MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3012962171 · doi:10.1111/gcb.15094

Incorporating climate change adaptation into marine protected area planning

2020· review· en· W3012962171 on OpenAlexafffund
Kristen L. Wilson, Derek P. Tittensor, Boris Worm, Heike K. Lotze

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Change Biology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoral and Marine Ecosystems Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaJarislowsky FoundationOcean Frontier Institute
KeywordsClimate changeEnvironmental resource managementAdaptation (eye)Vulnerability (computing)Marine protected areaClimate change adaptationEnvironmental planningMarine spatial planningAdaptive managementCorporate governanceEnvironmental scienceGeographyBusinessComputer scienceHabitatEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change is increasingly impacting marine protected areas (MPAs) and MPA networks, yet adaptation strategies are rarely incorporated into MPA design and management plans according to the primary scientific literature. Here we review the state of knowledge for adapting existing and future MPAs to climate change and synthesize case studies (n = 27) of how marine conservation planning can respond to shifting environmental conditions. First, we derive a generalized conservation planning framework based on five published frameworks that incorporate climate change adaptation to inform MPA design. We then summarize examples from the scientific literature to assess how conservation goals were defined, vulnerability assessments performed and adaptation strategies incorporated into the design and management of existing or new MPAs. Our analysis revealed that 82% of real-world examples of climate change adaptation in MPA planning derive from tropical reefs, highlighting the need for research in other ecosystems and habitat types. We found contrasting recommendations for adaptation strategies at the planning stage, either focusing only on climate refugia, or aiming for representative protection of areas encompassing the full range of expected climate change impacts. Recommendations for MPA management were more unified and focused on adaptative management approaches. Lastly, we evaluate common barriers to adopting climate change adaptation strategies based on reviewing studies which conducted interviews with MPA managers and other conservation practitioners. This highlights a lack of scientific studies evaluating different adaptation strategies and shortcomings in current governance structures as two major barriers, and we discuss how these could be overcome. Our review provides a comprehensive synthesis of planning frameworks, case studies, adaptation strategies and management actions which can inform a more coordinated global effort to adapt existing and future MPA networks to continued climate change.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.159
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.171 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations200
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Change BiologySame topicCoral and Marine Ecosystems StudiesFrench-language works237,207