|Variable Component Type||Governance System|
|Theme||Institutional-biophysical linkage (learn about themes)|
|Question||Were the ecological principles of Comprehensive, Adequate, Representative considered in the design of this MPA?|
|Select Options||1 No, 2 Partially, 3 Yes|
|Importance||Comprehensive, Adequate, and Representative (CAR) are three key principles from the conservation planning literature that broadly determine what it is that a reserve should protect. The goal of the CAR principles is to find a system of reserves that comprehensively captures viable representatives of all biodiversity features. The CAR principles serve to inform the design of a resilient MPA that reflects available data and knowledge of the biodiversity of the region. (see Beaver & Llewellyn 2009 or http://www.uq.edu.au/marxan/tutorial/module1.html for further information)|
Comprehensive: refers to an aim to capture the full range of biodiversity (both typical and atypical) within an MPA, taking into consideration biodiversity composition, structure and function and evolutionary processes. A reserve system is most comprehensive if it contains examples of as many elements of biodiversity as possible (Possingham et al. 2005).
Adequate: refers to a MPA/network’s ability to play a role in the long term protection of biodiversity within a given bioregion – it builds on the comprehensiveness principle – but with the goal not to just capture biodiversity, but to promote its persistence (long-term viability)
Representative: requires MPAs to capture biodiversity that is representative of their surroundings (i.e. protection covers the range of variation in that chosen species and/or habitat). The selection of such areas should also take into consideration any communities/species that are rare, endangered or unique.
Partially: consideration was given to the CAR principles in the design of the MPA but their application was compromised, either through size, shape (some features bisected), or insufficient management or protection.
No: the CAR principles were not considered in the design of the MPA (i.e. little or no consideration was given to the size and/or shape of the sites, and/or entire features are not sufficiently protected).
|Sectors||Marine protected areas|
|CAR principles for conservation area design||Yes|
|GBR Marine Park Act 1975-1999||Yes (3)|
|GBR Marine Park Act 2004-current||Yes (3)||Representative Areas Program specifically used these principles to re-zone the GBR|
|Wakatobi National Park 2008-current||Partially (2)||The WNP is considered to adhere to two of the required criteria (based on documentation to the Coral Triangle Atlas) Representation and Replication are cited, with the WNP including at least 396 coral species and 572 fish species (Rapid Ecological Assessment, 2003). And No take zones were designated in each main group of islands. Coded as 'partially' as awareness of the principles in the zoning is evident, but the extent to which they were applied is unclear. Ref: CTMPAs Wakatobi National Park information requirements|
|NWHI Monument Act 2006||Yes (3)||Fulfills all the principles, although not explicitly stated|
|Raja Ampat Governance System||Yes (3)||Yes - the ecological prinicples were fully considered, including the use of Marxan, expert mapping and the wide variety of surveys (see Agostini et al 2012).|
|Joint Sanctuary Management Governance System||Yes (3)||Multiple ecosystems, depths, and habitat types are included in the sanctuaries. The Sanctuaries specify protecting and researching rocky shores, kelp forests, beaches, continental shelf habitats, sandy floor, estuaries, seamounts and banks, submarine canyons, rocks and islands, deep sea habitats, and the open ocean. In 2015, the Cordell Bank and Gulf of the Farallones NMSs were expanded to protect more ecologically critical habitats. The three sanctuaries are bordering to enhance protection of these habitats.|
|Svalbard Environmental Protection Act||No (1)||These reserves were created in 1973, before these principles had become commonplace.|
|Seaflower MPA Act 2005||Partially (2)||I am not sure if the creation of this MPA followed these principles or not. They were not mentioned in the literature as such. However, based on the variables Mpa Comprehensiviness and Mpa Representativeness I would imagine that it was pretty close to this principle. That is why I selected Partially as my answer.|
|Galapagos Governance System 1998-current||Partially (2)||The CDF proposed a zoning scheme to represent all habitats and biogeographic regions of the archipelago in the two categories of no-take zone, (mainly focusing on inshore areas). But the final zoning plan was not based as much on scientific evidence, but instead it focussed on consensus between fishing and tourism sectors|
|Macquarie Island Marine Park Management Plan||Yes (3)|
