Fig. 1 Literature review of climate change consideration in MPA design. (A) Number of studies from the review where MPA climate change adaptation strategies were broadly discussed, presented as a proof of concept, or implemented in practice, respectively. (B) Location and brief description of the six implemented examples. Green areas represent MPA locations from the World Database on Protected Areas (79). See main text for further discussion, including search limitations, and text and tables in the Supplementary Materials for full methodological details and results.
Fig. 2 Vulnerability of the existing global MPA network to climate change. (A) Bivariate map of the time of emergence and historical variability for the global ocean [see (B) for color axes] under a business-as-usual emissions scenario [Representative Concentration Pathway (RCP) 8.5]. Time of emergence refers to the year when projected mean sea surface temperature (SST) at a given location exceeds the bounds of preindustrial conditions. Historical variability is the total thermal range calculated from a detrended 1900 to 2018 SST time series. (B) Quadrant plot of MPA position in climate emergence and historical variability space. Black points represent 1° × 1° grid cells within MPAs, with larger MPAs having more points based on overlap with SST data (see text in the Supplementary Materials for full methodological details). Histograms provide the distribution of MPAs along each axis. Percentage values indicate the proportion of MPA area (grid cells) in each quadrant; percentages in brackets indicate the proportion of the global ocean in each quadrant. Color scale is based on background distribution in global ocean.
Fig. 3 The need for climate-responsive management features. Climate-driven changes in mobile species, biogenic habitat features, and static geomorphological features (e.g., seamounts and ridges), with management measures (permanent and dynamic) superimposed (left column). In this example, under the current distribution percent coverage targets (e.g., Aichi Target 11 of 10% by 2020) will be met for many species, habitats, and features (right column). However, climate-driven shifts will affect future distributions such that these targets would no longer be met, as a result of species and biogenic habitats expanding, shrinking, disappearing, or moving in relation to static protected features (although some features may get increased protection if they move into MPAs). Dynamic closures (hashed boxes, Table 2) can help to fill the protection gap in a more rapid manner than simply extending or adding new MPAs; however, these dynamic areas will not count toward international targets unless they meet OECM criteria (see Table 3).
- Table 1 Examples of climate change adaption objectives and possible actions.
Objective with climate change Example actions to
operationalizeEarly detection of climate change
impactsEnhanced multisensor monitoring Citizen science observer networks Use of sentinel species as
indicatorsProtecting species or habitats that
moveSupport migration of climate-
displaced species or habitats
with flexible design features or
other management measures
and protect from other
stressorsEnabling reorganization of
ecosystems to retain functions
and services under climate
changeManage for resilience under a
changing climate rather than
assuming static features and
outcomesReassess and revise zoning and
management plans to account
for ecosystem and species
shiftsSpecify climate mitigation into MPA
network design and
management objectivesMaintaining representative MPA
networks in a changing climateInclude areas of high and low
predicted climate resilience,
future change, and adaptation
potential in representative
network designUse both static and dynamic
features to better conserve
ecosystemsBetter integrate conservation and
fisheries management
measures to augment one
anotherFocus network around anchor-
point static areas but integrate
multiple tools including more
dynamic and responsive
approaches (see Table 2)Adapting to unforeseen
conservation challenges and
opportunities as climate change
reconfigures ecosystemsMove toward dynamic
conservation objectivesUpdate management plans and
objectives a based on observed
changesCollect stakeholder observations
and feedback - Table 2 Climate design principles for the protected seascape.
Different tools perform complementary functions within a climate-resilient conserved seascape.
Management tool Objectives/characteristics Examples Static tools Static MPAs (anchor points) Conservation of assemblages associated with
static geomorphological features and other
sites of present and future conservation
importanceGreat Barrier Reef Marine Park
(Australia)Maintaining long-term monitoring (control/
baseline) sites where climate impacts can be
assessed in the absence of other stressorsGalapagos Marine Reserve (Ecuador) Creating networks for meta-populations and
fixed migration corridorsMarianas Trench National Monument
(USA)Static OECMs Effective conservation of key ecological features
and biodiversity from a single or several
threats (regardless of primary objective of
OECM)Rockall Haddock Box High Seas Trawl
Closure (North East Atlantic
Fisheries Commission)Act as long-term monitoring sites for climate
impacts with single or multiple additional
uses and/or stressors superimposedCreating networks for meta-populations and
fixed migration corridorsDynamic tools Dynamic ocean management areas* Respond to rapid shifts in species distribution
and threatsDynamic fisheries closures to protect
North Atlantic right whales
(Canada)Provide short-term/seasonal corridors or
stepping stonesProvide quicker deployment (and removal) than
MPAsNot fully multisectoral; often single-sectoral Unlikely to be considered OECMs under the
present definition, unless they remain in
place for an extended period (see Table 3)Climate-responsive biodiversity closures
(CRBCs)A hybrid of MPAs (multisectoral) with
shorter-term closures (ability to relocate and
react to climate-driven changes)Currently conceptual—see main text Respond to climate-driven biological responses
by moving boundaries to track shifting
habitats or ecosystemsFocus on shifts due to climate signal rather than
other fluctuationsUnlikely to be considered OECMs under the
present definition, unless they remain in
place for an extended period (see Table 3)*Also known as dynamic conservation features and/or short-term closures.
- Table 3 Assessment of whether dynamic management tools meet the CBD criteria (13) for being OECMs.
CBD criterion Do dynamic management tools as envisaged
meet criterion?A: Area is not currently recognized as a PA Not currently recognized as a PA Yes B: Area is governed and managed Geographically defined space Yes in size and area described No for geographically delineated boundaries Legitimate governance authorities Yes Managed Yes C: Achieves sustained and effective contribution to in situ conservation of biodiversity Effective Yes (assuming biodiversity and conservation
benefits, regardless of objectives)Sustained over the long term Depends on definition of “long term.” Some features
may shift year to year but be in place for many
years. Ultimately, it may be the intent; is the
proposed length of management expected to be
long-term, regardless of shorter-term dynamics?In situ conservation of biological diversity Yes Information and monitoring Yes D: Associated ecosystem functions and services and cultural, spiritual, socioeconomic, and other locally relevant values Ecosystem functions and services Yes Cultural, spiritual, socioeconomic, and other
locally relevant valuesYes (assuming explicitly accounted for)
Supplementary Materials
Supplementary material for this article is available at http://advances.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/5/11/eaay9969/DC1
Section S1. Methods for review of climate change adaptation in MPAs
Section S2. Methods for derivation assessing MPA vulnerability (see Fig. 2)
Table S1. References for the marine specific papers that incorporated climate change adaptation in MPA design or management presented in Fig. 1.
Table S2. Google scholar search term results for April 2019.
Table S3. Examples where climate change adaptation has been implemented in the design or management of an MPA.
References (80–168)
Additional Files
Supplementary Materials
This PDF file includes:
- Section S1. Methods for review of climate change adaptation in MPAs
- Section S2. Methods for derivation assessing MPA vulnerability (see Fig. 2)
- Table S1. References for the marine specific papers that incorporated climate change adaptation in MPA design or management presented in Fig. 1.
- Table S2. Google scholar search term results for April 2019.
- Table S3. Examples where climate change adaptation has been implemented in the design or management of an MPA.
- References (80–168)
Files in this Data Supplement:
