A spatial framework for improved sanitation to support coral reef conservation.

Coral reefs are one of the most valuable yet threatened ecosystems in the world. Improving human wastewater treatment could reduce land-based impacts on coral reefs. However, information on the quantity and spatial distribution of human wastewater pollution is lacking. Here, we develop a spatial model linking residential human wastewater pollution (nitrogen and phosphorus/year) and conservation sectors [coral reefs] to better understand the relative differences in the distribution and efficacy of different sanitation services and their potential implications for conservation monitoring and management. We apply our model to Fiji, where ongoing initiatives and investments in wastewater treatment for human health could be leveraged to cost-effectively improve coral reef condition. We estimate that wastewater treatment plants account for nearly 80% of human wastewater nutrients released into surface waters. Wasterwater nutrient pollution is widespread, affecting 95% of reefs, but is concentrated across a few watersheds. Our spatially explicit approach can be used to better understand potential benefits and trade-offs between sanitation service improvements and coral reef health, helping to bridge the sanitation and conservation sectors as well as inform and prioritize on the ground action.

Global rarity of intact coastal regions.

Management of the land-sea interface is essential for global conservation and sustainability objectives because coastal regions maintain natural processes that support biodiversity and the livelihood of billions of people. However, assessments of coastal regions have focused strictly on either the terrestrial or marine realm. Consequently, understanding of the overall state of Earth's coastal regions is poor. We integrated the terrestrial human footprint and marine cumulative human impact maps in a global assessment of the anthropogenic pressures affecting coastal regions. Of coastal regions globally, 15.5% had low anthropogenic pressure, mostly in Canada, Russia, and Greenland. Conversely, 47.9% of coastal regions were heavily affected by humanity, and in most countries (84.1%) >50% of their coastal regions were degraded. Nearly half (43.3%) of protected areas across coastal regions were exposed to high human pressures. To meet global sustainability objectives, all nations must undertake greater actions to preserve and restore the coastal regions within their borders.

costa, huella humana, impacto humano cumulativo, litoral, presión humana, restauración, tierras vírgenes Resumen El manejo de la interfaz entre la tierra y el mar es esencial para los objetivos mundiales de conservación y sustentabilidad ya que las regiones costeras mantienen los procesos naturales que sostienen a la biodiversidad y al sustento de miles de millones de personas. Sin embargo, los análisis de las regiones costeras se han enfocado estrictamente en el ámbito marino o en el terrestre, pero no en ambos. Por consiguiente, el conocimiento del estado general de las regiones costeras del planeta es muy pobre. Integramos la huella terrestre humana y mapas marinos del impacto humano cumulativo en un análisis global de las presiones antropogénicas que afectan las áreas costeras. De las áreas costeras de todo el mundo, el 15.5% tuvieron una presión antropogénica reducida, principalmente en Canadá, Rusia y Groenlandia. En cambio, el 47.9% de las regiones costeras estuvieron fuertemente afectas por la humanidad, y en la mayoría de los países (84.1%) >50% de sus regiones litorales se encuentran degradadas. Casi la mitad (43.3%) de las áreas protegidas en las regiones costeras tienen un grado de exposición a fuertes presiones humanas. Para cumplir los objetivos mundiales de sustentabilidad, todos los países deben emprender mejores acciones para preservar y restaurar las regiones litorales dentro de sus fronteras.

Multinational coordination required for conservation of over 90% of marine species.

