No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Do marine protected areas deliver flows of ecosystem services to support human welfare?
... A study by Potts et al. (2014) have identified ecosystem services from UK protected habitats and species and subjected them to internal and external peer review through an expert-based process. They described the protected habitats using a EUNIS classification. ...
... Results are presented in matrices in which ecosystem services are scored for Broad Scale Habitats (EUNIS Level 3) and Habitats (EUNIS Level 4). Their relevant matrix is presented as Fig 3 in Potts et al. (2014). A shading of each cell within the matrix represents an indication of the relative importance of each EUNIS habitat in providing the respective ecosystem service (darker being more important, lighter less important). ...
... A shading of each cell within the matrix represents an indication of the relative importance of each EUNIS habitat in providing the respective ecosystem service (darker being more important, lighter less important). For the purpose of REST-COAST ecosystem service mapping, we have translated the shading in Potts et al. (2014) into numbered classifications where 3=Moderate contribution, 2=Low contribution, 1=No or negligible contribution, 0=Not known contribution, Blank=Not assessed ( A study by have mapped the distribution of seabed-associated ecosystem services capacity by using (i) a geospatial dataset representing the broadscale distribution of permanently-submerged seabed habitats with (ii) information on each habitat capacity to provide ecosystem services. The latter was found in six publications among which Galparsoro et al. (2014) and Potts et al. (2014). ...
This deliverable presents the generation of EUNIS habitat maps for Europe as a whole and for each of the pilot areas in REST-COAST. Subsequently, it presents the assignment of semi-quantitative scores for the contribution of each EUNIS (sub)habitat to the five key ecosystem services applying the rank scale 0 (none), 1 (very low contribution), 2 (low contribution), 3 (medium contribution), 4 (high contribution) to 5 (very high contribution). It also describes the assignment of the IUCN Red List of Habitats to each of the depicted EUNIS (sub)habitats in the pilot areas. And finally, to assess coastal system behaviour and restoration effects on ecosystem services and biodiversity gains under climate change, a homogenised score card methodology is presented to overcome the problem of comparing minor changes (some percents) with major changes (tens of percents) in the total scores for ESS or BDV in each pilot area.
... Studies across Europe have linked marine habitats to the provisioning of ESs (Burdon et al., 2017;Culhane et al., 2020;Potts et al., 2014;Salomidi et al., 2012;Teixeira et al., 2019;Turner and Schaafsma, 2015). In the Baltic Sea, however, the studies have concentrated mainly on a few habitats (Heckwolf et al., 2021;Rönnbäck et al., 2007) or the assessments are based on expert knowledge (Armoškaitė et al., 2020;Schumacher et al., 2021), and data and literature based, comprehensive assessment is lacking. ...
... This study follows the approach developed by Potts et al. (2014) where the results are presented in a matrix format with habitats and species listed in rows and ESs listed in columns. We use the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Services (CICES) v. 5.1 (Haines-Young and Potschin, 2018) for the selection of ES, as this classification has been adopted widely in many assessments and policies in the EU, including the MAES process that aimed to achieve the goals of EU's Biodiversity Strategy 2020 (Maes et al., 2014) and within the UK by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) who developed an online universal asset-service matrix tool (JNCC, 2023). ...
... Some highly mobile species, such as fish and marine mammals, cannot be placed in only one habitat. Following the approach by Potts et al. (2014) we included eight fish species that have importance for commercial and/or recreational fishery, into the assessment. The fish species included: Baltic herring (Clupea harengus membras), sprat (Sprattus sprattus), European smelt (Osmerus eperlanus), perch (Perca fluviatilis), pikeperch (Sander lucioperca), pike (Esox lucius), European whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus) and salmon (Salmo salar). ...
... This technical report accompanies the general summary and outlines of the project undertaken by the Marine Biological Association of the UK and experts at the University of Plymouth to assess the ecosystem services delivered by the marine habitats around Ascension Island. Ecosystem services are defined as 'the outputs of ecosystems from which people and society derive benefits' (Potts et al., 2014). ...
... No specific research has been undertaken to examine ecosystem service types and the levels of flow provided by the deep-sea and intertidal habitats present at Ascension Island. To systematically assess the types of ecosystem services and likely levels of provision, we adapted the framework used by Potts et al. (2014). This framework classifies ecosystem services into supporting services that result from habitat and species ecological function, regulating services, provisioning services and cultural services. ...
... To assess ecosystem goods and services provided by the deep-sea, the Potts et al., (2014) framework was adopted which categorises ecosystem services into four main groups (Fig. 1). The list of services outlined by Potts et al., (2014) has been modified and tailored to Ascension Island deep-sea habitats based on expert knowledge. ...
... These classifications give an indication of a species' contribution to the provision of the ecosystem service, and can be used as a proxy for the impact that the loss of that species (either completely or thorough reduced abundance) may have on service provision. The species-level ecosystem service contribution matrix is similar to ecosystem service matrices, which have been used to guide management decisions by identifying the importance of habitats (and occasionally species) for ecosystem service provision and the certainty underlying this importance (Burkhard et al. 2009;Campagne et al. 2017;Geange et al. 2019;Kokkoris et al. 2019;Potts et al. 2014). However, to our knowledge, the two measures (importance and certainty), within species-level ecosystem service matrices (which have so far been restricted to marine species (Potts et al. 2014;Burdon et al. 2017)), have not previously been combined to give an indication of contribution, or used to assess how responses to anthropogenic pressures may vary across species that differ in their service contribution. ...
... The species-level ecosystem service contribution matrix is similar to ecosystem service matrices, which have been used to guide management decisions by identifying the importance of habitats (and occasionally species) for ecosystem service provision and the certainty underlying this importance (Burkhard et al. 2009;Campagne et al. 2017;Geange et al. 2019;Kokkoris et al. 2019;Potts et al. 2014). However, to our knowledge, the two measures (importance and certainty), within species-level ecosystem service matrices (which have so far been restricted to marine species (Potts et al. 2014;Burdon et al. 2017)), have not previously been combined to give an indication of contribution, or used to assess how responses to anthropogenic pressures may vary across species that differ in their service contribution. Overall, the species-level ecosystem service contribution matrix provides a relatively simple approach to explore the responses of species with differing ecosystem service contributions to environmental change. ...
Animal‐mediated pollination is a key ecosystem service required to some extent by almost three‐quarters of the leading human food crops in global food production. Anthropogenic pressures such as habitat loss and land‐use intensification are causing shifts in ecological community composition, potentially resulting in declines in pollination services and impacting crop production. Previous research has often overlooked interspecific differences in pollination contribution, yet such differences mean that biodiversity declines will not necessarily negatively impact pollination. Here, we use a novel species‐level ecosystem service contribution matrix along with mixed‐effects models to explore how groups of terrestrial species who contribute differently to crop pollination respond globally to land‐use type, land‐use intensity, and availability of natural habitats in the surrounding landscape. We find that the species whose contribution to crop pollination is higher generally respond less negatively (and in some cases positively) to human disturbance of land, compared to species that contribute less or not at all to pollination. This result may be due to these high‐contribution species being less sensitive to anthropogenic land conversions, which has led humans to being more reliant on them for crop pollination. However, it also suggests that there is potential for crop pollination to be resilient in the face of anthropogenic land conversions. With such a high proportion of food crops requiring animal‐mediated pollination to some extent, understanding how anthropogenic landscapes impact ecological communities and the consequences for pollination is critical for ensuring food security.
... marina and Z. noltei) are numerous and have been defined within ecosystem service frameworks (Finlayson, 2016;UK National Ecosystem Assessment. (UK NEA), 2023) based on the habitat-ecosystem service matrix approach (Potts et al., 2014). From evidence identified in the literature, littoral (intertidal) (Potts et al., 2014;Saunders et al., 2015;Rees et al., 2022). ...
... (UK NEA), 2023) based on the habitat-ecosystem service matrix approach (Potts et al., 2014). From evidence identified in the literature, littoral (intertidal) (Potts et al., 2014;Saunders et al., 2015;Rees et al., 2022). The number indicates the confidence in evidence available to assign ES provision (3 = UK-related, peer-reviewed literature; 2 = Grey or overseas literature; 1 = Expert opinion). ...
Seagrass is an important marine habitat that provides benefits to society in the form of ecosystem services. Services include the provision of food via fisheries, the regulation of water quality and the ability to sequester and store carbon. In the UK, seagrass beds are in decline, increasing the risk of ecosystem service loss. Current efforts to protect, restore and create seagrass habitat, beyond spatial management measures, rely on grant funding and donations. Emerging carbon, biodiversity and wider ecosystem service markets offering potential revenue sources could facilitate the enhancement of seagrass habitat at scale. Participation in ecosystem service markets, requires that projects deliver on the ecosystem service benefits defined. As the benefits will have been paid for, there are risks associated with not delivering on ecosystem service benefits. It is important that the risk is clearly defined. In this study we further the marine natural capital and risk register approach and apply the method to a case study area to support the development of sustainable funding options for seagrass habitat enhancement in Plymouth Sound, UK. Habitat Suitability modelling is also used to map potential areas for seagrass habitat enhancement. We find that, in the Plymouth Sound area, the risk of loss of ecosystem services for subtidal seagrass habitats is, at present, high. This is primarily linked to the declining extent and condition of subtidal seagrass assets. Under current governance, all of Plymouth Sound’s subtidal seagrass are within a Marine Protected Area, though this conservation designation does not guarantee that the seagrass bed is protected from damaging activity. Under current environmental conditions there is opportunity for widespread seagrass restoration and creation. Risk to seagrass beds and any future private funding could be reduced by governance actions that enable effective direct protection of the seagrass assets and mitigate harmful pressures ( e.g. , reduction of water pollution). Emerging financial ‘products’ from seagrass ecosystem services that can support restoration and creation, require a high degree of integrity. The natural capital asset and risk register framework can provide information to underpin product development. With the development of revenue streams from ecosystem services there is a need for more intentional governance and site-based monitoring of these habitats as natural capital assets. Further research is needed to define any social or economic outcomes.
Synthesis and Application
By assessing the risk to the status of seagrass assets through this approach, it is possible to determine the complementary governance actions needed to underpin investment in seagrass habitat enhancement. The methods are transferable to other locations where data exists to define the asset status. These specific findings are relevant nationally where similar vectors of risk (pressures) are identified.
... The combined evidence review and regional expert knowledge elicitation allowed increased confidence in the applicability of reviewed evidence to European Atlantic Area sites. The evidence gathered was assessed and graphically represented within a matrix design adapted from Burdon et al. (2017) and Potts et al. (2014). ...
... As such, results have been used to inform policy and the development of management measures for target areas, such as, assessing changes in ecosystem service supply and demand in response to land use and cover change in the Yangtze river delta, China (Tao et al., 2018). Matrices have also been applied to assess potential for ecosystem service contribution within UK marine protected area (MPA) networks, related to contribution of habitats and species designated as protected features within individual MPAs (Potts et al., 2014) and to inform marine spatial planning decisions . Extension of existing matrices to provide evidence on particular taxa such as seabirds has increased the capacity of an integrated tool to support local and regional assessment in marine planning (Burdon et al., 2017). ...
... One reason may be that marine ecosystems and their services are harder to map due to their three-dimensional, multi-layer (water surface, water column, sea bottom) and dynamic (flowing water, tide-affected systems) character. Most authors link specific habitats (Salomidi et al. 2012, Galparsoro et al. 2014, Depellegrin et al. 2017, Hattam et al. 2021 and/or species (Burdon et al. 2017, Culhane et al. 2018, or marine protected areas (Potts et al. 2014, Geange et al. 2019) and the supply of ES . Other au-thors combine the analysis of marine and terrestrial habitats , Schumacher et al. 2021 or connect ecosystem functions and the supply of ES (Armoškaitė et al. 2020). ...
... The results reveal clear positive and negative interactions within the studied linkages. Potts et al. (2014) described the links between the supply of ES and the ecosystem components found within nature reserves, suggesting there are links between the types of use and the ES supply. ...
Marine ecosystems are highly dynamic and complex and contribute immensely to human well-being. Spatiotemporal overlaps of marine uses and human activities are constantly pressuring ecosystems, and that in turn impacts the supply quantity and quality of various ecosystem services (ES). This study is the first attempt to use the ES matrix to link marine uses and the capacity to supply ES. Combining expert- and literature-based evaluations, we assessed the relationships of twelve marine uses and five selected ecosystem services in the German North and Baltic Sea and mapped their spatial distribution. Despite a limited data availability and a higher need for simplification, the matrix approach proved to be applicable for the marine realm. Areas used for tourism and those that provide coastal safeguarding show high values of ES supply in comparison to areas used for sediment extraction and areas previously used as ammunition dumping areas. Nature conservation areas tend to have the highest capacity to supply ES. Differences in the ES supply pattern between the North Sea and Baltic Sea were identified. The results show the influence of anthropogenic activities on the spatial distribution of ES supply and can support future marine planning.
