essay on marine ecosystem

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• Introduction

Origins of marine life

Geography, oceanography, and topography.

• Physical and chemical properties of seawater
• Ocean currents
• Links between the pelagic environments and the benthos
• Organisms of the deep-sea vents
• Distribution and dispersal
• Migrations of marine organisms
• Dynamics of populations and assemblages
• The pelagic food chain
• Seasonal cycles of production

marine ecosystem

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Defenders of Wildlife - Basic Facts About Marine Habitats
• Table Of Contents

marine ecosystem , complex of living organisms in the ocean environment .

Marine waters cover two-thirds of the surface of the Earth . In some places the ocean is deeper than Mount Everest is high; for example, the Mariana Trench and the Tonga Trench in the western part of the Pacific Ocean reach depths in excess of 10,000 metres (32,800 feet). Within this ocean habitat live a wide variety of organisms that have evolved in response to various features of their environs.

The Earth formed approximately 4.5 billion years ago. As it cooled, water in the atmosphere condensed and the Earth was pummeled with torrential rains , which filled its great basins , forming seas. The primeval atmosphere and waters harboured the inorganic components hydrogen , methane , ammonia , and water. These substances are thought to have combined to form the first organic compounds when sparked by electrical discharges of lightning . Some of the earliest known organisms are cyanobacteria (formerly referred to as blue-green algae ). Evidence of these early photosynthetic prokaryotes has been found in Australia in Precambrian marine sediments called stromatolites that are approximately 3 billion years old. Although the diversity of life-forms observed in modern oceans did not appear until much later, during the Precambrian (about 4.6 billion to 542 million years ago) many kinds of bacteria , algae , protozoa , and primitive metazoa evolved to exploit the early marine habitats of the world. During the Cambrian Period (about 542 million to 488 million years ago) a major radiation of life occurred in the oceans. Fossils of familiar organisms such as cnidaria (e.g., jellyfish ), echinoderms (e.g., feather stars), precursors of the fishes (e.g., the protochordate Pikaia from the Burgess Shale of Canada ), and other vertebrates are found in marine sediments of this age. The first fossil fishes are found in sediments from the Ordovician Period (about 488 million to 444 million years ago). Changes in the physical conditions of the ocean that are thought to have occurred in the Precambrian—an increase in the concentration of oxygen in seawater and a buildup of the ozone layer that reduced dangerous ultraviolet radiation—may have facilitated the increase and dispersal of living things.

The marine environment

The shape of the oceans and seas of the world has changed significantly throughout the past 600 million years. According to the theory of plate tectonics , the crust of the Earth is made up of many dynamic plates. There are two types of plates— oceanic and continental —which float on the surface of the Earth’s mantle , diverging, converging, or sliding against one another. When two plates diverge , magma from the mantle wells up and cools, forming new crust; when convergence occurs, one plate descends—i.e., is subducted—below the other and crust is resorbed into the mantle. Examples of both processes are observed in the marine environment . Oceanic crust is created along oceanic ridges or rift areas, which are vast undersea mountain ranges such as the Mid-Atlantic Ridge . Excess crust is reabsorbed along subduction zones , which usually are marked by deep-sea trenches such as the Kuril Trench off the coast of Japan .

The shape of the ocean also is altered as sea levels change. During ice ages a higher proportion of the waters of the Earth is bound in the polar ice caps , resulting in a relatively low sea level. When the polar ice caps melt during interglacial periods, the sea level rises. These changes in sea level cause great changes in the distribution of marine environments such as coral reefs . For example, during the last Pleistocene Ice Age the Great Barrier Reef did not exist as it does today; the continental shelf on which the reef now is found was above the high-tide mark.

Marine organisms are not distributed evenly throughout the oceans. Variations in characteristics of the marine environment create different habitats and influence what types of organisms will inhabit them. The availability of light , water depth, proximity to land, and topographic complexity all affect marine habitats.

The availability of light affects which organisms can inhabit a certain area of a marine ecosystem. The greater the depth of the water, the less light can penetrate until below a certain depth there is no light whatsoever. This area of inky darkness, which occupies the great bulk of the ocean, is called the aphotic zone . The illuminated region above it is called the photic zone , within which are distinguished the euphotic and disphotic zones . The euphotic zone is the layer closer to the surface that receives enough light for photosynthesis to occur. Beneath lies the disphotic zone, which is illuminated but so poorly that rates of respiration exceed those of photosynthesis. The actual depth of these zones depends on local conditions of cloud cover, water turbidity, and ocean surface. In general, the euphotic zone can extend to depths of 80 to 100 metres and the disphotic zone to depths of 80 to 700 metres. Marine organisms are particularly abundant in the photic zone, especially the euphotic portion; however, many organisms inhabit the aphotic zone and migrate vertically to the photic zone every night. Other organisms, such as the tripod fish and some species of sea cucumbers and brittle stars, remain in darkness all their lives.

Marine environments can be characterized broadly as a water, or pelagic, environment and a bottom, or benthic, environment . Within the pelagic environment the waters are divided into the neritic province, which includes the water above the continental shelf, and the oceanic province, which includes all the open waters beyond the continental shelf. The high nutrient levels of the neritic province—resulting from dissolved materials in riverine runoff—distinguish this province from the oceanic. The upper portion of both the neritic and oceanic waters—the epipelagic zone —is where photosynthesis occurs; it is roughly equivalent to the photic zone. Below this zone lie the mesopelagic , ranging between 200 and 1,000 metres, the bathypelagic , from 1,000 to 4,000 metres, and the abyssalpelagic , which encompasses the deepest parts of the oceans from 4,000 metres to the recesses of the deep-sea trenches.

The benthic environment also is divided into different zones. The supralittoral is above the high-tide mark and is usually not under water. The intertidal, or littoral, zone ranges from the high-tide mark (the maximum elevation of the tide) to the shallow, offshore waters. The sublittoral is the environment beyond the low-tide mark and is often used to refer to substrata of the continental shelf, which reaches depths of between 150 and 300 metres. Sediments of the continental shelf that influence marine organisms generally originate from the land, particularly in the form of riverine runoff , and include clay, silt, and sand. Beyond the continental shelf is the bathyal zone , which occurs at depths of 150 to 4,000 metres and includes the descending continental slope and rise. The abyssal zone (between 4,000 and 6,000 metres) represents a substantial portion of the oceans. The deepest region of the oceans (greater than 6,000 metres) is the hadal zone of the deep-sea trenches. Sediments of the deep sea primarily originate from a rain of dead marine organisms and their wastes.

How Vital Is The Ocean Ecosystem?

Earth: the blue planet, as terrestrial animals, how did humans come to understand the oceans, what is an ecosystem, disruption of the ocean ecosystem.

The ocean ecosystem regulates global climate temperatures, plays an important role in the carbon cycle, supplies living and non-living resources, and assists in transportation.

Did you know that oceans occupy 99% of the ‘living space’ on Earth! You may be wondering how that is possible, if the land on our planet supports billions of humans and countless other varieties of flora and fauna. It may become clear if you think about the vertical zone on land versus in the oceans. Animals and plants occupy only 100 meters of space above the ground and a few meters below the surface. Oceans, on the other hand, can host life in up to 13,000 meters of vertical space from the surface to its lowest depths!

Recommended Video for you:

It should come as no surprise that our earth is called a blue planet. Oceans occupy more than 70% of Earth’s surface, making it a vital ecosystem for the sustenance of life. If you think that forests handle humanity’s nonsense in terms of our environmental footprint by fixing carbon, think again! Since the commencement of the Industrial Revolution, oceans have absorbed 50% of the carbon dioxide emissions, making it a critical carbon reservoir for the planet.

Also Read: What Would Earth Be Like If All The Land Was Oceans And All The Oceans Were Land?

Deep-sea diving has enabled humans to manually explore the ocean biome. With the further advancement of technology, we now have monitoring and remote sensing technologies and satellites that help us map the surface, structure and circulation of the ocean. This has led to an information explosion surrounding the oceanic ecosystem.

Also Read: Why Do Some Creatures In The Deep Sea Grow To Enormous Sizes?

Just as humans have communities where we interact with one another and partially depend on each other, nature also has such interlinked communities. These communities, where living organisms interact with one another in a particular area and are thereby affected by those interactions, are known as ecosystems. The ocean ecosystem is a part of the aquatic ecosystem that comprises freshwater, saltwater and wetlands.

The oceanic ecosystem is distinguished by salt content in the water. The ocean ecosystem itself is divided into many zones, but the four major zones are intertidal, neritic, oceanic and abyssal .

The intertidal zone comprises the coastal areas, which support many other ecosystems. Beaches support reptiles, birds and crustaceans, whereas the tides provide refuge for stranded creatures, while also serving as a hunting ground for birds. These are some examples of how an ecosystem exhibits complex relationships and varying layers of interdependence.

The neritic zone is the shallow area of the oceans.

The abyssal zone refers to the area right above the ocean floor where sunlight is negligible or completely nonexistent. The creatures in this ecosystem have adapted to life without the benefit of solar energy. They produce energy from the chemical reactions and minerals found in volcanic vents present on the ocean floor. The oceanic zone is the dominant region of the ocean that sits above the abyssal plains.

Corals have their own ecosystem and support many other marine creatures, including sharks, eels, crustaceans and myriad fish species.

Also Read: What Is The Benthic Zone?

Oceans play a number of roles on our planet, including regulating the world climate, managing the carbon cycle, supplying living and non-living resources, and providing social (recreation) and economic (transportation) facilities.

Regulation Of Climate

The ocean transfers the heat from the equator to the poles, thereby helping to balance global climate. Ocean currents act as carriers of heat and water around the globe and function as heat basins to delay or mitigate climate change . The oceans also play a key role in the hydrologic cycle. The vast surface area of the oceans enables solar energy to evaporate huge amounts of water, which then condenses and falls as rain on land.

Oceans are an essential component of the carbon cycle, and are far more important than forests in their function as carbon sinks. Oceanic waters can hold 54 times more carbon than the atmosphere. Microalgae present in the ocean absorb most of the carbon dioxide, but what happens to all that carbon? The carbon in the ocean gets converted into carbonic acid, which leads to the creation of limestone, which can then be used by humans. Talk about turning every curse into a gift!

Oceans act as a natural carbon reservoir by storing the atmosphere’s carbon in the form of methane, coal, oil, natural gas and limestone. Mangroves and salt marshes also act as critical carbon sinks. Oceans are larger carbon sinks than forests, obviously, due to the fact that they occupy a majority of the Earth’s surface.

There has been a lot of news surrounding the recent Amazon fires, and many claims that the Amazon supplies 20% of the earth’s oxygen, but there is little truth behind the claim. The oxygen produced by all the forests on Earth, including the Amazon basin, results in very little residual oxygen. Most of the oxygen produced by the forests are consumed by the organisms and microorganisms within the forest, bringing the net oxygen supply to nearly zero. Oxygen produced by algae in the ocean, however, is barely used by marine creatures, resulting in large residues of oxygen in the atmosphere. In other words, we should be more worried about protecting our oceans when it comes to maintaining healthy oxygen levels on the planet!

Living And Non-living Resources

Lobsters, squid, octopus, shrimp, tuna, oysters and countless other seafood delicacies come directly from the oceans. Approximately half of the human population lives in coastal areas and a billion people rely on seafood for their daily protein requirements.  There is an emerging sector known as blue or marine biotechnology that uses the oceanic ecosystem to create innovative products for the health and cosmetic industries.

In terms of non-living resources, we know that tidal energy is a renewable source of energy (energy that doesn’t deplete when used) that can help us replace non-renewable sources, such as fossil fuels. Oceans also help the economy through the extraction of raw materials like oil and gas. Oceans provide employment to 3 million people working in ocean-dependent industries, including fisheries, oil drilling and transportation—and that is just in the United States!

Transportation And Recreation

76% of trade in the United States involves some form of sea travel. 90% of the European Union’s external trade and 40% internal trade is achieved through sea routes. Coral reefs and marshlands act as natural defenses. Coastal and marine tourism is a billion-dollar industry worldwide and is highly dependent on the oceanic ecosystem. Without the oceans, forget about planning any exotic cruises or diving trips. Ecotourism is also an emerging sector that uses its profits to further protect the ecosystem and mitigate any damage that occurs during travel.

Also Read: What Are Ecosystem Services?

Global warming, rising sea levels, coral bleaching, ocean acidification, overfishing, and oil spills are all damaging the ocean ecosystem. More than 80% of marine pollution is caused by activities perpetrated on land. Ocean acidification makes it difficult for coral, shellfish and plankton to form shells and skeletal structures, increased levels of carbon dioxide are making it difficult for corals to thrive, and oil spills are polluting the oceans, killing marine creatures and sea birds alike. Climate change is not only affecting us, but also the oceans!

Damage to the ocean ecosystem can wreak havoc on global climatic conditions, cause severe redistributions of marine species, change sea levels and currents, increase storm frequency and severity, and lower the pH of the ocean, which increases ocean acidification and perpetuates global warming .

Not only does the ocean ecosystem suffer as a result, but also the global economy that depends on it. There will be increased costs for protecting coastal regions, changes in trading and shipping routes, and dips in the fishery industry, tourism and marine biotechnology, as well as the loss of livelihood and unemployment.

With all this in mind, it can reasonably be concluded that oceans directly affect human life, not just the climate and marine biodiversity. Wondering how it can directly affect you on a daily basis? Well, even though waterways are the cheapest form of transportation, you can expect an exorbitant increase in shipping charges in the coming years as the cost of doing business on the oceans continues to rise!

Also Read: When A Hurricane Strikes, What Happens To Marine Animals Living Below It?

• Why are the oceans important?.
• Costanza, R. (1999, November). The ecological, economic, and social importance of the oceans. Ecological Economics. Elsevier BV.
• Why should we care about the ocean?.

Anupriya is an English and Social Studies teacher at Jamnabai Narsee School, Mumbai. Besides her interest in Literature and Social Sciences, she spends her time reading finance articles and binge watching historical drama series on Netflix. She aspires to be an author.

Will Earth Remain The Same If All Coral Reefs Die?

How Do Coral Reefs Form?

What If Our Oceans Became Freshwater?

What Are The Different Biomes Of The World?

What Role Do Elephants Play In Ecosystems?

What Are Biogeochemical Cycles?

Global Warming and Climate Change: Explained in Simple Words for Beginners

Why Is Volcanic Soil So Fertile?

What Happens to a Human at the Bottom of the Ocean?

What Makes A Planet Habitable?

Biomes of the World: Oceans, Mountains, Forests, Grasslands, Deserts and More!

What Would Happen If The Amount Of Oxygen On Earth Doubled?

• News, Stories & Speeches
• Get Involved
• Structure and leadership
• Committee of Permanent Representatives
• UN Environment Assembly
• Funding and partnerships
• Policies and strategies
• Evaluation Office
• Secretariats and Conventions

• Asia and the Pacific
• Latin America and the Caribbean
• New York Office
• North America
• Climate action
• Nature action
• Chemicals and pollution action
• Digital Transformations
• Disasters and conflicts
• Environment under review
• Environmental rights and governance
• Extractives
• Fresh Water
• Green economy
• Ocean, seas and coasts
• Resource efficiency
• Sustainable Development Goals
• Youth, education and environment
• Publications & data

The marine environment is an essential component of the global life-support system

Oceans cover 71 per cent of the Earth’s surface and provide us with food, oxygen and jobs. But they are probably the least understood, most biologically diverse, and most undervalued of all ecosystems.

From deep oceans to coastal reefs, from mudflats to sea grass beds, ocean and marine systems provide us with essential services: carbon capture for climate mitigation, renewable energy and protection from storm surges, to name but a few. As the global population grows, we are probing deeper and further into the oceans - for fish, oil, gas, minerals and new genetic resources - in an attempt to keep pace with increasing consumption. This is damaging the oceans that sustain us.

