<<  <  >  >>

 

FR O M I  N D I C AT O R S

9

TO ACTION

The challenges facing coral reef managers and

We strongly recommend that all groups

conservation practitioners are enormous. This guide

engaged in monitoring commit to the

provides a common framework to interpret monitoring

consistent long-term collection of a core

data -- a tool to increase the effectiveness and impact

set of highest priority ecological and social

of our collective conservation work.  This section

indicators.

provides examples and suggestions on:

While the full suite of "optimal" indicators monitored

· Establishing a core set of priority indicators

by any group (MPAs, NGOs, universities, government

· Using indicators to address management questions

departments) may vary from one community or

reef site to another, these core priority indicators

· Examining sample management scenarios and

are widely applicable and useful, particularly when

decision support tools

shared and made widely available for broad regional

comparisons.

· Increasing effectiveness through collaboration

Priority Ecological Indicators

ESTABLISHING A CORE SET OF PRIORITY INDICATORS

Our highest priority ecological indicators -- those

Natural resource managers face the challenge of

denoted with a Priority 1 seal in the profiles --

allocating limited financial resources to a variety

represent our best estimation of how to conduct a

of essential undertakings: collecting status data,

basic ecological assessment with the fewest possible

implementing management actions, and evaluating

indicators (Table 9.a).  Such a "bare essentials"

programeffectiveness.Coralreefsandtheirassociated

program may be appropriate for management

marine ecosystems are particularly complex, making

programs with very limited budgets.

this challenge even more difficult.

These indicators are sometimes classified as status

No one combination of indicators is right for all

indicators because they measure the current status

situations. In designing a monitoring program, reef

of structural components and functional processes.

managers need to choose indicator combinations

that fit their particular situations and answer their

Priority Drivers and Social Indicators

specific management questions. For example, a an

MPA in Xcalak, Mexico, may be more concerned with

The top ten highest priority

the direct impacts of growing coastal development

ORITY ON

indicators for drivers of change

RI

than a more remote MPA on Isla Contoy, Mexico.

and social well-being are

also  presented  in  Table

The measurement of only one or a few indicators

9.a. These indicators were

cannot fully reflect the overall health of the

selected by the authors,

ecosystem. For instance, even efforts to assess one

RE

with input by social experts,

TH

of the main drivers of change, fishing, cannot rely on

EF

S FOR HEAL

local managers, and regional

merely one of the fishing indicators. Instead, multiple

consultations. It represents a

indicators that address the volume of production,

first iteration and could be revisited

natural abundances of targeted species, management

at future regional workshops.

practices, and linked ecological and cultural indicators

are needed to provide the full picture and guide

Our priority drivers and social indicators address the

management strategies.

following:

· The main threats or drivers of change (tourism and

No one combination of indicators is right forever.

coastal development, agriculture, fishing, global

Changing conditions may require that new indicators

climate change)

be added to the monitoring program to respond to the

· Incorporating community perception

introduction of a new activity or concern. Yet, a core

· Management effectiveness

set of indicators is needed for long-term monitoring by

a variety of assessors.

163