Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit some fishing and collection (including where restrictions are unspecified)
-
Overall effectiveness category Awaiting assessment
-
Number of studies: 20
View assessment score
Hide assessment score
How is the evidence assessed?
-
Effectiveness
not assessed -
Certainty
not assessed -
Harms
not assessed
Study locations
Supporting evidence from individual studies
A replicated, site comparison study in 1999 in 16 marine sites across eight reef areas in two regions of Yucatan, Mexico (Ruiz-Zárate & Arias-González 2004) found that protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection had similar diversity and density of juvenile stony coral cover compared to areas where fishing was unrestricted. Coral diversity was similar in the protected areas (17 coral species, with 7-13 species/reef) compared to unprotected areas (16 species, 7-13 species/site) and was similarly dominated by Agaricia spp., Siderastrea spp., and Porites spp. (40–100% abundance at the site level) but with differences between specific sites (see paper for details). Juvenile coral density was similar in protected reefs (3 juveniles/m2) and the reefs in unprotected areas (3 juveniles/m2) but with sometimes large differences between specific sites (see paper for details). The Sian Ka’an Biosphere Reserve has been protected since 1986, with a closed season fishing and additional fishing restrictions. The southern part was unprotected with unrestricted fishing activity. Within each reef, three sites (1 km apart) were selected north to south. In 1999, at each site, 10–18 transects (10 m long) were positioned 1–5 m apart 8–13 m deep. Five, 25 × 25 cm quadrats were placed every 2 m along each transect. Every quadrat (total 1,747 quadrats on 360 transects) was surveyed by a diver counting juvenile stony corals (under 2 cm diameter).
Study and other actions testedA replicated, paired, site comparison study in 2002 in six marine reef areas at Ahus and Onetta islands, Papua New Guinea (Cinner et al. 2005), found that protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection had similar diversity and live coral cover compared to sites where fishing was unrestricted. Coral diversity and live coral cover were similar in protected, traditionally managed community (tambu) sites compared to unprotected sites (data as model outputs). Protected tambu sites had 60% higher fish biomass (205 kg/ha) compared to unprotected sites (127 kg/ha) and fewer fishing gear discards (data as models). Three traditionally managed (tambu) sites were compared to three sites of similar reef profile, current regimes, and wave exposure, which had no protective management or fishing restrictions. At each site, 10 m long transects (18/site) were positioned to cover the same aspect areas of reefs at 6 –8 m depth, and hard corals were identified to genus. Management and effectiveness were assessed via interviews and the recording of discarded fishing gear in transects. With 2–3 exceptions/year to fish for ceremonial food at tambu sites, spear and net fishing were prohibited and harvesting of invertebrates was severely limited, but line fishing was unregulated. Tambu areas (six sites; total 33ha) represented 6% of the available fishing area.
Study and other actions testedA site comparison study in 2006 at 24 coral reef sites in National Natural Park Rosario and San Bernardo Corals, Colombia (Camargo et al. 2009) found that sites in a protected area that prohibited some fishing and collection had similar coral cover and densities of coral species compared to sites outside the protected area. Coral cover was similar for sites in the protected area (hard corals: 27%, gorgonians: 2%) and unprotected sites (hard corals: 21%, gorgonians: 3%). Counts of four major coral species tended to be higher in the protected area than outside (result not tested for statistical significance: Acropora cervicornis: 56 inside vs 54 outside; Acropora palmata: 118 vs 32; Diploria labyrinthiformis: 109 vs 102; Siderastrea siderea: 427 vs 156), but densities and size structure of populations were similar inside and outside the protected area (data reported as statistical model results). Sixteen sites within a protected area and eight sites outside of the protected area were selected. In May 2006, sixteen sites were surveyed (8 protected, 8 unprotected), and in September 2006 and additional eight protected sites were surveyed. Surveys consisted of two transects/site (30 × 2 m), with sixty 1 m2 photographs taken along each transect.
Study and other actions testedA study in 2002–2005 in four sites within one protected area in Nha Trang Bay, Vietnam (Dung 2009) found that in a protected area that prohibited some fishing and collection, there was a slight decrease in the number of coral species found three years after designation compared to in the year of designation. Three years after designation, 256 species were detected (92–177 species/site) compared to 274 (122–187 species/site) in the year of designation (result not tested for statistical significance). There were differences in coral community composition three years after designation compared to the year of designation (data reported as statistical model results). Authors reported increases in aquaculture and presence of fishing boats within the protected area between the two time periods (see paper for details). A Marine Protected Area was established in 2002, with surveys conducted in August 2002 and March–April 2005. Surveys were conducted at one location in the core of the protected area, and three locations within the buffer zone, with two surveys/site at different depths along a 250 m2 area.
