Seaflower Marine Protected Area. Archipelago of San Andres

Case study:
Seaflower Marine Protected Area. Archipelago of San Andres, Old Providence &
Santa Catalina. Colombian Caribbean.
Lincoln Bent
Lcb78
Master in Public Administration
Candidate 2012
Introduction
The Seaflower Marine Protected Area – MPA –
is part of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve
located in the Southwestern Caribbean Sea.
Seaflower is an open ocean MPA surrounding
the inhabited islands and including the coastal
and oceanic coral reefs of the San Andres
Archipelago comprised of three inhabited
islands: San Andres, Old Providence and Santa
Catalina. The largest island and center of
government, San Andres, is about 800 km
northwest of Colombia and 100 km east of
Nicaragua. The Seaflower MPA is characterized
by 2 barrier reef complexes on the windward
sides of the main populated islands of San
Andres – SAI - and Old Providence & Santa
Catalina – OPSC - and a series of atolls and
coral banks that extend for over 500 km.
External limits of the MPA within the jurisdictional
waters of Colombia
The Seaflower MPA comprises 6,500,000
hectares of which only 0.01% is terrestrial
surface, this comprised of several tiny cays
located in the midst of atolls.
Major threats from use and practice within the
MPA derive from over-exploitation of marine
resources, not only from artisanal and industrial
fishing, but also from uncontrolled subsistence
gathering, unsustainable tourism practices such
as poor diving techniques, groundings from
watercraft, and overuse of popular sites.
Brief historical background of the Archipelago
of San Andres, Old Providence & Santa
Catalina.
In 1953 the San Andres archipelago was
declared a free-port. This marked the start of a
radical change in the economic and social basis
of the island. The declaration of free-port status
allowed exported goods to enter the island with
relaxed restrictions. The development of the
free port allowed commercial tourism to
flourish. Restrictive trade policies pursued by
the Colombian government meant that luxury
goods from other countries were difficult to buy
in mainland Colombia. For visitors to take full
advantage of the free-port status, and also as a
strategy to promote tourism, they were
required to spend at least four nights on the
island. This requirement stimulated the quick
and uncontrolled development of hotel
accommodation and a tourist infrastructure
than started to put enormous pressure on
public services.
In SAI, tourism became the mainstay of the
economy while the islands of OPSC remained
largely dependent on agriculture and fishing,
although there is a growing ecotourism
industry. The development of the free-port and
tourist-based economy on SAI led to a
considerable influx of population from mainland
Colombia. This was driven by the lack of
economic opportunity on the mainland and
government incentive programs to stimulate
and facilitate migration to the islands.
National government saw the cultural
difference of the inhabitants of the Archipelago
as a threat, the risk of a secession was palpable.
The
Colombian
government
promoted
mainland, restricted the use of the native
language, the practice of protestant religious
services and any cultural expression that they
considered “un-Colombian”. Unable to speak
the official language (local islander speak
Caribbean English. The Archipelago was an
English colony until the late XIX century.), few
native islanders could get licenses to participate
in the free port. Hotels, restaurants, shops, and
other development are still mostly owned and
staffed by off-islanders. As seamen and boatbuilders, islanders had been trading directly
with Caribbean countries for centuries.
With modernization, informal trade was
abolished and products had to be sold to the
mainland at fixed prices. Soon artisanal fishers
had to request permission from naval
authorities in Bogota (two hours away by plain)
to go to sea. Losing control over their
livelihoods and knowing little about the
introduced models of commerce and tourism,
native
islanders
became
economically
marginalized and their quality of life and natural
resource base declined.
The Seaflower Marine Protected Area
The Seaflower MPA is located in the
Southwestern Caribbean eco-region and, at this
time, is the 7th largest MPA in the world at just
over 6,500,000 ha. It comprises diverse coastal
and marine ecosystems of the Archipelago of
San Andres, Old Providence and Santa Catalina.
Seaflower MPA location in the Caribbean basin
Importance of the Seaflower MPA
The MPA has 5 legally defined, linked objectives
that were developed in collaboration with
stakeholders, are of equal significance, and take
an integrated, sustainable development
approach. These are: 1) Preservation, recovery
and long-term maintenance of species,
biodiversity, ecosystems, and other natural
values including special habitats; 2) Promotion
of sound management practices to ensure longterm sustainable use of coastal and marine
resources; 3) Equitable distribution of economic
and social benefits to enhance local
development; 4) Protection of the rights
pertaining to historical use; and 5) Education to
promote
stewardship
and
community
involvement in planning and management.