Marine species are declining at an unprecedented rate, catalyzing many nations to adopt conservation and management targets within their jurisdictions. However, marine species and the biophysical processes that sustain them are naive to international borders. An understanding of the prevalence of cross-border species distributions is important for informing high-level conservation strategies, such as bilateral or regional agreements. Here, we examined 28,252 distribution maps to determine the number and locations of transboundary marine plants and animals. More than 90% of species have ranges spanning at least two jurisdictions, with 58% covering more than 10 jurisdictions. All jurisdictions have at least one transboundary species, with the highest concentrations of transboundary species in the USA, Australia, Indonesia, and the Areas Beyond National Jurisdiction. Distributions of mapped biodiversity indicate that overcoming the challenges of multinational governance is critical for a much wider suite of species than migratory megavertebrates and commercially exploited fish stocks-the groups that have received the vast majority of multinational management attention. To effectively protect marine biodiversity, international governance mechanisms (particularly those related to the Convention on Biological Diversity, the Convention on Migratory Species, and Regional Seas Organizations) must be expanded to promote multinational conservation planning, and complimented by a holistic governance framework for biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction.

Spatial cost-benefit analysis of blue restoration and factors driving net benefits globally.

Marine coastal ecosystems, commonly referred to as blue ecosystems, provide valuable services to society but are under increasing threat worldwide due to a variety of drivers, including eutrophication, development, land-use change, land reclamation, and climate change. Ecological restoration is sometimes necessary to facilitate recovery in coastal ecosystems. Blue restoration (i.e., in marine coastal systems) is a developing field, and projects to date have been small scale and expensive, leading to the perception that restoration may not be economically viable. We conducted a global cost-benefit analysis to determine the net benefits of restoring coral reef, mangrove, saltmarsh, and seagrass ecosystems, where the benefit is defined as the monetary value of ecosystem services. We estimated costs from published restoration case studies and used an adjusted-value-transfer method to assign benefit values to these case studies. Benefit values were estimated as the monetary value provided by ecosystem services of the restored habitats. Benefits outweighed costs (i.e., there were positive net benefits) for restoration of all blue ecosystems. Mean benefit:cost ratios for ecosystem restoration were eight to 10 times higher than prior studies of coral reef and seagrass restoration, most likely due to the more recent lower cost estimates we used. Among ecosystems, saltmarsh had the greatest net benefits followed by mangrove; coral reef and seagrass ecosystems had lower net benefits. In general, restoration in nations with middle incomes had higher (eight times higher in coral reefs and 40 times higher in mangroves) net benefits than those with high incomes. Within an ecosystem type, net benefit varied with restoration technique (coral reef and saltmarsh), ecosystem service produced (mangrove and saltmarsh), and project duration (seagrass). These results challenge the perceptions of the low economic viability of blue restoration and should encourage further targeted investment in this field.

Análisis de Rentabilidad Espacial de la Restauración Azul y de los Factores Determinantes del Beneficio Neto Mundial Resumen Los ecosistemas costeros marinos, llamados comúnmente ecosistemas azules, proporcionan servicios valiosos para la sociedad, pero se encuentran bajo una amenaza creciente a nivel mundial causada por una variedad de determinantes, incluyendo la eutrofización, el desarrollo, el cambio en el uso de suelo, la reclamación de tierra y el cambio climático. Algunas veces se necesita de la restauración ecológica para facilitar la recuperación en los ecosistemas costeros. La restauración azul (es decir, en los sistemas costeros marinos) es un campo en desarrollo, con proyectos que a la fecha han sido a pequeña escala y costosos, lo que resulta en la percepción de que la restauración puede no ser viable económicamente. Realizamos un análisis de rentabilidad mundial para determinar los beneficios netos de la restauración de ecosistemas de arrecife de coral, manglar, marisma y pastos marinos en donde el beneficio está definido como el valor monetario de los servicios ambientales. Estimamos los costos a partir de estudios de caso de restauración publicados y usamos un método de transferencia de valor ajustado para asignar los valores de beneficio a estos estudios de caso. Los valores de los beneficios fueron estimados como el valor monetario proporcionado por los servicios ambientales de los hábitats restaurados. Los beneficios superaron los costos (es decir, fueron beneficios netos positivos) de la restauración de todos los ecosistemas azules. El beneficio promedio consistió en que la proporción de costos para la restauración del ecosistema fue 8-10 veces mayor que en los estudios anteriores de la restauración de los arrecifes de coral y los pastos marinos, probablemente debido a que usamos estimaciones de costo más bajas. Entre los ecosistemas, las marismas tuvieron los mayores beneficios netos seguidos por los manglares; los arrecifes de coral y los pastos marinos tuvieron los beneficios netos más bajos. En general, la restauración en los países con niveles medios de ingreso tuvo más beneficios netos (ocho veces más en los arrecifes de coral y 40 veces más en los manglares) que aquellos países con niveles altos de ingreso. En cuanto al tipo de ecosistema, el beneficio neto varió de acuerdo con la técnica de restauración (arrecife de coral y marisma), servicio ambiental producido (manglar y marisma) y duración del proyecto (pastos marinos). Estos resultados desafían las percepciones de la baja viabilidad económica que tiene la restauración azul y deberían fomentar una mayor inversión focalizada en este campo.