Estimating the total value of marine ecosystems could provide policymakers with a strong rationale to improve ocean management and invest in marine conservation. This would reduce environmental risks and ecological scarcities while boosting human well-being.

This year’s tagline for World Oceans Day (8 June) “Healthy Oceans, Healthy Planet”, aptly encapsulates the importance of oceans and seas in our ecosystem, and represents an opportunity to raise awareness.  

Managing a complex ecosystem UNEP has been busy supporting an integrated management of oceans and seas. Within UNEP, the Ecosystems Management Subprogramme works to drive change over both the short and long term through innovative solutions, build partnerships, and support countries to better manage, monitor and account for biodiversity and the health and productivity of ecosystems.

Central to a transformational response to decades of overfishing, pollution and unplanned coastal development will be moving from sectoral management, to an approach that marries seemingly competing interests in relation to marine and coastal resources and space within a robust framework and a spatial planning perspective. This is central to ensuring equitable access among diverse interests and users.

Oceans face the threats of marine and nutrient pollution, resource depletion and climate change, all of which are caused primarily by human actions. These threats place further pressure on environmental systems, like biodiversity and natural infrastructure, while creating global socio-economic problems, including health, safety and financial risks.

In order to promote ocean sustainability, innovative solutions that prevent and mitigate detrimental impacts on marine environments are essential. The internationally agreed Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) guide governments towards creating a world in which we better value the global ecosystem upon which we all depend for life.

We have 14 years to meet SDG 14: Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development.

What’s UNEP’s Regional Seas Programme? Established in 1974, the UNEP Regional Seas Programme focuses on the protection of specific bodies of water from pollution, from land-based and sea-based sources; on promoting assessments of the status of the marine environment; and on the conservation and sustainable management of oceans through support to the establishment of regional conventions and action plans.

There are currently 18 Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plans across the world, of which 14 were established under the auspices of UNEP. They received initial support, and continue receiving technical assistance from UNEP upon request.

These programmes aim to restore the health and productivity of oceans and marine ecosystems by promoting responsible stewardship. Over the last 40 years, they have helped countries to reduce land-based pollution, improve the management of coastal zones, and brought nations together to conserve the marine environment.

Some examples of change The number of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) is growing. With support from UNEP, Haiti last year designated its first nine MPAs and others are set to follow suit.

The EU Common Fisheries Policy, which came into force in 2014, is phasing out the practice of throwing unwanted fish overboard and requires the industry to stick to quotas designed to achieve healthy fish stocks. The government of the Seychelles has pledged to expand Marine Protected Areas  to cover 30 per cent of its exclusive economic zone (400, 000 square kilometres), with 15 per cent designated as no-take areas. The commitment has been incorporated in the Seychelles’ first Protected Areas Policy which was endorsed in 2013.

Traditional fishers in Madagascar have carried out more than 250 temporary closures over about 450 km of coastline, a practice that has dramatically increased the size of their catch.

• Coastal and Marine Ecosystems

Related Content

Related Sustainable Development Goals

© 2024 UNEP Terms of Use Privacy   Report Project Concern Report Scam Contact Us

Home — Essay Samples — Environment — Ocean Pollution — Ocean Pollution: A Threat to Marine Ecosystems

Ocean Pollution: a Threat to Marine Ecosystems

• Categories: Ocean Pollution Water Pollution

About this sample

Words: 574 |

Published: Mar 16, 2024

Words: 574 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr. Karlyna PhD

Verified writer

• Expert in: Environment

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 1259 words

5 pages / 2087 words

1 pages / 749 words

1 pages / 372 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Ocean Pollution

The delicate balance of marine ecosystems is under siege as ocean acidification poses a grave threat to their health and vitality. This essay dives into the intricate web of challenges presented by ocean acidification and [...]

Logan, Robert A., editor. Issues in Environmental Science and Technology: Ocean Acidification. Royal Society of Chemistry, 2010.

Marine resources play a crucial role in sustaining the livelihoods of millions of people around the world. However, overexploitation of these resources has led to significant declines in fish populations and damage to marine [...]

Oceans play a crucial dual role in promoting sustainable development and conserving biodiversity. Coastal regions, where the land meets the sea, are particularly important as they are hubs of economic activity, biodiversity [...]

The oceans, the lifeblood of our planet, are facing an unprecedented crisis at the hands of human activity. Among the myriad threats to marine ecosystems, the Great Pacific Garbage Patch (GPGP) stands out as a stark symbol of [...]

Overview of the issue of ocean pollution and its impact on marine ecosystems and the environment Mention of plastic pollution as a particularly destructive form of pollution Statistics on the environmental impact [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

An official website of the United States government

Here’s how you know

Official websites use .gov A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.

Secure .gov websites use HTTPS A lock ( Lock A locked padlock ) or https:// means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

• Education home
• About NOAA Education
• NOAA in your backyard: Alaska
• NOAA in your backyard: Caribbean
• NOAA in your backyard: Central
• NOAA in your backyard: Great Lakes
• NOAA in your backyard: Gulf of Mexico
• NOAA in your backyard: Mid-Atlantic
• NOAA in your backyard: Northeast
• NOAA in your backyard: Northwest
• NOAA in your backyard: Pacific Islands
• NOAA in your backyard: Southeast
• NOAA in your backyard: Southwest
• Educational mailing lists
• Jan-Mar 2024
• Oct-Dec 2023
• Jul-Sep 2023
• Apr-Jun 2023
• NOAA Sea to Sky: Education resource database
• Ocean acidification
• Ocean currents
• Ocean floor features
• Ocean pollution and marine debris
• El Niño and La Niña
• Space weather
• Weather observations
• Weather systems & patterns
• Carbon cycle
• Changing seasons
• Climate change impacts
• Climate data monitoring
• Aquatic food webs
• Coral reef ecosystems
• Fisheries and seafood
• Life in an estuary
• Marine mammals
• Sea turtles
• Great Lakes ecoregion
• Water cycle
• Watersheds, flooding, and pollution
• Data resources for educators
• Education at home
• Elementary resources
• Hands-on science activities
• Special topics
• Conference resources
• About the education resource collections
• Conservation Service Corp Act Direct Hiring Authority
• Finding a career at NOAA
• Educator opportunities
• Grants & networks
• News and stories

Marine life

Our ocean, coasts, and estuaries are home to diverse living things. These organisms take many forms, from the tiniest single-celled plankton to the largest animal on Earth, the blue whale. Understanding the life cycles, habits, habitats, and inter-relationships of marine life contributes to our understanding of the planet as a whole. Human influences and reliance on these species, as well as changing environmental conditions, will determine the future health of these marine inhabitants. Toxic spills , oxygen-depleted dead zones, marine debris , increasing ocean temperatures, overfishing, and shoreline development are daily threats to marine life. Part of NOAA's mission is to help protect these organisms and their habitats.

Food webs describe who eats whom in an ecological community. Made of interconnected food chains, food webs help us understand how changes to ecosystems — say, removing a top predator or adding nutrients — affect many different species, both directly and indirectly.

Phytoplankton and algae form the bases of aquatic food webs. They are eaten by primary consumers like zooplankton, small fish, and crustaceans. Primary consumers are in turn eaten by fish, small sharks, corals, and baleen whales. Top ocean predators include large sharks, billfish, dolphins, toothed whales, and large seals. Humans consume aquatic life from every section of this food web.

Coral reefs are some of the most diverse ecosystems in the world. Coral polyps , the animals primarily responsible for building reefs, can take many forms: large reef building colonies, graceful flowing fans, and even small, solitary organisms. Thousands of species of corals have been discovered; some live in warm, shallow, tropical seas and others in the cold, dark depths of the ocean.

Seafood plays an essential role in feeding the world’s growing population. Healthy fish populations lead to healthy oceans and it's our responsibility to be a part of the solution. The resilience of our marine ecosystems and coastal communities depend on sustainable fisheries.

Estuaries are areas of water and shoreline where rivers meet the ocean or another large body of water, such as one of the Great Lakes. Organisms that live in estuaries must be adapted to these dynamic environments, where there are variations in water chemistry including salinity, as well as physical changes like the rise and fall of tides. Despite these challenges, estuaries are also very productive ecosystems. They receive nutrients from both bodies of water and can support a variety of life. Because of their access to food, water, and shipping routes, people often live near estuaries and can impact the health of the ecosystem.

Marine mammals are found in marine ecosystems around the globe. They are a diverse group of mammals with unique physical adaptations that allow them to thrive in the marine environment with extreme temperatures, depths, pressure, and darkness. Marine mammals are classified into four different taxonomic groups: cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises), pinnipeds (seals, sea lions, and walruses), sirenians (manatees and dugongs), and marine fissipeds (polar bears and sea otters).

Sea turtles breathe air, like all reptiles, and have streamlined bodies with large flippers. They are well adapted to life in the ocean and inhabit tropical and subtropical ocean waters around the world. Of the seven species of sea turtles, six are found in U.S. waters; these include the green, hawksbill, Kemp's ridley, leatherback, loggerhead, and olive ridley.

SPECIALTY GRAND CHALLENGE article

Past and future grand challenges in marine ecosystem ecology.

• 1 AZTI, Marine Research, Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA), Pasaia, Spain
• 2 NIVA Denmark Water Research, Copenhagen, Denmark
• 3 LifeWatch ERIC, Plaza de España, Seville, Spain
• 4 Institute of Marine Biology, Biotechnology and Aquaculture, Hellenic Centre for Marine Research, Gouves, Greece
• 5 Department of Science and Biological and Environmental Technology, University of Salento, Lecce, Italy
• 6 Institute of Marine Research (IMR), Bergen, Norway
• 7 Red Sea Research Centre, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Thuwal, Saudi Arabia
• 8 Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia
• 9 Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science (Cefas), Lowestoft, United Kingdom
• 10 Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico, Mexico
• 11 Aix-Marseille Université, Université Toulon, CNRS/INSU, IRD, Mediterranean Institute of Oceanography MIO UM 110, Marseille, France
• 12 Department of Chemistry and Biology, University of Bremen, Bremen, Germany
• 13 Department of Marine Sciences, University of the Aegean, Mytilene, Greece
• 14 State Key Laboratory of Estuarine and Coastal Research, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China
• 15 Department of Oceanography, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
• 16 CIMA-Centre for Marine and Environmental Research, Gambelas, University of Algarve, Faro, Portugal
• 17 NILU-IMPACT, Kjeller, Norway
• 18 European Commission, Joint Research Centre, Ispra, Italy
• 19 Coastal and Freshwater Group, Cawthron Institute, Nelson, New Zealand
• 20 Institute of Marine Science, University of Auckland, Warkworth, New Zealand
• 21 Plymouth Marine Laboratory, Plymouth, United Kingdom
• 22 Department of Ocean Sciences and Biology Department, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St. John's, NL, Canada
• 23 Istituto Nazionale di Oceanografia e di Geofisica Sperimentale (OGS), Trieste, Italy
• 24 DTU AQUA, National Institute of Aquatic Resources, Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark
• 25 CESAM & Department of Biology, University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal

Initial Grand Challenges

Frontiers in Marine Science launched the Marine Ecosystems Ecology (FMARS-MEE) section in 2014, with a paper that identified eight grand challenges for the discipline ( Borja, 2014 ). Since then, this section has published a total of 370 papers, including 336 addressing aspects of those challenges. As editors of the journal, with a wide range of marine ecology expertise, we felt it was timely to evaluate research advances related to those challenges; and to update the scope of the section to reflect the grand challenges we envision for the next 10 years. This output will match with the United Nations (UN) Decade on Oceans Science for Sustainable Development (DOSSD; Claudet et al., 2020 ), UN Decade of Ecosystems Restoration (DER; Young and Schwartz, 2019 ), and the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs; Visbeck et al., 2014 ).

First, we analyzed each published paper and assigned their topic to a maximum of two out of the eight challenges (all information available in Supplementary Table 1 ). We then extracted the 3–5 most cited papers within each challenge using two criteria: the total number of citations during this 6-year period, and the annual citation rate (i.e., the mean annual number of citations since publication). We then collated the topics covered by this reduced list of papers ( Table 1 ) and summarized the outcomes for each topic.

Table 1 . Grand Challenges in Marine Ecosystems Ecology, as defined by Borja (2014) , number of papers published (and percentage) on each challenge in Frontiers in Marine Science (section Marine Ecosystems Ecology), topics covered by the most cited references for each challenge, considering mean annual citations per paper (excluding self-citations from all authors for the period 2014–2019) and/or total number of citations received (as in SCOPUS on 15th January 2020).

Not surprisingly, 50.5% of the papers dealt broadly with the role of marine biodiversity in maintaining ecosystem function, since they are related to the core of the journal section. They are followed by papers addressing relationships between human pressures and marine ecosystems (19.5%), and ecosystem modeling (11.6%). Just fewer than 10% of the papers were unrelated to any of the challenges defined by Borja (2014) ( Table 1 ). Papers related to the assessment of ocean health had the highest impact, with a relatively high number of citations, despite the low number of papers published on the topic ( Figure 1 ). In fact, of the top papers assigned to each challenge, those assessing ocean health received the highest annual mean number of citations, followed by papers on understanding relationships between human pressures and ecosystems, and those dealing with understanding the role of biodiversity in maintaining ecosystems functionality ( Table 1 ).

Figure 1 . Number of papers published in Frontiers in Marine Science, under the Marine Ecosystem Ecology topic, during the period 2014–2019. Papers are grouped per original Grand Challenge (GC1-8), as identified by Borja (2014) , and plotted against the total number of citations received by all papers assigned to each Grand Challenge.

The topics of the publications spanned all ecosystem components, from microbes to mammals; habitats from pelagic to benthic; many individual and multiple human pressures and natural stressors affecting species, their populations, communities and habitats; methodologies for monitoring, modeling, and assessment; conservation, protection, restoration, and recovery of marine ecosystems; global change effects; and different management issues ( Table 1 ). Some of the papers that did not focus on the grand challenges dealt with a special Research Topic, for example, ocean literacy ( Borja et al., 2020a ).

Grand Challenges for Coming Decade

Although publications in FMARS-MEE have focused on many of the challenges stated in 2014, critical gaps remain which will require considerable research effort to be bridged ( Table 1 ). Furthermore, the analysis of the papers published from 2014 to 2019 in FMARS-MEE, and the discussion held by the editorial board when preparing this paper, points to some new or updated grand challenges, as core of our journal section. Other secondary challenges alongside governance, social, and methodological priorities, were identified as important and we also propose them for consideration into the next decade ( Table 2 ). Addressing these challenges, which are deeply related to each-other ( Table 2 ), would help increase our knowledge of the global ocean, raise awareness on ocean status and identify nature-based solutions to mitigate the impacts of current pressures.

Table 2 . Summary of the new (N) and updated Grand Challenges faced by marine ecosystems in the next decade, as identified by the editorial board of Frontiers in Marine Science (section Marine Ecosystems Ecology), which need to be addressed from science in different ways.

