science forum day 1 - len garces - management effectiveness of marine protected areas in the...
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
MPA management effectiveness in selected areas in the Philippines:
Lessons learned and way forward
“Enhancing Marine Protected Areas (MPA) Management in the Philippines”
Len Garces, Mike PidoMaripaz Perez and Mark Tupper
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Outline
1. MPA Evaluation in Philippines and project sites
2. Lessons learned
3. Way forward
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Background
• MPAs are useful tools among a suite of management options for fisheries and CRM in the Philippines
• Despite potential benefits of MPAs to coastal management programs, majority of MPAs do not meet their management objectives.
• only 10% of the over 3,000 MPAs globally meet their target goals and objectives
• At least 10-15% of the MPAs have been effectively managed (Alino 2001, PAMS 2008).
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
The degree to which management actions are
achieving the stated goals and objectives of a protected area
What is Management Effectiveness?
Source: Pomeroy et al 2004
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
It tells us how a managed area is -- or is not -- meeting its stated
goals and objectives
Why evaluate management effectiveness?
Source: Pomeroy et al 2004
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Does your MPA look more like this?…
…or this?
Source: Pomeroy et al 2004
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Figure 1. Some methodologies used in the evaluation of MPA management effectiveness in the Philippines.
Evaluation of MPA Management
Effectiveness
2. WCPA/DENR Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool
(METT)
3. National CTI CC MPA Management Effectiveness Assessment Tool (MEAT)
1. How is your MPA Doing?
(IUCN/Pomeroy et al. 2004)
4. Others methods
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Indicator-based MPA Management Effectiveness
• Started in 2002 by joint effort of IUCN – WCPA (Marine), NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program and WWF.
• 2004: Publication of “How is Your MPA Doing?” guidebook by Pomeroy et al.
• Used in some Palawan MPAs
• WorldFish rafting and testing of indicators in the Philippines since 2008-2009 (NOAA project) & 2009-2010 (DOST projects)
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Outline
1. MPA Evaluation in Philippines and project sites
2. Lessons learned
3. Way forward
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Lesson 1 - Number of indicators
Number of indicators could be reduced to ‘barest’ minimum
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Progression/Testing of indicators
World Conservation Union (IUCN) - 2004
42 indicators:
10 Biophysical
16 Socioeconomic
16 Governance
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Progression/Testing of indicators
“Enhancing MPA Management Effectiveness for the Calamianes Islands
MPA Network” - 2008
23 indicators:
6 Biophysical
8 Socioeconomic
9 Governance
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Progression/Testing of indicators
“Capacity building to enhance MPA management effectiveness for the MPA
networks in the Philippines” – 6 sites
13 indicators:
1 Biophysical
6 Socioeconomic
6 Governance
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Indicators selected
Cluster of Indicator Name of IndicatorBiophysical 1. Type, level, and return on fishing effort
Socioeconomic
1. Local marine resource use patterns2. Level of understanding of human impacts 3. Perceptions of local resource harvest4. Perceptions of non-market and non-use value5. Household income distribution by source6. Number and nature of markets
Governance
1. Level of resource conflict 2. Existence of a decision-making & management body3. Existence and adoption of a management plan4. Existence and adequacy of enabling legislation5. Availability and allocation of MPA admin resources6. Degree of interaction between managers and stakeholders
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Study SitesProvince Municipality Name of MPA Year
established Ecosystem/Habitat Date survey conducted Partners involved Total Area
(ha)
Surigao del Sur
Cortes Capandan Marine Sanctuary 2003 Coral reefs with patches
of seagrass/algal bedsAugust2009
DOST XIII; SSPSU; BFAR;
USAID-FISH Project; WorldFish
Center
21.5
Cantilan General Island Marine Sanctuary 2005 Coral reefs with patches
of seagrass/algal beds 28
Bohol
Bien Unido Bilagbilangan East Marine Sanctuary 2006
Coral reefs with patches of mangroves and
seagrass beds
August – October
2009DOST VII; BISU;
PSU; USAID-FISH Project; WorldFish
Center
44.8
