Download Status of Marine Protected Areas in the Mediterranean Sea 2012

Chiffres
clé
Key figures
Recommendations
677
number of MPAs in the Mediterranean
1.08%
1. Reinforce the development of the MPA
network in order to achieve the 10% target
of the Mediterranean’s surface area
4.56%* with Pelagos
• Reinforce the capacity to ensure the financial sustainability of
MPAs: in particular to encourage the development of
business plans and to strengthen partnerships with the
private sector
• Support regional initiatives and strategies aimed at creating
sustainable financial instruments which enable a large scale
support for the network
• Extend the boundaries of existing MPAs
(1)
6.6% of the world‘s total - 114 600 km²
of the total surface of the Mediterranean
is covered by MPAs
• Reinforce awareness-raising and education for current and
future users of the marine environment (inside and outside
MPAs), taking into account the use of new technologies
161
MPAs of national status
18 500 km²
9
MPAs of international status only
88 000 km²
507
MPAs of the Natura 2000 system
Sites at sea
8 101 km² (2)
• Create new coastal MPAs of all sizes according to their
management objectives
• Create large MPAs in areas beyond national jurisdiction
• Integrate other areas of usage restrictions which will contribute positively to biodiversity conservation, such as fishery
management zones
2. Enhance the representativity and ecological
coherence in areas with larger gaps, working
at different levels
• On an MPA scale (management plan objectives)
• On a national level (public policy objectives)
• On a regional scale (Barcelona Convention’s objectives)
• On an international scale (CBD and other conventions’
objectives)
• Support the creation of 55 MPAs in project today, primarily in
the countries least equipped with MPAs
• Prioritise action among the many sites already identified as
essential for the protection of biodiversity
In order to do this, it is necessary to:
• Reinforce long-term monitoring programmes, scientific
programmes, as well as programmes of participatory
science and harmonise certain protocols and indicators on a
regional level
• Strengthen research on habitats critical for the maintainance
of viable populations of threatened species
• Demonstrate the economic and social value of MPAs
* 5.26% with the 4 open sea Fisheries Restricted Areas of the GFCM (17 677 km2)
of the world’ ocean surface is
covered by MPAs
2.3% 10 280 MPAs 8,3 million km²
< 0.1%
of the Mediterranean is covered by a
strict protection zone (integral reserve)
or a no take zone
of the total MPA surface cover is located
in the North of the basin
96% 84% without Natura 2000
of the 12 nautical mile zone is under
protection status
2.4% 8.2% with Pelagos
of the open sea is under protection status
0.1% 2.7% with Pelagos
2 countries
out of 21 have over 10% of
their waters covered by MPAs
of MPAs dispose of a management structure (3)
of MPAs with national status
42% 95%
25% of Natura 2000 sites
4 17 677 km²
open sea Fisheries Restricted Areas (FRAs of the GFCM)
Spalding et al., in press. The Mediterranean covers 0.8% of the world’s ocean surface.
Surface not overlapping with other MPAs
(3)
Panel of 80 AMP
(1)
(2)
The Mediterranean is considered to be one of the world’s
priority ‘‘hot-spots’’. Although it represents less than 1%
of the global ocean surface, the Mediterranean is one
of the main reservoirs of marine and coastal biodiversity
in the world: it hosts almost 20% of global marine biodiversity and has a high level of endemism, up to nearly
50% for some groups. It is an important breeding area
for several key pelagic species, and some of these are
threatened. But intense urbanisation, tourism, shipping
traffic, overfishing, pollution and global changes weigh
heavily on this environment.
RAC/SPA and MedPAN are working alongside their
partners (IUCN, WWF, local NGOs, research organisations,...) to establish an ecological network of MPAs to
protect at least 10% of the marine and coastal waters
which is representative of the Mediterranean’s diversity
and made up of ecologically interconnected and well
managed MPAs, in accordance with the latest guidelines
from the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Barcelona Convention.