Study and other actions testedA replicated, site comparison study in 2003–2008 at two coral reef sites off St John, US Virgin Islands (Monaco et al. 2009) found that in protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection, hard coral cover was lower in the protected areas compared to outside, and soft coral cover was higher in one of two protected areas compared to outside but similar in the other. Hard coral cover was lower in the protected areas (4% and 4%) compared to the unprotected areas (15% and 8%), and soft coral cover was higher in one comparison (protected: 22%, unprotected: 13%) and similar in a second (protected: 12%, unprotected: 11%). In one location, coral cover declined in the protected area (2003: 7%, 2008: 3%), but declined more dramatically in the unprotected area (2003: 26%, 2008: 6%). In the second location, cover in the protected area was 4% in 2003 and 2% in 2008, and in the unprotected area cover was 10% in 2003 and 6% in 2008 (results were not tested for statistical significance). Two protected areas were selected, one on the mid-shelf reef and one in a bay. In addition to fishing restrictions (apart from for blue runner Caranx crysos), anchoring was also prohibited in the protected areas. Sites in the protected areas (18–30 sites/year) and in adjacent unprotected areas (15–25 sites/year) were surveyed annually from 2003–2008. Coral cover was assessed at one location/site within a 15 m diameter area.
Study and other actions testedA replicated, paired, site comparison study in 1992–2002 of 15 pairs of coral reef sites in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia (Myers & Ambrose 2009) found that in protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection (a range of different restrictions), hard coral cover was similar but soft coral cover lower than in unprotected areas. When pooling data across all reefs, hard coral cover was similar in protected (39%) and unprotected reefs (31%), but soft coral cover was lower (protected: 12%, unprotected: 19%). For undisturbed reefs, hard coral cover was higher in protected reefs (46%) than in unprotected (25%), and soft coral cover was lower (protected: 18%, unprotected: 36%), but there were no overall differences for disturbed reefs (hard: 34–36%, soft: 8–10%). Annual increases in hard coral cover were higher in protected than in unprotected areas in two of five comparisons at undisturbed reefs, but at disturbed reefs neither protected or unprotected areas consistently had higher increases in cover. For soft corals, there was very little change in cover in protected and unprotected areas over time on both undisturbed and disturbed reefs (see paper for details). Fifteen pairs of sites, one protected and one unprotected, were selected across 23 reefs. The protected sites included three levels of protection: no fishing, collecting or diving; no fishing or collecting, but diving permitted; or no trawling or collection, limited line fishing, other fishing and diving permitted. Disturbances included cyclones, storms and crown-of-thorns Acanthaster planci invasions. Annual surveys in 1992–2002 were conducted at each site, with three survey locations selected per site, and five transects (50 m) surveyed/location.
Study and other actions testedA review of 27 studies from 1978–2008 of coral reefs in the Caribbean (Álvarez-Filip et al. 2011) found that in protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection (a range of different restrictions), changes in reef structural complexity was similar compared to unprotected areas. Changes in reef structural complexity were similar in protected (2% decrease/year) and unprotected sites (3% decrease/year), though the decline in protected areas was significant whereas in unprotected areas it was not. Declines in complexity in protected areas were present in both areas impacted by hurricanes (2% decrease, 7 sites) and in unimpacted areas (3% decrease, 17 sites). Changes in complexity in protected areas were not linked to duration of protection (18% decrease to 4% increase, 3–47 years of protection). Relevant journals for Caribbean reef studies were searched, and researchers and reef managers were also contacted directly to obtain data. A total of 27 studies with data from 1978–2008 from 49 reef sites were obtained (2–17 years of data/study) that compared reef complexity inside and outside a protected area. Two thirds of the studies included protected areas classified in IUCN protection category II. Reef structural complexity was measured by comparing contoured length with straight-line length along a section of reef.
Study and other actions testedA review of studies of coral reefs in the western Indian Ocean (Ateweberhan et al. 2011) found that in protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection, coral cover was higher in two time periods compared to fished reefs, lower in one and similar in a fourth. In the first two time periods (1977–1993 and 1994–1997), cover was higher on protected reefs with fishery closures (42–47%) than on fished reefs (16–33%). In the third period (1999–2000), immediately after a climatic disturbance in 1998, cover was lower on protected reefs (17%) than on fished reefs (24%), and by the final period (2001–2005) cover was similar in both reef types (protected: 26%, fished: 26%). Information was collated for the western Indian Ocean (region west of the 90°E meridian) for areas with fisheries closures (including reserves and no-take areas) and explicitly fished reefs. Samples came from peer reviewed publications, grey literature, Reef Check surveys and regional monitoring programs. The number of samples for each period ranged from 23–115 (16, 52, 55, 77 samples for fishery closures, 7, 31, 28, 38 for fished reefs). Most field sampling was based on haphazard or permanent line intercept transects.
