TY - JOUR
T1 - Bridging the divide
T2 - social–ecological coherence in Marine Protected Area network design
AU - Rees, Sian E.
AU - Pittman, Simon J.
AU - Foster, Nicola
AU - Langmead, Olivia
AU - Griffiths, Charly
AU - Fletcher, Steve
AU - Johnson, David E.
AU - Attrill, Martin
PY - 2018/6/1
Y1 - 2018/6/1
N2 - Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and networks of MPAs are being implemented globally as a spatial management tool for achieving conservation objectives. There has been considerable progress in reaching the prescribed 10% protected area target for 2020, outlined in the Convention on Biological Diversity Aichi Target 11 and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 14. The application of MPA network design principles (e.g. Representative, ecological connectivity), which underpin ecological coherence, is still lacking or insufficient in many regions. Poor ecological coherence hinders the ecological performance of MPA networks, leading to dysfunction in the flow of ecosystem services and reduced ecosystem benefits, with potentially negative consequences for human well-being. This paper presents four pivotal focus points for future progress that can bridge the gap between ecological and social systems. The aim is to shift the discourse of ‘ecological coherence’ further into the social sphere, and hence support the alignment of the process of designating ecologically coherent MPA networks with the ‘triple bottom line’ of economic development, environmental sustainability, and social inclusion, as described in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), to achieve social–ecological coherence in MPA network design.
AB - Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and networks of MPAs are being implemented globally as a spatial management tool for achieving conservation objectives. There has been considerable progress in reaching the prescribed 10% protected area target for 2020, outlined in the Convention on Biological Diversity Aichi Target 11 and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 14. The application of MPA network design principles (e.g. Representative, ecological connectivity), which underpin ecological coherence, is still lacking or insufficient in many regions. Poor ecological coherence hinders the ecological performance of MPA networks, leading to dysfunction in the flow of ecosystem services and reduced ecosystem benefits, with potentially negative consequences for human well-being. This paper presents four pivotal focus points for future progress that can bridge the gap between ecological and social systems. The aim is to shift the discourse of ‘ecological coherence’ further into the social sphere, and hence support the alignment of the process of designating ecologically coherent MPA networks with the ‘triple bottom line’ of economic development, environmental sustainability, and social inclusion, as described in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), to achieve social–ecological coherence in MPA network design.
KW - coastal
KW - ecosystem services
KW - Marine Protected Areas
KW - ocean
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85044326883&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - https://pearl.plymouth.ac.uk/handle/10026.1/11996
UR - http://plymsea.ac.uk/id/eprint/7958/
U2 - 10.1002/aqc.2885
DO - 10.1002/aqc.2885
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85044326883
SN - 1052-7613
VL - 28
SP - 754
EP - 763
JO - Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems
JF - Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems
IS - 3
ER -