Rachel Campos Sabioni
email: rachel.campos-sabioni@utc.fr

Joanna Daaboul
email: joanna.daaboul@utc.fr

Julien Le Duigou
email: julien.le-duigou@utc.fr

Julien Le

Rachel Campos Sabioni

OPTIMAL INTEGRATION OF PRODUCT CONFIGURATION AND PROCESS PLANNING TO MEET INDIVIDUAL CUSTOMER REQUIREMENTS IN MASS CUSTOMIZATION

Keywords: Systems optimization, Operations Research, Industry 4.0, Production systems of goods and services, Mass Customization, Co-design

d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

INTRODUCTION

The recent technological advances provided by the Industry 4.0 together with the globalization are increasingly affecting the customer behaviors and requirements (Koren 2010;Wang et al. 2017). Currently, customers no longer want just standard products; they prefer customized and high quality products capable to satisfy their individual requirements. This new era of large variety demand and market instability, has forced companies to find innovative and viable ways of attending customer demands in relatively few time and low cost (Wang et al. 2017).

One strategy that companies have been using in order to increase their product offers to attain individual customer requirements by keeping the competitiveness is the Modular Product Design (MPD) strategy. MPD means the development of products capable to accomplish several functionalities through the combination of different modules (Pahl and Beitz 1995;Gershenson et al. 2003). According to some authors, the MPD seems to be the best product design strategy to achieve a sustainable Mass Customization (MC) (Pine 1993;Sanchez and Mahoney 1996).

Currently, the most common strategy used by companies on the configuration of modular mass-customized products is asking customers to configure their product themselves, through a configurator, in which they can choose their desired modules (Pitiot et al. 2014). Generally, customers are not assisted during the purchase process, since only options of modules are proposed (Chen and Wang 2010; Piller and Walcher 2017).

Nevertheless, customers do not always know how to translate their requirements into product configurations. Non-experts or customers new to a given product type do not have sufficient knowledge about the product and struggle to find what they want (Huffman and Kahn 1998). In MC contexts, this kind of trouble can be even worse due to the high set of choices.

Further, current configurators do not integrate production planning or supply chain issues, such as cost and time. Companies usually present a product price and delivery date calculated by standard values of duration as well as material and operation costs (Pitiot et al. 2014). Nevertheless, costs related to manufacturing are variable and can significantly affect the product price.

The several possibilities of sequencing and assigning operations, required to manufacture a product, into machines, together with the various ways of combining modules in a product configuration driven by individual customer requirements can greatly increase the system 13 the International Conference on Modeling, Optimization and Simulation -MOSIM'20 -November 12-14, 2020-Agadir -Morocco "New advances and challenges for sustainable and smart industries" complexity, regarding to product differentiation (Tseng et al. 1996;Koren et al. 2018). The process planning, product configuration and customer requirements are interconnected and they must be integrated in a sense that process plan decisions are also based on product configuration (i.e. the set of modules compounding the product), which in turn is oriented by individual customer requirements.

In order to achieve this integration, this paper proposes a 0-1 integer linear programming (ILP) model that integrates individual customer requirements, product configuration and process planning in order to minimize the overall manufacturing costs. For validating this model, a 2-steps approach based an exhaustive search algorithm (ESA) and CPLEX solver was applied to solve a numerical example.

This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents a literature review. The problem statement is in Section 3, while Section 4 brings the proposition and the numerical illustration. Finally, Section 5 presents the conclusion and research perspectives.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Product Configuration and Configurators for MC

MPD consists of developing modular products composed by a set of relatively autonomous modules that can be combined in several ways to accomplish various functionalities (Pahl and Beitz 1995). In many cases, modules can have variants called module instances. The combination of different module instances to create product variants takes place in the product configuration, an essential stage in MPD (Jiao and Tseng 2000;Paes et al. 2018).

The objective of MC is providing products that meet individual customer needs with mass production efficiency (Jiao and Tseng 1999). In order to enable the participation of customers into the value creation, the configuration of mass-customized products is carried out through configurators (Chen and Wang 2010; Piller and Blazek 2014). Configurator is a "co-design toolkit" that allows customers choosing and combining different product components (modules), during a purchase process, until they find a product variant that fits their needs (Piller and Blazek 2014).

Most of configurators only give choices of product components, without assisting the customer during their purchase process (Chen and Wang 2010; Piller and Walcher 2017). Nevertheless, customers do not always know how to translate their needs into product configurations. Further, as stated by Liu et al. (Liu et al. 2017), the main objective of customers when buying a product is benefiting from its functionalities rather than getting the product embodiment. Likewise, Huffman and Kahn (1998) state that presenting the product information based on its attributes/functionalities, instead of showing product alternatives, reduces the purchasing process complexity while increases the customer satisfaction. This means that guiding customer choices through product functionalities (PFs) seems to be more appropriate than just proposing them many product alternatives.

Further, the high number of choices proposed by MC can entail customers to the "paradox of choice", with risk of turning MC into "mass-confusion" (Piller and Walcher 2017). The large set of options proposed in an MC configurator together with the knowledge gap between customers and companies, makes the product configuration for MC being a main driver for customization complexity, from the customers' viewpoint (Franke et al. 2004;Chen and Wang 2010).

To overcome this problem, some works have tried to optimize product configuration driven by individual customer requirements in order to increase customer satisfaction (Hong et al. 2008;Dou and Zong 2014;Zhao et al. 2020). Although these researches focused on customer needs when configuring products, they did not consider costs related to manufacturing process. However, as previously stated, a sustainable MC must provide products capable of meeting individual customer requirements while being efficiently mass-produced. Thus, it seems to be of great importance to consider manufacturing costs when configuring a product for MC, and these costs depend among others on the process planning.

Integrated product configuration and process planning driven by customer needs

Process planning is related to transcribing the product design data into a method to manufacture it, including selection of machines and operations sequencing (Mohapatra et al. 2013). This means, manufacturing costs, such as operations and material handling costs, will vary according to the process plan. In addition to the overall manufacturing costs, process planning can significantly affect the product performance, since an inappropriate process plan cannot ensure the achievement of desired PFs (Xu and Liang 2006).

On the other hand, product configuration without regard to the manufacturing system settings can imply in higher production cost and delivery time (Jiao and Tseng 2000;Xu and Liang 2005). When configuring products for MC, in addition to the manufacturing system it is important to consider specific customer requirements in order to meet their individual needs. Although product configuration and process planning are essential elements for MC, few papers addressed both subjects together by considering individual customer needs (Pine 1993;Pitiot et al. 2013).

Among them, Pitiot et al. (Pitiot et al. 2013(Pitiot et al. , 2014(Pitiot et al. , 2020) ) addressed manufacturing costs considering variable resources, but they did not precise if the same operation could be performed by different resources neither did they address material handling costs. Further, to our 2020) tried to optimize the product configuration for mass-customizing products. They considered costs of product modules and/or module instances in their optimization problems, but they did not detail these costs in terms of manufacturing costs (material handling, operations cost, etc.) and raw material cost. Meaning each module always had the same cost, no matter the process plan.

Yigit et al. ( 2002) and Yigit and Allahverdi (2003), in turn, were not focused on MC, but they included individual customer requirements as input/constraints to optimize the product configuration concurrently to the process planning in a reconfigurable manufacturing system. They assumed that each type of module could have two or three module instances. However, they considered that for each type of module, there was a fixed production system configuration; consequently, manufacturing costs were considered constant according to the type of fabricated module.

The increasing globalization and demand for customized and personalized products has forced companies to be more flexible and reactive (Najid et al. 2020). This is why companies have invested in flexible manufacturing systems (FMS) and, more recently, in reconfigurable manufacturing systems (RMS) (Najid et al. 2020). In these manufacturing systems different types of machines can execute the same operation, increasing their flexibility and capacity to produce high product variety.

Nevertheless, as far as we know, there is still no work proposing to optimize the configuration of masscustomized products, driven by individual customer requirements, integrated with the process planning in FMS or RMS, with machines performing many operations, and the same operation being performed by different machines.

Further, no papers addressing the concurrent optimization of product configuration and process planning considered material handling costs in their objective functions. However, this cost can significantly affect the overall manufacturing cost.

PROBLEM STATEMENT

Rather than proposing modules to the customers, here they are invited to select, among a set of options, which PFs they desire in their product. Each individual customer requirement can be translated into a PF that are represented by product modules. Each instance from a module can satisfy several PFs, while each PF can be satisfied by one or many module instances.

The set of operations required to manufacture a product variant corresponds to the combination of the operations required by each module instance chosen in the product configuration. Operations can be performed by different machines, whilst the same machine can perform several operations. In any case, each operation is performed once while the same machine can be assigned many times, but never to multiple operations simultaneously. The operation's cost can change from one machine to another and there is a cost of handling material between two machines. Therefore, manufacturing costs cannot be considered constants according to the module instance type.

Several product configurations can origin from the combination of module instances capable of satisfying PFs required by the customer, Each module instance has a raw material cost, in addition to that, costs of manufacturing, assembly and material handling are also considered. Thus, the number and types of selected module instances as well as how operations are sequenced and 13 the International Conference on Modeling, Optimization and Simulation -MOSIM'20 -November 12-14, 2020-Agadir -Morocco "New advances and challenges for sustainable and smart industries" assigned can affect the search for the optimal product configuration. It means a product configuration with the lowest overall manufacturing cost capable to meet all individual customer requirements (required PFs).

PROPOSITION

Figure 1 illustrates the proposition for integrating the product configuration with the process planning with consideration of individual customer requirements for MC.

Customers specify which PFs they want in their product. Only module instances capable to satisfy at least one PF are considered in the product configuration stage. Each product configuration will require a set of operations that must be sequenced and assigned to machines, at process level. The optimal product configuration corresponds to the one that meets all customer requirements (required PFs) and that has the lowest overall manufacturing cost, which comprises (1) costs of raw material, (2) operations and (3) material handling. Finally, the customer validates the product variant proposed and, if she/he wants, she/he can do some changes.