The aim of this study, conducted by RAC/SPA and
MedPAN, is to evaluate in 2012, the progress that
has been made since the first inventory carried out
in 2008, of the Mediterranean system of MPAs in
view of the following objectives: does the system
cover 10% of the Mediterranean, is it representative of the Mediterranean’s diversity, are MPAs
well-connected and well managed?
An increasing number of studies led in recent years, particularly impelled by RAC/SPA, have identified important
gaps in protecting key habitats and species which highlights the urgent need to protect certain critical areas.
The present study has used the latest, most up-to-date
MPA inventory and a survey questionnaire sent to 80
MPA managers.
• Continue talks on MPAs (including SPAMIs and Natura
2000) in areas beyond the 12 nautical miles, beyond national
jurisdiction and in transborders areas, contributing to the
international work on these issues and creating an ad hoc
regional committee
3. Reinforce the effectiveness of protection,
management and evaluation measures in
MPAs
• Maintain the systematic recording of data taken on a
regional scale and communicating results
5. Promote the development of the network’s
evaluation tools on a regional level
One must start working with partners on:
• Reviewing and rationalising the labels of MPAs with a national status and the IUCN statuses for better transparency,
particularly internationally
• Develop a strategy for reinforcing strict nature reserve zones/
wilderness areas and other no take zones
• Reinforce human resources and managers capacities:
deliver training and promote exchanges of expertise
• Reinforce equipment and human resources for surveillance
and better enforcement of regulations as well as a better
communication with stakeholders on MPAs’ rules and
regulations
Download the full report on
www.medpan.org
www.rac-spa.org
A MedPAN and RAC/SPA report
• Continue developing and improving the MAPAMED database so that it becomes the region’s reference database
qualified for feeding adequate data to international
databases
• Improve governance of MPAs and implement appropriate
management structures, close to the field, with well-trained
teams, with a particular emphasis on the needs of Natura
2000 sites in this area
• Ensure that all MPAs have a management plan which is
regularly revised in order to adapt management decisions:
support the completion of management plans in progress
(18 MPAs) and promote the development of these plans in
the 24 MPAs which still have none
Status of
Marine Protected Areas
in the
Mediterranean Sea
2012
4. Reinforce the resources and tools to ensure
a management effectiveness evaluation
6. Ensure a better management of threats to
MPAs
Findings and Recommendations
• Consider creating MPAs within a broader ecosystem-based
and integrated management
7. Enhance the international recognition of
Mediterranean MPAs
• Support the registration of SPAMIs and UNESCO World
Heritage sites and, with the GFCM, the protection of areas
heavily impacted by fishing
• Promote the adoption of a national MPA status for the 9
sites which currently only have an international status
Bonifacio Strait Natural Reserve, France © C. Amico WWF-Canon
With the financial support of:
R A C / S P A
CITATION: Gabrié C. Lagabrielle E., Bissery C., Crochelet E., Meola B., Webster C., Claudet J., Chassanite A., Marinesque S., Robert P., Goutx M., Quod C. 2012. The Status of
Marine Protected Areas in the Mediterranean Sea. MedPAN & CAR/ASP. Ed: MedPAN Collection. 260 pp.
The findings
5 413 km2
2 951km2
1.82 km2
0.51 km2
18 58
32 188 23
2
4
LEGEND
x km2
Distribution des AMP de statut national
par
région
of sites
x Number
MPA
SLOVENIA
525 km2
ITALY
MONACO
1
2
10
CROATIA
x Number of sites
Natura 2000 at sea
1
MPA in project
Protected surface
x
Number of sites
Trans-boundary MPAs
MONTENEGRO
2 684 km2
1
3 011 km2
ALBANIA
2 825 km2
41 96
The representativity of species is
variable
The analysis shows that the infralitoral zone which comprises
several of the remarkable Mediterranean habitats, is better represented than other zones within the system of MPAs (10% or
13% with Pelagos). For this zone, rocky substrate dominated
habitats appear best represented (16%).
