Perspectives on ecosystem-based approaches to the management of marine resources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) include many subclasses (e.g.marine sanctuaries, marine parks, wildlife refuges, fisheries closures, no-take MPAs, multiple-use MPAs, marine reserves, ecological reserves) all of which can be defined based mainly upon the level of protection and the primary conservation goal (see www.mpa.gov;Lubchenco et al. 2003).MPAs, and especially the marine reserves subclass (i.e.'areas of the ocean completely protected from all extractive and destructive activities'; Lubchenco et al. 2003) represent the extreme case of the precautionary approach to managing marine resources (e.g.Lauck et al. 1998).The strong and rapidly growing interest in MPAs (and particularly in marine reserves) is reflected in the dramatic increase in the number of publications devoted to them (reviewed in Jones 2002, Gell & Roberts 2003, and the articles in 'The Science of Marine Reserves', a supplemental issue of Ecological Applications, Vol 13, Iss 1, freely available for download at www.esa-journals.org/esaonline/?request=get-static&name=s1051-0761-013-01-0001).In addition, there are now a number of sites on the World Wide Web that are either totally devoted to MPAs, or include relevant information on them: UNEP's World Conservation Monitoring Centre (www.unep-wcmc.org/protected_areas), the Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans (PISCO, www. piscoweb.org),and several others.This intense interest is at least partly related to MPAs having been identified and advocated as a conservation (of habitat and biodiversity) and managerial (of fisheries) tool of central importance in the Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries (EAF) (e.g.Agardy 2000, Stergiou 2002, Halpern & Warner 2003, Lubchenko et al. 2003, Pauly & MacLean 2003, Hilborn et al. 2004).It is hoped that MPAs will be beneficial in (1) rebuilding overexploited fish stocks, (2) preserving habitat and biodiversity, (3) maintaining ecosystem structure, (4) buffering against the effects of environmental variability, (5) serving as a control group against which populations in exploited regions can be Acknowledgements.For their influences on our development as marine scientists, we dedicate this essay to Maxwell J.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".