BookPDF Available

Marine Peace Parks in the Mediterranean

Authors:
  • Mediterranean Science Commission, Paris, Monaco

Abstract

Far too little - less than 2% - of the Mediterranean Sea is currently truly protected. Existing MPAs are often limited to the coast … and to the size of confetti. Obviously this will not suffice to preserve Mediterranean biodiversity and integrity from the assaults of coastal development, urbanization, overfishing, tourism, fast-growing maritime traffic, oil and gas off-shore exploration. A main reason for this dismal level of protection is the fragmented nature of maritime governance in international waters, the poor enforcement of existing regulations and the difficult concertation / harmonization between EU and non-EU countries. How to circumvent such obstacles and reach the target defined by the Convention of Biological Diversity - to effectively protect at least 10% of the world ocean by 2020 ? After identification of key biological, geological and oceanographic features, the Mediterranean Science Commission does propose eight large international, coast-to coast marine reserves. This proposal is unique in combining such elements as: - including contiguous coastal and open sea habitats, which will protect what is a dynamic, inter-connected marine system, and offer corridors for migratory animals; - preserving an endemic, threatened biota (unique deepsea communities, white coral beds, monk seals, rare endemic species, fin whales, spawning grounds of bluefin tunas, etc.), together with unique geological features (deep sea canyons, mud volcanoes, sea mounts, hypersaline deepwaters), and key oceanographic processes (surface sites of deep water formation, complex strait dynamics); - taking into account the complex history and geography of the Mediterranean Sea, where no coastal point is farther than 200 nautical miles from waters under another jurisdiction, and where a number of ancient, unresolved legal disputes subsist. The trans-frontier structure of the CIESM Marine 'Peace' Parks neatly puts this problem aside, encouraging without prejudice to current national claims the local Governments involved to join forces in the pursuit of a cause higher than their national interest. Mediterranean Marine Peace Parks Interested readers can access the table of contents and full 121 pages illustrated Monograph from the page www.ciesm.org/online/monographs/Siracusa.html Full text in CIESM Monograph n° 41, 2011, F. Briand [Ed.] 121 pages
CIESM The Mediterranean Science Commission www.ciesm.org
MARINE PEACE PARKS
IN
THE MEDITERRANEAN
PREVIEW OF
A CIESM PROPOSAL
Text : Frederic Briand
layout : Paula Moschella
CIESM The Mediterranean Science Commission www.ciesm.org
The context
The long history of the Mediterranean Science
Commission (CIESM), an organization conceived in
1910 by pioneers of oceanography such as Prince
Albert 1st of Monaco, did nurture over time the
humanistic vision - some may call it idealistic - that
personal collaborations among researchers across
strong cultural, linguistic and religious divides can
overcome the mistrust, sectarism, intolerance - those
seeds of conflicts and wars - that plague the region.
Today the vitality and diversity of CIESM programs,
and the thousands of researchers from all shores who
work jointly on the exploration and lasting protection
of this highly impacted sea, attest of the modernity
and power of this vision.
The challenge
Far too little - less than 2% - of the Mediterranean
Sea is currently protected. Existing MPAs are often
limited to the coast … and to the size of confetti.
Obviously this will not suffice to preserve
Mediterranean biodiversity and integrity from the
assaults of coastal development, urbanization,
overfishing, tourism, fast-growing maritime traffic,
oil and gas off-shore
exploration.
One of the main reasons for
this dismal level of protection
is the fragmented nature of
maritime governance in
international waters, the
poor enforcement of existing
regulations and difficult concertation /
harmonization between EU and non-EU countries.
How to circumvent such obstacles? How to reconcile
such low protection levels with the targets defined
by the Convention of Biological Diversity at its recent
meeting in Nagoya (October 2010)? How to
effectively protect at least 10% of the world ocean by
2020? How to move Governments to multiply by five
the coverage of marine protection?