Software for prioritizing conservation actions based on probabilistic information.

Marxan is the most common decision-support tool used to inform the design of protected-area systems. The original version of Marxan does not consider risk and uncertainty associated with threatening processes affecting protected areas, including uncertainty about the location and condition of species' populations and habitats now and in the future. We described and examined the functionality of a modified version of Marxan, Marxan with Probability. This software explicitly considers 4 types of uncertainty: probability that a feature exists in a particular place (estimated based on species distribution models or spatially explicit population models); probability that features in a site will be lost in the future due to a threatening process, such as climate change, natural catastrophes, and uncontrolled human interventions; probability that a feature will exist in the future due to natural successional processes, such as a fire or flood; and probability the feature exists but has been degraded by threatening processes, such as overfishing or pollution, and thus cannot contribute to conservation goals. We summarized the results of 5 studies that illustrate how each type of uncertainty can be used to inform protected area design. If there were uncertainty in species or habitat distribution, users could maximize the chance that these features were represented by including uncertainty using Marxan with Probability. Similarly, if threatening processes were considered, users minimized the chance that species or habitats were lost or degraded by using Marxan with Probability. Marxan with Probability opens up substantial new avenues for systematic conservation planning research and application by agencies.

Marxan es la herramienta de apoyo a las decisiones que más comúnmente se usa para orientar el diseño de los sistemas de áreas protegidas. La versión original de Marxan no considera el riesgo y la incertidumbre asociados con los procesos amenazantes que afectan a las áreas protegidas, incluyendo la incertidumbre sobre la ubicación y la condición de las poblaciones de las especies y su hábitat ahora y en el futuro. Describimos y analizamos la funcionalidad de una versión modificada de Marxan: Marxan con Probabilidad. Este software considera explícitamente cuatro tipos de incertidumbre: probabilidad de que una característica exista en un lugar en particular (estimada con base en los modelos de distribución de especies o con modelos de población espacialmente explícitos); probabilidad de que las características de un sitio se pierdan en el futuro debido a un proceso amenazante, como el cambio climático, las catástrofes naturales y las intervenciones humanas descontroladas; probabilidad de que una característica existirá en el futuro debido a los procesos naturales de sucesión; como los incendios o las inundaciones; y probabilidad de que una característica exista pero haya sido degradada por los procesos amenazantes, como la sobrepesca y la contaminación, y por lo tanto no puede contribuir a los objetivos de conservación. Sintetizamos los resultados de cinco estudios que ilustraron cómo cada tipo de incertidumbre puede usarse para orientar el diseño del área protegida. Si hubiera incertidumbre en la distribución de la especie o de su hábitat, los usuarios podrían maximizar la posibilidad de que estas características estuvieran representadas mediante la inclusión de Marxan con Probabilidad. De manera similar, si los procesos amenazantes estuvieran considerados, los usuarios minimizarían la posibilidad de que se pierda la especie o degrade el hábitat usando Marxan con Probabilidad. Marxan con Probabilidad abre nuevas vías importantes para la investigación sobre la planeación sistemática de la conservación y su aplicación por parte de las agencias.

