Status of the marine protected area network across the English channel (La Manche): Cross-country similarities and differences in MPA designation, management and monitoring. (January 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Rodríguez-Rodríguez, D.; Rees, S.; Mannaerts, G.; Sciberras, M.; Pirie, C.; Black, G.; Aulert, C.; Sheehan, E.V.; Carrier, S.; Attrill, M.J.
• Is Part Of: Marine policy. Volume 51(2015)
• Page Start: 536
• Page End: 546
• Publication Date: 2015-01
• Subjects: Marine protected area -- English Channel -- MPA network development -- Management -- Monitoring; Marine resources -- Economic aspects -- Periodicals; Fisheries -- Periodicals; Ressources marines -- Aspect économique -- Périodiques; Pêches -- Périodiques; Fisheries; Marine resources -- Economic aspects; Periodicals; 333.916405
• DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2014.09.021
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0308-597X

Abstract

Abstract: Recent international policy developments require states to conserve at least 10% of coastal and marine areas by creating effectively managed and ecologically coherent networks of protected areas in the marine environment. In the framework of the PANACHE project, the current status of designation, management and monitoring of the network of marine protected areas (MPAs) of an important environmental, social and economic marine area: the English Channel (the Channel) was examined. Currently 224 MPAs exist belonging to 12 different designation categories and covering 17 440 km 2, or approximately 20.3% of the project area in the Channel. International protection targets in the marine environment are thus met at this regional scale, although the individual contributions of the UK and France are considerably different, with French MPAs accounting for nearly 80% of the total area protected. Differences between countries are also found regarding MPA designation categories (11 in France, 6 in the UK, 1 in the Channel Islands) and management structures (with more actors involved in the UK) and approach, whereas the monitoring techniques used are similar, although more standardised in the UK. Pending challenges include greater within-country and cross-country MPA designation, monitoring and management simplicity, integration and coordination as well as the assessment of management effectiveness and ecological coherence of the Channel network of MPAs. Highlights: MPAs cover 20.3% of the PANACHE area in the Channel. The marine area protected in France and the UK is uneven (80–20%). Most protected area was designated since 2005. Management structures are more numerous in the UK than in France. Monitoring of marine features uses similar techniques but it is not consistent.