Marine protected area strategies: issues, divergences and the search for middle ground

Marine protected area strategies: issues, divergences and the search for middle ground There has been a dramatic increase in recentyears in the number of papers, reports, etc.,which have been published concerning MarineProtected Areas (MPAs). This overview of theobjectives, selection, design and management ofMPAs aims to provide a basis for discussionregarding possible ways forward by identifyingemerging issues, convergences and divergences. Whilst the attributes of the marine environmentmay limit the effectiveness of site-specificinitiatives such as MPAs, it is argued that itwould be defeatist in the extreme to abandonMPAs in the face of these limitations. Ten keyobjectives for MPAs are discussed, includingthat of harvest refugia, and it is argued thatwhilst these objectives may be justifiable froma preservationist perspective, they may beobjected to from a resource exploitationperspective. MPAs generate both internal(between uses) and basic (between use andconservation) conflicts, and it is argued thatthese conflicts may be exacerbated whenscientific arguments for MPAs are motivated bypreservationist concerns. It is reported thata minority of MPAs are achieving theirmanagement objectives, and that for themajority insufficient information was availablefor such effectiveness evaluations. Structureand process-oriented perspectives on marineconservation are discussed. It is argued thatthere are two divergent stances concerningoptimal MPA management approaches: top-down,characterized as being government-led andscience-based, with a greater emphasis onset-aside; and bottom-up, characterized asbeing community-based and science-guided, witha greater emphasis on multiple-use. Given thedivergent values of different stakeholders, thehigh degree of scientific uncertainty, and thehigh marine resource management decisionstakes, it is concluded that a key challenge isto adopt a ``middle-ground'' approach whichcombines top-down and bottom-up approaches, andwhich is consistent with the post-normalscientific approach. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries Springer Journals

Marine protected area strategies: issues, divergences and the search for middle ground

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/marine-protected-area-strategies-issues-divergences-and-the-search-for-cc1uX7tS00
Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2001 by Kluwer Academic Publishers
Subject
Life Sciences; Freshwater & Marine Ecology; Zoology
ISSN
0960-3166
eISSN
1573-5184
D.O.I.
10.1023/A:1020327007975
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

There has been a dramatic increase in recentyears in the number of papers, reports, etc.,which have been published concerning MarineProtected Areas (MPAs). This overview of theobjectives, selection, design and management ofMPAs aims to provide a basis for discussionregarding possible ways forward by identifyingemerging issues, convergences and divergences. Whilst the attributes of the marine environmentmay limit the effectiveness of site-specificinitiatives such as MPAs, it is argued that itwould be defeatist in the extreme to abandonMPAs in the face of these limitations. Ten keyobjectives for MPAs are discussed, includingthat of harvest refugia, and it is argued thatwhilst these objectives may be justifiable froma preservationist perspective, they may beobjected to from a resource exploitationperspective. MPAs generate both internal(between uses) and basic (between use andconservation) conflicts, and it is argued thatthese conflicts may be exacerbated whenscientific arguments for MPAs are motivated bypreservationist concerns. It is reported thata minority of MPAs are achieving theirmanagement objectives, and that for themajority insufficient information was availablefor such effectiveness evaluations. Structureand process-oriented perspectives on marineconservation are discussed. It is argued thatthere are two divergent stances concerningoptimal MPA management approaches: top-down,characterized as being government-led andscience-based, with a greater emphasis onset-aside; and bottom-up, characterized asbeing community-based and science-guided, witha greater emphasis on multiple-use. Given thedivergent values of different stakeholders, thehigh degree of scientific uncertainty, and thehigh marine resource management decisionstakes, it is concluded that a key challenge isto adopt a ``middle-ground'' approach whichcombines top-down and bottom-up approaches, andwhich is consistent with the post-normalscientific approach.

Journal

Reviews in Fish Biology and FisheriesSpringer Journals

Published: Nov 28, 2004

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off