**The Contribution of Ecosystem Services in Developing E**ff**ective and Sustainable Management Practices in Marine Protected Areas. The Case Study of "Isola dell'Asinara"**

### **Maddalena Floris <sup>1</sup> , Vittorio Gazale <sup>2</sup> , Federica Isola <sup>1</sup> , Francesca Leccis 1,\*, Salvatore Pinna <sup>1</sup> and Cheti Pira <sup>1</sup>**


Received: 29 December 2019; Accepted: 31 January 2020; Published: 4 February 2020

**Abstract:** Ecosystem Services (ESs) are assuming a constantly increasing importance in management practices due to their key role in ensuring a sustainable future to fauna and flora on Earth. In addition, ES degradation and quality loss jeopardize current human activities. For this reason, it is essential to develop methodologies and practices able to efficiently assess environmental and socio-economic impacts in terms of ES deterioration, especially within protected areas. Norms and regulations have to be able to identify habitat and species categories to be preserved, and to determine the cost of their destruction and decline, according to a holistic vision, which includes social and economic impacts, besides the environmental ones. The paper illustrates the case study of the "Isola dell'Asinara" Marine Protected Area (MPA) in Sardinia, where an experimental methodology was developed with the aim to draw new regulations that integrate conservation measures of Natura 2000 sites included in its territory, provisions determined by the integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) protocol and the Standardized Actions for Effective Management of MPAs (ISEA) project. Subsequently, in order to assess the status of ESs and impacts on ESs located within the MPA territory, an ecosystem-based approach was implemented and applied to the actions defined for the new regulation proposal. Results show that regulations are in this way valuably enriched by environmental aspects of the MPA that would otherwise be overlooked.

**Keywords:** ecosystem services; millennium ecosystem assessment; marine protected areas; Natura 2000 network; integrated coastal zone management; standardized actions for effective management of marine protected areas; sustainable management; agenda 2030

### **1. Introduction**

Commitment to biodiversity preservation has been increasing dramatically since the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1992. Thanks to international cooperation and stronger awareness of the close relationship between human needs and ESs, attention to ES preservation has grown exponentially over the years. Indeed, a constantly increasing number of scientific studies underline the fundamental role of marine and coastal ecosystems in providing important social and economic advantages [1–4], including food provisioning, nutrient cycling, biodiversity, climate regulation, cultural values, recreation and amenities [5] and the growing human dependence on marine ecosystems and their services [6].

However, overexploitation and mismanagement of marine and coastal resources, habitat destruction and water pollution jeopardize the wealth of ecosystems [7] and, consequently, the services they provide [2], thus threatening the well-being of local communities and of the global community as a whole in developing and industrial countries [8]. Nowadays, many coastal areas have been shown to be vulnerable due to ocean warming, sea level rise, flooding, storm surges, beach erosion, changes in ocean freshwater balance [9], overfishing, tourism and pollution [10,11]. Therefore, appropriate marine and coastal area management and governance are essential to limit environmental and ecosystem damages caused by human activities, to protect biodiversity [12–15] and to improve ecosystem resilience [2] and ecosystem services supply [16]. Scientific research shows that Ecosystem Services (ESs) have to be included in planning discourses [17], but this is still little done in practice [18]. Therefore, following the suggestions of the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 and the related Aichi Targets, it is necessary to add a new conservation paradigm that integrates ESs in protected areas' planning rules in addition to the existing sets of biodiversity conservation measures [19]. The Strategic Plan for Biodiversity 2011–2020 was adopted in 2010 by the parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity, which has been ratified by 196 countries. Since the contracting countries are committed to the achievement of a number of targets by 2020, in 2011 the EU adopted the EU Biodiversity Strategy, which sets out six targets and 20 actions to halt the loss of biodiversity and ecosystem services in the EU by 2020. Among the objectives set by the strategy, this study focuses on those related to the preservation and protection of habitat, species and ESs located in Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) and Natura 2000 sites. In particular, regulation and planning aspects related to ESs are examined in the light of EU recommendations and communications in order to define research objectives and actions.

