Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and Their Effectiveness Alan T

Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness Alan T. White1 and Catherine A. Courtney2

Abstract

The various issues affecting the health of coral reefs in the tropical world are many and complex, yet they can be grouped for analysis and policy formulation into “local” or “global”. The local issues generally include physical destruction caused by fishing gear, mining, boats, anchors, divers, etc.; over-extraction and use by fishers and/or visitors; and pollution or sedimentation from local sources (shoreline development, boats, people and other causes). The global issues generally include warmer water and climate change; pollution from distant sources (rivers, upland areas, ships, industry); and storms, disease, crown-of-thorns and others. As issues become better understood and causes better known, it becomes easier to determine appropriate and effective policies, strategies and actions to address them.

Policies supporting coral reef protection and management are grouped into three categories – governance, regulatory (limits to access or use) and economic (incentives or disincentives) – and discussed in relation to local and global scales. Policies that support localized management mostly revolve around decentralization of authority to local governments and communities; use of marine protected areas and integrated coastal management regimes; various types of regulations governing use of an area or the resource; education; and appropriate economic incentives such as user fees, trust funds or compensation payments. Policies that support global (national and international) protection of reefs include international or national marine parks; transnational or national integrated coastal management programs; legal frameworks that recognize local management regimes; long-term lease agreements and management rights; education; valuation tools to raise awareness; privatization of common property; various national laws; bans on import/export of vulnerable species; pollution taxes; conservation tax write-offs; market entry fees; debt-for-nature swaps; carbon emission taxes and others.

The relative effectiveness of various policies and strategies is discussed in relation to management of coral reefs in several Philippine case studies. Marine protected areas are analyzed as management approaches that can work in a supportive policy context. Institutional arrangements that facilitate coral reef management in the Philippines and other countries are presented. Finally, a matrix analysis compares various, mostly successful, coral reef management projects or areas, with the whole range of potential policies and strategies in order to determine the relative effectiveness and importance of the policy/strategy mechanisms.

Introduction: directions to regulators to achieve designated Types of policy instruments outcomes. Policies for coral reef management will often lead to management strategies and Policy instruments refer to tools and measures, actions, although policies are not interchangeable which can be a set of actions (direct), or mere with the latter. Policies set the stage for incentives or disincentives designed to provide management and provide direction and

1. Chief of Party, Coastal Resource Management Project, 5th Floor, CIFC Towers, Cebu City, Cebu, Philippines 2. Technical Advisor, Coastal Resource Management Project, Tetra Tech EM Inc., Honolulu, Hawaii, USA

128 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 129 incentives. Policies are normally created in and local governments. To be effective, national response to an understanding of issues and their government must devolve jurisdiction to local causes, so that policies support actions to solve a governments and local governments must have problem, such as coral reef destruction, that the ability and desire to plan and implement results from any one of many causes. MPAs. The effectiveness of this approach has been borne out in the Philippines and Indonesia where The various issues affecting the health of coral most effective coral reef management is being reefs in the world are many and complex, yet they done within the institutional context of com- can be categorized into groups for analysis and munity-based and local government ordained policy formulation. Issues may initially be MPAs (White et al. 2001). These two countries grouped as “local” or “global” and then further also have national MPAs that are effective but broken down as shown in Table 1. As issues successes appear more difficult to attain at the become better understood and causes better national level of management. In contrast, the known, it becomes easier to determine appro- Great Barrier Reef Marine Park is considered priate and effective policies, strategies and actions highly effective but it is located in a developed to address them. country (Kelleher 1991). Policies that support local autonomy in managing coral reefs through

Table 1. Categories of issues affecting coral reefs and important causative factors Scale Broad Issues 1st level causes 2nd level causes Local Physical destruction from fishing gear, Weak law enforcement and/or Lack of education and low awareness mining, boats, anchors, divers, other regulation

Over extraction and use by fishers and/or Open access and/or weak Food security, Poverty, Lack of visitors management alternatives to fishing, Low awareness

Pollution or sedimentation from local Weak law enforcement, regulation Low awareness, Cost of prevention, sources (shoreline development, boats, or monitoring Difficulty of solution people, other) Global Warmer water and climate change Uncontrolled carbon emission Lack of alternative energy source, Waste

Pollution from distant sources (rivers, Deforestation, Dumping from Lack of monitoring, access control, law upland areas, ships, industry, mining) industry and ships, Waste from enforcement, policy, regulation and cities and towns, other others

Storms, disease, Crown-of-thorns and Natural events, climate change, Lack of monitoring, knowledge, others pollution prediction

Policies that address the broad issues shown in MPAs also include strategies that support either Table 1 can also be divided into “local” and more generalized coastal resource management “global” in a manner that roughly follows the (CRM) or integrated coastal management (ICM) kinds of issues to be addressed. A difference in programs that focus on multiple local government the grouping for policies is that local will refer to jurisdictions or ecological regions, such as the the very local context of a reef area but global will bay-wide management being tested in the refer to legal and institutional contexts at the Philippines (Figure 2) (Christie and White 1997; national as well as the true global levels. A listing Chua and Scura 1992). Policies or strategies that of policies for guiding coral reef management, operate through CRM or ICM programs often grouped by type, is shown in Table 2, and the support successful MPA programs and generally overall global and local issue and policy structure include: is shown in Figure 1. • Implementation of “best practices”, such as Local management policies and well-managed MPAs, zoning, functional local their effectiveness resource management organizations, effective coastal law enforcement units, shoreline Governance policies development plans and regulation, and other habitat management mechanisms particular Governance policies that encourage marine to coral reefs (Figure 2) (Courtney and White protected areas (MPAs) as a basic approach to 2000). coral reef management emanate from national