Bien Unido Pinamgo Marine Sanctuary 2004
Coral reefs with patches of mangroves and
seagrass beds
August – October
200937.8
Palawan
Busuanga Sagrada-Bogtong Marine Reserve 2006
Mangrove with patches of coral reefs and
seagrass beds
April – June 2008
PSU; USAID-FISH Project; WorldFish
Center
392
Coron
Declave Strict Protection Zone (Bintuan-Sangat
Marine Park)
2004Coral reefs with patches
of mangroves and seagrass beds
62.61
Culion Bugor-Sand Island MPA 2005
Coral reefs with patches of mangroves and
seagrass beds125
Quezon Alabat Casama Marine Sanctuary 2001 Mangroves October
2009DOST IV A; SLSU; WorldFish Center 10
Batangas Nasugbu Cutad Marine Protected Area 2009 Mangroves, coral reefs,
seagrass/algal beds July 2010 DOST IV A; BatSU; WorldFish Center
20 (no take); 93 (marine reserve)
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Lesson 2 – Institutional Partnership
Partnership remains essential but may take different configuration
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
International donors
International project
National government agencies
State universities and colleges
Local government units, MPA management boards, fishing associations, etc
Levels of institutional partnership in MPA evaluation
International research agency
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Roles and Responsibilities
overall coordination, technical direction and training of SUCs
Funding support, policy and advocacy
technical support to SUCs & facilitation of stakeholder workshops
Provision of secondary literature, site assistance
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Lesson 3 – Capacity Building
Local SUCs/LGUs may be capacitated to take more active
roles in MPA management
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Local Capacity Building
site coordination, testing/evaluation of MPA indicators
LGUs/ community members
Participation in interviews and workshops
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Happy Faces of Partners!
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Lesson 4 – Perception Surveys
Social survey needs to be validated with scientific bio-
physical surveys
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Comparative Perspective• People’s perception• Scientific findings
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
People’s perception• General decline in
fish catch
• Scientific findings• in fish biomass
Complementary Results in Fisheries Condition
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
• People’s perception
• General in fish abundance
• Scientific findingsin fish density
Discrepancy in Fisheries Condition
Bintuan Inside (Abundance)
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
2004 2006 2008
Targ
et &
Indi
cato
r Abu
ndan
ce
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
target ab indic ab All abund
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
• People’s perception• Sagrada-Bogtong – 58% worse now than
before• Bugor-Sand – 43% worse now than before
• Scientific findings• or no change in live hard coral cover
Discrepancy in Reef Condition
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Lesson 5 – Summarizing the Results of Evaluation
‘Metrication’ of factors affecting MPA management effectiveness
remains a lingering question
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Various factors related to MPA management effectiveness
Source: Pomeroy et al 2004
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
MPA Rating System adopted by projectRating Meaning+ positive change (towards
meeting objectives)
0 no change
- negative change (in direction away from objectives)
? cannot determine (trend is uncertain or no data available)
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Lesson 6 – Baseline Information
Need for good baseline remains critical
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
FISH Project Sites
• Good biophysical: 2004, 2006 and 2008• Limited socio-economic and governance
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Outline
1. MPA Evaluation in Philippines and project sites
2. Lessons learned
3. Way forward
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
Contextualizing MPAs with other economic sectors
MPA Site
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
MPAs: in a nut shell 1. Be based on the fundamental ecology of the
organisms and/or habitats to be protected.
2. Limited by capacity of institutions and stakeholders involved.
3. Socioeconomic and political issues cause more MPA failures than ecological problems.
4. Be part of an integrated coastal management plan that addresses land and sea uses and their interactions
partnership Ÿ excellence Ÿ growth
MPA Evaluation and Action:Beyond Rhetorics