Mathematical model

Assumptions

i. Instances from different modules cannot require the same operations; ii. Each machine is able to perform different operations; iii. The same operation can be performed by different machines.

Input parameters

𝑭 = {1,2, … , f, … ,

Decision variables

𝒚 𝒎𝒊 1, if instance i of module m is selected. 0, otherwise.

𝒙 𝒑𝒘𝒋 1, if operation p is assigned to machine win process plan position j. 0, otherwise.

𝒕 𝒘,𝒘 ′ 𝒋,𝒋+𝟏

1, if the occurrence of machine w is on the position j of process plan and the occurrence of machine w' is on the position j+1. 0, otherwise.

Objective function

Eq. ( 1) presents the objective function, which consists of the sum of raw material cost (CRM), operations cost (CP) and material handling costs (CMT):

𝒁 = 𝑪𝑹𝑴 + 𝑪𝑷 + 𝑪𝑴𝑻 𝒎𝒊𝒏 𝒁 (1)
Where:

𝐶𝑅𝑀 = ∑ ∑ 𝑦 𝑚𝑖 × 𝛼 𝑚𝑖 𝑖 𝑚 (2) 𝐶𝑃 = ∑ ∑ ∑ 𝑥 𝑝𝑤𝑗 × 𝜎 𝑝𝑤 𝑗 𝑤 𝑝 × 𝜏 𝑝𝑤 (3) 𝐶𝑀𝑇 = ∑ ∑ 𝑡 𝑤𝑤 ′ 𝑗,𝑗+1 × 𝜓 × 𝑑 𝑤,𝑤 ′ 𝑗 𝑤,𝑤 ′ ∊𝑊 (4) Subject to: ∑ 𝑦 𝑚𝑖 𝑖 ≤ 1 ∀ 𝑚 ∊ 𝑀 (5) 𝑦 𝑚𝑖 + 𝑦 𝑚′𝑖′ ≤ 𝐺 𝑚,𝑖,𝑚 ′ ,𝑖 ′ + 1 ∀ 𝑚, 𝑚 ′ ∊ 𝑀 (6)
13 the International Conference on Modeling, Optimization and Simulation -MOSIM'20 -November 12-14, 2020-Agadir -Morocco "New advances and challenges for sustainable and smart industries"

∀ 𝑖, 𝑖 ′ ∊ 𝐼 ∑ ∑ 𝑦 𝑚𝑖 𝑖 × 𝑆 𝑚𝑖𝑓 ≥ 𝐷 𝑓 𝑚 ∀ 𝑓 ∊ 𝐹 (7) ∑ ∑ 𝑥 𝑝𝑤𝑗 𝑤 𝑝 = 1 ∀ 𝑗 ∊ 𝐽 (8) ∑ ∑ 𝑥 𝑝𝑤𝑗 = 1 𝑗 𝑤 ∀ 𝑝 ∊ 𝑂𝑃 (9) ∑ ∑ ∑ 𝑦 𝑚𝑖 × 𝑅 𝑝𝑚𝑖 𝑖 𝑚 𝑝 = ∑ ∑ 𝑤 ∑ 𝑥 𝑝𝑤𝑗 × 𝑗 𝑄 𝑝𝑤𝑐 𝑝 (10) ∑ ∑ 𝑥 𝑝 ′ 𝑤 ′ 𝑗 ′ 𝑗-1 𝑗 ′ =1 𝑤 ′ ≥ ∑ 𝑥 𝑝,𝑤,𝑗 × 𝑃 𝑝′𝑝 𝑤 (11) ∀ 𝑝, 𝑝′ ∊ 𝑂𝑃 ∀ 𝑗 = 1, 2, … , 𝑛 ∑ 𝑡 𝑤,𝑤 ′ 𝑗,𝑗+1 𝑤,𝑤 ′ ∊𝑊 ≤ 1 ∀ 𝑗 ∊ 𝐽 (12) 𝑡 𝑤,𝑤 ′ 𝑗,𝑗+1 ≥ 𝑥 𝑝𝑤𝑗 + 𝑥 𝑝 ′ 𝑤 ′ 𝑗+1 -1 (13)
𝑦 𝑚𝑖 ∊ {0,1} ∀ 𝑚 ∊ 𝑀 ∀ 𝑖 ∊ 𝐼 (14)
𝑥 𝑝𝑤𝑗 ∊ {0,1} ∀ 𝑝 ∊ 𝑂𝑃 ∀ 𝑤 ∊ 𝑊 ∀ 𝑗 ∊ 𝐽 (15) 𝑡 𝑤,𝑤 ′ 𝑗,𝑗+1 ∊ {0,1} ∀ 𝑤 ∊ 𝑊 ∀ 𝑗 ∊ 𝐽 (16)
Constraint Eq. ( 5) ensures that only one instance (i) of a given module (m) can be selected each time. Eq. ( 6) states that only the module instance i compatible with the module instance i' can be selected to constitute a given product variant. Eq. ( 7) ensures that each required product functionality (f) must be satisfied by at least one selected module instance (𝑌 𝑚𝑖 ). Eq. ( 8) states that each operation (p) is processed at one process plan position (j) by one machine (w), whilst Eq. ( 9) states that each operation (p) is processed once in one machine (w). With constraints ( 8) and ( 9), the Eq. ( 10) ensures that each of all required operations must be performed in only one machine (w) at one stage of the process plan (j). Eq. ( 11) describes the precedence constraint. Constraint (12) ensures that between position j and j+1 there is at most one machine change(𝑡 𝑤,𝑤 ′ 𝑗,𝑗+1 ), while the Eq.Erreur ! Source du renvoi introuvable. states that if two followed machines in the process plan are different, there is a material transfer between them (𝑡 𝑤,𝑤 ′ 𝑗,𝑗+1 = 1). The variable domains are described by Eq. ( 14), ( 15) and ( 16).

Solution approach

In this paper, a 2-step solution approach (Figure 2) based on an exhaustive search algorithm (ESA) and CPLEX solver is proposed. As previously said, in this paper each PF can be satisfied by at least one module instance.

Further, each combination of module instances corresponds to a product configuration (PC). In the first step, ESA lists all possible PCs, through the combination of all available module instances, while respecting the compatibility constraint of module instances. Then, based on the customer requirements, it means, their desired PFs, ESA filters all available PCs, to obtain only feasible product configurations (FPC). Each FPC corresponds to a PC capable to satisfy all PFs required by the customer.

Operations required by each feasible PC are inputs to the second step, in which the optimal operations sequence and machine assignment for each FPC is searched with the aid of CPLEX solver. The total cost as well as optimal process planning found for each FPC is archived. At the end, the set of optimal solutions found for all FPCs is enumerated and therefore the global optimal is selected, which corresponds to the FPC presenting the process plan and product configuration with the minimal overall manufacturing cost. Here, the minimal overall manufacturing cost includes costs of (1) raw material, (2) operations and (3) material handling. Step 1

Step 2

Figure 2. Framework of the 2-step solution approach to optimize the product configuration integrated with its process planning by considering individual customer requirements.

13 the International Conference on Modeling, Optimization and Simulation -MOSIM'20 -November 12-14, 2020-Agadir -Morocco "New advances and challenges for sustainable and smart industries"

This approach allows for the simultaneous optimization of PC and process planning, while ensuring that:

1) The minimum cost is obtained;

2) All customer requirements, it means, PFs required by the customer, are attended.

Results and discussion

In order to verify the model and the solution approach, a numerical illustration with 7 available PFs, 4 modules (with module instances varying from 2 to 5 per module), 13 operations, 10 machines, positioned in different layout positions with known distances, was used.

The algorithm was implemented in Python 3.7 language and all tests were conducted in a laptop computer powered by an Intel core i7-7600U CPU (2.80 GHz) and 16 GB of RAM.

In this problem, the optimal solution will always depend on the PFs required by the customer. Since in the example 7 PFs are available, there are 127 different ways of requiring these PFs (e.g. PF1+PF2, PF2+PF4+PF5, etc.), consequently there is a global optimum for each case. However, no matter which PFs customer requires, the proposed solution approach follows the same steps. Due to that, only one example is presented in this paper for detailing the obtained results.

The optimal solution found for the example considering the selection of PFs 1, 4, 5, and 7 is presented in Table 1. The best product configuration is composed by the module instances M1I3, M3I1 and M4I1 (M1I3 is instance 3 of module 1), with an overall manufacturing cost of 43.52 €. The CPU time required was 60.96 s.

Table 1. Results found for the example considering the following selected PFs: 1, 4, 5, and 7.

Step 1 -Filtering all FPCs Selected PFs 1, 4, 5, 7

Number of FPCs 5

Step 2 -Finding the global optimum

The best FPC is composed by : Overall production cost is:

CONCLUSION

This paper proposed an approach to reduce "mass confusion" through customer guidance at the product configuration stage, while integrating the latter with the process planning in order to minimize overall manufacturing cost. This cost is composed of (1) raw material of module instances, (2) process operations and (3) material handling. This optimization was modeled as an ILP problem and a 2-steps approach was used to solve it. In this model, the product configuration was optimized in terms of PFs required by customers, proving that it is possible to integrate customer requirements while optimizing the product configuration integrated to the process planning. Results found have proven that considering manufacturing costs when configuring a product for MC is relevant, because a product with a more expensive raw material cost does not always mean a higher overall manufacturing cost. Therefore, this approach can be used as an alternative to help customer during their decision making process in order to reduce the "mass confusion" caused by the too many available choices in MC contexts.

Further, the exact solution approach presented in this paper has proven its ability to find rapidly and efficiently a global optimum, for a relatively complex problem that integrate two combinatorial problems: the product configuration and process planning.

