Transcript Solving the Mystery of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) Performance

Solving the Mystery of MPA Performance:
linking governance, biodiversity conservation, & poverty
Working Draft
Mike Mascia, Helen Fox, & Al Lombana
WWF Conservation Science Program
Overview
•
•
•
•
Background
Conceptual framework
Research options
Moving forward
Definitions
Marine protected areas
Marine reserves
Open access
Multiple use
(not zoned)
Source: redrawn from Mascia (2004).
Multiple use
(zoned)
Nonconsumptive
use only
No human use
Marine Protected Area (MPA) coverage
~4600 MPAs
Source: MPA global
MPA growth
Source: MPA global
The MPA debate
Proponents
– MPAs benefit both fish & fishermen
Opponents
– MPAs place fish before fishermen
Evidence?
– Varies
– Largely anecdotal
– Causality unclear
3 key questions
What are the social impacts of MPAs?
– Monitoring & evaluation/management effectiveness
– Describe outcomes
What determines MPA social impacts?
– Scientific research
– Explain outcomes
How should we design MPAs to alleviate poverty?
– Conservation policy
– Deliver outcomes
Fisheries
Science
(from Ward, Heinemann &
Evans 2001)
Results Chains
Design and Facilitate the Implementation of a MPA Network
Inputs provided
to WIOMER
MPA design
Links with
WIOMER
identified
Reduce impact of
Infrastructure
development
MPA5
Assessment
connectivity in
coral, fish and
spawning sites
WWF-US lead process of:
-review of existing experiences of
MPA (Australia)
-Review of WWF ecoregion map
-Gap analysis on existing systems of
MPAs in EAME states
Preliminary
understanding
of connectivity
More proper
Tourism Behavior
Review MPA
network Blue
Prints on bases
of connectivity
science
MPA1
Process to
develop a MPA
Network
established
Understanding
of connectivity
improved
MPA2
Team/Committee
Established (Governments,
Scientists, WWF EAME,
Private sector)
Apply results of
climate change
adaptation strategy
First draft of MPA
Network (using
existing data/Info)
developed
Consultation
Process (including
Community)
Transboundary
MPAs discussion
as needed
Communication
-Governments
-donors
-NGOs
More proper
industrial fishing
MPA3
Revised MPA
Network
blueprint
MPA Network
Blueprint
endorsed by
stakeholders
Dunes
Species
of special
concern
Off
Shore
species
MPA4
Governments
adopt the
MPA Network
Governments, Donors
and NGOs commit
resources to
implementation of the
network
Facilitation of MPA
lesson sharing
Promotion of
management
effectiveness
assessment and
adaptive
management
MPA network
implemented
Ecological
representative
network of MPAs
functioning
More proper
artesanal fishing
Reduce Coral
mining
Near
shoe
species
Coral
reef
Sea
Grasses
Reduce Cutting
Mangroves
Increase
resilience to
Climate change
Costal
wetlands
Mangrov
es
Political Theory
MPA
governance
Resource use patterns
Biological condition
Contextual
variables
Social condition
MPA
governance
Resource use patterns
Decision making
arrangements
Resource use
rights
User
demographics
Rules x
compliance
Location
of use
Biomass
Wealth
Catch x
effort
Health
Mortality x
habitat
Timing
of use
Conflict
resolution
mechanisms
Social condition
Population
size
Resources
used
Monitoring &
enforcement
systems
Contextual
variables
Biological condition
Richness
Empowerment
Diversity
Education
Mode
of use
Pollution &
sediment’n
Climate
change
Ecosystem
type
Economic
environment
Political
environment
Cultural
environment
Demographics
MPA governance
Decision-making arrangements
–
–
Users participate in decisions-making
Users may self-govern resource use
Resource use rights
–
–
–
–
Resource users defined clearly
Resources defined clearly
User costs-benefits ratio roughly proportional
Use rights linked to local conditions
Monitoring and enforcement systems
–
–
–
–
–
–
Monitors assess resource conditions
Monitors assess user behavior
Monitors are or accountable to users
Sanctions for noncompliance likely
Sanctions for noncompliance graduated
Sanctions for noncompliance context-dependent
Conflict resolution mechanisms
–
–
Conflict resolution mechanisms accessible to users
Conflict resolution mechanisms accessible to officials
Social condition
Wealth
–
–
–
–
Income
Material assets
Natural assets
Food security
Health
– Nutrition
– Infant mortality
– Childhood stunting
Political empowerment
– Resource control
– Involvement in broader political activities
Education
– School attendance
Research options
Survey MPA managers
Mgmt. effectiveness meta-analysis
Field-based retrospective
Less
cost
turn around time
precision
predictive power
Field-based prospective
More
Moving forward
WWF
– Indicator review & framework development
– Global lit review of MPA social impacts
– Natural experiments to explain MPA performance
SCB Social Science Working Group (SSWG)
– Online catalog of social science tools
– SCB 2007
• symposiums
• workshops
• short courses
– Working paper series
– Discussion list
Global survey
Concept:
• examine governance-performance links based on collection &
analysis of MPA managers’ perceptions
– survey specific MPAs/MPA managers
– provide constrained-choice responses
– use statistical data analysis
Pros & Cons
• rapid, inexpensive, powerful
• no context, may miss subtleties, possible response bias
Example:
• Bruner, et al. 2001. Effectiveness of parks in protecting tropical
biodiversity. Science 291: 125-128.
Management Effectiveness meta-analysis
Concept:
• Analyze existing assessments of MPAs for links between
governance, biophysical, and socioeconomic indicators
– Regional: East Africa
– Global: How is your MPA doing?
Pros & Cons
• data from a variety of sites, potentially very useful
• data quality, data access, indicator quality
Example:
• Halpern, B.S. 2003 The impact of marine reserves: do reserves work and
does reserve size matter? Ecological Applications
Retrospective field research
Concept:
• measure MPA governance-performance links through field-based
reconstruction of historic patterns and trends
– construct natural experiments
– employ mixed methods
– use statistical data analysis
Pros & Cons:
• relatively quick and inexpensive, rigorous, powerful
• logistically complex, difficult to fund?
Example:
• Cinner, et al. 2005. Conservation and community benefits from traditional
coral reef management at Ahus Island, Papua New Guinea. Conservation
Biology 19(6): 1714-1723.
Field-based prospective: Windows of opportunity
Concept:
• obtain baseline data as MPAs are established, measure changes
in social and ecological indicators
– “before” data: Primeiras and Segundas, Tun Mustafa
– still early: Quirimbas
Pros & Cons:
• most rigorous “proof” of effects, indicator quality control
• long-term, expensive, low power
Example:
• Apo Island, Philippines
MPA
governance
Resource use patterns
Decision making
arrangements
Resource use
rights
User
demographics
Rules x
compliance
Location
of use
Biomass
Wealth
Catch x
effort
Health
Mortality x
habitat
Timing
of use
Conflict
resolution
mechanisms
Social condition
Population
size
Resources
used
Monitoring &
enforcement
systems
Contextual
variables
Biological condition
Richness
Empowerment
Diversity
Education
Mode
of use
Pollution &
sediment’n
Climate
change
Ecosystem
type
Economic
environment
Political
environment
Cultural
environment
Demographics