Report on the Efficacy of Marine Protected Areas in Achieving Sustainable Development Goal 14

Introduction: Assessing Global Commitments to Ocean Conservation

The international community’s commitment to Sustainable Development Goal 14 (SDG 14), “Life Below Water,” is critically examined through the performance of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). While over 8% of the world’s oceans are designated as MPAs, concerns persist regarding their effectiveness, with many labeled as “paper parks” that fail to prevent illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing. This report assesses the efficacy of MPAs, particularly in the context of SDG Target 14.4 (ending overfishing and IUU fishing) and SDG Target 14.5 (conserving at least 10% of marine areas), and evaluates the role of advanced technology in strengthening enforcement and achieving the ambitious “30 by 30” conservation pledge.

The State of Marine Ecosystems and the Challenge to SDG 14

The sustainability of global marine resources is under severe threat, directly challenging the objectives of SDG 14. The global industrial fishing fleet, comprising nearly half a million vessels, extracts approximately 100 million metric tons of seafood annually. This level of activity has led to a critical situation where over one-third of commercial fish species are overfished, undermining efforts to restore fish stocks and maintain marine biodiversity.

Varying Standards of Marine Protection

The term “protection” within MPAs is inconsistent, impacting progress toward conservation goals.

• “Gold Standard” MPAs: Only about 3% of the global ocean is covered by MPAs that fully ban industrial fishing. These areas are considered the most effective for achieving SDG 14.2 by protecting marine and coastal ecosystems.
• Weakly Regulated MPAs: The majority of designated protected areas permit some forms of industrial fishing, including destructive practices like bottom trawling. This discrepancy between designated protection and actual regulation hinders meaningful progress on SDG 14.

High-profile incidents, such as the seizure of a vessel in the Galápagos Marine Reserve carrying 300 tons of marine life, including 6,000 sharks, highlight the threat of poaching and the urgent need for robust monitoring to uphold the rule of law, a key component of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions).

Leveraging Technology for Monitoring and Accountability

Effective monitoring is fundamental to enforcing MPA regulations and achieving SDG 14. New technologies are overcoming the limitations of traditional systems, providing a clearer picture of maritime activity.

1. Automatic Identification System (AIS): While widely used, AIS can be disabled by vessels seeking to evade detection, creating “dark fleets” that engage in IUU fishing.
2. Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR): This satellite technology can detect vessels regardless of their AIS status by sending radar pulses to the ocean surface. When combined with artificial intelligence, SAR provides a comprehensive view of vessel activity, revealing that approximately 75% of fishing vessels detected by SAR in one study were not broadcasting on AIS.

These technological advancements are critical for strengthening institutional capacity (SDG 16) and fostering partnerships (SDG 17) among governments, researchers, and organizations like Global Fishing Watch to hold actors accountable.

Global Analysis of MPA Compliance and Effectiveness

Two recent studies provide a comprehensive global analysis of industrial fishing within MPAs, with significant implications for ocean conservation policy.

Key Findings from a Study on Fully Protected Areas

An analysis of nearly 1,400 MPAs where industrial fishing is explicitly banned revealed a high degree of compliance, supporting the efficacy of strong regulations for achieving SDG 14.

• Industrial fishing activity was minimal, with an average of five fishing vessels detected per 100,000 square kilometers, compared to 42 in unprotected coastal areas.
• 96% of these fully protected MPAs experienced less than one day per year of alleged illegal fishing.

Comparative Findings on All MPA Types

A broader study examining all types of MPAs, including those that permit fishing, found substantially higher levels of industrial fishing activity. The vessel detection rate was approximately eight times greater in these weakly regulated areas than in MPAs with full industrial fishing bans. The combined results lead to a clear conclusion: MPAs with weak regulations do not effectively curtail industrial fishing, whereas those with strong, enforced bans are largely successful.

