Download The benefits of Marine Protected Areas

The benefits of Marine Protected Areas
Dr Steve Fletcher
Director, Centre for Marine and Coastal Policy Research
Plymouth University
@MarCoPolPU
[email protected]
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
•
Why should we be interested in the wider benefits of MPAs?
What are the wider benefits of MPAs?
How can wider benefits be classified?
How can wider benefits be measured?
Examples of benefit assessments
Implications for Dorset?
Why should we be interested in the wider
benefits of MPAs?
We need holistic assessments of benefits and burdens to
make rational decisions about:
•
•
•
•
Designation and de-designation of MPAs
Choice of management measures in an MPA
Adaptive management of MPAs
Ecosystem based approach to MPAs
Burden
Impact
assessment
Benefits
Burden
Benefits
Displacement of
current activities
Improved fish
stocks
Restrictions on
current activities
Habitat
protection
Burden
Benefits
Burden
But how do we
classify and quantify
the benefits?
Benefits
Classification: Ecosystem Services Approach
Human well-being
Ecosystem services and benefits
Ecosystem
Food
Sea water
Raw materials
Genetic resources
Value
Medicinal resources
Ornamental resources
Social
Air purification
Safety
Climate regulation
Health
Flood protection
Happiness
Water flow regulation
Economic
Waste treatment
Identity
Coastal erosion prevention
Biological control
Lifecycle maintenance
Gene pool maintenance
Recreation and leisure
Ecosystem services provide a
Aesthetics
checklist to ensure all
Inspiration
benefits are identified
Spirituality
Cognitive development
Heritage and culture
Where do ecosystem services come from?
Habitat and species
• Services arise from specific marine features.
• Lacks context and linkages to other features.
Places
• Services arise from the combination of features.
• Acknowledges that services come in bundles.
• Social benefits arise from interaction with places.
Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2003).
A typology of ecosystem services for marine planning
(Bohnke-Henrichs et.al. 2013)
Provisioning services
• Food
• Sea water
• Raw materials
• Genetic resources
• Medicinal resources
• Ornamental resources
Regulating services
• Air purification
• Climate regulation
• Flood protection
• Water flow regulation
• Waste treatment
• Coastal erosion prevention
• Biological control
Habitat Services
• Lifecycle maintenance
• Gene pool maintenance
Cultural and amenity services
• Recreation and leisure
• Aesthetics
• Inspiration
• Spirituality
• Cognitive development
• Heritage and culture
Methods to asses the benefits of MPAs
Type
Method
Market Valuation
Avoidance Cost
Travel Cost method
Monetary
assessment
Hedonic Pricing
methods
Payment for
Ecosystem Service
Conclusion:
different
Contingent Valuation Method
services need different
Choice Modelling
assessment
methods
Citizen Juries
Place based Valuation
Non-monetary
Health Valuation
assessment
Indicator Approach
methods
Q-methodology
Fletcher, S., Rees, S., Gall, S. Shellock, R., Dodds, W. and Rodwell, L. (2014). Assessing the socio-economic benefits of marine
protected areas. A report for Natural Resources Wales by the Centre for Marine and Coastal Policy Research, Plymouth University.
How can we quantify the benefits from MPAs using ecosystem
services?
Feature Type
Feature Name
Broad-scale
Habitats
Subtidal mud
Intertidal coarse sediment
Intertidal mixed sediment
Intertidal mud
Intertidal sand and muddy sand
Low energy intertidal rock
Moderate energy intertidal rock
Habitats FOCI
Intertidal under boulder communities
Sabellaria alveolata reefs
Seagrass beds
Species FOCI
Long snouted seahorse (Hippocampus
guttulatus)
Native oyster (Ostrea edulis)
Peacock’s tail seaweed (Padina pavonica)
Sea snail (Paludinella littorina)
Ecosystem service values associated with proposed MCZs in England
(Fletcher et.al. 2012)
Ecosystem services provided by Holderness Inshore rMCZ
Valued
the
activities
in the red
box
The financial value of the Marine Ecosystem Services in the Holderness Inshore rMCZ
Aesthetic benefits
Spiritual and cultural wellbeing
Tourism
Research and education
Sport/recreation: Angling
Sport/recreation: Diving
Sport/recreation: Charter boat
Nature watching
Environmental resillience
Natural hazard protection
Regulation of pollution
Fisheries: Hooks and line
Fisheries: Nets
Fisheries: Bottom trawls
Fisheries: Crab and Lobster
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Value of marine ecosystem service (£m/yr)
1.2
The financial value of the Marine Ecosystem Services in the Holderness Inshore rMCZ
Aesthetic benefits
?
Spiritual and cultural wellbeing
Tourism
Research and education
Sport/recreation: Angling
Sport/recreation: Diving
Sport/recreation: Charter boat
Nature watching
?
