IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecomod/v510y2025ics0304380025002649.html

Integrating marine protected areas and spatial fisheries restrictions in ecosystem models of the Aegean Sea

Author

Listed:
  • Keramidas, Ioannis
  • Dimarchopoulou, Donna
  • Kokkos, Nikolaos
  • Islam, Tushith
  • Halouani, Ghassen
  • Sylaios, Georgios
  • Tsikliras, Athanassios C.

Abstract

The Mediterranean Sea faces significant ecological challenges, including overexploitation and climate change, that necessitate innovative management strategies. Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) serve as critical management measures in preserving biodiversity and rebuilding fish stocks. This study employed the ECOSPACE modelling framework to assess the impacts of various spatio-temporal management scenarios in the Aegean Sea, focusing on biomass, catches, and spatial distributions of marine populations. The reference scenario revealed a 6 % decline in total biomass and substantial decreases in commercially important species by 2050. While prey species at lower trophic levels showed biomass increases due to reduced predation, these gains were inconsistent across functional groups (FGs). Five scenarios explored MPA placement, extended protection within Natura 2000 areas, and offshore wind farm (OWF) integration. Results demonstrated localized biomass increases within restricted zones but highlighted trade-offs, including effort redistribution and reduced total catches in some cases. Larger MPAs with stricter protections yielded more pronounced ecological benefits, particularly for demersal and benthic species, but posed economic challenges for fisheries. Among the tested scenarios, Scenario 3, which extended the bottom trawling and purse seining restriction area, demonstrated the highest biomass gains for key commercial species with moderate trade-offs in catch, making it suitable for fisheries-focused management. In contrast, Scenarios 1 and 2, which prohibited fisheries within Natura 2000 areas, offered broader conservation benefits, supporting their use in biodiversity-driven strategies. Once in operation, the areas associated with OWFs provided modest conservation benefits, supporting the potential for multi-use marine spatial planning. The findings of the present work can provide valuable insights for policymakers, aiding the development of adaptive management plans that balance biodiversity conservation with sustainable fisheries in the Aegean Sea. Future improvements should integrate high-resolution spatial data and socioeconomic analyses for a holistic understanding.