128 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 129 Table 2. Policies and strategies for coral reef management Scale/ Policy type Potential policies and strategies Level Local Governance Community-based, cooperative or local government marine protected areas Marine protected area networks Integrated coastal management planning and implementation Traditional natural resource management regimes Certification of coastal resource management (best practice) implementation Municipal fisheries management or stewardship councils Periodic monitoring (biophysical, socioeconomic, management/governance) Information networks that disseminate the results of monitoring Planning for biophysical effectiveness and geographical priorities Education support and programs to raise awareness and encourage action Valuation tools to raise awareness and incorporate economic analysis Penalties for non-compliance

Regulatory (limits to Ban on logging and destructive fishing techniques access or use) Restrictions to access through zoning, boundary demarcation Restriction to access through community-owned land or marine tenure Use of catch quotas, size limits, seasons for fishing Restrictions on fishing gear by type and place Rules and guidelines for visitor use of dive sites

Economic incentive or Sustainable tourism disincentive Dive or visitor fee or tax system Boat/gear permits or licensing with fees Community coastal resource management trust funds Price incentives to fishers using sustainable methods Compensation payments to local fishermen or traditional users Alternative livelihoods for coastal resource dependent communities Fines for non-compliance

Global Governance National and international policies on coastal and coral reef management and/or International or national marine parks national Marine protected area networks Transnational or national integrated coastal management programs Certification of best practices in coastal management, shoreline development Legal framework to facilitate and recognize local management regimes Training programs on coastal resource management Standardize management and evaluation approaches and rating criteria Standardize criteria for management site selection Standardize biophysical and management descriptions and rating systems Long-term lease agreements and management rights Education support and programs to raise awareness and encourage action Valuation tools to raise awareness and incorporate economic analysis

Regulatory (limits to Privatization of common property, freehold property permits access or use) Laws controlling land-based pollution Laws banning or controlling destructive fishing techniques Ban import/export of vulnerable species and trade regulation Human population management

Economic incentive or Sustainable tourism disincentive Eco labeling for sustainable practices Pollution taxes based on “polluter pays principle” Conservation tax write-offs and market entry fees Debt-for-nature swaps Reduction of government land rents, fees, taxes as conservation incentive Reforms that improve security of tenure and the investment climate Carbon emission taxes and alternative energy sources Supporting references: Barber and Pratt 1997 Huber 2001 Bettencourt and Gillett 2001 Kuperan et al. 1999 Bryant et al. 1998 Mascia 2001 Burke et al. 2001 Murray et al. 1999 Calumpong 1996 Oracion 2001 Cesar 1996 Ross et al. 2001 Cicin-Sain 1993 Seenprachawong 2001 Courtney et al. 2000 Spurgeon 2001 DENR et al. 2001b White et al. 1994 Gustavson and Huber 2001 White and Trinidad 1998 Hatziolos et al. 1998 White et al. 2001

Figure 2. Planning and zoning of municipal water use in a typical Philippines bay or coastal area

130 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 131 • Certification of coastal management plans Education is also part of the CRM planning cycle and their implementation through local illustrated in Figure 3. government units (Courtney and White 2000). Regulatory policies

• Periodic monitoring of coral reef biophysical, Regulatory mechanisms are many, and yet few are socioeconomic and governance impacts and successful at achieving their intended result. This context through local participatory means that is probably because most regulations are raises awareness about the situation among implemented without the prerequisite education local resource users and also gathers essential and consensus-building processes that will help information for management and refinement ensure compliance. Regulatory policies almost of plans and actions (Uychiaoco et al. 2001). A always limit access and use in some form but they typical planning cycle that incorporates the must be locally acceptable to be effective. Typical results of monitoring for management is regulations used to help protect coral reefs are: shown in Figure 3.

Figure 3. Coastal resource management planning and implementation cycle for a local government unit

Education is needed to reinforce positive actions • Bans on resource use activities such as logging at all levels and among all stakeholders. Education and on use of destructive fishing methods. is a tool that must fit into the local context and Such bans are common and necessary yet they that is more effective if driven by actual experience are often ineffective because of poor education rather than by theory or ideas that are not easily and acceptance among the target audience comprehended by those expected to change their (Pomeroy and Carlos 1997). patterns of behavior (Wells and White 1995). Education can also make use of information from • Regulatory limits to access and use for fishers resource economic valuation and benefit analysis or visitors. These are proving to be effective if to raise awareness about the inherent values of implemented through a MPA approach that is the reef resources or area of concern. The role of specific for small areas, as shown in the case of education is illustrated in Case study 1 below. functional MPAs in the Philippines where various rules are accepted and followed.

132 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 133 • Use of catch quotas, size limits and seasons for community is well organized and there is no fishing. These methods are generally not problem of too much government effective tools in developing countries because intervention. of the difficulty of implementation and enforcement (Pomeroy and Carlos 1997) in • Compensation payments to local resource situations where there is no appropriate users – may help initiate a conservation government bureaucracy. Even in places like program but might not be sustainable unless the Great Barrier Reef or Florida there are still the compensation comes from revenue that is problems with monitoring compliance. generated from sustainable tourism or another related source. • Restrictions on fishing gear by type and place. These are often effective in the context of • Alternative livelihood projects for fishers localized management implemented by local dependent on reefs – often do not work as governments or through MPAs but are often intended and many times end up assisting the difficult to monitor in large areas due to lack wrong beneficiaries. Thus, all livelihood of government capacity. Private sector projects must be carefully planned and tested cooperation through the dive industry or local to ensure that they do indeed support better management organizations can enhance the conservation by benefiting the targeted enforcement of fishing restrictions. stakeholders of concern to reef management. Livelihoods that are working in the Philippines to support reef conservation are tourism- Economic incentives related or environmentally friendly forms of aquaculture that can be implemented without • Use of economic incentives and disincentives too much capital or training. is a valuable tool in making MPAs effective and also attractive to users such as visitors or Economic disincentives can also have a beneficial local fishers (Cesar 1996; Arin 1997; White effect on reef management if implemented and Trinidad 1998). In the local context, consistently in the context of law enforcement. economic incentives must operate so that they Even community-based management regimes use directly reinforce conservation practices fines for offenders of marine sanctuaries or through the local resource users (Vogt 1997). fishing gear rule infractions. Local governments The economic incentive should be linked in the Philippines are increasingly collecting fines directly to a resource user behavior pattern for illegal fishing (Courtney et al. 2002). that requires changing or reinforcement so that the connection is very clear. Options for Global/national management economic incentives include: policies and their effectiveness