An innovative, ecosystemic solution
In November 2010, CIESM did gather thirty of its top
marine experts in the Sicilian town of Syracuse to
examine and refine a bold initiative that would assign
vast, coast-to-coast, trans-frontier marine areas - of
oceanographic, biological and geological importance -
to conservation. The outcome (CIESM Monograph 41,
2011) is a detailed, rigorous scientific rationale for
eight large areas (see map) identified in both the
western and eastern basins of the Mediterranean.
Goals and objectives for concerned countries
- Increase cooperation, training and
coordination between National agencies across the
border;
- Develop, manage joint research programs
and data sets;
- Jointly design, enforce pragmatic, dynamic
measures, such as spatial zoning, temporary
restrictions of fishing, restricted navigation corridors,
optimal location of off-shore drilling operations, etc.
The term ‘Marine Peace Parks’ became an evidence
for those familiar with the troubled, conflict-ridden
history of the Mediterranean region. Moving towards
their implementation will be a huge challenge, as the
fate of recent attempts (Gulf of Aqaba, Korean
Peninsula) amply demonstrates. It would mark the
first time that such a well-tested concept (on land)
becomes a reality in the marine world.
The origin of Peace Parks
Transboundary protected areas were first developed
in terrestrial environments with the clear, explicit
objective to conserve biodiversity while fostering
regional cooperation and
security (IUCN McNeil 1990;
Hamilton et al. 1996). The
benefits of transfrontier
conservation are many: the
larger zone of protection so
created does substantially
reduce the risk of
biodiversity loss and
enhances genetic mixing. Further, opportunities for
staff exchange and joint training at various levels
promote mutual understanding between different
approaches, different jurisdictions, and thus optimize
management of large areas, as shown by the current
success of transboundary cooperation in the Wadden
Sea. Taking the concept further, it became a
deliberate instrument of peace in sensitive regions
such as the once-troubled zone between Nicaragua
and Costa Rica or the Virunga volcano region shared
by Rwanda, Zaire and Uganda. These are the seeds
of the current CIESM proposal.
The creation of transfrontier ‘peace parks’ will
safeguard and improve existing friendly relations
between States, and lower the strain of existing
disputes over contested sea territory. And
particularly so in the Mediterranean Sea, where
historical conflicts and ideological tensions are the
rule.
The case for Marine Peace Parks
CIESM The Mediterranean Science Commission www.ciesm.org
Eight Marine Peace Parks proposed by CIESM
The CIESM proposal is very innovative in that it combines three powerful, unique features:
1. The coast-to coast nature of CIESM marine parks integrates contiguous coastal and open sea habitats, allowing for a
coherent set of measures to protect what is a dynamic, inter-connected marine system. The dimension of the park will
provide a more suitable range and connecting corridors to larger animals that actively move across the landscape,
enhancing the robustness and resilience of the ecosystem in the face of climate change, and thus ultimately enhancing
resource yields and local economies.
2. Not only will Marine Peace Parks preserve an endemic, threatened biota (unique deepsea communities, white coral
beds, monk seals, rare endemic species, fin whales, spawning grounds of bluefin tunas, etc.), they will also protect unique
geological features (deep sea canyons, mud volcanoes, sea mounts, hypersaline craters), and key oceanographic
processes (surface sites of deep water formation, strait fluxes) from the fast-growing exploitation of marine resources by
modern technology.
3. The complex history and geography of the Mediterranean Sea, where no coastal point is farther than 200 nautical miles
away from waters under another jurisdiction, is taken into account. Today a large number of legal disputes, some very
ancient, others quite modern, all still unresolved. The trans-frontier structure of the CIESM Marine Peace Parks puts this
problem aside: it will encourage, without prejudice to current national claims, the Governments of those countries directly
concerned to join forces and develop joint planning in the pursuit of a cause higher than their national interest.