Marine Protected Areas (MPA) are globally recognized tools for managing marine ecosystems, specifically designed to safeguard biodiversity, to preserve marine ecosystem health, to maintain the supply of ESs [20], to prevent habitat loss [21] and to sustainably regulate human activities that affect the marine environment [22]. The aim is to reverse ecosystem and biodiversity loss, while sustaining local economy relying on sea and coastal resources [23]. The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) underlines that deep knowledge of the area is necessary in order to define ecological boundaries of the MPA and to set its objectives. It also calls attention to the vital support of the public and to established techniques for surveillance and monitoring of compliance with the provisions of the regulations. It plays an essential role in advocating the expansion of the MPA network through reliable science and by engaging with local stakeholders. In Europe, the State of the Environment Report (SOER) identifies three types of MPAs: Marine Natura 2000 sites, marine protected areas designed in the framework of regional marine agreements and the single national marine protected areas [24]. These three typologies of protected areas can overlap, that is, a specific zone can be disciplined according to more than one regulatory regime [25]. In Italy, MPAs are established through a ministerial order under the laws no. 979/1982 and no. 394/1991 and normally include three zones characterized by different levels of protection; namely, zone A, the "integral reserve", which is a no entry and no take zone; zone B, the "general reserve", which surrounds zone A where human activities and resource exploitation are severely restricted; and zone C, the "partial reserve", where human activities and resource exploitation are generally allowed but regulated [26]. It might occur that other regulatory regimes operate within the boundaries of an MPA, such as Natura 2000 network conservation measures for Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and Sites of Community Importance (SCIs), the provisions determined by the integrated coastal zone management (ICZM) and by the Standardized Actions for Effective Management of MPAs (ISEA). SCIs, identified by European countries according to article 2 of European Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora, subsequently labelled SACs, contribute towards ensuring bio-diversity through the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora. SPAs, identified by European countries according to article 1 of European Directive 79/409/EEC on the conservation of wild birds, contribute to the conservation of all species of naturally occurring birds in the wild state in the European territory. In this way, fragmentation, spatial isolation and

functional independence of protected areas often prevent a coordinated and integrated management of local activities, which might even present conflicts and contrasts that need to be handled. For example, the coexistence of tourist, commercial and fishery activities need multidisciplinary and integrated public policies [27]. In addition, managing protected areas as isolated reserves—without integrating them into wider spatial strategies—exposes them to the consequences of habitat alteration and destruction, pollution and overfishing that might occur outside their boundaries [28]. For these reasons, an integrated management tool able to adequately harmonize sector-specific policies according to a holistic vision of the territory that goes beyond fragmentation and sectoral policies is clearly crucial [29,30]. Researchers agree that its objectives must be clearly defined and compatible with one another [31–38] so that they need to be researched empirically through negotiation with stakeholders, balancing ecological concerns, economic interests, social issues and political power [39].

With the aim of developing the growth potential of marine and maritime economic activities in a sustainable way, the European Commission identified nine ongoing initiatives in the European Union, including the one on maritime spatial planning and integrated coastal zone management introduced by Directive 2014/89/EU and the one on the ecosystem-based approach introduced by the Marine Strategy Framework Directive (2008/56/EC) [40].

On the one hand, Directive 2014/89/EU defines maritime spatial planning as a cross-cutting policy tool enabling the application of a coordinated, integrated and trans-boundary ecosystem-based approach, which promotes smart, sustainable and inclusive growth and ensures sustainable use of marine and coastal resources [41]. On the other hand, Directive 2008/56/EC recommends ecosystem-based approaches for marine strategies, so that pressure of human activities does not compromise the capacity of marine ecosystems to respond to human-induced changes and the sustainable use of marine goods and services is ensured to present and future generations [42]. In Italy, according to article 2 subsection 3 and article 3 subsection 4 of the Decree of the Ministry of Environment, Land and Sea Protection (in Italian: Ministero dell'Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare, MATTM) published on 17th October 2007, the management of Natura 2000 sites located within the boundaries of an MPA is in charge of the MPA managing authority. Therefore, the MATTM demanded the integration of Natura 2000 conservation measures into MPA regulations in order to efficiently manage the area.