Conclusion: A Path Forward for Ocean Sustainability

The evidence indicates that MPAs with robust, legally binding bans on industrial fishing are effective tools for achieving the targets of SDG 14. To meet the global “30 by 30” commitment, the focus must shift from merely designating areas to ensuring high-quality protection and rigorous enforcement.

The integration of advanced satellite technologies like SAR offers a cost-effective solution for monitoring vast ocean areas, deterring illegal activity, and enforcing marine law. By leveraging these tools and fostering international partnerships (SDG 17), nations can strengthen their institutional capacity (SDG 16) to protect marine biodiversity, restore fish populations, and ensure the sustainable use of ocean resources for future generations.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

SDG 14: Life Below Water

• The article is fundamentally about the conservation and sustainable use of the oceans, which is the core mission of SDG 14. It directly addresses issues of marine biodiversity, overfishing, illegal fishing, and the protection of marine ecosystems through Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). The text mentions the goal of MPAs is to protect habitats “where fish and other marine life breed and feed,” which aligns perfectly with conserving life below water.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

SDG 14: Life Below Water

1. Target 14.2: By 2020, sustainably manage and protect marine and coastal ecosystems to avoid significant adverse impacts, including by strengthening their resilience, and take action for their restoration in order to achieve healthy and productive oceans.
   • The article’s focus on Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) as a tool to “help restore fish populations and marine habitats” and protect treasures like coral reefs directly supports this target. It discusses how “well-designed and enforced” MPAs can achieve this goal.
2. Target 14.4: By 2020, effectively regulate harvesting and end overfishing, illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing and destructive fishing practices, and implement science-based management plans, in order to restore fish stocks in the shortest time feasible, at least to levels that can produce maximum sustainable yield as determined by their biological characteristics.
   • This target is central to the article. It explicitly mentions that “more than one-third of commercial fish species are overfished” and details the problem of illegal fishing through “poaching” and ships that “go dark.” The entire discussion on using satellite technology to track the “dark fleet” is about combating IUU fishing.
3. Target 14.5: By 2020, conserve at least 10 per cent of coastal and marine areas, consistent with national and international law and based on the best available scientific information.
   • The article directly references this target and provides an update on progress and future commitments. It states that MPAs “cover more than 8% of the world’s oceans today” and that “Nearly every country has pledged to protect 30% of the ocean by 2030.”
4. Target 14.c: Enhance the conservation and sustainable use of oceans and their resources by implementing international law as reflected in UNCLOS, which provides the legal framework for the conservation and sustainable use of oceans and their resources.
   • The article analyzes the effectiveness of MPAs based on their legal status, noting that areas “where all industrial fishing is explicitly banned by law” are “largely respected.” This highlights the importance of implementing and enforcing legal frameworks for ocean conservation.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Indicators for SDG 14 Targets

• Indicator for Target 14.5 (Coverage of protected areas): The article provides direct quantitative data for this indicator.
  • It states that “Marine protected areas cover more than 8% of the world’s oceans today.”
  • It provides a more detailed indicator of protection quality, noting that “only about 3% is actually covered by industrial fishing bans.”
  • It mentions the future target commitment, a pledge to “protect 30% of the ocean by 2030.”
• Indicator for Target 14.4 (Proportion of fish stocks within biologically sustainable levels): The article cites a specific statistic that serves as this indicator.
  • It states that “more than one-third of commercial fish species are overfished, exceeding what population growth can replenish.”
• Indicator for Target 14.4 (Level of IUU fishing): The article implies several ways to measure this through new technology.
  • The discrepancy between tracking systems is used as a proxy for potential IUU activity: “in about 75% of instances fishing vessels detected by synthetic aperture radar were not being tracked by AIS.”
  • The density of fishing vessels in protected areas is used as an indicator of illegal fishing: The study found “about five fishing vessels per 100,000 square kilometers” in protected areas with bans, compared to “42 on average in unprotected coastal areas.”
  • The frequency of violations is another indicator: “96% [of protected areas with bans] had less than one day per year of alleged illegal fishing effort.”

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: gijn.org