... This study also considered "nursery function" and "maintenance of food webs" in its assessment, even if these are sometimes considered as functions [15] or as regulating services [22]. Although we also included "nursery function" and "maintenance of food webs", ecological functions, such as primary and secondary production provided by marine ecosystems and sometimes defined as support services, were not included in this review [25,29,30]. ...
... Our results were influenced by the high proportion of articles on food provision (i.e., fisheries), which is an important ecosystem service that marine ecosystems provide, having high economic importance for humans. Some marine species groups are more frequently assessed and studied such as commercial species and top predator fish stocks [30]. Regarding tourism or recreation, our screening process retrieved literature on the impact of tourism and/or recreation activities on the ecosystems, which we excluded as out of scope. ...
Background
The current biodiversity crisis underscores the urgent need for sustainable management of the human uses of nature. In the context of sustainability management, adopting the ecosystem service (ES) concept, i.e., the benefits humans obtain from nature, can support decisions aimed at benefiting both nature and people. However, marine ecosystems in particular endure numerous direct drivers of change (i.e., habitat loss and degradation, overexploitation, pollution, climate change, and introduction of non-indigenous species) all of which threaten ecosystem structure, functioning, and the provision of ES. Marine ecosystems have received less attention than terrestrial ecosystems in ES literature, and knowledge on marine ES is hindered by the highly heterogeneous scientific literature with regard to the different types of marine ecosystem, ES, and their correlates. Here, we constructed a systematic map of the existing literature to highlight knowledge clusters and knowledge gaps on how changes in marine ecosystems influence the provision of marine ES.
Method
We searched for all evidence documenting how changes in structure and functioning of marine ecosystems affect the delivery of ES in academic and grey literature sources. In addition to Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, we searched 6 online databases from intergovernmental agencies, supranational or national organizations, and NGOs. We screened English-language documents using predefined inclusion criteria on titles, abstracts, and then full texts, without any geographic or temporal limitations. All qualifying literature was coded and metadata were extracted. No formal validity appraisal was undertaken. We identified knowledge clusters and gaps in terms of which ecosystem types, biodiversity components, or ES types have been studied and how these categories are linked.
Review findings
Our searches identified 41 884 articles published since 1968 of which 12 140 were duplicates; 25 747 articles were excluded at the title-screening stage, then 2774 at the abstract stage. After full-text screening, a total of 653 articles—having met the eligibility criteria—were included in the final database, spanning from 1977 to July 2021. The number of studies was unevenly distributed across geographic boundaries, ecosystem types, ES, and types of pressure.
The most studied ecosystems were pelagic ecosystems on continental shelves and intertidal ecosystems, and deep-sea habitats and ice-associated ecosystems were the least studied. Food provision was the major focus of ES articles across all types of marine ecosystem (67%), followed by climate regulation (28%), and recreation (14%). Biophysical values were assessed in 91% of the analysed articles, 30% assessed economic values, but only 3% assessed socio-cultural values. Regarding the type of impact on ecosystems, management effects were the most studied, followed by overexploitation and climate change (with increase in seawater temperature being the most commonly assessed climate change pressure). Lastly, the introduction of non-indigenous species and deoxygenation were the least studied.
Conclusions
This systematic map provides, in addition to a database, knowledge gaps and clusters on how marine ecosystem changes impact ES provision. The current lack of knowledge is a threat to the sustainability of human actions and knowledge-based nature conservation. The knowledge gaps and clusters highlighted here could guide future research and impact the beneficial development of policy and management practices.
... These MPAs face multiple challenges, including ocean acidification, coastal erosion, and the cumulative impacts of human activities such as fishing, pollution, and coastal development (Gill et al. 2017;IPBES 2019;Grorud-Colvert et al. 2021). While marine ecosystems provide essential ecosystem services including tourism, food security, and climate regulation (Potts et al. 2014;Ban et al. 2019), unsustainable tourism practices can undermine these ecosystems. Furthermore, marine and coastal tourism have great economic potential. ...
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) worldwide are under increasing pressure to balance biodiversity conservation with the growing demands of tourism, often exacerbated by anthropogenic impacts on coastal ecosystems. Exog-enous shocks, such as environmental or policy-driven events, can offer opportunities for shifts in natural resource governance. This longitudinal study examines how a 2016 tourism ban in Mexico Islas Marietas National Park, prompted by coral reef degradation, influenced its polycentric governance. We use a mixed-methods approach, analyzing data from 53 governance meetings held before (March 2015 to April 2016) and after (May 2016 to Novem-ber 2017) the regulatory shock. We compare stakeholder participation, affiliation networks, rules, and institutions to assess changes in the polycentric governance system. Our results show an increase in stakeholder engagement and two new decision-making forums have emerged. Network analysis reveals a rise in network density and social ties, suggesting enhanced trust and collaboration among stakeholders, although individual stakeholder responses to the shock varied. The tourism ban triggered a shift towards formalizing collaboration agreements, increasing stakeholder involvement in shaping public use norms, and decentralizing revenue generation. The coastal MPA also implemented a specific regulatory framework with recalculated carrying capacity, improved monitoring, and stricter accountability for tour operators. The Islas Marietas case offers valuable insights into coastal management in the Anthropocene, emphasizing the need for adaptive polycentric governance approaches that foster collaboration , and empower stakeholders to safeguard the long-term sustainability of both marine commons and livelihoods.
... Furthermore, the regulatory services (11%) provided by the reservoir contribute to maintaining ecological balance and water quality. These findings underscore the significance of engaging local people in conservation and management efforts, as their insights can inform more effective and contextually appropriate strategies for sustaining the ecosystem services provided by the Shanzai reservoir (Potts et al. 2014;Burdon et al. 2019). ...
This study employed an innovative participatory geographic information system (PGIS) approach to evaluate the health of reservoirs and their socioecological importance to communities within the Shanzai sub‐catchment. The participation rate was 100% in all five communities, with 53% of participants were women. Statiscial analysis shows that algal bloom negatively correlate with less fish productivity and positively with unhealthy reservoir indicators. In contrast, clean water positively correlates with healthy reservoir indicators, while algal blooms consistently show negative correlations with all indicators of healthy reservoir. These findings show current reservoir health, with 41% of participants recognizing reservoirs as healthy, 23% as unhealthy and 36% responded as moderate. Laboratory analysis identified 30 phytoplankton genera, with Cyanophyta as the dominant group. Highest phytoplankton density was observed in May, followed by June and April, providing crucial insights into the seasonal dynamics of reservoir ecosystems. Sentinel‐2 imagery further highlighted algal bloom fluctuations, the bloom extent particularly increased during May 2023, supporting water quality measurements and validating algae as a community‐identified indicator. This study underlines the value and accuracy of community‐driven insights in environmental monitoring. The alignment of participatory mapping, laboratory analyses, and remote sensing demonstrates the efficiency of PGIS in managing freshwater resources. By fostering knowledge exchange, this approach promotes sustainable resource monitoring and conservation. These findings represent a significant contribution to the advancement of reservoir monitoring and underscore the importance of prioritizing community‐driven initiatives in environmental research.
... Nevertheless, several ecosystem services have been 102 identified in the Philippines including biodiversity preservation, research and educational 103 purposes, increase in tourism, climate change regulation, and shoreline protection [18]. 104 However, a high number of MPAs in the Philippines are under-managed, not seeing 105 positive results in biodiversity conservation [8,12]. The ongoing degradation of the country's 106 marine resources highlights the urgent need to boost resilience against climate change impacts. ...
The increasing threats to marine ecosystems underscore the urgent need for effective conservation strategies. Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) serve as critical tools for safeguarding these ecosystems, shielding them from human induced pressures. If well managed, these areas have the potential to increase ecosystem resilience and have positive impacts on their surrounding communities. This study will investigate the management effectiveness of four MPAs in the Southeastern Mindanao, Philippines. To do this the MPA Management Effectiveness Assessment Tool (MEAT) was used followed by focus group discussions (FGDs). Four municipalities (Mabini, Lupon, San Isidro, Mati) and a total of 12 villages were studied. All MPAs had an excellent rating in their overall MEAT score, however, none of the MPAs were able to achieve the necessary thresholds to reach effectiveness level 3 (Sus-tained). The main management challenges identified were poor enforcement, limited funding, and lack of training. MEAT results do not appear to show the whole picture as, during the FGDs, fishers revealed several challenges and recommendations of each MPA. This project provided several recommendations that can serve as a baseline for the MPAs to improve both its ecological and social systems.
... For the ecosystem service assessment, we used the matrix-based approach [39], which links ecosystem service potentials to land use/land cover types or habitats. Due to the possibility of using various data sources, including expert judgement, the matrix-based approach is applicable in data-scarce areas and has become a common approach for mapping and assessing marine ecosystem services [40][41][42][43][44][45]. Marine ecosystem service potentials are commonly linked to benthic habitats using classifications like EUNIS [45,46]. ...
Knowledge of the structure and spatial distribution of coastal water habitats is crucial for understanding coastal water systems. However, spatial habitat data are largely lacking, hampering ecological and ecosystem service assessments as required by EU policies. Mapping the structure, spatial distribution, and temporal dynamics of macrophytes is a particular challenge. In this study, we combined long-term macrophyte data with remote sensing methods (i.e., aerial and underwater drones, as well as SENTINEL-2 data) to assess their potential for spatial macrophyte monitoring and habitat-based ecosystem service assessments, in which ecosystem services were linked to habitats using the expert-based Baltic Ecosystem Service Potential Matrix. Greifswald Bay in the German Baltic Sea served as the case study for this research. Our aerial drone detected macrophytes up to a depth of 3 m that could be integrated into the existing macrophyte monitoring scheme of the Water Framework Directive. Reliable data from SENTINEL-2 were only obtained in optically shallow waters and could therefore only be used as proxy indicators to assess changes at a water body level. Despite the uncertainties and inaccuracies of the SENTINEL-2-based macrophyte maps, they were crucial for filling data gaps and enabled a spatially differentiated ecosystem service assessment for Greifswald Bay. However, we have shown that the commonly used matrix approach does not allow for the assessment of spatiotemporal changes at the water body level and is thus not suitable for supporting coastal and marine policy implementation.
... Within MPAs, often there are variations, ranging from those with no-take zones, where extractive activities are prohibited, to multiple-use protected areas allowing for regulated human activities. The regulations established by MPAs can help them serving various purposes, including biodiversity conservation, enhanced fisheries management, and the protection of ecosystem services, such as the replenishment of fishery stocks and opportunities for tourism (Lester et al. 2009, Cinner et al. 2016, Potts et al. 2014. In this sense, MPAs have the potential to deliver both positive ecological (Lester et al. 2009, Edgar et al. 2014, Rojo et al. 2019) and social outcomes (Mascia et al. 2010, Oldekop et al. 2016, Ban et al. 2019). ...
Marine protected areas (MPAs) are widely promoted as effective tools for conserving biodiversity and safeguarding ecosystem services. However, MPA success can be hindered by a lack of legitimacy and low social support because of perceived negative effects on ecosystem services and human well-being. Despite these social challenges, the social dimensions of marine conservation, such as the effects of MPAs on coastal livelihoods and local communities' perceptions of these effects, are often overlooked in conservation initiatives. In this study, we use a mixed methods approach, combining qualitative thematic analysis and quantitative network analysis derived from interviews and focus group discussions, to examine the perceptions of key stakeholder groups about the Litoral Norte MPA in Portugal. Our findings reveal that most stakeholder groups hold more negative than positive views about the governance and management of the MPA. Key concerns include unsatisfactory participation in MPA decisions and perceptions that the MPA fails to deliver positive social and ecological outcomes, such as increased community involvement, fair income distribution, and enhanced fish abundance. Policy makers and managers need to address these negative perceptions to improve conservation governance and management. By considering the stakeholder feedback presented in this study, such as fostering better engagement with the local community and transforming conflicts into opportunities for co-developing new conservation actions with local resource users, policy makers and managers can increase support for Litoral Norte and enhance the social and ecological outcomes of the MPA.