### **2. The Case Study**

Among the tools identified by the European Union to promote trans-boundary cooperation there is the Interreg Maritime Italy–France Programme, which financed 87 projects [43] including the GIREPAM project (Integrated Management of Ecological Networks through Parks and Marine Areas; in Italian: Gestione Integrata delle Reti Ecologiche attraverso i Parchi e le Aree Marine), which involves 16 partners located in five Italian and French regions (Sardinia, Corsica, Provence-Alps-Côte d'Azur, Liguria and Tuscany) and pursues the following three objectives:


The research group of the Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering and Architecture (DICAAR) of the University of Cagliari worked on the second objective by outlining an Experimental Procedure (in Italian: Protocollo Sperimentale, PS) aiming at formulating appropriate regulations for the management and control of the Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) named "Tavolara-Punta Coda Cavallo" and "Isola dell'Asinara" located in north-eastern and north-western Sardinia, respectively, as shown in Figures 1 and 2.

*Sustainability* **2020**, *12*, 1108 4 of 33

*Sustainability* **2020**, *12*, 1108 4 of 33

**Figure 1.** The territory of "Tavolara-Punta Coda Cavallo" Marine Protected Area (MPA) and of the Natura 2000 sites that overlap with it. Source: Authors' elaboration. **Figure 1.** The territory of "Tavolara-Punta Coda Cavallo" Marine Protected Area (MPA) and of the Natura 2000 sites that overlap with it. Source: Authors' elaboration. **Figure 1.** The territory of "Tavolara-Punta Coda Cavallo" Marine Protected Area (MPA) and of the Natura 2000 sites that overlap with it. Source: Authors' elaboration.

**Figure 2.** The territory of "Isola dell'Asinara" MPA and of the Natura 2000 sites that overlap with it. Source: Authors' elaboration. **Figure 2.** The territory of "Isola dell'Asinara" MPA and of the Natura 2000 sites that overlap with it. Source: Authors' elaboration. **Figure 2.** The territory of "Isola dell'Asinara" MPA and of the Natura 2000 sites that overlap with it.Source: Authors' elaboration.

Figures 1 and 2 show that SPAs, SACs and SCIs are located within the boundaries of the MPAs of "Tavolara-Punta Coda Cavallo" and "Isola dell'Asinara". Consequently, conservation measures identified by the Natura 2000 network for SPAs, SACs and SCIs are in force in the MPAs. In addition, the ICZM protocol and the ISEA project are adopted by the MPAs; therefore, the provisions they determine are in force in the MPAs as well. The PS aims at integrating these legislative measures in a single document, coherently with a holistic territory vision able to ensure favorable conservation status of habitats, thus preserving biodiversity. identified by the Natura 2000 network for SPAs, SACs and SCIs are in force in the MPAs. In addition, the ICZM protocol and the ISEA project are adopted by the MPAs; therefore, the provisions they determine are in force in the MPAs as well. The PS aims at integrating these legislative measures in a single document, coherently with a holistic territory vision able to ensure favorable conservation status of habitats, thus preserving biodiversity. Within the framework of the study carried out by the DICAAR research group, following the

*Sustainability* **2020**, *12*, 1108 5 of 33

of "Tavolara-Punta Coda Cavallo" and "Isola dell'Asinara". Consequently, conservation measures

Within the framework of the study carried out by the DICAAR research group, following the provisions provided by the European Directives 2014/89/EU and 2008/56/EC mentioned above, this paper focuses on the definition of a pioneering methodology to define "ecosystemic objectives", in accordance with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of Agenda 2030, to enrich the traditional assessment for sustainability provided by the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). In this way, ecological and socio-economic disciplines are integrated to provide decision-makers with a synthesis of complex information to inform strategies definition. The aim is to provide a scientific framework, which integrates ecosystem services in environmental assessment procedures, in order to guide managers and legislators in making sound decisions. provisions provided by the European Directives 2014/89/EU and 2008/56/EC mentioned above, this paper focuses on the definition of a pioneering methodology to define "ecosystemic objectives", in accordance with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of Agenda 2030, to enrich the traditional assessment for sustainability provided by the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA). In this way, ecological and socio-economic disciplines are integrated to provide decision-makers with a synthesis of complex information to inform strategies definition. The aim is to provide a scientific framework, which integrates ecosystem services in environmental assessment procedures, in order to guide managers and legislators in making sound decisions. For the purpose of this paper, only data concerning the MPA of "Isola dell'Asinara" are

