The economic sustainability of artisanal fisheries: the case of the trawl ban in the Gulf of Castellammare, NW Sicily
In: Marine policy, Band 27, Heft 6, S. 489-497
ISSN: 0308-597X
26 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: Marine policy, Band 27, Heft 6, S. 489-497
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Marine policy: the international journal of ocean affairs, Band 27, Heft 6, S. 489-498
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Marine policy, Band 71, S. 301-309
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Marine policy: the international journal of ocean affairs, Band 71, S. 301-309
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Mondoperaio: rivista mensile periodico dei socialisti, Heft 2, S. 63-74
ISSN: 0392-1115
In: Marine policy, Band 75, S. 174-186
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Marine policy: the international journal of ocean affairs, Band 75, S. 174-186
ISSN: 0308-597X
As a response to increasing human pressures on marine ecosystems, the legislation aimed at improving the conservation and management of marine coastal areas in European and Contiguous Seas (ECS) underwent crucial advances. ECS, however, still remain largely affected by increasing threats leading to biodiversity loss. Here, by using emblematic case studies and expert knowledge, we review current conservation tools, comparing their application in different areas to assess their effectiveness, potential for synergies, and contradictions. Despite regional differences in their application, the existing legislative frameworks have the potential to regulate human activities and to protect marine biodiversity. However, four challenges remain to be addressed to fully achieve environmental policy goals: (1) Lack of shared vision representing a limitation in transboundary collaboration. Although all EU countries are committed to fulfil EU Directives and other binding international legislative acts, a remarkable heterogeneity exists among countries in the compliance with the common legislation on conservation and in their degree of implementation. (2) Lack of systematic procedures for the selection of protected marine sites. Regional and national approaches in designating Natura 2000 sites and nationally designated marine protected areas (MPAs) reflect varying conservation targets and importance of conservation issues in political agendas. (3) Lack of coherent ecological networks. Natura 2000 sites and other MPAs are still far from reaching the status of effective networks in all considered case studies. (4) Hotspot of conflicts with private economic interests prevailing over conservation aims. Recommendations are given to overcome the fragmented approach still characterizing the conservation and management of coastal marine environments. [.]
BASE
As a response to increasing human pressures on marine ecosystems, the legislation aimed at improving the conservation and management of marine coastal areas in European and Contiguous Seas (ECS) underwent crucial advances. ECS, however, still remain largely affected by increasing threats leading to biodiversity loss. Here, by using emblematic case studies and expert knowledge, we review current conservation tools, comparing their application in different areas to assess their effectiveness, potential for synergies, and contradictions. Despite regional differences in their application, the existing legislative frameworks have the potential to regulate human activities and to protect marine biodiversity. However, four challenges remain to be addressed to fully achieve environmental policy goals: (1) Lack of shared vision representing a limitation in transboundary collaboration. Although all EU countries are committed to fulfil EU Directives and other binding international legislative acts, a remarkable heterogeneity exists among countries in the compliance with the common legislation on conservation and in their degree of implementation. (2) Lack of systematic procedures for the selection of protected marine sites. Regional and national approaches in designating Natura 2000 sites and nationally designated marine protected areas (MPAs) reflect varying conservation targets and importance of conservation issues in political agendas. (3) Lack of coherent ecological networks. Natura 2000 sites and other MPAs are still far from reaching the status of effective networks in all considered case studies. (4) Hotspot of conflicts with private economic interests prevailing over conservation aims. Recommendations are given to overcome the fragmented approach still characterizing the conservation and management of coastal marine environments. [.]
BASE
As a response to increasing human pressures on marine ecosystems, the legislation aimed at improving the conservation and management of marine coastal areas in European and Contiguous Seas (ECS) underwent crucial advances. ECS, however, still remain largely affected by increasing threats leading to biodiversity loss. Here, by using emblematic case studies and expert knowledge, we review current conservation tools, comparing their application in different areas to assess their effectiveness, potential for synergies, and contradictions. Despite regional differences in their application, the existing legislative frameworks have the potential to regulate human activities and to protect marine biodiversity. However, four challenges remain to be addressed to fully achieve environmental policy goals: (1) Lack of shared vision representing a limitation in transboundary collaboration. Although all EU countries are committed to fulfil EU Directives and other binding international legislative acts, a remarkable heterogeneity exists among countries in the compliance with the common legislation on conservation and in their degree of implementation. (2) Lack of systematic procedures for the selection of protected marine sites. Regional and national approaches in designating Natura 2000 sites and nationally designated marine protected areas (MPAs) reflect varying conservation targets and importance of conservation issues in political agendas. (3) Lack of coherent ecological networks. Natura 2000 sites and other MPAs are still far from reaching the status of effective networks in all considered case studies. (4) Hotspot of conflicts with private economic interests prevailing over conservation aims. Recommendations are given to overcome the fragmented approach still characterizing the conservation and management of coastal marine environments. [.]
