william crosse the marine outcomes monitoring framework

William Crosse William Crosse

The Marine Outcomes Monitoring The Marine Outcomes Monitoring Framework Framework

The Marine Outcomes Monitoring The Marine Outcomes Monitoring Framework Framework

Conservation InternationalConservation International October, 2005October, 2005

Background:Background:

• Extinction risk of marine speciesExtinction risk of marine species

• Historical assumptions applied to fishery management tools/modelsHistorical assumptions applied to fishery management tools/models• Large geographical rangesLarge geographical ranges• Vast population sizesVast population sizes• Long-distance dispersal mechanismsLong-distance dispersal mechanisms• High fecundity values – ‘High fecundity values – ‘million eggs hypothesis’million eggs hypothesis’

• Contemporary studies have challenged this view (Roberts & Hawkins, 1999, Contemporary studies have challenged this view (Roberts & Hawkins, 1999, Roberts Roberts et al, et al, 2002, Carlton 2002, Carlton et alet al, 1999 and Dulvy , 1999 and Dulvy et alet al, 2003, Edgar , 2003, Edgar et al, et al, 2005)……. 2005)…….

• ……. Marine species also possess limited ranges. Marine species also possess limited ranges

Extinction Extinction resistant? resistant?


Background:Background:• Human induced threats are depressing populationsHuman induced threats are depressing populations

• FishingFishing• Direct harvesting – Haddock (Direct harvesting – Haddock (Melanogrammus aeglefinus)Melanogrammus aeglefinus), Southern Grand Bank, Southern Grand Bank• Non-selective activity – By-catch, Beam trawling Non-selective activity – By-catch, Beam trawling • Ecosystem & trophic cascading effects – Caribbean (Jackson Ecosystem & trophic cascading effects – Caribbean (Jackson et alet al, 2000, North American Kelp , 2000, North American Kelp

forests (Steneck forests (Steneck et al, et al, 2004)2004)

• Habitat lossHabitat loss• Mangrove deforestation – Mumby Mangrove deforestation – Mumby et al et al (2003)(2003)

• PollutionPollution• Eutrophication/nutrification Eutrophication/nutrification

• Climate changeClimate change• El Nino/Southern Oscillation - Peruvian anchovy fishery collapseEl Nino/Southern Oscillation - Peruvian anchovy fishery collapse


Outcomes Definition:Outcomes Definition:

• The central focus for conservation planning should be on species and The central focus for conservation planning should be on species and the avoidance of species extinction (Brooks et al, 2004)the avoidance of species extinction (Brooks et al, 2004)

• ‘‘Bottom up, data & scientifically driven approach to establish targets Bottom up, data & scientifically driven approach to establish targets

and priorities for conservation strategiesand priorities for conservation strategies

• …….not influenced by socio-economic, political or opportunistic reasoning.not influenced by socio-economic, political or opportunistic reasoning

• …….or the use of surrogacy as representative information of species .or the use of surrogacy as representative information of species susceptible to extinctionsusceptible to extinction


Outcomes Definition:Outcomes Definition:

• Key Biodiversity Areas provide a systematic protocol for identifying and Key Biodiversity Areas provide a systematic protocol for identifying and documenting sites critical for global biodiversity conservation (Eken documenting sites critical for global biodiversity conservation (Eken et et al,al, 2004). 2004).

• Delineation of marine Key Biodiversity Areas triggered by Delineation of marine Key Biodiversity Areas triggered by irreplaceability and vulnerability species criteria (Graham Edgar: in irreplaceability and vulnerability species criteria (Graham Edgar: in progress)progress)

• Biodiversity is distributed across a continuum of scales of ecological Biodiversity is distributed across a continuum of scales of ecological organization….organization….

• ……..thus outcomes definition guides effective ..thus outcomes definition guides effective conservation planning of conservation planning of species, sites and biodiversity conservation corridorsspecies, sites and biodiversity conservation corridors


Outcomes monitoring:Outcomes monitoring:

Increasing scale of ecological organizationIncreasing scale of ecological organization

Genes Biosphere

Species

ExtinctionsExtinctionsAvoidedAvoided

Sites

AreasAreasProtectedProtected

Seascapes

CorridorsCorridorsCreatedCreated

• Outcomes Monitoring is designed to systematically measure progress Outcomes Monitoring is designed to systematically measure progress towards achieving these three broad scale outcomes targets. towards achieving these three broad scale outcomes targets.