New and Updated Grand Challenges

Our revisited list of new (N) grand challenges ( Table 2 ) includes:

(N1) Understanding of interaction among diversity and ecosystem processes, structure and function, which is still the core of FMARS-MEE. Expanding the scope and relevance of future studies will allow to better understand the complex biophysical relationships among biodiversity, food-web structure, ecological processes, and ecosystem functioning, and thus increase our predictive capacity of the ecological consequences of shifts in biodiversity;

(N2) Measuring ecosystem shifts, biodiversity and habitat loss, clearly related to international commitments on sustaining biodiversity ( O'Hara et al., 2019 ). Although ecologists recognize that Earth is now experiencing the sixth mass extinction, quantifying ecosystem shifts, and biodiversity loss remains challenging and often leads to scientific debates (e.g., Vellend et al., 2017 );

(N3) Restoring degraded systems, in line with the UN DER. Marine and coastal ecosystems have suffered substantial degradation in the last century, with important loss in their capacity to deliver ecosystem services ( Rocha et al., 2015 ). Ecological restoration efforts often have low success rates, indicating the need for new strategies, that better account for marine connectivity and interactions with adjacent ecosystems, as well as the physical environment ( Gillis et al., 2017 ). To date, restoration efforts have focused on coastal ecosystems, but with increasing exploration for hydrocarbons and other resources offshore and in areas beyond national jurisdiction, approaches for deep-sea and open sea restoration should be explored and tested;

(N4) Moving from descriptive studies to those providing functional assessments, improving the understanding of marine ecosystems, supporting management and sustainability strategies for human activities in the ocean, in line with the UN DOSSD;

(N5) Understanding the cause-effect pathways and the response of ecosystems to increasing cumulative human impacts and climate change ( Ortiz et al., 2018 ), as drivers of shifts in most marine ecosystems, altering species distributions and threatening biodiversity ( Halpern et al., 2019 ). Such cause-effect pathways are inherently non-linear and include direct and indirect feedbacks ( Fu et al., 2018 ). Consequently, this challenge is complex and requires novel methods of assessment and models spanning across disciplines ( Crain et al., 2008 ; Phillips et al., 2019 ). The assessment of success rates for management under these often synergistic pressures ( Audzijonyte et al., 2016 ); and

(N6) Supporting marine conservation actions and their efficiency under global change and shifting policies. Climate change and a developing policy landscape (e.g., Blue Growth, UN SDGs) present great challenges for marine conservation, requiring changes in human attitudes, and adaptive and creative approaches, such as adaptive conservation planning (including Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) design) that account for climate hotspots and refugia ( Queirós et al., 2016 ), assisted evolution, and shifting focus from protecting species to protecting ecological functions ( Rilov et al., 2020 ).

Secondary Challenges

In addition to the grand challenges, we have also identified some secondary (S) challenges ( Table 2 ), including:

(S1) Linking ocean health with human health, as in the recent agenda proposed by Borja et al. (2020b)

(S2) Understanding the impacts of alien and neonative ( Essl et al., 2019 ) species on ecosystems. Species modify their natural range and invade new regions either aided by human activities (alien species) or by natural means, tracking human-induced environmental change (neonative species). In both cases, they may substantially modify recipient communities, ecosystem functioning and services. Important knowledge gaps restrict our understanding of traits that facilitate invasions and the magnitude of their impacts, our capacity to predict future shifts in ecosystem processes and functioning due to invasive species, and our ability to propose adequate mitigation measures;

(S3) Assessing urban development and subsequent loss of natural coastlines and ecosystem services ( Barragán and de Andrés, 2015 )

(S4) Understanding the impacts of human activities as well as climate change in the deep ocean ( Levin and Le Bris, 2015 ; Danovaro et al., 2017 )

(S5) Considering the land-ocean continuum, with major terrestrial and riverine inputs to the ocean ( Xenopoulos et al., 2017 ). Better understanding these processes would help resolve massive uncertainties in global ocean function, including nutrient cycling, and especially carbon cycling, tightly linked to climate regulation ( Friedlingstein et al., 2019 )

(S6) Reassessing and evaluating ecosystem processes under the marine “holobiont” paradigm ( Margulis, 1991 ), meaning that any marine organism is a multispecies entity of host and associated microbes. The role of these microbes in organismal function, performance, interaction and ecological context is grossly underappreciated and hence poorly understood;

(S7) Assessing cumulative effects to guide management, since such assessments are increasingly used to inform environmental policy and guide ecosystem-based management but are inherently complex and seldom linked to management processes ( Stelzenmüller et al., 2018 ). There is a need for developing best practices for the operationalization of cumulative effects assessments in a management context ( Greenwood et al., 2019 ; Stelzenmüller et al., 2020 ); and

(S8) Investigating emerging pollutants (e.g., plastics and additives, pharmaceuticals), artificial light at night, noise and toxin effects on coastal and marine species, habitats and ecosystems ( Chae and An, 2017 ; Rako-Gospić and Picciulin, 2019 ), including monitoring and assessment.

Governance and Social Priorities

We identified some major challenges related to governance (G) and social priorities ( Table 2 ), including:

(G1) Using ecological knowledge, as well as traditional knowledge, to meet UN SDGs, and contributing to the UN DOSSD and DER;

(G2) Incorporating new methods into decision support tools for policy frameworks, promoting effective ecosystem-based management ( Pinarbaşi et al., 2019 );

(G3) Implementing climate-ready Marine Spatial Planning, including the role of MPAs in conserving the oceans, and creating climatic refugia ( Queirós et al., 2016 ; Frazão Santos et al., 2019 );

(G4) Developing transnational observation strategies, in the long-term ( Moltmann et al., 2019 );

(G5) Engaging society more effectively in ocean science, from ocean literacy, to citizen science and participation in supporting management decision making ( Pocock et al., 2018 ; Borja et al., 2020a ); and

(G6) Investigating the role of fake news and how we can use science and science communication to offset this ( Scheufele and Krause, 2019 ). Understanding the impact of social media in positive (e.g., citizen science) and negative ways (e.g., dissemination of fake news).

Methodological Priorities

In this section, we identified some methodological (M) priorities, including:

(M1) Further developing and refining molecular tools for marine applications as decision support tools, particularly those related to the implementation of DNA/RNA-based approaches, e.g. metabarcoding ( Pochon et al., 2017 ; Keeley et al., 2018 ). These are highly promising approaches, but often still have limited direct applications for monitoring and assessment. International standardization of protocols, Quality Assured/Certified laboratory workflows, and minimal reporting standards, which are critical for improved policy-level uptake, are needed ( Leese et al., 2018 ; Pawlowski et al., 2018 ). Integration of multi-omics tools for understanding ecosystems functioning is also important;

(M2) Addressing problems multidimensionally, taking into account the whole Earth (e.g., planetary boundaries; Nash et al., 2017 );

(M3) Achieving “Consilience,” that is, a common path to knowledge by linking facts and fact-based theory across disciplines to create a common groundwork of explanation ( Wilson, 1998 ); this will promote and embrace interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary studies, including e.g., marine ecologists, fisheries scientists, oceanographers, social scientists, economists;

(M4) Acknowledging cultural differences in conducting marine science. Much of the knowledge we produce today is an outcome of many ecologists who share their data and algorithms and release them open and free for access to other scientists and society. All this information can be used in big data and machine learning to tackle all the grand and secondary challenges outlined here ( Ma et al., 2018 )

(M5) Modeling the future states of marine ecosystems and their services in the face of scenario and process uncertainty ( MacNeil et al., 2019 ). Real limitations still exist with our ability to project and simulate the ecology of a multiple stressors ocean, regime shifts, or extreme climate events (cold snaps, heatwaves); and

(M6) Developing thresholds/targets to assess current and future ecosystems health, especially under climate change ( Borja et al., 2012 ; Queirós et al., 2018 ).

Final Remark

To adequately address these revised grand challenges over the next 10 years, the FMARS-MEE editors recommend promoting open access to scientific data and publications in order to provide wider distribution of marine ecosystem science, ecological processes, and the complex relationships between biotic and abiotic components, at all levels of biological organization and scales of observation. Free and easy access to data and publications creates a system of information that is transparent, promoting confidence among stakeholders, marine users, policy-makers and the society at large, thus facilitating informed decisions to find solutions for global and ocean-based challenges, such as the UN SDGs, DOSSD and DER. These are core values of FMARS-MEE, enhancing collaborations across the global ocean ( Borja et al., 2017 ; Duarte et al., 2018 ; Behrenfeld et al., 2019 ; Duffy et al., 2019 ; Moltmann et al., 2019 ).

Author Contributions

AB developed the idea of the paper and wrote the first draft. Each author contributed with ideas for new challenges and contributed equally to the discussion and in writing the final manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Acknowledgments

This paper was contribution number 973 from AZTI's Marine Research; Basque Research and Technology Alliance (BRTA). Heliana Teixeira thanks FCT/MCTES for the financial support to the host institution CESAM (UIDB/50017/2020+UIDP/50017/2020).

Supplementary Material

The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fmars.2020.00362/full#supplementary-material

Audzijonyte, A., Fulton, E., Haddon, M., Helidoniotis, F., Hobday, A. J., Kuparinen, A., et al. (2016). Trends and management implications of human-influenced life-history changes in marine ectotherms. Fish Fish. 17, 1005–1028. doi: 10.1111/faf.12156

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Aylagas, E., Borja, A., Irigoien, X., and Rodriguez-Ezpeleta, N. (2016). Benchmarking DNA metabarcoding for biodiversity-based monitoring and assessment. Front. Mar. Sci. 3:96. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00096

Barragán, J. M., and de Andrés, M. (2015). Analysis and trends of the world's coastal cities and agglomerations. Ocean Coast Manage. 114, 11–20. doi: 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2015.06.004

Behrenfeld, M. J., Moore, R. H., Hostetler, C. A., Graff, J., Gaube, P., Russell, L. M., et al. (2019). The North Atlantic Aerosol and Marine Ecosystem Study (NAAMES): science motive and mission overview. Front. Mar. Sci. 6:122. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2019.00122

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Borja, A. (2014). Grand challenges in marine ecosystems ecology. Front. Mar. Sci. 11:1. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2014.00001

Borja, Á., Dauer, D. M., and Grémare, A. (2012). The importance of setting targets and reference conditions in assessing marine ecosystem quality. Ecol. Indic. 12, 1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2011.06.018

Borja, A., Elliott, M., Andersen, J. H., Berg, T., Carstensen, J., Halpern, B. S., et al. (2016). Overview of integrative assessment of marine systems: the ecosystem approach in practice. Front. Mar. Sci. 3:20. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00020

Borja, A., Elliott, M., Uyarra, M. C., Carstensen, J., and Mea, M. (2017). Bridging the Gap Between Policy and Science in Assessing the Health Status of Marine Ecosystems, 2nd Edn . Lausanne: Frontiers Media. doi: 10.3389/978-2-88945-126-5

Borja, A., Prins, T., Simboura, N., Andersen, J. H., Berg, T., Marques, J. C., et al. (2014). Tales from a thousand and one ways to integrate marine ecosystem components when assessing the environmental status. Front. Mar. Sci. 1:72. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2014.00072

Borja, A., Santoro, F., Scowcroft, G., Fletcher, S., and Strosser, P. (2020a). Editorial: connecting people to their oceans: issues and options for effective ocean literacy. Front. Mar. Sci. 6:837. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2019.00837

Borja, A., White, M. P., Berdalet, E., Bock, N., Eatock, C., Kristensen, P., et al. (2020b). Moving toward an Agenda on ocean health and human health in Europe. Front. Mar. Sci. 7:37. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2020.00037

Chae, Y., and An, Y. J. (2017). Effects of micro- and nanoplastics on aquatic ecosystems: current research trends and perspectives. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 124, 624–632. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2017.01.070

Chartrand, K. M., Bryant, C. V., Carter, A. B., Ralph, P. J., and Rasheed, M. A. (2016). Light thresholds to prevent dredging impacts on the Great Barrier reef seagrass, Zostera muelleri ssp. capricorni. Front. Mar. Sci. 3:106. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00106

Claudet, J., Bopp, L., Cheung, W. W. L., Devillers, R., Escobar-Briones, E., Haugan, P., et al. (2020). A roadmap for using the un decade of ocean science for sustainable development in support of science, policy, and action. One Earth 2, 34–42. doi: 10.1016/j.oneear.2019.10.012

Crain, C. M., Kroeker, K., and Halpern, B. S. (2008). Interactive and cumulative effects of multiple human stressors in marine systems. Ecol . Lett . 11, 1304–1315. doi: 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2008.01253.x

Danovaro, R., Carugati, L., Berzano, L., Cahill, A. E., Carvalho, S., Chenuil, A., et al. (2016). Implementing and innovating marine monitoring approaches for assessing marine environmental status. Front. Mar. Sci. 3:213. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00213

Danovaro, R., Corinaldesi, C., Dell'Anno, A., and Snelgrove, P. V. R. (2017). The deep-sea under global change. Curr. Biol. 27, R461–R465. doi: 10.1016/j.cub.2017.02.046

Duarte, C. M., and Krause-Jensen, D. (2017). Export from seagrass meadows contributes to marine carbon sequestration. Front. Mar. Sci. 4:13. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2017.00013

Duarte, C. M., and Krause-Jensen, D. (2018). Intervention options to accelerate ecosystem recovery from coastal eutrophication. Front. Mar. Sci. 5:470. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2018.00470

Duarte, C. M., Poiner, I., and Gunn, J. (2018). Perspectives on a global observing system to assess ocean health. Front. Mar. Sci. 5:265. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2018.00265

Duffy, J. E., Benedetti-Cecchi, L., Trinanes, J., Muller-Karger, F. E., Ambo-Rappe, R., Boström, C., et al. (2019). Toward a coordinated global observing system for seagrasses and marine macroalgae. Front. Mar. Sci. 6:317. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2019.00317

Essl, F., Dullinger, S., Genovesi, P., Hulme, P. E., Jeschke, J. M., Katsanevakis, S., et al. (2019). A conceptual framework for range-expanding species that track human-induced environmental change. BioScience 69, 908–919. doi: 10.1093/biosci/biz101

Faillettaz, R., Paris, C. B., and Irisson, J. O. (2018). Larval fish swimming behavior alters dispersal patterns from marine protected areas in the North-Western Mediterranean Sea. Front. Mar. Sci. 5:97. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2018.00097

Frazão Santos, C., Ehler, C. N., Agardy, T., Andrade, F., Orbach, M. K., and Crowder, L. B. (2019). “Chapter 30 - marine spatial planning,” in World Seas: an Environmental Evaluation, 2nd Edn , ed C. Sheppard (London: Academic Press), 571–592.