For the purpose of this paper, only data concerning the MPA of "Isola dell'Asinara" are considered. The MPA was established in 2002 by a decree of the MATTM and its current regulations were approved by the MATTM through the decree of the 30th of July 2009 [45]. Its area covers approximately 108 km<sup>2</sup> in the sea and 79.64 km<sup>2</sup> in the mainland entirely comprised within the boundaries of the Municipality of Porto Torres, in the Province of Sassari [46]. The MPA territory overlaps with the following Natura 2000 sites: The SPA "ITB010001 Isola Asinara", the SPA "ITB013011 Isola Piana di Porto Torres" and the SAC "ITB010082 Isola dell'Asinara", as shown in Figure 2 [47]. It is characterized by an extensive coverage of various high-quality assets of natural capital as shown in Figure 3. considered. The MPA was established in 2002 by a decree of the MATTM and its current regulations were approved by the MATTM through the decree of the 30th of July 2009 [45]. Its area covers approximately 108 km2 in the sea and 79.64 km2 in the mainland entirely comprised within the boundaries of the Municipality of Porto Torres, in the Province of Sassari [46]. The MPA territory overlaps with the following Natura 2000 sites: The SPA "ITB010001 Isola Asinara", the SPA "ITB013011 Isola Piana di Porto Torres" and the SAC "ITB010082 Isola dell'Asinara", as shown in Figure 2 [47]. It is characterized by an extensive coverage of various high-quality assets of natural capital as shown in Figure 3.

**Figure 3. Figure 3.**  Map of the natural capital. Source: Povero et al., 2018 [ Map of the natural capital. Source: Povero et al., 2018 [48]. 48].

### **3. Methodology**

The approach adopted for the definition of the new MPA regulation proposal is based on the outline of the PS. It draws inspiration from the Strategical Environmental Assessment (SEA), with particular reference to articles 1 and 6 of Directive 2001/42/CE, which concern decisional processes and public participation. In particular, the PS recalls the principle that the SEA is not a simple assessment of environmental impacts related to a decision, but it plays a strategic role in all the stages of the whole decisional process [49,50]. In this respect, the SEA is an effective political instrument for territorial governance, able to define strategical actions through the integration of diverse approaches and tools [49,51–55].

The PS applies these concepts with the aim of enhancing decisional processes and management practices. In particular, it promotes public participation in a holistic vision pointing at going beyond the fragmentation and sectorization that characterize the planning and management tools in force. It is structured into the sections illustrated in Figure 4. *Sustainability* **2020**, *12*, 1108 7 of 33

**Figure 4.** The Experimental Procedure (PS) scheme. Source: Authors' elaboration. **Figure 4.** The Experimental Procedure (PS) scheme. Source: Authors' elaboration.

The first level lists the sustainability-oriented objectives—formulated on the basis of the SWOT analysis—which depict the environmental status of the area through the analysis of each The core of the PS is constituted by the Logical Framework (LF), since it organizes all the objectives and actions identified in the previous sections, and connects them in a cascade relationship. The LF

potential effects of plans and programs within the MPA territory and their interaction with the regulations. The third level enumerates specific objectives. They represent the regulation aims, as their codification is based on the contents of normative and management tools in force within the MPA. This section is the core of the PS, due to its importance within the process of upgrading the

The last level of the LF is the operative one, since it identifies the actions that address regulation objectives. In order to draw an efficient new regulation proposal, actions are formulated considering the planning and management tools in force (specific objectives) and the results of the SWOT analysis. These actions are then compared with the legislative instruments in force, which are in this way

regulations, and its subsequent implementation.

integrated in the new regulation proposal.

is organized according to a matrix structure, largely adopted in the programs promoted by the EU and other international entities. The LF is inspired to the so-called "programming by objectives", according to which the definition of the activities strictly follows the objective identification [56–58]. The LF structure ensures the identification of "conceptual connections between sustainability-oriented objectives related to the spatial contexts at stake and the operational planning actions concerning the integration of conservation measures related to" Natura 2000 sites into the new regulation proposal [59]. It is organized into four levels, which express the relationships among the various objectives drawn from the diverse protection instruments analyzed during the process of regulation elaboration (see Figure 4) and the actions defined to pursue the objectives selected for the prospective regulations.

The first level lists the sustainability-oriented objectives—formulated on the basis of the SWOT analysis—which depict the environmental status of the area through the analysis of each environmental component that characterizes the area [60]. The second level encompasses the objectives derived from the policy consistency and coherence assessment, which analyzes plans and programs in force at the regional, provincial and local level. The aim of this analysis is to identify the potential effects of plans and programs within the MPA territory and their interaction with the regulations. The third level enumerates specific objectives. They represent the regulation aims, as their codification is based on the contents of normative and management tools in force within the MPA. This section is the core of the PS, due to its importance within the process of upgrading the regulations, and its subsequent implementation.

The last level of the LF is the operative one, since it identifies the actions that address regulation objectives. In order to draw an efficient new regulation proposal, actions are formulated considering the planning and management tools in force (specific objectives) and the results of the SWOT analysis. These actions are then compared with the legislative instruments in force, which are in this way integrated in the new regulation proposal.

### *The Construction of the Logical Framework*

As illustrated in Figure 4, the first level of the LF is constituted by the sustainability-oriented objectives. These objectives result from the analysis of various environmental and socio-economic aspects that describe the analyzed area. The environmental components are identified on the basis of the list provided by the guidelines issued by the Sardinian Region adequately adapted to the MPA studied [61]. In particular, the following ten "environmental components" are examined:


Characteristics of each component are reported in a summary sheet, whose scheme is illustrated in Table 1. The sheet contains the essential information assessing the status of natural resources and the pressures of anthropic and economic factors, which can be relevant in the phase of implementation of the regulations. Contextually, a SWOT analysis is conducted to analyze each environmental component, considering data drawn from the context analysis, in order to finally define a set of sustainability-oriented objectives. Subsequently, these objectives are better focused thanks to the ten sustainability criteria identified by the EC [48].


**Table 1.** Summary sheet for the analysis of the environmental components.

Table 2 shows the SWOT analysis conducted for the "air" component, in relation to the sustainability-oriented objective: "Increasing air quality by mitigating pollution impacts, in order to control negative effects caused by climate change". It highlights strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats related to the component "air". Subsequently the identified sustainability-oriented objective is compared to the appropriate environmental sustainability criteria, designated by the EC [42] (The ten sustainability criteria are the following: (i) Minimization of the use of non-renewable resources; (ii) use of renewable resources within limits of capacity for regeneration; (iii) environmentally sound use and management of hazardous/polluting substances and wastes; (iv) conservation and enhancement of the status of wildlife, habitats and landscapes; (v) maintenance and improvement of the quality of soils and water resources; (vi) maintenance and improvement of the quality of historic and cultural resources; (vi) maintenance and improvement of the local environmental quality; (viii) protection of the atmosphere (global warming); (ix) development of environmental awareness, education and training; (x) promotion of public participation in decisions involving sustainable development). In particular, the sustainability-oriented objective here identified is better focused by considering the environmental sustainability criteria numbers i, ii, iii, vii and viii.


**Table 2.** SWOT analysis.

The second level of the LF is represented by the policy consistency and coherence objectives.

The assessment of policy consistency and coherence considers all the plans and programs in force at any level in the Marine Protected Area by examining the economic, social and spatial aspects relevant to the analyzed context. All the objectives illustrated in each plan or program are analyzed, and those considered meaningful for the regulations are adopted, either identical to their original formulation or adequately rephrased in order to be specifically tailored to the context.

