Vis enkel innførsel

dc.contributor.authorOlsen, Erik Joel Steinar
dc.contributor.authorKaplan, Isaac C.
dc.contributor.authorAinsworth, Cameron
dc.contributor.authorFay, Gavin
dc.contributor.authorGaichas, Sarah
dc.contributor.authorGamble, Robert
dc.contributor.authorGirardin, Raphael
dc.contributor.authorEide, Cecilie H
dc.contributor.authorIhde, Thomas F
dc.contributor.authorMorzaria-Luna, Hem Nalini
dc.contributor.authorJohnson, Kelli F
dc.contributor.authorSavina-Rolland, Marie
dc.contributor.authorTownsend, Howard
dc.contributor.authorWeijerman, Mariska
dc.contributor.authorFulton, Elizabeth A.
dc.contributor.authorLink, Jason S.
dc.date.accessioned2018-10-01T14:16:05Z
dc.date.available2018-10-01T14:16:05Z
dc.date.created2018-09-06T13:43:24Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.citationFrontiers in Marine Science. 2018, 5 .nb_NO
dc.identifier.issn2296-7745
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11250/2565579
dc.description.abstractEcosystem-based management (EBM) of the ocean considers all impacts on and uses of marine and coastal systems. In recent years, there has been a heightened interest in EBM tools that allow testing of alternative management options and help identify tradeoffs among human uses. End-to-end ecosystem modeling frameworks that consider a wide range of management options are a means to provide integrated solutions to the complex ocean management problems encountered in EBM. Here, we leverage the global advances in ecosystem modeling to explore common opportunities and challenges for ecosystem-based management, including changes in ocean acidification, spatial management, and fishing pressure across eight Atlantis (atlantis.cmar.csiro.au) end-to-end ecosystem models. These models represent marine ecosystems from the tropics to the arctic, varying in size, ecology, and management regimes, using a three-dimensional, spatially-explicit structure parametrized for each system. Results suggest stronger impacts from ocean acidification and marine protected areas than from altering fishing pressure, both in terms of guild-level (i.e., aggregations of similar species or groups) biomass and in terms of indicators of ecological and fishery structure. Effects of ocean acidification were typically negative (reducing biomass), while marine protected areas led to both “winners” and “losers” at the level of particular species (or functional groups). Changing fishing pressure (doubling or halving) had smaller effects on the species guilds or ecosystem indicators than either ocean acidification or marine protected areas. Compensatory effects within guilds led to weaker average effects at the guild level than the species or group level. The impacts and tradeoffs implied by these future scenarios are highly relevant as ocean governance shifts focus from single-sector objectives (e.g., sustainable levels of individual fished stocks) to taking into account competing industrial sectors' objectives (e.g., simultaneous spatial management of energy, shipping, and fishing) while at the same time grappling with compounded impacts of global climate change (e.g., ocean acidification and warming).nb_NO
dc.language.isoengnb_NO
dc.titleOcean futures under ocean acidification, marine protection, and changing fishing pressures explored using a worldwide suite of ecosystem modelsnb_NO
dc.title.alternativeOcean futures under ocean acidification, marine protection, and changing fishing pressures explored using a worldwide suite of ecosystem modelsnb_NO
dc.typeJournal articlenb_NO
dc.typePeer reviewednb_NO
dc.description.versionpublishedVersionnb_NO
dc.source.pagenumber23 pp.nb_NO
dc.source.volume5nb_NO
dc.source.journalFrontiers in Marine Sciencenb_NO
dc.identifier.doi10.3389/fmars.2018.00064
dc.identifier.cristin1607335
cristin.unitcode7431,1,0,0
cristin.unitcode7431,0,0,0
cristin.unitnameLedelse
cristin.unitnameHavforskningsinstituttet
cristin.ispublishedtrue
cristin.fulltextoriginal
cristin.qualitycode1


Tilhørende fil(er)

Thumbnail

Denne innførselen finnes i følgende samling(er)

Vis enkel innførsel