Study and other actions testedA review of studies from six protected areas in the Caribbean (Guarderas et al. 2011) found that in protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection, responses of corals were mixed. Studies from six reserves found that for a range of measures (including density, biomass and percent cover), coral responses to protection ranged from positive to negative (data reported as log response ratios, result not tested for statistical significance). Four databases were searched for studies published 1970–2007, and references from those studies were also searched. Studies were included from Latin American and Caribbean countries where protected areas were established for at least three years, were at least moderately enforced, and included comparisons with fished areas or comparisons to before protection was established. A total of 32 studies from 23 reserves were found, though studies from only six reserves in the Caribbean contained data on coral.
Study and other actions testedA replicated, paired, site comparison study in 2005–2010 in six coral reef sites in a lagoon and three on a barrier reef off New Georgia Island, the Solomon Islands (Halpern et al. 2013) found that in protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection, coral cover in a lagoon was similar in the protected areas compared to adjacent fished areas, but lower than on a fished barrier reef. Live coral cover was similar in protected areas in a lagoon (26–27%) and adjacent fished locations (23–30%), but lower than in fished areas out on the barrier reef (70%). At the level of individual protected areas, the same trend was seen at two of three sites. At the third, coral cover was higher in 2005 in the protected than fished area (protected: 30%, fished: 19%) but lower in 2010 (protected: 39%, fished: 48%), but again, cover was highest on the fished barrier reef (65%). Three protected areas within a lagoon were selected, with protection in place for 6–10 years. Areas were managed by Resource Management Committees from local villages, which included chiefs and elders, church authorities, and women representatives. Three paired sites within the lagoon that were fished were selected, along with three fished sites on the barrier reef. Six transects (30 × 4 m) were sampled at each site, and coral cover was sampled with 1 m2 quadrats. Lagoon sites were sampled in 2005 and 2010, and barrier reef sites in 2010 only.
Study and other actions testedA replicated, before-and-after, site comparison study in 2008–2012 at five coral reef sites off the southwest coast of Grenada (Anderson et al. 2014) found that in protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection, hard coral cover was similar and soft coral cover higher than outside protected areas and neither changed following protection. Hard coral cover did not change following protection (after: 10–15%, before: 12–19%), and was similar to cover in the unprotected areas (after: 9–13% and before: 12–16%). Soft coral cover did not change following protection (after: 3%, before: 5%), but was higher in protected areas than in unprotected areas before protection in two of two cases (protected: 5%, unprotected: 1–2%) and higher after protection in one comparison (protected: 3%, unprotected: 1%) but similar in a second (protected: 3%, unprotected: 2%). Authors also reported cover by different coral forms (massive, branching and encrusting, see paper for details). Fishing restrictions were implemented at two sites in 2010. An additional three sites with no restrictions were selected. Annual surveys were carried out at all sites in 2008–2012. Four 30 m parallel transects were surveyed at each of the five sites, with substrate type recorded at 50 cm intervals. This was combined with photograph surveys along the transects to give two assessments of coral cover.
Study and other actions testedA review of 37 studies of coral reefs in the Philippines (Magdaong et al. 2014) found that in protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection, coral cover was similar and annual change in cover higher compared to unprotected areas. Coral cover was similar in protected (19–48%) and unprotected areas (18–48%), but the annual change in cover increased in protected areas (3% increase/year) and did not change in unprotected areas (0% change/year). Annual change in cover was similar in partially protected areas (6% increase/year) and fully protected areas (3% increase/year). In addition, there was some evidence that coral cover increased annually in older (≥6 years: 2–3%) and larger (>10 ha: 2–4%) protected areas, while there was not a significant annual change in younger (≤5 years: 6%) and smaller (≤10 ha: 3%) protected areas. Peer reviewed publications and grey literature was searched online and through personal communications, and studies were retained that recorded hard coral cover, had surveys from two or more years, and reported the number and length of transects surveyed. Protected areas were classified in terms of level of protection (partially protected: activities and fishing gear regulated, fully protected: no extractive activities). Data from 1,096 surveys from 317 sites (155 protected, 162 unprotected) from 36 studies and one monitoring program were retained. Most sites (83% of 317) were surveyed with 50 m transects at depths of 2–20 m.