The threatened species and those of conservation importance
considered in the report have a low representation in the current
system of MPAs.
Trends are similar for the circalitoral zone of which 3.9% is covered by MPAs; for this zone, the rocky substrate which supports
coralligenous assemblages is best represented (6.5%).
FRANCE
126 km2
The representativity of habitats is
variable
Depth
pth
10.2%
13 152 3
SPAIN
14
GREECE
3.9%
TURKEY
33 km2
231 km2
2
2
6
2
32 km2
2
6 km2
208 km2
3
3
SYRIA
MALTA
ALGERIA
MOROCCO
6
204 km2
1
7
2
0.22 km2
CYPRUS
3
3
LIBYA
3
357 km2
2
10
8
ISRAEL
EGYPT
Number, surface cover, and localisation of existing and projected MPAs by Mediterranean country
Our knowledge increases and data are
recorded in the new MAPAMED tool
The inventory of Mediterranean MPAs
has helped to identify and geo-locate
677 MPAs (about 7% of the total number
of MPAs in the world(1)). All data collected
during this study has been incorporated
into the MAPAMED database (mapamed.org), developed for
the occasion, which is a major breakthrough for the evaluation
of the Mediterranean system of MPAs.
Among these MPAs, 161 have a national status, 9 just an international status and 507 are Natura 2000 at sea sites. Among
existing MPAs, 40 have one or several international statuses,
including 32 Specially Protected Areas of Mediterranean Importance (SPAMI). There are 5 Biosphere Reserves and only 2
Marine World Heritage sites which is exceptionally low for such
a unique sea which is so naturally rich and culturally diverse. In
addition, 55 MPAs are being planned.
MPAs have various sizes and
seniorities
There is a very diverse range of sizes for the marine part of
MPAs: the smallest covers 0.003 km² (Akhziv National Park
in Israel) and the largest (excluding the Pelagos Sanctuary for
marine mammals) covers about 4 000 km² (Gulf of Lion Marine
Park in France). But 66% of MPAs are no bigger than 50 km².
Over half (61%) of MPAs are over 10 years old, which is considered the minimum age for an MPA to reach a certain maturity
and 35% are over 20 years old, which provides a unique opportunity to fathom management effectiveness.
(1)
According to the last works from Spalding et al.
The target of 10% protection of
Mediterranean waters is far from being
achieved
2020 CBD Objective
10%
2012 level
of protection
in the Med.
4.56%
with the Pelagos Sanctuary
1.08%
Actual protection in the Mediterranean in 2012
The MPAs inventoried cover a total surface area of almost
114 600 km², so about 4.56% of the Mediterranean; and 1.08%
if we exclude the Pelagos Sanctuary (87 500 km²).
The 161 MPAs of national status cover a surface of 18 500 km²
(0.73% of the Mediterranean); the 9 MPAs of international status
represent 88 000 km² (3.5 % of the Mediterranean, 0.02% if we
exclude the Pelagos Sanctuary). The 507 Natura 2000 at sea
sites amount to 25 200 km² (1% of the Mediterranean). From
these 507 sites, 122 represent non overlapping surfaces with
other MPAs and contribute for 8 100 km² of protection (0.32%
of the Mediterranean).
Since 2008, 23 MPAs have been established in 10 countries
amounting to an additional area of 6 754 km² which represents
close to a 7% increase of the protected surface area in 5 years
compared to the 2008 protected surface area of 97 410 km2, or
4% of the Mediterranean (0.04% without Pelagos).
These figures do not take into account the 4 Fisheries Restriction Areas (FRAs) created by the GFCM (17 677 km2 or 0.7% of
the Mediterranean) that would bring the surface area of protection to 5.26%.
