{"title":"Beyond the horizon: Evidence of management deficiencies in UK offshore protected areas","authors":"T. Bridier, H. Wauchope, J. Vad","doi":"10.1016/j.marpol.2025.106741","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Management effectiveness assessments are crucial to improve the quality of Protected Areas (PA), however, offshore ecosystems suffer from a lack of accessibility and funding and are under-evaluated. As a result, the status of UK offshore protected areas is unclear. Here we evaluate how effectively these are being managed using the Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) which has never been applied to UK offshore protected areas. As bottom fishing is one of the primary threats to marine habitats and ecosystems, scores were evaluated in the context of bottom fishing restrictions. Overall, the management of the 76 UK PAs averaged 37.7 %, below global averages from previous studies. Across the four METT categories, PAs scored best in their ‘Design and Planning’; however, this did not translate into outcomes, with deficiencies in ‘Decision-making Arrangements’, ‘Delivery of PA Objectives’ and ‘Management Systems and Processes’. This raises concerns over whether these PAs are ‘paper parks’. Only larger and older PAs had significantly higher management effectiveness. Further, just 11 % of the total protected offshore area is strictly protected from bottom fishing and trawling. The deficiencies identified in this study are a result of both the original design and current management of the offshore PA network in the UK and signal the importance of solutions such as increasing integrated and adaptive management, implementing climate change and connectivity considerations and introducing buffer zones.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48427,"journal":{"name":"Marine Policy","volume":"179 ","pages":"Article 106741"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Marine Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X25001563","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Management effectiveness assessments are crucial to improve the quality of Protected Areas (PA), however, offshore ecosystems suffer from a lack of accessibility and funding and are under-evaluated. As a result, the status of UK offshore protected areas is unclear. Here we evaluate how effectively these are being managed using the Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) which has never been applied to UK offshore protected areas. As bottom fishing is one of the primary threats to marine habitats and ecosystems, scores were evaluated in the context of bottom fishing restrictions. Overall, the management of the 76 UK PAs averaged 37.7 %, below global averages from previous studies. Across the four METT categories, PAs scored best in their ‘Design and Planning’; however, this did not translate into outcomes, with deficiencies in ‘Decision-making Arrangements’, ‘Delivery of PA Objectives’ and ‘Management Systems and Processes’. This raises concerns over whether these PAs are ‘paper parks’. Only larger and older PAs had significantly higher management effectiveness. Further, just 11 % of the total protected offshore area is strictly protected from bottom fishing and trawling. The deficiencies identified in this study are a result of both the original design and current management of the offshore PA network in the UK and signal the importance of solutions such as increasing integrated and adaptive management, implementing climate change and connectivity considerations and introducing buffer zones.
期刊介绍:
Marine Policy is the leading journal of ocean policy studies. It offers researchers, analysts and policy makers a unique combination of analyses in the principal social science disciplines relevant to the formulation of marine policy. Major articles are contributed by specialists in marine affairs, including marine economists and marine resource managers, political scientists, marine scientists, international lawyers, geographers and anthropologists. Drawing on their expertise and research, the journal covers: international, regional and national marine policies; institutional arrangements for the management and regulation of marine activities, including fisheries and shipping; conflict resolution; marine pollution and environment; conservation and use of marine resources. Regular features of Marine Policy include research reports, conference reports and reports on current developments to keep readers up-to-date with the latest developments and research in ocean affairs.