Study and other actions testedA before-and-after study in 1955–2012 at 14 rocky reef sites on the Portofino Promontory, Ligurian Sea, Italy (Bavestrello et al. 2015) found that in a protected area that prohibited some fishing and collection, red coral Corallium rubrum density was lower after protection that a few years before, but coral biomass increased. Density of corals was lower in 2012 after protection (227 colonies/m2) than in 1990 before protection (378 colonies/m2), but higher than before protection in 1964 (93 colonies/m2). Coral biomass was higher after protection (1,505 g/m2) than before (1990: 809 g/m2, 1964: 302 g/m2). Coral height, weight, apex number and basal diameter were all similar after protection in 2012 and before in 1955, but weight and basal diameter were higher in 2012 than before protection in 1990 (see paper for details). In 1999, an area was designated as a protected area. In 2012, coral samples were collected at 12 locations, from three 400 cm2 surfaces at each location (total of 36 replicates, 368 colonies collected). Data were compared with those collected in two previous studies published in 1965 and 1993. For the 1965 study, forty location were visited, with coral samples collected from 14, and for the 1993 study, four of those 14 locations were resampled. Overall coral metrics from each sampling year were compared.
Study and other actions testedA replicated, site comparison study in 2007–2010 in five coral reef sites in the Red Sea off Egypt (Branchini et al. 2015) found that in protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection and also introduced mooring buoys for dive boats, a biodiversity index (which included corals) was higher in two of three protected areas compared to one of two unprotected areas. There was no difference between sites in other comparisons (data reported as statistical model results). For fire corals Millepora sp., frequency of sightings increased over time in one protected area (2007: 85% of surveys, 2010: 90%). Other coral species did not show trends over time (data reported as statistical model results). Three protected areas in Sharm el-Sheikh where commercial and sport fishing were prohibited and two unprotected areas were selected. In 2007–2010, over 7,000 volunteer divers carried out surveys at 100 locations across the five sites (17,900 surveys, 14,500 hours of survey time). Divers completed a questionnaire where they recorded species that they had seen (14 named coral species and option to report other corals) and estimated the number of individuals. Volunteer surveys were validated against surveys carried out by experts.
Study and other actions testedA replicated, site comparison study in 2012 at 41 coral reef sites in the Whitsunday Islands, Australia (Lamb et al. 2015) found that protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection had similar coral cover, but higher prevalence of coral disease and damage compared to areas that did not limit those fishing activities. Coral cover was similar in sites that limited hook and line fishing and prohibited spear fishing and collecting (23%) compared to areas that did not restrict those activities (25%). Coral disease prevalence was higher in sites with more restrictions (5%) than in sites with fewer restrictions (3%). The lowest disease prevalence was in sites that prohibited all fishing (1%). Coral damage was also higher in sites with more restrictions (4%) than in sites with fewer restrictions (2%). In October and November 2012, surveys were conducted at nine fished sites that limited the amount of hook and line fishing and prohibited spear fishing and collecting (27 transects) and 11 fished sites that allowed hook and line fishing, spear fishing, and collecting (33 transects). In addition, 21 sites where all fishing was prohibited (63 transects) were also surveyed. Surveys were conducted along 15 × 2 m belt transects.
Study and other actions testedA before-and-after study in 1998–2011 at two sites containing deep sea cold-water coral mounds west of Scotland, UK (Huvenne et al. 2016) found that after designating a Marine Protected Area that prohibited some fishing and collecting there was no change in coral Lophelia pertusa and Madrepora oculate cover at one site and a disappearance of most corals at the other site. At one site coral cover was similar eight years after protection was established (47%) compared to 3–5 years before protection (55%). At the other site, cover was 0% eight years after protection compared to 45% in the 3–5 years before protection. Video data after protection found a few cases of coral regrowth but no evidence of coral recolonisation from larval settlement. In addition, there was a significant reduction of trawling after protection compared to before, particularly at the site where all corals were lost (data presented graphically). In 2003, an area containing deep sea cold-water coral mounds was closed to bottom trawling and designated as a permanent protected area in 2004. Video and sonar surveys were conducted in 1998–2000 (3–5 years prior to protection), and follow up surveys were carried out in 2011, eight years after initial fishery closures. The proportion of survey trips that travelled over live coral and presence of trawling scars were recorded.
