Artificial reefs (ARs) are one of the most popular means of supporting marine ecosystem conservation and coastal fisheries, particularly in developing countries. However, ARs generate complex socio-bio-economic interactions that require careful evaluation. This is particularly the case for ARs outside no-take zones, where fish might be subject to enhanced exploitation due to easier catchability. Here, we conducted an interdisciplinary study on how ARs impact fish and fishing yields, combining mathematical and sociological approaches. Both approaches converge to confirm that fishery yields decline when ARs are exploited as if they were open access areas. This situation typically occurs in areas with weak governance and/or high levels of illegal fishing activity, both of which are common in many developing countries. To avoid these adverse effects and their associated ecological consequences, we recommend prioritizing the onset of a long-term surveillance system against illegal fishing activities, and adapting design and location of the ARs based on both and local and academic knowledge, before the deployment of ARs.

/pdf/successful-artificial-reefs-depend-on-getting-the-context-35na3z24pp.pdf

Successful artificial reefs depend on getting the context right due to complex socio-bio-economic interactions

Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are essential to reach the UN Ocean’s Decade challenges and the Sustainable Development Goal 14 (life bellow water – conserve coastal and marine areas), and their crucial role for the health of the planet was highlighted in the United Nations Ocean Conference. However, often these MPA’s are no more than Paper Parks, with poor financial and human resources, thus lacking effectiveness. Moreover, they frequently trigger conflicts with local communities, by imposing restrictions to their activities with no alternative or compensations, causing serious governance inefficiencies. Thus, within the UN Oceans Decade, MPA’s must face simultaneously three of the challenges: Protect and restore ecosystems and biodiversity (Challenge 2); Develop a sustainable and equitable ocean economy (Challenge 4) and Change humanity’s relationship with the ocean (Challenge 10). To address those challenges, it becomes clear that management models of MPA’s had to find ways to value natural capital and, at the same time, involve local communities and stakeholders in the governance processes. The conservation of biodiversity has both direct and indirect economic benefits for many sectors of the economy, namely tourism, being ecotourism considered one of the segments particularly adequate to value natural capital. Ecotourism, defined as “environmentally responsible travel and visitation to relatively undisturbed natural areas”, to enjoy and appreciate nature, is often used to enhance the natural capital, while protecting and promoting protected areas. Several studies have been carried out about ecotourism in MPA’s all over the world, particularly in the 21st century. In this article, we analyzed several case studies focusing ecotourism in MPAs, to better understand the connection between the development of this industry, the development of sustainable blue economy, and the efforts for ocean conservation. From the analysis conducted, we conclude that ecotourism development and community participation are of paramount importance in achieving sustainable development in MPAs, although there is still room to new advances improving good marine governance.

/pdf/ecotourism-in-marine-protected-areas-as-a-tool-to-valuate-3j1hzkxq.pdf

Ecotourism in Marine Protected Areas as a tool to valuate natural capital and enhance good marine governance: A review

Environmental issues such as the progressive loss of biodiversity on a global scale and climate change cannot be separated from other territorial problems caused by social injustice, economic inequality, access to natural resources, gender violence and the fight for human and nature’s rights. The evaluation of biodiversity management strategies must by necessity draw on a retrospective look at the interpretation of the problem and the conceptual approach of the general territorial management policies in which they are framed. From a critical view, these approaches have different nuances depending on the historical journey, theories and main actors involved with territorial policies in different regions of the world. In this work, we apply qualitative content analysis to contrast the key concepts on which the main European territorial policies of recent decades have been based with the main guidelines of the emerging Latin American territorial perspectives. Thus, we seek to initiate a dialogue between the northern hemisphere’s globally hegemonic notions of nature, territory, biodiversity and its management and new theories and proposals from the South, whilst simultaneously contrasting both with the content of the latest Convention on Biological Biodiversity Strategic Plan 2011–2020. We conclude with some recommendations aimed at building bridges and contributing to the construction of future global conservation strategies from a critical and territorial perspective that tends towards integrating sustainability with social and environmental justice.