BASE
As a response to increasing human pressures on marine ecosystems, the legislation aimed at improving the conservation and management of marine coastal areas in European and Contiguous Seas (ECS) underwent crucial advances. ECS, however, still remain largely affected by increasing threats leading to biodiversity loss. Here, by using emblematic case studies and expert knowledge, we review current conservation tools, comparing their application in different areas to assess their effectiveness, potential for synergies, and contradictions. Despite regional differences in their application, the existing legislative frameworks have the potential to regulate human activities and to protect marine biodiversity. However, four challenges remain to be addressed to fully achieve environmental policy goals: (1) Lack of shared vision representing a limitation in transboundary collaboration. Although all EU countries are committed to fulfil EU Directives and other binding international legislative acts, a remarkable heterogeneity exists among countries in the compliance with the common legislation on conservation and in their degree of implementation. (2) Lack of systematic procedures for the selection of protected marine sites. Regional and national approaches in designating Natura 2000 sites and nationally designated marine protected areas (MPAs) reflect varying conservation targets and importance of conservation issues in political agendas. (3) Lack of coherent ecological networks. Natura 2000 sites and other MPAs are still far from reaching the status of effective networks in all considered case studies. (4) Hotspot of conflicts with private economic interests prevailing over conservation aims. Recommendations are given to overcome the fragmented approach still characterizing the conservation and management of coastal marine environments. [.]
BASE
In: Marine policy, Band 161, S. 106012
ISSN: 0308-597X
In: Marine policy, Band 37, S. 149-164
ISSN: 0308-597X
Este artículo contiene 11 páginas, 2 figuras, 2 tablas. ; Local, regional and global targets have been set to halt marine biodiversity loss. Europe has set its own policy targets to achieve Good Environmental Status (GES) of marine ecosystems by implementing the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) across member states. We combined an extensive dataset across five Mediterranean ecoregions including 26 Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), their reference unprotected areas, and a no-trawl case study. Our aim was to assess if MPAs reach GES, if their effects are local or can be detected at ecoregion level or up to a Mediterranean scale, and which are the ecosystem components driving GES achievement. This was undertaken by using the analytical tool NEAT (Nested Environmental status Assessment Tool), which allows an integrated assessment of the status of marine systems. We adopted an ecosystem approach by integrating data from several ecosystem components: the seagrass Posidonia oceanica, macroalgae, sea urchins and fish. Thresholds to define the GES were set by dedicated workshops and literature review. In the Western Mediterranean, most MPAs are in good/high status, with P. oceanica and fish driving this result within MPAs. However, GES is achieved only at a local level, and the Mediterranean Sea, as a whole, results in a moderate environmental status. Macroalgal forests are overall in bad condition, confirming their status at risk. The results are significantly affected by the assumption that discrete observations over small spatial scales are representative of the total extension investigated. This calls for large-scale, dedicated assessments to realistically detect environmental status changes under different conditions. Understanding MPAs effectiveness in reaching GES is crucial to assess their role as sentinel observatories of marine systems. MPAs and trawling bans can locally contribute to the attainment of GES and to the fulfillment of the MSFD objectives. Building confidence in setting thresholds between GES and non-GES, investing in long-term monitoring, increasing the spatial extent of sampling areas, rethinking and broadening the scope of complementary tools of protection (e.g., Natura 2000 Sites), are indicated as solutions to ameliorate the status of the basin. ; This article was undertaken within the COST Action 15121 MarCons (http://www.marcons-cost.eu, European Cooperation in Science and Technology), the Interreg MED AMAre Plus (Ref: 8022) and the project PO FEAMP 2014-2020 Innovazione, sviluppo e sostenibilita ` nel settore della pesca e dell'acquacoltura per la Regione Campania (ISSPA 2.51). M.C.U., A.B. have been funded by the project MEDREGION (European Commission DG ENV/MSFD, 2018 call, Grant Agreement 110661/ 2018/794286/SUB/ENV.C2). Aegean Sea data were retrieved from the project PROTOMEDEA (www.protomedea.eu), funded by DG for Marine Affairs and Fisheries of the EC, under Grant Agreement SI2.721917. JB acknowledges support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation (Juan de la Cierva fellowship FJC 2018-035566-I). ; Peer reviewed
BASE
International audience ; Cumulative human impacts have led to the degradation of marine ecosystems and thedecline of biodiversity in the European and contiguous seas. Effective conservationmeasures are urgently needed to reverse these trends. Conservation must entail societalchoices, underpinned by human values and worldviews that differ between the countriesbordering these seas. Social, economic and political heterogeneity adds to the challenge ofbalancing conservation with sustainable use of the seas. Comprehensive macro-regionalcoordination is needed to ensure effective conservation of marine ecosystems andbiodiversity of this region. Under the European Union Horizon 2020 framework programme,the MarCons COST action aims to promote collaborative research to support marinemanagement, conservation planning and policy development. This will be achieved bydeveloping novel methods and tools to close knowledge gaps and advance marineconservation science. This action will provide support for the development of macro-regional and national policies through six key actions: to develop tools to analysecumulative human impacts; to identify critical scientific and technical gaps in conservationefforts; to improve the resilience of the marine environment to global change and biologicalinvasions; to develop frameworks for integrated conservation planning across terrestrial,freshwater, and marine environments; to coordinate marine conservation policy acrossnational boundaries; and to identify effective governance approaches for marine protectedarea management. Achieving the objectives of these actions will facilitate the integration ofmarine conservation policy into macro-regional maritime spatial planning agendas for theEuropean and contiguous seas, thereby offsetting the loss of biodiversity and ecosystemservices in this region.
BASE