Evaluating the biological effectiveness of fully and partially protected marine areas
-
Published source details
Sciberras M., Jenkins S.R., Kaiser M.J., Hawkins S.J. & Pullin A.S. (2013) Evaluating the biological effectiveness of fully and partially protected marine areas. Environmental Evidence, 2, 4.
Published source details Sciberras M., Jenkins S.R., Kaiser M.J., Hawkins S.J. & Pullin A.S. (2013) Evaluating the biological effectiveness of fully and partially protected marine areas. Environmental Evidence, 2, 4.
Actions
This study is summarised as evidence for the following.
| Action | Category | |
|---|---|---|
|
Designate a Marine Protected Area and introduce some fishing restrictions (types unspecified) Action Link |
 |
|
|
Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit all types of fishing Action Link |
|
-
Designate a Marine Protected Area and introduce some fishing restrictions (types unspecified)
A systematic review of 27 studies published before February 2011 of marine protected areas partially prohibiting fishing (restrictions unspecified) across the world (Sciberras et al. 2013) found that they had greater abundances of scallops and lobsters compared to outside where fishing was fully allowed. Average lobster abundance was 0.53 times higher, and scallop density 2.33 times higher, inside marine protected areas compared to outside. Exact species were not specified. Abundance data were not reported, but the outcome of analysis was reported as statistical model results. The selected studies compared invertebrate abundance inside and outside 25 marine protected areas with partial fishing prohibition. The abundance data were extracted and used in a meta-analysis.
(Summarised by: Anaëlle Lemasson)
-
Designate a Marine Protected Area and prohibit all types of fishing
A systematic review of 14 studies published until February 2011 of marine protected areas across the world prohibiting all types of fishing (no-take) (Sciberras et al. 2013) found that they had more lobsters (species unspecified) compared to marine protected areas only partially prohibiting fishing. Lobster abundance was on average 1.76 times higher in no-take areas compared to partially protected areas (data were not reported, but the analysis outcome was reported as statistical model results). The selected studies compared lobster abundance inside 14 no-take areas with adjacent partial fishing prohibition zones. The abundance data were extracted and used in a meta-analysis.
(Summarised by: Anaëlle Lemasson)
)_2023.JPG)