Google Scholar

Friedlingstein, P., Jones, M., O'Sullivan, M., Andrew, R., Hauck, J., Peters, G., et al. (2019). Global carbon budget 2019. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 11, 1783–1838. doi: 10.5194/essd-11-1783-2019

Fu, C., Travers-Trolet, M., Velez, L., Grüss, A., Bundy, A., Shannon, L. J., et al. (2018). Risky business: The combined effects of fishing and changes in primary productivity on fish communities. Ecol. Model. 385, 265–276. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2017.12.003

Galparsoro, I., Borja, A., and Uyarra, M. C. (2014). Mapping ecosystem services provided by benthic habitats in the European North Atlantic Ocean. Front. Mar. Sci. 1:23. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2014.00023

Gillis, L. G., Jones, C. G., Ziegler, A. D., van der Wal, D., Breckwoldt, A., and Bouma, T. J. (2017). Opportunities for protecting and restoring tropical coastal ecosystems by utilizing a physical connectivity approach. Front. Mar. Sci. 4:374. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2017.00374

Goodwin, K., Thompson, L., Duarte, B., Kahlke, T., Thompson, A., Marques, J., et al. (2017). DNA sequencing as tool to monitor marine ecological status. Front. Mar. Sci. 4:107. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2017.00107

Greenwood, N., Devlin, M. J., Best, M., Fronkova, L., Graves, C. A., Milligan, A., et al. (2019). Utilizing eutrophication assessment directives from transitional to marine systems in the thames estuary and liverpool bay, UK. Front. Mar. Sci. 6: doi: 10.3389/fmars.2019.00116

Halpern, B. S., Frazier, M., Afflerbach, J., Stewart, J. S., Micheli, F., O'Hara, C., et al. (2019). Recent pace of change in human impact on the world's ocean. Sci. Rep. 9:11609. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-47201-9

Heithaus, M. R., Alcoverro, T., Arthur, R., Burkholder, D. A., Coates, K. A., Christianen, M. J. A., et al. (2014). Seagrasses in the age of sea turtle conservation and shark overfishing. Front. Mar. Sci. 1:28. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2014.00028

Katsanevakis, S., Coll, M., Piroddi, C., Steenbeek, J., Ben Rais Lasram, F., Zenetos, A., et al. (2014). Invading the mediterranean sea: biodiversity patterns shaped by human activities. Front. Mar. Sci. 1:32. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2014.00032

Keeley, N., Wood, S. A., and Pochon, X. (2018). Development and preliminary validation of a multi-trophic metabarcoding biotic index for monitoring benthic organic enrichment. Ecol. Indic. 85, 1044–1057. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2017.11.014

Korpinen, S., and Andersen, J. (2016). A global review of cumulative pressure and impact assessments in marine environment. Front. Mar. Sci. 3:153. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00153

Kristensen, E., Delefosse, M., Quintana, C. O., Flindt, M. R., and Valdemarsen, T. (2014). Influence of benthic macrofauna community shifts on ecosystem functioning in shallow estuaries. Front. Mar. Sci. 1:41. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2014.00041

Leese, F., Bouchez, A., Abarenkov, K., Altermatt, F., Borja, Á., Bruce, K., et al. (2018). Chapter two - why we need sustainable networks bridging countries, disciplines, cultures and generations for aquatic biomonitoring 2.0: a perspective derived from the DNAqua-net COST action. Adv. Ecol. Res. 58, 63–99. doi: 10.1016/bs.aecr.2018.01.001

Levin, L. A., and Le Bris, N. (2015). The deep ocean under climate change. Science 350, 766–768. doi: 10.1126/science.aad0126

Lindemann, C., and St. John, M. A. (2014). A seasonal diary of phytoplankton in the North Atlantic. Front. Mar. Sci. 1:37. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2014.00037

Lynam, C., Uusitalo, L., Patrício, J., Piroddi, C., Queiros, A., Teixeira, H., et al. (2016). Uses of innovative modelling tools within the implementation of the marine strategy framework directive. Front. Mar. Sci. 3:182. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00182

Ma, A., Bohan, D. A., Canard, E., Derocles, S. A. P., Gray, C., Lu, X., et al. (2018). “Chapter seven - a replicated network approach to ‘Big Data',” in Ecology in Advances in Ecological Research , eds. D. A. Bohan, A. J. Dumbrell, G. Woodward, and M. Jackson (London: Academic Press), 225–264.

Mačić, V., Albano, P. G., Almpanidou, V., Claudet, J., Corrales, X., Essl, F., et al. (2018). Biological invasions in conservation planning: a global systematic review. Front. Mar. Sci. 5:178. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2018.00178

MacNeil, M. A., Mellin, C., Matthews, S., Wolff, N. H., McClanahan, T. R., Devlin, M., et al. (2019). Water quality mediates resilience on the Great Barrier Reef. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 3, 620–627. doi: 10.1038/s41559-019-0832-3

Margulis, L. (1991). “Symbiosis as a source of evolutionary innovation: speciation and morphogenesis,” in Symbiogenesis and Symbionticism (Cambridge MA: MIT Press), 1–14.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

Mayorga-Adame, C. G., Batchelder, H. P., and Spitz, Y. H. (2017). Modeling larval connectivity of coral reef organisms in the Kenya-Tanzania region. Front. Mar. Sci. 4:92. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2017.00092

Moltmann, T., Turton, J., Zhang, H.-M., Nolan, G., Gouldman, C., Griesbauer, L., et al. (2019). A Global Ocean Observing System (GOOS), delivered through enhanced collaboration across regions, communities, and new technologies. Front. Mar. Sci. 6:291. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2019.00291

Nanninga, G. B., and Berumen, M. L. (2014). The role of individual variation in marine larval dispersal. Front. Mar. Sci. 1:71. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2014.00071

Nash, K. L., Cvitanovic, C., Fulton, E. A., Halpern, B. S., Milner-Gulland, E. J., Watson, R. A., et al. (2017). Planetary boundaries for a blue planet. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 1:1625. doi: 10.1038/s41559-017-0319-z

Newton, A., and Elliott, M. (2016). A typology of stakeholders and guidelines for engagement in transdisciplinary, participatory processes. Front. Mar. Sci. 3:230. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00230

O'Hara, C. C., Villaseñor-Derbez, J. C., Ralph, G. M., and Halpern, B. S. (2019). Mapping status and conservation of global at-risk marine biodiversity. Conserv. Lett. 12:e12651. doi: 10.1111/conl.12651

Ortiz, J. C., Wolff, N. H., Anthony, K. R., Devlin, M., Lewis, S., and Mumby, P. J. (2018). Impaired recovery of the Great Barrier Reef under cumulative stress. Sci. adv. 4:eaar6127. doi: 10.1126/sciadv.aar6127

Patrício, J., Elliott, M., Mazik, K., Papadopoulou, N., and Smith, C. (2016). DPSIR - two decades of trying to develop a unifying framework for marine environmental management? Front. Mar. Sci. 3:177. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00177

Pawlowski, J., Kelly-Quinn, M., Altermatt, F., Apothéloz-Perret-Gentil, L., Beja, P., Boggero, A., et al. (2018). The future of biotic indices in the ecogenomic era: Integrating (e)DNA metabarcoding in biological assessment of aquatic ecosystems. Sci. Total Environ. 637–638, 1295–1310. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.05.002

Pérez-Ruzafa, A., Campillo, S., Fernández-Palacios, J. M., García-Lacunza, A., García-Oliva, M., Ibañez, H., et al. (2019). Long-term dynamic in nutrients, chlorophyll a, and water quality parameters in a coastal lagoon during a process of eutrophication for decades, a sudden break and a relatively rapid recovery. Front. Mar. Sci. 6:26. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2019.00026

Phillips, G., Teixeira, H., Poikane, S., Herrero, F. S., and Kelly, M. G. (2019). Establishing nutrient thresholds in the face of uncertainty and multiple stressors: a comparison of approaches using simulated datasets. Sci. Total Environ. 684, 425–433. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2019.05.343

Pinarbaşi, K., Galparsoro, I., and Borja, Á. (2019). End users' perspective on decision support tools in marine spatial planning. Mar. Policy 108:103658. doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2019.103658

Pochon, X., Zaiko, A., Fletcher, L. M., Laroche, O., and Wood, S. A. (2017). Wanted dead or alive? Using metabarcoding of environmental DNA and RNA to distinguish living assemblages for biosecurity applications. PLoS ONE 12:e0187636. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0187636

Pocock, M. J. O., Chandler, M., Bonney, R., Thornhill, I., Albin, A., August, T., et al. (2018). “Chapter six - a vision for global biodiversity monitoring with citizen science,” in Advances in Ecological Research , eds D. A. Bohan, A. J. Dumbrell, G. Woodward, and M. Jackson (London: Academic Press), 169–223.

Queirós, A. M., Fernandes, J., Genevier, L., and Lynam, C. P. (2018). Climate change alters fish community size-structure, requiring adaptive policy targets. Fish Fish. 19, 613–621. doi: 10.1111/faf.12278

Queirós, A. M., Huebert, K. B., Keyl, F., Fernandes, J. A., Stolte, W., Maar, M., et al. (2016). Solutions for ecosystem-level protection of ocean systems under climate change. Glob. Change Biol. 22, 3927–3936. doi: 10.1111/gcb.13423

Rako-Gospić, N., and Picciulin, M. (2019). “Chapter 20 - underwater noise: sources and effects on marine life,” in World Seas: an Environmental Evaluation, 2nd Edn , ed C. Sheppard (London: Academic Press), 367–389. doi: 10.1016/B978-0-12-805052-1.00023-1

Renaud, P. E., Løkken, T. S., Jørgensen, L. L., Berge, J., and Johnson, B. J. (2015). Macroalgal detritus and food-web subsidies along an Arctic fjord depth-gradient. Front. Mar. Sci. 2:31. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2015.00031

Rilov, G., Fraschetti, S., Gissi, E., Pipitone, C., Badalamenti, F., Tamburello, L., et al. (2020). A fast-moving target: achieving marine conservation goals under shifting climate and policies. Ecol. Appl. 30:e02009. doi: 10.1002/eap.2009

Robinson, N. M., Nelson, W. A., Costello, M. J., Sutherland, J. E., and Lundquist, C. J. (2017). A systematic review of marine-based species distribution models (SDMs) with recommendations for best practice. Front. Mar. Sci. 4:421. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2017.00421

Rocha, J., Yletyinen, J., Biggs, R., Blenckner, T., and Peterson, G. (2015). Marine regime shifts: drivers and impacts on ecosystems services. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 370:20130273. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2013.0273

Rouse, S., Lacey, N. C., Hayes, P., and Wilding, T. A. (2019). Benthic conservation features and species associated with subsea pipelines: considerations for decommissioning. Front. Mar. Sci. 6:00. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2019.00200

Scheufele, D. A., and Krause, N. M. (2019). Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 116, 7662–7669. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1805871115

Smith, C., Papadopoulou, K.-N., Barnard, S., Mazik, K., Elliott, M., Patrício, J., et al. (2016). Managing the marine environment, conceptual models and assessment considerations for the European marine strategy framework directive. Front. Mar. Sci. 3:144. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00144

Stelzenmüller, V., Coll, M., Cormier, R., Mazaris, A. D., Pascual, M., Loiseau, C., et al. (2020). Operationalizing risk-based cumulative effect assessments in the marine environment. Sci. Total Environ. 724:138118. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.138118

Stelzenmüller, V., Coll, M., Mazaris, A. D., Giakoumi, S., Katsanevakis, S., Portman, M., et al. (2018). A risk-based approach to cumulative effect assessments for marine management. Sci. Total Environ. 612, 1132–1140. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.289

St. John, M. A., Borja, A., Chust, G., Heath, M., Grigorov, I., Mariani, P., et al. (2016). A dark hole in our understanding of marine ecosystems and their services: perspectives from the mesopelagic community. Front. Mar. Sci. 3:31. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00031

Tam, J. C., Link, J. S., Large, S. I., Andrews, K., Friedland, K. D., Gove, J., et al. (2017). Comparing apples to oranges: common trends and thresholds in anthropogenic and environmental pressures across multiple marine ecosystems. Front. Mar. Sci. 4:282. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2017.00282

Thomsen, M. S., Mondardini, L., Alestra, T., Gerrity, S., Tait, L., South, P. M., et al. (2019). Local extinction of bull kelp ( Durvillaea spp.) due to a marine heatwave. Front. Mar. Sci. 6:84. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2019.00084

Vázquez-Luis, M., Álvarez, E., Barrajón, A., García-March, J. R., Grau, A., Hendriks, I. E., et al. (2017). S.O.S. Pinna nobilis : a mass mortality event in the Western Mediterranean Sea. Front. Mar. Sci. 4:220. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2017.00220

Vellend, M., Dornelas, M., Baeten, L., Beauséjour, R., Brown, C. D., De Frenne, P., et al. (2017). Estimates of local biodiversity change over time stand up to scrutiny. Ecology 98, 583–590. doi: 10.1002/ecy.1660

Visbeck, M., Kronfeld-Goharani, U., Neumann, B., Rickels, W., Schmidt, J., van Doorn, E., et al. (2014). A Sustainable development goal for the ocean and coasts: global ocean challenges benefit from regional initiatives supporting globally coordinated solutions. Mar. Policy 49:87–89. doi: 10.1016/j.marpol.2014.02.010

Wilson, E. O. (1998). Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. Vintage Books, A Division of Random House. New York, NY.

Xavier, J. C., Brandt, A., Ropert-Coudert, Y., Badhe, R., Gutt, J., Havermans, C., et al. (2016). Future challenges in Southern Ocean ecology research. Front. Mar. Sci. 3:94. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2016.00094

Xenopoulos, M. A., Downing, J. A., Kumar, M. D., Menden-Deuer, S., and Voss, M. (2017). Headwaters to oceans: ecological and biogeochemical contrasts across the aquatic continuum. Limnol. Oceanogr. 62, S3–S14. doi: 10.1002/lno.10721

Young, T. P., and Schwartz, M. W. (2019). The decade on ecosystem restoration is an impetus to get it right. Conserv. Sci. Pract . 1:e145. doi: 10.1111/csp2.145

Keywords: biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, human pressures, global change, ecosystem health assessment, ecosystem services, conservation and protection, ecosystem-based management

Citation: Borja A, Andersen JH, Arvanitidis CD, Basset A, Buhl-Mortensen L, Carvalho S, Dafforn KA, Devlin MJ, Escobar-Briones EG, Grenz C, Harder T, Katsanevakis S, Liu D, Metaxas A, Morán XAG, Newton A, Piroddi C, Pochon X, Queirós AM, Snelgrove PVR, Solidoro C, St. John MA and Teixeira H (2020) Past and Future Grand Challenges in Marine Ecosystem Ecology. Front. Mar. Sci. 7:362. doi: 10.3389/fmars.2020.00362

Received: 27 February 2020; Accepted: 29 April 2020; Published: 03 June 2020.

Edited and reviewed by: Martin Edwards , Marine Biological Association, United Kingdom

Copyright © 2020 Borja, Andersen, Arvanitidis, Basset, Buhl-Mortensen, Carvalho, Dafforn, Devlin, Escobar-Briones, Grenz, Harder, Katsanevakis, Liu, Metaxas, Morán, Newton, Piroddi, Pochon, Queirós, Snelgrove, Solidoro, St. John and Teixeira. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Angel Borja, aborja@azti.es

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.

Protecting Marine Ecosystems

Learn about the types and goals of marine protected areas.

Biology, Ecology, Earth Science, Oceanography, U.S. History

Loading ...

How do oceans affect you? If you live far from the coast , you might think they don’t. But life on this planet depends on the ocean. Its cover almost three-quarters of the planet and hold 97 percent of Earth’s water. The phytoplankton that live on the oceans’ surface produce half of the oxygen in the atmosphere . Oceans are a vital source of food and other resources and an economic engine for many communities.

For all the ocean provides us, we haven ’t always been so responsible in our stewardship . “The ocean was thought of as a dumping ground for so long,” says Caitlyn Toropova of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). “There was a sense that there was no way we could harm it because it is so vast .” But human activities are having a negative impact on many of the world’s oceans, jeopardizing marine life, habitats , and ecosystems . These threats include overfishing or destructive fishing, coastal development , pollution and runoff , and the introduction of non-native species . Climate change is also having a big effect by causing warming seas and ocean acidification . The realization that something needs to be done to stem or reverse the damage has led to the creation of marine protected areas (MPAs). Broadly speaking, a marine protected area (MPA) is a region of the ocean where human activity is limited. Specifics differ around the globe, but the United States defines a marine protected area as “any area of the marine environment that has been reserved by federal , state, tribal, territorial, or local laws or regulations to provide lasting protection for part or all of the natural and cultural resources therein.” There are approximately 5,000 designated MPAs around the world but many more that are not officially recognized, says Toropova, the conservation group’s coordination officer for marine protected areas. The United States has 1,700 MPAs. That may sound like a lot, but less than one percent of the world’s oceans is protected. Countries around the world have committed to protecting 10 percent, Toropova says. But “even though there’s been an increase in the past 10 years, at the current rate it would take 100 years to reach that goal,” she says. MPA Goals While all MPAs are designed to limit human activity, there are different types of marine protected areas with different goals. The U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) developed a system that relies on a site’s five functional characteristics: conservation focus , level of protection , permanence of protection, constancy of protection, and ecological scale of protection.