Outcomes monitoring:Outcomes monitoring:• National, regional and global scale monitoring platform National, regional and global scale monitoring platform • Directly measures progress towards achieving conservation Directly measures progress towards achieving conservation

outcomes at species, site and corridor leveloutcomes at species, site and corridor level• Tracks the degree and direction of broad scale trends in threats and Tracks the degree and direction of broad scale trends in threats and

associated conservation action. associated conservation action. • Diagnostic monitoring of biodiversity components that provide early Diagnostic monitoring of biodiversity components that provide early

warning information for prioritization of conservation actionwarning information for prioritization of conservation action

• Why?Why? • Assessment of trends in biodiversity, threats and conservation actionAssessment of trends in biodiversity, threats and conservation action• Better assess whether investments are contributing to global, regional Better assess whether investments are contributing to global, regional

and national conservation successand national conservation success• Identifies further response mechanisms & areas needing to improve Identifies further response mechanisms & areas needing to improve

conservation actionconservation action• Provides valuable data to different audiences (donors, government, Provides valuable data to different audiences (donors, government,

industry, public)industry, public)


• Measures the results of conservation actions applied to a local contextMeasures the results of conservation actions applied to a local context• Indicators are measured at a higher level of resolution Indicators are measured at a higher level of resolution • Focus is on quantifying the cause and effect relationship between the Focus is on quantifying the cause and effect relationship between the

status of biodiversity, threats and interventions (SPR model)status of biodiversity, threats and interventions (SPR model)

• Why?Why?• Explicitly measure success levels of local conservation actions Explicitly measure success levels of local conservation actions • Experimental science based testing groundExperimental science based testing ground• Advances knowledge of intervention and strategy effectivenessAdvances knowledge of intervention and strategy effectiveness• Adaptive management – evaluate & revise the level of conservation Adaptive management – evaluate & revise the level of conservation

intervention needed to make a positive conservation impactintervention needed to make a positive conservation impact• Lessons learned – improvement of future conservation strategiesLessons learned – improvement of future conservation strategies

Intervention monitoring:Intervention monitoring:


Global Monitoring Framework:Global Monitoring Framework:

• Important in light of recent developments at the Convention of Important in light of recent developments at the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) – 2010 targetBiological Diversity (CBD) – 2010 target

• Donor and public need for quantitative assessment of biodiversity Donor and public need for quantitative assessment of biodiversity components, threats and conservation actionscomponents, threats and conservation actions

• Comparative intervention monitoring – test effectiveness through Comparative intervention monitoring – test effectiveness through experimental design of modelsexperimental design of models

• Build monitoring partnerships at local, national, regional and global Build monitoring partnerships at local, national, regional and global scalesscales


Multi-scale monitoring framework:Multi-scale monitoring framework:

Global-scaleGlobal-scale Global-scaleGlobal-scale

Regional-scaleRegional-scale

National Scale

National Scale

Intervention Scale

Intervention Scale

Intervention monitoring – Intervention monitoring – measuring specific measuring specific intervention intervention effectivenesseffectiveness

CBD reporting – CBD reporting – indicators for National indicators for National useuse

Hotspot, Eco-region, Hotspot, Eco-region, Seascape reportingSeascape reporting

Status & trends Status & trends monitoring – CBD monitoring – CBD reportingreporting

HighHigh spatial spatial extent of data, extent of data, lowlow data data resolutionresolution

LowLow spatial extent spatial extent of data, of data, highhigh data data resolutionresolution


Multi-scale framework: Collation & analysis of Multi-scale framework: Collation & analysis of monitoring information at different scales:monitoring information at different scales:

Global-scaleGlobal-scale

Regional-scaleRegional-scale Regional-scaleRegional-scale

Local ScaleLocal Scale

National-scaleNational-scale National-scaleNational-scale National-scaleNational-scale National-scaleNational-scale

Local ScaleLocal Scale Local ScaleLocal Scale Local ScaleLocal Scale Local ScaleLocal Scale Local ScaleLocal Scale Local ScaleLocal Scale Local ScaleLocal Scale





Local scale information required to measure regional and global trends is Local scale information required to measure regional and global trends is filtered up & distilled for regional and global trend analysisfiltered up & distilled for regional and global trend analysis









Analysis of broader trends guides adaptive management & identifies Analysis of broader trends guides adaptive management & identifies conservation priorities at finer monitoring scalesconservation priorities at finer monitoring scales









Information filterInformation filter


Analysis of broader trends guides adaptive management & identifies Analysis of broader trends guides adaptive management & identifies conservation priorities at finer monitoring scalesconservation priorities at finer monitoring scales






Challenges in scaling up monitoringChallenges in scaling up monitoring::

• Spatial and temporal standardization of SPR variables that need Spatial and temporal standardization of SPR variables that need measurementmeasurement

• Consistency in methodologies and sampling strategies applied for Consistency in methodologies and sampling strategies applied for data collectiondata collection

• Identify appropriate avenues for communication flow between Identify appropriate avenues for communication flow between different scales and among NGOs, governments, academic different scales and among NGOs, governments, academic institutions and local stakeholdersinstitutions and local stakeholders

• Harmonization of data analysis and representationHarmonization of data analysis and representation


Challenges in applying a biome neutral approach Challenges in applying a biome neutral approach to outcomes monitoringto outcomes monitoring::

• Deficiency in marine species dataDeficiency in marine species data

• Lack of knowledge of species population information and conservation statusLack of knowledge of species population information and conservation status• 2.5% of threatened species are marine (Edgar 2.5% of threatened species are marine (Edgar et al, et al, 2004)2004)• Only 190 marine species are recognized as threatened (CR, EN, VU)Only 190 marine species are recognized as threatened (CR, EN, VU)

• Current paucity of marine data limits our ability to define and measure Current paucity of marine data limits our ability to define and measure conservation outcomes through the IUCN Red List and KBA delineation…. conservation outcomes through the IUCN Red List and KBA delineation….

• …….Thus investment in the .Thus investment in the Global Marine Species Assessment (GMSA)Global Marine Species Assessment (GMSA) is is essentialessential

• Collecting and cCollecting and consolidating species information will dramatically enhance onsolidating species information will dramatically enhance the Red List and the progress of outcomes definition the Red List and the progress of outcomes definition


Challenges in applying a biome neutral approach to Challenges in applying a biome neutral approach to status measuresstatus measures::

• Constraints in using Remote Sensing for change detectionConstraints in using Remote Sensing for change detection

• To distinguish spatially quantitative properties to detect key habitat classesTo distinguish spatially quantitative properties to detect key habitat classes

• Pixel level classification of coral, sand, algal beds and sea-grass still lacks Pixel level classification of coral, sand, algal beds and sea-grass still lacks accuracyaccuracy

• Turks and Caicos Islands: Landsat TM – 73%, Spot XS – 67% (Mumby Turks and Caicos Islands: Landsat TM – 73%, Spot XS – 67% (Mumby et alet al, , 1997)1997)

• Further limiting factors include cloud cover, water depth effect on signals Further limiting factors include cloud cover, water depth effect on signals and turbidity effects reducing light transmittance through waterand turbidity effects reducing light transmittance through water

• Higher resolution instruments (QuickBird, IKONOS) and aerial photography Higher resolution instruments (QuickBird, IKONOS) and aerial photography (Compact Airborne Spectrographic Imagery) are presently too expensive for (Compact Airborne Spectrographic Imagery) are presently too expensive for broad scale application broad scale application


Challenges in applying a biome neutral approach Challenges in applying a biome neutral approach to status measuresto status measures::

Satellite Imagery is an effective tool Satellite Imagery is an effective tool for delineating geological/physical for delineating geological/physical features (reef flat, reef crest, barrier features (reef flat, reef crest, barrier reef, deep reef)reef, deep reef)