Over 90 endangered fish and invertebrates are caught in industrial fisheries.

Industrial-scale harvest of species at risk of extinction is controversial and usually highly regulated on land and for charismatic marine animals (e.g. whales). In contrast, threatened marine fish species can be legally caught in industrial fisheries. To determine the magnitude and extent of this problem, we analyze global fisheries catch and import data and find reported catch records of 91 globally threatened species. Thirteen of the species are traded internationally and predominantly consumed in European nations. Targeted industrial fishing for 73 of the threatened species accounts for nearly all (99%) of the threatened species catch volume and value. Our results are a conservative estimate of threatened species catch and trade because we only consider species-level data, excluding group records such as 'sharks and rays.' Given the development of new fisheries monitoring technologies and the current push for stronger international mechanisms for biodiversity management, industrial fishing of threatened fish and invertebrates should no longer be neglected in conservation and sustainability commitments.

The Location and Protection Status of Earth's Diminishing Marine Wilderness.

As human activities increasingly threaten biodiversity [1, 2], areas devoid of intense human impacts are vital refugia [3]. These wilderness areas contain high genetic diversity, unique functional traits, and endemic species [4-7]; maintain high levels of ecological and evolutionary connectivity [8-10]; and may be well placed to resist and recover from the impacts of climate change [11-13]. On land, rapid declines in wilderness [3] have led to urgent calls for its protection [3, 14]. In contrast, little is known about the extent and protection of marine wilderness [4, 5]. Here we systematically map marine wilderness globally by identifying areas that have both very little impact (lowest 10%) from 15 anthropogenic stressors and also a very low combined cumulative impact from these stressors. We discover that ∼13% of the ocean meets this definition of global wilderness, with most being located in the high seas. Recognizing that human influence differs across ocean regions, we repeat the analysis within each of the 16 ocean realms [15]. Realm-specific wilderness extent varies considerably, with >16 million km2 (8.6%) in the Warm Indo-Pacific, down to <2,000 km2 (0.5%) in Temperate Southern Africa. We also show that the marine protected area estate holds only 4.9% of global wilderness and 4.1% of realm-specific wilderness, very little of which is in biodiverse ecosystems such as coral reefs. Proactive retention of marine wilderness should now be incorporated into global strategies aimed at conserving biodiversity and ensuring that large-scale ecological and evolutionary processes continue. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

Climate Velocity Can Inform Conservation in a Warming World.

Climate change is shifting the ranges of species. Simple predictive metrics of range shifts such as climate velocity, that do not require extensive knowledge or data on individual species, could help to guide conservation. We review research on climate velocity, describing the theory underpinning the concept and its assumptions. We highlight how climate velocity has already been applied in conservation-related research, including climate residence time, climate refugia, endemism, historic and projected range shifts, exposure to climate change, and climate connectivity. Finally, we discuss ways to enhance the use of climate velocity in conservation through tailoring it to be more biologically meaningful, informing design of protected areas, conserving ocean biodiversity in 3D, and informing conservation actions.

Simple rules can guide whether land- or ocean-based conservation will best benefit marine ecosystems.

Coastal marine ecosystems can be managed by actions undertaken both on the land and in the ocean. Quantifying and comparing the costs and benefits of actions in both realms is therefore necessary for efficient management. Here, we quantify the link between terrestrial sediment runoff and a downstream coastal marine ecosystem and contrast the cost-effectiveness of marine- and land-based conservation actions. We use a dynamic land- and sea-scape model to determine whether limited funds should be directed to 1 of 4 alternative conservation actions-protection on land, protection in the ocean, restoration on land, or restoration in the ocean-to maximise the extent of light-dependent marine benthic habitats across decadal timescales. We apply the model to a case study for a seagrass meadow in Australia. We find that marine restoration is the most cost-effective action over decadal timescales in this system, based on a conservative estimate of the rate at which seagrass can expand into a new habitat. The optimal decision will vary in different social-ecological contexts, but some basic information can guide optimal investments to counteract land- and ocean-based stressors: (1) marine restoration should be prioritised if the rates of marine ecosystem decline and expansion are similar and low; (2) marine protection should take precedence if the rate of marine ecosystem decline is high or if the adjacent catchment is relatively intact and has a low rate of vegetation decline; (3) land-based actions are optimal when the ratio of marine ecosystem expansion to decline is greater than 1:1.4, with terrestrial restoration typically the most cost-effective action; and (4) land protection should be prioritised if the catchment is relatively intact but the rate of vegetation decline is high. These rules of thumb illustrate how cost-effective conservation outcomes for connected land-ocean systems can proceed without complex modelling.