A site’s conservation focus and its level of protection are the most important characteristics. A conservation focus asks what an MPA was created to protect. It could be the water’s natural heritage —such as its biodiversity , habitat , population, or ecosystems —or its cultural heritage , which reflects the country’s maritime history and connections to the sea. Or it might have been created for sustainable production, where the focus is on managing the removal of living resources such as plants, fish, or shellfish . A level of protection determines what kinds of activities are prohibited , restricted , or allowed in a marine protected area. Here are the varying levels of protection MPAs provide, according to NOAA’s framework:

• Uniform multiple-use MPAs allow activities, including fishing or taking other living resources from the water, across the entire protected area.
• Zoned multiple-use MPAs allow people to take resources but limits where or when they can do so to lessen the impact on the area.
• Zoned multiple-use MPAs with no-take zones are MPAs that allow many activities but have at least one zone where people are prohibited from taking any marine resources .
• No-take MPAs or zones restrict people from taking any natural or cultural resources.

Types of MPAs There are different types of marine protected areas. They may differ in their conservation focus and level of protection. Marine reserves are usually no-take MPAs, and therefore prohibit any taking of resources . Activities that aren’t allowed include fishing and mining . Other activities, such as swimming and boating, are often permitted. Many reserves have a strong education or research focus. Natural Bridges State Marine Reserve in California is one example. Located on the edge of the city of Santa Cruz, it covers 1.5 square kilometers (0.58 miles). Natural Bridges was created to protect surfgrass and sandy beach, which provide habitat for a variety of species. Fishing, drilling , and mining are not allowed at the MPA. Recreational activities like kayaking and swimming are allowed.

Marine sanctuaries have special conservation, recreational, ecological, historical, cultural, archaeological, scientific, educational, or aesthetic qualities. Most are multiple-use areas but may be zoned with no-take areas. The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary is one of 13 U.S. sanctuaries. Located on the southern tip of Florida, it holds a wealth of natural resources, including the largest living coral reef in North America. The marine sanctuary is vast, covering 9,500 square kilometers (3,667 square miles). The rich variety of habitats includes seagrass beds and mangrove swamps . Thousands of species live in the Keys, sponges, jellies, anemones, mussels, oysters, and coral among them.

The sanctuary also holds cultural resources that offer a glimpse of the area’s maritime history. Since the European arrival to Florida in the 1500s, many ships have sunk in the waters off Florida. Artifacts from these shipwrecks rest in the sanctuary. With its natural and cultural resources, it’s not surprising the Florida Keys draws visitors: more than 4 million people each year. Commercial fishing is vital to the economy of the Keys, where more than 20 million pounds of seafood are caught annually, according to NOAA. The Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary is a multiple-use MPA, with commercial, sport, and recreational fishing allowed in some zones. In other zones, only scientific research is allowed. Most of the park encourages a wide variety of recreational activities. National parks are large areas preserved in their natural state as public property. They are designed to protect the natural and cultural objects and wildlife within the park. Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve in Alaska, which covers more than 13,200 square kilometers (5,100 square miles), includes tidewater glaciers , snow-capped mountain ranges, ocean coastlines, deep fjords , and freshwater rivers and lakes. The conservation focus is on the arctic ecosystem. Commercial and recreational fishing are allowed but limited. Sport fishermen seek Pacific halibut and different species of salmon , such as sockeye, king, and coho, in Glacier Bay. Recreational activities such as kayaking, rafting, and boat tours are allowed.

Wildlife refuges conserve, protect, and enhance fish and wildlife and their habitats for the continuing benefit of people. Breton National Wildlife Refuge , in the Gulf of Mexico off Louisiana, covers about 52 square kilometers (20 square miles) and is only accessible by boat. The focus of protection is its ecosystem . One goal is to provide a haven for nearly two dozen species of birds, from nesting and wading seabirds to waterfowl and wintering shorebirds. They include endangered species like the piping plover, the least tern, and the brown pelican. The refuge suffered serious damage when Hurricane Katrina struck in 2005, and much of the land eroded . Breton National Wildlife Refuge allows recreational fishing, but commercial fishing is prohibited . Wildlife viewing is a popular recreational activity, but because so much land was lost during Katrina, camping is no longer permitted. Stakeholders Stakeholders are individuals, communities, or organizations with an interest in the marine protected area. As the above examples show, different types of MPAs provide different opportunities for stakeholders . The general public uses MPAs for recreation such as fishing, kayaking, sailing, boat tours, snorkeling, or wildlife viewing. There are usually few regulations on recreational activities. Commercial fishermen rely on the waters and the marine life in them for their livelihood. Most MPAs try to strike a balance between protecting resources and allowing for the sustainable extraction of those resources . As a result, there are very few no-take areas that prohibit all extraction . Many MPAs, however, do limit commercial fishing by where or when it can be done. Different seafood , such as salmon or lobster, have different seasons when it is safe and legal to harvest them. Scientists and researchers use marine protected areas to study marine life and habitats . MPAs are "living laboratories" for scientists and researchers, where they can monitor and measure the health of species, ecosystems , and human impact. As Toropova of the IUCN says, “Everything we depend on in life comes from the ocean .”

Papahanaumokuakea Marine National Monument Papahanaumokuakea, the area surrounding the remote and uninhabited Northwestern Hawaiian Islands, is the largest marine protected area (MPA) in the United States. The MPA is 362,072 square kilometers (139,797 square miles). Like most MPAs, it is multiple-use. The area's tuna and lobster fisheries remain open to seasonal use, while the remote islands provide protected areas for endangered species like the Hawaiian monk seal.

Media Credits

The audio, illustrations, photos, and videos are credited beneath the media asset, except for promotional images, which generally link to another page that contains the media credit. The Rights Holder for media is the person or group credited.

Last Updated

January 9, 2024

User Permissions

For information on user permissions, please read our Terms of Service. If you have questions about how to cite anything on our website in your project or classroom presentation, please contact your teacher. They will best know the preferred format. When you reach out to them, you will need the page title, URL, and the date you accessed the resource.

If a media asset is downloadable, a download button appears in the corner of the media viewer. If no button appears, you cannot download or save the media.

Text on this page is printable and can be used according to our Terms of Service .

Interactives

Any interactives on this page can only be played while you are visiting our website. You cannot download interactives.

Related Resources

Search the United Nations

• What Is Climate Change
• Myth Busters
• Renewable Energy
• Finance & Justice
• Initiatives
• Sustainable Development Goals
• Paris Agreement
• Climate Ambition Summit 2023
• Climate Conferences
• Press Material
• Communications Tips

How is climate change impacting the world’s ocean

The ocean has long taken the brunt of the impacts of human-made global warming, says UN Climate Change . As the planet’s greatest carbon sink, the ocean absorbs excess heat and energy released from rising greenhouse gas emissions trapped in the Earth’s system. Today, the ocean has absorbed about 90 percent of the heat generated by rising emissions. 

As the excessive heat and energy warms the ocean, the change in temperature leads to unparalleled cascading effects, including ice-melting, sea-level rise, marine heatwaves, and ocean acidification. 

These changes ultimately cause a lasting impact on marine biodiversity, and the lives and livelihoods of coastal communities and beyond - including around 680 million people living in low-lying coastal areas, almost 2 billion who live in half of the world’s megacities that are coastal, nearly half of the world’s population (3.3 billion) that depends on fish for protein, and almost 60 million people who work in fisheries and the aquaculture sector worldwide. 

Here are some of the major consequences of the impacts of climate change on the ocean.

Sea-level rise

Sea-level rise has accelerated in recent decades due to increasing ice loss in the world’s polar regions. Latest data from the World Meteorological Organization shows that global mean sea-level reached a new record high in 2021, rising an average of 4.5 millimeter per year over the period 2013 to 2021. 

Together with intensifying tropical cyclones, sea-level rise has exacerbated extreme events such as deadly storm surges and coastal hazards such as flooding, erosion and landslides, which are now projected to occur at least once a year in many locations. Such events occurred once per century historically.

Moreover, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) says that several regions, such as the western Tropical Pacific, the South-west Pacific, the North Pacific, the South-west Indian Ocean and the South Atlantic, face substantially faster sea-level rise.  

Marine heatwaves

Marine heatwaves have doubled in frequency, and have become longer-lasting, more intense and extensive. The IPCC says that human influence has been the main driver of the ocean heat increase observed since the 1970s. 

The majority of heatwaves took place between 2006 and 2015, causing widespread coral bleaching and reef degradation. In 2021, nearly 60 percent of the world’s ocean surface experienced at least one spell of marine heatwaves. The UN Environment Programme says that every one of the world’s coral reefs could bleach by the end of the century if the water continues to warm. 

Coral bleaching occurs as reefs lose their life-sustaining microscopic algae when under stress. The last global bleaching event started in 2014 and extended well into 2017 - spreading across the Pacific, Indian and Atlantic oceans.   

Loss of marine biodiversity

Rising temperatures increase the risk of irreversible loss of marine and coastal ecosystems . Today, widespread changes have been observed, including damage to coral reefs and mangroves that support ocean life, and migration of species to higher latitudes and altitudes where the water could be cooler.  Latest estimates from the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization warn that more than half of the world’s marine species may stand on the brink of extinction by 2100. At a 1.1°C  increase in temperature today, an estimated 60 percent of the world's marine ecosystems have already been degraded or are being used unsustainably. A warming of 1.5°C threatens to destroy 70 to 90 percent of coral reefs , and a 2°C increase means a nearly 100 percent loss - a point of no return.

The ocean – the world’s greatest ally against climate change

The ocean is central to reducing global greenhouse gas emissions. Here are a few reasons we need to safeguard the ocean as our best ally for climate solutions.

Peter Thomson: Moving the needle on the sustainable blue economy

Ambassador Peter Thomson of Fiji, UN Special Envoy for the Ocean, mobilizes global action to conserve and sustainably use the ocean. Read the full interview.

Climate Adaptation

Climate change is here. There are many ways to adapt to what is happening and what will happen. For more tips, check out the ActNow campaign .

Facts and figures

• What is climate change?
• Causes and effects
• Myth busters

Cutting emissions

• Explaining net zero
• High-level expert group on net zero
• Checklists for credibility of net-zero pledges
• Greenwashing
• What you can do

Clean energy

• Renewable energy – key to a safer future
• What is renewable energy
• Five ways to speed up the energy transition
• Why invest in renewable energy
• Clean energy stories
• A just transition

Adapting to climate change

• Climate adaptation
• Early warnings for all
• Youth voices

Financing climate action

• Finance and justice
• Loss and damage
• $100 billion commitment
• Why finance climate action
• Biodiversity
• Human Security

International cooperation

• What are Nationally Determined Contributions
• Acceleration Agenda
• Climate Ambition Summit
• Climate conferences (COPs)
• Youth Advisory Group
• Action initiatives
• Secretary-General’s speeches
• Press material
• Fact sheets
• Communications tips

NOTIFICATIONS

Human impacts on marine environments.

• + Create new collection

Throughout human existence we have relied on the oceans – for food, as a waste dump, for recreation, for economic opportunities and so on. However, it’s not only our activities in the marine environment that affect life in the sea – it’s also the things we do on land.

With more than half the world’s population now living within 100 kilometres of the coast, it’s not surprising that our activities are taking their toll. Human impacts have increased along with our rapid population growth, substantial developments in technology and significant changes in land use. Over-fishing, pollution and introduced species are affecting life in the sea – and New Zealand is no exception!

Threats to marine habitats

Human actions at sea and on land are putting increasing pressure on the ocean and the species that live there.

Humans living near the coast have probably always used the ocean as a source of food. However, with advances in fishing equipment, larger ships and new tracking technologies, many fish stocks around the world have reduced significantly. Fish stocks on continental shelf areas are now widely considered to be fully or over exploited. Aside from reducing fish stocks, unsustainable fishing practices can have other negative impacts on the marine environment. For example, some fishing techniques such as dredging and trawling can cause widespread damage to marine habitats and organisms living on the sea floor. These techniques also often capture non-target species (known as bycatch) that are then discarded.

Commercial fishing boat

Fishing was probably the first use of the oceans by humans. In the last century, significant increases in commercial fishing have resulted in the over-exploitation of many fish stocks.

In New Zealand, fisheries are managed by a quota system that sets catch limits for commercially important species and aims at sustainable management of our fish stocks. The Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society (NZ) used to publish the Best Fish Guide to try and encourage us to make more sustainable choices when purchasing seafood. The list evaluated fish stocks and bycatch levels and the fishing methods used.

Our oceans have long been used as an intentional dumping ground for all sorts of waste including sewage, industrial run-off and chemicals. In more recent times, policy changes in many countries have reflected the view that the ocean does not have an infinite capacity to absorb our waste. However, marine pollution remains a major problem and threatens life in the sea at all levels.

Phytoplankton bloom

This image shows a large phytoplankton bloom that occurred around New Zealand in October 2009. The image was acquired by the Moderate-resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS), flying aboard NASA’s Terra satellite.

Some marine pollution may be accidental, for example, oil spills caused by tanker accidents. Some may be indirect, when pollutants from our communities flow out to sea via stormwater drains and rivers. Some effects may not be immediately obvious, for example, bioaccumulation – the process where levels of toxic chemicals in organisms increase as they eat each other at each successive trophic level in the food web.

All marine pollution has the potential to seriously damage marine habitats and life in the sea. Scientists are concerned that marine pollution places extra stress on organisms that are already threatened or endangered.

Eutrophication

Eutrophication is the result of a particular type of marine pollution. It is caused by the release of excess nutrients into coastal areas via streams and rivers. These nutrients come from fertilisers used in intensive farming practices on land. Additional nutrients in the sea can lead to excessive phytoplankton growth that results in ‘blooms’. When these large numbers of organisms die, the sharp increase in decomposition of the dead organisms by oxygen-using bacteria depletes oxygen levels. In some cases, this can result in the death by oxygen starvation of large numbers of other organisms such as fish.

Introduced species

Since the arrival of humans in New Zealand, introduced species in our terrestrial ecosystems have contributed to a significant loss of biodiversity. Introduced species also present a threat to our marine environment. It is not always easy to monitor or prevent the introduction of unwanted marine organisms, and visiting ships may introduce them accidentally on their hulls, in ballast water or on equipment.

Not all introduced species will spread or even survive, but once established, they may be difficult or impossible to remove. For example, the Japanese seaweed, wakame Undaria pinnatifida , which probably arrived in 1987, is now widespread. Scientists are still monitoring its impact on our native marine organisms.

In New Zealand, the Ministry of Primary Industries is responsible for providing border inspectors who manage risks from people, planes, vessels (like ships) and goods coming into the country. They also coordinate responses when new, harmful pests and diseases are detected in our country.

Nature of science

Scientific research sometimes uncovers environmental problems that are linked to human lifestyles. This research shows that the way we live needs to be balanced with environmental needs, which sometimes puts scientists in a difficult position in defending their work.

Ocean acidification

There is evidence to suggest that human activities have caused the amount of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere to rise dramatically. This impacts on the marine environment as the world’s oceans currently absorb as much as one-third of all CO 2 emissions in our atmosphere. This absorption of CO 2 causes the pH to decrease, resulting in the seawater becoming more acidic.

Our role in ocean acidification

In this video, Associate Professor Abby Smith, from the University of Otago, talks about what we can do to help reduce ocean acidification.

Scientists have long understood that an increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere will result in higher levels of dissolved CO 2 in seawater. However, a relatively recent discovery is that even small changes in water pH can have big impacts on marine biology. Ocean acidification is a worldwide issue, but as CO 2 is more soluble in colder water, it is of particular concern in New Zealand’s temperate oceans.