Adapted from National Geographic Magazine
CIESM The Mediterranean Science Commission www.ciesm.org
A hotspot of biodiversity hosting many threatened and endangered species such as the common dolphin, sperm
whale and Cuvier‟s beaked whales, sharks and rays. This sector of the Mediterranean combines high levels of marine
diversity and a relatively low human population density.
Key features in need of protection
A unique oceanographic circulation, connecting the south Adriatic Sea to the northern Ionian Sea,
establishing vital corridors;
A seabed, derived from the Apulian platform and marked by a rich variety of marine canyons, caves and
submarine valleys, the latter hosting extensive white coral banks;
Deep hypersaline anoxic basins characterized by poorly known, highly specialized microbial communities;
Several submarine caves in the region represent a unique, vulnerable ecosystem, with specialized species
assemblages, highly vulnerable to disturbance;
Extensive deep sea white coral banks, considered biodiversity “hotspotsin the Mediterranean, have been
found in two valleys located in the Ionian Sea and South Adriatic.
Major pressures
The region is a complex mosaic of relatively well-preserved stretches of coast interspersed with areas subjected to multiple stressors, in particular deep sea fishing, illegal harvest of date
mussels, and heavy metal contamination.
High geo- and biodiversity
Massive Mesozoic limestones characterize the area. About 6 million years ago, during the „Messinian Salinity Crisis‟ (see CIESM Monograph 33, 2007), the former Apulian platform was
subjected to intense continental erosion and karsts processes. As a result, many caves and aerial valleys were cut into these rocks, to be later submerged in the low Pliocene.
One example: the CIESM Marine Peace Park proposed in the north Ionian Sea
CIESM The Mediterranean Science Commission www.ciesm.org
The recent exploration of the deep sea between the Southern Adriatic and the Ionian seas led to the discovery of important white-coral banks
(Lophelia pertusa, Madrepora oculata): one south of Capo Santa Maria di Leuca; another in the Canyon of Bari (between Italy and Albania). The coral
banks represent an important biodiversity „„hotspot‟ and require urgent protection from trawl and long lines fishing.
The North Ionian is extremely rich in submarine caves, which the EU Habitat Directive singles out as a special habitat in need of protection.
Illegal fishing
Hundreds of kilometres of subtidal rocky coast have been destroyed in Apulia due to the
illegal fishery of the date mussel Lithophaga lithophaga. This rock boring bivalve is
extracted from the substrate with sledgehammers… Deep sea fishing and illegal artisanal
fishery are not the only threats; the Apulian area has been
selected as a priority area for wind farms, with potential
impacts on marine mammals due to noise and vibration
generation.
Coastal diversity
The eastern sector (Greek and Albanian waters) is vital for biodiversity. Beyond the Amvrakikos Gulf, which is one of the most important wetland systems in Greece, there are important
lagoons in Apulia and in Albania. The Albanian sector, especially the Karaburuni Peninsula Sazani Island, has been identified as a priority area for marine biodiversity conservation by
recent national and international environmental reports.
Strong oceanographic connections
and the monk seal (Monachus monachus) to and from the Adriatic Sea.
3
Article
Full-text available
Spatial prioritization in conservation is required to direct limited resources to where actions are most urgently needed and most likely to produce effective conservation outcomes. In an effort to advance the protection of a highly threatened hotspot of marine biodiversity, the Mediterranean Sea, multiple spatial conservation plans have been developed in recent years. Here, we review and integrate these different plans with the goal of identifying priority conservation areas that represent the current consensus among the different initiatives. A review of six existing and twelve proposed conservation initiatives highlights gaps in conservation and management planning, particularly within the southern and eastern regions of the Mediterranean and for offshore and deep sea habitats. The eighteen initiatives vary substantially in their extent (covering 0.1-58.5% of the Mediterranean Sea) and in the location of additional proposed conservation and management areas. Differences in the criteria, approaches and data used explain such variation. Despite the diversity among proposals, our analyses identified ten areas, encompassing 10% of the Mediterranean Sea, that are consistently identified among the existing proposals, with an additional 10% selected by at least five proposals. These areas represent top priorities for immediate conservation action. Despite the plethora of initiatives, major challenges face Mediterranean biodiversity and conservation. These include the need for spatial prioritization within a comprehensive framework for regional conservation planning, the acquisition of additional information from data-poor areas, species or habitats, and addressing the challenges of establishing transboundary governance and collaboration in socially, culturally and politically complex conditions. Collective prioritised action, not new conservation plans, is needed for the north, western, and high seas of the Mediterranean, while developing initial information-based plans for the south and eastern Mediterranean is an urgent requirement for true regional conservation planning.