4.2%
Bathyal
with Pelagos
2%
Abyssal
without Pelagos
Representativity
Representativity of benthic zones - All status MPAs
LEBANON
22 km2
0.6%
7.2% Circalittoral
4
TUNISIA
307 km2
12.6% In
Infralittoral
The geographical distribution of MPAs is
uneven
The imbalance, already mentioned in 2008, is still important
in 2012, even if it is lower: 96% of MPAs are located in the
northern basin (84% without Natura 2000 sites). But several
southern and eastern countries (Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia,
Libya, Israel, Lebanon) have many on-going projects, which
would partly rebalance the system. More than half of the MPAs
of national status are covered by Italy and Spain, while 67%
of Natura 2000 sites at sea are covered by Greece and Italy(2).
Distribution data on coralligenous, as well as Posidonia oceanica and Cymodocea spp. meadows is so far only reasonably
homogenously mapped for the western basin of the Mediterranean, where they are fairly well covered by MPAs, respectively 12%, 50% and 8% , on the basis of current knowledge
(aside Pelagos). These habitats are those most often reported
by managers as present in their MPA (respectively 69%, 52%
and 19%); all other iconic habitats(3) are reported in less than
35% of MPAs.
In contrast, the system of MPAs is weak in representing deep
sea benthic habitats (covered mainly thanks to Pelagos). Deep
sea biocenosis that are unique to the Mediterranean, such as
cold seeps and cold-water corals are not protected.
Aside from deep-sea canyons and seamounts (respectively 13%
and 7% with Pelagos), other remarkable deep sea features such
as submarine knolls and banks are only weakly represented.
The Aegean Sea is best covered with 2.35% but when we take
into account the Pelagos sanctuary, it’s the Algerian-Provencal
Basin and the Tyrrhenian Sea that are best protected (12.55%
and 12.51% respectively).
Adriatic
Sea
0.42%
Algerian-Provencal Basin
1.42%
Tyrrhenian Sea
1.91%
Tunisian Plateau
/ Syrte Gulf
0.13%
Ionian Sea
0.28%
Aegean Sea
2.35%
Levantine Sea
0.21%
The ecological coherence remains weak
on a Mediterranean scale
A quick glance at the Mediterranean MPA spatial distribution
map shows that the network is not coherent: MPAs are concentrated in the North, they are mainly distributed in the coastal
zone (except for Pelagos) and large portions of the southern
and eastern shores of the Mediterranean are devoid of MPAs.
16%
Geographical distribution of the number of MPAs in the Mediterranean
Classes of benthic habitats from the intersection of the bathymetric layer and
Mediterranean sediments layer
(2)
A comparative analysis between nations that favour either a large number of small MPAs vs.
a lower number of large MPAs should be able to inform about the quality and the efficiency of a
network, particularly in terms of representativity and connectivity (when management is effective).
The representativity of ecological
sub-regions is weak
Representativity of ecological sub-regions
NORTH-EAST S0UTH
26%
The pen shell, the posidonia, the bottlenose dolphin, the loggerhead turtle and the grouper are the species that are most
often mentioned by managers. Several MPAs indicate the presence of a rather high number of species considered to be very
rare (date mussels: 60% of MPAs; monk seal: 10% or the great
white shark: 6%), which requires further investigation.
Alboran Sea
1.05%
The area beyond the 12 n.m. which represents 74% of the
Mediterranean’s surface area has a protection of less than 3%,
with Pelagos contributing to three quarters of this area.
58%
The potential range of the monk seal, classified as Critically
Endangered with less than 300 indivuals left, has very little protection (less than 2%). Only a restricted number of turtle nesting
sites are known and the few that exist are mainly located in the
North-East of the basin; 29% of known Caretta caretta nesting sites, and 18.7% of Chelonia mydas are currently covered
within the system of MPAs, which is very little given the very
threatened status of these species in the Mediterranean. Birds
are represented within MPAs on levels varying from 13% to 8%
(3 species were considered in the report). As for the distribution
range of the 16 species of fish considered in the study, 6% on
average is covered within the system of MPAs.
The study presents also a bioregionalisation of the epipelagic
zone based on the characteristics of oceanic water masses.