It is difficult to predict the overall impact on the marine ecosystem but many scientists fear that ocean acidification has the potential to decrease marine biodiversity on a very large scale.

New Zealanders are aware that old ways of managing our seas are in need of a rethink. The Sustainable Seas National Science Challenge is tasked with helping New Zealand enhance the value of our marine resources while ensuring they are safeguarded for future generations.

Related content

Explore the timeline to look at some of the historical aspects of fisheries in New Zealand.

Overfishing is an ongoing environmental issue in our oceans. This article answers the question: how do you locate ships that have gone ‘dark’ and are fishing illegally?

The Rena disaster impacted the habitat of many species, read how marine life adapts to habitats and how it deals with stress caused by human impacts .

Waitā is a whetū in the Matariki cluster connected to the oceans and marine environments. He reminds us that the mauri of the people is closely connected to the mauri of the moana.

Raʻui: Giving it back to the gods is a Connected article that takes a Pacific worldview and describes how the people of the Cook Islands have attempted to manage and protect their marine resources with the re-introduction of the tradition of ra‘ui.

• Identifying marine stressors
• Investigating marine and costal tipping points
• Modelling marine stressors and tipping points

Activity ideas

In Introducing biodiversity , students make models of a marine ecosystem and then explore ways humans might impact on that ecosystem.

After watching the video Our role in ocean acidification , explore why egg shells are dissolving and can you get a fisherman and a conservationist to agree ?

Changes on the beach is a cross-curricular activity that explores natural and human-induced changes to beach environments.

Citizen science

Using online citizen science opportunities as a way to deepen student learning and engagement is easier than you think. Have a look at this example, Adrift , looking at marine microbes drifting continually in our ocean systems. Read about these schools’ citizen science projects in the Connected articles Down the drain and Sea science .

Useful links

Visit the Department of Conservation’s website to find out more about marine reserves and other efforts being made to protect life in the sea.

In this recording, Marine reserves, part of Te Papa’s Science Express programme, hear biologist Jonathan Gardner discuss marine reserves around the world – their importance as ecosystems, and the competing interests that threaten or help protect them.

The OECD commissioned the report 2023 Agency in the Anthropocene . This easy to read report, co-authored by Dr Chris Eames at the University of Waikato, explains the competencies youth need to address local and global challenges in this Anthropocene epoch of human influences on the planet.

This classroom module for marine biosecurity is designed for years 5-8 to help them understand the role they play in protecting our coastlines. It is provided in both Google Docs and as printable PDFs so that it's easy for teachers to use. Part 3 uses the Marine Metre Squared project.

The Marine Stewardship Council is an international non-profit organisation that aims to protect oceans and safeguard fish stocks. It has a system for labelling sustainable seafood for consumers. Some critics argue the system is ‘greenwashing’, take a look at the Greenpeace article Understanding the true price of fish . Do either of the articles align with the 2017 Best Fish guide by the New Zealand Forest and Bird? If you were buying seafood, how would you decide on what species are sustainable?

See our newsletters here .

Would you like to take a short survey?

This survey will open in a new tab and you can fill it out after your visit to the site.

Emulsified oil washes ashore after the MV Braer , a U.S.-owned oil tanker, ran aground in hurricane-force winds off the Shetland Islands. The 1993 spill emptied 93,366 short tons (84,700 metric tons) of oil into the North Sea.

Ocean Threats

These types of human interference present the biggest threat to oceans.

Human activities are threatening the health of the world's oceans. More than 80 percent of marine pollution comes from land-based activities. From coral bleaching to sea level rise, entire marine ecosystems are rapidly changing.

Global warming is causing alterations in ocean chemistry and many oceanic processes, and it is threatening many species of marine animals that cannot cope with higher temperatures. Overfishing is a serious problem in many parts of the world. Conservationists advocate creating expansive marine reserves to protect the biodiversity of the oceans.

• Global warming is causing sea levels to rise , threatening coastal population centers.
• Many pesticides and nutrients used in agriculture end up in the coastal waters, resulting in oxygen depletion that kills marine plants and shellfish.
• Factories and industrial plants discharge sewage and other runoff into the oceans.
• Oil spills pollute the oceans, though U.S. water-sewage treatment plants discharge twice as much oil each year as tanker spills.
• Air pollution is responsible for almost one-third of the toxic contaminants and nutrients that enter coastal areas and oceans.
• Invasive species such as poisonous algae, cholera, and countless plants and animals have entered harbor waters and disrupted the ecological balance.
• The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that 31.4 percent of fish stocks are either fished to capacity or overfished.
• Establish marine parks to protect biodiversity.
• Reduce destructive fishing practices such as trawling.
• Minimize the use of military sonar that can harm or kill whales and other marine mammals.
• Help fishers to maintain their livelihoods by incorporating conservation efforts.
• Install measures to reduce the amount of fish caught accidentally.

Related Topics

• WATER POLLUTION
• CLIMATE CHANGE
• MARINE BIODIVERSITY
• FISHING INDUSTRY
• SUSTAINABILITY

You May Also Like

These creatures of the 'twilight zone' are vital to our oceans

The Gulf of Maine is warming fast. What does that mean for lobsters—and everything else?

What is aquaculture? It may be the solution to overfishing.

The world's biggest marine reserve seems to be doing its job

How warm oceans supercharge deadly hurricanes

• Interactive Graphic
• Photography
• Environment

History & Culture

• History & Culture
• The Big Idea
• History Magazine
• Paid Content
• Terms of Use
• Privacy Policy
• Your US State Privacy Rights
• Children's Online Privacy Policy
• Interest-Based Ads
• About Nielsen Measurement
• Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information
• Nat Geo Home
• Attend a Live Event
• Book a Trip
• Inspire Your Kids
• Shop Nat Geo
• Visit the D.C. Museum
• Learn About Our Impact
• Support Our Mission
• Advertise With Us
• Customer Service
• Renew Subscription
• Manage Your Subscription
• Work at Nat Geo
• Sign Up for Our Newsletters
• Contribute to Protect the Planet

Copyright © 1996-2015 National Geographic Society Copyright © 2015-2024 National Geographic Partners, LLC. All rights reserved

August 6, 2024

Love the Ocean? Thank a Shark

Sharks provide multiple benefits for ocean ecosystems: their declining numbers threaten habitats for baby fish

By Michael Heithaus & The Conversation US

Grey reef sharks swimming on a reef in French Polynesia.

miblue5/Getty Images

There are more than 500 species of sharks in the world’s oceans, from the 7-inch dwarf lantern shark to whale sharks that can grow to over 35 feet long. They’re found from polar waters to the equator, at the water’s surface and miles deep, in the open ocean, along coasts and even in some coastal rivers .

With such diversity, it’s no surprise that sharks serve many ecological functions. For example, the largest individuals of some big predatory species, such as tiger and white sharks, can have an oversized role in maintaining balances among species. They do this by feeding on prey and sometimes by just being present and scary enough that prey species change their habits and locations.

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing . By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

In a newly published study , colleagues and I surveyed decades of research on sharks’ ecological roles and considered their future in oceans dominated by people. We found that because sharks play such diverse and sometimes important functions in maintaining healthy oceans, their current decline is an urgent problem. Since 1970, global populations of sharks and rays have decreased by more than 70% .

People are killing many types of sharks at unsustainable rates , mainly through overfishing. We see a need for nations to rethink where and how to conserve sharks for healthy oceans.

How sharks foster seagrasses

Along the remote coast of Western Australia, more than two decades of work shows that the mere presence of tiger sharks shapes the entire seagrass ecosystem by changing where and how big grazers, such as sea turtles and sea cows, feed.

Having tiger sharks nearby protects wide swaths of seagrass from being overgrazed, allowing it to grow into thick underwater meadows that provide habitat for juvenile fish and shellfish. These species are important food for other animals and for humans.

In places where tiger sharks have declined and turtle populations have expanded, seagrasses are being overgrazed. In Bermuda, for example, the exploding turtle population has led to an almost total collapse of seagrasses .

White sharks produce some of the same effects. Along the California coast, where white shark numbers are increasing , otters are spending more time in the safety of protected inland waters and less time in the open waters of Monterey Bay. The otters prey on crabs, which in turn feed on grazing invertebrates such as sea slugs that clean algae from seagrasses. More otters means fewer crabs, more grazers and healthier seagrasses .

Kelp forests and reefs

Kelp forests are dense stands of large brown algae that grow in shallow zones near coasts. Along the U.S. West Coast, overhunting drove local populations of sea otters to extinction by the early 1900s . This caused huge kelp forest losses by allowing sea urchins – a favorite food of otters – to spread and consume kelp .

Over the past 50 years, otter populations have rebounded with federal protection . But as white sharks expand their ranges northward, they are preventing otters from expanding their range because there aren’t kelp forests for the otters to hide in.

The otters will likely expand their ranges only once kelp forests become established. This complicates restoration efforts, since otters won’t be removing enough urchins for kelp to become established.

When sharks are present near coral reefs, fish avoid the sharks by sticking close to the safety of the reef. This reduces grazing on seagrasses and algae across wide areas . There is still much to learn, however, about when, where and how sharks might be important for coral reef health.

Food and nutrient sources

Sharks can also be prey. Some, including large species like white sharks , are important food sources for some killer whale populations around the world . Smaller sharks, including blacktip sharks, can be key menu items for larger sharks, such as great hammerheads.

As sharks consume prey in one place and excrete waste elsewhere, they move nutrients throughout the ocean. In the Pacific, for example, gray reef sharks move nitrogen from the offshore waters where they feed to the coral reefs where they spend their days, providing important fertilizer for ocean food webs.

In Florida’s coastal waters , young bull sharks feed during brief visits to the ocean, then return to safer, nearly freshwater rivers, where they spend most of their time and release nutrients in their waste.

Sometimes sharks’ presence helps other fish. In the open ocean, sharks’ rough scales make perfect scratching posts for fish to remove parasites.

Protecting sharks’ roles

Our review makes clear that sharks play diverse roles in maintaining healthy oceans. We see important implications for shark conservation.

Step 1 would be to set goals beyond simply ensuring that there are sharks in the oceans and to target species that have key ecological roles.

Within populations, it is important to protect certain types of individual sharks. For example, the largest tiger sharks are the ones that shape the behavior of turtles and sea cows, benefiting seagrass ecosystems. Intensive fishing worldwide makes it extremely challenging for large sharks that can live for decades or even centuries to survive and grow to ecologically important sizes.

Working with local communities in coastal areas could build support for protecting these large ocean predators, much as conservationists are working on land to protect iconic predators such as wolves . Nations could build networks of large protected areas that forbid shark fishing, focusing on key areas where individual sharks may roam.

Research shows that sharks benefit from creating protected areas, limiting shark catch outside these zones and restricting use of fishing gear that does the most harm to sharks , such as gill nets and longlines . With a clearer understanding of sharks’ ecological value, my colleagues and I hope to see focused action at all levels to protect these essential animals.

This article was originally published on The Conversation . Read the original article .

Unseen Threats Along the Coast and in Underwater Ecosystems of South Korea: The Severity of Plastic Debris Entanglement

47 Pages Posted: 8 Aug 2024

Hee-Jin Noh

affiliation not provided to SSRN

Won Joon Shim

Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology - Oil and POPs Research Group

Sung Yong Ha

Sang hee hong.

Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology

Taejin Kwak

Sunwook hong.

This study aims to address this deficit by investigating marine fauna entanglement with plastic debris in South Korea’s coastal and marine ecosystems. Comprehensive data were collected from government wildlife rescue centers, an online platform, internet searches, and scuba divers’ underwater exploration descriptions. A total of 428 entanglement cases were documented, with estimated entanglement dates ranging from 2003 to 2023. The analysis identified at least 76 affected species, including birds, sea turtles, marine mammals, fish, and marine invertebrates. Of these species, 13.0% were listed on the Red List of International Union for Conservation of Nature. The total number of entanglements increased over time. Monofilament lines and hooks were the leading cause of entanglement. Other fishing-related debris, including nets, ropes, and traps, represented a high proportion of entanglements. Our results support the need for stricter regulations and improved management of recreational and commercial fishing activities to mitigate their impact on marine life.

Keywords: entanglement, plastic debris, marine wildlife, coast, underwater, citizen science

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

affiliation not provided to SSRN ( email )

No Address Available

Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology - Oil and POPs Research Group ( email )

United States

Korea Institute of Ocean Science and Technology ( email )

Geoje Korea, Republic of (South Korea)

Sunwook Hong (Contact Author)

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on ssrn, paper statistics, related ejournals, applied ecology ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

Global Ecological Change & Pollution Ecology eJournal

Natural resource management & conservation ejournal, environmental geoscience ejournal, marine ecology ejournal.

• DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoinf.2024.102762
• Corpus ID: 271850673

Visual analysis of oceanic data for marine ecosystems

• Vegu Shree Rama Kamal Kumar , Stephen Brooks
• Published in Ecological Informatics 1 August 2024
• Environmental Science

31 References

Sharkipedia: a curated open access database of shark and ray life history traits and abundance time-series, performance evaluation of sequential rule mining algorithms, towards a visual approach for representing analytical provenance in exploration processes, an annotated association mining approach for extracting and visualizing interesting clinical events, rpp algorithm: a method for discovering interesting rare itemsets, survey on visual analysis of event sequence data, motionglyphs: visual abstraction of spatio‐temporal networks in collective animal behavior, real-time clustering of large geo-referenced data for visualizing on map, analysis of web visit histories, part ii: predicting navigation by nested stump regression trees, dynamic visual abstraction of soccer movement, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Perspective
• Open access
• Published: 10 August 2024

Ecosystem services “on the move” as a nature-based solution for financing the Global Biodiversity Framework

• Ana M. M. Sequeira 1 , 2 ,
• U. Rashid Sumaila 3 &
• Abbie A. Rogers 4  

npj Ocean Sustainability volume  3 , Article number:  38 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

147 Accesses

11 Altmetric

Metrics details

• Biodiversity
• Conservation biology
• Environmental economics

The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) aims to halt global biodiversity loss. However, its implementation process will need strategic financing particularly to address the divide between the Global North and Global South. Highly migratory marine vertebrates (henceforth marine megafauna) connect distant ecosystems providing ecosystem services across jurisdictions with considerably different conservation interests and economic ability to pay for biodiversity protection. Although such migratory behaviour presents a specially challenging case for protection, because it provides a direct link between developed and less-developed countries it can provide a key to unlock the potential for financial support for implementing the GBF and shed light on a nature-based solution for how Official Development Assistance (ODA) could be deployed. Such ODA could ensure the global protection of these charismatic and threatened species, while contributing to the financing of the GBF. Our work emphasises the economic value of marine megafauna ecosystem services provided “on the move” across jurisdictions and highlights the economic value of conserving marine megafauna, our global heritage.

Similar content being viewed by others

Risks to global biodiversity and Indigenous lands from China’s overseas development finance

A global conservation basic income to safeguard biodiversity

Implementing the debt-for-nature swaps for marine protected areas: case studies from Seychelles and Belize

Introduction, the value of marine megafauna and their contribution to the global economy.

Urgent policy action is required to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations, and to resolve the current biodiversity crisis, as recognised by the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF; cbd.int/cop1,2; adopted 19th December 2022). In addition to halting global biodiversity loss (Goal A), the GBF aims to provide adequate means for its implementation by 2030 (Goal D). This ambitious goal focuses on increasing financial resources across all Parties to at least $30 billion per year by 2030, including through the use of Official Development Assistance (ODA) from developed to developing countries and States (Target 19). The GBF also seeks to ensure the effective management and use of wild marine species to provide benefits through sustainable biodiversity-based activities, products and services (Target 9).

