From stormy seas to the doldrums: The challenges of navigating towards an ecologically coherent marine protected area network through England's Marine Conservation Zone process

There is an on-going process to establish Marine Conservation Zones (MCZs) in England, to form part of a coherent and representative network of marine protected areas under national and EU legislation. From 2009 to 2011, the MCZ process included strong participatory elements. Four regional multi-sector stakeholder groups developed MCZ recommendations collaboratively, in line with ecological guidance provided by the Government's nature conservation advisers. This guidance was based on Government policy principles, including that MCZs should be designated based on 'best available evidence'. This paper analyses the multi-dimensional conflicts that emerged within the stakeholder group in south-west England, which were magnified by uncertainty about future MCZ management. In September 2011, after working through these conflicts through trade-offs and negotiations, the stakeholder groups jointly recommended 127 MCZs to Government. The process subsequently shifted to a top-down approach, with further stakeholder engagement limited to bilateral consultation. There was a concurrent shift in policy, from a broad-scale network-level focus towards single-feature conservation. A lengthy series of evidence reviews concluded that the existing evidence at the time was insufficient to progress with the designation of most sites, marking a clear departure from the policy principle of proceeding with the designation of a representative network based on 'best available evidence', and effectively undermining the work carried out by stakeholder groups. Though MCZ designation was originally timetabled for 2012, in November 2013 just 27 of the recommended 127 MCZs were designated in a first tranche. At the time, no clear timetable was in place for subsequent tranches

Marine spatial planning in reality: introduction to case studies and discussion of findings

This paper explores the realities of marine spatial planning (MSP'ing), drawing on 12 case studies around Europe, employing a structured qualitative empirical approach. The findings indicate that (1) MSP'ing is often focused on achieving specific sectoral objectives, related to nationally important strategic priorities, and might better be termed 'strategic sectoral planning'. (2) MSP'ing processes tend to be complex, fragmented and emergent on an ad hoc basis, rather than cyclical, adaptive and prescribed on an a priori basis. (3) Top-down processes tend to dominate, more participative platforms tending to be 'disconnected by design' from executive decision-making. (4) Blue growth is the dominant overall priority, often aligned with strategic sectoral priorities, despite growing indications that the target for Good Environmental Status (GES) by 2020 is unlikely to be met. This is consistent with growing concerns about the tensions between the Marine Strategy Framework Directive and the Directive Establishing a Framework for Maritime Spatial Planning. It is concluded that the realities of how MSP'ing is working contrast with widely recognised concepts and ideals as to how MSP'ing should work, as integrated-use MSP'ing based on political expedience and blue growth priorities is diverging from and potentially competing with ecosystem-based MSP'ing, including marine protected area networks, based on GES priorities. It is argued that a more empirical approach should be taken to MSP'ing research, whereby conceptual approaches which integrate sustainable blue growth and GES co-evolve with marine spatial planning practices through critical analyses of whether the realities of MSP'ing are consistent with these concepts

Contrasting patterns of population structure and gene flow facilitate exploration of connectivity in two widely distributed temperate octocorals

This is the final version of the article. Available from Springer Nature via the DOI in this record.Connectivity is an important component of metapopulation dynamics in marine systems and can influence population persistence, migration rates and conservation decisions associated with Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). In this study, we compared the genetic diversity, gene flow and population structure of two octocoral species, Eunicella verrucosa and Alcyonium digitatum, in the northeast Atlantic (ranging from the northwest of Ireland and the southern North Sea, to southern Portugal), using two panels of thirteen and eight microsatellite loci, respectively. Our results identified regional genetic structure in E. verrucosa partitioned between populations from southern Portugal, northwest Ireland, and Britain/France; subsequent hierarchical analysis of population structure also indicated reduced gene flow between southwest Britain and northwest France. However, over a similar geographical area, A. digitatum showed little evidence of population structure, suggesting high gene flow and/or a large effective population size; indeed, the only significant genetic differentiation detected in A. digitatum occurred between North Sea samples and those from the English Channel/northeast Atlantic. In both species the vast majority of gene flow originated from sample sites within regions, with populations in southwest Britain being the predominant source of contemporary exogenous genetic variants for the populations studied. Unsurprisingly, historical patterns of gene flow appeared more complex, though again southwest Britain appeared an important source of genetic variation for both species. Our findings have major conservation implications, particularly for E. verrucosa, a protected species in UK waters and listed by the IUCN as ‘Vulnerable’, and for the designation and management of European MPAs.We thank Natural England (project No. RP0286, contract No. SAE 03-02-146), the NERC (grant No. NE/L002434/1) and the University of Exeter for funding this research. Additional funding for sample collection, travel and microsatellite development was provided by the EU Framework 7 ASSEMBLE programme, agreement no. 227799, and NERC grant No. NBAF-362