• Sustainable tourism – often a strong positive Governance policies economic incentive for protecting coral reefs as long as the tourist is really interested in Policies that truly emanate from the global level visiting healthy reefs (White et al. 2000). are those embodied in the Earth Summit, Agenda Setting up user fee systems can reinforce good 21, Chapter 17 that addresses the conservation behavior by placing value on the site of needs of oceans and coasts. The overall thrust of visitation and also provide revenue to manage Chapter 17 is to promote the integrated a special area. Entry permits for boats can have management of coastal areas and resources the same positive effect and help control following the guiding principles of sustainable activities of the boat owners while in a limited use and development (Cicin-Sain 1993). Most of access area. the key principles and concepts of good coastal resource management are expressed in Chapter • Community trust funds – may be more 17, but what is of relevance to this paper is how complicated to set up and manage but still these policies affect coral reefs within the national have potential where the community has and local context. Important governance policies decided to manage an area and is able to and strategies at the global and/or national levels collect user fees that are managed through a with practical implications for improved communal system. Such a community-based management and conservation include those system is working in some areas where the listed in the following page.

132 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 133 • International agreements covering trans- • National education programs for coral reef national areas and creating international conservation and management. These exist in marine parks, such as the Turtle Islands varying capacities in many countries. The National Park which is jointly implemented extent to which they have a lasting and by Malaysia and the Philippines, or the positive impact depends on the degree to proposed Spratly Islands International Marine which they are integrated into school curricula Park in the South China Sea. There are few and national media outlets. All successful effectively managed areas that cross national coral management programs have strong, borders but there is potential for such ongoing education components. Certainly, management regimes in future. the general awareness about the importance of coral reefs is much higher now than it was a • National laws, guidelines and certification few years ago; much of this can be attributed systems that establish and support integrated to the dissemination of information on the coastal management approaches, national relative economic value of reefs to policy- marine parks or other similar management makers, government agencies and the general approaches. These are often essential public (Courtney et al. 2000). ingredients in supporting effective local management. The ability to transpose national Regulatory policies legal support into effective local action is still lacking in most countries, although good Global and national regulatory policies are examples exist in Australia, Indonesia, primarily reflected in, amongst other things, Malaysia, Thailand and the Philippines in a international trade and pollution control few well-known and high priority sites. A agreements as well as in national laws that national CRM certification system is now regulate trade and use of species, use of fishing being tested in the Philippines (Courtney et al. methods, laws controlling landuse and land- 2002). based pollution. One trade agreement that is relatively effective is the inclusion of corals in • International and national training programs Appendix 3 of the Convention on International in ICM, MPA management, monitoring and Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) under evaluation or other technical and governance which shipment of corals is inhibited techniques. Such programs are important in internationally. Yet, the best enforcement comes building capacity in the government and when national laws prevent both export and private sector for improved CRM. An import of corals directly so that national customs important aspect of training is dissemination officials are more vigilant. Having clear regulatory of standardized management and evaluation policies and laws at the national level makes it approaches, rating systems for governance in easier for effective enforcement at the local level. MPAs or CRM programs, criteria for site An example of an unclear national law is when selection of MPAs, and methods used for the law states that all “active fishing gears” are biophysical, socioeconomic and governance prohibited from use in municipal coastal waters monitoring. At present, in most countries, (including all coral reef areas) but fails to define such standards are lacking and training is “active fishing gears” or leaves the definition to the being done using non-standard methods. This discretion of local governments, as in the makes information sharing difficult and Philippines. Unclear laws usually lead to poor or ineffective. no enforcement.

• Access and management rights. These policy Economic policies tools are affected by national policies controlling the devolution of authority. In An important international and national some countries, traditional use rights are economic policy that can assist directly with reef awarded to indigenous communities for conservation is the promotion of sustainable shoreline and marine areas. This does not tourism. Tourism as an economic force cannot be always mean improved management but it disputed and, when harnessed to support does offer some local accountability for conservation in the right manner, it can be management and is effective in some Pacific beneficial, especially if it is linked to effective island countries (Bettencourt and Gillet 2001; local management policies that ensure Hviding and Baines 1992; Hviding 1991). distribution of benefits among coastal resource

134 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 135 stakeholders. National tourism promotion may tion of factors and cooperation to make such benefit well-managed national marine parks but arrangements work in reality is rather complex might be detrimental to local MPAs if the local and the overall use of these tools has not been authorities and communities cannot manage the great. influx of tourists and derive economic benefits from them in an equitable manner (White et al. • Finally, at the truly global level, the need to cut 2000). Other international or national economic carbon emissions is recognized but is making policy incentives or disincentives may include: little headway in the international arena. Certainly the most promising solution here • Pollution taxes by which polluters pay either will be alternative energy sources that depend for emissions to marine waters or for specific less on fossil fuels than at present. damages to coastal waters and reefs. This mechanism is difficult to implement in Case study 1: Local government and developing countries and is probably not very community coral reef management effective in terms of reef conservation in the Philippines anywhere except maybe in Australia and the United States where ships dumping wastes or Owing to years of neglect and mismanagement, directly breaking the reefs have been fined the condition of coral reefs and other coastal under the law. resources in the Philippines declined significantly until about 1985. Since then, over 430 MPAs have • Conservation tax write-offs and market entry been established in the country (Baling 1995; fees. These mechanisms are used in developed Pajaro et al. 1999; White et al. 2001). Presently, countries in certain circumstances but their the degradation of the reefs has slowed down and, effectiveness may be difficult to measure and although many are not well managed, the MPAs they may not work in developing countries. are having a positive effect and the level of awareness nationwide has improved. With the • Debt-for-nature swaps and incentives for passage of the Local Government Code in 1991 investments that support conservation. Such and the 1998 Fisheries Code responsibility for measures have been used to generate revenue managing municipal waters and their resources for conservation in developing countries was devolved to local governments. However, where the government allows and encourages local governments often lack technical capacity, retirement of public or private debt, or has funds, and economic justification to support progressive investment policies. The combina- investment in coastal resource management. Co-