... MSP is also seen as an important step in the implementation of a comprehensive ecosystem-based management. Another approach is the consideration of CES in the context of marine protected areas (MPAs) and marine habitats [33,34]. These essays point out the links with human activities such as sport, recreation, and nature watching, but all highlight the scarcity of data available for making assessments. ...
Socio-cultural dimensions and values in maritime spatial planning (MSP) are gaining momentum worldwide and especially in the European Union (EU), since it is acknowledged that they are the “missing layer” of maritime spatial plans (MSPlans). These values are partly explored through cultural ecosystem services (CES). Coastal and marine CES refer to the benefits that humans derive from the coastal and marine environments in recreational, artistic, spiritual, and educational terms. They reflect the ways in which coastal and marine ecosystems contribute to human well-being, cultural identity, and interactions with nature. The research question is how to map and assess coastal/marine ecosystem services and to integrate them in the MSPlans. Thus, this systematic review sheds light on methodological and technical issues with CES mapping and assessment and provides guidance on how to incorporate CES in MSP for future research. Publications dealing with the spatial aspects of CES were examined with an extra focus on participatory mapping approaches. Initially, 199 articles were identified, and 50 articles were ultimately eligible for the analysis. Papers were concentrated in the European Atlantic, whilst their scope was either local or regional. A large number of articles consider the contribution of CES to efficient marine management rather than to achieving an integrated and coordinated MSP. Social and mixed mapping approaches were met with the most often, especially participatory mapping approaches. Also, non-monetary valuation was prevailing, and a multitude of techniques, tools, and statistical software were used. In most of the cases, the distribution of values in relation to environmental, socio-economic, and demographic factors was examined. This article concludes that an effective integration of CES into MSP is crucial for creating prospects of a more sustainable and inclusive approach to coastal/marine planning and for the well-being of ecosystems and communities both currently and for future generations. This knowledge should become “property” of the maritime spatial planners.
... The concept of ecosystem services has emerged as central in understanding what must be maintained for humans to continue to benefit from coasts and seas (Potts et al., 2014). However, ecosystem services are not generally governed directly, but rather a range of scientific assessments enable consideration of trade-offs in development alternatives, or what actions or responses are needed to mitigate pressures or impacts caused by activities which impact ecosystem (Elliott et al., 2017). ...
The world’s coasts, estuaries and nearshore seas are highly dynamic. This presents a challenge for classification systems, including social, economic and legal classifications. Indeed, each system of classification brings pitfalls of fixed standardisation from a particular perspective, and so we commend the other chapters in this treatise for developing an holistic perspective. Nevertheless, we contend that in order to speak of coasts and estuaries we need some idea of what we are referring to. Coasts and estuaries include the human activities and institutions which occur there, and systems of classification can help us deepen understanding about these. With increasing levels human activity and international commitments to nature conservation and sustainable development, many coastal nations have developed systems of management to address these issues. Whilst some coastal management is informal or bottom-up by civil society, much management effort is driven by complex legal frameworks which span the land-sea divide. Our overview outlines the key legal jurisdictions, principles and tools which are relevant to the coastal zone. The law plays a significant role to define the powers and duties of public and private organisations and individuals living and working in the coastal zone, including property, ownership, and public rights such as access or private rights for development. Legal systems in coastal nations vary, but we outline the basic categories of civil and customary law, giving examples from different coastal nations. The complexity of law and regulation has famously been described using a ‘horrendogram’. To help make sense of this legal complexity, we present a classification of key sectors of maritime activity. We also present a classification of the functional goals of management which can aid reflection about effective management. Finally, we review whether legislative and management regimes are fit for purpose or how they might need reform to achieve more sustainable futures
... MSP is also seen as an important step in the implementation of comprehensive ecosystem-based management. Fletcher et al. and Potts et al. [32,33] consider CES in the context of marine protected areas (MPAs) and marine habitats. They point out the links with human activities such as sport, recreation and nature watching, but all highlight the scarcity of data available for making assessments. ...
Μapping of marine ecosystem services is a precondition for their subsequent assessment, so as to prepare economically, environmentally, societally and culturally relevant plans for the exploitation of coastal/marine resources, i.e., maritime spatial plans. Specifically, socio-cultural dimensions and values in MSP are gaining momentum worldwide and especially in the EU, since it is acknowledged that they are the “missing layer” of maritime spatial plans. These values are partly explored, especially through Cultural Ecosystem Services (CES), the latter being the non-material benefits that humans obtain from ecosystems. Since there are several limitations in assessing CES and their value, the aim of this paper is to review the spectrum of endeavors that include methods, techniques and tools used for mapping and assessing coastal and marine Cultural Ecosystem Services (CES), to inform MSP processes. The effective integration of CES into MSP creates prospects of a more sustainable and inclusive approach to coastal and marine management, guaranteeing the well-being of ecosystems and communities for the current and the future generations.
... In each study site, the assessment was carried out by eight experts. Expert elicitation for ecosystem service assessments is common in ES research and can provide valuable local or regional knowledge [36][37][38]. We identified and contacted multiple local and regional experts in the fields of marine conservation, marine science, and fisheries in the Baltic Sea, who have a thematic or spatial relation to either one of the case study sites. ...
Worldwide, fisheries have experienced change over time. An excess of exploitation for providing food has led to overfishing and the depletion of fish stocks. However, fishing communities are also part of the cultural heritage and contribute to the attractiveness of coastal areas to tourists. Our aim is to identify if ecosystem service assessments (ESA) can reflect the condition of fisheries and their economic and social aspects. We developed a tailored, expert-based ESA and applied it to two case studies in the eastern German Baltic Sea under different fishery management scenarios. The results show that reducing fishing pressure, actively restoring habitats, and improving their ecological status increase the provision of most ecosystem services. We discuss and conclude that ESAs allow for a holistic view on fisheries that goes beyond the economic importance of fisheries and shows both the interdependence between fisheries and healthy marine ecosystems, and their relevance for coastal communities. Such a holistic view is necessary for a sustainable approach to fisheries management. Our approach is easily transferable to other regions, and can be used to structure discussion on fisheries management scenarios, as well as to track and visualize societal changes.
... MPAs and OECMs must be proposed based on scientifically sound criteria and approved in a participatory manner that incorporates the views and needs of all stakeholders [85]. Once established, these areas must be managed effectively and equitably to conserve biodiversity and ensure the well-being of all people who depend, in one way or another, on the services provided by the ecosystems they protect [86]. ...
Mexico has committed to protecting 30% of its marine territory by 2030 to comply with Target 3 of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, adopted during the 15th Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity. In this paper, we demonstrate the feasibility of meeting this commitment by determining the marine extent of conservation measures based on legally established Marine Protected Areas and areas that meet the criteria to be considered as Other Effective area-based Conservation Measures (OECMs) and determining the marine extent of areas proposed in various conservation planning exercises that can be created as any of the area-based instruments that exist in Mexico. The total coverage of existing and proposed areas was calculated by merging the dataset to remove duplicates and dissolving the boundaries between polygons to determine the total area. Spatial analysis was carried out in ArcGIS using geoprocessing tools. Currently, more than 25% of Mexico’s marine area is legally protected or conserved, with federal marine protected areas covering more than 22% of the Exclusive Economic Zone. The legally established areas that can be considered OECMs cover about 3% of the marine territory. We found that more than 9% of Mexico’s Economic Exclusive Zone contains areas of high conservation importance that are not covered by any area-based instrument. This study shows that Mexico has the potential to protect or conserve 32.8% of its marine territory by 2030.
... The characterization of human-ocean relationships is complex, as multiple aspects must be considered simultaneously. These aspects include the non-linear interaction between humans and the biological systems in which they are embedded (Koch et al., 2009), the translation of these interactions into the flow of services from nature to people (Potts et al., 2014), and the different human uses that can generate conflicts between social actors (Agardy et al., 2003). Multidisciplinary methods that integrate information from diverse sources are needed. ...
The concept of ecosystem services has become increasingly important in understanding the interactions between humans and nature and the associated implications in terms of human well-being. Despite growing interest in ecosystem services research, knowledge of their ecological underpinnings and their integration with socioeconomic and management components remains limited. In this study, we propose a multi-layered network approach to assess the connection between ecological components, ecosystem functions and societal uses and benefits, management actions, and global change impacts in four Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) in Spain. An interaction matrix between all relevant components in the MPAs was built based on scientific knowledge, published records, and validated in stakeholder workshops. Then, we applied network analysis to explore the emergent properties of the network of connected elements in the MPAs. For example, habitat foundation species, such as kelp or seagrasses, were central to the networks and concentrated most connections with other ecological, social, and management components. The positive-negative index showed that human activities often had negative indices, ecological components had positive indices, and management, mitigation action, and infrastructure had variable effects across MPAs. Betweenness identified the foundation species or the scientific community as playing a key role in facilitating connections across the network in MPAs. This research provides valuable insights into the complex interactions between ecosystems, human activities, ecosystem functions and services, and management opportunities for coastal MPAs, with important consequences for the local management of the areas.
... Therefore, the common current approach is to carry out an ES assessment, for example by linking ES to the habitats where they derive from (e. g. Potts et al. [49]; Hattam et al. [48,50]) and then carry out an assessment of pressures and their impacts on those habitats in a separate step. Then, the results can be linked together (e. g. ...
An assessment framework of marine ecosystem services (ES) indicators to quantify the socio-ecological effectiveness of nature-based solutions (NBS) and nature-inclusive harvesting (NIH) under climate-driven changes was developed. It creates a common understanding about the health status of ecosystems, their services (ES), and the impact of implementing NBS&NIH to inform policymakers and the public. The two NBS considered were restoration and conservation which need to be performed considering the sustainable harvesting of marine resources (NIH). The interaction between the biodiversity indicators with the socioeconomic, response and pressure indicators was established using the ES cascade. However, it was also linked to other environmental (e.g., DAPSI(W)R(M)) and economic frameworks such as the Standard National Account (SNA) and the System of Environment Economic Accounting (SEEA). A set of 155 multidisciplinary indicators were identified through a literature review and their effectiveness in measuring ES under changing climate. Biodiversity & environmental as well as Pressure indicators are the most numerous in the list representing 34 % and 23 % of the total respectively, while only 12 % of the used Indicators below to the economic dimension. Socioeconomic indicators considering CC are rarely contemplated, except for a short list redefining output and demand approach indicators to aggregate a carbon footprint valuation. For cultural services economic indicators dominate, whereas sparse for provisioning and regulating. The 70 % of the selected indicators were also empirically verified with 27 European storylines. Storylines have high coverage of biodiversity, environmental indicators, and CC indicators (91 %), lower coverage of economic (71 %) and poorer related to social (31 %) indicators. Harvest, pressure and/or habitats are clearly the groups of indicators majority used when evaluating the ES on marine and coastal ecosystems both in terms of the number of used indicators but also, the frequency of use. Despite the increase of ES research, this study identifies 14 substantial gaps or weaknesses limiting the guidance for NBS&NIH implementation derived from the employment of an unbalanced (between dimensions and key groups) number of quantitative indicators.
... Clearly, there is a need for indicators (Church et al., 2014;Atkins et al., 2015;Broszeit et al., 2017) to elucidate the linkages between CES and wellbeing benefits of saltmarshes, and their spatial and temporal variability, currently rarely explored (Santana-Cordero et al., 2016). Some examples of these links in coastal and marine landscapes are emerging (Potts et al., 2014;X. Wang et al., 2017;Saunders et al., 2015;Burdon et al., 2017), but further work is required to advance decision-making (Kenter et al., 2016) and support the science-policy-practice interface (McKinley et al., 2018;Drakou et al., 2018) in a way that takes account of these complexities. ...
Coastal saltmarshes provide globally important ecosystem services including 'blue carbon' sequestration, flood protection, pollutant remediation, habitat provision and cultural value. Large portions of marshes have been lost or fragmented as a result of land reclamation, embankment construction, and pollution. Sea level rise threatens marsh survival by blocking landward migration where coastlines have been developed. Research-informed saltmarsh conservation and restoration efforts are helping to prevent further loss, yet significant knowledge gaps remain. Using a mixed methods approach, this paper identifies ten research priorities through an online questionnaire and a residential workshop attended by an international, multi-disciplinary network of 35 saltmarsh experts spanning natural, physical and social sciences across research, policy, and practitioner sectors. Priorities have been grouped under four thematic areas of research: Saltmarsh Area Extent, Change and Restoration Potential (including past, present, global variation), Spatio-social contexts of Ecosystem Service delivery (e.g. influences of environmental context, climate change, and stakeholder groups on service provisioning), Patterns and Processes in saltmarsh functioning (global drivers of saltmarsh ecosystem structure/function) and Management and Policy Needs (how management varies contextually; challenges/opportunities for management). Although not intended to be exhaustive, the challenges, opportunities, and strategies for addressing each research priority examined here, providing a blueprint of the work that needs to be done to protect saltmarshes for future generations.