/pdf/north-south-dialogue-on-territorial-policies-and-discourses-2ioaw9qz.pdf

North–South Dialogue on Territorial Policies and Discourses: Insights for the Future of Nature Conservation

In small-scale fisheries that suffer from weak formal governance, fishers use a variety of institutional strategies to self-govern. These self-governance arrangements may or may not be forms of collective action, yet they rely on informal institutions (such as norms of reciprocity) in generating social cohesion among users so that common rules can be agreed upon. Social network perspectives have been used to understand the cohesiveness of fishers operating with different gear types or in different communities, yet less is known about how social cohesion differs between fishers that operate through formal cooperative arrangements, such as fishing associations, and independent fishers who operate solely at the community level through informal cooperation. Using mixed methods, we compared the social cohesion of commercial fishers arising from information-sharing and work-support networks in four fishing communities of north-eastern Puerto Rico, as they coped with prolonged hurricane recovery and the COVID-19 pandemic. A series of exponential random graph models (ERGMs) were applied to untangle the drivers of cohesion emerging from fisher’s information-sharing patterns. Fisher’s communication was driven not just by operating at the same landing site or using the same primary gear type, but also by choosing to organize their fishing under the same self-governance arrangement. Specifically, fishers that were members of fishing associations mostly communicated among themselves, while independent fishers talked across arrangements, indicating the role of fishing associations in fostering social cohesion. However, associated fishers were less likely to receive information than independent fishers, suggesting the need for targeted communication strategies within each group. Moreover, independent fishers had more work support ties and a greater diversity of supporting actors across the supply chain, suggesting their need for higher levels of linking social capital. Multiple social factors explained whether fishers choose to be members of fishing associations or remain independent, including trust in leaders and agreement on membership rules. These findings highlight the importance of knowing the cohesiveness of cooperation networks among small-scale fishers.

/pdf/social-cohesion-and-self-governance-arrangements-among-small-3h6s8nui.pdf

Social cohesion and self-governance arrangements among small-scale fisheries in Puerto Rico

As a member of the “High Level Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy”, Mexico has committed to expand community-based marine conservation. We draw from more than two decades of experience to outline how existing resources may be leveraged to help inform the country’s ambitious conservation plans. A total of 514.12 km 2 have already been protected under community-based marine reserves. 14 years of ecological survey data, more than 130 community surveyors, more than one hundred publications, and an entire digital infrastructure provide a solid platform on which to continue building the community-based marine conservation movement. Parallel and complimentary efforts have advanced regulation, action, data access and transparency, and coordination. Future interventions should innovate, but leverage existing resources and continue to involve communities.

/pdf/two-decades-of-community-based-marine-conservation-provide-1q5fqijq.pdf

Two Decades of Community-Based Marine Conservation Provide the Foundations for Future Action

Marine area-based conservation measures including no-take zones (areas with no fishing allowed) are often designed through lengthy processes that aim to optimize for ecological and social objectives. Their (semi) permanence generates high stakes in what seems like a one-shot game. In this paper, we theoretically and empirically explore a model of short-term area-based conservation that prioritizes adaptive co-management: temporary areas closed to fishing, designed by the fishers they affect, approved by the government, and adapted every five years. In this model, no-take zones are adapted through learning and trust-building between fishers and government fisheries scientists. We use integrated social-ecological theory and a case study of a network of such fisheries closures (“fishing refugia”) in northwest Mexico to hypothesize a feedback loop between trust, design, and ecological outcomes. We argue that, with temporary and adaptive area-based management, social and ecological outcomes can be mutually reinforcing as long as initial designs are ecologically ‘good enough’ and supported in the social-ecological context. This type of adaptive management also has the potential to adapt to climate change and other social-ecological changes. This feedback loop also predicts the dangerous possibility that low trust among stakeholders may lead to poor design, lack of ecological benefits, eroding confidence in the tool’s capacity, shrinking size, and even lower likelihood of social-ecological benefits. In our case, however, this did not occur, despite poor ecological design of some areas, likely due to buffering by social network effects and alternative benefits. We discuss both the potential and the danger of temporary area-based conservation measures as a learning tool for adaptive co-management and commoning.

Santiago Domínguez-Sánchez

Papers

Positive Social-Ecological Feedbacks in Community-Based Conservation