Marine Protected Areas: Hitting the Target but Forgetting the Goal

Fishes on a deep reef in the Papahānaumokuākea Marine National Monument. Photo: Greg McFall/NOAA

Claire Rapp is a student in the Masters of Coastal and Ocean Policy program at UNC Wilmington. She is a 2015 graduate from Bucknell University with a BS in biology. Claire demonstrates her a passion for marine environmental conservation by working with organizations such as, the Central Caribbean Marine Institute in Little Cayman and the NC Coastal Federation to bridge the gap between science and policy through education.

Global demand for seafood and fish oil result in destructive fishing practices and pollution that harm the health of the ocean. Conflict between consumption and conservation demands drive controversy over the extent of ocean closures in marine protected areas (MPAs).

Scientists often use biodiversity- the variety of life- to measure the health of the ocean. The more biodiversity the ocean has, the more resilient it is to disturbances. Scientific research, however, indicates a decline in marine biodiversity, particularly in popular commercial fishery species.

NOAA National Marine Sanctuary System

Policymakers use MPAs as the primary means for protecting marine biodiversity in the US and around the world. But how much of the ocean should be designated as protected and thereby restricted?

In 2011, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) declared 10% of the ocean should be protected by 2020. Other organizations, like the 2014 World Parks Congress, called for 30% protection. After reviewing over 140 different studies, O’Leary, et al., (2016) concluded the “required coverage for protection to achieve, maximize, or optimize the [conservation and socioeconomic] objective(s) investigated was 37% of the sea” (p.3). Yet, currently, the Atlas of Marine Protection (AMP) estimates there is only about 4-6% coverage of protected oceans worldwide.

According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), approximately one-third of the ocean lies within national boundaries of coastal states, leaving over 60% in areas beyond national jurisdiction. These waters contain rich and unique biodiversity, and are highly susceptible to human-caused degradation, but they are difficult to govern. Therefore, most of the effective management of ocean resources will come from national waters. Yet, if we are to follow the findings of O’Leary, et al, we would need to close off nearly 100% of all national waters worldwide from any fishing or marine resource extraction, which is economically and politically impractical.

Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction. National Geographic

Maritime Zones under UNCLOS. Batongbacal and Baviera 2013

With so much disagreement on the quantity of ocean protection, we must also consider the quality of this protection. Currently, MPAs fail to meet their individual conservation goals. Kelleher, et al., (1995) discovered only about 30% of the MPAs (out of 383 studied) worldwide accomplish their conservation goals. In turn, governments sympathetic to commercial fishing interests, such as the current Trump Administration, propose the reduction of MPAs to make more space available for commercial fishing, blatantly disregarding the reasons for conservation.

So why are MPAs failing?

Though ocean protection advocates focus on park quantity, research demonstrates underlying problems are social in nature. Research demonstrates that MPA shortcomings boil down to poor planning and design, which includes lack of stakeholder buy-in, inefficient enforcement, and ineffective education (Agardy, et al., 2010). 

The design of a MPA often does not cater to its specific location or goal, thus establishing either underwhelming or impossible expectations. MPAs also tend to be established near coastal communities that rely on marine resources for their livelihood. When resource managers do not include these communities in the beginning stages of establishing the park, they often protest the MPA and refuse to comply with the regulations. With constant enforcement at every park impractical, effective education and collaboration can help reduce resistance.

Quantitative goals are useful as indicators of progress for resource managers and advocacy groups because they are typically easily understood. Yet without effective planning and management, the parks are subject to “paper park syndrome," protecting the ocean in name and concept only, not in actual practice. Even with an ample ocean space protected, biodiversity and ocean health will not improve if the quality and design of the protected areas are not sufficient to accomplish the specific goals of the parks. Therefore, before establishing a specific amount of MPAs, we must first improve their design, management, and enforcement.

If policymakers do not establish MPAs properly, they may do more harm than good by providing a false sense of accomplishment and security that proper measures towards ocean conservation are being taken. If park managers can focus on appropriate design, planning, stakeholder engagement, and education, we can avoid closing off our entire national waters to all while still taking effective steps towards a healthier, more diverse, and more resilient ocean.