Tracing the influence of land-use change on water quality and coral reefs using a Bayesian model.

Coastal ecosystems can be degraded by poor water quality. Tracing the causes of poor water quality back to land-use change is necessary to target catchment management for coastal zone management. However, existing models for tracing the sources of pollution require extensive data-sets which are not available for many of the world's coral reef regions that may have severe water quality issues. Here we develop a hierarchical Bayesian model that uses freely available satellite data to infer the connection between land-uses in catchments and water clarity in coastal oceans. We apply the model to estimate the influence of land-use change on water clarity in Fiji. We tested the model's predictions against underwater surveys, finding that predictions of poor water quality are consistent with observations of high siltation and low coverage of sediment-sensitive coral genera. The model thus provides a means to link land-use change to declines in coastal water quality.

Trade-offs between data resolution, accuracy, and cost when choosing information to plan reserves for coral reef ecosystems.

Conservation planners must reconcile trade-offs associated with using biodiversity data of differing qualities to make decisions. Coarse habitat classifications are commonly used as surrogates to design marine reserve networks when fine-scale biodiversity data are incomplete or unavailable. Although finely-classified habitat maps provide more detail, they may have more misclassification errors, a common problem when remotely-sensed imagery is used. Despite these issues, planners rarely consider the effects of errors when choosing data for spatially explicit conservation prioritizations. Here we evaluate trade-offs between accuracy and resolution of hierarchical coral reef habitat data (geomorphology and benthic substrate) derived from remote sensing, in spatial planning for Kubulau District, Fiji. For both, we use accuracy information describing the probability that a mapped habitat classification is correct to design marine reserve networks that achieve habitat conservation targets, and demonstrate inadequacies of using habitat maps without accuracy data. We show that using more detailed habitat information ensures better representation of biogenic habitats (i.e. coral and seagrass), but leads to larger and more costly reserves, because these data have more misclassification errors, and are also more expensive to obtain. Reduced impacts on fishers are possible using coarsely-classified data, which are also more cost-effective for planning reserves if we account for data collection costs, but using these data may under-represent reef habitats that are important for fisheries and biodiversity, due to the maps low thematic resolution. Finally, we show that explicitly accounting for accuracy information in decisions maximizes the chance of successful conservation outcomes by reducing the risk of missing conservation representation targets, particularly when using finely classified data.

Prioritising Mangrove Ecosystem Services Results in Spatially Variable Management Priorities.

Incorporating the values of the services that ecosystems provide into decision making is becoming increasingly common in nature conservation and resource management policies, both locally and globally. Yet with limited funds for conservation of threatened species and ecosystems there is a desire to identify priority areas where investment efficiently conserves multiple ecosystem services. We mapped four mangrove ecosystems services (coastal protection, fisheries, biodiversity, and carbon storage) across Fiji. Using a cost-effectiveness analysis, we prioritised mangrove areas for each service, where the effectiveness was a function of the benefits provided to the local communities, and the costs were associated with restricting specific uses of mangroves. We demonstrate that, although priority mangrove areas (top 20%) for each service can be managed at relatively low opportunity costs (ranging from 4.5 to 11.3% of overall opportunity costs), prioritising for a single service yields relatively low co-benefits due to limited geographical overlap with priority areas for other services. None-the-less, prioritisation of mangrove areas provides greater overlap of benefits than if sites were selected randomly for most ecosystem services. We discuss deficiencies in the mapping of ecosystems services in data poor regions and how this may impact upon the equity of managing mangroves for particular services across the urban-rural divide in developing countries. Finally we discuss how our maps may aid decision-makers to direct funding for mangrove management from various sources to localities that best meet funding objectives, as well as how this knowledge can aid in creating a national mangrove zoning scheme.