Article
The proposed area, South Adriatic, covers a domain including parts of the central Croatian and Montenegro coasts, and northern Albanian shore on the Eastern Adriatic (Figure1). On the Western side of the Adriatic it extends from Manfredonia to Brindisi in Italy. The onshore area is geologically quite homogeneous, dominated by limestone outcrops that belong to the Mesozoic Apulian platform. The central Adriatic region displays several specific morphological features such as the Jabuka Pit and the Palagrusa sill and deeper areas to the north with a maximum depth of 270m. The South Adriatic Pit is the dominant morphological feature of the Southern Adriatic. Dense water formed on the Northern Adriatic shelf accumulates in the Jabuka Pit. Along the eastern border of this Pit during summer, wind driven upwelling makes the area potentially rich biologically. The South Adriatic Pit is an area of open ocean convection and dense water formation, whose intensity depends on the air-sea heat flux and buoyancy content. In the centre of the South Adriatic Gyre the spring phytoplankton bloom is associated with vertical mixing and nutrient input into the euphotic zone. The northern part of the proposed area has been included (together with the northern Adriatic) in lists of important areas for biodiversity in the Mediterranean, such as in potential SPAMI candidates, in the Ecologically or Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs), in the priority conservation areas for sea birds, and in the priority conservation areas considering the impacts of fisheries in the open seas, including the deep sea. A considerable number of key and endangered species are found in this area. The seagrass Posidonia oceanica, several cetacean species, many waterfowl, the monk seal, the loggerhead turtle, and the otter are among the most important globally threatened species of this area. This area is characterized by several unique and sensitive habitats, especially in the south-eastern part. Neretva and Buna/Bojana river deltas, besides their role as sheltering habitats, are also important as migration corridors, especially for fish and bird species. Several MPAs have been instituted in Italy and Croatia, and regionally important Coastal ProtectionAreas (CPAs) in the Montenegro and Albania. Increasing human occupation of the coastal zone, with localised pollution, increasing fishing effort, maritime traffic, recreational use of the sea, habitat degradation, sewage discharge and agricultural wastes are among the main threats to this area. In recent years, there has been increasing interest in research and environmental work in the southern part of the proposed area, where studies and knowledge are more limited. This work is enlarging the database on marine biodiversity of the southern Adriatic, and improving biodiversity conservation and management in this region. Countries in the eastern Adriatic (Croatia, Montenegro, Albania) are making important steps towards fulfilling the environmental criteria and standards for their accession to EU structures: from this point of view, their involvement in the CIESM initiative for establishing coast-to-coast Marine Parks is another progressive step.
Article
As regions and countries become more interdependent and environmental problems become more global, conservation on a unilateral basis is no longer a viable option for the maintenance of large ecological systems (Thorsell and Harrison, 1990). This presents a challenge for the development of strategies for the coordination of transboundary conservation (López-Hoffman et al., 2010).As such, there is an opportunity for the ‘Peace Park’ concept to contribute to the development of frameworks for ecosystem based management, whilst providing a symbol of political cooperation. The ‘Peace Park’ rationale recognises the equal importance of both political and environmental criteria for balanced conservation (Westing, 1998). The designation of a peace park provides a rare opportunity for conservation and politics to benefit in harmony rather than at the expense of one another, which should be attractive both to environmentalists and politicians (Hammill and Besançon, 2007).
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any references for this publication.