search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Putting communities at the heart of marine conservation


GABRIEL LA CHURCH,S OP HI E B ENB OW and HEN R Y DUFFY


The ocean hosts some of the most productive ecosystems and sustains over three billion people (OECD, 2023). But following decades of overexploitation it is severely degraded. Overfishing has reduced fish biomass and truncated food webs, and destructive fishing has destroyed critical marine habitats and weakened ecosystem resilience. Carbon emis- sions are driving ocean warming and acidification, with negative impacts on marine biodiversity, and sea-level rise is threatening coastal communities. Plastic waste is clogging the seas and fragmenting into microplastics that are signifi- cantly affecting marine life (Entwistle et al., 2018). These unprecedented threats facing the ocean require ur-


gent and coordinated global action. Ambitious international targets were set in December 2022 at the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), with the adoption of the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Ambitions around marine pro- tected areas are included within Target 3, to protect 30% of land and sea by 2030, commonly referred to as the 30 by 30 target. Site-based conservation measures, such as marine protected areas, can have wide-ranging benefits for biodiversity (e.g. Marshall et al., 2019), increase climate adaptation and protection from extreme weather events (e.g. Jacquemont et al., 2022), and provide socioeconomic benefits (e.g. Smallhorn-West et al., 2019). The 30 by 30 tar- get became the headline of the CBD negotiations, but much depends on its implementation: will biologically important sites be prioritized, will sites be managed effectively, and will community-led approaches be at its heart? Reference to other effective area-based conservation measures and recog- nition of Indigenous and traditional territories set the groundwork for successful action to halt biodiversity loss, but progress needs to be monitored to ensure livelihoods and tenure rights of Indigenous Peoples and local commu- nities are not compromised (International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2022). Fauna & Flora is committed to increasing conservation


impact in marine and coastal ecosystems for the benefit of biodiversity and people, and we recognize the important role the 30 by 30 target could play in protecting the ocean. However, we support calls to ensure that area-based marine conservation networks are designed and managed with the


GABRIELLA CHURCH ( fauna-flora.org), SOPHIE BENBOW (


orcid.org/0000-0003-3948-8480, gabriella.church@ orcid.org/0000-0002-4770-9354) and


HENRY DUFFY ( orcid.org/0000-0002-9360-5142) Fauna & Flora, The David Attenborough Building, Pembroke Street, CB2 3QZ, Cambridge, UK


consent, participation and leadership of local stakeholders. Central to Fauna & Flora’s approach is the support we pro- vide, either directly or via locally-based partners, to coastal communities. By initially adopting a small-scale, community- led approach, we are ensuring that existing and newly desig- nated sites achieve their objectives, benefiting marine eco- systems and the communities that rely on them, and providing a robust foundation for scaling of effective and equitable marine conservation. This approach has proven to be effective across a range of contexts, as demonstrated by the articles in this and previous issues of Oryx. Fauna & Flora has been working in Aceh province,


Indonesia, since 2006, initially supporting post-tsunami re- covery among coastal communities through measures such as increasing access to finance (Novriyanto et al., 2012). Continued support has strengthened the traditional fisheries management system, the Panglima Laot, and created part- nerships between fishers and local authorities (Wilson et al., 2012). Working alongside the government, efforts have focused on the co-design and management of a locally managedmarine areas network that formalizes rights to trad- itional fishing grounds, empowers communities to manage marine resources sustainably and equitably (Syakur et al., 2012), and minimizes habitat degradation and maintains fish biomass (Campbell et al., 2012). Similarly, in Myanmar’s Myeik Archipelago, three locally managed marine areas were designated in 2017 to encourage sustainable fisheries man- agement and support conservation. These are the first co-managed areas for marine fisheries in Myanmar, and a further four communities are now engaged in new locally managed marine area initiatives (Thiha et al., 2023). This approach is also illustrated in Cambodia where, as a


result of long-term collaboration between NGOs and gov- ernment, the first large-scale marine protected area was designated in 2016. In Koh Rong Marine National Park, resource management is based around the Community Fisheries framework, in which legally recognized, commu- nity-level institutions are mandated to manage their marine resources (Glue et al., 2020). Surveys in 2019 revealed signs of recovery in Koh Rong, such as increases in hard coral coverage and grouper and parrotfish biomass. Also in Cambodia, stakeholders including NGOs and government are applying mixed methods, gathering data from local communities and nesting beach surveys to investigate the conservation status of sea turtles, showing that a small, high- ly threatened population remains (Duffy et al., 2023). As a result, a number of priority conservation actions have


This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Oryx, 2023, 57(2), 137–138 © Fauna & Flora International, 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Fauna & Flora International doi:10.1017/S0030605323000145

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140