Shortfalls in the protection of Important Shark and Ray Areas undermine shark conservation efforts in the Central and South American Pacific

Global biodiversity targets require nations to designate 30 % of their marine waters as protected areas by 2030. Sharks, rays, and chimaeras (hereafter ‘sharks’) are key components of aquatic ecosystems; however, over a third are globally threatened with extinction. Across the Central and South American Pacific Ocean region, we (i) assessed trends in Marine Protected Area (MPA) expansion and extent across the 12 nations of the region; (ii) quantified the spatial overlap between MPAs and Important Shark and Ray Areas (ISRAs); and (iii) evaluated the effectiveness of the current MPA governance structure at protecting sharks and their critical habitat. There has been a recent rapid increase in the establishment of MPAs with 90 % of current MPAs designated since 2010. Yet, El Salvador, Guatemala, Peru, and Honduras still protect less than 10 % of their waters. We find that ISRAs overlap with all MPAs by only 15.6 % and with no-take MPAs by 7.3 %. This raises concerns about the low level of protection afforded to critical shark habitats in the region. Of 182 MPAs identified, 41.8 % do not have a management plan, comprising 39.8 % of the total MPA surface area. Mexico, Costa Rica, and Colombia have relatively strong governance frameworks in place and, along with Panama, Honduras, and Ecuador, represent the highest overlap between MPAs and ISRAs. However, the contribution of the remaining six countries to shark protection via MPAs is low based on limited spatial overlap with ISRAs (<2 %). As countries mobilise to meet the 30×30 target, we propose considering ISRAs as a key component of spatial planning when designing new MPAs, designating existing partially protected areas as no-take zones, or reshaping the boundaries of existing MPAs. • 65 Important Shark and Ray Areas delineated in the Central and South American Pacific. • Nine-fold expansion in Marine Protected Areas since 2010. • El Salvador, Guatemala, Peru, and Honduras still do not meet Aichi Target 11. • Only 7 % of identified critical shark habitat overlaps with no-take zones. • Almost half of MPAs do not have management plans and are ‘paper parks’.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Marine Policy
Published
2024-10-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2024.106448
Citations
8
Primary Topic
Ichthyology and Marine Biology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
5.53
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Shortfalls in the protection of Important Shark and Ray Areas undermine shark conservation efforts in the Central and South American Pacific

Paola A. Mejía‐Falla, Ryan Charles, Rándall Arauz, Mario Espinoza et al.
8 citations
Marine Policy
Ichthyology and Marine Biology
5.53
article

Shortfalls in the protection of Important Shark and Ray Areas undermine shark conservation efforts in the Central and South American Pacific

Paola A. Mejía‐Falla, Ryan Charles, Rándall Arauz, Mario Espinoza, Jorge Manuel Morales‐Saldaña, Ángel Javier Vega, Alex R. Hearn, James Thomas Ketchum, Frida Lara-Lizardi, Emiliano García‐Rodríguez, Cristopher G. Avalos‐Castillo, Joanna Alfaro‐Shigueto, Rima W. Jabado, Ilena Zanella, Oscar Sosa‐Nishizaki, Javier Tovar‐Ávila, Giuseppe Notarbartolo di Sciara, Francisco Polanco-Vásquez, Yehudi Rodríguez-Arriatti, Christoph A. Rohner, Enzo Acuña, Elpis J. Chávez, Nathália Vieira Serrano, Luz Erandi Saldaña-Ruiz, Gonzalo Hernández, Marta D. Palacios, Enrique Wolpert Barraza, Andrés F. Navia, Cesar R. Peñaherrera-Palma, Ana Hacohen-Domené, Théophile L. Mouton, Eduardo Espinoza, Gabriela M. Ochoa, Peter M. Kyne, Sandra Bessudo, Felipe Galván‐Magaña, Melany Villate‐Moreno, Ximena Vélez‐Zuazo, Adriana González‐Pestana, Carlos Bustamante, Asia O. Armstrong, Amanda Batlle-Morera, Felipe Ladino, Ely Augustinus, José A. Gonzalez-Leiva, Jeffry Madrigal‐Mesén
article en
8 citations

Abstract

Global biodiversity targets require nations to designate 30 % of their marine waters as protected areas by 2030. Sharks, rays, and chimaeras (hereafter ‘sharks’) are key components of aquatic ecosystems; however, over a third are globally threatened with extinction. Across the Central and South American Pacific Ocean region, we (i) assessed trends in Marine Protected Area (MPA) expansion and extent across the 12 nations of the region; (ii) quantified the spatial overlap between MPAs and Important Shark and Ray Areas (ISRAs); and (iii) evaluated the effectiveness of the current MPA governance structure at protecting sharks and their critical habitat. There has been a recent rapid increase in the establishment of MPAs with 90 % of current MPAs designated since 2010. Yet, El Salvador, Guatemala, Peru, and Honduras still protect less than 10 % of their waters. We find that ISRAs overlap with all MPAs by only 15.6 % and with no-take MPAs by 7.3 %. This raises concerns about the low level of protection afforded to critical shark habitats in the region. Of 182 MPAs identified, 41.8 % do not have a management plan, comprising 39.8 % of the total MPA surface area. Mexico, Costa Rica, and Colombia have relatively strong governance frameworks in place and, along with Panama, Honduras, and Ecuador, represent the highest overlap between MPAs and ISRAs. However, the contribution of the remaining six countries to shark protection via MPAs is low based on limited spatial overlap with ISRAs (<2 %). As countries mobilise to meet the 30×30 target, we propose considering ISRAs as a key component of spatial planning when designing new MPAs, designating existing partially protected areas as no-take zones, or reshaping the boundaries of existing MPAs. • 65 Important Shark and Ray Areas delineated in the Central and South American Pacific. • Nine-fold expansion in Marine Protected Areas since 2010. • El Salvador, Guatemala, Peru, and Honduras still do not meet Aichi Target 11. • Only 7 % of identified critical shark habitat overlaps with no-take zones. • Almost half of MPAs do not have management plans and are ‘paper parks’.

Marine PolicyVol. 171
Charles Darwin Foundation (EC), Universidad de Antofagasta (CL), Universidad de San Carlos de Guatemala (GT), University of the Sunshine Coast (AU), Tethys Research Institute (IT), Universidad Científica del Sur (PE), Bay Institute (US), Universidad Católica del Norte (CL), Charles Darwin University (AU), Universidad de Costa Rica (CR), World Water Watch (US), Marine Megafauna Foundation (US), International Union for Conservation of Nature (United States) (US), International Union for Conservation of Nature (United Kingdom) (GB), Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología y Medio Ambiente (CU), Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad (EC), International Union for Conservation of Nature (CH), Galapagos (Belgium) (BE)
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Ichthyology and Marine Biology
5.53
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.