|GABMP (Commonwealth Waters) Plan of Management 2000 - 2005 and Management Plan 2005 - 2012||Partially (2)||CAR principles are well recognised in Australia and have been talked about regarding the GAB. However, in reality when this MPA was designated there was not enough knoweldge to know if the MPA was fulfilling these principles, so coded as partially. At the national level the goal of a "Comprehensive, Adequate and Representative System of Reserves" for Australia is endorsed by the Commonwealth and State and Territory Governments and the Australian Guidelines for Establishing the National Reserve System include information on processes used to work towards a comprehensive, adequate and representative system of reserves (Commonwealth of Australia, 1999). Although, there was a lack of information on the benthic communities of the GAB region at the time of the establishment of the GABMP (CW) and the location of the BPZ was not based on quantitative ecological data.|
|Heard and McDonald Islands Marine Reserve Management Plan||Yes (3)||These were the foundational principles used in citing this MPA.|
|Heard Island and McDonald Islands Fishery Management Plan||Not Applicable|
|Cenderwasih governance system||Partially (2)||50% of critical habitats (mangroves, coral reefs, seagrass beds, where nesting, fish spawning sites) designed to be the no take zone|
Basic:A basic variable describes essential and basic background information for a component.
Biophysical:Biophysical variables describe just that: important biophysical properties, largely of environmental commons, that are not captured by a more specific theme.
Causation:A variable with this theme describes issues of causality, which is a complex subject. Most basically this theme is associated with variables that describe different types of causation and different types of causes of environmental problems.
Context:contextual variable relates the component with which it associated to the social and/or ecological setting of a particular interaction and/or case.
Ecosystem services:Variables associated with this theme describe factors that affect or describe the provision of important ecosystem services by a natural resource.
Enforcement:Enforcement involves several different processes, including monitoring for violations of rules, sanctioning violators, and conflict resolution mechanisms involved in this process. Variables that relate to any of these processes should be attached to this theme.
External:Variables with this theme relate a component to processes external to the case with which the component is associated.
Heterogeneity:Variables with this theme describe important ways in which the member of an actor group differ from each other.
Incentives: This theme is associated with variables that are not directly related to institutions and rules, but which still play a role in affecting the incentives that commons users have to ameliorate or exacerbate the commons they use.
Institutional-biophysical linkage:This is a sub-theme of the institutions theme, and describes those variables that ask about the relationship between a set of institutions and a biophysical aspect of a commons.
Institutions:Variables with this theme describe the social institutions (rules, property rights) that are used to organize and direct human behavior. It does not include monitoring and enforcement of these institutions, as these are associated with the Enforcement theme.
Knowledge and uncertainty:Variables with this theme describe levels of knowledge that actor groups have regarding a commons, as well as factors that affect how much uncertainty there is in the status and dynamics of that commons.
Leadership:Leaders play an important role in commons management, most traditionally by providing for public goods needed to organize commons users. But there are other possible roles, and variables associated with this theme can relate to any role that a leader might play in an interaction.
Outcomes:This theme is attached to variables that deal with any outcomes that are produced by the actions of relevant actors in an interaction.
Resource renewability:Variables associated with this theme deal with the ability of a natural resource to be highly productive and renewable.
Social capital:Social capital captures the processes that enable the members of an actor group to work effectively together. Variables associated with this theme describe factors that affect or in some way express the level of social capital among members of a group.
Spatial:Variables associated with the Spatial theme describe important spatial patterns or dynamics, such as the spatial heterogeneity of a commons, or whether or not a user group resides within a particular commons.
Technology:This theme is attached to variables that consider the role that technology and infrastructure have in affecting commons outcomes.