For future researches, we want to evaluate the integration of product configuration and process planning in a RMS, by exploring its ability to reconfigure at machine and layout levels simultaneously. Further, we want to test this solution approach with a real product, and therefore with higher instances.

  13 the International Conference on Modeling, Optimization and Simulation -MOSIM'20 -November 12-14, 2020-Agadir -Morocco "New advances and challenges for sustainable and smart industries" best comprehension, they did not address the possibility of having different instances within the same module. Zhou et al. (2008), Li et al. (2006) and Yang et al. (

Figure 1 .

 1 Figure 1. Proposition's illustration of the integrated modular product configuration and process planning for manufacturing mass-customized products.

the International Conference on Modeling, Optimization and Simulation -MOSIM'20 -November 12-14, 2020-Agadir -Morocco "New advances and challenges for sustainable and smart industries"

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This research has been funded by the French National Agency of Research (Agence Nationale de la Recherche -ANR) as part of the project Integrated Product and Process Modular Design (IPROD).

Chen Z, Wang L (2010) Personalized product configuration rules with dual formulations: A method to proactively leverage mass confusion.


Nicolas Pascal

Angelique Brathwaite

Annabelle Bladon

Joachim Claudet

Eric Clua

IMPACT INVESTMENT IN MARINE CONSERVATION

Keywords: Blended finance solution, impact bonds, redistribution

ou non, émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

INTRODUCTION

Marine conservation and the financing gap Threats to our ocean are climbing both public and political agendas (Claudet et al. 2020). The UN 'Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development' begins in 2021; special ambassadors and envoys have been appointed to mobilise action. But for real impact, positive intentions must deliver concrete initiatives that protect the ocean and involve the coastal communities whose livelihoods depend on it (Gurney et al. 2015;Bennett et al. 2019). Marine protected areas (MPAs) are a promising example of Nature-Based Solutions that can protect diversity while delivering ecosystem services when used with a rigorous evidence-based approach, effective management and the right investment (Gill et al. 2017;Claudet 2018). Potential ecosystem services include enhanced resilience to climate change, and food and income provision for local communities by supporting sustainable fisheries and tourism (Roncin et al. 2008;Leenhardt et al. 2015). Several international bodies have adopted MPAs as a tool to achieve national biodiversity targets and multiple Sustainable Development Goals. However, insufficient funding for expansion and effective management of MPAs remains a challenge (Gill et al. 2017); one that particularly affects developing countries (Marinesque et al. 2012).1 Worldwide, 65% of MPAs are estimated to have inadequate management budgets and 91% to have inadequate staff capacity (REF). Rapid expansion without the necessary investment could see an explosion of 'paper parks', which fail to meet social or ecological goals and cannot financially sustain themselves (REF).

Impact investing: strong growth not yet reaching marine conservation Background & Definition The concept that economy and ecology can be mutually beneficial has its roots in the 1970s and evolved in the 1980s to include discussions about sustainable development (REF).

Businesses began reducing environmental damages by engaging in "corporate social responsibility." (REF) In the 1990s, the term "triple bottom line" to denote economic, ecological, and social performance became a popular catchphrase among businesses that aimed for more than just financial profits (REF). Economists refer to the triple bottom line as "utility maximization," where utility can include economic, environmental, and social targets (REF).

Emerson describes blurring the lines between natural, financial, and social capital and aiming for "blended value." (REF) The latest iteration in this trend is "impact investing," which has been defined by the Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN) as "investments made into companies, organizations, and funds with the intention to generate social and environmental impact alongside financial return." (REF) In this definition and in this article, the term "impact" refers to positive impacts or benefits such as cleaner water, more jobs, or greater protection for species. Unlike corporate social responsibility, which tries to reduce negative impacts of firms' economic activity, impact investing is characterized by the intent to produce net positive environmental or social outcomes. Impact investment is growing rapidly as private investors seek positive, measurable social and environmental gains alongside financial returns. The Global Impact Investing Network (GIIN) reported deals worth US$35 billion in 2017; up 17% from 2016. At the close of 2018, the industry was worth an estimated US$502 billion.3 Investments concentrated on energy (15%), microfinance (13%) and other financial services (11%). But conservation projects, particularly around marine ecosystems, are not attracting impact capital at this pace, largely due to a shortage of attractive opportunities with track records.

Marine conservation impact investment: track record and challenges Impact investment in conservation

To be updated -GIIN, forest trends, Credit Suisse A small but growing proportion of impact investments focus on environmental impacts. For example, a recent study backed by JP Morgan and The Nature Conservancy estimated that US$8.2 billion has been invested in conservation efforts since 2004 (REF). A 2016 report by Credit Suisse and McKinsey Center for Business and Environment estimated that up to US$200-400 billion between 2016 and 2020 might be invested in conservation finance (REF). Presentation of the paper Conservation projects, particularly around marine ecosystems, are not attracting impact capital at the same pace as the rest of the impact investment market (GIIN, 2018), largely due to a shortage of investment-ready projects and organisations developing future opportunities. Development finance being a scarce and precious resource, the mobilization of additional funds from commercial investors into marine conservation is indispensable for the meeting of financing needs of Agenda 2030.

II. THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC PROJECT Context

The MPA "Arrecifes del Sureste" in the Dominican Republic is almost 8000km2, covering just around 100 km coast and encompassing coral reef ecosystems, several major urban centers and 2 of the country's primary tourism centers (receiving >4M visitors annually). The MPA was designated in 2009 and has been mostly inactive since, hence could be considered a "paper park". On demand on Government, an agreement to co-manage the MPA with a consortium of non-profit entities was designed. The agreement was signed in 2018 and memorialized in a contract that outlines the responsibilities of each party and clearly allocates risk.

Figure 1. The Blue finance collaborative management model

Parties

The government will maintain its core functions and be responsible for regulation and enforcement of uses and zonation, the set-up of user fees and maintenance of specific on-shore facilities. The functions and staff of public agencies (e.g. Coast Guard, Marine Police, Fisheries, Environment and other government agencies) will be maintained and their work continued. A non-profit 'Special Purpose Entity' (SPE) to manage day-to-day operations was established. The SPE is comprised of local conservation NGOs, local foundations of the major tourism holdings in the country and other associations. A Stakeholders Advisory Committee (SAC) was established to participate in the co-management, which provides regular inputs into the zoning, management, uses and enforcement process. Its membership includes government agencies, tourism associations, local communities, fisherfolk, hoteliers, developers, research institutions, NGOs, civil society and the boating community.

Enforcement

The proposed plan for enforcement in the Sanctuary will see "soft enforcement" from the MPA staff and "hard enforcement" from the regulatory agencies. In DR, the legislation allows the agencies to appoint nongovernment officers with various powers of searching and detaining for marine infractions. In addition to these measures, self-enforcement from Fishers and other stakeholders will be encouraged via education and financial incentives.

Monitoring

A common set of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and result metrics has been developed with and for all partners, while specific reporting arrangements have been set-up to guarantee that the SPE is implementing activities as expected. An initial list of KPIs of conservation impacts (e.g. biodiversity metrics), social impacts (e.g. livelihood improvement, gender equity) and management impacts (e.g. MPA indicators of performances) have been agreed with partners. Initial data will be collected to produce a baseline in terms of indicators.

Environmental, Socio-economic and Management audits will be carried out annually by the The scope of activities of both The Blue Watch Operator and MABE will be clearly established in a Co-Management Agreement, which is expected to be a formal agreement between both parties that will set out terms for sharing responsibilities within the BMMA. A template of such an agreement can be provided if needed.

The company will also receive long term technical support to the company in order to improve both environmental management and entrepreneurial skills.

Financial aspects:

All financial risks are supported by the co-management SPE, with no increase in public debt, nor on-public budget allocation.

Revenues:

Revenue streams will be generated mainly from statutory visitor fees and innovative tourism activities. The SPE has received an irrevocable mandate to charge user fees and receives major financing for initial capital expenditures from impact investors and donors. The special purpose vehicle will charge park users between US$3-10, depending on chosen activities. Annually, with around 260,000 visitors, this should generate revenues of USD 1.5M. Revenues will be generated for MPA management and investor returns. Concerns re carrying capacities have been considered in the projections. The number of dive sites and the large choice of day-tour stop-overs allows for the reduction of visitor impacts to below recommended carrying capacity

Carrying capacity

OPEX

The activities expected to be undertaken by the BMMA have been categorised under the following programmes the implementation of the various activities and services will be guided by the annual work plans and budgets. Annual operating costs are expected to total US$1.4 million. The main costs are personnel (almost 55% of the total Opex), livelihood programmes with fishers, communication and BMMA compliance. The management team will include 18 permanent staff progressively recruited during the 2 years following the start of operations.

Scuba fees 29%

Day tours & water sport fees 39%

Mooring fees & License fees 12%

Voluntary donations 20%

CAPEX

The up-front investments of the BlueWatch are estimated at US$1.4M. The investment will be spread over a 2-year period and includes:

• US$1M approx.. for the purchase of the physical assets of the BMMA such as vessels, moorings, equipment, underwater facilities, etc. and preliminary studies 6 The concept of carrying capacity is the number of visitors an ecosystem can tolerate without suffering irreparable damage (Wielgus et al., 2002) BlueWatch Proposal for the Co-management of Marine Management Areas in Barbados Page 39 of 63 • US$0.4M as working capital (corresponding to the period of preliminary activities without incomes).

Impact investment Financing

A US$2.5 million bond was secured from impact investors with an eight-year term, for equipment and staff. This covered about 70% of initial funding; grants cover the rest. Philanthropic institutions and DFIs. The facility will provide technical assistance during the pre-and postinvestment phases to improve quality in the design and execution of the projects, strengthen environmental and social positive impacts, reduce risks and enable the projects to meet the investor's criteria. • De-risking partners providing loan guarantees to mitigate credit risk. One potential de-risking partner is USAID, through its first loss guarantee facility, which Althelia-Mirova secured for both the Sustainable Ocean Fund and the Land Degradation Neutrality Fund. SIDA -Guarantee Units has been approached also.

