138 Gabriella Church, Sophie Benbow and Henry Duffy
been suggested, including strengthening local capacity for sea turtle conservation, recognizing the role that charismatic marine species can play in catalysing community-level action. A community-based approach is also proving valuable in
Honduras, where five NGOs in the Atlántida Seascape, com- prising four marine protected areas and their connecting waters, have been working to enhance collaborative govern- ance, including empowering small-scale fishers, women and Indigenous groups to participate in decision-making. This has generated positive effects, including enhanced social capital, and early signs of increased abundance of fish and flagship species (Steadman, 2021). Similarly, in Cabo Verde, theMaio Biodiversity Foundation is empowering local com- munities to improve protection of nearshore waters and threatened species through several means, including the Guardians of the Sea—a group of local fishers who monitor and record infractions in their fishing grounds—and a beach patrol programme monitoring sea turtle nesting in coastal villages aroundMaio Island that is fully integrated into coast- al communities (Dutra & Koenen, 2014). This work has re- sulted in a 75% reduction in the poaching of nesting females, and has positionedMaio Island as a globally import- ant refuge for the Vulnerable loggerhead sea turtle (Patino- Martinez et al., 2022) and one of the largest nesting colonies (Patino-Martinez et al., 2023). Finally, in Turkey, local NGO Akdeniz Koruma Derneği has developed community-based management for six no-take zones in theGökova Bay marine protected area, resulting in a significant increase in fish biomass, and has successfully trialled a novel conservation approach for the Endangered Mediterranean monk seal, constructing an artificial ledge in a cave to provide critical pupping and resting habitat (Saydam et al., 2023). To address the threats to marine ecosystems, large-scale
ambitions, such as 30 by 30, are necessary to galvanize global action. Nonetheless, if area-based conservation is to be ef- fective, it needs to be adapted to varied contexts, designed and implemented with local stakeholders, managed effec- tively, and monitored to assess impact. The protection and restoration of nature will only be sustained if it is delivered by, or in close collaboration with, Indigenous Peoples and local communities. This is an approach that Fauna & Flora has found to be effective across a range of contexts, and we strongly advocate its continued adoption globally.
This Editorial and the Oryx articles cited herein are freely available as a virtual issue at
cambridge.org/core/journals/ oryx/virtual-issues.
References
CAMPBELL, S.J., CINNER, J.E., ARDIWI JAYA, R.L., PARDEDE, S., KARTAWIJAYA, T., MUKMUNIN,
A.etal. (2012) Avoiding conflicts
and protecting coral reefs: customary management benefits marine habitats and fish biomass. Oryx, 46, 486–494
DUFFY, H., MCNAMARA, A., MULLIGAN, B.,WEST, K., LENG,P., VONG, R. et al. (2023) An assessment of marine turtle population status and conservation in Cambodia. Oryx, 57, 160–170.
DUTRA,A.&KOENEN,F. (2014) Community-based conservation: the key to protection of marine turtles on Maio Island, Cape Verde. Oryx, 48, 325.
ENTWISTLE, A., MIHAYLOVA,D.& AKESTER,H. (2018) Fauna & Flora International expands strategy on marine plastics. Oryx, 52, 613–614.
GLUE, M., TEOH,M.&DUFFY,H. (2020) Community-led management lays the foundation for coral reef recovery in Cambodian marine protected areas. Oryx, 54, 599.
INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT (2022) The Global Biodiversity Framework’s “30×30” Target: Catchy slogan or Effective Conservation Goal?
iisd.org/articles/insight/ global-biodiversity-framework-30x30-target [accessed 10 December 2022].
JACQUEMONT, J., BLASIAK, R., LE CAM, C., LE GOUELLEC,M.& CLAUDET,J.(2022) Ocean conservation boosts climate change mitigation and adaptation. One Earth, 5, 1126-1138.
MARSHALL, D.J., GAINES, S.,WARNER, R., BARNECHE, D.R. & BODE, M. (2019) Underestimating the benefits of marine protected areas for the replenishment of fished populations. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 17, 407–413.
NOVRIYANTO,WIBOWO, J.T., ISKANDAR,W., CAMPBELL-SMITH, G. & LINKIE,M.(2012) Linking coastal community livelihoods to marine conservation in Aceh, Indonesia. Oryx, 46, 508–515.
OECD (2023) Ocean Economy and Developing Countries.
oecd.org/ ocean/topics/developing-countries-and-the-ocean-economy/ [accessed 25 January 2023].
PATINO-MARTINEZ, J., DOS PASSOS, L., AFONSO, I.O., TEIXIDOR, A., TIWARI, M., SZÉKELY,T.&MORENO,R. (2022) Globally important refuge for the loggerhead sea turtle: Maio Island, Cabo Verde. Oryx, 56, 54–62.
PATINO-MARTINEZ, J., DOS PASSOS, L., AMADOR, R., TEIXIDOR, A., CARDOSO, S.,MARCO,
A.etal. (2023) Strategic nest site selection in one of the world’s largest loggerhead turtle nesting colonies, on Maio Island, Cabo Verde. Oryx, 57, 152–159.
SAYDAM, E.,GÜÇLÜSOY, H.,&KIZILKAYA,Z.(2023)Anovel approach for Mediterranean monk seal conservation: an artificial ledge in a marine cave. Oryx, 57, 149–151.
SMALLHORN-WEST, P.F.,WEEKS, R., GURNEY,G.&PRESSEY, R.L. (2019) Ecological and socioeconomic impacts of marine protected areas in the South Pacific: assessing the evidence base. Biodiversity and Conservation, 29, 349–380.
STEADMAN,D.(2021) Towards ecological and social impact through collaborative governance of a seascape of marine protected areas in Honduras. Oryx, 55, 507–518.
SYAKUR, A.,WIBOWO, J., FIRMANSYAH, F., AZAM,I.&LINKIE,M. (2012) Ensuring local stakeholder support for marine conservation: Establishing a locally-managed marine area network in Aceh. Oryx, 46, 516–524.
THIHA, S., ZAYYA, K., AYE, M., AUNG, S.T., LIN, S.M.N.N., CARLI,F. &DUFFY,H. (2023) Strengthening small-scale fisheries management and conservation in Myanmar through locally managed marine areas. Oryx, 57, 171–174.
WILSON,C.&LINKIE,M.(2012) The Panglima Laot of Aceh: a case study in large-scale community-based marine management after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami. Oryx, 46, 495–500.
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