Figure 4. Gilutongan Island Marine Sanctuary, Cordova, Cebu, Philippines

134 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 135 management projects, such as the Coastal markedly (Figure 5). Study tours from other Resource Management Project (CRMP) in coastal communities and tourism in general are Cordova, Cebu, have helped to coordinate growing as well. Revenues from the recreational government and academic expertise to assist local diving industry are generating on average US$1 communities manage their coastal resources 000 a month, of which 70 per cent is allocated to better (Courtney and White 2000). the municipality to support marine sanctuary management and 30 per cent is allocated to the The boundaries of the Gilutongan Marine community for special improvement projects Sanctuary in Cordova were officially established (Ross et al. 2001). by a municipal ordinance in 1994 (Figure 4). However, the sanctuary has only recently become CRMP has been working with municipalities and effective with active involvement by the communities such as Cordova in other parts of community, national and municipal governments, the Philippines to build the capacity of local non-government organizations (NGOs) and governments to deliver coastal resource academic institutions. The National Department management as a basic service. By the end of of Environment and Natural Resources, the 2001, 70 municipal governments, covering more University of the Philippines, the Marine Science than 2 100 kilometers of shoreline, will have Institute and the University of San Carlos are adopted a rigorous CRM system. monitoring the coral reef substrate and fish abundance, activities the community does not Precursors to Gilutongan Island Marine Sanctuary, have the expertise to perform. However, because Apo, Pamilacan and Balicasag Islands and others the management is community-based, the risk of in the Central Visayas, Philippines, are also local resource conflicts and non-compliance is recognized as successful community-based reduced. resource management projects. In the late 1970s, blast and dynamite fishing, as well as other Early results have been positive. Fish abundance destructive fishing practices, threatened these and and diversity and live coral cover have improved other reefs in the Central Visayas. Thanks to a community-based marine management initiative that controlled destructive fishing practices, put in place in the mid 1980s, these practices stopped (MCDP 1986). With financial assistance, Silliman University staff organized local people on these islands into marine management committees. These groups then set up marine reserves that included “no fishing” sanctuaries on one part of the reef. With the assistance of the municipal governments, residents have continued to prevent reef damage from fishers and divers both within and outside the sanctuaries (White 1988a; 1988b; 1989; 1996). A growing tourism industry catering to scuba divers is providing much needed revenue to local communities. In 1999, live coral cover and fish populations within the marine sanctuaries had increased substantially, along with fish yields from the island reefs (White et al. 1999; White and Vogt 2000). Case study 2: National coral reef management in the Philippines

Policies supporting the three overall strategies prevalent in Southeast Asia – integrated coastal management, community-based coastal management and co-management – delegate the power to manage coastal resources to different groups. Figure 5. Change in coral cover and fish abundance in Gilutongan Island Sanctuary With top-down strategies, governments retain

most of the control. Following the trend of The major policies that affect coral reef decentralization, especially in the Philippines, management are the Republic Act (RA) 8550 or NGOs and local authorities have developed the Philippines Fisheries Code of 1998 and RA community-based management and co- 7160 or the Local Government Code. The relevant management regimes. This devolution of power provisions of the Fisheries Code are: makes local communities, and municipal and city governments, crucial actors in the a) A ban on coral exploitation and exportation. It management of coastal resources (Figure 6). is prohibited for any person or corporation to gather, possess, sell or export ordinary

136 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 137 precious and semi-precious corals, whether The National Integrated Protected Areas System raw or in processed form; (NIPAS) Act is also an important policy support for coral reef management. The NIPAS has b) A ban on muro-ami, other methods and gear included in its system 13 marine seascapes (Table destructive to coral reefs and related marine 3) of notable biological and physical diversity. habitat. It is unlawful to fish with a gear One of these seascapes is the Tubbataha Reef method that requires diving and other National Marine Park, which is also a World physical or mechanical acts that pound and Heritage Site due to the unparalleled beauty and destroy coral reefs, seagrass beds, and other biodiversity of coral reefs in the area. The NIPAS marine life habitat; further provides for a degree of interface with the LGUs through membership in the Protected Area c) The prohibition of fishing or taking of rare, Management Board (PAMB) and consultations threatened, or endangered species as listed in before enlistment in the system. Although a CITES (which includes species of corals); progressive law, the NIPAS Act has had the effect of alienating some community groups from a d) The declaration of fishing reserves. Local previously successful management operation. Government Units (LGUs) are authorized to The well-known Apo Island in the southern recommend to the Department of Agriculture Philippines is a case in point. There, the successful (DA) portions of municipal waters that can be community-based and local government-run declared as fishery reserves; and marine reserve of the 1980s was declared a Protected Seascape under the NIPAS Act in 1996. e) The establishment of fish refuges and Since 1996, the community has complained of sanctuaries. LGUs are authorized to establish problems of working within the national system these within their municipal waters. and, in fact, the revenues collected from visitors to the island have largely been lost in the national Meanwhile, the Local Government Code treasury through the poor management of the establishes the jurisdiction of municipalities in DENR. This highlights the potential weakness of the management of its municipal waters, where an apparently good national law for protected some coral reefs are found. The functions of areas that in theory involves local government LGUs relevant to coral reef management are: and communities in the planning and management process but in practice does not do a) Enforcement of all national laws on fishery so. Also, as can be seen from Table 3, management and coral reef conservation including is not effective in most of the nationally protected ordinances; seascapes, thus reinforcing the notion that national policies/laws are not effective without b) Legislation of ordinances that limit destructive local mechanisms and accountability (NIPAP activities on coral reefs, such as those 1999; White et al. 2001). associated with fishing (spear fishing by recreation divers) or tourism (anchoring, The Philippines has various other environment entrance fees in marine sanctuaries, etc.); and pollution prevention policies of importance to coral reefs, especially as the reefs function as c) Inter-LGU collaboration which enhances recipients of silt and polluting materials. Such implementation of integrated management; policies as they apply to shoreline development, forestry, and disposition of solid waste are all d) Consultation of national government agencies highly relevant to coral reef management but are with LGUs, NGOs and other stakeholders in woefully lacking in enforcement. relation to programs or projects which may cause pollution, climate change, depletion of While it is clear that local level management of non-renewable resources or any activities coral reefs is the mandate of the LGUs, the which would cause ecological imbalance; functional overlaps and interests of national agencies blur the issue. The Department of e) Recognition of the roles of peoples’ Agriculture-Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic organizations and NGOs as the backbone of Resources (DA-BFAR) has general responsibility participatory planning; and for the management of fishery management areas, while the Department of Environment and f) Power to generate their own sources of revenue, Natural Resources (DENR) has jurisdiction over e.g. charging entrance fees for marine parks. the entire natural resources and environment

