Exploring the Details and Effectiveness of Marine Protected Areas
R. Westerman Pew (Wes)
Virginia Tech Summer 2024 Strategies for Sustainability
Research Question: What are Marine Protected Areas, how well do they work, and what is their future outlook?
Abstract:
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are an environmental conservation strategy entailing the protection of a defined oceanic region, large or small, to ensure the long term sustainability of its ecosystems, their resources, and services.1 Since the first MPAs throughout the 20th century we have collected enough data to assess their effectiveness, strengths, weaknesses, recommendations for improvement, and areas that need more research. While there are many conclusions that have been drawn, overall there are mixed opinions on MPAs as a concept as well as their execution. This paper will attempt to distill the wide variety of available information on them in somewhat of a meta-analysis styled study, to summarize the above aspects of MPAs, find out what alternative MPA management techniques should be replicated, and how the threat of certain pitfalls can be avoided or minimized. The hypothesis going into the research is that, similar to just about anything, there are strengths and weaknesses. There are over 18,000 MPAs in the world;2 many of them are managed in different ways, by different overseeing authorities, with different levels of protection, and seek to preserve different types of marine areas. Therefore, results vary, different issues are faced, and different levels of success are achieved. Despite this, the benefits of MPAs outweigh the criticisms, particularly if they are supplemented through parallel marine conservation methods. This analysis highlights criticisms and beneficial features of MPAs, so that they can thrive and function as close to optimally as possible moving forward. Doing so will help to enable the preservation of crucial marine ecosystems, the fortification of the many natural and atmospheric cycles they contribute to, as well as food stability, cultural heritage, and other ecosystem services that they provide.
Introduction & Background
Today’s world is plagued by countless wicked problems that sustainability strives to improve. These are complicated and interdisciplinary problems that entail a wide range of factors, interconnected problems, inherent systems, and have no simple solution. Any action could have far reaching economic, political, ecological, or social ramifications. A solution that could help certain aspects of a wicked problem could come with its own set of drawbacks. It is exceedingly rare that a solution is created that helps one or multiple issues posed by a wicked problem without presenting its own downsides. Therefore, when a strategy is implemented as a potential solution or mitigator, it must be thoroughly analyzed to discern the various positive and negative outcomes it has influenced. This process can then result in advocating for the adjustment, perpetuation, or stoppage of said strategy. The strategy at hand that this project will be delving into, in somewhat of a meta-analysis styled examination, is that of Marine Protected Areas.
So what are Marine Protected Areas? Though they are seemingly self defined by their own name as a designated zone of coast and/or ocean under some level of protection, there is actually a lot more to them than that. Depending on factors such as the protection level, “Marine protected areas can have many different names, including marine parks, marine conservation zones, marine reserves, marine sanctuaries, and no-take zones.”3 Their level of protection can vary, as does the overseeing authority, purpose, and management strategies. The national director of the ocean program at the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS), Alexandra Barron, has said that the term MPA is just a general phrase used to describe an ocean area with some protection, and that all MPAs are unique and different from one another.4 This is especially true considering that different nations have different governmental structures, procedures, and languages that result in different details when it comes to the establishment and regulation of MPAs. Moreover, they are not only applicable for open ocean areas; they can also be established in areas containing coastline, estuaries, mangroves, or large lakes.3 In many instances they are established to protect fisheries, crucial habitat for biodiversity, historic sites such as shipwrecks, or geological structures such as underwater canyons.1,3
Though there are a number of examples of different versions of MPAs that came before (with 118 by 1970),5 MPAs that are close to as we know them today came to be as a result of a series of legislation, global conferences, and agreements between the 1960’s and the 1990’s.6,7 Today, nations create MPAs by executive decision, the passing of legislation, or regulatory action by a branch with the authority to do so already established through legislation, like the United States’ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).4 Additionally, “While the exact procedure will differ depending on the country, government scientists, environmental groups, or indigenous communities are usually the ones to identify prospective MPA’s.”4 Economic, social, and political factors play a role, in addition to ecological circumstances, in the selection of what areas are to become MPAs. It is usually a long process of up to multiple decades due to the wide variety of factors and stakeholders that must be consulted and considered in the process.4
(MPA Guide, https://mpa-guide.protectedplanet.net) This figure shows how MPAs progress from a proposal to being active.
