| Literature DB >> 32299952 |
Joshua E Cinner1, Jessica Zamborain-Mason2, Georgina G Gurney2, Nicholas A J Graham2,3, M Aaron MacNeil4, Andrew S Hoey2, Camilo Mora5, Sébastien Villéger6, Eva Maire2,3,6, Tim R McClanahan7, Joseph M Maina7,8, John N Kittinger9, Christina C Hicks2,3, Stephanie D'agata6,7,8,10, Cindy Huchery2, Michele L Barnes2, David A Feary11, Ivor D Williams12, Michel Kulbicki10, Laurent Vigliola10, Laurent Wantiez10, Graham J Edgar13, Rick D Stuart-Smith13, Stuart A Sandin14, Alison L Green15, Maria Beger16, Alan M Friedlander17, Shaun K Wilson18, Eran Brokovich19, Andrew J Brooks20, Juan J Cruz-Motta21, David J Booth22, Pascale Chabanet10, Mark Tupper23, Sebastian C A Ferse24, U Rashid Sumaila25, Marah J Hardt26, David Mouillot2,6.
Abstract
The worldwide decline of coral reefs necessitates targeting management solutions that can sustain reefs and the livelihoods of the people who depend on them. However, little is known about the context in which different reef management tools can help to achieve multiple social and ecological goals. Because of nonlinearities in the likelihood of achieving combined fisheries, ecological function, and biodiversity goals along a gradient of human pressure, relatively small changes in the context in which management is implemented could have substantial impacts on whether these goals are likely to be met. Critically, management can provide substantial conservation benefits to most reefs for fisheries and ecological function, but not biodiversity goals, given their degraded state and the levels of human pressure they face.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32299952 DOI: 10.1126/science.aax9412
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Science ISSN: 0036-8075 Impact factor: 47.728