Highly mobile or migratory marine vertebrates, including marine mammals, reptiles, fish and seabirds (such as whales, seals, turtles, sharks and penguins) - henceforth, marine megafauna, provide large benefits through sustainable biodiversity-based services, such as eco-tourism 1 , but also include species of high economic value in extractive activities, such as fisheries 2 or caught as by-catch. Unsustainable uses and lack of appropriate protection to date, have led to a third of marine megafauna being now threatened with extinction (iucnredlist.org). Indeed, conservation of marine megafauna is particularly challenging because most species have k-selected life-history patterns that include slow growth and late maturity 2 and many are predominantly migratory, apex predators able to travel 1000 s of km annually connecting distant ecosystems across multiple jurisdictions 3 . Such migratory behaviour means that the area-based protection targets, such as those set out by the GBF aiming to protect 30% of the ocean by 2030 are likely to offer insufficient protection. However, many marine megafauna provide key structural, functional and cultural services within marine ecosystems 4 , 5 , including acting as ecosystem and climate sentinels 6 , exerting top-down control, playing important roles in nutrient distribution, affecting food chains and nutrient cycles 7 , 8 , and creating opportunity for tourism, education and cultural connection 1 . Actions to conserve marine megafauna species and their migratory behaviour have the potential to be a nature-based solution that addresses a major current societal challenge while ‘simultaneously providing human well-being and biodiversity benefits’ (as defined by the International Union for Conservation of Nature; IUCN) 9 . Therefore, and particularly with the array of services they provide, it is important to understand how marine megafauna species connect different jurisdictions, where do they offer the provision of different services, and what is the value attributed to each of those services in different locations (Fig. 1 ).

Dashed line with arrows represents known movement paths used by different highly migratory marine species. Countries and their respective exclusive economic zones (EEZs) were obtained through https://www.iucnredlist.org/resources/spatialtoolsanddata and https://www.marineregions.org/downloads.php (accessed 06 Dec 23). Colour code reflects the Human Development Index (HDI) in 2021 ( https://hdr.undp.org/data-center/human-development-index#/indicies/HDI ; accessed 06 Dec 23). The solid black line represents the division between Global North and Global South. (1) Black marlin 30 ; (2) Leatherback turtle (seaturtlestatus.org/swot-report-vol-18); (3) Blue whale 31 ; (4) Loggerhead turtle 32 ; (5) South polar skua 33 ; (6) Mako shark 34 ; (7) Humpback whale 31 , 32 ; (8) White marlin 30 , (9) Arctic tern 30 , (10) Blue marlin 30 , (11) White Shark 32 , (12) Pacific bluefin tuna (ocean.si.edu).

Quantification of the value of marine megafauna services through existing economic frameworks, such as ‘Total Economic Value’ (TEV) 10 , would allow for identification and prioritisation of which services are highly valued in different locations, and also which of those might be conflicting or complementary. Specifically focusing on the mobile nature of these species, we propose that the identification of marine megafauna values could shed light on the economic value of the ecosystem services they generate and on how this value can be compensated to best support the GBF through sources such as ODA. Such innovative perspective of the economic value of marine megafauna would ensure global protection of charismatic and threatened marine megafauna species while the funds generated could be used to achieve the goals of the GBF. We emphasise that due to the immense economic value generated by marine megafauna, their global conservation can be economically advantageous through the net benefits they generate for the countries involved and the world at large.

Understanding ecosystem services ‘on the move’

The spatio-temporal variability of ecosystem services is defined in the literature as ecosystem services flows, particularly when looking at differences and mismatches between where an ecosystem service is supplied and where it is demanded 11 , or as ‘telecoupling’, i.e., as the socio-economic and environmental interactions that take place between different places that can be separated by distance 12 . Such ecosystem services flows are often defined based on the specific indicators that describe the relative contributions biophysical or socio-economic attributes, on the identification of the supply and receiving (or beneficiary) systems, on their direction and branching, and on the spatial and temporal scales at which they occur 13 . However, the concept we are presenting differs from those definitions, as our focus in on the producer of ecosystem services (rather than the beneficiaries) and on a type of ecosystem service that is continuous and itself moves and adapts (i.e., adds services) depending on the location where the producer travels through.

Marine megafauna movements across the global ocean results in the ‘delivery’ of a range of ecosystem services provided across multiple jurisdictions and human communities. These include the provision of regulating services, which are associated with the way many marine megafauna species balance the ecosystems through top-down control. Examples of such services include control of meso-predator release 14 , 15 and of overfeeding by herbivores 16 , provision of carbon sequestration services 8 , 17 and promotion of nutrient cycling, as well as transportation of nutrients between ecosystems or across depths, e.g., from the deep scattering layers to the surface 18 . Although these services are of value across the geographical ranges of marine megafauna, other services also provided by marine megafauna are of different value to different communities. These other valued services often derive from direct extractive uses, including artisanal or commercial fishing, which may deliver a direct market value or may be related with subsistence fishing, such as the indigenous whale hunting 19 . However, marine megafauna value can also derive from direct non-extractive uses. These include value from eco-tourism, which may deliver a direct market value, or contribute value through recreational use. The latter can be described as use-related non-market value, particularly for public or individual-led recreation opportunities, but also indirect market-based value through their support of related industries, such as enterprises who supply scuba diving gear or rent out other aquatic equipment. Additionally, marine megafauna also deliver non-use values, such as those generated from the knowledge that marine megafauna species exist, or those associated with the cultural connections to marine megafauna as totem species. All these non-market values contribute positively to the well-being of communities despite not generating a financial (market-valued) benefit. The combination of such ecosystem services provided by marine megafauna “on the move” across multiple jurisdictions and across communities can be summed to estimate the total value of marine megafauna across different market and non-market categories to highlight how much their conservation is worth (see Example in Box 1 ). Some quantification of ecosystem services provided by migratory species has been done through operationalisation of the telecoupling concept to calculate spatial subsidies 20 . Although this ‘spatial subsidies’ approach provides a good framework to understand how locations are coupled to each other based on the ecosystem services they need, a new approach that takes into consideration the negative effects on the producer (e.g., impacts on marine megafauna) needs to be added to the spatial subsidies calculations. This is needed to correctly account for detrimental activities in each location that may impair the provision of the needed ecosystem services, and will be crucial to assist mitigation of impacts on marine megafauna species within a nature-based solution framework. Such framework should focus on measuring ecosystem services “on the move” while assessing how the services and impairments to the services are coupled across locations through which marine megafauna migrate.

Box 1 Example of valuation of ecosystem services provided across jurisdictions by a marine megafauna species: the whale shark ( Rhincodon typus )

Whale shark ( Rhincodon typus ) is the world’s largest fish (up to 18 m total length 35 ) with a pan-oceanic distribution 36 likely to be affected by climate change 37 . This species has historically been targeted by fisheries mainly in South-East Asia and India 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 and also used as a FAD (fishing aggregating device) in large scale tuna purse-seine fisheries 42 . With the increasingly concerning conservation status of the whale shark (classified as Vulnerable in 2000 and then changed to Endangered in 2016; www.iucnredlist.org ), their targeted use in fisheries has been banned 43 . However, whale shark continued to be one of the most valuable marine species in the meat trade 44 , with a maximum potential value of almost US$ 350 K in traded parts (e.g., shark fins) 45 . Despite regulations on international trade for whale shark products (including meat and fins) by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species being in place since 2003, low scrutiny in implementation of bans 46 , continued illegal fishing or unintentional catch 41 , 47 , 48 , and other human-induced threats such as shipping strikes 27 are likely to have assisted the continued decline into a largely depleted global population of whale sharks (as per IUCN red list classification in 2021).

Whale sharks contribute to profitable eco-tourism industry activities in different locations around the world, where they are known to aggregate at specific times of the year, such as in Australia 49 , the Seychelles 50 , and Mexico 51 . Whale shark eco-tourism is worth around US$66 million worldwide 52 . Davis and Tisdell (1999) found that individual visitors were willing to pay an average of $167 per day (~$308 in 2024USD) for the experience of swimming with whale sharks 53 , and in Nosy Be, Seychelles, the value of the tourism operations over the 3-month peak season for whale shark occurrence was US$1.5 million in 2019 54 . Established tourism operations play an important conservation role because of the positive example of economic benefits from renewable tourism. Particularly for whale sharks, the high value of their ecotourism industry 55 has led to a swap of income that replaces previous income obtained through targeted fisheries 56 .

Across their geographical ranges, whale sharks provide an important role in nutrient cycling : they can dive to considerable depths where they consume prey and then provide nutrient supply through egestion at the surface. The release of nutrients at the surface promotes primary productivity, assisting with carbon sequestration. Additionally, w hale sharks can act as a carbon sink , similar to whales 8 . Being a large and long-lived species, whale sharks can store a large amount of carbon in their bodies, which sinks to the seafloor when they die to support deep-sea ecosystems 57 .

Whale sharks also provide a range of other services associated with their existence. For example, they are of high cultural value for indigenous communities , for which sharks are seen as creator beings, ancestors and totems, as is the case for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people 58 . In Australia, carvings of whale sharks may be seen in different locations ( https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/earshot/indigenous-cultural-views-of-the-shark/6798174 ), and the burial of a beached whale shark on Indigenous country was considered of cultural value to an Aboriginal community (ABC News 2021-12-17; https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12-17/whale-shark-carcass-to-be-buried-on-country/100708428 ).

The latter values are all complementary to each other, but conflict with the extractive activities associated with fishing, and also suffer from indirect impacts from other activities, such as shipping, which can lead to direct mortality of whale sharks 27 . The figure below depicts the ecosystem services provided by whale sharks as they go about their migrations, including conflicting (orange) and complementary direct (blue) and indirect services (green). The depiction of a shipping lane serves as a reminder that other activities not necessarily associated with whale shark services may also impact or hinder the provision of ecosystem services by whale sharks.

The critical role of economic valuation of ecosystem services provided by marine megafauna

The range of services provided by marine megafauna occurs across multiple Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) and through the high seas connecting far-apart jurisdictions, where countries with different Gross Domestic Product may have different conservation management and development budgets and interests. For this reason, across the different regions used by marine megafauna, the ecosystem services they provide can be in competition or complement each other. For example, if in one EEZ, marine megafauna are valued for their existence and recreation but in another, they are valued for extractive fisheries, the services they provide across these two EEZs are in competition. If instead of extractive fisheries, the same individual animals are considered a totem species for communities and valued for eco-tourism purposes, then the services provided by marine megafauna complement each other. Where there are competing uses, economic valuation has the important role to identify which uses will generate the largest net benefits and should therefore be considered as a priority. Similarly, where there are complementing (non-extractive) uses that can be aligned with sustainable commercial activities and improved conservation outcomes, economic valuation can demonstrate the additive benefits. Some examples of this type of valuation have been done for sharks, showing that the value of a shark left in the water to be appreciated during tourism operations (including scuba-diving) is financially more beneficial than catching that shark for consumption 1 , 21 . The identification of value associated with each service provided by marine megafauna can be spatially mapped to isolate competing services and to identify complementing opportunities, such as shifting from extractive fishing practices to eco-tourism opportunities as previously demonstrated for sharks. Importantly, economic valuation can be used to identify which communities will benefit (from additive, complementing services) or suffer (from prioritising competing services) from decisions to support conservation management of valued marine megafauna species for specific ecosystem services (see Table 1 and Fig. 2 ). Quantifying and assessing the value of the benefit resulting from these decisions is key to improving global conservation of marine life in general 22 and marine megafauna, in particular, and assist with the global financing of the GBF.

Example of how the TEV framework can assist in identifying where conflicting and complementing values exist, across different value categories, to isolate which ecosystem services provided by marine megafauna should be prioritised and align value generation with conservation. We note that our focus is on proposing the financing mechanism and on how to identify cases that can fund versus cases that could be funded. With this objective, we propose to use economic valuation to identify the most highly valued ‘uses’ of marine megafauna (including non-use related values of conservation), not the value associated with a full transition to a new sustainable management programme that might support conservation of marine megafauna (as we do not discuss full implementation of the mechanism here).

Migratory marine megafauna as a contributor to GBF financing

Marine megafauna present a yet to be fully appreciated, unique opportunity for modelling how sustainable development at global scale can take place. Given their mobile nature, which connects EEZs across the Global North and Global South and across countries with different levels of development (Fig. 1 ), highly migratory species, such as marine megafauna, likely present the only nature-based mechanism that connects developed to less developed countries to where financial transfer is needed. The need to protect global biodiversity in support of human well-being is putting a lot of pressure in many less developed countries, particularly where biodiversity is higher, generally due to lower industrial development (among other things). A key focus should be on the fact that uses of marine megafauna include a range of commercially sustainable activities that can support communities’ livelihoods while also improving conservation outcomes that are urgently needed across the Earth 23 .

The shift to sustainable uses is, however, not straightforward, particularly in the Global South where the financial and social capital may not exist to enable the needed shift. Additionally, shifts may be required in multiple places and communities, for example, to address environmental pressures on migratory species across a chain of sites that may be potential bottlenecks. Infrastructure is needed to help communities transition livelihoods, including governance institutions, as well as the development of facilities, for example, as required for ecotourism operations. Such a cultural shift in the perspectives of the value of marine megafauna, would allow the use of marine megafauna ecosystem services as a vehicle for the generation of funds to support ODA and help the latter transition to complementing uses of marine megafauna towards the global alignment for their conservation management. Defining a value for marine megafauna, and designing the market associated with marine megafauna uses will need to be carefully thought out to ensure that the impact of credit purchases or attribution of penalties is specific to activities that can be traced back to countries, and not a result of other impacts, such as ecological system changes. For the latter, distinction between human-induced changes, such as those from climate change, and natural changes will also need to be well defined. And more broadly, the feedback this suite of changes could collectively have on the socio-ecological system will also need to be understood.

Market-based schemes are already in existence and offer examples of frameworks that can be used to enable the proposed financing from the Global North to the Global South. The carbon market is a good example of international trading between entities for purchase of a carbon credit 24 . Similarly, biodiversity credits 25 and nature repair markets 26 are currently emerging using analogous principles. As part of the value attributed to marine megafauna species, specific credits or penalties could be placed in activities from the Global North that directly affect or impact marine megafauna. Penalties could be applied to activities where there is a lack of action to alleviate known threats, specifically those leading to mortality, such as, shipping leading to strikes 27 and commercial fishing by Global North-flagged ships leading to bycatch 28 . Credits could be generated for measures that alleviate the threats posed by activities taken by different countries. For example, changes in shipping lanes to avoid ecologically important areas for marine megafauna in the high seas or to undertake known mitigation measures in fisheries 29 , could revert into credits that can be sold both to fund the industry changes and contribute profits to a global fund. While credits for purchase may initially be provided through projects led by Global North industries, over time, and with support to transition towards the required infrastructure, Global South communities could be equipped to implement such measures that they can also contribute to the market as credits for purchase, creating a self-sustaining finance mechanism to continue such measures. Global commitments to deliver on related initiatives, including through governments electing to include ecosystem services in their national reporting using the UN System of Environmental Economic Accounting (seea.un.org/ecosystem-accounting) and organisations advancing the Nature Positive Initiative (naturepositive.org/about/the-initiative/), will have similar research and infrastructure requirements, such that the foundations to enable this financing mechanism can be supported through complementing programmes. Assessment of credits or penalties should be grounded in scientifically based evidence for what constitutes a benefit or a threat to marine megafauna biodiversity globally. The value of credits will need to be assigned using certified methods of best practice for valuation, to ensure consistency in approach (e.g., as done in the carbon credit system used in Australia; https://www.dcceew.gov.au/climate-change/emissions-reduction/emissions-reduction-fund/methods ). The resulting payments could then be transferred to Global South organisations responsible for implementing the shift needed in support of a change from conflicting (e.g., extractive) to complementing (sustainable) activities. Funds would, therefore, be used to help deliver the infrastructure needed for the alternative livelihoods, and to ensure compliance in terms of species protection from extractive or other unsustainable uses. In summary, a well-defined environmental market system would allow estimation of costs and benefits of activities and the impacts they have on marine megafauna and can be used to assess the level of payment or compensation to be provided between countries to assist implementation of the GBF. Although such market system would not be sufficient to estimate the value associated with a transition to a new sustainable management programme in support of marine megafauna conservation, using the TEV framework would be a first step in identifying the value associated with the ecosystem services they provide. Within this context, it is appropriate to arrive at a conclusion that the existence value of a marine megafauna species in a particular location is more highly valued than the consumptive value of the same species elsewhere, allowing the first conclusion that conservation of this species should be prioritised. An immediate next step could then be to identify the lower value, conflicting cases, where funding can be used to implement a transition to a new sustainable enterprise. This would serve as the basis for a financing mechanism after identification of cases that should provide funding versus cases that should be funded. The implementation of the funding strategy will need to be fully developed, and requires its own evaluation, for example through a benefit-cost analysis of the multiple values associated with stopping or starting different activities or alternative practices, including the potential loss versus creation of jobs or industry profits versus damage, and any aspects associated with gender equity or education opportunities.

