A thesis submitted to the Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy of Central European University in part fulfilment of the Degree of Master of Science An Ecological Coherence Assessment of the Wider Caribbean Region MPA Network CEU eTD Collection Rebecca GOTTLIEB June, 2021 Budapest i Erasmus Mundus Masters Course in Environmental Sciences, Policy and Management MESPOM This thesis is submitted in fulfillment of the Master of Science degree awarded as a result of successful completion of the Erasmus Mundus Masters course in Environmental Sciences, Policy and Management (MESPOM) jointly operated by the University of the Aegean (Greece), Central European University (Hungary), Lund University (Sweden) and the University of Manchester (United Kingdom). CEU eTD Collection ii Notes on copyright and the ownership of intellectual property rights: (1) Copyright in text of this thesis rests with the Author. Copies (by any process) either in full, or of extracts, may be made only in accordance with instructions given by the Author and lodged in the Central European University Library. Details may be obtained from the Librarian. This page must form part of any such copies made. Further copies (by any process) of copies made in accordance with such instructions may not be made without the permission (in writing) of the Author. (2) The ownership of any intellectual property rights which may be described in this thesis is vested in the Central European University, subject to any prior agreement to the contrary, and may not be made available for use by third parties without the written permission of the University, which will prescribe the terms and conditions of any such agreement. (3) For bibliographic and reference purposes this thesis should be referred to as: Gottlieb, R. 2021. An ecological coherence assessment of the Wider Caribbean Region MPA network. Master of Science thesis, Central European University, Budapest. Further information on the conditions under which disclosures and exploitation may take place is available from the Head of the Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy, Central European University. CEU eTD Collection iii Author’s declaration No portion of the work referred to in this thesis has been submitted in support of an application for another degree or qualification of this or any other university or other institute of learning. Rebecca GOTTLIEB CEU eTD Collection iv CENTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY ABSTRACT OF THESIS submitted by: Rebecca GOTTLIEB for the degree of Master of Science and entitled: An ecological coherence assessment of the Wider Caribbean Region MPA network Month and Year of submission: June, 2021. Marine protected areas (MPAs) are an area-based management tool that serve as the cornerstone for marine conservation. There has been a recent shift from establishing MPAs on an ad hoc basis to establishing MPA networks, partly driven by Aichi Biodiversity Target 11, which called for 10% coastal and marine coverage by 2020. Ecological coherence assessments can help determine if a group of individually established MPAs can retroactively be considered ecologically coherent, or if an intentionally established MPA network is ecologically coherent. This research, focusing on the Wider Caribbean Region, provides the first ecological coherence assessment of an MPA network outside of European waters. The ecological coherence of the Wider Caribbean Region MPA network was assessed by running fourteen tests to measure four main criteria: representativity, replicability, connectivity, and adequacy. Novel methodologies were presented for two of these tests: the human impact test and the ecologically important areas test. The results of the tests were aggregated using a methodology that incorporated uncertainty in the methods, data, and targets. The results showed that the network was likely to have achieved ecological coherence in terms of representativity, unlikely to have achieved ecological coherence in terms of replicability and connectivity, and very unlikely to have achieved ecological coherence in terms of adequacy. To get closer to ecological coherence, the region should focus on increasing no-take MPAs or zones and increasing the number of large MPAs. Overall, this assessment concluded that the Wider Caribbean Network is very unlikely to have achieved ecological coherence. CEU eTD Collection Keywords: Ecological coherence, MPA, marine, spatial analysis, GIS, conservation, protected areas, Caribbean v Acknowledgements I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation for the following people: Dr. Brandon Anthony, my internal thesis advisor, for his support and encouragement throughout the process. Your thoughtful and timely feedback, attention to detail, and commitment to my research and the conservation field are greatly appreciated. Sara Pruckner, my external thesis advisor, for her guidance and support from the very beginning. Thank you for always making time to help me, providing excellent feedback and suggestions, and invaluable technical advice. The Conserving Land and Seascapes team at UNEP-WCMC for welcoming me to the team during this thesis period, offering helpful advice, and answering questions. Cameron Bullen for generously sharing his resources, experiences, and ideas about ecological coherence assessments. It was immensely useful in starting off this project. Dr. Viktor Lagutov for generously assisting with equipment and software access. My partner, Doğu Erk, for his unwavering support throughout this process. Your encouragement, confidence in me, and fruit plates/endless tea refills/delicious cooking got me through this semester. My fellow MESPOM students and the staff and faculty at Central European University, University of the Aegean, and the University of Manchester for making this program and the last two years incredible, despite a global pandemic. My friends and family who are always there for me, no matter what. CEU eTD Collection vi Contents Chapter 1: Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 General Introduction ........................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Aim and Objectives.......................................................................................................... 3 1.3 Scope ................................................................................................................................ 3 1.4 Overview .......................................................................................................................... 4 Chapter 2: Literature review .................................................................................................. 6 2.1 Importance of Marine Protection ..................................................................................... 6 2.2 MPA Definition and Background .................................................................................... 6 2.3 Benefits and Challenges of MPAs as an Effective Conservation Tool ........................... 8 2.4 The Evolution of MPA Networks .................................................................................... 9 2.5 Ecological Coherence of MPA Networks ...................................................................... 10 2.6 Measuring Ecological Coherence .................................................................................. 11 2.6.1 Representativity....................................................................................................... 13 2.6.2 Replication .............................................................................................................. 13 2.6.3 Connectivity ............................................................................................................ 14 2.6.4 Adequacy ................................................................................................................. 17 2.7 Case Studies of Ecological Coherence Assessments ..................................................... 18 2.7.1 OSPAR .................................................................................................................... 19 2.7.2 HELCOM ................................................................................................................ 21 2.7.3 Mediterranean Sea .................................................................................................. 22 2.7.4 European Commission ............................................................................................ 22 2.7.5 The Celtic Seas ........................................................................................................ 23 2.7.6 California ................................................................................................................ 24 2.8 Background Information on the Caribbean Marine Environment ................................. 24 Chapter 3: Methodology........................................................................................................ 27 3.1 Data Handling ................................................................................................................ 27 3.1.1 Software .................................................................................................................. 27 3.1.2 Study Area ............................................................................................................... 27 3.1.3 MPAs ......................................................................................................................