Study and other actions testedA replicated, site comparison study [year not specified] at 14 areas of coralligenous habitat off western Italy (Piazzi et al. 2016) found that protected areas that prohibited some fishing and collection had similar community assemblages (including corals) compared to unprotected areas but showed different patterns of spatial variability. Average invertebrate cover (including corals) was 6% in protected areas and 4% in unprotected areas (result not tested for statistical significance). Overall, community assemblages were similar in protected areas and unprotected areas, but communities in protected and unprotected areas varied at different spatial scales (data reported as statistical model results). Protected areas had higher variation at the smallest spatial scale (individual survey plots) than unprotected areas, but lower variation at the largest spatial scale (the study areas) than unprotected areas (reported as pseudo-variance). Variation in the abundance of each species was also dependent on the spatial scale considered. Seven Marine Protected Areas and seven unprotected areas were chosen (10s of km apart), with two sites/area and three 10 m2 locations/site selected for sampling. Ten survey plots/location (40 × 50 cm plots) were randomly sampled in June and July using photographs (60 images/protected or unprotected area) to assess cover by different species (including corals).
Study and other actions testedA replicated, site comparison study in 2009–2013 in 16 coral reef sites along the Belize Barrier Reef, Belize (Cox et al. 2017) found that protected areas that prohibited some types of fishing had similar coral cover as unprotected areas and areas prohibiting all types of fishing. Coral cover was similar in areas with some fishing restrictions (18%), unprotected areas (21%) and fully protected areas (20%). In addition, cover was similar across different enforcement levels (good: 21%, moderate: 15%, inadequate: 19%, absent: 20%) and did not change due to time since protection started (see paper for details). Four sites were selected with some restrictions (limited fishing licenses and banned use of traps, nets and longlines), four with no protection (although fishing of herbivorous fish and Nassau groupers Epinephelus striatus was restricted at all sites), and four that were fully protected (only non-extractive activities allowed). Each site was monitored in May and June in 2009, 2010, 2012, and 2013 via six 10 m transects, spaced around 10 m apart. Coral cover was recorded, and corals were identified to species level.
Study and other actions testedA replicated, before-and-after study in 2007–2016 at four sites in Lyme Bay, UK (Kaiser et al. 2018) found that after a protected area that prohibited all towed fishing gear was established, abundance of one soft coral species Alcyonium digitatum increased over 8–10 years and abundance of another Eunicella verrucosa did not change. In 2016, A. digitatum abundance was higher than in 2007 (before protection) at a site that had previously been unprotected and dredged (after: 45 individuals/100 m2, before: 1 individual/100 m2) and a site that had previously been unprotected but not dredged (after: 27 individuals/100 m2, before: 6 individual/100 m2). A. digitatum abundance remained similar over time in two sites that had been voluntarily protected in 2006 (2016: 24–57 individuals/100 m2; 2007: 7–21 individuals/100 m2). Abundance of E. verrucosa remained similar over time at all sites (2016: 13–62 individual/100 m2, 2007: 4–28 individual/100 m2). Authors also report that by 2016, individual A. digitatum were larger in both sites that were unprotected in 2007, and that E. verrucosa was larger at one of two sites that were unprotected in 2007 (see paper for details). In 2008, a protected area was established that covered four sites and all towed fishing gear was prohibited. Two of the sites had been voluntarily protected with the same restrictions since 2006. In 2007, five locations within each site were surveyed: one site that had previously been dredged and one that had not. Follow up surveys were carried out in 2016. Previous fishing effort was estimated from tracks of five dredging vessels between 2000–2006. Coral cover was assessed using video footage, with cameras towed for around 10 minutes at 0.5 knots.
Study and other actions testedA replicated, site comparison study over six years [years unknown] from 56 sites spanning six years along the Great Southern Reef off Australia (Turnbull et al. 2021) found that in protected areas that prohibited some types of fishing and collection, diversity and cover of sessile invertebrate (reported as “sponges, soft corals, ascidians, etc.”) was lower compared to unprotected areas. See original paper for data. In addition, protected areas where all fishing and collecting was prohibited had similar diversity and cover of sessile invertebrates than unprotected areas. Sites either restricted some types of fishing (18 sites in 11 areas, with a range of different restrictions; see paper for details), fully restricted all fishing and collecting (19 sites in 10 areas) or were outside of a protected area (19 sites). Using data from an online database, a total of 1,971 photo quadrats (33% from partially protected, 46% from fully protected, 21% from unprotected areas) taken along 50 m transects were used to quantify diversity and cover of sessile invertebrates using the Collaborative and Annotation Tools for Analysis of Marine Imagery.
Study and other actions tested
Where has this evidence come from?
List of journals searched by synopsis
All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:
Coral Conservation
Coral Conservation - Published 2024
Coral synopsis