Peter J.S. Jones

Fish, human health and marine ecosystem health: policies in collision

BACKGROUND Health recommendations advocating increased fish consumption need to be placed in the context of the potential collapse of global marine capture fisheries. METHODS Literature overview. RESULTS In economically developed countries, official healthy eating advice is to eat more fish, particularly that rich in omega-3 oils. In many less economically developed countries, fish is a key human health asset, contributing >20% of animal protein intake for 2.6 billion people. Marine ecologists predict on current trends that fish stocks are set to collapse in 40 years, and propose increased restrictions on fishing, including no-take zones, in order to restore marine ecosystem health. Production of fishmeal for aquaculture and other non-food uses (22 MT in 2003) appears to be unsustainable. Differences in fish consumption probably contribute to within-country and international health inequalities. Such inequalities are likely to increase if fish stocks continue to decline, while increasing demand for fish will accelerate declines in fish stocks and the health of marine ecosystems. CONCLUSIONS Urgent national and international action is necessary to address the tensions arising from increasing human demand for fish and seafood, and rapidly declining marine ecosystem health.

Point-of-View: Arguments for conventional fisheries management and against no-take marine protected areas: only half of the story?

Recent arguments for conventional fisheries management approaches (CFMAs) and against no-take marine protected areas (NTMPAs) are reviewed, i.e. CFMAs are more effective, density-dependent factors will lead to reduced fish stock production in and around NTMPAs, rights-based approaches in combination with CFMAs will be more effective, and natural refuges from fishing already exist. It is concluded that these are largely valid but only from a fisheries management perspective. The arguments of proponents of NTMPAs and those of proponents of CFMAs are considered as contrasting storylines, the divergences between which are based on two key factors: different objectives and different science. In relation to different objectives, it is concluded that the arguments against NTMPAs based on their lack of fisheries management benefits must be considered as only applying to the secondary resource conservation objectives of such designations and not to the primary marine biodiversity conservation objectives. On this basis it is argued that it is counter-productive for NTMPAs to be ‘sold’ on a win–win basis, including their potential to deliver fisheries management benefits, as this detracts from their marine biodiversity conservation objectives and leaves such calls open to arguments that CFMAs are better able to deliver fisheries management objectives. In relation to different science, it is concluded that criticisms of NTMPAs and support for CFMAs implicitly resist the shift from Mode 1 (reductive, intra-disciplinary) to Mode 2 (holistic, trans-disciplinary) science that is inherent in calls for NTMPAs as part of an ecosystem approach. Mode 2 science attempts to accommodate both uncertainty and wider societal values and preferences, and it is argued that arguments for NTMPAs should be more explicitly focussed on this potential. It is difficult, if not impossible and inappropriate, to extend the reductive approach inherent in CFMA analyses to encompass the broader ethical and scientific concerns for the health of marine ecosystems and their component populations and habitats that arguments for NTMPAs reflect. NTMPA proponents might focus on stressing that arguments against such designations and in favour of CFMAs do not encompass such valid concerns, therefore they tell only half of the story.

Marine Protected Areas and the Governance of Marine Ecosystems and Fisheries

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are spatially defined marine units in which one or more human activities—particularly fishing—are restricted or prohibited. They represent a precautionary and ecosystem-based approach to ocean management (Mangel 2000; Pikitch et al. 2004; Jones 2006). The 1992 Convention for Biological Diversity set a target for 10% of the global marine area to be designated as MPAs by 2010. Progress with designating MPAs is, however, slow, MPAs covering just 1.3% of the marine area and 3.2% of marine areas under national jurisdiction. Consequently, the deadline was recently extended to 2020. Nonetheless, in the past two decades there has been a rapid increase in MPA research and implementation throughout the world. If the governance of MPAs is improved in ways we describe here, MPAs and other place-based approaches will continue to be important tools for the management of marine resources.

Participation in coastal zone management initiatives: A review and analysis of examples from the UK

Abstract General approaches that have been developed for facilitating community participation in coastal/estuarine management initiatives in the UK are considered and their implementation reviewed. It is argued that rural communities are more willing to participate proactively in such initiatives and that their relatively close association with the natural resources in question dictates that such participation is of particular importance. Urban communities, on the other hand, are less closely associated with natural resources and are less likely to take an interest in such initiatives, whilst recreational communities, especially those that are relatively diffuse, are more likely to take a reactive role in objecting to proposed management restrictions. It is concluded that, like many aspects of local coastal management, the approaches taken to community participation should be tailored to local characteristics, and that it is difficult to define an approach that represents ‘best practice’, though general approaches to improving the management formulation process by providing for community input are being developed and more widely applied in the UK. Issues related to the balance between providing for meaningful community participation and achieving strategic management objectives are considered, as are the possible reasons why community participation has a relatively low profile in the UK.

Marine protected areas in the UK: challenges in combining top-down and bottom-up approaches to governance

This review outlines the policy frameworks for marine conservation zones (MCZs) and marine special areas of conservation (SACs), which are the main components of the emerging UK marine protected area (MPA) network. If current recommendations are implemented, the coverage of MPAs in English seas could rise to 27%. The governance challenges that this will raise are explored through case studies of MPA initiatives in south-west England. Whilst the initial processes by which MCZ recommendations have been developed provided for stakeholder participation (bottom-up), the main steer has been from central government (top-down). The subsequent designation and implementation of MCZs is likely to be more top-down. Marine SAC processes have, by contrast, been top-down from the outset. The fishing industry fears that more MPAs will lead to increasing restrictions, whilst conservationists fear that MPAs will not be sufficiently protected, potentially becoming paper MPAs. Both argue that the burden of proof should be placed on the other party. Such combinations of top-down (central government-led) and bottom-up (community and user-led) approaches and the related conflicts are typical of government-led MPAs in temperate countries that have higher governance capacities. Top-down approaches tend to dominate, but this does not mean that they cannot be combined with bottom-up approaches.

Governing protected areas to fulfil biodiversity conservation obligations: from Habermasian ideals to a more instrumental reality.

This paper considers the implications of the growing recognition of scale challenges, with a particular focus on those concerning the governance of protected areas (PAs), through a critical literature review. Two key scale challenges raised by PAs are considered: (1) the divergence of objectives between resource exploitation and biodiversity conservation; (2) the requirement to fulfil biodiversity conservation obligations. These are explored through a review of a UK marine PA case study which found that even though the state had adopted a controlling role that had created tensions by undermining the authority and livelihoods of some stakeholders, the partnership had been sufficiently strengthened to withstand these tensions through the instrumental development of ‘bracing social capital’. Four conclusions for governance research with a particular reference to PA governance are drawn, and it is argued that presumptions based on Habermasian ideals should not constrain governance analyses, in that they should constructively incorporate the instrumental roles of the state.

Shellfishing, Eider Ducks, and Nature Conservation on the Wash: Questions Raised by a Fractured Partnership

This article examines the state of current approaches to the governance of common pool resources (CPRs), the impacts of the recent emergence of the partnership paradigm, and the consequences for the management of CPRs. These issues are explored through a case study of the Wash European Marine Site partnership, where a Public Inquiry recently upheld the refusal of the conservation agency to grant mussel cultivators permission to scare eider ducks off their lays using sonic bird-scaring devices. As a result, the relationship between the conservation agency and the mussel cultivators has been severely damaged, causing a “fracturing” of the partnership. Through this case study the article explores the contradictions involved in statutory partnerships and asks if it is possible to use partnerships to empower local communities while the state remains in overall control.