The ambiguous role of partially protected marine protected areas in Australia: Results from a systematic literature review.

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are an important tool in helping to protect biodiversity in the oceans. Recent ratification of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) has ensured that globally we are committed to effectively protecting 30% of the world's oceans by 2030, in MPAs....

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Genevieve A C Phillips, Emily Ogier, Ian Dutton, Neville Barrett, Nils C Krueck, Klaas Hartmann
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2025-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307324
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1841533161896411136
author Genevieve A C Phillips
Emily Ogier
Ian Dutton
Neville Barrett
Nils C Krueck
Klaas Hartmann
author_facet Genevieve A C Phillips
Emily Ogier
Ian Dutton
Neville Barrett
Nils C Krueck
Klaas Hartmann
author_sort Genevieve A C Phillips
collection DOAJ
description Marine protected areas (MPAs) are an important tool in helping to protect biodiversity in the oceans. Recent ratification of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) has ensured that globally we are committed to effectively protecting 30% of the world's oceans by 2030, in MPAs. In Australia there is considerable interest in the potential benefits that partially protected areas (PPAs) may provide. However, a consistent definition of a PPA is currently lacking, and urgently needed to conduct quantitative analyses of PPAs. We conducted a systematic literature review to understand the current knowledge surrounding PPAs and their potential benefits. We define a PPA, characterise PPA implementation in Australia, and present results for the outcomes of PPAs in terms of ecological, economic, and social indicators. Our review suggests that although 45% of Australia's marine environment is within MPAs, 61% of MPAs provide only partial protection. The Northern Territory (100%), New South Wales (81%), and Queensland (79.8%) have the highest percentage of MPAs that are partially protected, compared to Tasmania which has the smallest percentage of partially protected MPAs (13.12%). Tasmania also has the smallest percentage cover of MPAs (6.49% state waters). Most PPA management plans did not contain quantifiable Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to be able to effectively monitor the progress of these PPAs against the stated outcomes. We find the benefits of PPAs to be ambiguous: PPAs generally provide benefits when compared to 'open' ocean, however this is not a consistent result. There are no PPAs that provide greater overall benefits when compared to fully protected MPAs. Only one state (South Australia) and the Commonwealth (Australian Marine Parks) are collecting publicly available baseline data to facilitate quantitative monitoring of PPAs. Contrary to fisheries management, there were no plans of action if the declared MPAs and PPAs failed to meet their declared objectives and goals. Some PPAs within Australia appear to be incompatible with conservation priorities according to the recent "MPA Guide" classification framework. This study highlights the need for clearer management rationale and plans for PPAs in Australia, as these comprise the majority of MPAs in Australia's Exclusive Economic Zone.
format Article
id doaj-art-6070d78d0f1b45f2bdf3bcfd66057ee6
institution Kabale University
issn 1932-6203
language English
publishDate 2025-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj-art-6070d78d0f1b45f2bdf3bcfd66057ee62025-01-17T05:31:43ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032025-01-01201e030732410.1371/journal.pone.0307324The ambiguous role of partially protected marine protected areas in Australia: Results from a systematic literature review.Genevieve A C PhillipsEmily OgierIan DuttonNeville BarrettNils C KrueckKlaas HartmannMarine protected areas (MPAs) are an important tool in helping to protect biodiversity in the oceans. Recent ratification of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) has ensured that globally we are committed to effectively protecting 30% of the world's oceans by 2030, in MPAs. In Australia there is considerable interest in the potential benefits that partially protected areas (PPAs) may provide. However, a consistent definition of a PPA is currently lacking, and urgently needed to conduct quantitative analyses of PPAs. We conducted a systematic literature review to understand the current knowledge surrounding PPAs and their potential benefits. We define a PPA, characterise PPA implementation in Australia, and present results for the outcomes of PPAs in terms of ecological, economic, and social indicators. Our review suggests that although 45% of Australia's marine environment is within MPAs, 61% of MPAs provide only partial protection. The Northern Territory (100%), New South Wales (81%), and Queensland (79.8%) have the highest percentage of MPAs that are partially protected, compared to Tasmania which has the smallest percentage of partially protected MPAs (13.12%). Tasmania also has the smallest percentage cover of MPAs (6.49% state waters). Most PPA management plans did not contain quantifiable Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) to be able to effectively monitor the progress of these PPAs against the stated outcomes. We find the benefits of PPAs to be ambiguous: PPAs generally provide benefits when compared to 'open' ocean, however this is not a consistent result. There are no PPAs that provide greater overall benefits when compared to fully protected MPAs. Only one state (South Australia) and the Commonwealth (Australian Marine Parks) are collecting publicly available baseline data to facilitate quantitative monitoring of PPAs. Contrary to fisheries management, there were no plans of action if the declared MPAs and PPAs failed to meet their declared objectives and goals. Some PPAs within Australia appear to be incompatible with conservation priorities according to the recent "MPA Guide" classification framework. This study highlights the need for clearer management rationale and plans for PPAs in Australia, as these comprise the majority of MPAs in Australia's Exclusive Economic Zone.https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307324
spellingShingle Genevieve A C Phillips
Emily Ogier
Ian Dutton
Neville Barrett
Nils C Krueck
Klaas Hartmann
The ambiguous role of partially protected marine protected areas in Australia: Results from a systematic literature review.
PLoS ONE
title The ambiguous role of partially protected marine protected areas in Australia: Results from a systematic literature review.
title_full The ambiguous role of partially protected marine protected areas in Australia: Results from a systematic literature review.
title_fullStr The ambiguous role of partially protected marine protected areas in Australia: Results from a systematic literature review.
title_full_unstemmed The ambiguous role of partially protected marine protected areas in Australia: Results from a systematic literature review.
title_short The ambiguous role of partially protected marine protected areas in Australia: Results from a systematic literature review.
title_sort ambiguous role of partially protected marine protected areas in australia results from a systematic literature review
url https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0307324
work_keys_str_mv AT genevieveacphillips theambiguousroleofpartiallyprotectedmarineprotectedareasinaustraliaresultsfromasystematicliteraturereview
AT emilyogier theambiguousroleofpartiallyprotectedmarineprotectedareasinaustraliaresultsfromasystematicliteraturereview
AT iandutton theambiguousroleofpartiallyprotectedmarineprotectedareasinaustraliaresultsfromasystematicliteraturereview
AT nevillebarrett theambiguousroleofpartiallyprotectedmarineprotectedareasinaustraliaresultsfromasystematicliteraturereview
AT nilsckrueck theambiguousroleofpartiallyprotectedmarineprotectedareasinaustraliaresultsfromasystematicliteraturereview
AT klaashartmann theambiguousroleofpartiallyprotectedmarineprotectedareasinaustraliaresultsfromasystematicliteraturereview
AT genevieveacphillips ambiguousroleofpartiallyprotectedmarineprotectedareasinaustraliaresultsfromasystematicliteraturereview
AT emilyogier ambiguousroleofpartiallyprotectedmarineprotectedareasinaustraliaresultsfromasystematicliteraturereview
AT iandutton ambiguousroleofpartiallyprotectedmarineprotectedareasinaustraliaresultsfromasystematicliteraturereview
AT nevillebarrett ambiguousroleofpartiallyprotectedmarineprotectedareasinaustraliaresultsfromasystematicliteraturereview
AT nilsckrueck ambiguousroleofpartiallyprotectedmarineprotectedareasinaustraliaresultsfromasystematicliteraturereview
AT klaashartmann ambiguousroleofpartiallyprotectedmarineprotectedareasinaustraliaresultsfromasystematicliteraturereview