Measuring and monitoring compliance in no-take marine reserves

Authors

  • Brock J Bergseth,

    Corresponding author
    1. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, 1 James Cook Drive, Townsville, Qld, Australia
    2. School of Marine and Tropical Biology, James Cook University, 1 James Cook Drive, Townsville, Qld, Australia
    • Correspondence:

      Brock J Bergseth, School of Marine and Tropical Biology, James Cook University, 1 James Cook Drive, Townsville, Qld 4811, Australia

      Tel.: +61 7 4781 5730

      Fax: +61 7 4725 1570

      E-mail: brock.bergseth@my.jcu.edu.au

    Search for more papers by this author
  • Garry R Russ,

    1. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, 1 James Cook Drive, Townsville, Qld, Australia
    2. School of Marine and Tropical Biology, James Cook University, 1 James Cook Drive, Townsville, Qld, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author
  • Joshua E Cinner

    1. Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, 1 James Cook Drive, Townsville, Qld, Australia
    Search for more papers by this author

Abstract

No-take marine reserves are increasingly popular tools for conservation and fisheries management. While much attention has been paid to evaluating the effects of design aspects (size, location, etc.) in achieving reserve objectives, less emphasis has been placed on the role of stakeholder compliance. Therefore, the first aim of this study was to evaluate the state of compliance literature and examine the methods used to measure compliance in reserves. The state of compliance literature is limited, although publications with compliance information have increased sixfold in the last decade. However, most studies containing compliance information (63%) fail to provide quantitative estimates. Furthermore, most (95%) quantitative estimates of compliance were reported using a single method, which is problematic because each method has biases and limited applicability. Methods used to indicate compliance include (i) direct observation; (ii) indirect observation; (iii) law enforcement records; (iv) direct questioning; (v) expert opinion; and (vi) modelling. Our second aim was to empirically demonstrate the critical role of compliance in reserve outcomes by comparing a mixed-effects model on compliance data synthesized from 63 marine reserves to that of a null model. The model of best fit demonstrated a negative relationship between non-compliance and target species biomass response ratios. Thus, without incorporating any aspects of reserve design, compliance data predicted reserve response ratios of fish biomass. Accordingly, researchers should explore ways to better understand and measure non-compliance. Therefore, future research should triangulate multiple sources of quantitative compliance data collected using standardized techniques and conduct baseline surveys before reserve implementation.

Ancillary