... Therefore, achieving sustainable development of the ME and EE is a major challenge. In order to address the issues faced by the ME and EE, various countries have introduced corresponding ocean policies, such as the EU's "Guidelines for the Marine Strategic Framework" (2008), the UK's "Marine Protected Area Policy" (2013) [2], and Norway's "Norwegian Ocean Strategy" (2017) [3]. These policy documents aim to accelerate the sustainable development of the ME and EE, protect and restore marine ecosystems, and promote marine science and technology research. ...
The ecological environment (EE) is an important factor affecting the sustainable development of the marine economy (ME): achieving coordinated development between the ME and EE remains a problem to be explored. From three perspectives—comprehensive development level, coupling coordination degree spatiotemporal analysis, and obstacle degree recognition—this paper explores the development level and spatiotemporal evolution characteristics of ME and EE coupling coordination in 11 coastal areas in China from 1999 to 2019. The results indicate the following: (1) During the research period, the comprehensive development levels of the ME and EE in China’s coastal areas continued to improve, with relatively high levels of economic structure subsystems and pressure subsystems. (2) There was a clear coupling relationship between the ME and EE, with a high degree of coupling, mainly consisting of high-quality coupling and good coupling. The increase in coupling coordination was significant, especially in Guangdong, Shandong, and Liaoning. (3) The analysis of the obstacle degree found that the crucial obstacle elements affecting the coordinated development of the ME and EE included the ME vitality subsystem and the EE response subsystem. Finally, policy suggestions are put forward, including promoting the development of an ecotype ME, promoting marine technology innovation, and adopting differentiated EE governance policies according to local conditions. This study helps evaluate the development capacity of the ME in China’s coastal areas and provides a basis for formulating targeted ME development strategies.
... Aiming to acknowledge and analyse the spatial distribution of the ES supply, we have built, for the first time to our knowledge, a regional ES matrix to analyse the potential that marine benthic habitats have to provide multiple ES (i.e. the ecosystem service potential, ESP) in the Canary Islands. Even if ES have been widely mapped and assessed (Galparsoro, Borja, and Uyarra 2014;Potts et al. 2014), ES are context-dependent and linking them with the different ecosystems capable of providing them remains challenging. Moreover, literature has not always followed a homogeneous terminology to categorize ES, which hinders the gathering of empirical data on their supply (Haines-Young and Potschin 2018). ...
... There are various natural PAs in Wuyishan City, but some of them overlap with each other and there are local differences. Different types of PAs provide different ecosystem services (Potts et al., 2014), and thus it will be necessary to comprehensively evaluate and optimize the integration of the overlapping hot spots within PAs based on their dominant ecosystem services in the future. Moreover, the protection of PAs cannot be limited to management within the PAs. ...
The construction of protected areas (PAs) is not only the most effective way to preserve biodiversity resources and the natural heritage, but also provides important cultural ecosystem services (CESs) for satisfying human psychological and spiritual needs and improving human well-being. Knowledge of CESs at the county level is vital for the bottom-up promotion of the overall work of China’s PAs. The assessment and mapping of the spatial pattern of CESs, and their supply and demand relationship in PAs and their surrounding areas, are of great significance for high-quality development planning at the county scale. In our study, we developed an integrated approach to mapping the supply and demand of CESs, and then integrated the SolVES model with social media comments to explore the matching relationship between CESs’ (aesthetic inspiration, education humanities, and recreation and ecotourism) supply and demand using Wuyishan City, China, with its abundant PAs, as a case study. The results showed that the supply of three types of CESs accounting for approximately 70% of the study area was greater than the demand, and thus these CESs have significant future development prospects. The distribution of the three high-supply CESs and tourist destinations showed roughly the same spatial patterns, in which the high-demand hot spots were identified in the south of Wuyishan City. And the total supply and demand levels inside the PAs were much greater than those outside. Therefore, clarifying the matching relationship between supply and demand of CESs at the county level is not only conducive to promoting the sustainable development of natural resources, but also provides a reference for the planning of county-level protection of PAs under each county’s jurisdiction.
... Ecosystems can reduce wind speed and stabilize soil, while ecosystems located in arid and semi-arid areas play an important role in reducing wind erosion [23]. This effect on the ecosystem is called the sand-stabilization service [13]. ...
Ecosystem services (ES) have been shrinking due to unreasonable development and utilization for a long time. There are many studies on ES, but the ecological information for policymakers is still complex and obscure. To address this critical omission, based on remote sensing data, combined with meteorological data, land use data, and administrative division data, using GIS spatial analysis technology and some ecological process models, we develop an ecosystem services radiation assessment framework (ESRAF) that can provide policymakers with concise and reliable ecological information. We illustrate the measurement of ESRAF through an application to specific regions of China’s national ecological sheltering zone (NESZ), showing that the approach can effectively identify the beneficiary areas (SBA) for sand-stabilization service, soil conservation service, and water conservation service, and the degree of sharing of ES of SBA. ES produced by ecosystems in a specific region not only generates huge benefits locally but also a large number of ES benefit surrounding regions through cross-regional transmission. Specifically, in 2015, the area benefiting from sand-stabilization service provided by the Ordos’s ecosystem is about 1.66×106 km2, the amount of dust reduction in SBA would reduce by 28,738.67×104 tons. The Loess Plateau Ecological Screen (LPES) provides critical soil conservation service, the SBA of LPES includes two parts: LPES and the Yellow River. The Northeast Forest Belt (NFB) provides vital water conservation services. The water conservation service beneficiary area is mainly located near the NFB, with 266 hydrological response units, covering an area of 8.982×104 km2. This study also showed that the transmission distance is inversely proportional to the radiation effect, that is, the benefit level decreases with the distance from SPA. According to the degree of sharing of ES of SBA, the proposed cross-regional differentiated ecological compensation scheme is helpful to promote regional sustainable development. At the same time, this study also shows that NESZ is of great significance for ensuring China’s ecological security.
... Besides the provisioning ecosystem services assessed in our model, studies have shown positive effects for fish and benthic species and communities, including an increase in the biodiversity around turbine foundations from supporting services [87]. For regulating services, increase in mussel has been observed that is likely to increase the capacity of the system for waste remediation and carbon sequestration [88]. For cultural services, the OWFs could act as new recreational opportunities for tourists to visit these places [14], which may bring benefits through the development of MU platforms. ...
The rapid development of offshore wind farms (OWFs) has raised concerns about the increasing conflicts and synergies with existing marine activities, especially the traditional fishery industry, from socioeconomic and environmental perspectives. Quantifying the conflicts and synergies require frameworks that can consider environment and economic systems simultaneously. This study builds on and extends a well-established computable general equilibrium (CGE) model to incorporate a natural capital and ecosystem service into the modelling framework, enabling a comprehensive analysis of the two-way interactions between the economy and natural environment. Our results suggest that expansion of OWFs has significant negative impacts on the seafood sectors, whereas fish stocks benefit slightly as fewer fish are harvested. Moreover, the increase in fish stocks due to the closed areas and artificial reef effect could bring benefits to the fishing sector, and pass onto the wider economy. The combined impacts of expansion of OWFs and increased fish stock demonstrate the potential benefits of multi-use of marine spaces by the OWFs and fishing activities. This modelling approach provides an illustration of the potential and importance of incorporating natural capital into CGE models in practice, which could be used for policy making regarding marine renewable energy and sustainable development planning in the marine environment.
... Mongruel* et al., 2015) or matrix approaches (e.g. Geange et al., 2019;Potts et al., 2014) where ecosystem services provided by specific habitats were analysed respectively. Only a small number of qualitative reports have been prepared for tropical marine habitats such as the Maldives and Ascension Island (e.g. ...
Nature-based Solutions (NbS) are increasingly recognized as effective measures for mitigating flood risks and enhancing climate change adaptation. However, evaluating their efficacy in delivering flood risk reduction ecosystem service (FRR-ESS) is usually limited by reliance on qualitative, expert-based “quick-scan” scoring methods. While already challenging for present-day evaluations, this limitation becomes even more significant when addressing future climate scenarios, introducing deep uncertainties in the evaluation. The present study introduces a model-based framework to quantify FRR-ESS provided by coastal NbS, which integrates expert-based assessments with quantitative results from an eco-hydro-morphodynamic numerical model. The model enables a comparative evaluation of individual and combined effects of NbS following a Building Blocks approach. By integrating habitat map change prediction in the evaluation, NbS flood reduction response to present and future storm scenarios (i.e. wave climate and sea level rise) are investigated. The methodology is applied to a Mediterranean coastal lagoon in Sicily (Italy), and can be easily adapted to diverse coastal ecosystems. Our findings underscore the significant role of coastal habitats in reducing flood risk and highlight the importance of integrating physically-based modelling into FRR-ESS evaluation. This approach provides a robust and flexible tool for policymakers and stakeholders to make informed decisions that support both ecological sustainability and disaster risk reduction.
Understanding which habitats should be considered irreplaceable in the marine environment is important for Natural England’s marine casework and evolving policy. Knowing which habitats are irreplaceable will assist developers, planners and regulators to avoid habitats that cannot be replaced or recreated elsewhere in compensation for their loss.
Degradation of the natural world and associated ecosystem services is attributed to a historical failure to include its ‘value’ in decision-making. Uncertainty in the quantification of the relationship between natural capital ‘assets’ that give rise to critical societal benefits and people is one reason for the omission of these values from natural resource management. As this uncertainty increases in marine systems and further still with distance from the coast, the connection between society and natural capital assets is less likely to be included adequately in decision-making. Natural capital assets of Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction (ABNJ), including those of the deep sea, are distant but are known to generate many benefits for society, from the diffuse and broad-scale benefits of climate regulation to the provision of wild fish for food. While our understanding of the precise relationships (the status of asset stocks, ecosystem functions and processes) that control the availability of ecosystem services and the flows of benefits is limited, this does not preclude opening a discourse on how these natural capital assets could best be managed to continue to benefit society. Here we apply a natural capital approach to the South East Atlantic ABNJ, one of the least scientifically understood regions of the planet, and develop a framework for risk assessment. We do this by describing the benefit flows from the natural capital assets of the region, appraising how activities are creating pressures on these flows and whether the controls for these pressures protect them. Our risk register highlights how governance currently favours the protection of direct (extractive) benefit flows from natural capital assets of the region, which are primarily targeted for financial benefit. Without a systems-based framework that can account for the cumulative pressures on natural capital assets their status, associated ecosystem services and benefits are at risk. Such an approach is essential to capture and protect the foundational and often diffuse connections between marine natural capital and global society.
This is a draft version of a chapter's abstract. The final version is available in Elgar Encyclopedia of Water Policy, Economics and Management edited by Prof. Phoebe Koundouri, published in 2024, Edward Elgar Publishing Ltd http://dx.doi.org/10.4337/9781802202946
The costs and benefits of customary top-down Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) have been studied at length. But the costs and benefits of community-based MPAs –an increasingly common tool in conservation and fisheries management– remain understudied. Here, we quantify the operational costs of maintaining community-based MPA monitoring programs in nine small-scale fishing communities in Mexico. We then compare these costs to the potential extractive use value of invertebrate and fish biomass contained in the reserves. We find that the annual monitoring costs (median: 1,130 MXN/ha; range: 23-3,561 MXN/ha) represent between 0.3% and 55% of the extractive use value of the biomass contained in the reserves (median: 21.31 thousand MXN/ha; 5.22 - 49/12 thousand MXN/ha). These results suggest that the direct monetary benefits of community-based marine conservation can outweigh the costs of monitoring programs, providing further support for these types of management schemes. While further research should explore other mechanisms that would allow fishers to leverage the non-extractive use value of reserves (e.g., tourism) or the non-use value (i.e. existence value of biodiversity) to sustainably finance their conservation efforts, a stop-gap measure to ensuring long-term monitoring costs are covered might include limited extractive use of resources contained in the reserves.
