4.4 Science

MCA Field Guide: English | Spanish
MCA Field Guide Checklist
Phase 4: Implementation Checklist
4.1 Administration accounted for
4.2 Planning initiated
4.3 Outreach planned and begun
4.4 Science program established
4.5 Enforcement needs assessed and met
4.6 Public uses promoted and managed
4.7 Livelihoods identified
4.8 Habitat management needs realized
4.9 Maintenance identified and scheduled
4.10 Funding needs assessed and acquired for the long-term

Scientific activities related to the implementation of Marine Conservation Agreements (MCAs) include establishing baseline conditions, monitoring, determining ending conditions and experimentation. Some scientific activities may be optional while others may be required due to the desires of funders, regulatory agencies, right-holders and conservation organizations.

Before other implementation activities in the field begin, biodiversity and socio-economic baseline conditions and monitoring systems should be relatively well understood and developed. Much of the information necessary to establish these will likely have been gathered in sub-steps 1.1 Conservation Targets, 1.2 Threats and Strategies and 3.1 Conservation Commitments.

Baseline Conditions

Immediate Actions: If not accomplished during prior phases, initial baseline information should be gathered as soon as possible after the MCA is signed.

Biodiversity Baselines: It is a wise practice for due diligence purposes to establish baseline biological and physical conditions of MCA sites. Biological conditions include the presence and status of some or all plant and animal species as well as habitat conditions (including the current level and impact of public uses). Physical conditions include parameters such as sediment and water quality, shoreline processes, and erosion rates. If sediment and water quality conditions are poor, contributing factors should be identified.
Socio-economic Baselines: Establishing socio-economic baselines are likely more important for MCA projects in developing countries or those in developed countries that involve community benefits, development and livelihoods. In either case, baselines for broad socio-economic factors such as income, education and health should be determined. If not already completed, the project boundaries for the MCA should also be determined as accurately as possible. Knowing where project boundaries are located will help implementers identify encroachments on those boundaries in the future.

Monitoring

Immediate Actions: Biodiversity and socio-economic monitoring protocols should be established soon after the MCA is signed. Individuals and organizations responsible for undertaking the monitoring should be identified soon thereafter.

Establishing a monitoring program for sites is essential if project managers want to determine trends and impacts over time. Project adaptation, evaluation, and success all depend on site monitoring. Monitoring may or may not have to be scientifically rigorous to achieve its goals. The degree to which a formal monitoring program is needed depends on how the results will be used. If the desire is to simply ensure the neighbors and the public do not substantially impact the site, then casual observations may be all that is necessary. If, however, the desire is to document changes such as biodiversity increases due to habitat manipulations, then a more rigorous approach will be needed.

Although a formal, more rigorous monitoring system should be cost effective, it should also provide the necessary level of quantitative information to assess three key sets of indicators: conservation outcomes, socio-economic trends, and agreement compliance. Any other performance metrics in the agreement may be included as needed (e.g., use of benefits, communications and awareness). Monitoring, while dependent on site and resource-specific circumstances, should generally be undertaken at least annually throughout the duration of the MCA.

Monitoring can be used at sites to detect and document:

Boundary encroachment by neighbors
Changes to baseline conditions
Effects of habitat modification and experimentation
Effects of species re/introduction or eradication efforts
Effects of human activity reduction, modification, or prohibition
Existence or expansion of invasive species
Impacts from public uses (i.e., trampling, garbage, derelict vessels, resource extraction, and erosion)
New or continued sources of water, air, and sediment contamination (i.e., oil, sewage outfalls and under ground seeps).

Biodiversity Monitoring: Biodiversity monitoring helps measure progress towards achieving conservation outcomes and should be conducted at least annually or bi-annually. Protocols should be designed to track conservation targets regularly over time, taking into account seasonality when appropriate. Third party involvement in monitoring may be necessary to guarantee objectivity of data collection as well as analysis of progress in achieving biodiversity outcomes. In addition, agreements will often benefit in at least three ways from community involvement in biodiversity monitoring:

Employment opportunities
Cost effective data collection
Enhanced knowledge, capacity and pride of community members

For priority species, biodiversity monitoring will typically focus on abundance, measured directly through transects and plots. For protected areas, monitoring will concentrate on habitat quantity and quality. Data collection options will vary, but may include satellite imagery, flyovers, water quality tests, and third party monitoring of major access points to the resource.

Socio-Economic Monitoring: Tracking socio-economic changes, at least annually or bi-annually, will show the contribution of the MCA to improvement of local conditions as well as changes in local perspectives regarding conservation and the agreement itself. Third party involvement again may be necessary to guarantee objectivity of data collection and transparency in reporting. For rigor, control sites should also be monitored if possible and cost effective, or regional statistical data can be used (depending on quality and availability) to isolate the impact of the MCA on human well-being. The cost of data collection, which may take the form of household surveys and focus group discussions, can be reduced by involving local university students.

The following types of indicators should be considered when monitoring socio-economic changes:

Awareness/understanding of the MCA (rules, benefits, duration)
Overall satisfaction with the MCA
Perceptions and attitudes towards conservation
Community perceptions of changes attributable to the MCA
Effectiveness of the benefits provided under the MCA
Broad socio-economic changes (e.g., income, educational attainment, health)
Effectiveness of decision-making institutions and processes (e.g., transparency, participation)

Ending Conditions

At the end of MCA project periods (such as at the end of a lease term), it may be desired or necessary to once again determine biological and physical conditions, as well as socio-economic conditions, to allow comparisons against initial baseline conditions. This may be done for scientific or legal (documenting conditions and uses for liability purposes) purposes. The end of a lease or other MCA project may also be the time to determine the long-term effects of experiments that were undertaken during the project period.

Experimentation

MCAs can provide access to sites for scientific experimentation. This unique access to areas, which are typically open for a variety of multiple public uses, may be used by scientists to:

Manipulate habitat
Manipulate human uses
Re/introduce plant or animal species
Use as control sites
Use as pilot sites to determine or test best management practices (aquaculture, green public access)

Next Sub-step

Establishing an effective scientific program, to include monitoring, can assist with enforcement efforts.

Proceed to 4.5 Enforcement

Return to Top