Financially, the projects will offer a minimum internal rate of return (IRR) to impact investors. Returns are based on income projections and target market size estimates.

De risking

The Investors take the following risk: market risk (e.g. tourism cycles), management risk (e.g. mismanagement) and environmental risks (e.g. major climate adverse events).

No collateral guarantee is asked to the SPE investee to secure debt payback. A guarantee is an agreement from a third-party lending institution or insurer which guarantees that losses will be recovered in the event of the borrower failing to pay back the debt also known as defaulting on the loan. Investors benefit from a USAID Development Credit Authority (DCA) guarantee which provides a 50% shared loss facility on invested capital.

III. Discussion

Potential to scale-up the project? By demonstrating proof-of-concept at scale, can this project serve to build confidence and catalyse wider growth in the natural capital impact investment market globally?

The approach relies on 3 main pillars: a management lease for Marine Protected Areas (MPAs), tangible revenue models with positive impacts, and up-front blended finance solution. Can these 3 pillars be effectively tailored to the contexts and needs of different sites?

Co-management of MPAs: a common approach Some governments have addressed a lack of funding for protected areasboth individual parks and national networksby establishing 'collaborative management' arrangements with private partners (mainly non-profit enterprises, NGOs and community groups). Entrepreneurs and community groups have also set up co-managed protected areas, gaining recognition and support from governments and local people (Jupiter et al. 2014). A large body of evidence from marine and terrestrial protected areas shows that, when collaborative management is viable and appropriate, it can both redistribute the financial burden on states and attract the long-term economic and technical support needed for effective management (REF).  Scalable ? Although collaborative management will not always feasible or appropriate, exploring its potential seem a priority to address the paper park issue Business and ESG model A well-thought-out business model for the MPA to become financially self-sufficient over time as well as tangible environmental & social targets based on a clear scientific management approach are key aspects of the approach.

 Capacities to pay-back debt = tangible revenues in the short term.

Business model based on user fees: tangible

Studies show that most visitors would be willing to pay an entrance fee to marine sanctuaries if their expectations are fulfilled [START_REF] Wielgus | Coral reef quality and recreation fees in marine protected areas[END_REF]

Other revenue models based on tourism

Mooring fees: Commercial and leisure vessel owners will pay a fee to use the moorings in the MPAs. Initial investments in the MPAs will improve the number of moorings and the services offered by the MPAs, as well as increasing compliance to the fee payment.

License/permits fees: Another potential income source is the implementation of license/permits fees with service providers. These fees are typically collected from companies that are granted permits for providing a service to visitors within a site. Companies providing services within MPAs, such as diving, turtle watching and day tours, can be charged fees to operate such business concessions. Entrance fees to visitor centres. High-tech "edutainment" visitor centers will complement MPA revenues in the MPAs. The centers are designed as a media-rich, walk-through experience that will put the visitors in touch with fascinating marine life in new and exciting ways. They will be located in prime tourism locations and are expected to become new "must-see" attractions for visitors. The Visitor Centres will be also used as awareness & education tools for residents, schools and visitors. Most examples of protected areas that have raised significant funds from tourism, focus on sites with wellestablished infrastructure and tourism markets. These sites are exceptional in various ways and not necessarily relevant to many protected areas (especially in developing countries). MPAs can fall into three categories [START_REF] Font | Pay per nature view. Understanding tourism revenues for effective management plans[END_REF]): Sites already with high levels of visitation, sites with high tourism potential but with low level of visitations and sites with low tourism potential, or be subject to restricted access for conservation reasons. In all cases, priority is to ensure that tourism is sustainably managed so that it does not harm attainment of conservation goals, and second that it generates sufficient revenues for MPA management. For the first category, the priority may not be to raise revenue from tourism, but to reduce the impacts. In the third case, tourism will be limited to very low-level, specialist groups of visitors. Several authors [START_REF] Font | Pay per nature view. Understanding tourism revenues for effective management plans[END_REF]) recognize that MPAs need also to be realistic about the potential to raise funds from tourism. Many sites tend to overestimate the benefits and underestimate the costs of tourism: in part, this is because they often fail to establish proper management for tourism, and to understand the business realities of tourism.

For the present model, MPA sites under the first category are the main priority. Tourism is already consolidated and revenues can be generated in the short term for the MPa management and to pay-back the investors.

The potential to upscale this model where MPA generates most or all revenues through user fees therefore seems limited to these MPA sites. The NGO Blue finance has been working on replicating the DR model during the last 2 years and has identified a limited number of MPA sites in the Caribbean, SE Asia and Western Africa. with potential to become financially sustainable.

For the other MPA sites, 2 solutions shall be explored: (i) Redistribution of incomes: MPAs can join together to pool their resources to market the tourism they offer, and through this to try to direct tourism to lesser visited sites and away from areas that are already saturated by visitors. Some heavily visited sites may also allocate a portion of the revenues generated by tourism to assist conservation and tourism projects at less visited sites. This is done only in attractive locations that are potential "honey-pots" for tourists; (ii) Impact bonds as a solution to finance MPAs with inexistent but potential revenues. Impact bonds will allow more patient capital for the MPAs and the obligation to pay-back will be transfered to a third party.  Capacities to pay-back debt with tangible revenues in the short term seem a privilege to a few MPAs worldwide. This can be improved through redistribution or impact bonds

Blended finance potential

The report also revealed at least US$3.1 billion in committed capital, still on the sidelines, awaiting attractive deals in food and agriculture, habitat protection, clean water initiatives, and other conservation projects.

Private investment in marine biodiversity and ecosystem services is in an early stage of development, and practical experience is very limited with initiatives focusing on marine ecosystems rare and not well documented. Update . Impact investments are following the earlystage development of several sectors of the "blue economy" (ref). Adapt sectors sustainable fisheries, aquaculture, waste management, transport, Marine Protected areas have been identified as primary candidate industries for impact investments.

Are they good for MPAs? Precautions & Limits

Carrying capacity and Revenue with purpose

For tourism, the concepts of carrying capacity, maximum load capacity and limits of acceptable change (LAC) are the most commonly used to reflect ecological sustainability (McElroy, 2003;Spurgeon, 2004;Stoeckl et al., 2010). Like any ecosystem, coral reefs have capacities of regeneration from minor impacts from natural and human origin. However, the cumulative effect of thousands of these minor impacts can create often irreversible damage when threshold levels are exceeded. The concept of carrying capacity is the number of visitors an ecosystem can tolerate without suffering irreparable degradation (Wielgus et al., 2002). The concept of acceptable limits of change sets standards for minimum acceptable conditions (which may differ from the desired conditions). This involves defining the limits of ecological and sociological changes that could cause some degradation, but that would still be allowed on site.

The focus is placed more on the desired conditions of the site than on the amount of usage that the site can tolerate (Stankey et al., 1985).

Other tools such as Mc Elroy's tourism penetration index (TPI) and Butler's tourist destination product life cycle are useful in analysing how sustainable the current level of tourism is (Butler, 1980;McElroy, 2003). These tools take into consideration factors such as the number of days the average visitor stays and the amount of environmental resources used by guests. The TPI is designed for destinations, as an indicator that they may be going over carrying capacity.

For diving activity, the literature gives us quite different carrying capacities. For Hasler et al (Hasler and Ott, 2008), a total of 500 dives per site per year is sufficient to cause substantial damage to the sites. Dixon et al (1993) suggest a much larger number from 4 000 to 6 000 dives per site per year to cause prolonged damage to the environment. In practice, sites are not frequented in the same manner and only communication from dive clubs would identify the problem sites.

In other research studies, users were asked questions aimed at determining how "the quality of their visit" could be impacted by overcrowding (Barker and Roberts, 2004;Fau et al., 2008;Park et al., 2000). Results showed the importance of this criteria.

 Tourism management plans will be needed to integrate the business realities of tourism with the sites conservation goals. The following guidelines can be followed for the design of the marketing strategy (Bacci 1998): • Quality over quantity: numbers are not the objective per se but rather ensuring that the profile of the tourist is appropriate for protected area objectives and beneficial to host communities. • Diversification of the product: this involves the use of other natural and cultural resources located in the MPAs or in their vicinity in order to give the visitor an experience of quality and at the same time to release the pressure of use within the diving and snorkelling sites. It includes the use and interpretation of the cultural and historical resources in order to enrich the visitor's experience and contribute to their education on the marine environment.

•

Community involvement through education and training: marketing and promotion of MPAs must involve the participation of the host community in areas such as product development, interpretation, image creation and operational activities. Tourism development in MPAs must meet the priority needs of host communities. Marketing of these areas must contribute to the strengthening of cultural identity and self-esteem.

Legitimacy of the SPE: Contractual governance-:

Private and public involvement in MPAs complement each other at the institutional framework level (i.e. the rules of the game). However, having the mechanisms permanently entrenched in law, with no possible provision for regression is an important issue and needs to be seriously investigated if these tools are to be scaled up. One of the risks of not doing this, is that changes in governments and policies might result in an environment less conducive to ecological and financial returns. Contractual governance requires public legitimacy and a strong rule of law, so conditional contracts need to be backed by the judiciary. Ad hoc Special Purpose Entities need to be lawfully recognised and their prerogatives respected by the state. In all cases, private and civil society actors need to be assured that their contractual rights, and therefore their investments, are secure. This in turn means that the state needs to clearly define and defend the boundaries of MPAs, whether public, private or community-owned, and determine the respective responsibilities of all stakeholders vis--vis the PA in question. On behalf of Government, the co-management entity will face the challenge of setting varying degrees of exclusion to public goods through the development and enforcement of new access arrangements (Bennett and Dearden, 2014). The extent of exclusion may vary from full enclosure of a habitat with state support, to partial or seasonal exclusion established through usufruct rights agreed upon between the SPE and existing resource users. It is equally important to ensure that all stakeholders have an active role in determining how the park is established and operates and should also have an active participation in the economic and the environmental returns from implementing MPAs. Where concessions are concerned, the link between tourism earnings and conservation of the protected area must be made very strongly. In situations where this is not the case, local people will be much less inclined to protect the area. For example, a study in Komodo National Park, in Indonesia, found that although residents had positive attitudes towards tourism and that there was support for conservation, there was no positive connection between the two (IUCN and UNEP, 2014). Describe the communication strategy with government (at different level), local stakeholders (gain confidence in the conservation area and its management) and investors (risk analysis). New governance arrangements are drawn up whereby public, private and civil society actors join forces to coordinate their efforts and increase PA management effectiveness.