Despite its remoteness, human activity has impacted the deep sea and changes to the structure and function of deep-sea ecosystems are already noticeable. In terrestrial and shallow water marine environments, demonstrating how ecosystems support human well-being has been instrumental in setting policy and management objectives for sustainable resource use. Foundational to this approach is a framework of ecosystem service (ES) classification and a synthesis of the knowledge base, which can then be used to structure decision-support tools such as ecosystem accounts or Environmental Impact Assessments. At present, no such framework exists for the deep sea. There is thus an urgent need to determine and assess the ES provided by deep-sea habitats and species before (potentially irreversible) decisions are made about deep-sea habitat use and governance. As a first step towards the incorporation of ES in such decision-making, we undertake two systematic reviews of the scientific literature based on the principles of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) systematic process. This was to define a comparative ES framework and synthesise the current evidence base for how deep-sea habitats support ecosystem services. Our framework proposes four supporting services, three regulating services, four provisioning services and three cultural services for which there is an established and growing body of evidence for the role of deep-sea habitats. The ES framework presented here provides a structure for deep-sea ecosystem services. In its next phase of development, this could provide the foundation for the development of habitat-ecosystem service matrices, which are a critical component for truly accounting for ES in decision-making, particularly spatial management. This framework has significant implications for deep-sea management, conservation and policy, as it provides an ecosystem services-based tool that can be used in any deep-sea ecosystems management across the planet, and it also shows how critical these data gaps are for today’s decisions and how seriously they should be considered in decision-making processes.
The importance of marine protected areas (MPAs) in protecting marine habitats and biodiversity, especially for coral reefs, is acknowledged among conservationists, managers, and policy-makers. However, the socio-economic and ecological benefits of MPAs are understated and overshadowed by the establishment and operating costs, specifically for MPAs located in developing countries. Using a global survey of recreational divers, we estimate recreational users’ welfare benefits in support of MPAs. Using the travel cost method (TCM), we show that an increase in user fees has a modest effect on visitors’ numbers in MPAs in developing countries. It is justifiable to increase revenue to help cover the costs of developing and operating MPAs. The mean consumer surplus (CS) derived from the TCM is US347.71–$1908.39 USD. Such information is pertinent in protecting and restoring the marine ecosystem when multiple threats adversely affect coral reefs, upon which other marine life and local and international communities depend.
In this review we highlight the relevance of biodiversity that inhabit coastal lagoons, emphasizing how species functions foster processes and services associated with this ecosystem. We identified 26 ecosystem services underpinned by ecological functions performed by bacteria and other microbial organisms, zooplankton, polychaetae worms, mollusks, macro-crustaceans, fishes, birds, and aquatic mammals. These groups present high functional redundancy but perform complementary functions that result in distinct ecosystem processes. Because coastal lagoons are located in the interface between freshwater, marine and terrestrial ecosystems, the ecosystem services provided by the biodiversity surpass the lagoon itself and benefit society in a wider spatial and historical context. The species loss in coastal lagoons due to multiple human-driven impacts affects the ecosystem functioning, influencing negatively the provision of all categories of services (i.e., supporting, regulating, provisioning and cultural). Because animals’ assemblages have unequal spatial and temporal distribution in coastal lagoons, it is necessary to adopt ecosystem-level management plans to protect habitat heterogeneity and its biodiversity, ensuring the provision of services for human well-being to multi-actors in the coastal zone.
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are key management tools that contribute to the conservation of worldwide marine ecosystems, increasing nature's contributions to people derived from ecosystem services. These ecosystem services include key processes such as the release of oxygen, but also leisure opportunities, cultural inspiration, and food and medicine provision that improve the health and well-being of millions of people. In this Chapter we explain how natural processes and components in MPAs are valued by different groups of people; and how these can be addressed to maximize their effectiveness, avoiding negative socio-economic effects like social conflicts, or inequitable distribution of benefits. We recommend that creation and management decision-making in MPAs include the collection and integration of interdisciplinary data to develop pluralistic methods of valuation and fostering social equity by involving local stakeholders.
In recent years it has been stressed that the problems created by population growth and
climate change are so big and of such complexity that we do not have the capacity
to address them. We do not react to a cascade of situations that are driving us to
absolute collapse for two reasons: (1) The mental short-termism that is inherent in
any animal, including the human being, (2) the synergy of factors that act together,
not being able to isolate each other to give partial solutions.
In this puzzle, the oceans, after decades of being ignored, seem to take on rele�vance. The UN launched a plan to draw attention to the role of that 70% mass of
water that covers the surface of our planet, finally coming to the conclusion that
part of the solution lies in understanding, managing and restoring the oceans. Biodi�versity, complexity, and functionality take on relevance in one of the Sustainable
Development Goals that aims to improve our oceans. Life Below Water (SDG 14)
is one of the goals to be achieved in this desperate decade, in which we are going to
have to race to try to save civilization in its many facets. A Decade of the Oceans
has been instituted that aims to channel the greatest possible number of initiatives
to substantially improve the health of marine habitats, as well as try to mitigate the
impact on human communities.
Fisheries, pollution, and urban expansion are some direct issues that are stressing
the oceans, but we may have direct (local and regional) solutions to solve them in
many cases. However, among all the challenges we face, the most global and complex
one to mitigate is climate change. In the oceans, climate change is especially evident,
since 93% of the heat absorbed by the earth is concentrated in the water masses
that are warming rapidly. Acidification, which is the sister of warming in water
masses due to the increase in CO2 that penetrates and reacts to create slightly less
alkaline water, is the other large-scale problem that has a global impact and cannot
be controlled locally. Marine organisms suffer these consequences, having to adapt,
migrate or disappear. We have created a transition phase to a new unknown state in
which some species, habitats and even biomes will prevail while others languish or
simply disappear. Understanding, managing and repairing our actions in the oceans
has become a very urgent task to solve the problem and understand how long this
transition between systems will last. This book focuses, in seven chapters, on the perspectives and solutions that
different research groups offer to try to address problems related to SDG 14: Life
Below Water. The different objectives developed in SDG 14 are treated indepen�dently, with an attempt to give a global vision of the issues. The mechanism used to
select the book’s content was through an Artificial Intelligence program, choosing
articles related to the topics by means of keywords. The program selected those arti�cles, and those that were not related to the topic or did not focus on SDG 14 were
discarded. Obviously, the selection was partial and the entire subject is not covered,
but the final product gives a very solid idea of how to orient ourselves to delve deeper
into the topic of SDG 14 using published chapters and articles. The AI program itself
selected the text of these contributions to show the progress in different topics related
to SDG 14. This mode of operation will allow specialists (and non-specialists) to
collect useful information for their specific research purposes in a short period of
time. At a time when information is essential in order to move quickly by providing
concrete answers to complex problems, this type of approach will become essential
for researchers, especially for a subject as vast as SDG 14.
It is not surprising that we are interested in plastics as one of the most prominent polluting agents of the twenty-first century. We have gone from producing less than 10 million tons in the 1960s to more than 300 million in the 2010s. That plastic has had time to distribute itself, fragment and enter food chains of the oceans. Studies related to the three phenomena are now one of the main objectives of various research projects and groups around the planet. The first is understanding how fragmentation is increasing the volume of macro and microplastics, how they are dispersed at the oceanic and local level, and what their chemical characteristics are. In line with these observations and quantifications, we have to understand what influence they have on organisms and how we can reduce their concentration. For example, the displacements of macroplastics are modeled relative to their dispersion according to global and local currents, giving importance to the phenomena of fouling and fragmentation, as well as understanding how the creation of microplastics is heterogeneous according to latitude, water temperatures or seasonal conditions. One of the biggest problems is, without a doubt, the chemical, morphological and size classification of plastics, especially micro and nanoplastics. This topic is crucial, as is the standardization of the measures that we consider to classify them in one way or another. This topic has been largely discussed during the last decade, and in this chapter there are cues to understand that the consensus is very close. Other issues are still pending in the complex agenda of the understanding of these pollutants. For example, the adherence of certain types of elements such as heavy metals is a relevant issue on which much information is lacking. But it is not the only knowledge gap that we have. Dynamics in the water column and in the sediment is also a main issue, since this sediment is a sink for microplastics and nanoplastics that is continually disturbed by organisms from the meiofauna. Some of these microplastics become airborne, and their range from likely emission sources is still poorly understood. The understanding of these fluxes from the land-river to the sediments passing through the water column is one of the main challenges to solve the problems derived from the presence of such macro, micro and nano items. Marine organisms are the ones that, apparently, are the most affected by this increase in solid contamination, especially microplastics. Today they are found at any latitude, from the poles to the equator, even in places as surprising as sea ice or abyssal depths. In fact, microplastics are found in very remote places, interfering with the diet of various planktonic and benthic organisms. There are many questions to be resolved, among others, how temperature affects the retention of microplastics in organisms, or which are the most vulnerable species. And we have to understand one important issue: many of those marine organisms affected by micro and nano plastics are part of our diet. Therefore, understanding the rate of transmission in food chains in general and in our consumption in particular is a major issue. That is why we looked for solutions, such as the use of bioremediators (active suspension feeders such as sponges, sea squirts, etc.) in areas where the abundance of microplastics is especially high. Bacteria are also beginning to be used as active decomposers of microplastics, a solution that could help eliminate a large amount of this material about which we still have too many knowledge gaps regarding the health of ecosystems and our own health. The synergy of efforts to understand all these different variables is crucial. During the next decade we do have to solve this plastic problem, with coordination, standardization and the application of different tools to execute the solutions of different associated problems.
Following the previous chapter about ecosystem conservation and restoration, we also need to strengthen the monitoring of climate change and biodiversity with the help of a plan that involves people outside the academic context. Citizen science has been shown to be a very good tool for providing useful data for scientists, if well directed. For example, the monitoring of invasive species is impossible to do from research institutes due to lack of money, tools and personnel. But well trained, even sporadic tourists can give useful information about their distribution. This is also true in the case of rare or endangered species, or in migrations or the detection of anomalies. They can also be useful in tracking marine litter, not only helping to clean beaches and seabed, but also observing the origin of that waste thanks to photos or collections that can be used to understand where the objects come from. Other observations and data collection are more complex, and require specialists to make adequate quantitative observations, but may still benefit from broad support from people who want to help in the logistical part. Once again, indigenous people are put in the spotlight, because they help to solve many problems thanks to their great local wisdom. We are realizing that many of the things we do to monitor and give keys for conservation are provided by local populations who have lived in, protected or managed the areas we want to study for hundreds of years or millennia. That is why it is important to accelerate the follow-up processes by broadening the spectrum of people who can help in these processes, professionals and non-professionals alike. However, there are limits. Specialist teams are still needed to do sampling, monitoring or experiments. The tools used by scientific research teams to make such monitoring programs have substantially advanced. The technology to keep track of the problems we have in the oceans has made a really important qualitative leap. For example, although attempts have been made to track oil spills in certain circumstances, only the collection of data by specialists can help to understand the origin of contaminants. Coastal and ocean governance needs a paradigm change. We need co-governance processes in which democratic decisions, education and awareness-raising fit together. The models in which people interact with science, problems and solutions about the oceans are more and more demanded, and the last two decades have been crucial. An authentic bottom-up process in which all these advances and the different ways of observing nature and the impacts suffered are available to non-specialists. Without that bridge, we will not be able to create the necessary conditions to reverse the process of deterioration of our oceans.