The IUCN’s MPA classification system is based on protected areas of land, so when they are applied to marine areas certain aspects get somewhat confusing or lost in translation. However, in 2021, a group of scientists and environmental organizations published a paper in the scientific journal Science called The MPA Guide (https://mpa-guide.protectedplanet.net), which presents the different designations of MPAs in a much clearer manner. This is an extremely helpful resource that anyone who wants more details on MPAs is encouraged to check out. They outline four classifications: fully protected, highly protected, lightly protected, and minimally protected.8 While the United States has over 1,000 MPAs, only 3% of those are classified as Marine Reserves with fully protective “no-take” regulations.1 Globally as of 2024, 18,692 MPAs have been established covering 8.35% of the ocean (30,244,768 km2).2 The goal of protecting 10% of the world’s oceans was initially set in 2004.
(MPA Guide, https://mpa-guide.protectedplanet.net) This image taken from the MPA guide (PDF available to download on their website) does well to explain the differences in protection levels in simple terms.
The highest level of protection is fully protected, where often there is no human entry allowed aside from researchers. Highly protected MPAs are no-take zones, where fishing is not allowed, but the waters can be traversed freely or used for recreational activity including swimming or snorkeling. Lightly and minimally protected areas are commonly multiple use, meaning that certain fishing methods are permitted.3
(MPA Guide, https://mpa-guide.protectedplanet.net) This chart shows the level of protection's outcome on a variety of issues that ocean ecosystems face.
Threats, Concerns, and Benefits
MPAs seek to counter some of the many threats that our oceans face. Illegal and legal overfishing, pollution, acidification, temperature increase, habitat destruction, oil spills, algae blooms caused by agricultural run-off, marine traffic, invasive species, and more are issues threatening marine ecosystems, but in theory some of which can be mitigated through MPAs. By restricting activity and extraction, that alone reduces overfishing, pollution, and habitat destruction through unethical fishing methods like trawling and dredging. By promoting a healthy ecosystem and minimizing sediment disturbance, more carbon can be sequestered and remain stored in sediments which in turn would contribute to reducing acidification and temperature. Less temperature increase would reduce coral bleaching, which occurs due to the photosynthetic algae within the coral polyps over-producing oxygen, triggering the expulsion of the algae from the coral. Reducing acidification helps the ecosystem because when the ocean water contains too many acidic H+ ions, it is difficult for shellfish to build their shells. They do this by combining calcium and carbonate, but the extra hydrogen atoms in acidic water hinder this process by binding to the carbonate before the calcium can. Shellfish and corals are critical parts of many marine ecosystems, and taking action to ensure their long term survival would be extremely beneficial to the overall health of the ocean.
The most obvious benefit of MPAs, as briefly mentioned above, is that they allow for the recovery of depleted species of fish. Doing so fosters not only a healthier environment, but also secures valuable food resources that can be sustained long term and feed our population into the future if handled sustainably. This would enable fishermen to increase their catch per unit effort numbers. While there are concerns that local fishermen could be impacted in the short term, MPAs are not normally established in areas where it would be overly harmful to fishing based economies.4 Additionally, highly esteemed marine biologist and author Callum Roberts asserts that Marine Protected areas would provide immense benefits to surrounding areas:
“The thing about marine reserves is that they are leaky. And that means that they can leak benefits into the surrounding fishing grounds. When you protect an area from fishing, what happens is that the fish live longer, grow larger, they produce many many times more offspring. The reserve in a way starts switching on as this fountain of egg production. Sometimes tens, sometimes a hundred fold or more greater than the production from areas that are open to fishing. And those eggs and larvae are transported on ocean currents over long distances, so they replenish the fishing grounds, you know even up to a hundred kilometers away.”9
This is in contrast to another common concern with MPAs, that by restricting resource extraction in one area, it compounds the extraction taking place in adjacent areas. However, by the logic presented by Dr. Roberts, it is reasonable to believe that the fish population surplus within the zone and spreading to areas around the zone would offset the increased pressure outside the zone. Furthermore, “Economic concerns focused on maximizing the activities allowed in an MPA often result in watered down protections and a reduction in the protected area’s size.”4 This notion supports that the higher the level of protection a zone receives, the more benefit it will have not only to the ecosystem, but also to the economy in the long term.
A final speculated drawback of MPAs is that they can be difficult to thoroughly monitor because of how large they can be. However, what this comes down to is the entities in charge of regulating the MPA. This is determined by the country that established it and can be local or indigenous communities, high ranking positions or departments of government, even private entities such as tourism operators and commercial fisherman.4 It is often necessary for collaboration between multiple options of the prior list to effectively regulate the MPA. Local and indigenous communities are especially important because not only do they provide the much needed manpower, but also the infusion of traditional knowledge with conservation science often leads to better results.10 For a couple examples, lets compare Honduras and the United States. For Honduras, “we’ve seen remarkable progress with over 8,401 square kilometers of MPAs now under effective management and protection, partly thanks to the introduction of locally supported patrolling programs. This effort has been vital in protecting these areas from illegal activities and ensuring a thriving habitat for marine life.”10 Because of the infusion of assistance from local communities, Honduras has been able to serve as a role model for how to manage an MPA even if their government’s resources are not as abundant as the United States as an example. “In the United States, the US Coast Guard is in charge of patrolling MPAs and enforcing the rules, in cooperation with partners from NOAA and state agencies. They perform air and sea patrols and board vessels to monitor MPAs and ensure the rules are being followed, and they gather evidence of infractions.”4 Once again, the complaint of MPAs being too large to regulate can not be applied to all MPAs because there are ways to ensure proper monitoring, it just comes down to the resources that are available. Additionally, the United States are sure to consider indigenous populations as well. They have relied and placed cultural value upon the natural resources that are protected by MPAs for many centuries. They have rights to subsistence, fishing, and culturally significant areas, but also share the responsibility of management:
“Several tribes in Western Washington, Alaska and the Great Lakes have treaty-reserved fishing rights. These tribes share co-management authority and responsibility for marine resources in their usual and customary fishing areas with the federal government and/or states, depending on the specific resource and area identified. Tribes that have sole management authority may choose to establish MPAs as a tool to meet conservation goals for areas where they have management responsibilities.”11
Incorporation of indigenous people is not only the ethically correct thing to do, unlike certain examples of their exclusion in the past (such as the forced evictions of natives from their homeland in the establishment of Yellowstone National Park), but also provides many benefits. Of course there is the extra assistance in regulation in terms of manpower, but the following reason is even more important. Indigenous communities’ traditional wisdom that has been passed down generation after generation is often able to provide insights that modern science could not deduce on its own. The combination and diversity of perspectives results in greater overall knowledge and therefore more effective management strategies.
Examination
A key theme of this project has been that all MPAs are unique. Therefore attempting to come to a definitive conclusion deeming the concept of MPAs as bad or good, effective or ineffective, is futile. Depending on the type of MPA, its goal, how it's regulated and monitored, and by who, all factor in to determine the success it may have. This is the case with many concepts in biology, sustainability, and in life in general. The first that comes to mind is genetically modified organisms (GMO’s). Inherently they are neither good nor bad; they have potential to be used in ways that are beneficial, but also in ways that are harmful. MPAs as a concept, when implemented in the correct areas with the correct oversight, have proven to be effective. With that being said, this section will analyze large studies on their efficacy, a brief meta-analysis of meta-analyses.
