Action

Establish private coral reef management

How is the evidence assessed?
  • Effectiveness
    not assessed
  • Certainty
    not assessed
  • Harms
    not assessed

Study locations

Key messages

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (2 STUDIES)

  • Abundance/Cover (2 studies): One replicated, site comparison study in China found that privately managed areas had similar coral cover to protected areas managed by the government. One site comparison study in Malaysia and the Philippines found that privately managed areas had higher hard coral cover than a collaborative- and government-managed area.

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

  1. A site comparison study in 2000–2007 at three protected areas that prohibited all fishing and extractive activities in Malaysia and the Philippines (Teh et al. 2008) reported that privately managed areas had higher hard coral cover than a collaborative- and government-managed area. Results were not rested for statistical significance. Hard coral cover was 42% in the privately managed area, 26% in the collaboratively managed area and 23% in the government managed area. Cover by other species, including soft coral and algae, was 7% (private), 4% (collaborative) and 35% (government). Collaborative management involved the government appointing an organisation to take partial or complete responsibility for managing the area. Authors reported data from one privately managed area (established: 2001, surveyed: 2007), one collaboratively managed area (established: 1988, surveyed: 2000) and one government managed area (established: 1985, surveyed: 2005). In the privately managed area, coral cover was recorded along 20 × 5 m transects (number of transects not reported). Survey methods for other areas are not reported. Costs: Private management cost $3/ha of protected area. Cost included wages and salary (34%), administration (7%), depreciation (23%), sublease (12%), education and information (7%) and operational costs (17%). The area generated revenue of $5.70/visitor/night, and in 2006 revenues were $1.47/ha.

    Study and other actions tested
  2. A replicated, site comparison study in 2014 at nine coral reef sites in Sanya Bay, Hainan, China (Huang et al. 2017) found that privately managed areas had similar coral cover to protected areas managed by the government but lower cover than unprotected, unmanaged areas. Coral cover was similar in privately managed protected areas (10%), privately managed unprotected areas (8%), and government-managed protected areas (10%), but lower than in unprotected areas without private management (36%). In addition, fishing restrictions were well enforced in privately managed sites, but enforcement was lacking in protected areas without private management (see paper for details). In 2014, nine sites were selected that varied in management (privately managed or not) and protection status (protected vs unprotected). Privately managed areas were managed by three different companies for tourism (including diving, snorkelling, and other water sports) and protected areas were established in 1990. At each site, three 50 m transects were surveyed at each of two depths (2–3 m and 6–8 m), with photographs taken 25 times along each transect using evenly spaced quadrats (50 × 50 cm).

    Study and other actions tested
Please cite as:

Thornton A., Morgan, W.H., Bladon E.K., Smith R.K. & Sutherland W.J. (2024) Coral Conservation: Global evidence for the effects of actions. Conservation Evidence Series Synopsis. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

Coral Conservation

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Coral Conservation
Coral Conservation

Coral Conservation - Published 2024

Coral synopsis

What Works 2021 cover

What Works in Conservation

What Works in Conservation provides expert assessments of the effectiveness of actions, based on summarised evidence, in synopses. Subjects covered so far include amphibians, birds, mammals, forests, peatland and control of freshwater invasive species. More are in progress.

More about What Works in Conservation

Download free PDF or purchase
The Conservation Evidence Journal

The Conservation Evidence Journal

An online, free to publish in, open-access journal publishing results from research and projects that test the effectiveness of conservation actions.

Read the latest volume: Volume 22

Go to the CE Journal

Discover more on our blog

Our blog contains the latest news and updates from the Conservation Evidence team, the Conservation Evidence Journal, and our global partners in evidence-based conservation.


Who uses Conservation Evidence?

Meet some of the Evidence Champions

Endangered Landscape ProgrammeRed List Champion - Arc Kent Wildlife Trust The Rufford Foundation Mauritian Wildlife Supporting Conservation Leaders
Sustainability Dashboard National Biodiversity Network Frog Life The international journey of Conservation - Oryx Cool Farm Alliance UNEP AWFA Bat Conservation InternationalPeople trust for endangered species Vincet Wildlife Trust