For example, the objectives identified in relation to the Regional Air Quality Plan are listed below:


The third level of the LF is constituted of the specific objectives drawn from the various regulatory regimes in force in the "Isola dell'Asinara" MPA, with the aim of grouping them into a single regulatory framework. In correspondence with each objective, one or more actions are identified in order to guarantee the implementation of the objectives of the new regulation proposal. Simultaneously, actions pursue the aim of eliminating—or at least reducing—pressures exerted on natural resources by anthropic factors. In Tables 3 and 4 excerpts of the LF referring to the "air" component are reported.


### **Table 3.** LF excerpt referring to the "air" component.




**Table 4.** *Cont*.

Once the LF is completely filled, actions are compared with the regulations in force in order to evaluate their mutual coherence. In the event that the regulations in force in the MPAs do not include—or only partially include—a particular action, the regulations are updated either by adding new articles and subsections, or by modifying the existing ones. In order to best pursue this upgrading, regulations in force are also compared with regulations recently approved in other Italian MPAs, which are considered as best practices from which inspiration is taken. Table 5 shows the methodological model adopted to revise the regulations in force and is based on a double level of assessment.


**Table 5.** Methodology adopted to revise the regulations in force.

As a result of this double comparison, the new regulation proposal includes the aspects that characterize the sectorial norms that coexist in the area and those drawn from the regulations recently approved in other Italian MPAs. This integration aims at reinforcing biodiversity and environmental conservation, while guaranteeing efficient management of all the socio-economic activities in the area.

### **4. Definition of the PS Actions**

While the objectives constitute the structural dimension of the PS, the actions, in turn, embody the operational aspect, by providing detailed indications and restrictions for the organization and management of the MPA. Following the criteria adopted for the identification of the regulation objectives, actions are codified considering the current restrictions imposed by the legislation in force. These are the MPA establishment decree, the regulations, the management plans of the Natura 2000 sites, and the provisions of the ICZM protocol and of the ISEA project. In addition, the results of the environmental analysis—in particular, the SWOT analysis—for each environmental component have been considered. In this way, actions result strictly linked to the regulation objectives and well connected to the strategic themes raised during their definition.

Once defined, actions were grouped by the categories that characterize the regulations in force as illustrated below:


Attention has been focused on the dispositions and regulatory norms showing a strong link between the sustainable use of natural resources and the protection of marine habitats and species.

Table 6 reports the action set defined.


**Table 6.** Regulation actions. Source: PS of "Isola dell'Asinara" MPA.

### **Table 6.** *Cont*.


### **Table 6.** *Cont*.



**Table 6.** *Cont*.

### *Selection of Ecosystem Services for MPAs*

Given the need of guaranteeing coherency and compatibility among the diverse assessments, and the aim of properly integrating ES assessment into the PS in order to update the regulations in ecosystemic terms, this paper proposes a selection of ESs for the "Isola dell'Asinara" MPA based on the Common International Classification of Ecosystem Goods and Services (CICES). CICES consists of a hierarchical scheme for ES classification based on the three main categories of ecosystem services [62]:


The work has been conducted on the basis of a study realized in the "Isola dell'Asinara" MPA, concerning environmental accounting in Italian marine protected areas (in Italian: "Contabilità ambientale nelle aree marine protette italiane") [63], which assigns an ecological value to environmental heritage and subsequently identifies the ecological functions and the relative ESs that characterize it.

On the basis of data provided by the MPA, a set of ESs has been identified and classified according to the CICES scheme (Table 7). The criterion adopted for ES identification was the influence wielded over them by the protection regime in force within the MPA, and their suitability to MPA management.

**Table 7.** Proposal of a common Ecosystem Service (ES) classification [64].


The three sections identified by the CICES scheme are: Regulation and maintenance, provisioning and cultural. It must be noticed that these categories are not designed for a specific spatial scale nor for a unique governance level. Thus, the ES assessment needs to be tailored for MPAs and Natura 2000 sites by considering that:


Tables 8–10 illustrate the match between ES classes and PS actions related to the ES sections "regulation and maintenance", "provisioning" and "cultural", respectively.