138 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 139 Table 3. Nationally proclaimed marine protected areas in the Philippines and their effectiveness1 (DENR 2001) Name of protected area Date established Area Approximate Relative protection from (hectares)2 reef area protected area status3 Palaui Island Marine Reserve, Luzon 08-16-1994 7 415 <10% v Batanes Protected Landscape and 02-28-1994 213 578 <5% v Seascape, Luzon Masinloc and Oyon Bay Marine Reserve, 08-18-1993 7 568 <5% v Zambales Tubbataha Reef National Marine Park, Sulu 08-11-1988 33 200 >10 000 ha v v v Sea, Palawan Apo Reef Natural Park, Sulu Sea, Mindoro 02-20-1996 11 677 >3 000 ha v v Taklong Island National Marine Reserve 02-08-1990 1 143 <10% v Sagay Protected Seascape, Negros 06-01-1995 28 300 <10% v Occidental Apo Island Protected Landscape and 08-09-1996 691 =100 ha v v v Seascape, Negros Oriental Guiuan Protected Landscape and 09-26-1994 60 448 <10% v Seascape, Samar Turtle Island Heritage Protected Area, Tawi- 05-31-1996 1 740 <10% v v Tawi Pujada Bay Protected Landscape and 07-31-1994 21 200 <10% v Seascape, Mindanao Sarangani Protected Seascape, Mindanao 03-05-1997 215 950 <5% v v Tañon Strait Protected Seascape, Negros/ 05-28-1998 No data <5% v Cebu 1 There are many more marine protected areas established by municipal or city ordinance that are not listed here. About 10 to 15 per cent of the local government MPAs are considered to be managed effectively. 2 Area includes all marine waters of protected areas, generally less than 10% is coral reef habitat. 3 v Little or no management v v Management starting v v v Effective management in place for several years

sector. A positive legal agreement that emerged many existing but poorly managed MPAs despite this seeming confusion is the Joint under local and national governments; Memorandum Order No. 2000-01 between DA- BFAR and DENR. The agreement, first and • Promoting coastal resource management foremost, lays down procedures for cooperation planning and implementation for all and collaboration on matters that affect municipal and city governments that includes jurisdictional mandates of both agencies (DENR CRM best practices such as improved coastal et al. 2001a). law enforcement, zoning, MPAs, controls on shoreline development and collecting resource In the Philippines, despite a strong legal and rents; institutional framework for coral reef management, enforcement of the laws remains • Adopting a newly designed national policy weak. Reasons range from mere lack of political framework for coastal management that will on the part of the enforcer, to total ignorance streamlines the roles and responsibilities of of the law or lack of appreciation of resource various agencies that support local values on the part of stakeholders. Local governments in the task of protecting coral governments complain that there is very little reefs and other resources; funding for enforcement and that hardware and personnel support from national government is • Encouraging collection of resource rent in minimal. Nevertheless, there are important policy exchange for access to coral reefs and fisheries shifts taking place for improving CRM in the to obtain revenue for improved management country as indicated in Table 4. and protection; and

In the Philippines, the future of coral reefs • Continuing to educate the public and policy- depends on the actions listed below. makers about the importance of coral reefs in the local and national economy and about • Implementing more effective MPAs and their high biodiversity values. improving the quality of management of

FROM TO Improved local governance (adapted from Ellison 1997) Public administration Public management Centralized, uniform, “top down” service delivery Decentralized, diverse, localized service delivery Self-sufficiency Hierarchical control Inter-linked sectors “Upward” accountability Empowerment Standardized procedures “Outward” accountability Apolitical civil society Performance orientation Individual skill building Advocacy-oriented civil service Organizational competence Improved coastal resource management (adapted from Courtney and White 2000) Agri-based fisheries development Coastal resource management and protection National government control and regulation Local government delivery of CRM as a basic service Top-down planning by national government Upward, participatory planning and co-management regimes Input indicators used to monitor activities Output indicators used to benchmark local government performance Single local government interventions Inter-local government and multisectoral participation in co- Individual skill building in CRM management regimes Organizational capacity building in CRM for local government, resource management councils, NGOs, civil society

Institutional arrangements that from a local government or community. Thus, work for coral reef management national management regimes in developed countries may appear to be more hierarchical but, There are many different examples of institutional in reality, if they are effective in management, arrangements for managing coral reefs around they may have devolved much of their authority the world. The Philippines examples above and responsibility to local management units highlight the roles of communities, and local and that reflect local community and cultural needs. national governments in a varying mix that is Another trend that emerges from the management biased towards local level control, even in cases of Table 5 is that there is always some form national marine parks. In Table 5, examples from of collaborative management present. This may around the world are summarized to give a sense be in the form of collaboration between local or of what can work under different governments national governments and stakeholder com- and in various situations. One pattern that munities, or it may be collaboration between the emerges from this summary table is that local private sector and communities and/or accountability must always be in place whether it government. is orchestrated from national headquarters or