Field sampling possesses higher reliability Field sampling possesses higher reliability values when measuring change detection values when measuring change detection in habitat distribution and community in habitat distribution and community composition composition


Challenges in applying a biome neutral approach Challenges in applying a biome neutral approach to status measuresto status measures

• Delineating Marine Biodiversity Conservation Delineating Marine Biodiversity Conservation CorridorsCorridors

• Information gaps and lack of empirical knowledge related to ecological Information gaps and lack of empirical knowledge related to ecological linkages, larval dispersal routes and migratory distribution patternslinkages, larval dispersal routes and migratory distribution patterns

• Only theoretical studies support understanding of biological/physical Only theoretical studies support understanding of biological/physical relationships (Cowen, 2001). relationships (Cowen, 2001).

• Must be cautious in applying corridor terminology synonymously…Must be cautious in applying corridor terminology synonymously…• Terrestrial corridorsTerrestrial corridors – fragmentation and habitat destruction – fragmentation and habitat destruction• Marine corridorsMarine corridors – must recognize the movement of pelagic propagules and – must recognize the movement of pelagic propagules and

species that are independent of benthic features and driven by ocean circulation species that are independent of benthic features and driven by ocean circulation patternspatterns


Causal linkages measuring Causal linkages measuring conservation successconservation success

• Both scales of monitoring are designed to fit the SPR model.Both scales of monitoring are designed to fit the SPR model.

StateBiophysical System

StateBiophysical System

ResponseManagement System

ResponseManagement System

PressuresSocio-economic system

PressuresSocio-economic system

Baseline data collected for SPR variables

Baseline data collected for SPR variables

Outputs & Outputs & ActivitiesActivities

MilestonesMilestones

Conservation Conservation OutcomesOutcomes

Adaptive managementAdaptive management

Adaptive Adaptive managementmanagement

Targets Targets establishedestablished

• SPR model strengthens SPR model strengthens ability to report on progress ability to report on progress and determine the and determine the effectiveness of strategies effectiveness of strategies over time. over time.


Marine Outcomes Framework & IndicatorsMarine Outcomes Framework & Indicators

• Proposed indicators are considered practical, achievable and globally applicable.Proposed indicators are considered practical, achievable and globally applicable.

• Strongly correlated to the achievement of the three conservation outcomesStrongly correlated to the achievement of the three conservation outcomes

• Their generic and transparent nature allow indicators to be adapted and applied to a Their generic and transparent nature allow indicators to be adapted and applied to a regional contextregional context

• Represent the critical biophysical, socio-economic and management variables that Represent the critical biophysical, socio-economic and management variables that are feasibly measured across a broad scale. are feasibly measured across a broad scale.

• Indicators are status measures designed to report trends.Indicators are status measures designed to report trends.

• Indicators are both quantitative and qualitative approaches to monitoring.Indicators are both quantitative and qualitative approaches to monitoring.


Priority indicators for implementation:Priority indicators for implementation:

1) Number of threatened species is reduced1) Number of threatened species is reduced:: % change in number of % change in number of threatened species in each IUCN Red List category. threatened species in each IUCN Red List category. Conservation Outcome: ‘Conservation Outcome: ‘Extinction Avoided’Extinction Avoided’

Red List Index provides a scientifically sound mechanism for tracking the threatened status of across Red List Index provides a scientifically sound mechanism for tracking the threatened status of across all taxonomic groups (Butchart all taxonomic groups (Butchart et al, et al, 2005)2005)

Strongly correlates with CI’s species level outcome target ‘Strongly correlates with CI’s species level outcome target ‘avoiding extinctions.’ avoiding extinctions.’


2) Key Biodiversity areas are formally safeguarded:2) Key Biodiversity areas are formally safeguarded: % of all Key % of all Key Biodiversity Areas that are managed with a binding Biodiversity Areas that are managed with a binding contractual agreement & biodiversity conservation as a contractual agreement & biodiversity conservation as a management objective.management objective.

