Hidden benefits and risks of partial protection for coral reef fisheries

Partially protected areas are now the dominant global form of spatial management aimed at preserving ecosystem integrity and managing human use. However, most evaluations of their efficacy use only a narrow set of conservation indicators that reflect a fraction of ways in which protection can succeed or fail. In this paper, we examine three case studies of partially protected coral reef fishery systems to evaluate benefits and risks of their use as a management tool. We use data from community-based management arrangements in three Pacific Island countries to demonstrate three vignettes of how partial protection can boost fisheries production, enhance the ease with which fishers catch their prey, and alter the composition of fisheries yields. These changes in fisheries productivity, catchability, and vulnerability under partial protection carry substantial benefits for fishers. However, they also carry significant risks for ecosystems and fisheries livelihoods unless adaptively managed so as to confer the short to medium term benefits in resource performance without risking longer term sustainability

Loss of coral reef growth capacity to track future increases in sea level

Water-depths above coral reefs is predicted to increase due to global sea-level rise (SLR). As ecological degradation inhibits the vertical accretion of coral reefs, it is likely that coastal wave exposure will increase but there currently exists a lack of data in projections concerning local rates of reef growth and local SLR. In this study we have aggregated ecological data of more than 200 tropical western Atlantic and Indian Ocean reefs and calculated their vertical growth which we have then compared with recent and projected rates of SLR across different Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) scenarios. While many reefs currently show vertical growth that would be sufficient to keep-up with recent historic SLR, future projections under scenario RCP4.5 reveal that without substantial ecological recovery many reefs will not have the capacity to track SLR. Under RCP8.5, we predict that mean water depth will increase by over half a metre by 2100 across the majority of reefs. We found that coral cover strongly predicted whether a reef could track SLR, but that the majority of reefs had coral cover significantly lower than that required to prevent reef submergence. To limit reef submergence, and thus the impacts of waves and storms on adjacent coasts, climate mitigation and local impacts that reduce coral cover (e.g., local pollution and physical damage through development land reclamation) will be necessary

Social–environmental drivers inform strategic management of coral reefs in the Anthropocene

Without drastic efforts to reduce carbon emissions and mitigate globalized stressors, tropical coral reefs are in jeopardy. Strategic conservation and management requires identification of the environmental and socioeconomic factors driving the persistence of scleractinian coral assemblages—the foundation species of coral reef ecosystems. Here, we compiled coral abundance data from 2,584 Indo-Pacific reefs to evaluate the influence of 21 climate, social and environmental drivers on the ecology of reef coral assemblages. Higher abundances of framework-building corals were typically associated with: weaker thermal disturbances and longer intervals for potential recovery; slower human population growth; reduced access by human settlements and markets; and less nearby agriculture. We therefore propose a framework of three management strategies (protect, recover or transform) by considering: (1) if reefs were above or below a proposed threshold of >10% cover of the coral taxa important for structural complexity and carbonate production; and (2) reef exposure to severe thermal stress during the 2014–2017 global coral bleaching event. Our findings can guide urgent management efforts for coral reefs, by identifying key threats across multiple scales and strategic policy priorities that might sustain a network of functioning reefs in the Indo-Pacific to avoid ecosystem collapse

Sustainable Poverty Alleviation From Coastal Ecosystem Services: Coral Reef and Fisheries, 2013-2017

Ecological underwater surveys inform us about the abundance of the coral, algae, and fish communities on the reefs at the coral sites in Kongowea, Mkwiro, Vamizi, and Pemba. The data provides a measure of the stocks of many of the ecosystem service chains and allows us to interpret how human activity has impacted on ecosystem processes. From a fisheries perspective, it is a second way, along with the fish catch surveys, to assess the status and sustainability of local fisheries. Landings data was collected on how many people are fishing, how long they are fishing, what types of fishing gear and vessels they are using, and how much fish they are catching and of what size and species.This project aims to better understand the links between ecosystem services (ES) and wellbeing in order to design and implement more effective interventions for poverty alleviation. We do this in the context of coastal, social-ecological systems in two poor African countries; Kenya and Mozambique. Despite recent policy and scientific interest in ES, there remain important knowledge gaps regarding how ecosystems actually contribute to wellbeing, and thus poverty alleviation. Following the ESPA framework, distinguishing ecological processes, 'final ES', 'capital inputs', 'goods' and 'values', this project is concerned with how these elements are interrelated to produce ES benefits, and focuses specifically on how these benefits are distributed to (potentially) benefit the poor, enhancing their wellbeing. We thus address the ESPA goal of understanding and promoting ways in which benefits to the poorest can be increased and more people can meet their basic needs, but we also identify conflicted tradeoffs, i.e. those which result in serious harm to either the ecosystem or poor people and which need urgent attention. Several fundamental questions are currently debated in international scientific and policy fora, relating to four major global trends which are likely to affect abilities of poor people to access ES benefits: (1) devolution of governance power and its impacts on local governance of ecosystems and production of ES, (2) unprecedented rates and scales of environmental change, particularly climate change, which are creating new vulnerabilities, opportunities and constraints, 'shifting baselines', and demanding radical changes in behaviour to cope, (3) market integration now reaches the most remote corners of the developing world, changing relationships between people and resources and motivations for natural resource management, (4) societal changes, including demographic, population, urbanisation and globalisation of culture, forge new relationships with ES and further decouple people from direct dependency on particular resources. Study sites have been chosen so as to gather empirical evidence to help answer key questions about how these four drivers of change affect abilities of poor people to benefit from ES. We aim for direct impact on the wellbeing of poor inhabitants of the rapidly transforming coastal areas in Mozambique and Kenya, where research will take place, while also providing indirect impact to coastal poor in other developing countries through our international impact strategy. Benefits from research findings will also accrue to multiple stakeholders at various levels. Local government, NGOs and civil society groups - through engagement with project activities, e.g. participation in workshops and exposure to new types of analysis and systems thinking. Donor organizations and development agencies - through research providing evidence to inform strategies to support sector development (e.g. fisheries, coastal planning and tourism development) and methods to understand and evaluate impacts of different development interventions - e.g. through tradeoff analysis and evaluation of the elasticities between ecosystem services and wellbeing. International scientific community - through dissemination of findings via conferences, scientific publications (open access), and from conceptual and theoretical development and new understandings of the multiple linkages between ecosystem services and wellbeing. Regional African scientists will benefit specifically through open courses offered within the scope of the project, and through dissemination of results at regional venues. Our strategies to deliver impact and benefits include (1) identifying 'windows of opportunity' within the context of ongoing coastal development processes to improve flows of benefits from ecosystems services to poor people, and (2) identifying and seeking to actively mitigate 'conflicted' tradeoffs in Kenya and Mozambique.</p