Suggested Citation

  • Keramidas, Ioannis & Dimarchopoulou, Donna & Kokkos, Nikolaos & Islam, Tushith & Halouani, Ghassen & Sylaios, Georgios & Tsikliras, Athanassios C., 2025. "Integrating marine protected areas and spatial fisheries restrictions in ecosystem models of the Aegean Sea," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 510(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:510:y:2025:i:c:s0304380025002649
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2025.111278
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0304380025002649
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2025.111278?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nascimento, Marcela C. & Husson, Berengere & Guillet, Lilia & Pedersen, Torstein, 2023. "Modelling the spatial shifts of functional groups in the Barents Sea using a climate-driven spatial food web model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 481(C).
    2. Steenbeek, Jeroen & Coll, Marta & Gurney, Leigh & Mélin, Frédéric & Hoepffner, Nicolas & Buszowski, Joe & Christensen, Villy, 2013. "Bridging the gap between ecosystem modeling tools and geographic information systems: Driving a food web model with external spatial–temporal data," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 263(C), pages 139-151.
    3. Romagnoni, Giovanni & Mackinson, Steven & Hong, Jiang & Eikeset, Anne Maria, 2015. "The Ecospace model applied to the North Sea: Evaluating spatial predictions with fish biomass and fishing effort data," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 300(C), pages 50-60.
    4. Coll, M. & Pennino, M. Grazia & Steenbeek, J. & Sole, J. & Bellido, J.M., 2019. "Predicting marine species distributions: Complementarity of food-web and Bayesian hierarchical modelling approaches," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 405(C), pages 86-101.
    5. Püts, Miriam & Taylor, Marc & Núñez-Riboni, Ismael & Steenbeek, Jeroen & Stäbler, Moritz & Möllmann, Christian & Kempf, Alexander, 2020. "Insights on integrating habitat preferences in process-oriented ecological models – a case study of the southern North Sea," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 431(C).
    6. Agardy, Tundi & di Sciara, Giuseppe Notarbartolo & Christie, Patrick, 2011. "Mind the gap: Addressing the shortcomings of marine protected areas through large scale marine spatial planning," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 226-232, March.
    7. Coll, Marta & Steenbeek, Jeroen & Sole, Jordi & Palomera, Isabel & Christensen, Villy, 2016. "Modelling the cumulative spatial–temporal effects of environmental drivers and fishing in a NW Mediterranean marine ecosystem," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 331(C), pages 100-114.
    8. Danovaro, Roberto & Bianchelli, Silvia & Brambilla, Paola & Brussa, Gaia & Corinaldesi, Cinzia & Del Borghi, Adriana & Dell’Anno, Antonio & Fraschetti, Simonetta & Greco, Silvestro & Grosso, Mario & N, 2024. "Making eco-sustainable floating offshore wind farms: Siting, mitigations, and compensations," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Coll, M. & Pennino, M. Grazia & Steenbeek, J. & Sole, J. & Bellido, J.M., 2019. "Predicting marine species distributions: Complementarity of food-web and Bayesian hierarchical modelling approaches," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 405(C), pages 86-101.
    2. Püts, Miriam & Taylor, Marc & Núñez-Riboni, Ismael & Steenbeek, Jeroen & Stäbler, Moritz & Möllmann, Christian & Kempf, Alexander, 2020. "Insights on integrating habitat preferences in process-oriented ecological models – a case study of the southern North Sea," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 431(C).
    3. Nascimento, Marcela C. & Husson, Berengere & Guillet, Lilia & Pedersen, Torstein, 2023. "Modelling the spatial shifts of functional groups in the Barents Sea using a climate-driven spatial food web model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 481(C).
    4. Ramírez, Alejandro & Ortiz, Marco & Steenbeek, Jeroen & Christensen, Villy, 2015. "Evaluation of the effects on rockfish and kelp artisanal fisheries of the proposed Mejillones Peninsula marine protected area (northern Chile, SE Pacific coast)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 297(C), pages 141-153.
    5. Qu, Yang & Hooper, Tara & Austen, Melanie C. & Papathanasopoulou, Eleni & Huang, Junling & Yan, Xiaoyu, 2023. "Development of a computable general equilibrium model based on integrated macroeconomic framework for ocean multi-use between offshore wind farms and fishing activities in Scotland," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 332(C).
    6. Merrie, Andrew & Olsson, Per, 2014. "An innovation and agency perspective on the emergence and spread of Marine Spatial Planning," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 366-374.
    7. Zhang, Quanzhong & Wei, Haiyan & Liu, Jing & Zhao, Zefang & Ran, Qiao & Gu, Wei, 2021. "A Bayesian network with fuzzy mathematics for species habitat suitability analysis: A case with limited Angelica sinensis (Oliv.) Diels data," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 450(C).
    8. David M Keith & Jessica A Sameoto & Freya M Keyser & Christine A Ward-Paige, 2020. "Evaluating socio-economic and conservation impacts of management: A case study of time-area closures on Georges Bank," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(10), pages 1-25, October.
    9. Zimmerhackel, Johanna S & Pannell, David J & Meekan, Mark & Kragt, Marit E & Rogers, Abbie, "undated". "Diving Tourism and Fisheries in Marine Protected Areas: Market Values and New Approaches to Improve Compliance in the Maldives Shark Sanctuary," Working Papers 243921, University of Western Australia, School of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    10. Voyer, Michelle & Gollan, Natalie & Barclay, Kate & Gladstone, William, 2015. "‘It׳s part of me’; understanding the values, images and principles of coastal users and their influence on the social acceptability of MPAs," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 93-102.
    11. Rachel Nichols & Satoshi Yamazaki & Sarah Jennings, 2021. "How did a network of marine protected areas impact adjacent fisheries? Evidence from Australia," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 65(1), pages 119-142, January.
    12. Rojas-Nazar, U.A. & Cullen, R. & Gardner, J.P.A. & Bell, J.J., 2015. "Marine reserve establishment and on-going management costs: A case study from New Zealand," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 216-224.
    13. Delord, Karine & Barbraud, Christophe & Bost, Charles-André & Deceuninck, Bernard & Lefebvre, Thierry & Lutz, Rose & Micol, Thierry & Phillips, Richard A. & Trathan, Phil N. & Weimerskirch, Henri, 2014. "Areas of importance for seabirds tracked from French southern territories, and recommendations for conservation," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 1-13.
    14. He, Ziqi & Xu, Wanhai & Sun, Yumeng & Zhang, Xinrui, 2025. "A GIS-based techno-economic comparative assessment of offshore fixed and floating photovoltaic systems: A case study of Hainan," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 391(C).
    15. Nichols, Rachel & Yamazaki, Satoshi & Jennings, Sarah, 2018. "The Role of Precaution in Stock Recovery Plans in a Fishery with Habitat Effect," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 359-369.
    16. Guillaume Lafortune & Grayson Fuller & Guido Schmidt-Traub & Christian Kroll, 2020. "How Is Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals Measured? Comparing Four Approaches for the EU," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-24, September.
    17. Jeneen Hadj-Hammou & Joshua E. Cinner & Diego R. Barneche & Iain R. Caldwell & David Mouillot & James P. W. Robinson & Nina M. D. Schiettekatte & Alexandre C. Siqueira & Brett M. Taylor & Nicholas A. , 2024. "Global patterns and drivers of fish reproductive potential on coral reefs," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-11, December.
    18. de Mutsert, Kim & Steenbeek, Jeroen & Lewis, Kristy & Buszowski, Joe & Cowan, James H. & Christensen, Villy, 2016. "Exploring effects of hypoxia on fish and fisheries in the northern Gulf of Mexico using a dynamic spatially explicit ecosystem model," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 331(C), pages 142-150.
    19. Kristīne Pakalniete & Heini Ahtiainen & Juris Aigars & Ingrīda Andersone & Aurelija Armoškaite & Henning Sten Hansen & Solvita Strāķe, 2021. "Economic Valuation of Ecosystem Service Benefits and Welfare Impacts of Offshore Marine Protected Areas: A Study from the Baltic Sea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-30, September.
    20. Chan, Cheryl & Armitage, Derek & Alexander, Steven M. & Campbell, Donovan, 2019. "Examining linkages between ecosystem services and social wellbeing to improve governance for coastal conservation in Jamaica," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecomod:v:510:y:2025:i:c:s0304380025002649. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecological-modelling .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.