Marine conservation science and governance in North-West Europe: Conservation planning and international law and policy

Marine Policy

Volumn 39, Issue 1, 2013, Pages 289-295

  Metcalfe, Kristian ^a   Roberts, Thomas ^a   Smith, Robert J ^a   Harrop, Stuart R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KENT   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Birds Directive; CBD; Habitats Directive; Marine protected areas; Natura 2000; OSPAR; Systematic conservation planning

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; BIRD; CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT; CONSERVATION PLANNING; GOVERNANCE APPROACH; HABITAT CONSERVATION; INTERNATIONAL LAW; MARINE PARK; NATURE CONSERVATION;

EUROPE;

AVES;

EID: 84872168249     PISSN: 0308597X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2012.12.002     Document Type: Article

References (82)

1. Lubchenco J, Palumbi SR, Gaines SD, Andelman S Plugging a hole in the ocean: the emerging science of marine reserves. Ecol. Appl. 2003, 13:S3-S7.
2. CBD. Convention on Biological Diversity. Global Biodiversity Outlook 3. Montréal, Canada. 2010. http://gbo3.cbd.int/.
3. Fox HE, Soltanoff CS, Mascia MB, Haisfield KM, Lombana AV, Pyke CR, et al. Explaining global patterns and trends in marine protected area (MPA) development. Mar. Pol. 2012, 36:1131-1138.
4. Wood LJ, Fish L, Laughren J, Pauly D Assessing progress towards global marine protection targets: shortfalls in information and action. Oryx 2008, 42:340-351.
5. Wood LJ Global marine protection targets: how S.M.A.R.T are they?. Environ. Manage. 2011, 47:525-535.
6. CBD. Report of the 10th meeting of the conference of the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Nagoya, Japan. 2011. http://www.cbd.int/doc/meetings/cop/cop-10/official/cop-10-27-en.pdf.
7. Harrop SR Living in harmony with nature? outcomes of the 2010 Nagoya conference of the Convention on Biological Diversity. J. Environ. Law 2011, 23:117-128.
8. Smith RJ, Eastwood PD, Ota Y, Rogers SI Developing best practice for using Marxan to locate marine protected areas in European waters. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 2009, 66:188-194.
9. Haslett JR, Berry PM, Bela G, Jongman RHG, Pataki G, Samways MJ, et al. Changing conservation strategies in Europe: a framework integrating ecosystem services and dynamics. Biodivers. Conserv. 2010, 19:2963-2977.
10. Fenberg PB, Caselle JE, Claudet J, Clemence M, Gaines SD, Antonio Garcia-Charton J, et al. The science of European marine reserves: status, efficacy, and future needs. Mar. Pol. 2012, 36:1012-1021.
11. Dimitrakopoulos PG, Memtsas D, Troumbis AY Questioning the effectiveness of the Natura 2000 Special Areas of Conservation strategy: the case of Crete. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 2004, 13:199-207.
12. Jackson SF, Kershaw M, Gaston KJ The performance of procedures for selecting conservation areas: waterbirds in the UK. Biol. Conserv. 2004, 118:261-270.
13. Maiorano L, Falcucci A, Garton EO, Boitani L Contribution of the Natura 2000 network to biodiversity conservation in Italy. Conserv. Biol. 2007, 21:1433-1444.
14. Sundblad G, Bergström U, Sandström A Ecological coherence of marine protected area networks: a spatial assessment using species distribution models. J. Appl. Ecol. 2011, 48:112-120.
15. Margules CR, Pressey RL Systematic conservation planning. Nature 2000, 405:243-253.
16. Knight AT, Cowling RM, Campbell BM An operational model for implementing conservation action. Conserv. Biol. 2006, 20:408-419.
17. Knight AT, Driver A, Cowling RM, Maze K, Desmet PG, T Lombard A, et al. Designing systematic conservation assessments that promote effective implementation: best practice from South Africa. Conserv. Biol. 2006, 20:739-750.
