National Center for Ecological Analysis and Synthesis, Santa Barbara, CA 93101, USA.
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2010 Oct 26;107(43):18312-7. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0908503107. Epub 2010 Feb 22.
The rapid increase in the science and implementation of marine protected areas (MPAs) around the world in the past 15 years is now being followed by similar increases in the science and application of marine ecosystem-based management (EBM). Despite important overlaps and some common goals, these two approaches have remained either separated in the literature and in conservation and management efforts or treated as if they are one and the same. In the cases when connections are acknowledged, there is often little assessment of if or how well MPAs can achieve specific EBM goals. Here we start by critically evaluating commonalities and differences between MPAs and EBM. Next, we use global analyses to show where and how much no-take marine reserves can be expected to contribute to EBM goals, specifically by reducing the cumulative impacts of stressors on ocean ecosystems. These analyses revealed large stretches of coastal oceans where reserves can play a major role in reducing cumulative impacts and thus improving overall ocean condition, at the same time highlighting the limitations of marine reserves as a single tool to achieve comprehensive EBM. Ultimately, better synergies between these two burgeoning approaches provide opportunities to greatly benefit ocean health.
在过去的 15 年中,全球范围内海洋保护区(MPAs)的科学和实施迅速增加,现在海洋生态系统为基础的管理(EBM)的科学和应用也出现了类似的增长。尽管这两种方法有重要的重叠和一些共同的目标,但它们在文献以及保护和管理工作中仍然是分开的,或者被视为是一回事。在承认联系的情况下,通常很少评估 MPA 是否可以实现具体的 EBM 目标,以及实现的程度如何。在这里,我们首先批判性地评估 MPA 和 EBM 之间的异同。接下来,我们使用全球分析来展示禁捕海洋保护区在何处以及在多大程度上可以为 EBM 目标做出贡献,特别是通过减少压力源对海洋生态系统的累积影响。这些分析表明,在沿海海域的很大一部分地区,保护区可以在减少累积影响从而改善整体海洋状况方面发挥重要作用,同时突出了海洋保护区作为实现全面 EBM 的单一工具的局限性。最终,这两种新兴方法之间更好的协同作用为改善海洋健康提供了机会。