Phillips Genevieve A C, Ogier Emily, Dutton Ian, Barrett Neville, Krueck Nils C, Hartmann Klaas
Institute for Marine and Antarctic Studies, The University of Tasmania, Australia.
Centre for Marine Socioecology, The University of Tasmania, Australia.
PLoS One. 2025 Jan 7;20(1):e0307324. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0307324. eCollection 2025.
Marine protected areas (MPAs) are an important tool in helping to protect biodiversity in the oceans. Recent ratification of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) has ensured that globally we are committed to effectively protecting 30% of the world's oceans by 2030, in MPAs. In Australia there is considerable interest in the potential benefits that partially protected areas (PPAs) may provide. However, a consistent definition of a PPA is currently lacking, and urgently needed to conduct quantitative analyses of PPAs. We conducted a systematic literature review to understand the current knowledge surrounding PPAs and their potential benefits. We define a PPA, characterise PPA implementation in Australia, and present results for the outcomes of PPAs in terms of ecological, economic, and social indicators. Our review suggests that although 45% of Australia's marine environment is within MPAs, 61% of MPAs provide only partial protection. The Northern Territory (100%), New South Wales (81%), and Queensland (79.8%) have the highest percentage of MPAs that are partially protected, compared to Tasmania which has the smallest percentage of partially protected MPAs (13.12%). Tasmania also has the smallest percentage cover of MPAs (6.49% state waters). Most PPA management plans did not contain quantifiable Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to be able to effectively monitor the progress of these PPAs against the stated outcomes. We find the benefits of PPAs to be ambiguous: PPAs generally provide benefits when compared to 'open' ocean, however this is not a consistent result. There are no PPAs that provide greater overall benefits when compared to fully protected MPAs. Only one state (South Australia) and the Commonwealth (Australian Marine Parks) are collecting publicly available baseline data to facilitate quantitative monitoring of PPAs. Contrary to fisheries management, there were no plans of action if the declared MPAs and PPAs failed to meet their declared objectives and goals. Some PPAs within Australia appear to be incompatible with conservation priorities according to the recent "MPA Guide" classification framework. This study highlights the need for clearer management rationale and plans for PPAs in Australia, as these comprise the majority of MPAs in Australia's Exclusive Economic Zone.
海洋保护区（MPAs）是帮助保护海洋生物多样性的一项重要工具。最近批准的《昆明-蒙特利尔全球生物多样性框架》（GBF）确保了全球致力于到2030年在海洋保护区内有效保护世界30%的海洋。在澳大利亚，人们对部分保护区（PPAs）可能带来的潜在益处有着浓厚兴趣。然而，目前缺乏对PPA的一致定义，而这对于开展PPA的定量分析来说是迫切需要的。我们进行了一项系统的文献综述，以了解围绕PPA及其潜在益处的现有知识。我们定义了PPA，描述了其在澳大利亚的实施情况，并从生态、经济和社会指标方面展示了PPA的成果。我们的综述表明，尽管澳大利亚45%的海洋环境位于海洋保护区内，但61%的海洋保护区仅提供部分保护。北领地（100%）、新南威尔士州（81%）和昆士兰州（79.8%）的部分保护海洋保护区所占比例最高，相比之下，塔斯马尼亚州部分保护海洋保护区的比例最小（13.12%）。塔斯马尼亚州海洋保护区的覆盖比例也最小（州水域的6.49%）。大多数PPA管理计划没有包含可量化的关键绩效指标（KPIs），以便能够对照既定成果有效监测这些PPA的进展情况。我们发现PPA的益处并不明确：与“开放”海洋相比，PPA通常能带来益处，但这并非是一个一致的结果。与完全保护的海洋保护区相比，没有PPA能带来更大的总体益处。只有一个州（南澳大利亚州）和联邦（澳大利亚海洋公园）正在收集公开可用的基线数据，以促进对PPA的定量监测。与渔业管理不同的是，如果已宣布的海洋保护区和PPA未能实现其宣布的目标和目的，没有相应的行动计划。根据最近的“海洋保护区指南”分类框架，澳大利亚境内的一些PPA似乎与保护重点不相容。本研究强调，澳大利亚需要为PPA制定更清晰的管理原理和计划，因为这些PPA构成了澳大利亚专属经济区内大多数的海洋保护区。
