R. ;
Nilsson, J. ;
Raina, J. .
CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 2009, 23 (06) :1475-1484
[10]  
Berkes F, 2000, ECOL APPL, V10, P1251, DOI 10.2307/2641280