NOAA lists the following peer reviewed studies documenting the evidence of the benefits of MPAs:
- “The National Academy of Sciences’ Research Council and Ocean Studies Board issued a report in the summer of 2001 entitled, “Marine Protected Areas: Tools for Sustaining Ocean Ecosystems.”
- Scientists in Maryland and Virginia have released a scientific consensus, under the auspices of the Chesapeake Research Consortium, with recommendations to establish oyster reefs—protected in sanctuaries and off-limits to harvesting—as long term guidance to restoration of oyster populations to the Bay.
- Numerous scientific papers published in the last five years in peer reviewed science journals report the use of MPAs to restore and rebuild fisheries and protect and conserve sensitive species and habitats.”12
This fantastic meta-analysis by Dasgupta (https://news.mongabay.com/2018/01/the-ups-and-downs-of-marine-protected-areas-examining-the-evidence/#:~:text=Marine%20protected%20areas%20can%20benefit,expected%20to%20help%20species%20recover) analyzed 42 peer reviewed studies on MPA’s (10 of which are meta-analyses of their own that review hundreds of studies) and 7 marine experts, and provides many great insights. They make sure to note, as have I, that due to the large variance in types of MPA’s, there can be inconsistencies and information gaps in terms of the assessment of effectiveness and the methodology of the various studies on them. With that being said, “The research in our sample of literature suggests — and experts generally agree — that marine protected areas do help many marine animals recover within their boundaries, especially species that have been heavily exploited by fishing.”13 This analysis noted multiple of the studies they reviewed recorded increased fish population biomass, density, and abundance. However these increases were disproportionately favoring fish with quicker growth, reproduction, and life cycles, as well as ones that face high pressure from fishing. Species that face issues other than fishing did not experience as dramatic of benefits from the MPA’s establishment, which makes sense.
This next study published in Nature by 25 authors examines 87 MPAs and what makes them effective or ineffective (https://www.nature.com/articles/nature13022). Common pitfalls are mentioned in the following excerpt: “MPAs often fail to reach their full potential as a consequence of factors such as illegal harvesting, regulations that legally allow detrimental harvesting, or emigration of animals outside boundaries because of continuous habitat or inadequate size of reserve.”14 While illegal fishing can be mitigated via patrols if manpower is available (which is a quality that they understandably list as being extremely beneficial), it has been aforementioned that too lenient of protection when establishing an MPA can be an issue. In terms of emigration, that can be mitigated as a result of another one of the qualities they list as being key to increasing the success of an MPA. “The conservation benefits of 87 MPAs investigated worldwide increase exponentially with the accumulation of five key features: no take, well enforced, old (>10 years), large (>100 km2), and isolated by deep water or sand.”14 When planning new MPAs in the future, these attributes, though not always possible, should be attempted to be replicated to maximize likelihood of an effective MPA.
A 2024 Gill et al. analysis published in PNAS looking at 216 MPAs (https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2313205121) estimated the effects that they were having on fish species, particularly focusing on no-take verus multiple use MPAs. What they discovering was that “Both no-take and multiple-use MPAs generated positive conservation outcomes relative to no protection (58.2% and 12.6% fish biomass increases, respectively), with smaller estimated differences between the two MPA types when controlling for additional confounding factors (8.3% increase).”15 Moreover, it is stated that proper level of staffing and management led to more similar results between the two types of MPA in high pressured areas, whereas in low pressure environments multi use MPAs did not make as much of an impact.15
The final study that will be incorporated into this meta-meta-analysis is from the ICES Journal of Marine Sciences from 2017 and is simply titled Are MPAs Effective? (https://academic.oup.com/icesjms/article/75/3/1160/4098822) This paper is sure to note two of the main criticisms: the only issue MPAs can reduce is legal fishing and that without compensating fisherman the fishing pressure is just relocated to outside the MPA rather than being reduced. The conclusion that is reached in this journal article is that “MPAs can benefit abundance outside reserves (and the catch) only when fishing pressure is very high and stocks are seriously overexploited.”16 Hilborn asserts that MPAs do have circumstances where they are beneficial, but often times other fishery management techniques would be just as good or better.