Here the government is "steering, not rowing", using market and quasi-market mechanisms to deliver public services, and maintains a distance between politics and the management of public services. Thus, the traditional boundaries of the state have been modified (Birner and Wittmer, 2004) and a new principal agent relationship has been introduced whereby the SPE is responsible for reaching a set of negotiated objectives. Overall, these public-private independent entities are more efficient and service-oriented than single, public actors, and in end the contractual approach is effective in improving PA management.

Tourism industry engagement

Project shall adopt a two-pronged approach to engagement with the tourism industry, combining: (i) Negotiations with government to establish legal requirements and mandate for collection of user fees for MPA conservation, to establish the regulatory lever; (ii) Direct engagement with tourism operators in the relevant seascapes, regarding the business case to invest in the natural environment, making use of cutting-edge communications technology to engage their customers directly, and incentivize private sector support.

A multi-stakeholder approach is central to successful project development and management, including government, an engaged and experienced NGO, and partners with skills in social entrepreneurship, financial planning, and/or marine conservation. Intermediaries like Blue finance are essential to bridge the gap between investors and marine conservation. Community involvement in management, monitoring and awareness campaigns can generate buyin that weathers changes in government and supports project durability.

Length of the concession

A significant issue is the length for which a concession is granted. The private sector will generally want a long licence period in order to ensure sufficient return on initial outlay. The risk for the protected area agency with a long concession is that the business may fail, decline or attempt to change its mode of operation. Thus, safeguards such as an outline of rights and responsibilities, monitoring processes and 'break-points' in the event of unsatisfactory performance, need to be written into contracts.

 Needs of legitimacy Non-profit, non-stock co-management entities : Balance between resource protection and financial returns All stakeholders in DR agreed that they consider a nonprofit entity as the most trustworthy organization to comanage the MPA and collect entrance fees. In a similar way, scientific studies have shown that trust in protected area authorities significantly affected WTP (Wang & Jia 2012). Most tourists interviewed preferred NGOs to the Government as the most trustworthy organization type to collect and manage entrance fees (Buckley 2003). Co-management agreements necessitate a balance between resource protection, economic development and the financial bottom line. Government policy and regulations may require that management of visitor services provided by non-public entity consider public opinion, provide employment for local people and other elements of benefit to local communities, and include regular monitoring of environmental impacts.

Clear and transparent communication

about the co-management arrangement between government, the co-management partners, society and visitors (table XX). Ongoing investment in informed communities and stakeholders will allow for a powerful "backbone" that can weather changes in government. It will be crucial to have a Marine Park Manager, who can communicate effectively both with governments and communities, to ensure that support for the MMA continues. Building of local capacity for improved management and financial sustainability in social and conservation entrepreneurship, to successfully introduce a business approach to MPA management that serves to underpin and drive effective site management, and the resulting environmental and social benefits;

Capacity building

Intermediaries provide capacity building and technical assistance to help bridge market gaps [START_REF] Richter | Capital Aggregators. New Frontiers of Philanthropy: a guide to the new tools and actors reshaping global philanthropy and social investing[END_REF]. Sometimes the technical assistance is provided by investors along with funding, and sometimes technical assistance is provided by intermediaries through training sessions, workshops, and singular consulting engagements [START_REF] Tuan | Capacity Builders. New Frontiers of Philanthropy: a guide to the new tools and actors reshaping global philanthropy and social investing[END_REF]. Technical assistance is often necessary for entities that are expanding from more traditional non-profit programs to innovative for-profit models (Bugg-Levine and Emerson 2011). Providing technical assistance alongside investment, reduces the risk of providing capital to "inexperienced investees" [START_REF] Richter | Capital Aggregators. New Frontiers of Philanthropy: a guide to the new tools and actors reshaping global philanthropy and social investing[END_REF]. Capacity building can include advice on business planning, marketing, management, access to professional networks, and specialized expertise [START_REF] Richter | Capital Aggregators. New Frontiers of Philanthropy: a guide to the new tools and actors reshaping global philanthropy and social investing[END_REF]. One of the biggest challenges for capacity building is to ensure that there is a "cultural fit" between the capacity provider and the investee, as this affects the trust, power imbalances, and other relational dynamics [START_REF] Tuan | Capacity Builders. New Frontiers of Philanthropy: a guide to the new tools and actors reshaping global philanthropy and social investing[END_REF]. Mechanisms can be smoothly implemented when capacity building takes place at the operational level. Park managers, agency managers, local administration officers and NGO employees, local communities and individual fishers need to clearly understand the mechanism and its contractual approach [START_REF] Lapeyre | Innovating for biodiversity conservation in african protected areas: Funding and incentives[END_REF]. Without such common perception, resentment and conflicts can emerge.

Adequate enforcement

Inadequate enforcement results in poor performance of the MPA's marine conservation objectives. Ongoing training and financial incentives should result in increases in the number of enforcement personnel with regulatory abilities. The proposed plan for enforcement in the Sanctuary will see "soft enforcement" from the MPA staff and "hard enforcement" from the regulatory agencies. In DR, the legislation allows the agencies to appoint non-government officers with various powers of searching and detaining for marine infractions. In addition to these measures, self-enforcement from Fishers and other stakeholders will be encouraged via education and financial incentives. Reduce financial burden for MPAs: Appropriate blends of finance adapted to the MPA financial capacities avoiding any financial burden; Balanced Collateral or securities to hold against loans in case of failure to repayor default. To be completed . Are they good for impact investors? Addressing challenges of impact investment (merge with scaling-up) One of the main challenges of marine impact investment is finding a project with an adequate scale and size of returns as well as an acceptable profile of risk (see also next section on enabling conditions). The investment life and risk-return profile as well as environmental impacts must be properly assessed in order to address investors' needs. The environmental objectives must be stated clearly and performance metrics/targets related to these objectives must be set using standardized metrics. For each project, a preliminary business plan with a first description of the business model, the market opportunity and the management structure is drawn as well as a financial plan. The business plan shall focus also on exit strategy and, when necessary, risk reduction strategies shall be proposed (e.g. stage disbursement, net asset granting, monitoring) (Huwyler, ppeli et al. 2014). Ready-to-invest opportunities in MPAs are relatively scarce. Therefore, the intermediary may also assist local stakeholders to design the vehicle for the investment in the MPA. For example, they might be implicated in the early negotiations with government for the PPP. Deal sourcing for marine impact investments can be more difficult than for traditional investments for three reasons. In the first case, investment levels tend to be small (< US$5 million) which is less than the normal threshold for most investors [START_REF] O'donohue | Impact Investments: An Emerging Asset Class[END_REF]. Second, impact investment deals tend to be more complex and require expert knowledge in technical subject areas, that most investors do not have the capacity to assess (Bugg-Levine and Emerson 2011). Third, there are more impact investors than there are "investible deals" often termed the "supply side issue" (Bugg-Levine andEmerson 2011, Richter 2014). From the perspective of investees, it is very difficult to find the impact investors willing to take risks and invest in high environmental impact with concessionary financial returns [START_REF] Nee | Impact Investing Grows Up[END_REF]. Hence, intermediaries play a crucial "matchmaking" role to source deals and bring investors and investees together [START_REF] Brest | When Can Impact Investing Create Real Impact? Stanford Social Innovation Review[END_REF]. For private equity and venture capital firms, deals are most often found through personal and professional networks, and the use of paid and unpaid intermediaries is common [START_REF] Tetan | Where Are the Deals? Private Equity and Venture Capital Funds' Best Practices in Sourcing New Investments[END_REF]. A pipeline of investable projects focused on protection and enhancement of marine and coastal natural capital will accelerate flows of impact investment into such projects.

Investment sizes:

Investment sizes are typically smaller than institutional investors' minimum investment size, but larger than many individual impact investors' desired allocation. In the same way, there is a lack of innovative deal/fund structures consolidating projects and accommodating investors' needs.

Scale and size of MPA.

Both scale and size are important factors for achieving an integrated approach. Not only does a larger project cover a network of habitats and species, but it also supports a sustainable financial model that ensures the MPA is selfsufficient and has a long-term future.

Shortage of high quality investment opportunities with track records:

Many NGOs are doing credible work around policy and capacity-building, but few of these organizations are developing a pipeline of investment opportunities.

Common Standards and Metrics:

Shifting from "anecdotal stories" to standards is necessary to make results more transparent and accountable, benchmark projects against one another, and attract a wider audience of investors. Risk Mitigation Approaches: The risk-return relationship of conservation projects must become more attractive for investors through a combination of strategies to de-risk investments.

Transaction costs: too high?

