Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39996500›Full record

ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2025

Incorporating cyclone risk in the design of marine protected and conserved areas as an ecosystem-based adaptation approach.

Alyssa L Giffin, Vivitskaia J D Tulloch, Dominic A Andradi-Brown, Rod M Connolly, Unaisi Malani-Tagicakibau, Francis Areki, Christopher J Brown

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Incorporating cyclone risk in the design of marine protected and conserved areas as an ecosystem-based adaptation approach.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Alyssa L GiffinCoastal and Marine Research Centre, Australian Rivers Institute, School of Environment and Science, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-3317-6729
Vivitskaia J D TullochAustralian Rivers Institute, Griffith University, Nathan, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7673-3716
Dominic A Andradi-BrownOcean Conservation, World Wildlife Fund, Washington, DC, USA.
Rod M ConnollyCoastal and Marine Research Centre, Australian Rivers Institute, School of Environment and Science, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.
Unaisi Malani-TagicakibauWorld Wildlife Fund-Pacific, Suva, Fiji.
Francis ArekiWorld Wildlife Fund-Pacific, Suva, Fiji.
Christopher J BrownCoastal and Marine Research Centre, Australian Rivers Institute, School of Environment and Science, Griffith University, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7271-4091

Funding

Australian Government ScholarshipAustralian Research Council FT210100792Global Wetlands Project
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Marine protected and conserved areas (MPCAs) are promoted as an ecosystem-based adaptation (EbA) approach to increase community and ecosystem resilience to climate change. However, traditional approaches to MPCA design typically do not consider climate risk or habitat condition under a climate threat. We used the Great Sea Reef (GSR) in Fiji as a case study to develop a land-sea prioritization framework that links modeled sediment runoff from rainfall during extreme cyclone events to the probability of coral reefs being in good condition. We incorporated this information in an MPCA prioritization scenario intending to achieve 90% certainty of good-condition coral cover under cyclone risk while minimizing cost to fishers and meeting ecosystem conservation targets. We explored the trade-offs between sites selected for protection, the relative opportunity cost to fishers, and the representation of conservation feature targets between the MPCA scenario that included cyclone risk and a baseline scenario that did not. The cyclone risk scenario's best solution required larger areas of protection (5% more GSR area) than the baseline scenario and additional protection in areas with moderate to high probability of good-condition coral cover. Some areas prioritized for protection in the cyclone risk scenario had relatively high turbidity. Large sections around Vanua Levu were consistently selected for protection across both prioritization scenarios due to high concentrations of all ecosystem conservation features, particularly sea turtle feeding grounds. Overall, the cyclone risk MPCA design had a higher fisher opportunity cost but protected a larger amount of ecosystem conservation features and buffered against habitat condition uncertainty. We explored the potential outcomes of expanding on threat-avoidance and cost-effective conservation prioritization by including habitat responses to threats in the prioritization process. Our findings can inform MPCA design during EbA planning in regions at risk from climate change.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesCoral ReefsCyclonic StormsAnimalsAnthozoaClimate ChangeEcosystemFijicambio climáticoclimate changeconservation planningevento extremoextreme eventsmarine spatial planningMarProbMarProb工具MarxanMarxan软件planeación de la conservaciónplaneación espacial marinaresiliencethreat mapping保护规划威胁绘图恢复力极端事件气候变化海洋空间规划

Identifiers

PMID39996500
PMCPMC12309639

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.