Results, Future Direction, and Conclusion
The results of my analysis of various studies and meta-analyses on MPAs are that there are a few valid criticisms. Protection levels not being high enough for many of them, effectiveness of management relying on a lot of manpower, displacement of fishing pressure, uneven benefit depending on fish life cycle, and inability to mitigate certain issues including emigration, agricultural runoff, and more, are all reasonable critiques that must be taken into consideration. However, they are still a great option with clear benefits such as increasing abundance as proven by the data. If the choice is nothing or MPAs, then MPAs certainly would be the more beneficial choice, and they can reach their maximum potential by being paired with other management strategies and proper implementation and regulation.
“Combining LSMPAs [Large Scale MPAs] with effective management of all ocean uses, including fisheries, and other MPAs, such as smaller networked sites or dynamic MPAs, will establish a diversified management portfolio that tempers potential losses, insures against inherent ecological and management uncertainty, and ultimately enhances the probability of successfully achieving sustainably managed oceans.”17
These studies presented many ways that MPAs can continue to be improved as well, which makes them an even more viable option moving forward.
(MPA Guide, https://mpa-guide.protectedplanet.net) Visualization of Marine ecosystem richness over time, with different potential futures based on protection level.
Future direction MPAs should pursue to improve efficacy have been revealed through this study. As mentioned, the amount of no-take zones should be increased where possible. Large MPAs are more effective as well. They do require more manpower, but that trade off is worth it for improved fish population recovery, plus through collaboration with governmental, private, local and indigenous entities, and the advancement of technological assistance, the manpower issue becomes less challenging. Other suggestions include increasing the amount of high sea international water MPAs, which is now more possible than before thanks to the UN’s recent Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (BBNJ) treaty being agreed upon.4
(https://www.protectedplanet.net/en/thematic-areas/marine-protected-areas) This figure shows how little the amount of protected area there is in international waters versus national waters.
This figure shows that only 1.4% of the high seas are protected. Creating connecting networks of MPAs is another potential strategy that will serve to improve the effectiveness of MPAs.18 This project has also showed that the field is hampered by the lack of uniformity of both the MPAs themselves as well as the studies analyzing their progress. More adaptive management styled strategies should be implemented with the help of this data on progress, and this can be achieved by adopting a model developed by Nickols et al. in 2019, involving taking data from before an MPA’s establishment as well as during its time as active.19 Being able to uniformly and accurately asses an MPA’s effects on the mairne ecoystem would allow the managing entities to make adjustments and corrections to further enhance effectiveness. In conclusion, MPAs are not perfect, but are a great option for conservation, and by incorporating the suggested strategies in the establishment and management MPAs, they will only continue to improve thus enabling humans to sustainably reap the benefits of marine ecosystems for years to come.
- “What Is a Marine Protected Area (MPA)?” What is a marine protected area (MPA)? : Ocean Exploration Facts: NOAA Office of Ocean Exploration and Research. Accessed August 5, 2024. https://oceanexplorer.noaa.gov/facts/mpas.html.
- “Marine Protected Areas.” Protected Planet. Accessed August 5, 2024. https://www.protectedplanet.net/en/thematic-areas/marine-protected-areas.
- Ruteledge, Kim, Melissa McDaniel, Santani Teng, Hilary Hall, Tara Ramroop, Erin Sprout, Jeff Hunt, Diane Boudreau, and Hilary Costa. “The Importance of Marine Protected Areas (Mpas).” Edited by Jeannie Evers, Emdash Editing, and Kara West. National Geographic, April 10, 2024. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/importance-marine-protected-areas/#:~:text=More%20than%205%2C000%20MPAs%20have,the%20ocean%20as%20of%202023.
