Comprehensive, spatially explicit data that include regulatory information are essential for evaluating the level of protection that marine protected areas (MPAs) and other marine managed areas (MMAs) provide to marine life, and to inform progress towards ocean protection targets.
Marine protected areas (MPAs), particularly large MPAs, are increasing in number and size around the globe in part to facilitate the conservation of marine megafauna under the assumption that large-scale MPAs better align with vagile life histories; however, this alignment is not well established
Protected areas are a cornerstone for biodiversity conservation, and typically support more natural and undisturbed habitats compared to unprotected lands. The effect of protected areas on intra-specific ecological niche has been rarely investigated.
The aim of the National Protected Areas Forum was to fulfill mandates and strengthen policies to protect the country’s abundant natural assets into the future to benefit all life and future generations.
This new Pacific Islands framework for Nature Conservation and Protected Areas 2021-2025 was endorsed during the conference and subsequently at the 30th SPREP Meeting by 26 members countries and territories in 2021.
The dual mandate for many protected areas (PAs) to simultaneously promote recreation and conserve biodiversity may be hampered by negative effects of recreation on wildlife.
This paper contrasts seven spatial biodiversity conservation area designations by six different bodies: Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs), and the Ecologically and Biologically Significant Areas (EBSAs) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD); the Vulnerable Marine
