Explore the vast range of titles available.

To conserve global biodiversity, countries must forge equitable alliances that support sustainability in traditional pastoral lands, fisheries-management areas, Indigenous territories and more. To conserve global biodiversity, countries must forge equitable alliances that support sustainability in traditional pastoral lands, fisheries-management areas, Indigenous territories and more.

Historically, communities persisted in remote, isolated areas of Alaska in large part because of the abundance of marine and terrestrial resources, as well as the ability of local people to opportunistically access those resources as they became available. Species switching and the ability to shift effort away from fisheries during poor years allowed local residents to diversify their livelihoods in the face of uncertainties and ecological change. The advent of modern fisheries management, which views Alaskan fisheries as the property of all citizens of the United States, has fundamentally altered the relationship of place-based communities to fishery resources. Local access to fisheries has been particularly affected by the development of transferable fishing privileges, making it possible for fishing rights to leave place-based communities through the choices of individual community members to sell or to move away. When fishing communities in Alaska lose active fishing businesses, over time the loss of various types of community capital will follow, including human, social, cultural, technical, and financial capital. In some cases, communities are able to adapt or transform through diversification of their local economies. In other cases, no alternatives to a fishery-based economy are accessible. We have used resilience theory to explore drivers of change affecting Alaskan fishing communities. Emphasis was placed on two primary change drivers, the regulatory environment and rural out-migration, as well as their interconnections and their impacts on individuals, communities, and the larger social-ecological system. We summarized several government programs that have been implemented to support the continued participation of communities in Alaskan fisheries. In addition, we reviewed informal and private-sector efforts to generate resilience strategies that can facilitate new entry into fisheries or retain fishing businesses and fishing rights within communities, as well as respond to increasing uncertainty related to the global market and climate changes.

Mangroves, seagrass meadows, and salt marshes, collectively termed “Blue Forests”, are counted among the most valuable and productive coastal ecosystems on the planet. A recent literature review of the Blue Forest valuation research identified mangroves as the most frequently analyzed of these ecosystems, yet the literature demonstrates several deficits in terms of geographic location of studies, methods used to value the services, and most notably, a lack of valuation for cultural services. To better understand this, we analyzed the studies dealing specifically with mangroves from the original literature review to quantify what has been valued, where, by which methods, and the variation in the published values. We then use this information to synthesize our current level of knowledge on the type and value of services provided by mangroves, discuss data gaps, and address specifically the collection of data relevant to cultural ecosystem services (CES). Our results shed light on two principle issues affecting the mangrove valuation literature: overuse of benefit transfer in valuing mangrove ecosystem services and a lack of attention paid to the CES that mangroves provide. The mangrove valuation literature is not yet robust, lacking estimates of many ecosystem services, including CES, such as spiritual and aesthetic value. Most published studies focus on a small selection of ecosystem services based on the availability of benefit transfer values and the ability to easily measure values with market prices. Thus, many ecosystem services that cannot be valued monetarily, but that are often equally important to local communities, are ignored. Given the wide range of ecosystem services mangroves provide and the variety of valuation methods that need to be collectively employed, we argue that doing valuation studies well requires a multi-disciplinary approach, bringing together anthropologists, social scientists, ecologists and economists. Thoughtfully and thoroughly including the local stakeholders in valuation studies and the resultant policy discussions leads to a more holistic understanding of the services mangroves provide, and viable solutions with an increase in local willingness to act in accordance with those solutions.

Alongside government driven management initiatives to achieve sustainable fisheries management, there remains a role for market-based mechanisms to improve fisheries outcomes. Market-based mechanisms are intended to create positive economic incentives that improve the status and management of fisheries. Research to understand consumer demand for certified fish is central but needs to be mirrored by supply side understanding including why fisheries decide to gain or retain certification and the impact of certification on them and other stakeholders involved. We apply semi-structured interviews in seven different Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certified fisheries that operate in (or from) Western Australia with the aim of better understanding fisheries sector participation in certification schemes (the supply side) and the impacts and unintended benefits and costs of certification. We find that any positive economic impacts of certification were only realised in a limited number of MSC fisheries in Western Australia, which may be explained by the fact that only a small proportion of Western Australian state-managed fisheries are sold with the MSC label and ex-vessel or consumer market price premiums are therefore mostly not obtained. Positive impacts of certification in these Western Australian fisheries are more of a social and institutional nature, for example, greater social acceptability and increased efficiency in the governance process respectively. However, opinion is divided on whether the combined non-monetary and monetary benefits outweigh the costs.

Planning of marine areas has spread widely over the past two decades to support sustainable ocean management and governance. However, to succeed in a changing ocean, marine spatial planning (MSP) must be ‘climate-smart’— integrating climate-related knowledge, being flexible to changing conditions, and supporting climate actions. While the need for climate-smart MSP has been globally recognized, at a practical level, marine managers and planners require further guidance on how to put it into action. Here, we suggest ten key components that, if well-integrated, would promote the development and implementation of sustainable, equitable, climate-smart MSP initiatives around the globe.

The ‘Other Effective Area-based Conservation Measure’ (OECM) concept was first introduced in 2010, by the Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD COP) in the CBD Strategic Plan for Biodiversity conservation 2011–2020. The concept acknowledged that a range of spatial measures other than protected areas were appropriate for reaching Aichi Target 11 spatial conservation coverage. The OECM definition was adopted in 2018 in CBD COP Decision 14/8, which calls on States to mainstream OECMs into economic sectors, to recognize the current biodiversity conservation benefits and co-benefits from their area-based management measures and enhance them as much as possible. In the marine capture fisheries sector, the identification of OECMs is a work in progress and the issues addressed in this paper are key implementation issues that States and fisheries authorities are or will be encountering regarding their governance, management, and biodiversity outcomes. The purpose of the paper is to draw attention to some key OECM implementation issues arising in marine capture fisheries and to suggest possible approaches to address them. The governance issues addressed relate to enabling frameworks, industrial fisheries, legitimate authorities, long-term commitments, cross-sectoral coordination and planning, and contribution to the Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework of the CBD. The management issues considered relate to effectiveness in achieving expected outcomes, costs and benefits of OECMs, spatial relations between OECMs and fisheries, and the role of OECMs in the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries (EAF). Regarding the significant positive biodiversity outcomes expected from OECMs, issues relate to the type of outcomes expected, their current or intended nature, the level of evidence required, and their relationship to area-based conservation standards.

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233237.].[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0233237.].

This paper contrasts seven spatial biodiversity conservation area designations by six different bodies: Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs), and the Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); the Vulnerable Marine Ecosystems (VMEs) of the Food And Agriculture Organization (FAO); the Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) under criteria developed by the IUCN; the Areas of Particular Environmental Interest (APEIs) of the International Seabed Authority (ISA); the Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs) of the International Maritime Organization (IMO); and the Locally Managed Marine Areas (LMMAs) used by small island States in the Pacific Ocean; on five themes: biological and ecological features, functions served by areas receiving these labels, governance, threats and pressures, and other considerations. The seven different labels for such areas were generally similar in the biologically and ecological criteria to be met, and the functions typically served by these areas. Differences among the labels increased when considering governance, threat and pressures, and other considerations. Implications of these similarities and differences for policy development and outcomes are discussed. Performance reviews of the various labels under these themes could provide insight into both the effectiveness of the provisions in the Agreements and Decisions and how evidence is acquired and used to inform their application, allowing improvements to each approach to learn from experiences with other labels.

The Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) eco-labeling program provides fisheries a pathway to demonstrate their sustainability by undergoing an environmental certification. Like other standard-setters, the MSC’s ‘theory of change’ presumes that markets use this information to select for sustainable products, providing an incentive for producers to improve their practices and become certified. However, the underlying mechanisms which actually work to link market behavior and participation in the program in different contexts have not been systematically identified. We draw on broad MSC field experience to identify processes that have supported the theory of change in individual fisheries. Then, we develop a broadly applicable rapid assessment protocol, relying on a semi-structured interviews of key informants, to gather systematic evidence for key dynamics within the theory of change: the effects of going through MSC certification on market processes, partnerships in the fishery, and governance. In a pilot test of the protocol, we identify important common and idiosyncratic processes in three canned product fisheries: United States west coast albacore tuna, Brittany sardines, and Portuguese sardines. We find that the harvesters and buyers/processors in these fisheries sought certification primarily to expand or maintain their market share, and that certification was synergistic with stakeholder cooperation. The cases demonstrate how our rapid assessment interviews allow program participants to relate their experience in their own words yet facilitate systematic comparison to identify common mechanisms within the theory of change. We propose its wider application to systematically advance our understanding of social and economic processes that drive of eco-label interventions in different geographies and supply chains around the world.

Global commitments to conservation and sustainable development increasingly demand sensitivity to the rights and territories of Indigenous peoples and local communities. However, existing tenure systems are often overlooked by global actors and their initiatives. Using key informant surveys, literature, and established databases, we describe 62 distinct tenure systems (or place-based, governance relationships between people and coasts) across 24 countries. In all systems, people held rights to access and use aquatic resources to support healthy diets, livelihoods, and culture. The three collective-choice rights (i.e., management, exclusion, transferability) were present in 29% of systems – suggesting conditions sufficient for “self-governance”. People gained or held rights due to their residency (in 63% of systems); through historical use (52%), permits (35%), and/or kinship (29%). Our synthesis provides an opportunity for policy and action to recognize these systems of tenure, and to stimulate further actions that illuminate and recognize the rights of communities toward their sovereignty.