- Owens, Brian. “Marine Protected Areas, Explained.” Hakai Magazine. Accessed August 5, 2024. https://hakaimagazine.com/features/marine-protected-areas-explained/#:~:text=The%20MPA%20Guide%20has%20four,what%20impact%20they%20might%20have.
- Humphreys, John, and Robert W.E. Clark. “A Critical History of Marine Protected Areas.” Marine Protected Areas, 2020, 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-102698-4.00001-0.
- Marine Protected Areas: Tools for sustaining ocean ecosystems. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press, 2001.
- Moore, Elizabeth. “Time and Tide: A History of the National Marine Sanctuary System .” National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration , 2022. https://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/about/history/.
- The MPA Guide, 2024. https://mpa-guide.protectedplanet.net/.
- “Callum Roberts Explains The Importance Of Marine Protected Areas.” YouTube, June 6, 2019. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vHwe-wIsDs4.
- “The Importance of Marine Protected Areas (MPA’s).” Coral Reef Alliance, March 25, 2024. https://coral.org/en/blog/the-importance-of-marine-protected-areas-mpas/#:~:text=These%20areas%20are%20crucial%20for,%2C%20habitat%20destruction%2C%20and%20pollution.
- US Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. “Tribal Programs.” National Marine Protected Areas Center, July 27, 2009. https://marineprotectedareas.noaa.gov/aboutmpas/programs/tribal/.
- “Marine Protected Areas: Frequently Asked Questions.” National Marine Protected Areas Center. Accessed August 5, 2024. https://marineprotectedareas.noaa.gov/helpful_resources/faqs.html#MPAs.
- Dasgupta, Shreya. “The Ups and Downs of Marine Protected Areas: Examining the Evidence.” Mongabay Environmental News, May 14, 2021. https://news.mongabay.com/2018/01/the-ups-and-downs-of-marine-protected-areas-examining-the-evidence/#:~:text=Marine%20protected%20areas%20can%20benefit,expected%20to%20help%20species%20recover.
- Edgar, Graham J., Rick D. Stuart-Smith, Trevor J. Willis, Stuart Kininmonth, Susan C. Baker, Stuart Banks, Neville S. Barrett, et al. “Global Conservation Outcomes Depend on Marine Protected Areas with Five Key Features.” Nature506, no. 7487 (February 5, 2014): 216–20. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13022.
- Gill, David A., Sarah E. Lester, Christopher M. Free, Alexander Pfaff, Edwin Iversen, Brian J. Reich, Shu Yang, et al. “A Diverse Portfolio of Marine Protected Areas Can Better Advance Global Conservation and Equity.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 121, no. 10 (February 26, 2024). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2313205121.
- Hilborn, Ray. “Are Mpas Effective?” ICES Journal of Marine Science 75, no. 3 (August 31, 2017): 1160–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/icesjms/fsx068.
- O’Leary, Bethan C, Natalie C Ban, Miriam Fernandez, Alan M Friedlander, Pablo GarcÃa-Borboroglu, Yimnang Golbuu, Paolo Guidetti, et al. “Addressing Criticisms of Large-Scale Marine Protected Areas.” BioScience 68, no. 5 (April 5, 2018): 359–70. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biy021.
- The Pew Charitable Trusts. “Connecting Marine Protected Areas Can Improve Ocean Health.” The Pew Charitable Trusts, August 14, 2023. https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2022/07/connecting-marine-protected-areas-can-improve-ocean-health.
- Nickols, Kerry J., J. Wilson White, Dan Malone, Mark H. Carr, Richard M. Starr, Marissa L. Baskett, Alan Hastings, and Louis W. Botsford. “Setting Ecological Expectations for Adaptive Management of Marine Protected Areas.” Journal of Applied Ecology 56, no. 10 (July 16, 2019): 2376–85. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.13463.