The Seaflower MPA is home to 192 IUCN Redlisted species including 5 marine mammal
species, 4 marine turtle species that take
advantage of excellent nesting beaches, 52 fish
species, 43 scleractinian coral species, 2
hydrocorals, and 86 bird species including the
endemic St. Andrew Virio and at least 12
endemic sub-species. It has been confirmed
that at least 7 seabird species breed in the
Seaflower MPA. The MPA has the highest
octocoral species diversity in the Western
Caribbean with possible high levels of
endemism, and poriferan species diversity on a
par with Caribbean continental shelf reef areas.
The MPA contains the largest, most productive
open-ocean coral reefs in the Caribbean;
provides rare, unique and unusual reef
environments;
contains
remote
areas
demonstrating high integrity and little
anthropogenic influence; and displays a
continuum of habitats that support significant
levels of marine biodiversity.
The MPA’s mangroves are home to an endemic
mud turtle, while the coastal areas of both main
islands, SAI and OPSC, witness the seasonal
mass migration of black land crab to the sea to
spawn. This annual migration event is
considered unique to the eco-region. The
Seaflower MPA is an important site for the
conservation of endangered and threatened
species of global concern. Featuring barrier
reefs, reef lagoons, reef slopes, fore-reefs, deep
coral plateaus, seamounts, deep coral reefs,
mangroves, seagrass and algal beds, soft and
hard bottoms, beaches, and open ocean, the
Seaflower MPA provides an exceptional
example of marine habitat diversity, complexity,
and inter-connectivity.
Problems
Since free-port declaration, development
policies have led to significant levels of
environmental degradation alongside this
growing loss of ethnic identify, particularly in
SAI. The environment and culture of OPSC has
remained relatively intact but the possibility of
large-scale development driven by external
influences remains a threat. Overpopulation,
both through mass immigration from the
Colombian mainland and the Archipelago’s
growing popularity as a tourist destination, with
associated urbanization and poorly planned
development; increasing pressure on natural
resources
and
ecosystems;
and
a
marginalization and erosion of ethnic response
and concerns, self-reliance and cultural identity,
were all recognized as threats to the
Archipelago’s
heritage.
cultural
and
environmental
Coral reef of Old Providence
Exploitation of natural resources
Fishing
Fishing within the Seaflower MPA comprises an
artisanal and an industrial sector, the primary
target species being the spiny lobster, the
queen conch and a variety of reef and white
fish. The fisheries are regulated using a variety
of methods such as quotas, closed seasons, size
limits and closed areas. The Departmental
Fisheries Board makes annual quota
recommendations to the National Executive
Committee for Fisheries whose members
include the Ministry of Agriculture and
Fisheries; the Ministry of Environment, Housing
and Territorial Development; the National
Institute of Fishing and Aquaculture (INPA); the
Institute for Rural Development (INCODER) and
the Institute for Agro-fisheries (ICA). The quotas
are then distributed by INCODER.
Archipelago, is around 363,000, with 90%
directly using the MPA.
Artisanal fishers. Santa Catalina Island
There are approximately 820 registered
artisanal fishers. The artisanal fishery is
exclusively a dive fishery, targeting resources
around the main islands and nearby cays. Catch
is stored on ice while fishing, so this additional
weight combined with fuel needs, tends to
restrict the duration of fishing trips. Local
artisanal fishers are only able to undertake
occasional trips to the northern atolls, where
fishing is allowed, limited by these
requirements and weather conditions. A
number of fishery conflicts exist within the
Seaflower MPA, for example between legal and
illegal fishing, industrial and artisanal fishing,
and trapping and diving. The strongest conflict
centers on legal and illegal industrial fishing in
the northern areas of the MPA, issues of
concern to artisanal fishers being excessive
effort by the industrial fleet, little benefit to
native islanders in terms of employment and
landings, and inequitable distribution of quotas.