PPP for marine park management, as illustrated in Barbados are complex and involve a high number of steps and agreements . This kind of innovative PPP mechanisms have been coined a type of art form by several experts of the industry. However, art is generally very expensive and such tools are no exception [START_REF] Lapeyre | Innovating for biodiversity conservation in african protected areas: Funding and incentives[END_REF]. The transaction costs should be taken into account when evaluating the efficiency of the best management governance scenario for the MPA (see annex on the type of management) Financial under performance Financial under performance in the DR project (and potentially payment default) might occur from insufficient incomes to cover an elevated operational expenses (Opex). Main project risks must be examined in advance during a thorough due diligence process, using a risk matrix and third-party consulting firms. In the same way, internal controls and support functions must be implemented in the co-management entity during the lifetime of the agreement. Regarding the level of tourism incomes, financial modelling must use very conservative projections. Models in DR were based on observed and estimated annual number of users in the MPA (e.g. diver, snorkeler, day-tour passenger) less a 25% to reflect market risks (e.g. hurricanes, tourism crisis, etc.). Risk Nature tourism is currently the most viable revenue source for MPAs but relies on tourist volume. Grouping projects can improve risk-return profile; the special purpose vehicle helps isolate risk by separating projectrelated liabilities, tax and regulations from core business. An environmental and social action plan that meets international risk management standards (such as the International Finance Corporation's Performance Standards) is also key to delivering development goals. Deal Sourcing MPA sites are chosen via a scoring matrix that incorporates ecological, legal, management and business feasibility criteria, through desk study and preliminary consultations with local stakeholders. Based on these scores, priority MPA(s) are more rigorously screened (including site visits) and selected in collaboration with governments, UNDP and local partners. The assessment is based on a Decision Scoring Matrix tool screening. The Scoring Matrix has three major 1 components -Impact Feasibility, Legal Feasibility, and Business Feasibility with a total of 54 indicators . A decision tool describing the rationale for site prioritization will be shared with all participating sites. DR addresses Recent several challenges identified by recent works on impact investment: Niche and Boutique Strategies: Even if the investment market is seeking consolidated projects that can be scaled with attractive risk-return profiles, a market for niche and boutique investment projects should be considered. Co-management agreement + de risking partners Confidence for investors -PPP framework Expansion and intermediaries "Fundamentally, in developing a market-based solution, the problem is not a lack of capital. It is that the capital does not have a path into financing projects," Healey said. "The capital markets just want to make big decisions and allocate large sums. You make projects simple, replicable, scalable. That's the intermediaries' job. They can take the risk on the front end and then move it forward." As the go-between for capital and projects, intermediaries also work at the project level. Godschalk said, "Market-serving intermediaries provide capital to the second level of intermediaries, communityserving intermediaries.

Community-serving intermediaries offer products to serve businesses operating on the ground in communities." "At this level, intermediaries are closer to the community and the science, and understand the… risk that the capital takes," said Healey. Intermediaries are able to de-risk and standardize projects to connect them to the waiting capital markets. According to Godschalk, intermediaries serve a variety of functions at this on-the-ground level; they provide upfront venture and risk capital showing they have a stake in the outcome, advise and guide project developers, and help structure projects to make them more attractive to investors. Because intermediaries have deep familiarity with their investment ecosystems, they are well-positioned to design investable products that meet their clients' needs. Market-serving intermediaries know what capital markets require in terms of risk-adjusted returns. Community-serving intermediaries know what the project on the ground needs. Healey went further. "The capital markets need to see some kind of package. That package can only be sold by [an] expert. Ben Healey, director of clean energy finance at Connecticut Green Bank

Roles

While there are growing numbers of impact investors, investees, and mechanisms, there are many problems in executing successful impact investment "deals," and therefore "intermediaries", which are organizations and individuals that work between investors and investees , are essential [START_REF] Bugg-Levine | Impact Investing: Transforming How We Make Money While Making a Difference[END_REF][START_REF] Richter | Capital Aggregators. New Frontiers of Philanthropy: a guide to the new tools and actors reshaping global philanthropy and social investing[END_REF]Salamon, 2014). Most conservation professionals will benefit from connecting with impact investing intermediary professionals directly (Dent et al., 2017). Many mid-size to large conservation organizations (e.g., RARE, African Wildlife Foundation, The Nature Conservancy, WWF) now employ impact investing staff. There is also an increasingly diverse array of impact investing expertise associated with financial institutions (e.g., JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, etc.), with government (e.g., the UK Social Impact Investing Taskforce), and with independent organizations (e.g. Mission Markets, LLC., Social Enterprise Associates, Fondo Accion, Shell Catch, Inc, Verde Ventures, Ecosystem Investment Partners, Beartooth Capital, Encourage Capital, Community Capital Management, Social Ventures Australia, and Althelia Capital). Deal sourcing (identifying potential investments), due diligence (assessing the risks and returns of the potential investments), impact measurement (monitoring and evaluating the social and environmental benefits of an investment), and technical assistance (building capacity of investees and investors) are four of the biggest challenges which require intermediaries [START_REF] Bugg-Levine | Impact Investing: Transforming How We Make Money While Making a Difference[END_REF][START_REF] O'donohue | Impact Investments: An Emerging Asset Class[END_REF]. One must recognize when to pass responsibility to others. NGOs or government can play a valuable role in the deal sourcing, networking and community engagement. They must recognize, however, the areas in which they have limited expertise. In these situations, they should seek alternative support. Private sector partners in various countries have reported that some NGOs are ill equipped to be providing advice to the community-specifically, in relation to the nuances of a business deal-and that sometimes their predisposed mistrust of the private sector is transferred to communities (The World Bank and WWF 2014).

Performance indicators

Impact Measurement

Unbiased monitoring, reporting, and benchmarking of results must be reported to impact investors and donors [START_REF] Brest | When Can Impact Investing Create Real Impact? Stanford Social Innovation Review[END_REF]Born 2013, Tuan 2014). In 2009, the GIIN was launched as an intermediary organization to address some of these issues. There are numerous intermediaries with more limited geographic ranges including community development finance institutions, consultants, and non-profit organizations, e.g., Impact Assets in the United States (Bugg-Levine and Emerson 2011). Appropriate performance indicators must be identified with stakeholder input. Standard metrics (such as GIIN's Impact Reporting and Investing Standards) will not capture an MPAs' key social and environmental impacts. For example, indicators of ecological impacts in a coral reef ecosystem may include enhanced live coral cover and water quality. Indicators of the socioeconomic impacts of an MPA might include local employment in tourism businesses and improved fishery productivity. A common set of Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and result metrics has been developed with and for all partners, while specific reporting arrangements may be tailored to context. Indicators of conservation impacts (e.g. biodiversity metrics), social impacts (e.g. livelihood improvement, gender equity) and management impacts (e.g. MMA indicators of performances) will be agreed with partners. Initial data will be collected to produce a baseline in terms of indicators. Developed in collaboration with SPE members and Government agencies.

VI. CONCLUSION A checklist for ocean-loving impact investors

The Dominican Republic project presents an innovative and scalable approach that uses catalytic and development finance to mobilise commercial impact finance into Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) to strengthen natural resource management. This blended finance approach could be transformative for MPAs, and precedent-setting for impact investment in marine conservation and economic development worldwide. It will provide an opportunity for other project developers, MPA managers and investors to acquaint themselves with method & quality standards in this unfamiliar market of marine natural capital and assist in closing the knowledge gap of marine resource practitioners in attracting finance from these nontraditional sources. The project will contribute to draw new investors into this critical but underfunded area of protecting natural capital, and, by demonstrating proof-of-concept at scale, will serve to build confidence and catalyse wider growth in the market globally.

The marine environment has very few practical experiences with mechanisms to finance biodiversity through impact investment. As such, one of the primary priorities for the near future is to provide empirical evidence of how non-public funding mechanisms can support marine conservation. PPPs can be part of the solution. By linking government and private sector finance through agreements that allow sharing of funding, expertise, and access to technology and resources, PPPs can leverage significant new funds for, and interest in, marine conservation. The Blue Finance initiative provides one model of a PPP agreement for marine conservation that outlines the responsibilities of each party and clearly allocates investment and risk. This approach, though still in proof of concept, is expected to reduce the financial burden on the public sector and bring an entrepreneurial approach to managing MPAs.

The Blue finance initiative's primary activity is to design and implement impact investments for the conservation of marine biodiversity. A suite of investments is being developed in the Caribbean (Antigua & Barbuda, Bahamas, Barbados, the Dominican Republic, and St. Kitts & Nevis) where Blue Finance is partnering with government, key actors, and investors to ensure sustainable financing and efficient management for MPAs. The MPAs are expected to restore the coastal biodiversity of the islands and bring green opportunities for economic development to the countries. Blue Finance is a collaborative initiative between the NGO Economics for Coral Reef Ecosystems (ECRE) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP) through its Global Coral Reef Partnership. In the Caribbean, the Regional Activity Centre for the Protocol on Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife for the wider Caribbean (SPAW-RAC) of the Caribbean Environmental Program (CEP) is the main implementing agency.

Generating a financial return (ranging from concessional to competitive rates) is typically the major challenge for many proponents of impact investment projects. It is also difficult to demonstrate positive impacts of many management strategies as there are often inadequate baseline data associated with the social and environmental benefits they target.

Is a PPP right for your MMA? (to be completed)

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure 1: Distribution of activities between the BMMA operator and the government

Patrol boats and vehicles 14% Mooring, navigation, demarcation buoys and spars 7% Onshore improvements 4% Underwater trails and webcams 5% Wrecks and other underwater features for visitor experience 29% Office refurbishment & Inventories 6% Initial studies, legal & development fees 6% Working capital 29%

  Collaborative management is inherently consultative, but possible structures vary: governance and management responsibilities might be shared ('co-management'); a partner might assist the state with aspects of management, without formal decision-making authority; or the state might completely delegate management(Berado et al. 2016; Bodin et al. 2017; .