Conservation Outcome: Conservation Outcome: ‘Areas Protected’‘Areas Protected’

Protecting areas is the most important and successful tactic for maintaining Protecting areas is the most important and successful tactic for maintaining biodiversity and avoiding species extinctions (Bruner biodiversity and avoiding species extinctions (Bruner et alet al. 2001) . 2001)

Measuring both the extent and effectiveness of protected areas is regarded as a Measuring both the extent and effectiveness of protected areas is regarded as a useful indicator for meeting large-scale biodiversity targets (Chape useful indicator for meeting large-scale biodiversity targets (Chape et al, et al, 2005)2005)



3) Key habitats & critical ecological functions are 3) Key habitats & critical ecological functions are maintained at protected Key Biodiversity Areas:maintained at protected Key Biodiversity Areas: Change in Change in habitat distribution & ecosystem composition and structure habitat distribution & ecosystem composition and structure within Key Biodiversity Areaswithin Key Biodiversity AreasConservation Outcome: Conservation Outcome: ‘Areas Protected’‘Areas Protected’

Quantity and quality of habitat is among the indicators most highly Quantity and quality of habitat is among the indicators most highly correlated with the ability of species to persist an a site.correlated with the ability of species to persist an a site.

If habitat quality and ecosystem processes remain established, then If habitat quality and ecosystem processes remain established, then extinction of cryptic, habitat responding species is less likelyextinction of cryptic, habitat responding species is less likely

Ecosystem features such as architectural, keystone and indicator Ecosystem features such as architectural, keystone and indicator species represent biotic components that characterize the ecological species represent biotic components that characterize the ecological integrity of a system.integrity of a system.




Example:Example:Temperate Kelp Forest Systems (Steneck Temperate Kelp Forest Systems (Steneck et al, et al, 2004)2004)Consumer animals structure Kelp Forests interactions via two primary drivers: Consumer animals structure Kelp Forests interactions via two primary drivers: (1) Herbivory by sea Urchins & (2) Carnivory from predators of sea urchins.(1) Herbivory by sea Urchins & (2) Carnivory from predators of sea urchins.

Photo by Jon WitmanPhoto by Jon Witman - http://life.bio.sunysb.edu/marinebio/kelpforest.htmlhttp://life.bio.sunysb.edu/marinebio/kelpforest.html



North Atlantic’s Gulf of Maine – North Atlantic’s Gulf of Maine – ‘trophic cascading’‘trophic cascading’

Over-fishing of Atlantic Cod and Haddock (apex predators)Over-fishing of Atlantic Cod and Haddock (apex predators)

Sea urchin (invertebrate herbivores) population explosionSea urchin (invertebrate herbivores) population explosion

Architectural Kelp deforestation from increased herbivore grazingArchitectural Kelp deforestation from increased herbivore grazing

Loss of biodiversity (vulnerable and irreplaceable target species)Loss of biodiversity (vulnerable and irreplaceable target species)



Advantages of measuring ‘habitat cover’ indicator at a higher Advantages of measuring ‘habitat cover’ indicator at a higher resolutionresolution

• Provides early warning information to counteract impending biodiversity loss with Provides early warning information to counteract impending biodiversity loss with adaptive management action. adaptive management action.

• Measurement at the species level captures the subtle and hidden nature of associated Measurement at the species level captures the subtle and hidden nature of associated threats (fishing, invasive species, climate change)threats (fishing, invasive species, climate change)

• Allows practitioners to observe changes in functional redundancy and trophic dysfunctionAllows practitioners to observe changes in functional redundancy and trophic dysfunction

• Promotes systematic and quantitative broad-scale sampling of critical biotic Promotes systematic and quantitative broad-scale sampling of critical biotic components.components.