Tourism
Besides fishing, the other main use of the
Seaflower MPA is for tourism and recreation
(diving, snorkeling, swimming, water sports,
marine tours etc). The estimated annual mean
number of tourists, visiting the San Andres
Besides hotels (over 60), cabins, hostels, native
lodges, restaurants and bars, and local
commerce who all depend on tourism, there
are 15 dive centers, 8 boat and jet-ski rental
outlets, 7 tour operators, 1 launch cooperative
with over 40 launches, and a number of hotelbased water-sport providers that directly access
the MPA for their livelihood. It is estimated that
more than 14,000 people are employed directly
or indirectly by the tourist sector.
The mass tourism introduced in the San Andres
Archipelago, especially in SAI, has transformed
the environmental and cultural attributes of the
islands. The demands placed on the limited
natural resources by the tourist industry are
high and there is concern at the effects
development and associated factors such as
waste disposal practices and direct physical
damage may have on coastal and marine
ecosystems and water quality. In a social
context, the native islanders also feel that their
culture, traditional knowledge and indigenous
management practices are under threat from
these activities, particularly given the speed and
intensity with which the tourist infrastructure
has developed since the 1950s and the freeport declaration.
The costs of development
A major local threat to marine conservation in
the Seaflower MPA is population pressure on
resources and ecosystems. SAI has the highest
population density of any oceanic island in the
Americas and one of the highest in the world at
2,431persons/km2.
waste production averaged 91 metric tons per
day.
Possible Solutions
80,000 people live on the main Island – SAI – but more realistic
estimates suggest 100,000. The island is 27 km2
The steady influx of migrants from the
Colombian mainland, principally associated with
the development of the tourist industry and
infrastructure, has led to extreme competition
for scarce resources. Poverty, un- and underemployment, and growing food insecurity have
serious repercussions on the coastal and marine
environment. Another major problem is how to
dispose of the volume of solid and liquid waste.
A sewage system serves 8 percent of the island,
mainly hotels and businesses; 64 percent use
concrete septic tanks or pits (structures missing
a bottom and/or sides); and the rest have no
formal disposal system. Of the septic tanks, 28
percent do not meet specifications. The most
common reason is insufficient distance
between the tank and the groundwater.
Untreated waste from the sewage system is
discharged into the sea through an open-ocean
outfall. Sludge from septic tanks is also disposed
of at sea. The volume of solid waste produced
in San Andres has greatly increased because of
population growth, changing consumption
patterns, and tourist development. In 2003 solid
The Colombian constitution of 1991 promoted
an absolute decentralization of the national
government. Environmental issues were on top
of the list the national government wanted to
delegate. Protecting it was expensive, a country
with rainforest, deserts, mountains, seas in the
Caribbean and the pacific, etc, was not easy to
understand environmentally speaking. In 1993,
Colombia
established
the
National
Environmental System (SINA), of which
CORALINA (local environmental authority) is the
representative for the Archipelago. Because of
the significance and fragility of the ecosystems
in this Colombian department, CORALINA is one
of 7 regional sustainable development
corporations in the nation with a mandate that
combines responsibilities of conservation,
planning, management and education.
Locally managed MPA
The native islander population of the
Archipelago have developed a particular ethnic
identity within the Caribbean region, linked
closely to specific environmental circumstances
such as the islands geographic location on the
southwest of the major Atlantic hurricane path,
the small amount of landmass but high rate of
terrestrial biodiversity, a scarcity of freshwater,
and access to a wealth of marine biological
diversity. Islanders have the indigenous
knowledge and experience to make positive
contributions to the administration of the MPA.
Given the economic model and previous
national policies, they were restrained for
exercising any kind of influence over the way
their territory was being handled, the MPA
intended to give them back decision maker
power and guarantee their support.
There was an extremely high rate of support at
the time of the MPA declaration (over 90% of
primary stakeholders were in favor) and this
remains high despite some understandable
frustration from the local community with
respect to the slow progress made with
enforcement and poverty alleviation. It is
essential to address their concerns about
enforcement, introduce sustainable and
alternative livelihood programs to improve their
well-being and diversify the economy,
strengthen their involvement in management
and decision-making, build capacity, and
achieve long-term MPA financial sustainability
to improve effectiveness of MPA processes,
outputs, and outcomes.