**Table 9.** Association between ES classes and PS actions related to the ES section "regulation and maintenance".


**Table 9.** *Cont*.


**Table 9.** *Cont*.



**Table 9.** *Cont*.


**Table 10.** Association between ES classes and PS actions related to the ES section "cultural".

Tables 8–10 show that the previously defined actions of the PS match all the three ES sections and that the majority of the actions refer to the "regulation and maintenance" and "cultural" ES sections. In particular, the highest number of matches is observable in the classes "maintaining nursery populations and habitats" and "chemical condition of salt waters" in the section "regulation and maintenance" and in the class "physical use of land/sea-scapes in different environmental settings" in the section "cultural". However, not all the ES classes are matched to PS actions. Nevertheless, some of them are relevant for defining an appropriate management of the MPA. For example, "wild animals

and their outputs", "bio-remediation by micro-organisms, algae, plants and animals", "dilution by atmosphere, freshwater and marine ecosystems", "symbolic", "existence" and "bequest".

Subsequently to this classification, in order to assess the management of the MPA, ES classes have been grouped into five macro-themes according to the proposal of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment proposal [62] for urban, coastal and marine areas as follows:


These macro-themes have been assessed through a methodological approach similar to the one that guided the environmental assessment of the PS. Indeed, they have been described through a proper summary sheet with the aim of identifying a set of objectives in addition to those already defined in the PS. In this way, it is possible to update the regulations according to an "ecosystemic" perspective. Table 11 provides an example of a summary sheet for the ES "k".



Among the previously identified "ecosystemic macro-themes", for the purpose of this study, it is worth focusing on the following:


In the operational phase, after identifying and mapping where each ES fruition occurs in order to analyze each ES macro-theme, an interview sample was realized with the aim of monitoring anthropic pressures related to ES fruition. Data collection focused on bathing, scuba diving, professional and small-scale fishing and yachting and relied on fieldwork and interviews conducted in the MPA headquarters, especially through:


Human benefits have been assessed according to an anthropocentric approach. In particular, those that derive from ES fruition by operators, tourists and visitors of the MPA were considered as "environmental benefits" and thus evaluated in monetary terms. Differently, biophysical benefits (i.e., those related to the environment and not to humans) were assessed according to an eco-centric approach, which is currently being developed by the Department of Earth Sciences of Environment and Life of the University of Genova within a number of projects, such as GIREPAM. Environmental benefits deriving from the use of the MPA natural heritage have been re-classified on the base of the ES from which they originate [63].

Tables 12 and 13 show the summary sheets related to "tourism fruition" and "fish biomass supply for business or entertainment purposes", elaborated as an example of the previously illustrated analysis.

**Table 12.** Summary sheet related to "tourism fruition".


Thus, among the visitors of the "Isola dell'Asinara" MPA every year, 76% are occasional tourists. With respect to the origin, 95% of bathers are residents in Italy (of them, 25% are from Sardinia and 38% from the north of Italy). All the interviewees consider the MPA important or even a priority.


**Table 12.** *Cont*. **Scuba Diving** 

2016 period).

*Sustainability* **2020**, *12*, 1108 25 of 33

home, 31% rented a house and 44% chose other options (i.e., hotel, bed and breakfast, etc.). The remaining 23% of the interviewees were one-day tourists. Figure 5 shows tourist distribution according to the following categories of tourists: i) Usual stay; ii) occasional stay; iii) usual one-day stay; iv) occasional one-day stay. Thus, among the visitors of the "Isola dell'Asinara" MPA every year, 76% are occasional tourists. With respect to the origin, 95% of bathers are residents in Italy (of them, 25% are from Sardinia and 38% from the north of Italy). All the interviewees consider the MPA important or even a priority. *Class type Indicator Measure unit* 


**Figure 5. Figure 5.** Tourists' stay distribution. Tourists' stay distribution. Source: Authors' elaboration. Source: Authors' elaboration.

**Table 13.** Summary sheet related to "fish biomass supply for business or entertainment purposes".


2014 and 2016. The estimated quantity of fish caught was of 61,562 kg/year.

