This book is a critical analysis of the concept of marine protected areas (MPAs) particularly
as a tool for marine resource management. It explains the reasons for the extraordinary rise of
MPAs to the top of the political agenda for marine policy and evaluates the scientific
credentials for the unprecedented popularity of this management option. The book reveals the
role played by two policy networks - epistemic community and advocacy coalition - in promoting
the notion of MPA showing how advocacy for marine reserves by some scientists based on limited
evidence of fisheries benefits has led to a blurring of the boundary between science and
politics. Second the study investigates whether the scientific consensus on MPAs has resulted
in a publication bias whereby pro-MPA articles are given preferential treatment by
peer-reviewed academic journals though it found only limited evidence of such a bias. Third
the project conducts a systematic review of the literature to determine the ecological effects
of MPAs and reaches the conclusion that there is little proof of a positive impact on finfish
populations in temperate waters. Fourth the study uses discourse analysis to trace the effects
of a public campaigning policy network on marine conservation zones (MCZs) in England which
demonstrated that there was considerable confusion over the objectives that MCZs were being
designated to achieve. The book's conclusion is that the MPA issue shows the power of ideas in
marine governance but offers a caution that scientists who cross the line between science and
politics risk exaggerating the benefits of MPAs by glossing over uncertainties in the data
which may antagonise the fishing industry delay resolution of the MPA issue and weaken public
faith in marine science if and when the benefits of MCZs are subsequently seen to be limited.