Shortfalls in the global protected area network at representing marine biodiversity.

The first international goal for establishing marine protected areas (MPAs) to conserve the ocean's biodiversity was set in 2002. Since 2006, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) has driven MPA establishment, with 193 parties committed to protecting >10% of marine environments globally by 2020, especially 'areas of particular importance for biodiversity' (Aichi target 11). This has resulted in nearly 10 million km(2) of new MPAs, a growth of ~360% in a decade. Unlike on land, it is not known how well protected areas capture marine biodiversity, leaving a significant gap in our understanding of existing MPAs and future protection requirements. We assess the overlap of global MPAs with the ranges of 17,348 marine species (fishes, mammals, invertebrates), and find that 97.4% of species have <10% of their ranges represented in stricter conservation classes. Almost all (99.8%) of the very poorly represented species (<2% coverage) are found within exclusive economic zones, suggesting an important role for particular nations to better protect biodiversity. Our results offer strategic guidance on where MPAs should be placed to support the CBD's overall goal to avert biodiversity loss. Achieving this goal is imperative for nature and humanity, as people depend on biodiversity for important and valuable services.

Integrating regional conservation priorities for multiple objectives into national policy.

Multinational conservation initiatives that prioritize investment across a region invariably navigate trade-offs among multiple objectives. It seems logical to focus where several objectives can be achieved efficiently, but such multi-objective hotspots may be ecologically inappropriate, or politically inequitable. Here we devise a framework to facilitate a regionally cohesive set of marine-protected areas driven by national preferences and supported by quantitative conservation prioritization analyses, and illustrate it using the Coral Triangle Initiative. We identify areas important for achieving six objectives to address ecosystem representation, threatened fauna, connectivity and climate change. We expose trade-offs between areas that contribute substantially to several objectives and those meeting one or two objectives extremely well. Hence there are two strategies to guide countries choosing to implement regional goals nationally: multi-objective hotspots and complementary sets of single-objective priorities. This novel framework is applicable to any multilateral or global initiative seeking to apply quantitative information in decision making.

Ocean zoning for conservation, fisheries and marine renewable energy: assessing trade-offs and co-location opportunities.

Oceans, particularly coastal areas, are getting busier and within this increasingly human-dominated seascape, marine biodiversity continues to decline. Attempts to maintain and restore marine biodiversity are becoming more spatial, principally through the designation of marine protected areas (MPAs). MPAs compete for space with other uses, and the emergence of new industries, such as marine renewable energy generation, will increase competition for space. Decision makers require guidance on how to zone the ocean to conserve biodiversity, mitigate conflict and accommodate multiple uses. Here we used empirical data and freely available planning software to identified priority areas for multiple ocean zones, which incorporate goals for biodiversity conservation, two types of renewable energy, and three types of fishing. We developed an approached to evaluate trade-offs between industries and we investigated the impacts of co-locating some fishing activities within renewable energy sites. We observed non-linear trade-offs between industries. We also found that different subsectors within those industries experienced very different trade-off curves. Incorporating co-location resulted in significant reductions in cost to the fishing industry, including fisheries that were not co-located. Co-location also altered the optimal location of renewable energy zones with planning solutions. Our findings have broad implications for ocean zoning and marine spatial planning. In particular, they highlight the need to include industry subsectors when assessing trade-offs and they stress the importance of considering co-location opportunities from the outset. Our research reinforces the need for multi-industry ocean-zoning and demonstrates how it can be undertaken within the framework of strategic conservation planning.