The concept of establishing a locally managed
MPA emerged during the search for long-term
solutions to growing coastal and marine
problems, such as uncontrolled development,
environmental impact and overfishing. Local
stakeholders,
including
local
islanders,
businesses and authorities, worked together,
within an ecosystem-based approach, to design
MPA boundaries, zones and management
actions. During the process, national
government acknowledged that a decentralized
approach to management of the MPA would
improve efficiency, effectiveness and equity.
For the Seaflower MPA to be effective, it also
had to be owned by the community from the
outset. Stakeholders were consulted and
involved every step of the way; but, even
stronger, to create ownership of the MPA
planning process, they had decision-making
power and came together, reaching consensus
and signing formal agreements on MPA
objectives, zoning, external boundaries, and
management structure.
Meeting of Environmental Authority’s Directive Board
The management structure has 3 participatory
advisory committees – the Stakeholder Advisory
Committee (SAC) composed of marine users
such as artisanal fishers, watersports operators,
and representatives of the indigenous
community; the IIC (Inter Institutional
Committee) that includes institutions besides
CORALINA involved in coastal or fisheries
management; and the International Advisory
Board (IAB) made up of experts in MPA
management from around the world. The
collaborative structure ensures stakeholder
involvement in implementation and supports
adaptive management by facilitating the
continuous incorporation of scientific, technical,
and indigenous knowledge into management.
As a result, the MPA promotes an integrated,
sustainable
development
approach
to
conservation and its objectives are: 1)
Preservation,
recovery,
and
long-term
maintenance
of
species,
biodiversity,
ecosystems, and other natural values including
special habitats; 2) Promotion of sound
management practices to ensure long-term
sustainable use of coastal and marine
resources; 3) Equitable distribution of economic
and social benefits to enhance local
development; 4) Protection of rights pertaining
to historical use; and 5) Education to promote
stewardship and community involvement in
management.
Sustainability
As an approach toward long-term project
sustainability, the project components are
underpinned by four strategic principles to
confront the root causes of the failure to date
to achieve MPA objectives.
Component 1: Adaptive Management. This
component focuses on rendering the MPA’s
Integrated Management Plan –IMP operational and implementing it fully. Putting in
place effective management as soon as possible
will ensure that the MPA does not lose
momentum, community support, or fail to
conserve the marine ecosystems and
biodiversity it was designed to protect.
Furthermore,
the
continued
effective
management, community “ownership” of the
MPA and participation by local professionals in
MPA management will be supported by
promoting local technical capacity and
understanding through extensive, in-depth
training in essential functions such as adaptive
management skills; enforcement, compliance,
and research methods; and environmental
education, conflict resolution, and outreach
techniques.
Component 2: Financial Sustainability.
One of the main problems the environmental
authority has faced is the lack of financing.
Administering a reserve of this size and at the
same time offer viable economic alternatives to
80,000 people is an enormous challenge.
Stakeholders proposed a number of initiatives
that are intended to guarantee the financial
sustainability of the MPA and reduction of
economic dependence on the Colombian
Ministry of the Environment. The initiatives are:
(i) implementing an MPA entrance fee and
collection
mechanism,
based
on
a
comprehensive Willingness-to- Pay and financial
analysis; (ii) implementing marine user (e.g.,
water sports) operators’ licenses with an annual
fee structure; (iii) carrying out a demonstration
project of Payment for Environmental Services
(PES) and determining replicability; (iv) creating
an MPA trust fund with endowment from funds
generated through entrance and licensing fees,
matching contributions and an associated
“Friends of Seaflower” (contributing voluntary
financial donations); (v) assessing the feasibility
and operational aspects of secondary financial
mechanisms; e.g., access fees for special dive
sites, and/or a percentage allocation of the
existing tourist tax for MPA management; and
(vi) providing training, education, and outreach
activities in financial management, operational
methods, PES schemes, educational materials
to accompany entrance fee collection,
educational displays at point of entry to
Seaflower, and promotional material for the
Friends of Seaflower.
Component 3: Alternative Livelihoods. This
component will promote practices compatible
with MPA objectives that enhance conservation
and provide local economic benefit, including
the development of replicable alternative
livelihood pilot projects to diversify the
economy, alleviate poverty, and reduce
pressure on marine biodiversity and
ecosystems. The activities to be financed are: (i)
building capacity of the local private sector by
working with NGOs and cooperatives on
developing alternative livelihood pilot projects:
seaweed and iguana farming with value-added
products, marine tourism options guided by
artisanal fishers, and community-based nature
tourism programs in Old Point Mangrove Park;
(ii) improving the compatibility and practice of
existing livelihoods such as fishing, farming and
cattle raising, and ecotourism through
examining new technologies, strengthening
cooperatives, and promoting sustainable
practices; (iii) building stakeholder involvement
in MPA management with community support
programs (outreach ranger and buoy
maintenance support teams); and (iv) carrying
out
substantial
training
in
business
management, marketing, and other skills
related to economic development.