18. Pressey RL, Cowling RM, Rouget M Formulating conservation targets for biodiversity pattern and process in the Cape Floristic Region, South Africa. Biol. Conserv. 2003, 112:99-127.
19. Carwardine J, Klein CJ, Wilson KA, Pressey RL, Possingham HP Hitting the target and missing the point: target based conservation planning in context. Conserv. Lett. 2009, 2:3-10.
20. Cowling RM, Pressey RL, Sims-Castley R, le Roux A, Baard E, Burgers CJ, et al. The expert or the algorithm? Comparison of priority conservation areas in the Cape Floristic Region identified by park managers and reserve selection software. Biol. Conserv. 2003, 112:147-167.
21. Klein CJ, Chan A, Kircher L, Cundiff AJ, Gardner N, Hrovat Y, et al. Striking a balance between biodiversity conservation and socioeconomic viability in the design of marine protected areas. Conserv. Biol. 2008, 22:691-700.
22. Klein CJ, Steinback C, Scholz AJ, Possingham HP Effectiveness of marine reserve networks in representing biodiversity and minimizing impact to fishermen: a comparison of two approaches used in California. Conserv. Lett. 2008, 1:44-51.
23. Naidoo R, Balmford A, Ferraro PJ, Polasky S, Ricketts TH, Rouget M Integrating economic costs into conservation planning. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2006, 21:681-687.
24. Carwardine J, Wilson KA, Watts M, Etter A, Klein CJ, Possingham HP Avoiding costly conservation mistakes: the importance of defining actions and costs in spatial priority setting. PloS One 2008, 3:e2586. 10.1371/journalpone.0002586.
25. Nhancale B, Smith R The influence of planning unit characteristics on the efficiency and spatial pattern of systematic conservation planning assessments. Biodivers. Conserv. 2011, 20:1821-1835.
26. Ban NC, Klein CJ Spatial socioeconomic data as a cost in systematic marine conservation planning. Conserv. Lett. 2009, 2:206-215.
27. Cowling RM, Knight AT, Privett SDJ, Sharma G Invest in opportunity, not inventory of hotspots. Conserv. Biol. 2010, 24:633-635.
28. Cowling RM, Wilhelm-Rechmann A Social assessment as a key to conservation success. Oryx 2007, 41:135-136.
29. Jones PJS Marine protected areas in the UK: challenges in combining top-down and bottom-up approaches to governance. Environ. Conserv. 2012, 1-11.
30. EC. Towards a strategy to protect and conserve the marine environment. European Commission, Brussels. 2002. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2002:0539:FIN:EN:PDF.
31. EC Council Directive 2008/56/EC establishing a framework for community action in the field of marine environmental policy (Marine Strategy Framework Directive). Off. J. L. 2008, 164(19).
32. IUCN. Protected areas, benefits beyond boundaries. International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN).Gland, Switzerland. 2000.
33. CBD. Convention on Biological Diversity. United Nations Treaty Series. 1992 http://www.cbd.int/doc/legal/cbd-un-en.pdf.
34. CBD. COP 7 (DecisionVII/5 Marine and Coastal Biological Diversity) Convention on Biological Diversity. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 2004. http://www.cbd.int/decision/cop/?id=7742.
35. CBD. COP 7 (DecisionVII/28 Protected Areas) Convention on Biological Diversity. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. 2004. http://www.cbd.int/decision/cop/?id=7765.
36. United Nations. Plan of implementation of the world summit on sustainable development. 2002. http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/documents/WSSD_POI_PD/English/WSSD_PlanImpl.pdf.
37. IUCN. Recommendation 5.22: building a global system of marine and coastal protected areas. Fifth IUCN world parks congress, Durban, South Africa. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 2003.
