Skip to content

Article

Falling Short of Potential: Transforming Mediterranean MPAs

By Sabrina Croft | October 31, 2024

The Mediterranean Sea is a vast treasure trove of diverse marine species, and it has played host to much of the history and ever-changing culture of the peoples inhabiting its shores. Unfortunately, as is the case with many ocean treasures, this ecosystem is under threat. The Mediterranean is home to a critically endangered population of Mediterranean monk seals (Monachus monachus),1 an endangered Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus) population,2 and a declining abundance of Neptune grass (Posidonia oceanica),3 among many other unique and threatened species.

The Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment and the Coastal Region of the Mediterranean (formerly the Barcelona Convention) is the leading international agreement to protect biodiversity in this sea.4 This agreement calls for the protection of at least 30% of marine areas by 2030 (also known as ‘30x30’) in accordance with Target 3 of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. As a result, 9.12% of Mediterranean waters are now contained in designated MPAs.5,6 This coverage does not approach the target, and beneath its surface lies an even less encouraging reality.

Atlantic bluefin tuna. Photo from Oceana Marine Life Encyclopedia.

Paper Parks: The Status Quo

The reality of Mediterranean MPAs is that few of them employ strong protections that will deliver conservation outcomes. A 2019 World Wildlife Fund report found that most Mediterranean MPAs were ‘paper parks.’3 Paper parks are legally established environmental protection zones lacking sufficient enforcement, funding, or planning to effectively halt biodiversity loss and habitat degradation. In essence, they are MPAs that exist only on paper, not in practice. Many Mediterranean MPAs exemplify this issue, showing only moderate levels of environmental health based on biological indicators.7 The indicators with the lowest values were canopy and erect algae cover, with fish, turf, and barren indicators also lowering the Mediterranean’s protection value.7 MPAs in the Adriatic, Aegean, and Ionian Seas are in the poorest relative state, due to reasons varying from low enforcement to lack of robust protections for specific ecosystem components.7 Suffice it to say, an epidemic of paper parks is hindering conservation progress across the Mediterranean.

The Flaws that Make a Paper Park

One of the primary problems with many Mediterranean MPAs is the lack of a science-based management plan. According to the WWF’s 2019 study, only 2.48% of Mediterranean MPAs had a management plan, and 1.27% effectively implemented said plans (see Figure 1).3 Even in countries with a higher number of MPAs, such as Spain and Croatia, MPAs tend to lack planning and enforcement for conservation goals, including European Union-recognized Natura 2000 sites.3 As highlighted in the Blue Park Standard, identifying biodiversity threats and developing action plans to minimize those threats is important for conservation outcomes, as is monitoring for outcomes.8 Without clear management plans and the capacity to execute said plans, conserving marine biodiversity is dead in the water, even for officially designated MPAs.

Figure 1. Percent MPA coverage, marine area with management plan, and implemented management plan across the Mediterranean Sea by country. (Source: Gomei et al. 2019)

Going hand-in-hand with explicit management plans, Mediterranean MPA regulations are typically weak. MPAs must limit extractive activities and other ecosystem-damaging activities to reliably produce biodiversity conservation outcomes, which is one of the essential requirements of a Blue Park.8 Less than 2% of Mediterranean MPAs are fully or highly protected, while 48% are minimally protected and 24% are incompatible with biodiversity conservation.9 When extractive and industrial activities are allowed in MPAs, biodiversity suffers.

Compounding these issues, Mediterranean MPAs frequently favor fisheries-based monitoring and neglect ecosystem level monitoring. Mediterranean MPAs tend to hyperfocus on rocky-littoral fish assemblages that are relevant to fisheries, neglecting important ecological variability in fish (and other) populations as well as prior baseline data to measure MPA effects against.10 Without consistent hypothesis-based monitoring of diverse ecological metrics, there is no certainty in the effectiveness of these MPAs.10 The fisheries-first priorities of most Mediterranean MPAs ignore ecological complexities and make MPA effectiveness impossible to verify, even if conservation is achieved. With shortcomings such as these, the wide gap of Mediterranean MPAs achieving effective conservation is more clearly understood.

Stories of Hope

All is not lost, however. Despite the shortcomings of most Mediterranean MPAs, there are standout examples of conservation done right. There are three Blue Parks in Mediterranean waters: Réserve Naturelle Marine de Cerbère-Banyuls in France (Silver 2018), Area Marina Protetta di Torre Guaceto in Italy (Silver 2019), and Nacionalni Park Brijuni in Croatia (Gold 2021). Each of these MPAs has met the rigorous, science-based Blue Park Standard for conservation effectiveness and serve as examples for other Mediterranean MPAs.

The momentum exists for better MPA management in the Mediterranean, as fishers and other stakeholders recognize their responsibility to participate in marine conservation through MPA planning.11,12 As MPA success stories spread, so too will the public desire to mobilize efforts for creating quality MPAs that benefit marine life and humans.