Component 4: MPA Monitoring and Analysis.
This component will enable that MPA
management measures and effectiveness be
informed by relevant, up-to-date monitoring
programs and analyses, performed by trained
personnel, and developed within an adaptive,
question-based context.
Conclusion
It is too early to determine whether the
alternatives proposed will offer the required
solutions. The Seaflower MPA administrators
not only have to worry about the environment,
but foremost, for the inhabitants of the
Archipelago. It is clear that including as many
stakeholders as possible will create a sense of
belonging that could work for the benefit of the
MPA, but it could also work against
environmental interests. There are too many
interests than need to be reconciled before a
decision is adopted. This type of decisionmaking process is certainly more legitimate, but
it is not efficient enough when the situation
calls for a rapid response.
There is an urgent need of getting to action. As
was stated on the paper, momentum could
easily be lost and with it support for the MPA.
People may not go against the initiative per se,
but it is foreseeable that if economic conditions
continue to deteriorate, the protection of the
environment will no longer be a priority. There
are natural resources to exploit and a toothless
environmental authority to protect them, which
is a terrible equation for conservation.
The Archipelago cannot afford to have the
discussion on either protecting the fish or the
fisher; there is a moral responsibility of local
authorities to allow the exploitation of natural
resources if it is the only viable alternative for
the inhabitants to escape poverty. There is a
need not only to speed up the alternative
livelihood strategies, but foremost to make
them profitable. This is not about being
imaginative on the alternatives they create; it is
about guaranteeing the stakeholder a similar
income than the one he had using the MPA.
As we have seen there has been an intensive
support
from
international
scientific
community. Unfortunately CORALINA as the
MPA administrator has not been able to
guarantee the same level of support from
international governmental agencies, and
sometimes even national. The Seaflower MPA is
part of the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve. This is
the largest UNESCO oceanic Biosphere Reserve
in the world; it is a territory the size of Germany
(or Montana for those more familiar with
American geography) with 9 international
boundaries. That being said, it is evident that
there is need of much more than good policies
for the objectives of environmental protection
and sustainable development to be achieved.
Colombia and Nicaragua are currently disputing
parts of the Seaflower MPA waters. As part of
the Colombian legal strategy the Ministry of
Defense withdrew the Navy vessels that
guarded the boundaries. Without a policing
institution
that
could
enforce
the
environmental legislation protecting the MPA
there have been an uncontrolled increase of
foreign fishing vessels that illegally fish in MPA
waters, exploiting the resources that local
fishers are not allowed to touch. Although the
complaints, the Colombian Ministry of Foreign
Affairs and the Ministry of Defense have
repeatedly stated that the national policy is not
to have a military presence to avoid a conflict
escalation with Central American neighbors.
The Colombian constitution allows local
authorities to sign international treaties with
local counterparts. Instead of relying exclusively
on Colombian military authorities to enforce
the environmental laws, a softer, yet more
effective approach could be used. There needs
to be a closer collaboration with Central
American environmental authorities, CORALINA
cannot enforce its own regulations because of
lack of national support, hence it needs to look
for it elsewhere. If there were a coherent and
comprehensive approach on the conservation
objectives, other stakeholders could be
included (with the risks and benefits this may
have), make sure that central American fishing
and environmental authorities make a closer
inspection on their fishing fleet, let them be the
ones hindering their vessels from entering not
Colombian or Nicaraguan waters, but protected
waters.
There is not a more ambitious environmental
initiative in the Caribbean. The Seaflower MPA
has enormous potential, but equally big
challenges. This is a unique moment to put the
protection of the MPA on the international
agenda and get it out of a bilateral and harmful
discussion between Colombia and its neighbors.
Protecting one of the most important and
biggest part of the Caribbean sea is appealing
enough to mobilize international political
community, decision makers, maybe it is time
to get started.