4.6 Article

Designing effective marine protected areas in seaflower biosphere reserve, colombia, based on biological and sociological information

Journal

CONSERVATION BIOLOGY
Volume 17, Issue 6, Pages 1769-1784

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2003.00338.x

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Ecologists have paid increasing attention to the design of marine protected areas (MPAs), and their design advice consistently recommends representing all habitat types within MPAs or MPA networks as a means to provide protection to all parts of the natural ocean system. Recent developments of new habitat-mapping techniques make this advice more achievable, but the success of such an approach depends largely on our ability to define habitat types in a way that is ecologically relevant. We devised and tested the ecological relevance of a set of habitat-type definitions through our participation in a stakeholder-driven process to design a network of MPAs, focusing on no-take marine reserves in the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve, San Andres Archipelago, Colombia. A priori definitions of habitat types were ecologically relevant, in that our habitat-type definitions corresponded to identifiable and unique characteristics in the ecological communities found there. The identification of ecological pathways and connectivity among habitats also helped in designing ecologically relevant reserve boundaries. Our findings contributed to the overall design process, along with our summary of other general principles of marine reserve design. Extensive stakeholder input provided information concerning the resources and their patterns of use. These inputs also contributed to the reserve design process. We anticipate success for the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve at achieving conservation and social goals because its zoning process includes detailed yet flexible scientific advice and the participation of stakeholders at every step.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available