Environmental resillience
Natural hazard protection
Regulation of pollution
Fisheries: Hooks and line
Fisheries: Nets
Fisheries: Bottom trawls
Fisheries: Crab and Lobster
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Value of marine ecosystem service (£m/yr)
1.2
The financial value of the Marine Ecosystem Services in the Holderness Inshore rMCZ
Aesthetic benefits
Spiritual and cultural wellbeing
Tourism
Research and education
Sport/recreation: Angling
Sport/recreation: Diving
Sport/recreation: Charter boat
Nature watching
Environmental resillience
Natural hazard protection
Regulation of pollution
Fisheries: Hooks and line
Fisheries: Nets
Fisheries: Bottom trawls
Fisheries: Crab and Lobster
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
Value of marine ecosystem service (£m/yr)
1.2
Scenario analysis of ecosystem service value change at Holderness
(Fletcher et.al., 2012)
Future
management
Scenarios
Future
Futuremanagement
managementScenarios
Scenarios
Do
Recover
Maintain
Improve
Improve
Do nothing
nothing
Recover
Maintain
Improve
Holderness Inshore
Fisheries
Fisheries –– potting
potting
Fisheries – bottom trawl
Coastal protection
Regulation
Regulation of
of Pollution
Pollution
Environmental
Resilience
Environmental Resilience
Nature
Nature Watching
Watching
Sport/Recreation (angling)
Research & Education
Tourism
Tourism
Aesthetic
Aesthetic benefits
benefits
0%
£0
-10%
-£50k
-10%
-£50k
-10%
-£5k
-10%
-£50k
-10%
-£50k
-10%
-£50k
0%
£0
-10%
-£50k
-10%
?
0%
£0
0%
£0
0%
£0
0%
£0
0%
£0
0%
£0
0%
£0
0%
£0
0%
£0
0%
?
-10%
/ +5% -10%
/ +5%
-£10k/+£5k
Values -£10k/+£5k
0%
+10%
£0
+£15k
0%
0%
£0
£0
0%
+10%
£0
+£15k
0%
+10%
£0
+£50k
0%
+10%
£0
+£15k
0%
+10%
£0
+£100k
0%
+10%
£0
+£15k
0%
+10%
£0
+£25k
0%
+10%
?
?
Testing ecosystem service assessment to
support marine and coastal management
in the Western English Channel
Identification of coastal
management challenge
Assessment of services,
benefits and values
Ecosystem Service Assessments
supporting management
Initial findings
Product
• Static financial assessment of benefits = “interesting”
• Predicted %age change in benefits = “of limited help”
• Predicted absolute financial change of benefits = “better, but still
of limited help”
Key factor repeatedly cited was SIGNIFICANCE of the benefit
(however measured) = ‘importance in context’.
Process
• In order to be trusted, assessments should be CO-CONSTRUCTED.
Significance assessment
(illustrative)
Scale
Limited local significance for
Service trawling, high significance for
biodiversity conservation
Fisheries – potting
Fisheries – bottom trawl
Coastal protection
Regulation of Pollution
High significance
for local and
Environmental
Resilience
national spiritual
community
Natureand
Watching
identity
Sport/Recreation
Spiritual
Aesthetic benefits
Value significance
High significance
Limited significance
No significance
L
Scale significance
L
Local
N
National
G
Global
N
Other
G
EF BC CI
Other significance
EF
Ecosystem function
BC
Biodiversity conservation
CI
Community identity
Scale of assessment
Dorset Sea
Dorset MPA Network
Site Specific
Implications for Dorset
• MPAs provide multiple benefits at multiple scales and significance.
• Understanding the mix of benefits and burdens related to MPAs is
critical to good MPA governance and long-term security.
• Methods of benefit assessment need to be appropriate to the
benefit being measured.
• Real community engagement (not just support) is important to
deliver trusted outcomes of benefits assessments.
• Consider a nested approach to generating benefits – site specific,
network, Dorset sea.
References:
Fletcher, S., Rees, S., Gall, S. Jackson, E., Friedrich, L., and Rodwell, R. (2012) Securing
the benefits of the Marine Conservation Zone Network. A report to The Wildlife Trusts
by the Centre for Marine and Coastal Policy Research, Plymouth University.
Fletcher, S., Rees, S., Gall, S. Shellock, R., Dodds, W. and Rodwell, L. (2014). Assessing
the socio-economic benefits of marine protected areas. A report for Natural Resources
Wales by the Centre for Marine and Coastal Policy Research, Plymouth University.
More information on the Centre for Marine and Coastal Research:
Web:
Twitter:
Email:
www.plymouth.ac.uk/research/marcopol
@MarCoPolPU
[email protected]
Further research in marine ecosystem services and marine planning and
management: www.valmer.eu