Planning for success: Leveraging two ecosystem models to support development of an Antarctic marine protected area

被引:7
|
作者
Dahood, Adrian [1 ,2 ,4 ]
Klein, Emily S. [1 ,5 ]
Watters, George M. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] NOAA, Antarctic Ecosyst Res Div, Southwest Fisheries Sci Ctr, Natl Marine Fisheries Serv, 8901 La Jolla Shores Dr, La Jolla, CA 92037 USA
[2] Univ Calif Santa Cruz, Inst Marine Sci, 1156 High St, Santa Cruz, CA 95064 USA
[3] Farallon Inst, 101 H St, Petaluma, CA 94952 USA
[4] Calif Nat Resources Agcy, Calif Ocean Protect Council, 1416 Ninth St,Suite 1311, Sacramento, CA 95814 USA
[5] Boston Univ, Frederick S Pardee Ctr Study Longer Range Future, 67 Bay State Rd, Boston, MA 02215 USA
关键词
Antarctic; Marine protected area; Ecosystem model; Multi-model inference; Decision support; Science for policy advice; KRILL FISHERY; UNCERTAINTY; PARAMETERS; PENINSULA; ECOPATH; OPTIONS; ECOSIM;
D O I
10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104109
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Efforts are underway to forward a marine protected area (MPA) in the Western Antarctic Peninsula, guided by an internationally agreed framework of protected area objectives. Preliminary MPA boundaries were evaluated against some of these objectives using a static, map-based process, yet further assessment and additional objectives could be addressed with dynamic approaches. Here, the MPA's evaluation was expanded using the joint application of two published dynamic ecosystem models to further appraise the MPA. These models also considered potential impacts of climate change in the region, and greater insight can be gained from using them together rather than independently. Both models projected the proposed MPA could increase ecosystem viability in the region by reducing potential population declines, especially of penguins. These benefits manifested even when the impacts of climate change occurred over the long term, and likely accrued due to protection of areas important for krill aggregation and predator foraging. Model outcomes also suggested possible improvements to the preliminary MPA boundaries to reinforce these benefits. Using the two structurally distinct models together increased confidence in results and the potential for an MPA to meet multiple policy objectives in the region, and the paper further details the process of translating outcomes into timely decision support for stakeholders. Modelling results were regularly communicated using established formal and informal channels, ensuring modelderived advice directly supported policy needs. Collectively, the work demonstrates the process and value of leveraging existing ecosystem models, quickly adapting models to policy needs, and developing actionable advice for policy makers.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Applying marine protected area design models in large estuarine systems
    Neely, Amanda E.
    Zajac, Roman N.
    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES, 2008, 373 : 11 - 23
  • [42] Do marine protected areas deliver flows of ecosystem services to support human welfare?
    Potts, Tavis
    Burdon, Daryl
    Jackson, Emma
    Atkins, Jonathan
    Saunders, Justine
    Hastings, Emily
    Langmead, Olivia
    MARINE POLICY, 2014, 44 : 139 - 148
  • [43] Using choice models to inform large marine protected area design
    Wallmo, Kristy
    Kosaka, Rosemary
    MARINE POLICY, 2017, 83 : 111 - 117
  • [44] MarineMap: A web-based platform for collaborative marine protected area planning
    Merrifield, Matthew S.
    McClintock, Will
    Burt, Chad
    Fox, Evan
    Serpa, Paulo
    Steinback, Charles
    Gleason, Mary
    OCEAN & COASTAL MANAGEMENT, 2013, 74 : 67 - 76
  • [45] A clash of values and approaches: A case study of marine protected area planning in Mozambique
    Rosendo, Sergio
    Brown, Katrina
    Joubert, Alison
    Jiddawi, Narriman
    Mechisso, Micas
    OCEAN & COASTAL MANAGEMENT, 2011, 54 (01) : 55 - 65
  • [46] The role of science in supporting marine protected area network planning and design in California
    Saarman, Emily
    Gleason, Mary
    Ugoretz, John
    Airame, Satie
    Carr, Mark
    Fox, Evan
    Frimodig, Adam
    Mason, Tom
    Vasques, Jason
    OCEAN & COASTAL MANAGEMENT, 2013, 74 : 45 - 56
  • [47] Methods of social assessment in Marine Protected Area planning: Is public participation enough?
    Voyer, Michelle
    Gladstone, William
    Goodall, Heather
    MARINE POLICY, 2012, 36 (02) : 432 - 439
  • [48] Monitoring Antarctic toothfish in McMurdo Sound to evaluate the Ross Sea region Marine Protected Area
    Parker, S. J.
    Mormede, S.
    Hanchet, S. M.
    Devries, A.
    Canese, S.
    Ghigliotti, L.
    ANTARCTIC SCIENCE, 2019, 31 (04) : 195 - 207
  • [49] Food web structure and species' role in the sub-Antarctic Marine Protected Area Yaganes
    Scian, Melina
    Riccialdelli, Luciana
    Marina, Tomas I.
    POLAR BIOLOGY, 2025, 48 (02)
  • [50] Purpose vs performance: What does marine protected area success look like?
    Yates, Katherine L.
    Clarke, Beverley
    Thurstan, Ruth H.
    ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & POLICY, 2019, 92 : 76 - 86