An academic publishing model in which journals do not charge fees to either authors or readers.

Average time for first decision (excluding desk-rejections): 5 weeks

Animal Biodiversity and Conservation. Volume 34.1 (2011) Pages: 191-203

Review of the effects of protection in marine protected areas: current knowledge and gaps

Ojeda-Martínez, C., Bayle-Sempere, J. T., Sánchez-Jerez, P., Salas, F., Stobart, B., Goñi, R., Falcón, J. M., Graziano, M., Guala, I., Higgins, R., Vandeperre, F., Le Direach, L., Martín-Sosa, P., Vaselli, S.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.32800/abc.2011.34.0191

Download

PDF

Abstract

The effectiveness of marine protected areas (MPAs) and the conservation of marine environments must be based on reliable information on the quality of the marine environment that can be obtained in a reasonable timeframe. We reviewed studies that evaluated all aspects related to the effectiveness of MPAs in order to describe how the studies were conducted and to detect fields in which research is lacking. Existing parameters used to evaluate the effectiveness of MPAs are summarised. Two-hundred and twenty-two publications were reviewed. We identified the most commonly used study subjects and methodological approaches. Most of the studies concentrated on biological parameters. Peer reviewed studies were based on control vs. impact design. BACI and mBACI designs were used in very few studies. Through this review, we have identified gaps in the objectives assigned to MPAs and the way in which they have been evaluated. We suggest some guidelines aimedat improving the assessment of the effects of protection in MPAs.

Keywords

Marine conservation, Management, Assessment, Descriptors, Subject of study, Marine protected areas

Cite

Ojeda-Martínez, C., Bayle-Sempere, J. T., Sánchez-Jerez, P., Salas, F., Stobart, B., Goñi, R., Falcón, J. M., Graziano, M., Guala, I., Higgins, R., Vandeperre, F., Le Direach, L., Martín-Sosa, P., Vaselli, S., 2011. Review of the effects of protection in marine protected areas: current knowledge and gaps. Animal Biodiversity and Conservation, 34: 191-203, DOI: https://doi.org/10.32800/abc.2011.34.0191

Share

Visits

1615

Downloads

638

Content appears on: