Q 14 - How to assess compatibility of maritime uses and MPA conservation objectives? How to prioritize uses?

Broader “Question”

• Q 39 - What criteria are available to assess sustainability of maritime uses?

Related sites

• Western Black Sea

• Belgian part of the North Sea

Source

Matczak et al. (2024) Test Sites Methodology Including the Participation Strategy (Deliverable – D5.2., under the WP5 of MSP4BIO project (GA n° 101060707))

inside the Management questions

Answers

Operational approaches

• Trade-off for MPA Design (Trade-off for MPA Design)

• Participatory mapping (Trade-off for MPA Design)

• Trait-based Vulnerability Assessment (Trait-based Vulnerability Assessment)

ESE1 - Ecological toolkit

Practices: Scoping Data collection and presentation Analysis and diagnosis Prioritisation and designation Implementation and management Monitoring and evaluation

Spatial scales: National Regional / local

Protection regimes: Non-strict protection

Marine zones: Coastal zone Deep sea Offshore zone

Criteria classes: 1.1.1 Vulnerability

Criteria

• Category Ecological and genetic criteria

  • Subcategory Functional

    • Macro-criterion Vulnerability

Operational approaches: (Method) Trait-based Vulnerability Assessment

Implementation details

Use of the vulnerability assessment methods to identify the uses most likely to impact your conservation targets.

Notes

Cambra et al (2024). Guidance for including climate change scenarios in protection and prioritization strategies for Marine Protected Areas development. Deliverable D3.3, under the WP3 of MSP4BIO project (GA n°101060707)

ESE3 - Trade-offs method for protections and restoration in MSP

Practices: Scoping Data collection and presentation Analysis and diagnosis Prioritisation and designation Implementation and management Monitoring and evaluation

Spatial scales: National Regional / local

Protection regimes: Non-strict protection

Criteria classes: 5 Socio–economic & governance criteria

Criteria

• Category Socio–economic & governance criteria

  • Subcategory Socio–economic criteria

    • Criteria Area important because it allows access to relevant areas for the marine users.

    • Criteria Area important for locally-caught seafood

    • Criteria Area important for the generation of employment and income linked to non traditional activities

    • Criteria Area important for fishery activity

    • Criteria Area important for dredging

    • Criteria Area important because of the presence of structure with significant historical and cultural. (mo

    • Criteria Area of high scientific interest

    • Criteria Area important for educational interest

    • Criteria Area important because of the occurrence of iconic species/habitats for the local community

    • Criteria Area important for thehealth of coastal residents and/or resource users (mental health, physical hea

    • Criteria Area important due to the socio-cultural dependence of the coastal community with its environ

    • Criteria Area important to be managed due to the presence ofspatial conflicts among users

    • Criteria Area important because of the presence of cultural symbolic value

    • Criteria Area important for recreation and leisure

    • Criteria Area important because of the presence of cultural and tradition activities that support local fo

    • Criteria Area important for traditional human settlement, land-use, or sea-use which is representative of

    • Criteria Area with high scenic and/or aesthetic value

    • Criteria Area important for shipping

    • Criteria Area is important for the development of blue economy activities

    • Criteria Area with current/potential importance to explore and demonstrate approaches and management solution

  • Subcategory Governance criteria

    • Criteria Equity

    • Criteria Clear strategic plan for the development of sustainable blue economy

    • Criteria Cross-border cooperation

    • Criteria Decision making is based on best information and knowledge available

    • Criteria Strategic Environmental Assessment

    • Criteria Monitoring and evaluation

    • Criteria Instruments to ensure and guide development and implementation of marine policies

    • Criteria Sustainable fishing management

    • Criteria Climate change measures established

    • Criteria Ecosystem based management approach

    • Criteria Long term strategic adaptive management

    • Criteria Coherence management of the area

    • Criteria Stakeholder participation

Operational approaches: (Method) Trade-off for MPA Design (Method) Participatory mapping

Implementation details

Use of the Guidelines for applying trade-off methodology for MPA design (Figure 4) from Deliverable 4.3 “Trade-offs method for protection and restoration in MSP”, including all annexes.

Notes

Use of the method Trade-off for MPA Design.

Gutierrez D., Calado H., De Bruyn A., et al., (2024). Trade-offs method for protection and restoration in MSP – ESE3 (Deliverable – D4.3., under the WP4 of MSP4BIO project (GA n° 101060707)).

ESE3 - Trade-offs method for protections and restoration in MSP

Measures

ESE1 - Ecological toolkit

Practices: Analysis and diagnosis

Spatial scales: National

Protection regimes: Strict protection

Marine zones: Deep sea

Measures: Aquaculture - Artisanal Fish Farming Commitments - Code of Good Practice Aquaculture - Community-Based Contracts - Sea Garden Community Fishery - “Who is allowed to fish” - Cultural and Community  Approaches/Practices - Industrial fishery restrictions

ESE3 - Nature-inclusive operation of blue economy sectors

ESE3 - Nature-inclusive operation of blue economy sectors

Practices: Scoping Data collection and presentation Analysis and diagnosis Prioritisation and designation Implementation and management Monitoring and evaluation