Exemplary EU MPAs that Mediterranean MPAs can model include the aforementioned Cerbère-Banyuls Marine Reserve and the Network of Marine Protected Areas in the Azores (RAMPA). These MPAs employ strong regulations, effective management planning, and monitoring intended for adaptive management.
Cerbère-Banyuls Marine Reserve not only achieves the Blue Park Standard with its strong regulations and extensive, well-executed management plan, but the management team also regularly evaluates their own progress and adapts as needed. Currently, the Reserve is undergoing an expansion to at least double the current protected surface area, an addition of 600 hectares, in hopes of achieving France’s 30x30 target.13 This expansion was motivated by the success of the MPA’s biodiversity conservation, given its international recognition by the IUCN alongside Blue Parks.13 Cerbère-Banyuls Marie Reserve’s conservation progress is adaptive, as shown by expanding its strongly protected coverage for the benefit Mediterranean biodiversity.

RAMPA is a recently designated Atlantic MPA network.14 It has been explicitly planned to protect a total of 30% of the Azores marine area, with clearly defined zoning for highly and fully protected zones.15 Rigorous scientific expeditions in 2016 and 2018 identified vital marine species beyond targeted fish and habitats across the area and the water column, including a newly discovered hydrothermal vent field, providing a well-informed basis for the revised MPA network.15 RAMPA’s vision exemplifies the science-based management that is needed for proper biodiversity conservation. If MPAs like RAMPA and Cerbère-Banyuls can succeed, then it is high time other Mediterranean MPAs follow their example to draft and implement management plans, threat mitigation, and monitoring.

Image of a vent in the Luso hydrothermal vent field, located within RAMPA. Photo by © ROV Luso, Portuguese Task Force for the Extension of the Continental Shelf.

Writing the Mediterranean's Next Chapter

Effective MPAs in Mediterranean waters are possible and are a first step towards better MPA implementation elsewhere. If the EU can improve MPAs under their jurisdiction, it could lead the charge for improved MPAs throughout including North Africa and the Middle East. The Mediterranean Sea has hosted a rich history, from carrying ships of armies bound for Troy to Afro-European trade. Yet the twenty first century must be defined by the recognition and protection of its marine life by surrounding national governments and stakeholders. From seagrass meadows to deep-sea communities, from sea sponges to fin whales, the Mediterranean is a biodiversity hotspot that is long overdue for the quality MPAs it needs.

References:

  1. Aguilar, A. et Lowry, L. (2010) Monachus monachus (Mediterranean assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2010. Retrieved September 2024 from https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/13653/4305567.
  2. Di Natale, A. et al. (2011) Thunnus thynnus (Mediterranean assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2011. Retrieved September 2024 from https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/21860/9330380.
  3. Gomei, M. et al. (2021) [original 2019]. Towards 2020: how Mediterranean countries are performing to protect their sea, p. 7.
  4. European Environment Agency (2015) Marine Protected Areas in European Seas, pp. 19-20.
  5. Marine Conservation Institute. (2024). MPAtlas. Seattle, WA. MPAtlas.org. (Accessed: 16/10/2024)
  6. UNEP-WCMC and IUCN, Protected Planet: The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) [via MPAtlas, 10-2024], Cambridge, UK: UNEP-WCMC and IUCN. Current dataset available at: protectedplanet.net.
  7. Fraschetti, S. et al. (2022) An integrated assessment of the Good Environmental Status of Mediterranean Marine Protected Areas. Journal of Environmental Management 305:114370.
  8. Marine Conservation Institute (2022) Blue Park Criteria: 2022, pp. 23, 25.
  9. Aminian-Biquet, J. et al (2024) Over 80% of the European Union’s marine protected area only marginally regulates human activity. One Earth 7:1614-1629.
  10. Fraschetti, S. et al. (2002) Marine Protected Areas in the Mediterranean Sea: Objectives, Effectiveness and Monitoring. Marine Ecology 23:190-200.
  11. Di Cintio, A. et al. (2024) Investigating artisanal fishers’ support for MPAs: Evidence from the Tuscan Archipelago (Mediterranean Sea). Marine Policy 167:106260.
  12. Intoni, G. S. et al. (2024) Public perceptions of marine protected areas: an Italian study. Journal of Coastal Conservation 28:54.
  13. Cadene, F. et Hartmann, V. (2022) Plan de gestion 2023-2032 de la RNMCB – Section A – Diagnostic de la RNMCB: informations générales, environnement, biodiversité, cadre socioéconomique et culturel, vocation à accueillir le public et intérêt pédagogique, pp. 1, 14.
  14. Blue Azores (2024) Azores Establishes Largest Marine Protected Area Network In North Atlantic. Retrieved October 2024 from https://www.blueazores.org/azores-amp-rede.
  15. Blue Azores (2023) Blue Azores: Facts and Figures, pp. 3, 5, 10.
LinkedInPin