38. CBD. COP 10 (Decision X/2 strategic plan for biodiversity 2011-2020) Convention on Biological Diversity. Nagoya, Japan. 2010.
39. Metcalfe K, Delavenne J, Garcia C, Foveau A, Dauvin JC, Coggan RA, et al. Impacts of data quality on the setting of conservation planning targets using the species-area relationship. Diversity and Distributions. 2013; 19(1):1-13.
40. Gaston KJ, Jackson SE, Nagy A, Cantu-Salazar L, Johnson M Protected areas in Europe: principle and practice. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 2008, 1134:97-119.
41. Harrop SR, Pritchard DJ A hard instrument goes soft: the implications of the Convention on Biological Diversity's current trajectory. Global Environ. Change 2011, 21:474-480.
42. EC. Council conclusions on Convention on Biological Diversity: outcome of and follow-up to the Nagoya conference. 3061st Environment Council meeting Brussels. 2010.
43. EC Our life insurance, our natural capital: an EU biodiversity strategy to 2020 2011, European Commission, Brussels.
44. EC Council Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds. Off. J. L 1979, 103:1.
45. EC Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. Off. J. L 1992, 206:7-50.
46. EC. Commission working document on Natura 2000. European Commission, Brussels. 2002. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/info/pubs/docs/nat2000/2002_faq_en.pdf.
47. EC. Guidelines for the establishment of the Natura 2000 network in the marine environment. Application of the Habitats and Birds Directives. European Commission, Brussels. 2007. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/marine/docs/marine_guidelines.pdf.
48. Evans D Building the European Union's Natura 2000 network. Nat. Conserv. 2012, 1:11-26.
49. Cogalniceanu D, Cogalniceanu GC An enlarged European Union challenges priority settings in conservation. Biodivers. Conserv. 2010, 19:1471-1483.
50. Apostolopoulou E, Pantis JD Conceptual gaps in the national strategy for the implementation of the European Natura 2000 conservation policy in Greece. Biol. Conserv. 2009, 142:221-237.
51. van Haastrecht EK, Toonen HM Science-policy interactions in MPA site selection in the Dutch part of the North Sea. Environ. Manage. 2011, 47:656-670.
52. Harrop SR Conservation regulation: a backward step for biodiversity?. Biodivers. Conserv. 1999, 8:679-707.
53. Giakoumi S, Katsanevakis S, Vassilopoulou V, Panayotidis P, Kavadas S, Issaris Y, et al. Could European marine conservation policy benefit from systematic conservation planning?. Aquat. Conserv.: Mar. Freshwater Ecosyst. 2012, doi 10.1002.aqc.2273.
54. De Santo EM, Jones PJS Offshore marine conservation policies in the North East Atlantic: emerging tensions and opportunities. Mar. Pol. 2007, 31:336-347.
55. Ioja CI, Patroescu M, Rozylowicz L, Popescu VD, Verghelet M, Zotta MI, et al. The efficacy of Romania's protected areas network in conserving biodiversity. Biol. Conserv. 2010, 143:2468-2476.
56. EC. Criteria for assessing national lists of pSCI at biogeographic level. Habitats Committee. 1997.
57. Borrini-Feyerabend G Collaborative management of protected areas. Partnership for protection: new strategies for planning and management for protected areas 1999, Earthscan Publications Ltd, London. S. Stolton, N. Dudley (Eds.).
58. Jones PJS Marine nature reserves in Britain: past lessons, current status and future issues. Mar. Pol. 1999, 23:375-396.
59. Roberts T, Jones PJS Shellfishing, eider ducks, and nature conservation on the wash: questions raised by a fractured partnership. Soc. Nat. Resour. 2009, 22:538-553.
60. Grodzinska-Jurczak M, Cent J Expansion of nature conservation areas: problems with Natura 2000 implementation in Poland?. Environ. Manage. 2011, 47:11-27.