Table 5. Selected coral reef management programs and their type of institutional support and role of community (modified from White et al. 1994) Local Community and/or Local Government Management Site name Area Organization responsible Management role of community FIJI 1. Customary Inshore areas up to reef drop- Local communities with Owners of fishing rights must grant fishing rights off government Fisheries Division permission for activities that might areas affect reefs; joint government and community program to stop dynamite fishing with increased prosecutions. MOZAMBIQUE 2. Bazaruto Reefs and other marine Local tourism organizations Through custodianship of resources Archipelago habitats of five islands and villages, with assistance of and a joint decision-making process, Conservation World Wide Fund for Nature residents have established five reserves Project and South African Nature on fringing reefs in which fishing is Foundation prohibited and four in which spearing ad seine nets are prohibited but other artisanal methods are permitted. PHILIPPINES 3. Apo Island 106 ha of fringing reef reserve Marine Management Marking and guarding of sanctuary and Municipal Marine surrounding the island to 60 m Committee of residents, regulation of fishing practices and Reserve (until isobath municipal government, and tourist activities around the island. 1996) Silliman University

140 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 141 4. Balicasag Island 31 ha of fringing reef reserve Marine Management Guarding of sanctuary and prevention Municipal Marine surrounding the small island to Committee of residents, of destructive fishing. Reserve 20 m isobath municipal government, and the Philippine Tourism Authority 5. Mabini Municipal Coral reef and marine waters Marine Management Surveillance of sanctuaries, installation Marine Reserve to 500 m offshore fringing 4 Committee of fishers and of mooring buoys, and prevention of km of coastline, with three resort operators, municipal destructive fishing. sanctuaries inside government 6. Pamilacan Island 180 ha of fringing reef reserve Marine Management Guarding of sanctuary and regulation Municipal Marine surrounding the island to 20 m Committee of residents and of fishing activities. Reserve isobath municipal government 7. San Salvador Fringing reef surrounding 300 Marine Management Surveillance of sanctuary and Island Municipal ha island, 125 ha reef sanctuary Committee of residents, monitoring of fishing activities on Marine Reserve, municipal government and the remaining fish areas. Zambales Haribon Foundation 8. Sumilon Island 25 ha island surrounded by 50 Municipal government and Municipal employees watch the reef to Municipal Marine ha coral reef resort company prevent destructive fishing and collect Park fees from tourists; sanctuary imposed until 1984. Monitoring showed dramatic increases in fish diversity, abundance and yield up to 1984.

SOLOMON ISLANDS 9. Marovo Lagoon 700 km2 of reefs and water Traditional chief oversees Control access to reef resources and Customary Marie enclosed by barrier reefs regulations; village regulation of harvesting within Tenure communities control access to community areas; may give fishing reef rights to outsiders under certain conditions.

National or State Government Management Site name Area Organization responsible Management role of community AUSTRALIA 10. Great Barrier Reef 350 000 km2 with about 2 900 Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Community or park users assist in Marine Park reefs, 300 coral cays, and 600 Authority and Queensland determining activities within park continental islands National Parks and Wildlife zones; implementation through Services education, public awareness and enforcement as needed. BELIZE 11. Hol Chan Marine Several small reef areas and Fisheries Department Fishing banned by government, and Reserve sand cays local fishers cooperate by not fishing within the reserve. EGYPT 12. Ras Mohammed 170 km coastline with fringing Department of National Parks, Tour companies cooperate with Marine Park reefs and desert landscape with assistance of European government office to monitor diving Economic Community project activities and mooring of boats. INDONESIA 13. Bali Barat One small island and fringing Directorate of Nature The park director works closely with National Marine reefs (sanctuary); fringing reefs Conservation within the local fishing communities in a Park, Bali and other marine ecosystems Ministry of Forestry, park cooperative manner to ensure bordering mainland shore director, and staff compliance. 14. Bunaken National 89 000 ha with five islands and Directorate of Nature Several NGOs are beginning to work Marine Park, two stretches of mainland Conservation within the with the park management. Local North Sulawesi shoreline with 5 000 ha of coral Ministry of Forestry, park participation is beginning through a reefs and 1 800 ha of director, and staff planning process. mangrove forest MEXICO 15. Sian Ka’an 528 000 ha of rain forest, Government department in Fishing cooperative for spiny lobster Biosphere mangroves, reefs , and cooperation with the NGO and Council of Representatives of Reserve, Yucatan associated waters, bounded by Amigos de Sian Ka’an people living in the reserve participate Yucatan barrier reef in management with the government. 16. Key Largo 259 km2 of patch and bank Florida Department of Natural Surveillance and education; National Marine reefs, sea grass beds, and Resources spearfishing and trap fishing prohibited; Sanctuary, Florida adjacent waters mooring buoys installed.