Comanagement of coral reef social-ecological systems

In an effort to deliver better outcomes for people and the ecosystems they depend on, many governments and civil society groups are engaging natural resource users in collaborative management arrangements (frequently called comanagement). However, there are few empirical studies demonstrating the social and institutional conditions conducive to successful comanagement outcomes, especially in small-scale fisheries. Here, we evaluate 42 comanagement arrangements across five countries and show that: (i) comanagement is largely successful at meeting social and ecological goals; (ii) comanagement tends to benefit wealthier resource users; (iii) resource overexploitation is most strongly influenced by market access and users’ dependence on resources; and (iv) institutional characteristics strongly influence livelihood and compliance outcomes, yet have little effect on ecological conditions

Sustainable Poverty Alleviation From Coastal Ecosystem Services: Household Survey in Kenya and Mozambique, 2013-2017

The objective of this research was to elicit data required for a quantitative assessment of the contribution of ecosystem services to wellbeing of the poor through a large standardized household survey administered to individuals.The survey was conducted in Kenya and Mozambique. The household survey aimed to sample a total of 1,200 household (600 household per country) and interview up to three people per household. The three respondents included the household head, spouse and a third randomly selected person in order to collect data on individual (i.e.) sub household access to ES.This project aims to better understand the links between ecosystem services (ES) and wellbeing in order to design and implement more effective interventions for poverty alleviation. We do this in the context of coastal, social-ecological systems in two poor African countries; Kenya and Mozambique. Despite recent policy and scientific interest in ES, there remain important knowledge gaps regarding how ecosystems actually contribute to wellbeing, and thus poverty alleviation. Following the ESPA framework, distinguishing ecological processes, 'final ES', 'capital inputs', 'goods' and 'values', this project is concerned with how these elements are interrelated to produce ES benefits, and focuses specifically on how these benefits are distributed to (potentially) benefit the poor, enhancing their wellbeing. We thus address the ESPA goal of understanding and promoting ways in which benefits to the poorest can be increased and more people can meet their basic needs, but we also identify conflicted tradeoffs, i.e. those which result in serious harm to either the ecosystem or poor people and which need urgent attention. Several fundamental questions are currently debated in international scientific and policy fora, relating to four major global trends which are likely to affect abilities of poor people to access ES benefits: (1) devolution of governance power and its impacts on local governance of ecosystems and production of ES, (2) unprecedented rates and scales of environmental change, particularly climate change, which are creating new vulnerabilities, opportunities and constraints, 'shifting baselines', and demanding radical changes in behaviour to cope, (3) market integration now reaches the most remote corners of the developing world, changing relationships between people and resources and motivations for natural resource management, (4) societal changes, including demographic, population, urbanisation and globalisation of culture, forge new relationships with ES and further decouple people from direct dependency on particular resources. Study sites have been chosen so as to gather empirical evidence to help answer key questions about how these four drivers of change affect abilities of poor people to benefit from ES. We aim for direct impact on the wellbeing of poor inhabitants of the rapidly transforming coastal areas in Mozambique and Kenya, where research will take place, while also providing indirect impact to coastal poor in other developing countries through our international impact strategy. Benefits from research findings will also accrue to multiple stakeholders at various levels. Local government, NGOs and civil society groups - through engagement with project activities, e.g. participation in workshops and exposure to new types of analysis and systems thinking. Donor organizations and development agencies - through research providing evidence to inform strategies to support sector development (e.g. fisheries, coastal planning and tourism development) and methods to understand and evaluate impacts of different development interventions - e.g. through tradeoff analysis and evaluation of the elasticities between ecosystem services and wellbeing. International scientific community - through dissemination of findings via conferences, scientific publications (open access), and from conceptual and theoretical development and new understandings of the multiple linkages between ecosystem services and wellbeing. Regional African scientists will benefit specifically through open courses offered within the scope of the project, and through dissemination of results at regional venues. Our strategies to deliver impact and benefits include (1) identifying 'windows of opportunity' within the context of ongoing coastal development processes to improve flows of benefits from ecosystems services to poor people, and (2) identifying and seeking to actively mitigate 'conflicted' tradeoffs in Kenya and Mozambique.</p