• Further species of interest can be integrated into the sampling strategyFurther species of interest can be integrated into the sampling strategy• Further abundance and distribution point locality data on target speciesFurther abundance and distribution point locality data on target species• Invasive speciesInvasive species• Corridor-utilizing speciesCorridor-utilizing species• Species of commercial value (ecosystem goods and services)Species of commercial value (ecosystem goods and services)


The development of an index of ecological integrity to measure The development of an index of ecological integrity to measure ‘areas ‘areas protected’protected’

• Potential to incorporate long-term population data into an easily interpretable and Potential to incorporate long-term population data into an easily interpretable and measurable multi-metric index of ecological integritymeasurable multi-metric index of ecological integrity

• An ecosystem-based indicator summarizing intricate ecological dynamics in a simplified An ecosystem-based indicator summarizing intricate ecological dynamics in a simplified model that describes changing levels of ecological conditionmodel that describes changing levels of ecological condition

• Requires identifying an ecosystem’s ‘vital signs’ parameters (Davis, 2005)Requires identifying an ecosystem’s ‘vital signs’ parameters (Davis, 2005)

• Further developments:Further developments:• Understanding of regional biological and ecological characteristicsUnderstanding of regional biological and ecological characteristics• Establish baseline reference point to evaluate divergence of ecological integrityEstablish baseline reference point to evaluate divergence of ecological integrity• Identify population thresholds and multiple states for index values Identify population thresholds and multiple states for index values

• Undertake meta-analysis using existing long-term population data as well as utilize Undertake meta-analysis using existing long-term population data as well as utilize MMAS as a testing platform.MMAS as a testing platform.




4) Connectivity allows natural biotic interactions to be maintained:4) Connectivity allows natural biotic interactions to be maintained: Change in relative/absolute abundance & distribution patterns of Change in relative/absolute abundance & distribution patterns of migratory/corridor-utilizing species.migratory/corridor-utilizing species.

Conservation Outcome:Conservation Outcome: ‘Corridors Consolidated’‘Corridors Consolidated’

Marine corridors should not be gauged a success unless population numbers of Marine corridors should not be gauged a success unless population numbers of migratory utilizing species are stable or increasing (Edgar & Garske, 2005)migratory utilizing species are stable or increasing (Edgar & Garske, 2005)

Species level indicator that directly measures population trends of regionally Species level indicator that directly measures population trends of regionally specific wide-ranging species at life history bottlenecksspecific wide-ranging species at life history bottlenecks


Additional Indicators for measurement:Additional Indicators for measurement:

5) Target species of biodiversity importance are maintained at Key5) Target species of biodiversity importance are maintained at Keybiodiversity Areas:biodiversity Areas: Change in relative/absolute abundance ofChange in relative/absolute abundance ofconservation relevant target species (threatened, endemic, conservation relevant target species (threatened, endemic, congregational species, range restricted, biome restrictedcongregational species, range restricted, biome restrictedassemblages) assemblages) ‘‘Extinctions Avoided’ Extinctions Avoided’

6) Species on the Red List are down-listed:6) Species on the Red List are down-listed: % improvement towards% improvement towardsachieving down-listing of each threatened species, concentratingachieving down-listing of each threatened species, concentratingon rates of decline, starting with Critically Endangered species.on rates of decline, starting with Critically Endangered species.‘‘Extinctions Avoided’ Extinctions Avoided’

7) Ecosystem integrity is maintained at Key biodiversity Areas:7) Ecosystem integrity is maintained at Key biodiversity Areas:Change in Water Quality at Key Biodiversity AreasChange in Water Quality at Key Biodiversity Areas ‘‘Areas Protected’ Areas Protected’


Additional Indicators for measurement cont…Additional Indicators for measurement cont…

8) Ecosystem integrity is maintained at Key biodiversity Areas:8) Ecosystem integrity is maintained at Key biodiversity Areas:Change in Marine Trophic Index at Key Biodiversity AreasChange in Marine Trophic Index at Key Biodiversity Areas ‘‘Areas Protected’ Areas Protected’

9) Globally threatened species are being studied:9) Globally threatened species are being studied: % of% ofthreatened species with ongoing studies or conservation actionsthreatened species with ongoing studies or conservation actionsthat focus on ecology, population or distributionthat focus on ecology, population or distribution ‘‘Extinctions Avoided’ Extinctions Avoided’

10) Species are nationally protected:10) Species are nationally protected: % of threatened% of threatenedspecies that have protected status in each nationspecies that have protected status in each nation ‘‘Extinctions Avoided’ Extinctions Avoided’


