Integration of biophysical connectivity in the spatial optimization of coastal ecosystem services.

Ecological connectivity in coastal oceanic waters is mediated by dispersion of the early life stages of marine organisms and conditions the structure of biological communities and the provision of ecosystem services. Integrated management strategies aimed at ensuring long-term service provision to society do not currently consider the importance of dispersal and larval connectivity. A spatial optimization model is introduced to maximise the potential provision of ecosystem services in coastal areas by accounting for the role of dispersal and larval connectivity. The approach combines a validated coastal circulation model that reproduces realistic patterns of larval transport along the coast, which ultimately conditions the biological connectivity and productivity of an area, with additional spatial layers describing potential ecosystem services. The spatial optimization exercise was tested along the coast of Central Chile, a highly productive area dominated by the Humboldt Current. Results show it is unnecessary to relocate existing management areas, as increasing no-take areas by 10% could maximise ecosystem service provision, while improving the spatial representativeness of protected areas and minimizing social conflicts. The location of protected areas was underrepresented in some sections of the study domain, principally due to the restriction of the model to rocky subtidal habitats. Future model developments should encompass the diversity of coastal ecosystems and human activities to inform integrative spatial management. Nevertheless, the spatial optimization model is innovative not only for its integrated ecosystem perspective, but also because it demonstrates that it is possible to incorporate time-varying biophysical connectivity within the optimization problem, thereby linking the dynamics of exploited populations produced by the spatial management regime.

Equity trade-offs in conservation decision making.

Conservation decisions increasingly involve multiple environmental and social objectives, which result in complex decision contexts with high potential for trade-offs. Improving social equity is one such objective that is often considered an enabler of successful outcomes and a virtuous ideal in itself. Despite its idealized importance in conservation policy, social equity is often highly simplified or ill-defined and is applied uncritically. What constitutes equitable outcomes and processes is highly normative and subject to ethical deliberation. Different ethical frameworks may lead to different conceptions of equity through alternative perspectives of what is good or right. This can lead to different and potentially conflicting equity objectives in practice. We promote a more transparent, nuanced, and pluralistic conceptualization of equity in conservation decision making that particularly recognizes where multidimensional equity objectives may conflict. To help identify and mitigate ethical conflicts and avoid cases of good intentions producing bad outcomes, we encourage a more analytical incorporation of equity into conservation decision making particularly during mechanistic integration of equity objectives. We recommend that in conservation planning motivations and objectives for equity be made explicit within the problem context, methods used to incorporate equity objectives be applied with respect to stated objectives, and, should objectives dictate, evaluation of equity outcomes and adaptation of strategies be employed during policy implementation.