With reference to data throughout the resource booklet, to what extent would the establishment of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) benefit marine ecosystems and human societies within the Coral Triangle?

This question requires “Resource Booklet - May 2019 SL paper 1”, available under the "your tests" tab > supplemental materials.

Merits – [4 max]:
MPAs are supported by legislation and associated enforcement powers;
MPA could provide nursery/breeding ground for species /sanctuary for some species/protect species from human activities / MPAs stop reduction in fish stocks through fishing activities / by restricting tourism to certain areas MPAs can reduce damage caused by tourism to reef ecosystems;
…this could allow recovery of threatened species/range of species/ biodiversity;
MPA would lead to increase in population of species that could provide food;
MPA would lead to increase in population of species that could provide an income avenue for local people/sustainable livelihood;
species from MPA could move/migrate and allow for increase in biodiversity in surrounding areas;
increase in regional biodiversity could lead to increase in ecotourism that provides an alternative income for local communities;
improvements in marine ecosystems/increase in mangroves/seagrasses can enhance carbon dioxide sequestered from the atmosphere / improvements in mangroves/seagrasses can increase carbon storage, contributing to the mitigation of climate change;
within MPAs the increase in mangroves/seagrasses/coral filters the water and removes pollutants in the marine environment;
MPAs help to meet our moral/ethical obligation to conserve/protect species / MPAs help to meet our duty to conserve our environment for future generations;
improvements in coastal ecosystems can help to protect coastal communities from extreme storm events/coastal flooding;
increase in mangroves/seagrasses population can improve water quality for other primary producers/coral reefs;
MPA creates jobs for local people and an alternative income;
MPAs allow some restricted fishing to meet the needs of local people;

Limitations – [4 max]:
establishing MPAs could cause areas surrounding them to be over-exploited / many areas still adversely affected by fishing/human activities;
difficult to stop people fishing/using areas that have been traditionally used;
difficult to stop illegal fishing by non-local vessels;
without effective policing/enforcement is unlikely to work;
some species population may have fallen below recovery levels;
MPAs can in the short-term lead to loss of income/resources / maybe difficult to find alternative income/food source in the short term for local people;
in the short-term local communities may require support to consider other ways to earn money/obtain food / loss/reduction in shark fin trade results in loss of income for fishers;
local community needs to be educated on value of MPAs;
local community needs to be educated/trained on how to sustainably fish stocks outside the MPAs;
as MPAs are managed by government (not local community) there may be a lot of bureaucracy involved and management of MPA may be inefficient / may take time to reach a consensus before action can be implemented / corruption may be an issue leading to inefficient management of MPA;
difficult to manage/balance interests of so many stakeholders (ie six countries, local governments, NGOs etc.);
predicted loss of coral by 2050 is a result of global warming, which will not be stopped by protecting local areas;
with increase in tourism there may be increased pollution caused by waste/plastics resulting in decrease in biodiversity;
with population growth in the area and associated increase in food demand the restriction in fishing within MPAs will cause human hardship;

Award [5 max] for merits and limitations.

Conclusion/opinion [1 max]
For example: over the long term MPAs can be effective at improving biodiversity/state of the ecosystem and sustainable resources for local people although in the short term they can pose many difficulties/hardships for local communities (without appropriate support);

A valid conclusion should be credited if it is explicit, balanced (addresses both sides of the argument) and supported by evidence. Do not credit the conclusion if only one side of the argument has been considered within the overall response.

Accept other reasonable responses supported by information in the resource booklet.

[6 max]

Most candidates achieved some marks for this question, with many obtaining between 2 to 4 marks. Common error was to discuss only the merits of using MPAs and not include any limitations. In addition, few accounts gave a balanced conclusion that addressed both sides of the argument.