61. OSPAR. Convention for the protection of the marine environment of the North-East Atlantic. OSPAR Commission. 1992.
62. OSPAR. The North-East Atlantic Environment strategy. Strategy of the OSPAR Commission for the Protection of the marine environment of the North-East Atlantic 2010-2020. OSPAR Commission (OSPAR Reference Number: 2010-3). 2010.
63. OSPAR. Guidelines for the identification and selection of marine protected areas in the OSPAR maritime area. OSPAR Commission (Reference Number: 2003-17). 2003.
64. OSPAR. Joint HELCOM/OSPAR work programme on marine protected areas. First joint managerial meeting of the Helsinki and OSPAR Commissions, Agenda Item 6, Annex 7. 2003.
65. Ardron JA The challenge of assessing whether the OSPAR network of marine protected areas is ecologically coherent. Hydrobiologia 2008, 606:45-53.
66. OSPAR. OSPAR list of threatened and/or declining species and habitats. OSPAR Commission. (Reference Number: 2008-6). 2008.
67. OSPAR. Case reports for the OSPAR list of threatened and/or declining species and habitats. OSPAR Commission. Biodiversity Series No. 358. 2008.
68. OSPAR. Guidance on developing an ecologically coherent network of OSPAR marine protected areas. OSPAR Commission (Reference Number: 2006-3). 2006.
69. CBD. Decisions adopted by the conference of the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity at its eighth meeting (DecisionVIII/15, Annex IV). Convention on Biological Diversity. Curitiba, Brazil 2006.
70. OSPAR. 2006 Report on the status of the OSPAR network of marine protected areas. OSPAR Commission Biodiversity Series, 319. 2007.
71. Oldfield TEE, Smith RJ, Harrop SR, Leader-Williams N A gap analysis of terrestrial protected areas in England and its implications for conservation policy. Biol. Conserv. 2004, 120:303-309.
72. OSPAR. 2009/2010 Status report on the OSPAR network of marine protected areas. OSPAR Commission. Biodiversity Series. 2010.
73. OSPAR. Guidance for good practice for communicating with stakeholder on the establishment and management of marine protected areas. OSPAR Commission (Reference Number: 2008-2). 2008.
74. Dimitrakopoulos PG, Jones N, Iosifides T, Florokapi I, Lasda O, Paliouras F, et al. Local attitudes on protected areas: evidence from three Natura 2000 wetland sites in Greece. J. Environ. Manage. 2010, 91:1847-1854.
75. MCAA Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 2009, The Stationery Office, London, Chapter 23.
76. JNCC, Natural England. Marine Conservation Zone Project. Ecological Network Guidance. Joint Nature Conservation Committee and Natural England. 2010. http://www.jncc.gov.uk/pdf/100608_ENG_v10.pdf.
77. Jones PJS Equity, justice and power issues raised by no-take marine protected area proposals. Mar. Pol. 2009, 33:759-765.
78. Rabaut M, Degraer S, Schrijvers J, Derous S, Bogaert D, Maes F, et al. Policy analysis of the 'MPA-process' in temperate continental shelf areas. Aquat. Conserv.-Mar. Freshwater Ecosys. 2009, 19:596-608.
79. Stewart RR, Noyce T, Possingham HP Opportunity cost of ad hoc marine reserve design decisions: an example from South Australia. Mar. Ecol.-Prog. Ser. 2003, 253:25-38.
80. Kark S, Levin N, Grantham HS, Possingham HP Between-country collaboration and consideration of costs increase conservation planning efficiency in the Mediterranean Basin. PNAS 2009, 106:15368-15373.
81. Bladt J, Strange N, Abildtrup J, Svenning J-C, Skov F Conservation efficiency of geopolitical coordination in the EU. J. Nat. Conserv. 2009, 17:72-86.
82. Agardy T, di Sciara GN, Christie P Mind the gap: addressing the shortcomings of marine protected areas through large scale marine spatial planning. Mar. Pol. 2011, 35:226-232.