An important part of the health of the oceans depends on a good balance of the biogeochemical cycles. Both climate change (in its broadest sense, from the warming of the oceans to acidification) and the introduction of excess nutrients or heavy metals have caused, in many places, distortions in the balances between chemical elements, organisms and detritus. A series of scenarios have been created in which the excess or absence of certain components are distorting carbon fluxes or biomass accumulation. Such changes are not new at all, but now are accelerating and we have to be ready to understand and manage the repercussions that they may have locally and globally. An increase in nitrogen and phosphorus due to land changes in the Amazon, together with other local phenomena, are promoting an uncontrolled increase in Sargassum, which moves every year with the currents until it invades the Caribbean coast, for example. There is such inertia in the entry of these nutrients into the ocean that it becomes difficult to manage them, and even in areas where there is already a much more exhaustive control of the agricultural or industrial activities that promote them, the proliferation of micro and macro algae seems unstoppable. The microbial composition and also the seasonality are key points that have to be considered, especially when certain physical phenomena are weakened such as upwelling (and the related nutrient supply) or the ocean currents (and the related nutrient transport). Several models are based not only on temperature changes (which affect the availability of macro and micronutrients) but also on coastal morphology and local current dynamics. Such models are complex but very useful to understand, locally, what may happen with a cascade effect, such as the relationship of biogeochemical cycles with primary productivity and, in turn, with biomass production. Climate change is greatly affecting this nutrient availability, not only because the physical-chemical balance may be changing, but also because the organisms that process these nutrients are also changing and their ability to recycle may be affected. Acidification also enters this equation, which makes some microelements less available, or makes some species (for example, coccolithophorids) less capable of completing their life cycles, compete for nutrients or suffer more predation because they have more fragile structures. Latitude must also be taken into account in these changes, both due to the effects of climate change and the direct impacts of human activities that have profoundly transformed many ocean environments. In certain areas the predominance of the impact on biogeochemical cycle comes from the direct action of humans (e.g. fertilizers, farming, etc.), but in others the predominance comes from the warming or acidifying effect due to climate change. Thus, for example, the most accelerated changes in the Arctic are having very rapid effects on these biogeochemical cycles, both due to the increase in temperature and acidification and also due to the fact that the dynamics and coverage of the ice are changing. In this area, the direct impacts by pollution and eutrophication are replaced by climate change accelerating paths. Associated with these changes in nutrient cycles is the decrease in available oxygen that alters the physiological capacities of some organisms. The increase in temperature, the decrease in primary production and the slowdown in currents in various parts of the planet are affecting the response capacity of organisms, from benthic to pelagic. No less important is also the fact that stormy phenomena of different types are increasing in frequency and intensity. Storms and hurricanes are also responsible for the distortion of biogeochemical cycles, in some cases impoverishing biomass production and its quality for the following trophic levels. It is a very complex scenario in which the physiology and adaptability of many organisms is at stake, and which we will have to understand in order to properly manage marine resources in the near future.
Climate change, rigorously heralded more than thirty years ago as a real threat, has become the most pressing and pernicious global problem for the entire planet. In conjunction with local impacts such as fishing, eutrophication or the invasion of alien species, to give just a few examples, the acidification of the oceans and the warming of the sea began to show its effects more than twenty years ago. These signals were ignored at the time by the governing bodies and by the economic stakeholders, who now see how we must run to repair the huge inflicted damage. Today, different processes are accelerating, and the thermodynamic machine has definitely deteriorated. We see, for example, that the intensity and magnitude of hurricanes and typhoons has increased. Most models announce more devastation of flash floods and a decomposition in the water cycle, which are factors directly affecting ecosystems all over the world. Important advances are also observed in the forecasting of impacts of atmospheric phenomena in coastal areas with more and more accurate models. Rising temperatures and acidification already affect many organisms, impacting the entire food chain. All organisms, pelagic or benthic, will be affected directly or indirectly by climate change at all depths and in all the latitudes. The impact will be non-homogeneous. In certain areas it will be more drastic than in others, and the visualization of such impacts is already ongoing. Some things may be very evident, such as coral mortalities in tropical areas or in the surface waters of the Mediterranean, while others may be less visible, such as changes in microelement availability affecting plankton productivity. In fact, primary productivity in microalgae, macroalgae and phanerogams is already beginning to feel the impact of warmer, stratified and nutrient-poor waters in many parts of the planet. Nutrients are becoming less available, temperature is rising above certain tolerance limits and water movement (turbulence) may change in certain areas favoring certain species of microplankton instead of others. All these mechanisms, together with light availability (which, in principle, is not drastically changing except for the cloudiness), affect the growth of the organisms that can photosynthesize and produce oxygen and organic matter for the rest of the trophic chain. That shift in productivity completely changes the rest of the food chain. In the Arctic or Antarctic, the problem is slightly different. Life depends on the dynamics of ice that is subject to seasonal changes. But winter solidification and summer dissolution is undergoing profound changes, causing organisms that are adapted to that rhythm of ice change to be under pressure. The change is more evident in the North Pole, but is also visible in the South pole, where the sea ice cover has also dramatically changed. In the chapter there is also a mention about the general problem of the water currents and their profound change do greenhouse gas effects. The warming of the waters and their influence on the marine currents are also already affecting the different ocean habitats. The slowdown of certain processes is causing an acceleration in the deoxygenation of the deepest areas and therefore an impact on the fragile communities of cold corals that populate large areas of our planet. Many organisms will be affected in their dispersion and their ability to colonize new areas or maintain a connection between different populations. The rapid adaptations to these new changes are apparent. Nature is on its course of restart from these new changes, but in this transitional phase the complexity and interactions that have taken thousands or millions of years to form can fade away until a new normal is consolidated.
The impacts of industrial fishing have been present in the oceans for over one hundred years, but the exponential increase all over the world and the systematic exploitation of different areas started after world war II. The phenomenon of fishing has to be understood in order to understand the changes in the oceans, and such deep transformation is essential to capture the essence of the resilience: the collapse of fish stocks, the lack of biodiversity, and the profound transformation of ecosystems due to overfishing is in part responsible for the ocean’s impacted functioning that we witness today. It now seems that the collapse of many habitats is to blame for rising acidification or temperature, but the reality is that the impact of overfishing on pelagic and benthic systems is largely responsible for the profound transformations we see today. Trawling has devastated entire ecosystems, destroying the complexity of marine forests, both those that are dominated by vegetal organisms (macroalgae and phanerogams) and those dominated by animals (corals, gorgonians, sponges, etc.). It has been possible to verify that it is not only the destruction of the structures, but the compaction of the sediment and the continuous resuspension that made possible the impoverishment of the communities and therefore of the impoverishment of the fishing stocks. Beyond these impacts, pelagic fisheries have seen profound changes in populations, which evolve to the sound of fishing pressure. The minimum size of successful reproduction (i.e. the size in which the fish is lying eggs to promote the continuity of the populations), for example, has been drastically changed in many species, making possible for populations to survive despite the immense pressure of the predator, us. In addition, these fisheries highlight the fact that many animals are trapped with nets and long lines (dolphins, turtles, birds, etc.). The solutions to these problems are sometimes difficult to apply. These large organisms are usually essential for the health status of the ecosystem and the maintenance of the biodiversity, but we are impacting them in such a way that they have become irrelevant from an ecosystem functioning point of view. The so-called by-catch of smaller organisms is another huge problem. Discards (sometimes more than 50% of fisheries) profoundly harm and transform the ecosystem, and are difficult to sell in the fishing market. Solutions have been sought for decades and this collateral damage has been denounced, but there is still a long way to go. There is also a long way to go to eliminate the high percentage (calculated in more than a quarter of the fish landings of the entire planet) of those known as illegal, unreported and unregulated fisheries. This type of mismanagement of the sea is at the heart of the active policies of many countries, but without transparency and transnational actions, it will it will be difficult to reach a good agreement to suppress or minimize them. In fisheries models, apart from direct impacts, the effects of climate change have long been implemented. As already explained in the previous chapter, rising temperatures and the effects of acidification are transforming the landscape of primary and secondary productivity. The most obvious of these changes is the fact that there will be less fishing, and therefore less production. The effect of lower productivity is already felt in several long-lasting time series, where fishing is being affected by the decrease in phytoplankton. But, in addition, there are less obvious effects. One is the substitution of species, because some are more vulnerable than others to the increase in temperature, so that in the same taxonomic and functional group those who are best adapted to the new conditions win. Another is the expansion of invasive species that directly affect the food chain, and that may feel more comfortable with the new “rules” of fisheries impact and climate change. Some animals are already undergoing these changes, such as cetaceans dying of starvation in certain areas where the synergistic effects of fishing and climate change are felt. The co-governance of fisheries, in which scientists, politicians and society work together, is essential to move forward. They are not hollow words; they are real needs in a world of an excessively accelerated change.
It is difficult to make a synthesis of the new trends in the so-called Blue Growth. This chapter opens a small window with some examples that can serve to understand a little bit the trends of some (not all) sectors that are in full expansion all over the world simultaneously, with their pros and cons. There is a need to change the rules of the game, the paradigms to which we have so far been working with. It is not a simple exercise. It needs a lot of will and a deep understanding of what are the limits and dangers of the old model in which we still live immersed. Many examples show that the actual model runs too fast and has a direct impact on natural resources and ecosystem functioning. In this framework, aquaculture is coming under specific scrutiny. We have gone from an almost negligible aquaculture figure in the ‘70s in terms of fisheries production, to almost half of the biomass extracted from the sea and continental waters from this “farming” activity. This is a considerable achievement, but it has its consequences. The impact of monocultures (salmon, shrimp, etc.) has been, in many places, equal to or worse than overfishing. Eutrophication, salinization, introduction of drugs to contain diseases, the use of wild fish to feed mariculture species or the systematic hunting of potential predators (eagles, seals, etc.) are only some of the problems associated with aquaculture nowadays. The impact on wild ecosystems such as mangroves or fjords is very relevant, and has been highlighted as one of the most important problems to be solved in coastal waters. A new vision is that of the Integrated Multitrophic Aquaculture. This is a method that is gaining strength and that may be the change we need, especially if we move from species of high energy and carbon investment (carnivores) to those species that require less energetic effort (such as bivalves, macroalgae, holothurians, etc.). To do this, one of the first things to do is a good forecast of the impact of climate change, selecting the most suitable organisms (and areas) according to the changing environmental conditions. The regional possibilities (i.e., those areas that may be suitable for a mariculture expansion) and the carrying capacity of the surrounding ecosystems according to different areas must also be taken into account if we want a significant paradigm change. Also, the inclusion of stakeholders and clear co-governance roles of these kind of infrastructures has to be understood as a tool to a successful management of the products that will be available for the local people. The Blue Growth related to the mariculture is not the only open front for the future. The use of microalgae is another type of approach to a future in which low-energy cost organisms are gradually taking center stage. The possibilities have a wide spectrum, and now these microorganisms are beginning to be applied industrially in nutraceuticals, biofuels or for the generation of interesting molecules for biomedical applications. The solutions are there, and changing the priorities and the way we apply the different discoveries to be in line with SDG14 in this Blue Growth strategy is a challenge. In fact, it is not all positive prospects in Blue Growth. There are cases in which excessive acceleration of production and inadequate management of “new generation” resources can cause stress on systems, especially in places with fragile ecosystem balances. In addition, considering the production of alternative energies such as offshore wind, or the new planning of maritime traffic, we have to deeply change our way to proceed. The Blue Growth roadmap must change the paradigm if we really want to consider it sustainable. New solutions and new perspectives in a changing world that require spatial planning and a very different model of resource management than the one we are now applying are urgently needed, considering new models of production, economy and social interaction.
The acceleration of the processes of biodiversity loss and complexity has gone too far, putting ourselves as a species in a crossroads. We now understand that it is not enough to conserve, we need to regenerate. That regeneration goes through two different paradigm changes. The first takes into account upscaling plans. That concept is based on the fact that restoration to regenerate ecosystems is on the verge, but there is a lack of a good plan to create large-scale animal and plant forest restoration programs in different areas of the oceans. The second paradigm is the participation of people, but not only as volunteers; the restoration plans need them as customers. The first paradigm is closely linked to the second. There has to be a business model that allows, in part, to pay for conservation and restoration, which, in turn, will allow for regeneration. However, we are not talking about a privatization process, as has sometimes been attempted. It is not about allowing access only to those who can afford it. Is about making people of different economic statuses and possibilities a part of the process of restoring, and giving them a real return in terms of awareness, education and enthusiasm related to the enhancement and recovery of biodiversity and complexity. People are willing to pay to maintain that complexity, that beauty, that diversity of animals and plants. Tourism can, therefore, make a difference in new conservation plans. It is not enough to expand marine protected areas, we must provide financial mechanisms so that the surveillance and infrastructure of the area we want to regenerate can be maintained. At the same time that this area is preserved, it can be replanted. Methods to quantify biodiversity, calculate the metabolism of the system and recover degraded areas with underwater gardening exist. It is demonstrated, for example, in the advances made in transplant methods for phanerogams, the environmental DNA to calculate the biodiversity of the area, and the calculations on the state of health of a coral reef. However, technology and great advances are not enough. We need to implement an inclusive policy in which local people, especially indigenous people, help in both conservation and restoration processes. They are the first that want (and need) to maintain or recover the lost habitats, but in many cases the policy makers and some stakeholders do not consider them in the equation. We must create those conditions of synergy in which the academic world, the political world and society itself (local and foreign) come together to solve the problems related to the loss of ecosystem services in the oceans.
It is well documented that bottom towed fishing gear can negatively and substantially influence benthic communities through changes in species composition, trophic structure and habitat complexity (de Groot & Lindeboom, 1994; Dayton et al., 1995; Kaiser & Spencer, 1996; Blyth et al., 2004; Hiddink et al., 2006). Such effects caused by fishing gear can be long lasting, especially when disturbance is repeated and frequent (Kaiser & Spencer, 1996). Lyme Bay reefs have been trawled and dredged for scallops for many years. Those which are mudstone are potentially, particularly vulnerable to structural damage and can be broken up by fishing gear, which affects the associated benthos, primarily through the removal of epifauna (Devon Wildlife Trust, 1993, Hiscock, 2007, Hiddink et al., 2008).
Ecosystem services are the benefits humankind derives from the workings of the natural world. These include most obviously the supply of food, fuels and materials, but also more basic processes such as the formation of soils and the control and purification of water, and intangible ones such as amenity, recreation and aesthetics. Taken together, they are crucial to survival and the social and economic development of human societies. Though many are hidden, their workings are now a matter of clear scientific record. However, the integrity of the systems that deliver these benefits cannot be taken for granted, and the process of monitoring them and of ensuring that human activity does not place them at risk is an essential part of environmental governance, not solely at a global scale but also regionally and nationally. In this chapter, we assess the importance of ecosystem services in a European context, highlighting those that have particular importance for Europe, and we set out what is known about the contribution biodiversity makes to each of them. We then consider pressures on European ecosystem services and the measures that might be taken to manage them. One of the key insights from this work is that all ecosystems deliver a broad range of services, and that managing an ecosystem primarily to © Royal Society of Chemistry 2010. deliver one service will reduce its ability to provide others. A prominent current example of this is the use of land to produce biofuels. There is an urgent need to develop tools for the effective valuation of ecosystem services, to achieve sustainable management of the landscape to deliver multiple services.
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are recognised as being the mechanism through which marine ecosystem services may be conserved to benefit human well-being. Planning and decision-making can be supported by the quantification and valuation of ecosystem services. To inform the development and management of MPAs a service-orientated framework has been developed to use available data to spatially map and explore the pathways between ecosystem services, processes and the ecological functioning of benthic species for indirect ecosystem service provision within a case study area. The framework demonstrates that ecosystem service delivery is functionally interlinked and ecological function cannot be clearly mapped onto individual ecosystem services. The methodology developed here enables decision-makers to understand the links between benthic species, ecological function and indirect ecosystem services. There is currently no measure to quantify how much function is required to maintain human well-being. This lack of a measure, coupled with a large amount of uncertainty surrounding the links between ecosystem function and ecosystem service provision in marine systems, demonstrates that the inclusion of percentage targets for the conservation of broad-scale habitats in MPA planning and management should be considered within a precautionary approach to maintain the delivery of indirect ecosystem services.
This study investigated the effects of a fully protected marine reserve on commercially valuable scallops and benthic habitats
in Lamlash Bay, Isle of Arran, United Kingdom. Dive surveys found the abundance of juvenile scallops to be greater within
the marine reserve than outside. A novel multivariate approach, based upon neural networks and generalised linear models,
revealed the greater abundance of juveniles to be related to the greater presence of macroalgae and maerl within the reserve
boundaries. This complex habitat appeared to have positively encouraged spat settlement. In contrast, the density of adult
scallops did not differ between the two treatments, possibly due to the short duration of protection. However, the age, size
and biomass of adult scallops were significantly greater within the reserve. Overall, this study suggests that the newly created
marine reserve is already providing benefits which are flowing back to species targeted by fisheries, emphasising the importance
of marine reserves in ecosystem-based management of fisheries.
Linking biophysical aspects of ecosystems with human benefits through the notion of ecosystem services is essential to assess the trade-offs (ecological, socio-cultural, economic and monetary) involved in the loss of ecosystems and biodiversity in a clear and consistent manner. Any ecosystem assessment should be spatially and temporally explicit at scales meaningful for policy formation or interventions, inherently acknowledging that both ecological functioning and economic values are context, space and time specific. Any ecosystem assessment should first aim to determine the service delivery in biophysical terms, to provide solid ecological underpinning to the economic valuation or measurement with alternative metrics. Clearly delineating between functions, services and benefits is important to make ecosystem assessments more accessible to economic valuation, although no consensus has yet been reached on the classification. Ecosystem assessments should be set within the context of contrasting scenarios - recognising that both the values of ecosystem services and the costs of actions can be best measured as a function of changes between alternative options. In assessing trade-offs between alternative uses of ecosystems, the total bundle of ecosystem services provided by different conversion and management states should be included. Any valuation study should be fully aware of the „cost‟ side of the equation, as focus on benefits only ignores important societal costs like missed opportunities of alternative uses; this also allows for a more extensive range of societal values to be considered. Ecosystem assessments should integrate an analysis of risks and uncertainties, acknowledging the limitations of knowledge on the impacts of human actions on ecosystems and their services and on their importance to human well-being. In order to improve incentive structures and institutions, the different stakeholders - i.e. the beneficiaries of ecosystem services, those who are providing the services, those involved in or affected by the use, and the actors involved at different levels of decision-making - should be clearly identified, and decision making processes need to be transparent
This research is concerned with the following environmental research questions: socio-ecological system complexity, especially when valuing ecosystem services; ecosystems stock and services flow sustainability and valuation; the incorporation of scale issues when valuing ecosystem services; and the integration of knowledge from diverse disciplines for governance and decision making. In this case study, we focused on ecosystem services that can be jointly supplied but independently valued in economic terms: healthy climate (via carbon sequestration and storage), food (via fisheries production in nursery grounds), and nature recreation (nature watching and enjoyment). We also explored the issue of ecosystem stock and services flow, and we provide recommendations on how to value stock and flows of ecosystem services via accounting and economic values respectively. We considered broadly comparable estuarine systems located on the English North Sea coast: the Blackwater estuary and the Humber estuary. In the past, these two estuaries have undergone major land-claim. Managed realignment is a policy through which previously claimed intertidal habitats are recreated allowing the enhancement of the ecosystem services provided by saltmarshes. In this context, we investigated ecosystem service values, through biophysical estimates and welfare value estimates. Using an optimistic (extended conservation of coastal ecosystems) and a pessimistic (loss of coastal ecosystems because of, for example, European policy reversal) scenario, we find that context dependency, and hence value transfer possibilities, vary among ecosystem services and benefits. As a result, careful consideration in the use and application of value transfer, both in biophysical estimates and welfare value estimates, is advocated to supply reliable information for policy making.
What the current policy debate on marine protected areas (MPAs) and marine reserves (MRs) has failed
to address is the fact that protection of the marine environment has as much to do with scientists,and
others values as it has to do with science.To date natural science has played a dominant role in the
implementation of MPAs, yet normative considerations which are embedded in the way scientists and
the wider community think about the condition the marine environment should be in,and which may
influence decision-making,are rarely acknowledged or discussed.This paper seeks to correct that
deficiency by investigating the values that lie behind the natural science of MPAs.With the aid of
epistemic community, advocacy coalition and discourse coalition theories of policy networks, this
article explores the role science and scientists have played in influencing policy on MPAs at the global
and national level, and looks at the extent to which normative conceptualisations within and beyond
natural science have influenced the debate.
This paper addresses the problem of measuring the local economic impact of marine protected areas (MPAs). It relies on a broad socio-economic field survey covering 12 case studies in southern Europe, and focusing on two major uses of MPA ecosystem services: fishing and scuba-diving. The impact of these uses on the local economic system is expressed in terms of incomes and jobs, and the methodology relies on a distinction between users transforming ecosystem services into commodities, and users consuming ecosystem services for recreational purposes. Assessment results show a variety of situations, from MPAs where commercial fishing is the major economic stake, to MPAs where recreational activities have a dominant economic role. However, available information concerning the number of recreational users and visitors, on one side, and the number and characteristics of commercial fishing boats, on the other side, suggest that the second situation is more representative of the area under study than the former one. Due to the lack of baseline, the question of sorting out the “reserve effect” from the “site effect” is addressed with the help of survey results concerning perceptions and attitudes of users. As regards divers and diving operators, answers to the survey suggest that the reserve effect plays an important role in the attractiveness of the area. Results are not so clear in the case of fishers, an ambiguity reflecting the uncertainty of the spill-over effects expected from marine reserves on fishing grounds.
Addressing social and economic considerations is crucial to the success of Marine Protected Area (MPA) planning and management. Ineffective social assessment can alienate local communities and undermine the success of existing and future MPAs. It is rare to critique the success of methods used currently to incorporate social and economic considerations into MPA planning. Three Australian MPA planning processes covering three states and incorporating federal and state jurisdictions are reviewed in order to determine how potential social impacts were assessed and considered. These case studies indicate that Social Impact Assessment (SIA) is under-developed in Australian MPA planning. Assessments rely heavily on public participation and economic modelling as surrogates for dedicated SIA and are followed commonly by attitudinal surveys to gauge public opinion on the MPA after its establishment. The emergence of issues around public perception of the value of MPAs indicates the failure of some of these proposals to adequately consider social factors in planning and management. This perception may have potential implications for the long term success of individual MPAs. It may also compromise Australia's ability to meet international commitments for MPA targets to gazette at least 10% of all its marine habitats as MPAs. Indeed, this is demonstrated in two of the three case studies where social and economic arguments against MPAs have been used to delay or block the future expansion of the MPA network.Highlights► Social factors are key determinants to MPA success or failure. ► Three MPA planning process are compared to review how social factors were considered. ► Next to no dedicated social assessment was conducted in any of the 3 case studies. ► MPA opposition is increasing in its influence yet it is poorly understood. ► Social assessment would improve through a cross disciplinary approach to planning.
The incorporation of the ecosystem approach into marine planning requires that all aspects of value associated with marine biodiversity are incorporated into the decision making process. An ecosystem services approach to valuing marine biodiversity is recognised as a framework by which economic, ecological and social values may be incorporated into the decision making process. There are sectors of the marine leisure and recreation industry (sub-aqua diving, sea angling and wildlife watching), which depend on the presence of natural marine resources in order to carry out their activity. Estimating the value of this direct use can provide an evidence base for the sustainable use of marine biodiversity when set against other competing economic interests in marine spatial planning. In the case study area of Lyme Bay, the marine leisure and recreation industry has been valued using both monetary and non-monetary methods. The results show that the leisure and recreation industry is dependent on the diversity of sites (many of which are currently unmanaged) and that the industry is of economic significance and an area which has recently been closed to trawling activity enables the protection of some of the most valuable sites but has limited benefits for protecting the full resource base upon which this local industry depends.
Global decline of marine resources has triggered a worldwide demand for changing the way ocean resources are managed. Ecosystem-based management approaches have emerged using marine protected areas (MPA) as the main tool. Several classifications of marine protected areas benefits have been made, but all have focused only on the benefits to humans, neglecting many important benefits accrued to nature. This paper presents a new comprehensive classification of MPA benefits that will provide scientists and managers with an inclusive framework to accurately identify and account for all possible benefits derived from MPAs. The paper also analyses the methods available for valuing these benefits. A total of 99 benefits were identified within nine main categories: fishery, non-fishery, management, education/research, cultural, process, ecosystem, population and species benefits. These categories are arranged in two main divisions (direct and indirect benefits), which, at the same time, fall within the realms of benefits to humans and to nature.
The concept of ecosystems services has become an important model for linking the functioning of ecosystems to human welfare. Understanding this link is critical for a wide-range of decision-making contexts. While there have been several attempts to come up with a classification scheme for ecosystem services, there has not been an agreed upon, meaningful and consistent definition for ecosystem services. In this paper we offer a definition of ecosystem services that is likely to be operational for ecosystem service research and several classification schemes. We argue that any attempt at classifying ecosystem services should be based on both the characteristics of the ecosystems of interest and a decision context for which the concept of ecosystem services is being mobilized. Because of this there is not one classification scheme that will be adequate for the many contexts in which ecosystem service research may be utilized. We discuss several examples of how classification schemes will be a function of both ecosystem and ecosystem service characteristics and the decision-making context.
This letter is in response to an article by Ken Wallace titled “Classifications of ecosystem services: problems and solutions” (Biological Conservation 139, 2007). This letter discusses the points we see as problematic with Wallace’s framework and sets out our conceptualization of linking ecosystem services with human welfare. In this letter we suggest that utilizing the terms intermediate services, final services and benefits should go a long way to clearing up much of the ambiguity in ecosystem services typologies, especially for economic valuation purposes. As Wallace points out, clearly defining and organizing the concept of ecosystem services is not just a semantic decision, but it is integral to operationalizing something that can clearly illuminate tradeoffs in natural resource management.
