Editing IPCC:AR6/WGII/Chapter-12 (section)

==== 12.5.2.2 Adaptation Success in Ocean and Coastal Ecosystems of Central and South America ====

<div id="h3-37-siblings" class="h3-siblings"></div>

There is ''low evidence'' about how the strategies and actions taken and implemented in ocean and coastal systems of CSA have contributed to advance in the protection and conservation of ocean and coastal ecosystems. However, some important advances are visible in Colombian Pacific areas with coral reefs (new conservation plans, research monitoring and conservation practices) ( ''low confidence'' ) ( [[#Cruz-Garcia--2015|Cruz-Garcia and Peters, 2015]] ; [[#Alvarado--2017|Alvarado et al., 2017]] ; [[#Bayraktarov--2020|Bayraktarov et al., 2020]] ). In Panama, actions taken have allowed the protection of a high number of marine areas with coral reefs, as well as the incorporation of management approaches that include several sectors such as fisheries, tourism, coral protection and coral conservation ( ''low confidence'' ) ( [[#Alvarado--2017|Alvarado et al., 2017]] ). In the case of Costa Rica, 80% of coral habitats are located inside of MPAs, multiple research coral-related activities have been performed, and several training activities have favoured the engagement of the local community in their protection against climate and non-climate hazards ( ''low confidence'' ) ( [[#Alvarado--2017|Alvarado et al., 2017]] ).

There is ''low evidence'' of how the incorporation of mangroves as Ramsar sites, the reforms of legislations (e.g., fines and stronger regulations), and the creation of reserves and private protection initiatives (e.g., Belize Association of Private Protected Areas BAPPA), and capacity-building projects or new educational programmes have promoted the protection of mangroves in CSA countries such as Honduras, Guatemala and Belize ( [[#Cvitanovic--2014|Cvitanovic et al., 2014]] ; [[#Carter--2015|Carter et al., 2015]] ; [[#Ellison--2020|Ellison et al., 2020]] ). In Brazil, between 75–84% of mangroves are under some level of protection which has improved the forest structures, and multiple research programmes (e.g., Mangrove Dynamics and Management, MADAM, and ‘GEF-Mangle’) have been developed ( ''medium confidence'' ) ( [[#Krause--2014|Krause, 2014]] ; Medeiros et al., 2014; [[#Estrada--2015|Estrada et al., 2015]] ; [[#Ferreira--2016|Ferreira and Lacerda, 2016]] ; Oliveira- [[#Filho--2016|Filho et al., 2016]] ; [[#Borges--2017|Borges et al., 2017]] ; [[#Maretti--2019|Maretti et al., 2019]] ; [[#Strassburg--2019|Strassburg et al., 2019]] ). In Colombia, research projects (e.g., Mangroves of Colombia Projects, MCP), the installation of a geographic information system for mangroves (e.g., SIGMA Sistema de Información para la Gestión de los Manglares en Colombia), surveillance monitoring plans (e.g., EGRETTA Herramientas para el Control y Vigilancia de los Manglares), and the establishment of protected areas have contributed to decrease loss of the mangrove forest ( ''high confidence'' ) ( [[#Blanco-Libreros--2015|Blanco-Libreros and Estrada-Urrea, 2015]] ; [[#Rodríguez-Rodríguez--2016|Rodríguez-Rodríguez et al., 2016]] ; [[#Álvarez-León--2017|Álvarez-León and Álvarez Puerto, 2017]] ; [[#Baptiste--2017|Baptiste et al., 2017]] ; [[#Jaramillo--2018|Jaramillo et al., 2018]] ; [[#Salazar--2018|Salazar et al., 2018]] ; [[#Armenteras--2019|Armenteras et al., 2019]] ; [[#Blanco-Libreros--2019|Blanco-Libreros and Álvarez-León, 2019]] ).

There is ''low evidence'' whether the establishment of MPAs and the creation of legal instruments have allowed the development of new research activities have increased the environmental awareness, decreased the illegal extraction, and improved the local coordination which have promoted the sustainable use of marine resources, and improved the community-government cooperation in marine ecosystems ( [[#Alvarado--2017|Alvarado et al., 2017]] ). The experience in countries like Chile demonstrates the importance of implementing robust management plans that guarantee the protection objectives and the sustainability through the implementation of EbA measures such as MPAs ( [[#Petit--2018|Petit et al., 2018]] ).

There is ''low confidence'' about how measures adopted are ensuring the sustainability of marine resources used by fisheries. In Peru, industrial fisheries follow an adaptive management approach (i.e., stock assessments, catch limits), while in Chile, small-scale fisheries of benthic-demersal resources is managed through the granting of exclusive territorial use rights (called TURFS) with established quotas defined by the central authority ( [[#Bertrand--2018|Bertrand et al., 2018]] ). In addition, MPAs in Chile play a key role in climate-change adaptation for fisheries ( ''medium confidence'' ) ( [[#Gelcich--2015|Gelcich et al., 2015]] ; [[#Petit--2018|Petit et al., 2018]] ), and an increasing amount of funds have been invested in initiatives to reduce the vulnerability of fishery and aquaculture sectors to climate change ( [[#OECD--2017|OECD, 2017]] ). Since 2016, Argentina has been developing a strategy to implement EbM on fisheries with support from the Global Environment Facility (GEF) programme. Also, Argentina and Chile are promoting the local consumption of seafood and the certification of its fishery products ( [[#OECD--2017|OECD, 2017]] ), while Brazil and Chile have advanced in their response to climate change through the development of new research studies and methodologies incorporating research institutions ( [[#Nagy--2015|Nagy et al., 2015]] ). Uruguay is incorporating stakeholders in its climate-change adaptation strategies ( ''low confidence'' ) ( [[#Nagy--2015|Nagy et al., 2015]] ), while Colombia is supporting the capacity building of fishers, promoting livelihood diversification to increase the resilience of the sector ( ''medium confidence: medium evidence, high agreement'' ) ( [[#Hellebrandt--2014|Hellebrandt et al., 2014]] ; [[#Arroyo%20Mina--2016|Arroyo Mina et al., 2016]] ; [[#Matera--2016|Matera, 2016]] ). Chile and Peru have made certain advances in the development of guidelines for the management of the coast line and the implementation of the EbM, which has favoured the collaboration of diverse and multiple stakeholders (fishers, academics, municipal institutions), the development of outreach and educational activities, the creation of networks and the interests of other fishery communities to implement EbM ( ''medium confidence: medium evidence, high agreement'' ) ( [[#Hellebrandt--2014|Hellebrandt et al., 2014]] ; [[#Gelcich--2015|Gelcich et al., 2015]] ; [[#Gutiérrez--2016a|Gutiérrez et al., 2016a]] ; [[#Oyanedel--2016|Oyanedel et al., 2016]] ; [[#Guerrero-Gatica--2020|Guerrero-Gatica et al., 2020]] ). In countries like Peru and Chile, there is an increasing presence of intergovernmental and international cooperation agencies, in addition to new funding (e.g., GEF) and projects (Inter-American Development, SPINCAM) related to change adaptation for the fishery sector ( ''medium confidence: medium evidence, high agreement'' ) ( [[#Galarza--2015|Galarza and Kámiche, 2015]] ; [[#Barragán--2018|Barragán and Lazo, 2018]] ).

<div id="12.5.2.3" class="h3-container"></div>

<span id="national-climate-change-commitments-for-ocean-and-coasts"></span>