	Technical assistance
	3%	Other Overhead
		Costs
		6%
	Government license fee
	8%
	Communication & Awareness Compared to solely state-run MPAs, collaborative
	11% management tends to operate more participative decision
	Salaries & Wages 54% making, helping to achieve better social and ecological
	Maintenance outcomes (Guidetti et al. 2010; Cinner et al. 2012). Non-6% public partners bring further advantages, including:
	Fuel & Transport Costs • A business approach: establishing revenue streams
	Programmes with around ecosystem services, most commonly nature 5%
	fishers 7% tourism; greater capacity and expertise to develop,
	market and manage commercial operations and maximise
	revenues
	• Greater freedom to retain and reinvest profits than
	government agencies, giving managers incentives for
	cost saving, accountability and improved management

• Greater ability to raise capital (including impact investments) to cover start-up costs, such as restoring the ecosystem, purchasing equipment and developing visitor facilities. Pascal , Duke presented a list of protected areas comanaged with the private sector, with discussion of a select few. , there is a large body of evidence from both marine and terrestrial systems showing that it can redistribute the financial burden on states while facilitating long-term financial and technical support to deliver effective management. Many protected areas under collaborative management have succeeded in becoming financially sustainable while also demonstrating positive social and ecological impacts.

  Thereby, from the visitors' perspective, MPAs are expected to contain one or all of the following characteristics (Bacci 1998): cleanliness of water and beaches, no fishing, lots of fish, healthy reefs, trained park rangers, visitor information services, environmentally-oriented facilities, etc. Past experiences have shown that a fee not properly introduced can be a cause for major fee evasion as well as lack of stewardship from the marine stakeholders (REF). Usual issues concern fee too high, lack of transparency in the use of funds and/or inefficient fee collection system. It is usually hard to correct these issues once they have been experimented by users. In DR, no major concerns were raised by local service providers in charging user fees to their divers and snorkelers. The user fee price has been sized to the price paid by the client. Same businesses agreed that clients will not have an issue in accepting an increase in the tour price if tangible "value for money" is provided. Vibrant biodiversity, clear communication, adequate facilities and moorings, clean beaches, UW trails, multimedia apps and eco-activities were recognized as valuable arguments for price increases.

	. Acceptance
	and size of entrance fees in MPA will depend on visitors'
	income, level of education, environmental awareness,
	residency and desire to provide a legacy to future
	generations. However, there are also aspects that can
	deter including trust in the fee collection agency and
	openness re how the money is spent (Peters & Hawkins
	2009).
	From the tourism businesses' perspective, Green (2003)
	conducted surveys with dive operators in 30 countries for
	their use of MPAs. He found the majority are located
	within 20 km of at least one MPA and 46% conduct at
	least 80% of their diving within a MPA.(Green &
	Donnelly 2003)

Several studies

(Bacci 1998, Ahmad 2009, Peters & Hawkins 2009, Uyarra et al. 2010[START_REF] Wielgus | Coral reef quality and recreation fees in marine protected areas[END_REF], Wang & Jia 2012, Imran et al. 2014

) have shown that, for most visitors, MPAs are the trademark of an ideal marine environment.

  The KatoombaGroup and Marketplace, 2010), in order to ensure the success of this innovative mechanism. In that sense, experts planned expected incomes for the MPA on a mid-term horizon (3-5 years) (pers. comm.) c.. Biodiversity offset credits (habitat banking): It corresponds to payment received by the MPA in compensation for damage caused by development projects which impact coral reefs and other marine habitats(Bovarnick et al., 2010; Pinault et al., 2016; Pioch, 2015). The MPA is the guarantor that the habitats are protected and could offer habitat "credits". Permitted impacts are generally associated with beach nourishment, channel dredging, tourism infrastructure (hotels), private docks and piers, private and commercial ports or marinas, laying energy and communication cables, pipelines, and coastal protection projects. Most countries have developed a legal framework based on the mitigation hierarchy to ensure that impacts of a project will be, as far as possible avoided and/or reduced, following Environmental Impacts Assessments (EIAs). The remaining impacts must be compensated in the form of restoration, rehabilitation, replacement, and/or acquisition to the equivalent of the habitat impacted. The aim of the mitigation hierarchy is to achieve No Net Loss (NNL) of biodiversity, and preferably a net gain for currently threatened biodiversity and ecosystems(Quétier and Lavorel, 2011). The legal systems strongly favor on-site compensation, using the same type of ecosystem as was impacted. Nonetheless, although simple in principle, compensation policies for coral reefs are difficult to implement due in particular to the complexity of the ecosystems, potential large number and heterogeneity of impacts, and costs and delays in assessing damage(François and Pascal, 2012; Several MPAs generate most or all revenue through user fees and/or mooring fees, such as the Bonaire National Marine Park, the St Lucia Marine Management Area or Belize Marine Protected Areas (Pascal, Duke).

	Groot et al., 2013; Levrel et al., 2012; Pinault et al.,
	2016). The quality of the implementation of these
	policies is still to be proven. Methods have been
	inadequately applied, monitoring of the restoration
	actions has been lacking, and most small projects have
	been exempted. Using off-site mitigation such as
	mitigation banking of the habitats managed by the MMA
	is proposed as an option. The medium-term/long term
	potential shall be explored.
	d. Others generate revenues through ecotourism resorts,
	such as Misool Eco-Dive resort in Indonesia and
	Chumbe Island Coral Park in Tanzania
	Business model based tourism based revenue streams: limited	Other Revenue models for the MPA not based on tourism
	scalability	Whilst the initial sectoral focus are revenue streams
		associated with tourism, other sectors are capable of
		driving sustainable income into MPAs and be bundled
		within the structure of site-level projects.
		a. Blue carbon credits: The credits are generated and sold
		to organizations seeking to meet voluntary or regulatory
		climate mitigation targets. MPA Carbon credit buyers
		will benefit from the emission reductions provided, as
		well as the co-benefits associated with MPA projects
		(e.g. community livelihood enhancement).
		b. Nature Based solutions to mitigate or help adapt to
		against beach erosion. Payers would be coastal real estate
		and beach owners (e.g. Hotels, local HNWI,

Government) financing through the MPA and local NGOs the conservation and restoration of the coral reefs that largely provides the ecosystem services. Many issues regarding fund management, implementation of the instrument, the choice of activities, progress indicators, as well as equity aspects have to be addressed

(Naeem et al., 2015;


Joachim Claudet
email: joachim.claudet@cnrs.fr

The seven domains of action for a sustainable Ocean

The Ocean strongly contributes to our well-being but is severely impacted by human activities. Here, I propose seven domains of action to structure our collective efforts toward a scientifically sound, just, and holistic governance of a sustainable Ocean.

The Ocean is a key piece of our Earth system. Thanks to its abundant phytoplankton, drifting photosynthetic plants, algae and bacteria, it produces between 50% and 80% of the planetary oxygen and an estimated 30% of the oxygen we breathe as humans. It also regulates the climate by storing solar radiation, distributing heat and moisture around the globe, and driving weather systems. In addition, it helps buffer climate change by absorbing up to 93% of the excess heat from global warming and more than a quarter of the excess CO2 associated with anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions over the past half century [START_REF] Laffoley | Evolving the narrative for protecting a rapidly changing ocean, post-COVID-19[END_REF].

Life appeared in the Ocean 3.7 billion years ago and resulted in far greater evolutionary diversity than on land. Terrestrial species have evolved from marine species, and the most unique taxa are in the oceans, reflected by 39% of phyla being endemic to the Ocean whereas none are endemic to land and freshwaters [START_REF] Costello | Marine Biodiversity, Biogeography, Deep-Sea Gradients, and Conservation[END_REF].

Marine biodiversity and ecosystem functioning provide tremendous ecosystem services and benefits to human societies, communities, and individual well-being. In addition to oxygen production and climate regulation, Ocean biodiversity supports control of coastal erosion and pollution. Seafood from wild capture fisheries and mariculture is critical for food security [START_REF] Costello | The future of food from the sea[END_REF]. Many cultures and societies are integrally linked to marine biodiversity and benefit from an Ocean in a good environmental state [START_REF] Ban | Well-being outcomes of marine protected areas[END_REF]. Humans can also derive increased physical and mental health from the Ocean [START_REF] Fleming | Fostering human health through ocean sustainability in the 21st century[END_REF]. In particular, Ocean diversity has proven to be a rich source of inspiration for drug discovery, with success rates for marine natural products up to 4 times higher than other naturally derived compounds [START_REF] Sigwart | Unlocking the potential of marine biodiscovery[END_REF]. With up to 30% to 90% of marine species undescribed, depending on the estimates, Ocean diversity offers tremendous opportunities for research.

Here, I will first show that while science is pushing the frontiers of Ocean discoveries, it is also revealing that our human footprint spares no component of the Ocean. I will then describe seven domains of action to transform our societies toward a sustainable use of a healthy and productive Ocean, which I synthesized from the specific recommendations made by recent international efforts.

Further, deeper, smaller: the Ocean's new frontiers

Although more than eighty percent of the Ocean seafloor is unmapped, unobserved, and unexplored (we have better maps of the Moon and Mars), the last decades have seen an unprecedented pace of Ocean discoveries that push further away from the coasts, dive deeper into the ocean, and observe at smaller organizational scales.

The capacity to combine, at global scales, remote sensing data with physicochemical and biological data collected in-situ from recent Ocean expeditions, such as the Tara Ocean Expeditions [START_REF] Sunagawa | Tara Oceans: towards global ocean ecosystems biology[END_REF], offers new perspectives to build a more comprehensive knowledge base of global Ocean ecosystems biology. Such endeavors expand our knowledge of biodiversity, organismal interactions, ecological drivers of community structure and genomic proxies for key ecosystem processes, such as the carbon biological pump [START_REF] Sunagawa | Tara Oceans: towards global ocean ecosystems biology[END_REF]. While the field is still in a data-driven, phenomenological discovery phase, it holds promises to gain a holistic understanding of the biodiversity and processes that govern the Ocean.

To start addressing the many unresolved questions on ecosystem functioning in the deep ocean the international scientific community started developing deep-sea observatories in the 1990's. The first observatories were deployed very recently, in the 2010's, and have particular application in studying hydrothermal vents, which were discovered only in the 1970's. Because of these observatories, we are now beginning to understand the functioning of hydrothermal circulation, the key role hydrothermal emissions play in the iron content of the Ocean, the decadal temporal stability of communities, and the existence of behavioral biological rhythms at a species level.