While conservationists, resource managers, scientists and coastal planners have recognized the broad applicability of marine protected areas (MPAs), they are often implemented without a firm understanding of the conservation science — both ecological and socio‐economic — underlying marine protection. The rush to implement MPAs has set the stage for paradoxical differences of opinions in the marine conservation community.
The enthusiastic prescription of simplistic solutions to marine conservation problems risks polarization of interests and ultimately threatens bona fide progress in marine conservation. The blanket assignment and advocacy of empirically unsubstantiated rules of thumb in marine protection creates potentially dangerous targets for conservation science.
Clarity of definition, systematic testing of assumptions, and adaptive application of diverse MPA management approaches are needed so that the appropriate mix of various management tools can be utilized, depending upon specific goals and conditions. Scientists have a professional and ethical duty to map out those paths that are most likely to lead to improved resource management and understanding of the natural world, including the human element, whether or not they are convenient, politically correct or publicly magnetic.
The use of MPAs as a vehicle for promoting long‐term conservation and sustainable use of marine biodiversity is in need of focus, and both philosophical and applied tune ups. A new paradigm arising out of integrated, multi‐disciplinary science, management and education/outreach efforts must be adopted to help promote flexible, diverse and effective MPA management strategies. Given scientific uncertainties, MPAs should be designed so one can learn from their application and adjust their management strategies as needed, in the true spirit of adaptive management.
It is critical for the conservation community to examine why honest differences of opinion regarding MPAs have emerged, and recognize that inflexible attitudes and positions are potentially dangerous. We therefore discuss several questions — heretofore taken as implicit assumptions: (a) what are MPAs, (b) what purpose do MPAs serve, (c) are no‐take MPAs the only legitimate MPAs, (d) should a single closed area target be set for all MPAs, and (e) how should policymakers and conservation communities deal with scientific uncertainty?
Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Marine reserves are being established worldwide in response to a growing
recognition of the conservation crisis that is building in the oceans. However, designation
of reserves has been largely opportunistic, or protective measures have been implemented
(often overlapping and sometimes in conflict) by different entities seeking to achieve different
ends. This has created confusion among both users and enforcers, and the proliferation
of different measures provides a false sense of protection where little is offered. This paper
sets out a procedure grounded in current understanding of ecological processes, that allows
the evaluation and selection of reserve sites in order to develop functional, interconnected
networks of fully protected reserves that will fulfill multiple objectives. By fully protected
we mean permanently closed to fishing and other resource extraction. We provide a framework
that unifies the central aims of conservation and fishery management, while also
meeting other human needs such as the provision of ecosystem services (e.g., maintenance
of coastal water quality, shoreline protection, and recreational opportunities). In our scheme,
candidate sites for reserves are evaluated against 12 criteria focused toward sustaining the
biological integrity and productivity of marine systems at both local and regional scales.
While a limited number of sites will be indispensable in a network, many will be of similar
value as reserves, allowing the design of numerous alternative, biologically adequate networks.
Devising multiple network designs will help ensure that ecological functionality is
preserved throughout the socioeconomic evaluation process. Too often, socioeconomic criteria
have dominated the process of reserve selection, potentially undermining their efficacy.
We argue that application of biological criteria must precede and inform socioeconomic
evaluation, since maintenance of ecosystem functioning is essential for meeting all of the
goals for reserves. It is critical that stakeholders are fully involved throughout this process.
Application of the proposed criteria will lead to networks whose multifunctionality will
help unite the objectives of different management entities, so accelerating progress toward improved stewardship of the oceans.
Coastal zone ecosystem services: from science to values and decision making, a conceptual framework Unpublished report of the NERC-funded valuing nature network
- Mee K L Turner
- Elliot M D Burdon
- Atkins
- Saunders J Jp
Turner K, Mee L, Elliot M, Burdon D, Atkins JP, Saunders J., et al. Coastal zone ecosystem services: from science to values and decision making, a conceptual framework. Unpublished report of the NERC-funded valuing nature network. Norwich: UEA; January 2013.
Ecological effects of the Lundy No-Take Zone: the first five years
- Hoskin
- Coleman Ra Mg
- Carlshausen
Hoskin MG, Coleman RA, von Carlshausen L. Ecological effects of the Lundy No-Take Zone: the first five years (2003–2007). Report to Natural England, DEFRA and WWF-UK; 2009.
Report to the Scottish Parliament on progress to identify a Scottish network of marine protected areas. Edinburgh: Marine Scotland [online]
- Scottish
- Government
Scottish Government. Report to the Scottish Parliament on progress to identify a Scottish network of marine protected areas. Edinburgh: Marine Scotland [online], 〈http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/marine-environment/ mpanetwork/MPAParliamentReport〉; 2012.
Skomer marine nature reserve annual report 2011. Countryside council for Wales regional report CCW/WW/11/3
- P Newman
- K Lock
- M Burton
- J Jones
Newman P, Lock K, Burton M, Jones J. Skomer marine nature reserve annual
report 2011. Countryside council for Wales regional report CCW/WW/11/3;
April 2012.
The Moray Firth special area of conservation management scheme, revision two
- Sac
- Management
SAC Management Group. The Moray Firth special area of conservation management scheme, revision two [online], 〈http://www.morayfirthpartner ship.org/assets/files/SAC%20REV%202/Rev2%20MF%20SAC% 20MS&AP-final–first%20annual%20review%202010-amended%20online.pdf〉; 2009.
Uses of ecosystem services provided by MPAs: how much do they impact the local economy? A southern
- Roncin N F Alban
- R E Charbonnel
- Cruz De
- R Modino
- J-M Culioli
Roncin N, Alban F, Charbonnel E, Crec'hriou R, De la Cruz Modino R, Culioli J-M, et al. Uses of ecosystem services provided by MPAs: how much do they impact the local economy? A southern Europe perspective Journal for Nature Conservation 2008;16:256–70.
Lyme Bay—a case-study: measuring recovery of benthic species; assessing potential 'spillover' effects and socio-economic changes; 2 years after the closure. Assessing the socio-economic impacts resulting from the closure restrictions in Lyme Bay.Final report
- Mangi
- Sc
- Gall
- Sc
- Rees C S Hattam
- Ld
Mangi SC, Gall SC, Hattam C, Rees S, Rodwell LD. Lyme Bay—a case-study: measuring recovery of benthic species; assessing potential 'spillover' effects and socio-economic changes; 2 years after the closure. Assessing the socio-economic impacts resulting from the closure restrictions in Lyme Bay.Final report. Report to the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs from the University of Plymouth. Plymouth: University of Plymouth Enterprise Ltd.; 2011.
Methodologies for defining and assessing ecosystem services. Final report, JNCC, project code C08-0170-0062
- R H Haines-Young
- M B Potschin
Haines-Young RH, Potschin MB. Methodologies for defining and assessing
ecosystem services. Final report, JNCC, project code C08-0170-0062; 2009.
69p.
The value of tourism expenditure related to the east of Scotland bottlenose dolphin population
- B Davies
- C Pita
- D Lusseau
- C Hunter
Davies B, Pita C, Lusseau D, Hunter C. The value of tourism expenditure related
to the east of Scotland bottlenose dolphin population. Final report. Inverness:
Moray Firth partnership [online], 〈http://morayfirth-partnership.org/assets/
files/Microsoft%20Word%20-%20The%20Value%20of%20Tourism%20Expendi
ture%20related%20to%20the%20East%20of%20Scotland%20.pdf〉; 2010. 67p.
UK Marine Policy Statement. London, UK: The Stationery Office
- Hm Government
- Scottish Northern Ireland Executive
- Welsh Government
- Assemblygovernment
HM Government, Northern Ireland Executive, Scottish Government, Welsh
AssemblyGovernment. UK Marine Policy Statement. London, UK: The Stationery Office [online], 〈https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-marinepolicy-statement〉; 2011.
The Moray Firth special area of conservation management scheme, revision two [online], 〈http://www.morayfirthpartner ship
- Group Sac Management
SAC Management Group. The Moray Firth special area of conservation
management scheme, revision two [online], 〈http://www.morayfirthpartner
ship.org/assets/files/SAC%20REV%202/Rev2%20MF%20SAC%
20MS&AP-final–first%20annual%20review%202010-amended%20online.pdf〉;
2009.
UK Marine Policy Statement UK: The Stationery Office [online], 〈https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-marinepolicy-statement〉 ; 2011. [19] HM Government Marine and Coastal Access Act
- Hm Government
- Scottish Northern Ireland Executive
- Welsh Government
- Assemblygovernment
HM Government, Northern Ireland Executive, Scottish Government, Welsh
AssemblyGovernment. UK Marine Policy Statement. London, UK: The Stationery Office [online], 〈https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/uk-marinepolicy-statement〉 ; 2011.
[19] HM Government Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 [online], 〈http://www.
legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2009/23/contents〉.
Guidelines on the selection of MPAs and development of the MPA network
- Scottish Government
Scottish Government. Guidelines on the selection of MPAs and development of
the MPA network. Edinburgh: Scottish Government [online], 〈http://www.
scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/marine-environment/mpanetwork/
mpaguidelines〉.
Marine Conservation Zones: Consultation on proposals for designation in UK: Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
- Department
- Environment
- Rural Food
- Affairs
Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA). Marine Conservation Zones: Consultation on proposals for designation in 2013 December
2012. London, UK: Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
[online], 〈http://www.defra.gov.uk/consult/2012/12/13/marine-conservation-
zones-1212/〉; 2012.
The value of potential marine protected areas in the UK to divers and sea anglers
- J O Kenter
- R Bryce
- A Davies
- N Jobstvogt
- V Watson
- S Ranger
Kenter JO, Bryce R, Davies A, Jobstvogt N, Watson V, Ranger S., et al. The value
of potential marine protected areas in the UK to divers and sea anglers. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK [online], 〈http://uknea.unep-wcmc.org/LinkClick.aspx?
fileticket=Mb8nUAphh%2bY%3d&tabid=82〉; 2013.
The economics of ecosystems and biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations. London and Washington
- R S De Groot
- B Fisher
- M Christie
- J Aronson
- L Braat
- R Haines-Young
De Groot RS, Fisher B, Christie M, Aronson J, Braat L, Haines-Young R, et al.
Integrating the ecological and economic dimensions in biodiversity and
ecosystem service valuation. In: Kumar P, editor. The economics of ecosystems
and biodiversity: ecological and economic foundations. London and Washington: Earthscan; 2010 ([chapter 1]).
The strategy for marine nature conservation in Scotland's Seas. Edinburgh: Marine Scotland
- Scottish Government
Scottish Government. The strategy for marine nature conservation in Scotland's Seas. Edinburgh: Marine Scotland [online], 〈http://www.scotland.gov.
uk/Topics/marine/marine-environment/Conservationstrategy/marineconstrat
egy〉; 2011.
Report to the Scottish Parliament on progress to identify a Scottish network of marine protected areas
- Scottish Government
Scottish Government. Report to the Scottish Parliament on progress to identify
a Scottish network of marine protected areas. Edinburgh: Marine Scotland
[online],
〈http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/marine-environment/
mpanetwork/MPAParliamentReport〉; 2012.
The Moray Firth special area of conservation management scheme, revision two
- Sac Management Group
SAC Management Group. The Moray Firth special area of conservation
management scheme, revision two [online], 〈http://www.morayfirthpartner
ship.org/assets/files/SAC%20REV%202/Rev2%20MF%20SAC%
20MS&AP-final-first%20annual%20review%202010-amended%20online.pdf〉;
2009.
Skomer marine nature reserve annual report
- P Newman
- K Lock
- M Burton
- J Jones
Newman P, Lock K, Burton M, Jones J. Skomer marine nature reserve annual
report 2011. Countryside council for Wales regional report CCW/WW/11/3;
Lyme Bay-a case-study: measuring recovery of benthic species; assessing potential 'spillover' effects and socio-economic changes, 2 years after the closure. Response of the benthos to the zoned exclusion of bottom towed fishing gear and the associated socio-economic effects in Lyme Bay
- M J Attrill
- M C Austen
- Dti Bayley
- H L Carr
- K Downey
- S C Fowell
Attrill MJ, Austen MC, Bayley DTI, Carr HL, Downey K, Fowell SC, et al. Lyme
Bay-a case-study: measuring recovery of benthic species; assessing potential
'spillover' effects and socio-economic changes, 2 years after the closure.
Response of the benthos to the zoned exclusion of bottom towed fishing gear
and the associated socio-economic effects in Lyme Bay.Report to the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs from the University of Plymouth.
Plymouth: University of Plymouth Enterprise Ltd.; 2011.