140 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 141 17. Looe Key 18 km2 of reefs, sea grass beds, Florida Department of Natural Surveillance and education; National Marine and associated waters Resources spearfishing and trap fishing prohibited; Sanctuary, Florida mooring buoys installed. 18. Marine Life Nine areas ranging in size from State Division of Aquatic Dive tour operators cooperate with Conservation 11 to 150 ha of coral reef and Resources state to manage sites on a case-by-case Districts, Hawaii marine water basis; fishing and anchoring banned; recreation permitted. 19. Virgin Islands 6 127 ha, including 2 286 ha National Park Service, Park Service is encouraging National Park sea, 3 644 ha land. Park has Department of Interior, with participation of fisher groups through (VINP) and fringing reefs, mangroves, sea Virgin Islands Resource traditional fishing and planning; and Biosphere grasses, and associated waters Management Cooperative NGO, Friends of the VINP, serves as a Reserve, and beaches liaison. Caribbean Collaborative Management Site name Area Organization responsible Management role of community BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS 20. RMS Rhone 323 ha, including the wreck, National Parks Trust, with Local dive operators involved in Marine Park island, and surrounding waters participation of Dive surveillance, monitoring, education, and and reefs Operatives Association installation of mooring buoys. HAITI 21. Les Arcadins Islands with fringing coral reefs Government in cooperation Fisher cooperatives, the Haiti Hotel Marine Park on west coast north of Portau- with World Wildlife Fund Association, and local dive club, with Prince assistance of World Wildlife Fund-U.S., are active in regulating fishing activities in the park with the implementation of no-fishing areas. JAMAICA 22. Montego Bay 13 km2 includes extensive coral National government agency, Dive operators have trained wardens; Marine Park reefs, sea grass beds, and with active assistance of NGOs Rotary Club has raised funds; schools mangroves are involved in publicity and awareness- raising; local fishing cooperatives assist with fishing regulation and area-use monitoring; mooring buoys installed. NETHERLANDS ANTILLES 23. Bonaire Marine Coral reef and marine habitat An NGO, Bonaire National STINAPA, hotels, dive organizations, and Park surrounding the island to 60 m Parks Foundation (STINAPA), the government are represented on the isobath with local government support management committee; partially and assistance of local zoned with two scientific reserves. community groups 24. Saba Marine Park Entire nearshore environment Saba Conservation Foundation Zoned for diving, anchoring, and of the island covering 870 ha with local government and fishing; mooring buoys installed; permit dive operators system for dive operators; one-quarter of park closed to fishing with cooperation of fishers. MALDIVES 25. Maldives Resort Fringing coral reefs, beaches, Department of Fisheries and Resort and dive operators actively Islands islands, and surrounding national resort organization monitor use of reefs on their islands marine waters zoned for and dive sites frequented by their boats, tourism in collaboration with Department of Fisheries. MICRONESIA (Federated States) 26. Kosrae Island Fringing coral reefs, mangroves, Island government and Trochus shell sanctuaries are being and beaches bordering island communities maintained by communities where no collection is permitted; habitat protection is generally promoted, and fishing by outsiders is discouraged; locally managed tourism is being planned. PHILIPPINES 27. Tubbataha 32 200 ha, two atolls with Protected Area Management The World Wildlife Fund for Nature National Marine lagoons, and fringing coral Board (PAMB) of National and actively supports, manages, and patrols Park, Sulu Sea reefs Local Governments, NGOs and to prevent destructive fishing, conducts stakeholder education programs, and makes liaisons with dive operators and the Philippine navy under direction of the PAMB.

142 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 143 ST. LUCIA 28. Soufriere Fringing coral reefs along Department of Fisheries and Dive companies monitor the about 10 km of coastline on dive operators conditional of the reefs and maintain the west coast of St. Lucia mooring buoys, in coordination with government and the Caribbean Natural Resources Institute.

Note: Organization responsible refers to the local (community or government) entity, state or national government agency, or NGO responsible for management of the site or program. Management role of community varies from one program to another because of the need for brevity and the difficulty in obtaining complete sets of data for each program. Community, as used here, refers to local residents, resource users, and tour or dive operators, as appropriate for the site. All the sites noted are relatively successful. Indicators of success are given in a similar table in White et al. (1994).

References used in this table: Anon 1991 Russ and Alcala 1996 Arquiza and White 1999 Savina and White 1986a; 1986b Buhat 1994 Smith and Van’t Hof 1991 Carillo and Martinez 1989 Smith and Water 1991 Causey 1990 Toch 1990 Christie et al. 1990 Towle and Rogers 1989 Christie et al. 1994 Walker 1992 Christie et al. 1999 White 1984 Clark et al. 1989 White 1987 Ferrer et al. 1996 White and Savina 1987a; 1987b Geoghean et al. 1991 White 1988a; 1988b Hviding 1990; 1991 White 1989 Hviding and Baines 1992 White and Palaganas 1991 Katon et al. 1997 White 1992 Katon et al. 1999 White and Calumpong 1992 Kelleher 1991 White et al. 1999 Miller 1986 White et al. 2000 Post and Van’t Hof 1992

Critical success factors and policy Regulatory priorities for sustainable 1. National laws ban or control destructive management of coral reefs activities 2. Local laws ban or control destructive activities Policies and strategies that are frequently used 3. Local fishing gear restrictions in place and known to be successful in documented 4. Local restricted access in place marine management areas are highlighted in 5. Local visitor rules applied Table 6. This analysis helps us prioritize those policies and strategies that, based on experience, Economic deserve the most attention. Those that show up 1. Sustainable tourism a theme or policy in area most frequently (in 40 per cent or more cases) as 2. Visitor fees are collected with positive results critical success factors in MPAs or in other forms 3. Boat permit used and effective of management areas are listed below in the order 4. Alternative livelihood present and used of frequency of occurrence in Table 6. successfully

Governance When reviewing the matrix of Table 6, it is noted 1. Education support and programs that certain policies/strategies marked in black 2. Supportive national policies/laws are key supporting factors in many management 3. Periodic monitoring activities areas. This does not imply that the others marked 4. Technical planning for biophysical effective- in gray, or those less frequent in the table are not ness and geography important as some, such as national laws that are 5. Extant national marine protected area always present but which may not make the mandate difference in successful management, will 6. Local management or stewardship council automatically be important supporting factors. 7. Training programs on coastal management Some policy/strategy approaches are only starting 8. National monitoring or rating standards to be tested and will not show up in this type of 9. National site selection standards analysis, which depends on experience and 10. National management standards results over time. An approach such as “CRM 11. Valuation tools used to raise awareness or certification”, being tested in the Philippines, make decisions ranks low in the analysis because it is new and 12. Information network available not used in other countries. 13. Local government or community-based MPA 14. MPA network exists in a supportive context

142 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 143

Table 6. Policies and strategies used with success in marine management areas Relative success of mgt./protection of success Relative

3 2 2 1 1 3 3 3 2 3 1 1 3 2 No. of supporting policy regimes policy supporting of No.