Optimal conservation outcomes require both restoration and protection.

Conservation outcomes are principally achieved through the protection of intact habitat or the restoration of degraded habitat. Restoration is generally considered a lower priority action than protection because protection is thought to provide superior outcomes, at lower costs, without the time delay required for restoration. Yet while it is broadly accepted that protected intact habitat safeguards more biodiversity and generates greater ecosystem services per unit area than restored habitat, conservation lacks a theory that can coherently compare the relative outcomes of the two actions. We use a dynamic landscape model to integrate these two actions into a unified conservation theory of protection and restoration. Using nonlinear benefit functions, we show that both actions are crucial components of a conservation strategy that seeks to optimise either biodiversity conservation or ecosystem services provision. In contrast to conservation orthodoxy, in some circumstances, restoration should be strongly preferred to protection. The relative priority of protection and restoration depends on their costs and also on the different time lags that are inherent to both protection and restoration. We derive a simple and easy-to-interpret heuristic that integrates these factors into a single equation that applies equally to biodiversity conservation and ecosystem service objectives. We use two examples to illustrate the theory: bird conservation in tropical rainforests and coastal defence provided by mangrove forests.

Incorporating conservation zone effectiveness for protecting biodiversity in marine planning.

Establishing different types of conservation zones is becoming commonplace. However, spatial prioritization methods that can accommodate multiple zones are poorly understood in theory and application. It is typically assumed that management regulations across zones have differential levels of effectiveness ("zone effectiveness") for biodiversity protection, but the influence of zone effectiveness on achieving conservation targets has not yet been explored. Here, we consider the zone effectiveness of three zones: permanent closure, partial protection, and open, for planning for the protection of five different marine habitats in the Vatu-i-Ra Seascape, Fiji. We explore the impact of differential zone effectiveness on the location and costs of conservation priorities. We assume that permanent closure zones are fully effective at protecting all habitats, open zones do not contribute towards the conservation targets and partial protection zones lie between these two extremes. We use four different estimates for zone effectiveness and three different estimates for zone cost of the partial protection zone. To enhance the practical utility of the approach, we also explore how much of each traditional fishing ground can remain open for fishing while still achieving conservation targets. Our results show that all of the high priority areas for permanent closure zones would not be a high priority when the zone effectiveness of the partial protection zone is equal to that of permanent closure zones. When differential zone effectiveness and costs are considered, the resulting marine protected area network consequently increases in size, with more area allocated to permanent closure zones to meet conservation targets. By distributing the loss of fishing opportunity equitably among local communities, we find that 84-88% of each traditional fishing ground can be left open while still meeting conservation targets. Finally, we summarize the steps for developing marine zoning that accounts for zone effectiveness.

Achieving the triple bottom line in the face of inherent trade-offs among social equity, economic return, and conservation.

Triple-bottom-line outcomes from resource management and conservation, where conservation goals and equity in social outcomes are maximized while overall costs are minimized, remain a highly sought-after ideal. However, despite widespread recognition of the importance that equitable distribution of benefits or costs across society can play in conservation success, little formal theory exists for how to explicitly incorporate equity into conservation planning and prioritization. Here, we develop that theory and implement it for three very different case studies in California (United States), Raja Ampat (Indonesia), and the wider Coral Triangle region (Southeast Asia). We show that equity tends to trade off nonlinearly with the potential to achieve conservation objectives, such that similar conservation outcomes can be possible with greater equity, to a point. However, these case studies also produce a range of trade-off typologies between equity and conservation, depending on how one defines and measures social equity, including direct (linear) and no trade-off. Important gaps remain in our understanding, most notably how equity influences probability of conservation success, in turn affecting the actual ability to achieve conservation objectives. Results here provide an important foundation for moving the science and practice of conservation planning-and broader spatial planning in general-toward more consistently achieving efficient, equitable, and effective outcomes.