Recent progress in metagenomics allows us to explore ecosystem diversity and function at new organizational scales in the Ocean, such as the microbiome (Bacteria, Archaea, viruses and microeukaryotes). Efforts are dedicated as well on the pelagic or sediment microbiome, or on the organismal external microbiome, which is found to be compositionally distinct from the pelagic microbiome. Such research is expanding rapidly but scientists can already appreciate the central role microbial processes play in climate change regulation.

New impact pathways

Concomitantly with pushing the frontiers of scientific discoveries, we are realizing the extent of our human footprint on the Ocean, in particular related to climate change. In the last 15 years, six major areas of global concern have been documented [START_REF] Laffoley | Evolving the narrative for protecting a rapidly changing ocean, post-COVID-19[END_REF]: accelerating heating of the Ocean and associated oxygen loss; sea-level rise and linked loss of coastal natural protection; increasing ocean acidification; alterations to wind regimes and perturbations to major ocean currents and upwelling systems; changes in patterns of ocean primary production, species distribution and ecosystems.

Those climate change drivers do not act in isolation but interact with other human drivers, leading to cumulative impacts all across the Ocean, with no place in the Ocean that is not impacted by human activities. While fisheries are themselves impacted by climate change, direct overexploitation of organisms is having the largest relative impact on marine ecosystems (IPBES, 2019). Unsustainable coastal development is destroying valuable coastal habitat formers, such as mangrove forests or coral reefs, which provide protection against coastal erosion and shelter marine resources that can be harvested. Deforestation and land clearing are increasing terrestrial run-offs and land-based pollution. Microplastics are found in organisms down to the deep-sea. Maritime traffic is favoring the spread of non-indigenous species.

The Ocean economy, or blue economy, is predicted to grow faster than the global economy from 2010 to 2030 [START_REF] Virdin | The Ocean 100: Transnational corporations in the ocean economy[END_REF] and human use of the Ocean for food, material, and space is increasing at a worrying pace [START_REF] Jouffray | The Blue Acceleration: The Trajectory of Human Expansion into the Ocean[END_REF]. Progress toward achieving international goals for ocean sustainability is lagging behind and concerns are rising on how to ensure this blue growth is sustainable and equitable [START_REF] Bennett | Blue growth and blue justice: Ten risks and solutions for the ocean economy[END_REF][START_REF] Reimer | Benefits and gaps in area-based management tools for the ocean Sustainable Development Goal[END_REF].

The sustainable Ocean's domains of action

The urgent need to identify and implement solutions for sustainable Ocean use has led to many international initiatives promoting innovative or underused solutions, from the recognition of traditional or indigenous sustainable practices to the implementation of innovative finance mechanisms. We are now in year one of the UN Decade for Oceans Science for Sustainable Development and there is an opportunity to harness science for action and real change in the Ocean. Here, I synthesize and structure into seven broad domains of action (Table 1; Figure 1) the recommendations from three recent collective efforts aimed at promoting a scientifically sound, just, and holistic governance for sustainable use of the Ocean [START_REF] Bennett | Blue growth and blue justice: Ten risks and solutions for the ocean economy[END_REF][START_REF] Claudet | A Roadmap for Using the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development in Support of Science, Policy, and Action[END_REF][START_REF] Lubchenco | Five priorities for a sustainable ocean economy[END_REF]. In doing so, I hope to convey the message to policy makers, the private sectors, and civil society at large, that the evidence and knowledge base to transform our Ocean into a paragon of sustainability is already there. What is needed now is action. 1. Recognize and protect resource and spatial tenure and access rights.

Inclusive and holistic governance 2. Take a precautionary approach to reduce pollution and ensure that environmental burdens are not placed on marginalized populations.

Ocean health

3. Minimize the impacts of development on habitats, resources, and ecosystem services.

Ocean health 4. Consider and safeguard the access rights and livelihoods of small-scale fishers.

Inclusive and holistic governance 5. Maintain and promote access to marine resources needed for food security and well-being.

Equity and justice 6. Develop policies and mechanisms to foster and ensure the equitable distribution of economic benefits.

Sustainable economic opportunities 7. Monitor, mitigate and manage the social and cultural impacts of ocean development.

Equity and justice 8. Recognize, include and promote the equal role of women in the ocean economy.

Equity and justice 9. Recognize and protect human and Indigenous rights.

Equity and justice 10. Develop inclusive and participatory planning and governance processes for ocean development.

Inclusive and holistic governance [START_REF] Claudet | A Roadmap for Using the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development in Support of Science, Policy, and Action[END_REF]'s roadmap for using the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development in support of science, policy, and action.

1. Stronger integration of sciences. Scientific integration 2. Ocean-observing systems.

Scientific integration 3. Improved science-policy interfaces.

Inclusive and holistic governance 4. New partnerships.

Inclusive and holistic governance 5. New ocean-climate finance system.

Financial mechanisms 6. Improved ocean literacy and education to modify social norms and behaviors.

Literacy and social norms [START_REF] Lubchenco | Five priorities for a sustainable ocean economy[END_REF]'s five priorities for a sustainable ocean economy.

1. Manage seafood production sustainably.

Inclusive and holistic governance 2. Mitigate climate change.

Ocean health 3. Stem biodiversity loss.

Ocean health 4. Seize opportunity for economic recovery.

Sustainable economic opportunities 5. Manage the ocean holistically.

Inclusive and holistic governance Note that the assignment of the actions into domains is not exclusive and some actions can overlap domains. One of the most obvious domains of action is to directly improve Ocean health. All domains of action shall ultimately improve Ocean health, but direct actions should be considered here, such as protecting biodiversity, or restoring it where needed. The use of marine protected areas to do so can help to deliver both ecological and social outcomes while reaching a large number of the targets of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal dedicated to the Ocean (SDG14) [START_REF] Reimer | Benefits and gaps in area-based management tools for the ocean Sustainable Development Goal[END_REF]. In a rapidly changing world, not only is reducing the existing impacts of human use on species, habitats and ecosystems important, but avoiding new impacts is also key. This Ocean health domain encompasses also actions aimed at mitigating climate change, either by promoting and securing carbon sequestration into the Ocean or by directly reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

A second domain of action for a sustainable Ocean is to ensure social equity and justice is present in all Ocean matters. In particular, care should be given to achieving equitable access to ocean resources, and recognizing and protecting the rights of women and indigenous communities. Conservation or development projects need to be designed with a social justice lens to avoid unexpected cultural harm on the most vulnerable communities [START_REF] Gill | Social Synergies, Tradeoffs, and Equity in Marine Conservation Impacts[END_REF].

A third domain of action is the identification and investment in sustainable economic opportunities. Investments should target low-emission sectors and create jobs based on a sustainable use of marine ecosystem services, ensuring they fairly benefit local communities. In a (soon-to-be) post-COVID world, such opportunities should be prioritized for economic recovery.

The development of innovative ocean finance schemes is a fourth domain of action for a sustainable Ocean. Such mechanisms should be linked to climate and conservation finance efforts and help raise capital investments for the necessary expenditures associated with most transformative actions.

With incentive payments to private sector market actors, it should be sustainable in the long term.

Ensuring a strong scientific integration represents a fifth domain of action. The scientific community has a key role to play as a starting point for developing evidence-based solutions that can promote ocean sustainability. Integration should lie at multiple levels. The integration of disciplines within and across social, natural, and physical sciences should be promoted, as well as the recognition and use of indigenous local knowledge. Observations need to be integrated too, within a globally coordinated and sustained biophysical, ecological and socioeconomic ocean-observing system. Finally, fit-forpurpose science practice aimed at solving sustainability problems needs to be adapted to and integrated with the ecological, economic, and sociocultural contexts, including regulatory frameworks and political realities, in which the sustainability problems to solve lie.

Improved ocean literacy and education is the sixth domain of action. It should stimulate new models for ocean action. We should collectively harness a global ocean identity, returning the ocean to the center of our lives, and ensure that that identity is preserved for future generations. Such a change of perspective can help develop new social norms that will in turn create new conditions that incentivize governments, the private sector, and individuals to make necessary changes to their behavior [START_REF] Claudet | A Roadmap for Using the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development in Support of Science, Policy, and Action[END_REF].

Inclusive and holistic governance is the last domain of action. Co-produced, adaptive instruments to foster sustainable use of ocean resources at multiple organizational scales are both supported by the six previous domains and provide the enabling conditions for their realizations. Science should play a critical role in informing policies but effective science-policy interfaces are scant, hindered by complex policy processes and the distinct methods and epistemologies of science and policy. Science should not compete with other forces shaping the policy-making space but instead co-produce evidence with them, to ensure recommendations can better be transferred into action (Claudet et al., 2020). The private sector, a major actor of current unsustainable trajectories of ocean use, is also increasingly recognized as having the capacity to bend these trajectories by taking on the mantle of corporate biosphere stewardship [START_REF] Virdin | The Ocean 100: Transnational corporations in the ocean economy[END_REF]. This can also foster the development of more holistic, multi-sectoral policies. Together with science and the private sector, involving civil society, indigenous and local communities in more inclusive, participatory, and decentralized governance arrangements can induce the behavioral change needed to result in the development and ownership of more sustainable practices.

Conclusion

The Ocean is unique. It was home of the birth of life on our Planet and currently supports vital and valuable services and contributions to human well-being. Preserving the Ocean is preserving our way of life. Now that there is no place in the Ocean that is not impacted by our activities, we should collectively place it at the center of our lives and action the levers that are already identified to start a new era of a sustainable relationships with our Ocean.

Figure 1 :

 1 Figure 1: The seven domains of action for a sustainable Ocean

Table 1 :

 1 Domains of action for a sustainable Ocean.

	Source	Action