MPAs are mainly coastal with 86% of the MPAs surface area
located within the 12 nautical mile (n. m.) zone, without the
Pelagos Sanctuary. This area, where legal instruments exist,
has an 8.5% protection from MPAs with a strong contribution
from the Pelagos Sanctuary (6.1%).
NORTH-WEST
Among the marine mammals considered in this study, only the
fin whale sees its distribution range covered by over 10% by
the network of MPAs. The 6 other cetaceans species have a
lower representation in the MPA network. But these species are
highly mobile and priority protection areas have been identified
by ACCOBAMS.
(3)
The Marine habitats type reference list is developed by RAC/SPA and can be consulted on
Appendix 2 of the ‘‘Status of Marine Protected Areas in the Mediterranean sea’’, 2012.
In the western basin, the richest, as well as in the North-East,
the number of MPAs is sizable, especially with the network of
Natura 2000 sites, and one could therefore consider that this
part of the network is quite coherent; but most of the Natura
2000 sites do not yet have a management structure.
The proximity study between MPAs for the entire basin (Euclidean distance) shows that 60% are less than 25 km apart from
their nearest neighbour. But distance is not always a guarantee
for ecological coherence, which depends on connectivity.
MPA management is still insufficient
Whilst some progress has been made since 2008, the level of
management in Mediterranean MPAs still remains weak on several points(4): if over 90% of MPAs of national
status have a manager, 75% of Natura
2000 sites have none and over half of
the MPAs in the sample group still
do not have a management plan.
30%
As a management plan defines
clear conservation objectives and
44%
strategies, it is a strong indicator of
good management, if implemented.
22%
Yet, there is hope for a significant
improvement in these figures, parExistence of a management
ticularly in the southern and eastern
plan in the MPAS of the panel
countries, as 22% of MPAs mentioned that they were preparing their management plan at the time
of the survey. Nearly three quarters of MPAs with management
plans have already evaluated them and an analysis on these evaluations should already be able to give an idea of the management
effectiveness.
NO
YES
In Dev.
However, there is progress on ecological baselines and regular monitoring of parameters and indicators in MPAs, with
70% and 80% of managers respectively indicating that they
implement them (against 39% in 2008).
Frequency in MPAs
Regular monitoring
Opportunistic studies
80% -
60% -
40% -
20% -
0% -
Specie
Physico-chemical
conditions
Fishing
Tourism
Pollutants
Ecosystem
functions
Percentage of MPAs conducting regular monitoring and opportunistic studies on the themes mentionned
The human resources assigned to management is substantial, on average 84% of MPAs reported having permanent staff,
usually supplemented by seasonal and temporary staff.
Surveillance, as well as applying infraction penalties for
breaches of regulations, is recognised as essential for the effectiveness of MPAs.In the sample group analysed, only a quarter
of MPAs reported having sworn-in staff, but most of them rely
on other partners for surveillance (coast guards, marine police,
armed forces). The reality and effectiveness of this surveillance
is difficult to measure.The number of surveillance hours varies
widely, with an average of 8.5 hours per day for MPAs in the
north and 1.5 hours per day for MPAs in the south.
Financial resources are essential for good management.
Among the MPAs that responded, the ones in the north-west
are to date the only ones with a sufficient budget to ensure
an effective management. 36% of MPAs self-finance, which is
still too little to ensure the sustainability of MPAs with no other
resources and the private sector’s commitment is low (8 MPAs
reported benefiting from it).
Thus, the study shows that not all Mediterranean MPAs have
the same capacity or even management resources: training,
equipment, governance, .... A capacity building ‘‘needs assessment’’ has already been completed on the initiative of the
MedPAN network (conducted by WWF Mediterranean);
Recreational and fishing activities (artisanal and recreational)
are the usages that MPA managers consider to exert the most
pressure on MPAs.
(4)
Management effectiveness was measured through several parameters taken from the answers
of 80 MPAs who responded to the questionnaire.