Managing Natura 2000 in the marine environment e An evaluation of the effectiveness of ‘management schemes’ in England Roger K.A. Morris a, * , Teresa Bennett b , Rob Blyth-Skyrme c , Peter J. Barham d , Andrena Ball e a Bright Angel Coastal Consultants Ltd., 7 Vine Street Stamford, Lincolnshire PE9 1QE, UK b Natural Values, Stonebridge House, Brook, Ashford, Kent TN25 5PJ, UK c Ichthys Marine Ecological Consulting Ltd., Cherry Gate, Tubbs Lane, Highclere, Newbury RG20 9PR, UK d Peter Barham Environment Ltd., Woodview, Southwick Road, Bulwick, Northants NN17 3DY, UK e 255 Eastfield Road, Peterborough PE1 4BH, UK article info Article history: Available online 27 November 2013 abstract T he EU Habitats Directive (1992) has been a major mechanism for conservation of marine biodiversity in the UK. It involves rigorous scrutiny of new plans or projects combined with the use of local regulatory powers to limit detrimental impacts on important wildlife assets. UK law requires the statutory nature conservation adviser to establish conservation objectives for sites, but the management mechanism is effectively voluntary. The ‘management scheme’ was developed in the latter part of the 1990s and has been in place for more than a decade. This paper describes the lessons learned following a review commissioned to determine the effectiveness of management schemes. Strong local commitment and leadership of management schemes have helped to improve the con- servation status of some sites. Elsewhere, the absence of legal provision for a designated leadership structure means that some management schemes may not have performed as effectively as they could have. Weaknesses in the feedback loop between monitoring and assessment of the need for corrective action were also detected. In addition, insecure funding provisions mean that staff turnover can be high and this limits scheme effectiveness, which is dependent upon the maintenance of a sound knowledge base. The strengths of well-led and proactive management approaches could be fostered elsewhere pro- vided relevant authorities and their staff are empowered to do so. The lessons arising from this approach are relevant to management initiatives worldwide, even though different legislative frameworks will apply. They emphasise the importance of matching legal provisions with the necessary capacity to make sure that management interventions are implemented and are respected. Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction The case for marine protected areas (MPAs) has become increasingly clear (Roberts and Hawkins, 2000; Halpern, 2003; Gell and Roberts, 2003; Roberts et al., 2005). Conservation of the marine environment is, however, a relatively new phenomenon and is effectively playing ‘catch-up’ with its terrestrial counterpart where protected areas have been established for many decades. This is clearly shown by the increase in the numbers of publications and reports in the peer-reviewed and grey literature that directly relate to management of marine protected areas (Fig. 1), based on a detailed Scopus search for post-1960 citations concerning MPAs. A sub-total of 222 citations specifically related to aspects of site management was identified from a literature search that yielded 1 466 citations relevant to MPA design and management. Conservation of marine habitats in the UK took off in the 1970s with a voluntary approach (Murry et al., 2007). A further advance came with the Wildlife and Countryside Act (HM Government, 1981) which made provisions for designating Marine Nature Re- serves (MNRs); however, the legislation proved difficult to apply, such that just 3 MNRs have been designated. The main stimulus for the conservation of marine habitats and species has been European legislation [the Habitats Directive (EEC, 1992)] (Johnson et al., 2008) and latterly the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (EEC, 2008). * Corresponding author. E-mail addresses: brightangel.coastal@gmail.com, roger.morris@dsl.pipex.com (R.K.A. Morris), teresa@naturalvalues.co.uk (T. Bennett), rob@ichthysmarine.com (R. Blyth-Skyrme), peterjbarham@googlemail.com (P.J. Barham). Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Ocean & Coastal Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ocecoaman 0964-5691/$ e see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2013.10.017 Ocean & Coastal Management 87 (2014) 40e51