Tradeoffs in marine reserve design: Habitat condition, representation, and socioeconomic costs

62Citations
Citations of this article
164Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

We present a novel method for designing marine reserves that trades off three important attributes of a conservation plan: habitat condition, habitat representation, and socioeconomic costs. We calculated habitat condition in four ways, using different human impacts as a proxy for condition: all impacts; impacts that cannot be managed with a reserve; land-based impacts; and climate change impacts. We demonstrate our approach in California, where three important tradeoffs emerged. First, reserve systems that have a high chance of protecting good condition habitats cost fishers less than 3.1% of their income. Second, cost to fishers can be reduced by 1/2-2/3 by triaging less than 1/3 of habitats. Finally, increasing the probability of protecting good condition habitats from 50% to 99% costs fishers an additional 1.7% of their income, with roughly 0.3% added costs for each additional 10% confidence. Knowing exactly what the cost of these tradeoffs are informs discussion and potential compromise among stakeholders involved in protected area planning worldwide. ©2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Klein, C. J., Tulloch, V. J., Halpern, B. S., Selkoe, K. A., Watts, M. E., Steinback, C., … Possingham, H. P. (2013). Tradeoffs in marine reserve design: Habitat condition, representation, and socioeconomic costs. Conservation Letters, 6(5), 324–332. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12005

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free