Definition of "Ecosystemic objectives" was realized on the basis of the strategy of Agenda 2030 towards sustainable development (Agenda 2030 is an action program joined by 193 ONU countries in September 2015. Agenda 2030 strongly highlights the unsustainability of current economic, environmental and social development models. This vision shifts away from the common idea that sustainable development is just an environmental issue by simultaneously integrating the diverse development dimensions into one coherent vision. The agenda gathers 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into an action program articulated in 169 "targets" or "goals". The objectives were launched in 2016, and the subscribing countries committed themselves to achieve them by 2030). In particular, with the aim of defining the "ecosystemic objectives" referring to the studied MPA, the Sustainable Development Goals of Agenda 2030 refer to the themes on which the case study focuses. They have been selected and linked to the macro-themes previously defined. The selected goals are the following:


Subsequently, each SDG has been matched with the previously identified macro-themes. Table 14 shows the definition of the ecosystem objectives in relation to the ES chosen for the case study and in correspondence with the selected SDG. These objectives are drawn from the SDGs, but are carefully rephrased in order to be adapted to the context.


### **5. Discussion**

In this section, results previously obtained and presented are discussed, highlighting the main issues that characterized the two phases of the research. The results offer a way to cope with the critical issues related to the definition of MPA regulations, identified in the previous sections.

The research was articulated into two phases: In the first phase, the methodological approach to update the regulation in the light of Natura 2000 conservation measures was defined; in the second phase, the analysis of the constitutive elements of the PS and their assessment in light of the ESs was conducted.

Concerning the first phase of the research, it is worth noting the following two significant results:


The two results reported above allow the overcoming of some critical issues that arose during the construction of the PS:


Concerning the second phase of the research, it is worth noting the following three significant results:


### **6. Conclusions and Suggestions for Further Research**

In light of the previously discussed results, the main obstacles to efficient MPA management are the high variety of objectives regarding protection and development of MPAs and the need to provide users with information about norms and rules concerning the sustainable fruition of these areas. The need to overcome these discrepancies and to simultaneously facilitate users' fruition, by reducing information fragmentation, called for the construction of a dynamic and interdisciplinary instrument able to consider, in an integrated way, all the ecosystem fragilities, the coastal landscape and the human impacts on them.

The proposed conceptual approach represents the starting point for the definition of guidelines on the systematic application of the PS model to spatial planning and to the management of natural areas characterized by an overlapping of diverse normative levels.

Thus, governance and management of marine areas can be innovated according to a holistic territorial vision, able to efficiently contrast biodiversity loss and ecosystem degradation.

Possible further research projects can be developed according to this vision, as, for example:


In conclusion, this study proposes an innovative ecosystem approach based on the interaction of diverse disciplines [67] that allows a draft of a new regulation proposal that is more effective with respect to the themes of environmental safeguards and biodiversity protection [68]. It demonstrates that it is possible to realize efficient ex-ante and ex-post assessment for public policies through the development of accounting systems, indicators and assessment methods related to the impact of these policies on the state of the natural capital [66]. This innovative approach can be replicated in other similar contexts for sustainable planning in coastal territories.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, M.F., V.G., F.I., F.L., S.P. and C.P.; methodology, M.F., F.I., F.L., S.P. and C.P.; investigation, M.F., F.I., F.L., S.P. and C.P.; resources, M.F., V.G., F.I., F.L., S.P. and C.P.; writing—original draft preparation, M.F., F.I., and C.P.; writing—review and editing, F.L. and S.P.; visualization, F.L. and S.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research was funded by the Research project based on the Agreement between Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile, Ambientale e Architettura (Department of Civil, Environmental Engineering and Architecture, DICAAR) of the University of Cagliari, Italy, and the Autonomous Region of Sardinia, Departmental Office of Environment Protection, finalized to the objectives of the Project "GIREPAM–Integrated Management of Ecological Networks through Parks and Marine Areas" (Programme INTERREG Marittimo Italy-France Maritime 2014–2020, Axis 2).

**Acknowledgments:** Maddalena Floris gratefully acknowledges Sardinia Regional Government for the financial support of her Ph.D. scholarship. (P.O.R. Sardegna F.S.E. Operational Program of the Autonomous Region of Sardinia, European Social Fund 2014-2020 - Axis III Education and training, Thematic goal 10, Priority of investment 10ii.).

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

### **References**


© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

*Article*
