2019•Aquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater EcosystemsRequires access

Bio‐physical models of marine environments reveal biases in the representation of protected areas

Kelsey E. Roberts, Grant A. Duffy, Carly N. Cook

Open publisher page 16 citations

Abstract

Abstract The significant shortfall in global marine protection targets is likely to continue to drive rapid growth in marine protected areas (MPAs). Systematic conservation planning to fill gaps in marine protection requires sufficient knowledge of both the distribution of biodiversity and the threats to species and ecosystems. Yet such data are lacking for much of the marine environment, creating significant challenges for planning effective marine protection. In the absence of habitat mapping data, critical environmental variables associated with species' distributions can be used to model the spatial distribution of different environments. Although this approach has been used in some jurisdictions to assist MPA planners, the increased availability and resolution of spatial data now provide an opportunity to improve assessments of MPA representation. Capitalizing on advances in spatial data, this study uses a range of biological and physical environmental attributes to model the distribution of Australian marine environments. Given many Australian MPAs were implemented without knowledge of the distribution of species and benthic habitats, this Bio‐physical model is used to assess MPA coverage and equality of protection for Australian marine environments. Results of the Bio‐physical model revealed that Australian MPAs overrepresent warm, offshore waters (such as the Coral Sea) and underrepresent temperate environments. Furthermore, the distribution of protection in Australian MPAs is heavily skewed, with no‐take protection disproportionately targeting tropical environments, leaving major gaps in the protection of both temperate and nearshore habitats. Without comprehensive habitat mapping, the representativeness and adequacy of an MPA system cannot be accurately evaluated, nor can the required expansion of MPAs be planned effectively. In the interim, the biological and physical attributes chosen for this model provide useful proxies to assist in efforts to better target current and future protection based on the most up‐to‐date knowledge.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Abstract The significant shortfall in global marine protection targets is likely to continue to drive rapid growth in marine protected areas (MPAs). Systematic conservation planning to fill gaps in marine protection requires sufficient knowledge of both the distribution of biodiversity and the threats to species and ecosystems. Yet such data are lacking for much of the marine environment, creating significant challenges for planning effective marine protection. In the absence of habitat mapping data, critical environmental variables associated with species' distributions can be used to model the spatial distribution of different environments. Although this approach has been used in some jurisdictions to assist MPA planners, the increased availability and resolution of spatial data now provide an opportunity to improve assessments of MPA representation. Capitalizing on advances in spatial data, this study uses a range of biological and physical environmental attributes to model the distribution of Australian marine environments. Given many Australian MPAs were implemented without knowledge of the distribution of species and benthic habitats, this Bio‐physical model is used to assess MPA coverage and equality of protection for Australian marine environments. Results of the Bio‐physical model revealed that Australian MPAs overrepresent warm, offshore waters (such as the Coral Sea) and underrepresent temperate environments. Furthermore, the distribution of protection in Australian MPAs is heavily skewed, with no‐take protection disproportionately targeting tropical environments, leaving major gaps in the protection of both temperate and nearshore habitats. Without comprehensive habitat mapping, the representativeness and adequacy of an MPA system cannot be accurately evaluated, nor can the required expansion of MPAs be planned effectively. In the interim, the biological and physical attributes chosen for this model provide useful proxies to assist in efforts to better target current and future protection based on the most up‐to‐date knowledge.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 16 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Abstract The significant shortfall in global marine protection targets is likely to continue to drive rapid growth in marine protected areas (MPAs). Systematic conservation planning to fill gaps in marine protection requires sufficient knowledge of both the distribution of biodiversity and the threats to species and ecosystems. Yet such data are lacking for much of the marine environment, creating significant challenges for planning effective marine protection. In the absence of habitat mapping data, critical environmental variables associated with species' distributions can be used to model the spatial distribution of different environments. Although this approach has been used in some jurisdictions to assist MPA planners, the increased availability and resolution of spatial data now provide an opportunity to improve assessments of MPA representation. Capitalizing on advances in spatial data, this study uses a range of biological and physical environmental attributes to model the distribution of Australian marine environments. Given many Australian MPAs were implemented without knowledge of the distribution of species and benthic habitats, this Bio‐physical model is used to assess MPA coverage and equality of protection for Australian marine environments. Results of the Bio‐physical model revealed that Australian MPAs overrepresent warm, offshore waters (such as the Coral Sea) and underrepresent temperate environments. Furthermore, the distribution of protection in Australian MPAs is heavily skewed, with no‐take protection disproportionately targeting tropical environments, leaving major gaps in the protection of both temperate and nearshore habitats. Without comprehensive habitat mapping, the representativeness and adequacy of an MPA system cannot be accurately evaluated, nor can the required expansion of MPAs be planned effectively. In the interim, the biological and physical attributes chosen for this model provide useful proxies to assist in efforts to better target current and future protection based on the most up‐to‐date knowledge.

Key concepts: Marine protected area, Marine spatial planning, Representativeness heuristic, Habitat, Biodiversity, Marine habitats, Environmental resource management, Marine ecosystem

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Bio‐physical models of marine environments reveal biases in the representation of protected areas — Research Paper | ScholarLens