海洋荒野价值评估:代表性海洋保护区与生物多样性恢复的感知价值

R. Craig
{"title":"海洋荒野价值评估:代表性海洋保护区与生物多样性恢复的感知价值","authors":"R. Craig","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.922504","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although the political will to protect areas of the ocean in marine protected areas lagged far behind governments' willingness to protect ecologically or culturally important terrestrial areas, marine protected areas and systems of marine protected areas have emerged into the political agendas of governments throughout the world, including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States, and, as of June 2003, the European Union. However, the creation of marine protected areas and systems of MPAs requires countries to sacrifice potentially beneficial uses of those areas, such as fishing and mineral extraction. Creation of MPAs and systems of MPAs thus involve political choices and policy promotion, and a country's choice of legal vehicle and political priorities can suggest implications regarding the eventual scientific and ecological success of its national system of MPAs. This paper examines the legal and political rhetoric that three countries - the United States, Canada, and Australia - have used to justify their national systems of MPAs and explores the potential ramifications of that rhetoric and the policy chooices behind it for the scientific and ecological success of each of their systems. Because each system is relatively new, measurements of success may have to wat for several years. Nevertheless, some distinctions are already striking. The United States, for example, is pursuing its national systems of MPAs based on a non-binding legal policy to promote economic goals, suggesting that the scientific and ecological value of its system will readily fall victim to changing political priorities and national pressures. Canada, in contrast, has put in place substantial national culture and national pride policies that will serve to reinforce its bioidiversity goals for its system of national marine conservation areas. Finally, Australia has committed fully to the protection of marine biodiversity for biodiversity's sake, suggesting that its national system of MPAs, as has already been evidenced in the history of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, will enjoy considerable scientific validity.","PeriodicalId":403334,"journal":{"name":"EcoRN: Conservation Ecology (Topic)","volume":"31 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2006-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Valuing Marine Wilderness: Representative Marine Protected Areas and the Perceived Value of Biodiversity Restoration\",\"authors\":\"R. Craig\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.922504\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although the political will to protect areas of the ocean in marine protected areas lagged far behind governments' willingness to protect ecologically or culturally important terrestrial areas, marine protected areas and systems of marine protected areas have emerged into the political agendas of governments throughout the world, including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States, and, as of June 2003, the European Union. However, the creation of marine protected areas and systems of MPAs requires countries to sacrifice potentially beneficial uses of those areas, such as fishing and mineral extraction. Creation of MPAs and systems of MPAs thus involve political choices and policy promotion, and a country's choice of legal vehicle and political priorities can suggest implications regarding the eventual scientific and ecological success of its national system of MPAs. This paper examines the legal and political rhetoric that three countries - the United States, Canada, and Australia - have used to justify their national systems of MPAs and explores the potential ramifications of that rhetoric and the policy chooices behind it for the scientific and ecological success of each of their systems. Because each system is relatively new, measurements of success may have to wat for several years. Nevertheless, some distinctions are already striking. The United States, for example, is pursuing its national systems of MPAs based on a non-binding legal policy to promote economic goals, suggesting that the scientific and ecological value of its system will readily fall victim to changing political priorities and national pressures. Canada, in contrast, has put in place substantial national culture and national pride policies that will serve to reinforce its bioidiversity goals for its system of national marine conservation areas. Finally, Australia has committed fully to the protection of marine biodiversity for biodiversity's sake, suggesting that its national system of MPAs, as has already been evidenced in the history of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, will enjoy considerable scientific validity.\",\"PeriodicalId\":403334,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"EcoRN: Conservation Ecology (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"31 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2006-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"EcoRN: Conservation Ecology (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.922504\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EcoRN: Conservation Ecology (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.922504","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管在海洋保护区保护海洋区域的政治意愿远远落后于政府保护具有重要生态或文化意义的陆地区域的意愿,但海洋保护区和海洋保护区系统已经出现在世界各国政府的政治议程中,包括澳大利亚、加拿大、新西兰、美国,并于2003年6月加入欧盟。然而,建立海洋保护区和海洋保护区系统要求各国牺牲这些地区的潜在有益用途,例如捕鱼和矿物开采。因此,海洋保护区和海洋保护区系统的建立涉及政治选择和政策促进,一个国家对法律手段和政治优先事项的选择可能对其国家海洋保护区系统的最终科学和生态成功产生影响。本文考察了三个国家——美国、加拿大和澳大利亚——用来证明其国家海洋保护区制度合理性的法律和政治辞令,并探讨了这些辞令的潜在后果及其背后的政策选择,以促进各自制度在科学和生态方面的成功。因为每个系统都是相对较新的,衡量成功的标准可能需要几年的时间。然而,一些区别已经很明显了。例如,美国正在推行其国家海洋保护区制度,其基础是一项不具约束力的法律政策,以促进经济目标,这表明其制度的科学和生态价值很容易成为不断变化的政治优先事项和国家压力的牺牲品。相比之下,加拿大制定了大量的民族文化和民族自豪感政策,这些政策将有助于加强其国家海洋保护区系统的生物多样性目标。最后,澳大利亚已充分承诺为保护海洋生物多样性而保护海洋生物多样性,这表明,正如大堡礁海洋公园的历史所证明的那样,其国家海洋保护区系统将具有相当大的科学有效性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Valuing Marine Wilderness: Representative Marine Protected Areas and the Perceived Value of Biodiversity Restoration
Although the political will to protect areas of the ocean in marine protected areas lagged far behind governments' willingness to protect ecologically or culturally important terrestrial areas, marine protected areas and systems of marine protected areas have emerged into the political agendas of governments throughout the world, including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United States, and, as of June 2003, the European Union. However, the creation of marine protected areas and systems of MPAs requires countries to sacrifice potentially beneficial uses of those areas, such as fishing and mineral extraction. Creation of MPAs and systems of MPAs thus involve political choices and policy promotion, and a country's choice of legal vehicle and political priorities can suggest implications regarding the eventual scientific and ecological success of its national system of MPAs. This paper examines the legal and political rhetoric that three countries - the United States, Canada, and Australia - have used to justify their national systems of MPAs and explores the potential ramifications of that rhetoric and the policy chooices behind it for the scientific and ecological success of each of their systems. Because each system is relatively new, measurements of success may have to wat for several years. Nevertheless, some distinctions are already striking. The United States, for example, is pursuing its national systems of MPAs based on a non-binding legal policy to promote economic goals, suggesting that the scientific and ecological value of its system will readily fall victim to changing political priorities and national pressures. Canada, in contrast, has put in place substantial national culture and national pride policies that will serve to reinforce its bioidiversity goals for its system of national marine conservation areas. Finally, Australia has committed fully to the protection of marine biodiversity for biodiversity's sake, suggesting that its national system of MPAs, as has already been evidenced in the history of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park, will enjoy considerable scientific validity.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信