In this work, we highlight that leveraging the services provided by marine megafauna as they travel across jurisdictions could significantly aid conservation efforts, help achieve the GBF financing goals, and support the sustainability of both marine ecosystems and human communities. Outlining the economic potential of marine megafauna’s mobile behaviour provides the first nature-based mechanism to economically connect far-apart countries between the Global North and Global South providing a basis to ground global financing for much-needed biodiversity conservation. Converting marine megafauna services into economic value will be challenging due to disparities between developed and less developed nations, governance differences, as well as the complexity of measuring values across diverse contexts and cultures. However, other emerging markets associated with nature restoration and biodiversity credits will provide some clues for how to proceed. Our proposed approach underscores the significance of charismatic marine megafauna, our global heritage, and could offer insights into solving other financing challenges for achieving GBF targets.

Cisneros-Montemayor, A. M., Sumaila, U. R., Kaschner, K. & Pauly, D. The global potential for whale watching. Mar. Policy 34 , 1273–1278 (2010).

Article   Google Scholar  

Collette, B. B. et al. High value and long life-double jeopardy for Tunas and Billfishes. Science 333 , 291–292 (2011).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Florko, K. R. N. et al. Linking movement and dive data to prey distribution models: new insights in foraging behaviour and potential pitfalls of movement analyses. Mov. Ecol. 11 , 17 (2023).

Estes, J. A., Heithaus, M., McCauley, D. J., Rasher, D. B. & Worm, B. Megafaunal impacts on structure and function of ocean ecosystems. Annu Rev. Environ. Resour. 41 , 83–116 (2016).

McCauley, D. J. et al. Assessing the effects of large mobile predators on ecosystem connectivity. Ecol. Appl. 22 , 1711–1717 (2012).

Hazen, E. L. et al. Marine top predators as climate and ecosystem sentinels. Front. Ecol. Environ. https://doi.org/10.1002/fee.2125 (2019).

Atwood, T. et al. Predators help protect carbon stocks in blue carbon ecosystems. Nat. Clim. Change 5 , 1038 (2015).

Roman, J. et al. Whales as marine ecosystem engineers. Front. Ecol. Environ. 12 , 377–385, https://doi.org/10.1890/130220 (2014).

Cohen-Shacham, E., Walters, G., Janzen, C. & Maginnis, S. Nature-based Solutions to address global societal challenges. 97 , 2016–2036 (2016).

Randall, A. A total value framework for benefit estimation. In Valuing wildlife resources in Alaska (pp. 87-111). 1st. edition Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429267062

Serna-Chavez, H. M. et al. A quantitative framework for assessing spatial flows of ecosystem services. Ecol. Indic. 39 , 24–33 (2014).

Liu, J., Yang, W. & Li, S. Framing ecosystem services in the telecoupled Anthropocene. Front. Ecol. Environ. 14 , 27–36 (2016).

Chalkiadakis, C., Drakou, E. G. & Kraak, M.-J. Ecosystem service flows: a systematic literature review of marine systems. Ecosyst. Serv. 54 , 101412 (2022).

Abrahms, B. et al. Climate mediates the success of migration strategies in a marine predator. Ecol. Lett. 21 , 63–71 (2018).

Lloyd, P. Predator control, mesopredator release, and impacts on bird nesting success: a field test. Afr. Zool. 42 , 180–186 (2007).

Zimmerman, L. C. & Tracy, C. R. Interactions between the environment and ectothermy and herbivory in reptiles. Physiol. Zool. 62 , 374–409, https://doi.org/10.1086/physzool.62.2.30156176 (1989).

Daba, M. H. & Dejene, S. W. The role of biodiversity and ecosystem services in carbon sequestration and its implication for climate change mitigation. Environ. Sci. Nat. Resour. 11 . https://doi.org/10.19080/IJESNR.2018.10.555810 (2018).

Nixon, S. W. & Totowa, N. H. P. In Estuaries and nutrients - Contemporary Issues in Science and Society (eds. B. J. Neilson & L. E. Cronin) 111–138 (Humana Press, 1981).

Huntington, H. P. et al. In The Bowhead Whale: Balaena mysticetus: Biology and Human Interactions (eds. J. C. George & J. G. M. Thewissen) 501–517 (Academic Press, 2021).

Lopez-Hoffman, L. et al. Ecosystem services from transborder migratory species: implications for conservation governance. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 42 , 509–539 (2017).

Zimmerhackel, J. S., Kragt, M. E., Rogers, A. A., Ali, K. & Meekan, M. G. Evidence of increased economic benefits from shark-diving tourism in the Maldives. Mar. Policy 100 , 21–26 (2019).

Sumaila, U. R. Infinity Fish: Economics and the future of fish and fisheries . (Academic Press, 2021).

Sumaila, U. R. & Tai, T. C. End overfishing and increase the resilience of the ocean to climate change. Front. Mar. Sci. 7 , 523, https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2020.00523 (2020). https://doi.org:ARTN.

van Kooten, G. C. Biological carbon sequestration and carbon trading re-visited. Clim. Change 95 , 449–463, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10584-009-9572-8 (2009).

Bayon, R., Carroll, N. & Fox, J. Conservation and biodiversity banking: a guide to setting up and running biodiversity credit trading systems . (Routledge, 2007).

Nature Repair Market Bill: A Bill for an Act to establish a national voluntary framework for projects to enhance or protect biodiversity, and for other purposes. The Parliament of the Commonwealth of Australia House of Representatives. Department of Climat Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, 2023. ParlInfo - Nature Repair Bill 2023 (aph.gov.au).

Womersley, F. C. et al. Global collision-risk hotspots of marine traffic and the world’s largest fish, the whale shark. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 119 , e2117440119 (2022).

Miller, D. D. & Sumaila, U. R. Flag use behavior and IUU activity within the international fishing fleet: refining definitions and identifying areas of concern. Mar. Policy 44 , 204–211 (2014).

Sacchi, J. Overview of mitigation measures to reduce the incidental catch of vulnerable species in fisheries (FAO, 2021).

Ortiz, M. et al. Global overview of the major constituent-based billfish tagging programs and their results since 1954. Mar. Freshw. Res. 54 , 489–507 (2003).

Johnson, C. et al. Protecting blue corridors - Challenges and solutions for migratory whales navigating national and international seas. (World Wildlife Foundation, 2022).

Alerstam, T. & Bäckman, J. Ecology of animal migration. Curr. Biol. 28 , R968–R972 (2018).

Weimerskirch, H. et al. Population-specific wintering distributions of adult south polar skuas over three oceans. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 538 , 229–237 (2015).

Bernal, D. In Encyclopedia of Fish physiology: from genome to environment (ed. Anthony P. Farrell) 1887–1902 (Academic Press, 2011).

Chen, C.-T., Liu, K.-M. & Joung, S.-J. Preliminary report on Taiwan’s whale shark fishery. Traffic Bull. 17 , 53–57 (1997).

Google Scholar  

Sequeira, A. M. M., Mellin, C., Meekan, M. G., Sims, D. W. & Bradshaw, C. J. A. Inferred global connectivity of whale shark Rhincodon typus populations. J. Fish. Biol. 82 , 367–389 (2013).

Sequeira, A., Mellin, C., Fordham, D., Meekan, M. & Bradshaw, C. Predicting current and future global distributions of whale sharks. Glob. Change Biol. 20 , 778–789 (2014).

Joung, S.-J., Chen, C.-T., Clark, E., Uchida, S. & Huang, W. Y. P. The whale shark ( Rhincodon typus) is a livebearer: 300 embryos found in one ‘megamamma’ supreme. Environ. Biol. Fishes 46 , 219–223 (1996).

Pravin, P. Whale shark in the Indian coast – need for conservation. Curr. Sci. 79 , 310–315 (2000).

Stevens, J. D. Whale shark ( Rhincodon typus ) biology and ecology: a review of the primary literature. Fish. Res. 84 , 4–9 (2007).

White, W. T. & Cavanagh, R. D. Whale shark landings in Indonesian artisanal shark and ray fisheries. Fish. Res. 84 , 128–131 (2007).

Sequeira, A., Mellin, C., Rowat, D., Meekan, M. & Bradshaw, C. Ocean-scale prediction of whale shark distribution. Diversi. Distrib. 18 , 504–518 (2012).

COA. Council of Agriculture bans fishing for whale sharks , http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/taiwan/archives/2007/05/27/2003362648 (2007).

Li, W., Wang, Y. & Norman, B. A preliminary survey of whale shark Rhincodon typus catch and trade in China: an emerging crisis. J. Fish Biol. 80 , 1608–1618 (2012).

McClenachan, L., Cooper, A. B. & Dulvy, N. K. Rethinking trade-driven extinction risk in marine and terrestrial megafauna. Curr. Biol. 26 , 1640–1646 (2016).

Stewart, B. S. & Wilson, S. G. Threatened fishes of the world: Rhincodon typus (Smith 1828) (Rhincodontidae). Environ. Biol. Fishes 74 , 184–185 (2005).

Riley, M. J., Harman, A. & Rees, R. G. Evidence of continued hunting of whale sharks Rhincodon typus in the Maldives. Environ. Biol. Fishes 86 , 371–374 (2009).

Romanov, E. V. Bycatch in the tuna purse-seine fisheries of the western Indian Ocean. Fish. Bull. 100 , 90–105 (2002).

Catlin, J. & Jones, R. Whale shark tourism at Ningaloo Marine Park: a longitudinal study of wildlife tourism. Tour. Manag. 31 , 1–9 (2009).

Rowat, D. Occurrence of whale shark ( Rhincodon typus ) in the Indian Ocean: a case for regional conservation. Fish. Res. 84 , 96–101 (2007).

de la Parra Venegas, R. et al. An unprecedented aggregation of whale sharks, Rhincodon typus , in Mexican coastal waters of the Caribbean Sea. PLoS ONE 6 , e18994 (2011).

Djunaidi, A., Jompa, J., Nadiarti, N., Bahar, A. & Tilahunga, S. D. Benefit sharing from whale shark tourism in Botubarani, Gorontalo and Labuhan Jambu, Teluk Saleh. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science 763 , 012063 (2021).

Davis, D. & Tisdell, C. A. Tourist Levies and willingness to pay for a whale shark experience. Tour. Econ. 5 , 161–174 (1999).

Ziegler, J., Diamant, S., Pierce, S., Bennett, R. & Kiszka, J. Economic value and public perceptions of whale shark tourism in Nosy Be, Madagascar. Tour. Marine Environ. 16 . https://doi.org/10.3727/154427321x16223819324721 (2021).

Anderson, C. & Waheed, A. The economics of shark and ray watching in the Maldives. Shark N. - Newsl. IUCN Shark Specialist Group 13 , 1–4 (2001).

CAS   Google Scholar  

Quiros, A. Tourist compliance to a Code of Conduct and the resulting effects on whale shark (Rhincodon typus) behavior in Donsol, Philippines. Fish. Res. 84 , 102–108 (2007).

Chami, R., Cosimano, T., Fullenkamp, C. & Oztosun, S. Nature’s Solution to Climate change. Finance Dev. Mag. 56 , 34–38 (2019).

McDavitt, M. T. In Seaweek 2005 - Save our sharks 5 (Marine Industries Environment Branch and the Bureau of Rural Sciences (Australian Government Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry), Shark Bay 2005).

Download references

Acknowledgements

Thanks to Michelle VanCompernolle for assistance with figure 1 .

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Ecology and Evolution, Research School of Biology, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia

Ana M. M. Sequeira

UWA Oceans Institute and School of Biological Sciences, The University of Western Australia, Perth, WA, Australia

Fisheries Economics Research Unit, Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries and the School of Public Policy and Global Affairs, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada

U. Rashid Sumaila

Centre for Environmental Economics and Policy, School of Agriculture and Environment, Oceans Institute, University of Western Australia, Crawley, WA, Australia

Abbie A. Rogers

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

A.M.M.S. conceived the study. A.A.R. and U.R.S. assisted with developing ideas. A.M.M.S. led the writing of the manuscript, with significantly contributions from A.A.R. and U.R.S. A.M.M.S. and A.A.R. prepared tables and figures.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ana M. M. Sequeira .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Sequeira, A.M.M., Rashid Sumaila, U. & Rogers, A.A. Ecosystem services “on the move” as a nature-based solution for financing the Global Biodiversity Framework. npj Ocean Sustain 3 , 38 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44183-024-00073-7

Download citation

Received : 16 February 2024

Accepted : 17 July 2024

Published : 10 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s44183-024-00073-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Data, analysis, convening and action.

The world’s largest and most diverse environmental network.

• IUCN WORLD CONSERVATION CONGRESS
• REGIONAL CONSERVATION FORA
• CONTRIBUTIONS FOR NATURE
• IUCN ENGAGE (LOGIN REQUIRED)

IUCN tools, publications and other resources.

• News & Events
• Eastern and Southern Africa
• Eastern Europe and Central Asia
• Mediterranean
• Mexico, Central America and the Caribbean
• North America
• South America
• West and Central Africa
• IUCN Academy
• IUCN Contributions for Nature
• IUCN Library
• IUCN Red List of Threatened Species TM
• IUCN Green List of Protected and Conserved Areas
• IUCN World Heritage Outlook
• IUCN Leaders Forum
• Protected Planet
• Union Portal (login required)
• IUCN Engage (login required)
• Commission portal (login required)

Get Involved

Our resources share the knowledge gathered by IUCN’s unique global community of 16,000+ experts. They include databases, tools, standards, guidelines and policy recommendations. We author hundreds of books, assessments, reports, briefs and research papers every year.

IUCN Issues Briefs provide key information on selected issues central to IUCN’s work. They are aimed at policy-makers, journalists or anyone looking for an accessible overview of the often complex issues related to nature conservation and sustainable development.

Conservation tools

IUCN's conservation tools consist of conservation databases, metrics and other knowledge products. These products have helped hundreds of organisations design, monitor and implement just and effective conservation.

IUCN produces publications on a wide range of topics to share our expertise on nature, conservation and sustainable development. Publications include reports, analyses, best practices, standards, periodicals from IUCN Commissions and numerous other types of knowledge from the Union.

Search all resources

• Sunday 28 July 28 2024, 11:00 – 16:30 (TBC)
• Courtyard Marriot (Frangipani Room)