Addressing distribution equity in spatial conservation prioritization for small-scale fisheries.

Spatial conservation prioritization is used worldwide for designing marine protected areas (MPA) that achieve set conservation objectives with minimal impacts to marine users. People involved in small-scale fisheries (SSF) may incur negative and disproportionate impacts from implementing MPAs, yet limited available data often restricts their representation in MPA planning. Using a Philippines case study, we focus here on the systematic design of a MPA network that aims to minimize and distribute costs equitably for SSF whilst achieving representation targets for biodiversity conservation. The objectives of the study are to: (1) document a participatory mapping approach for collecting SSF data for prioritization using the local knowledge of fishers; and (2) examine how the completeness and resolution of SSF data may affect prioritization outputs in terms of biodiversity representation, spatial efficiency, and distribution equity. In the data-poor region, we conducted participatory mapping workshops with fishers in 79 communities to collect data on the spatial distribution patterns of different SSF fisheries and communities, and employed remote sensing techniques to define coastal habitats, which were targeted for inclusion in MPAs. The datasets were integrated within the decision-support tool Marxan with Zones to develop three scenarios. The SSF data incorporated in each scenario varied based on their completeness (considered all fishing methods or only dominant methods) and resolution (fishing methods itemized by community or municipality). All scenarios derived MPA plans that met representation targets with similar area coverage. The outputs, however, varied in terms of distribution equity, measured by the distribution of opportunity costs (loss of fishing grounds) across different fisheries and communities. Scenarios that did not include minority fisheries or variations between communities, led to inequitable costs. These results highlight the need to incorporate detailed data on SSF at appropriate resolutions, and how this can be achieved through participatory approaches.

Evaluating approaches for scaling-up community-based marine-protected areas into socially equitable and ecologically representative networks.

Marine-protected areas (MPAs) are vital to marine conservation, but their coverage and distribution is insufficient to address declines in global biodiversity and fisheries. In response, many countries have committed through the Aichi Target 11 of the Convention on Biological Diversity to conserve 10% of the marine environment through ecologically representative and equitably managed MPAs by 2020. The rush to fulfill this commitment has raised concerns on how increasing MPA coverage will affect other elements of Target 11, including representation and equity. We examined a Philippines case study to assess and compare 3 MPA planning approaches for biodiversity representation and equitable distribution of costs to small-scale fishers. In the opportunistic approach, MPAs were identified and supported by coastal communities. The donor-assisted approach used local knowledge to select MPAs through a national-scale and donor-assisted conservation project. The systematic conservation planning approach identified MPA locations with the spatial prioritization software Marxan with Zones to achieve biodiversity objectives with minimal costs to fishers. We collected spatial data on biodiversity and fisheries features and performed a gap analysis to evaluate MPAs derived from different approaches. We assessed representation based on the proportion of biodiversity features conserved in MPAs and distribution equity by the distribution of opportunity costs (fishing areas lost in MPAs) among fisher stakeholder groups. The opportunistic approach did not ineffectively represent biodiversity and resulted in inequitable costs to fishers. The donor-assisted approach affected fishers disproportionately but provided near-optimal regional representation. Only the systematic approach achieved all representation targets with minimal and equitable costs to fishers. Our results demonstrate the utility of systematic conservation planning to address key elements of Target 11 and highlight opportunities (e.g., integration of local and scientific knowledge can address representation and equity concerns) and pitfalls (e.g., insufficient stakeholder considerations can exacerbate social inequalities) for planning MPAs in similar contexts.

Evaluación de las Estrategias para Ampliar las Áreas Marinas Protegidas Basadas en Comunidades a Redes Equitativa y Ecológicamente Representativas Resumen Las áreas marinas protegidas (AMP) son vitales para la conservación marina, pero su cobertura y distribución es insuficiente para tratar las declinaciones globales en la biodiversidad y en las pesquerías. Como respuesta, muchos países se comprometieron por medio del Objetivo 11 de Aichi de la Convención sobre la Diversidad Biológica a conservar el 10% del ambiente marino por medio de AMP ecológicamente representativas y manejadas equitativamente para el año 2020. La prisa por cumplir con este compromiso ha incrementado la preocupación sobre cómo el incremento de la cobertura de las AMP afectará a otros elementos del Objetivo 11, incluyendo la representación y la equidad. Examinamos un estudio de caso de las Filipinas para evaluar y comparar 3 estrategias de planeación de AMP en cuanto a la representación de la biodiversidad y la distribución equitativa de los costos para las pesquerías a pequeña escala. En la estrategia oportunista, las AMP fueron identificadas y respaldadas por las comunidades costeras. La estrategia asistida por donantes usó el conocimiento local para seleccionar las AMP por medio de un proyecto de conservación a escala local y asistido por donantes. La estrategia de planeación sistemática de la conservación identificó la ubicación de las AMP con el software de priorización espacial Marxan with Zones para lograr los objetivos de biodiversidad con un costo mínimo para los pescadores. Recolectamos datos espaciales de las características de la biodiversidad y de las pesquerías y realizamos un análisis de vacío para evaluar las AMP derivadas de las diferentes estrategias. Evaluamos la representación con base en la proporción de las características de la biodiversidad conservadas en las AMP y en la distribución de la equidad por distribución de los costos de oportunidad (áreas de pesca perdidas en las AMP) entre los grupos de accionistas de las pesquerías. La estrategia oportunista no representó inefectivamente a la biodiversidad y resultó en costos injustos para los pescadores. La estrategia asistida por donantes afectó desproporcionalmente a los pescadores, pero proporcionó una representación regional cercana a la óptima. Sólo la estrategia sistemática logró todos los objetivos de representación con costos mínimos y equitativos para los pescadores. Nuestros resultados demuestran la utilidad de la planeación sistemática de la conservación para tratar los elementos importantes del Objetivo 11 y resalta las oportunidades (p. ej.: la integración del conocimiento científico y local puede lidiar con los temas de representación y equidad) y obstáculos (p. ej.: las consideraciones insuficientes de los actores pueden exacerbar las desigualdades sociales) que tienen la planeación de las AMP en contextos similares.