11) Management and enforcement plans exist & are adopted:11) Management and enforcement plans exist & are adopted: Change in number of protected Key Biodiversity Areas with sustainable & integrated Change in number of protected Key Biodiversity Areas with sustainable & integrated management and enforcement plans in place management and enforcement plans in place

‘‘Areas Protected’ Areas Protected’

• Level of resource conflictLevel of resource conflict• Existence and adoption of a management planExistence and adoption of a management plan• Community involvement – Community involvement – employment levels in park staff, guides and surveillanceemployment levels in park staff, guides and surveillance• Area boundary demarcation Area boundary demarcation • Enforcement levels – Enforcement levels – number of guards per kmnumber of guards per km² of managed KBAs² of managed KBAs• Availability of management administrative resourcesAvailability of management administrative resources• Presence of research stations, universities and local NGO’sPresence of research stations, universities and local NGO’s

• Existing management rating systems and socio-economic assessment models (White Existing management rating systems and socio-economic assessment models (White et al, et al, 2004, Bunce 2004, Bunce et al, et al, 2000) provide sound foundations for further development. 2000) provide sound foundations for further development.

• Can we aggregate socio-economic/management effectiveness parameters into a single numerical index Can we aggregate socio-economic/management effectiveness parameters into a single numerical index for outcomes monitoring analysis of management effectiveness? for outcomes monitoring analysis of management effectiveness?



Additional Indicators for measurement cont….Additional Indicators for measurement cont….

12) Biodiversity threats are reduced:12) Biodiversity threats are reduced: Change in number of unsustainable & illegal fishing incidences Change in number of unsustainable & illegal fishing incidences within marine Key Biodiversity Areas (dynamite, cyanide)within marine Key Biodiversity Areas (dynamite, cyanide)

Change in Number of extractive mining activities in Key Biodiversity Change in Number of extractive mining activities in Key Biodiversity Areas Areas

Change in coastal population density (number of persons/km Change in coastal population density (number of persons/km coastline) within Key Biodiversity Areacoastline) within Key Biodiversity Area

Change in number of legislative plans in place to protect marine Change in number of legislative plans in place to protect marine biodiversity biodiversity

‘‘Areas Protected’ Areas Protected’



13) National fishing legislative & regulation plans exist:13) National fishing legislative & regulation plans exist:Change in number of national legislative plans inChange in number of national legislative plans inplace to reduce fishing pressureplace to reduce fishing pressure ‘‘Corridors Consolidated’ Corridors Consolidated’

14) Biodiversity threats are reduced: 14) Biodiversity threats are reduced: Change in frequency and Change in frequency and area coverage of fishing trawling activity area coverage of fishing trawling activity ‘‘Corridors Consolidated’ Corridors Consolidated’


Further developments:Further developments:

• Applying regional perspective to the global outcomes monitoring modelApplying regional perspective to the global outcomes monitoring model• Initial development started in ETPSInitial development started in ETPS• Creation of monitoring capacity data layerCreation of monitoring capacity data layer

• Adapt and apply model to suit deep-sea characteristicsAdapt and apply model to suit deep-sea characteristics

• Collaborate with existing initiatives and database networks to scale up Collaborate with existing initiatives and database networks to scale up monitoring capacity monitoring capacity

• GCRMN, Reefbase, Living Planet Index, Millennium Coral Reef Mapping GCRMN, Reefbase, Living Planet Index, Millennium Coral Reef Mapping ProjectProject

• Continue communication with MMAS and scientific partners to further Continue communication with MMAS and scientific partners to further develop scientific underpinning of monitoring frameworkdevelop scientific underpinning of monitoring framework

• Develop fundraising strategy for biodiversity monitoring workshops in Develop fundraising strategy for biodiversity monitoring workshops in priority seascapespriority seascapes

william crosse the marine outcomes monitoring framework

Documents

conservation outcomes

conservation actionbetter

associated conservation

roberts et

edgar et

carlton et

dulvy et

broad scale outcomes