Area Based Conservation Tools Have Mixed Effects Across All SDGs but Research May Overstate Effects

Area-based conservation measures are some of the pre-eminent tools used in conservation and development planning. Area-based conservation, particularly Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), are cited as promoting societal goals through their positive ecological effects. However, MPAs are also known to have adverse consequences, including fisheries displacement and restriction of community access to marine resources. We searched the literature for evidence of MPA effects across the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), recorded the kinds of effects across the SDGs, and collected information on the kinds of evidence used to document these effects. Our analysis indicates that MPAs have both positive and negative effects across each of the 17 SDGs. We also found that many papers rely on secondary data over primary data in making these conclusions, and many studies are conducted at multi-site to global scales rather than local scales. For SDGs 1 (End Poverty), 2 (No Hunger), and 5 (Gender Equality)—among the most important for development across countries—we find evidence that papers highlighting benefits of MPAs were usually more reliant on secondary information than papers emphasizing adverse impacts, and were also conducted at larger scales. This may lead to the positive effects of MPAs being overemphasized in the literature.