The Utilization Of Marine Protected Areas
Literature and studies to-date consists majorly of management approaches that only consider the biological significance. Whether it is talking about connectivity, habitat representation within the MPA, adequate size and dimensions, and the spill-over effect are all very active areas of analysis regarding MPAs. Many of these scientific articles are lacking when it comes to accounting for the social side of MPAs and the activities associated such as recreational diving, fishing, various forms of tourism, and conducting research. This lack of social research has led to an incomplete understanding on how to most effectively utilize this popular management tool and what the human responses have been to these protected areas.
Often, conflict emerges when attempting to establish an MPA between the environmentalists and scientists who are trying to create this preserved area and the fishing communities. A careful consideration of how well these fishing communities receive the idea of an MPA is fundamental in the success of the MPA long-term. Depending on how the success of a preservation area is measured some MPAs might be viewed as successful because they are succeeding biologically but are causing social conflict amongst the people the area is affecting. This study looked at four “failing or vulnerable” MPAs and comments on the dire implications of ignoring social complexities associated with marine protected areas.
This study was based on four MPAs in the southeast Pacific, three of which are in the Philippines and one located off the coast of Indonesia. The Philippine management of their MPAs was to both improve reef conditions and encourage sustainable development on the community level. The Indonesian park was established to meet conservation and economic development needs. All four MPAs overlap with social and environmental goals but each utilized a different approach – with each management group attempting some form of comanagement with resident, government, private sector, institutional influence, etc. to varying degrees. In this study, social success was measured by: broad stakeholder participation, sharing of economic benefits, and conflict-resolution mechanisms present. The way this study measured biological success was increased abundance, diversity, and living coral cover. Each park in this study had unique and different social issues surrounding it, while biologically for the most part they all succeeded. San Salvador Island (Philippines) while initially successful this was eroded away by interpersonal conflicts that arose between long-standing rivals within the community.
Former supporters now feel that the advocates of this MPA are too heavy handed in their method of enforcement and unwilling to share the responsibility of the MPA. So once united have now become divided on the San Salvador Island MPA. The Twin Rocks (Philippines) was also initially a socially successful MPA but was eventually taken over by a very influential stakeholder, the recreational dive resort owners. They bought up all the land surrounding these areas and heavily enforced the regulation of the MPA, not allowing the local fishermen access taking away the community-based management that they initially had. Biologically, the conditions at Twin Rocks are only improving but this is giving way to a social fail because of the disregard for the community-based regime that had previously been in place. Balicasag Island (Philippines) forcefully had the central government agency step in to control what used to be a community-based MPA. When the Philippines National Tourism Authority laid claim to this MPA, they built a resort on the shores of the no-take area and now captures all the major revenues an MPA can generate, including offshore dive business. With the locals demoted to selling seashells and t-shirts to tourists, many of the former supportive community members have most likely become poachers due to the declining fish populations both inside and outside the no-take area. Bunaken National Park (Indonesia) is a unique case because it is a relatively large park that was established through governmental decree. Some stakeholders feel that the economic benefit of this MPA is not being shared fairly, but rather certain groups are being favored. Such as when they were discussing the rezoning of the park the fisherman and the recreational divers were going head-to-head with something that reflects the disparities at Twin Rocks and should be advised carefully to not make similar mistakes as the Filipino MPAs made.
Creating an MPA in impoverished and socially stratified areas gives way to discussion on the need to create a monitoring system the can balance both the biological and social complexities of these countries. This study shows that while MPAs may be meeting biological success markers that they may be falling short in social success. By including formal conflict-resolution mechanisms into the basis of determining whether your MPA is “successful” could allow for open discussion about all stakeholder interests weighing equally.
