A conceptual framework to help choose appropriate blue nature-based solutions.

Biodiversity loss and climate change have severely impacted ecosystems and livelihoods worldwide, compromising access to food and water, increasing disaster risk, and affecting human health globally. Nature-based Solutions (NbS) have gained interest in addressing these global societal challenges. Although much effort has been directed to NbS in urban and terrestrial environments, the implementation of NbS in marine and coastal environments (blue NbS) lags. The lack of a framework to guide decision-makers and practitioners through the initial planning stages appears to be one of the main obstacles to the slow implementation of blue NbS. To address this, we propose an integrated conceptual framework, built from expert knowledge, to inform the selection of the most appropriate blue NbS based on desired intervention objectives and social-ecological context. Our conceptual framework follows a four incremental steps structure: Step 1 aims to identify the societal challenge(s) to address; Step 2 highlights ecosystem services and the underlying biodiversity and ecological functions that could contribute to confronting the societal challenge(s); Step 3 identify the specific environmental context the intervention needs to be set within (e.g. the spatial scale the intervention will operate within, the ecosystem's vulnerability to stressors, and its ecological condition); and Step 4 provides a selection of potential blue NbS interventions that would help address the targeted societal challenge(s) considering the context defined through Step 3. Designed to maintain, enhance, recover, rehabilitate, or create ecosystem services by supporting biodiversity, the blue NbS intervention portfolio includes marine protection (i.e., fully, highly, lightly, and minimally protected areas), restorative activities (i.e., active, passive, and partial restoration; rehabilitation of ecological function and ecosystem creation), and other management measures (i.e., implementation and enforcement of regulation). Ultimately, our conceptual framework guides decision-makers toward a versatile portfolio of interventions that cater to the specific needs of each ecosystem rather than imposing a rigid, one-size-fits-all model. In the future, this framework needs to integrate socio-economic considerations more comprehensively and be kept up-to-date by including the latest scientific information.

Survey data of public awareness on climate change and the value of marine and coastal ecosystems.

The long-term provision of ocean ecosystem services depends on healthy ecosystems and effective sustainable management. Understanding public opinion about marine and coastal ecosystems is important to guide decision-making and inform specific actions. However, available data on public perceptions on the interlinked effects of climate change, human impacts and the value and management of marine and coastal ecosystems are rare. This dataset presents raw data from an online, self-administered, public awareness survey conducted between November 2021 and February 2022 which yielded 709 responses from 42 countries. The survey was released in four languages (English, French, Spanish and Italian) and consisted of four main parts: (1) perceptions about climate change; (2) perceptions about the value of, and threats to, coasts, oceans and their wildlife, (3) perceptions about climate change response; and (4) socio-demographic information. Participation in the survey was voluntary and all respondents provided informed consent after reading a participant information form at the beginning of the survey. Responses were anonymous unless respondents chose to provide contact information. All identifying information has been removed from the dataset. The dataset can be used to conduct quantitative analyses, especially in the area of public perceptions of the interlinkages between climate change, human impacts and options for sustainable management in the context of marine and coastal ecosystems. The dataset is provided with this article, including a copy of the survey and participant information forms in all four languages, data and the corresponding codebook.

Effects of habitat modifications on the movement behavior of animals: the case study of Fish Aggregating Devices (FADs) and tropical tunas.

BACKGROUND: Aggregation sites represent important sources of environmental heterogeneity and can modify the movement behavior of animals. When these sites are artificially established through anthropogenic actions, the consequent alterations to animal movements may impact their ecology with potential implications for their fitness. Floating objects represent important sources of habitat heterogeneity for tropical tunas, beneath which these species naturally aggregate in large numbers. Man-made floating objects, called Fish Aggregating Devices (FAD), are used by fishers on a massive scale to facilitate fishing operations. In addition to the direct impacts that fishing with FADs has on tuna populations, assessing the effects of increasing the numbers of FADs on the ecology of tuna is key for generating sound management and conservation measures. METHODS: This study investigates the effects of increasing numbers of FADs (aggregation sites) on the movements of tunas, through the comparison of electronic tagging data recorded from 146 individuals tunas (yellowfin tuna, Thunnus albacares, and skipjack tuna, Katsuwonus pelamis) tagged in three instrumented anchored FAD arrays (Mauritius, Oahu-Hawaii and Maldives), that differed according to their distances among neighboring FADs. The effect of increasing inter-FAD distances is studied considering a set of indices (residence times at FADs and absence (travel) times between two visits at FADs) and their trends. RESULTS: When inter-FAD distances decrease, tuna visit more FADs (higher connectivity between FADs), spend less time travelling between FADs and more time associated with them. The trends observed for the absence (travel) times appear to be compatible with a random-search component in the movement behaviour of tunas. Conversely, FAD residence times showed opposite trends, which could be a result of social behavior and/or prey availability. CONCLUSION: Our results provide the first evidence of changes in tuna associative behavior for increasing FAD densities. More generally, they highlight the need for comparing animal movements in heterogeneous habitats in order to improve understanding of the impacts of anthropogenic habitat modifications on the ecology of wild animals.