14 16 12 16 13 14 25 11 30 17 21 29 15 Summary Carbon emission tax emission Carbon

8 Debt for nature swap nature for Debt

8 Ecolabeling for practice for Ecolabeling

3 Price incentive for practice for incentive Price

5 Tax write-off Tax

5 Pollution tax Pollution

0 Fines

26 Alternative livelihood Alternative

Economic 46 Compensation payment Compensation

21 Trust fund Trust

10 Boat permit Boat

51 Visitor fee Visitor

69 Sustainable tourism Sustainable

77 Population mgt. Population

3 Local visitor rules visitor Local

49 Local fishing gear restrictions gear fishing Local

62 Local quotas Local

8 Traditional restricted access restricted Traditional

5 National privatization National

21 Local restricted access restricted Local

59 Regulations Pollution laws Pollution

28 Import/export laws Import/export

15 National bans National

85 Local bans Local

67 Penalties

36 Valuation tools used tools Valuation

44 Education program Education

87 Lease agreement/mgt. right agreement/mgt. Lease

23 National monitoring standard monitoring National

54 National site selection standard selection site National

49 National mgt. standard mgt. National

46 Technical planning Technical

Collaborative Management (National/Local Collaboration) Management (National/Local Collaborative

79 Training program Training

54 Information network Information

41 Periodic monitoring Periodic

82 Local mgt council mgt Local

59 Certification of ICM of Certification

Governance

5 Traditional regime Traditional

10 Local ICM program ICM Local

28 National ICM program ICM National

5 MPA Network MPA

41 Local MPA Local

41 National MPA National

67 International MPA International

8 National policies/laws National

85 International policies policies International 15 RMS Rhone, RMS Rhone, Virgin Is. British Arcadins, Les Haiti Komodo, Indonesia Seribu, Pulau Jakarta Bay Bay, Montego Jamaica Bonaire, Netherlands Antilles Saba, Netherlands Antilles ResortMaldives Islands, Maldives Island, Kosrae Micronesia Island, Apo (post P. Negros, 1996) Reef, Apo P. Mindoro, Bacuit El Nido, P. Bay, Tubbataha P. Reefs, St. Soufriere, Lucia 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Relative Frequency Frequency Relative of policy/strategy in all 39 cases (%) Legend: Relative success of mgt.: 3 Effective management in place for several years ICM Integrated Coastal Management 2 Management starting or only moderately effective MPA Marine Protected Area 1 Little or no management P. Philippines

Note: This table is based on information available which is not consistent for each site analyzed. Thus, specific details in each site can be improved with better knowledge and information of each site. The bigger trends are the important result of this matrix and not the individual details.

¢ Gray box indicates some level of importance in the management of an area ¢ Key policy/strategy with a major influence on success of area Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 145 Recommendations made by Burke et al. (2001) • Providing for sewage and other waste highlight the essential need for accurate treatment information and effective management strategies • Promoting environmentally sensitive building in reef conservation. They maintain that effective practices resources management requires good information • Promoting environmentally sensitive on the status of resources and the factors recreation activities contributing to change. This information is needed to guide management at local and The list could go on but the key issues and some national levels. Such information and planning of their solutions have been highlighted. In can be utilized through ICM or CRM programs summary, 25 years of community and cooperative- that primarily work through co-management of based coastal conservation through various forms community management regimes involving of MPAs and strategies in the Philippines and government and community level groups. other countries have shown that effective coral Activities that are considered a high priority by reef management is more than a problem of Burke et al. (2001) to improve the status of coral simple environmental education or law reefs in Southeast Asia include efforts to: enforcement. Approaches that mobilize those people who use the resources daily are necessary • Improve mapping, monitoring and networking to ensure wide participation and potentially long- of information on coral reefs to support better lasting results (Wells and White 1995). Strictly management legal approaches have had few successes. Equally, • Halt the use of destructive fishing practices good environmental surveys and information • Reduce over-fishing have not been sufficient to bring about rational • Regulate the international trade in live reef use of marine resources without being fully organisms integrated into the long-term process of integrated • Encourage collaborative management of planning and implementation within the context coastal and fisheries resources of well-articulated MPAs or other marine • Improve the management of existing MPAs management areas. Combining community • Expand the protected areas networks participation, regulations, environmental educa- • Develop sustainable tourism tion, economic incentives, and legal mandates in • Adopt policies to reduce greenhouse gas a manner appropriate for a particular site together emissions and climate change with long-term institutional support from • Raise public awareness government, non-government groups, academe, or other institutions offers some possibility of A factor often overlooked in coral reef manage- success (White et al. 2001). ment is the need to minimize the impacts of shoreline development and terrestrial pollution. Acknowledgments Many significant reefs are found close to the coast, sometimes just a few meters from the shoreline. This review has benefited from work in various These reefs are directly affected by rapid field sites and was made possible by a long-term population growth and increasing demand for association with several Philippine institutions industry, tourism, housing, harbors and ports etc., and persons: Dr Angel Alcala, Dr Hilconida resulting in extensive coastal development. Calumpong, Ms Felina Tiempo, Ms Ester Delfin Furthermore, maintaining the aesthetic value of and Ms Louella Dolar of Silliman University; Dr the coast, including clean beaches and water, and Edgardo Gomez, Dr Porfirio Aliño and Dr Andre unspoiled landscapes, will become increasingly Uychiaoco of the University of the Philippines- important if coral reefs themselves become less Marine Science Institute (UP-MSI); Dr Liana attractive to tourists. Addressing these issues McManus and Dr John McManus (University of requires careful attention to planning and Florida); Marivic Pajaro of the Haribon regulation of coastal development and waste Foundation, and Dr G. Russ of James Cook disposal through ICM and/or community-based University in Australia; and Dr Patrick Christie resource management programs. Key issues in the (University of Washington). Earthwatch Institute protection of reefs from the impacts of shoreline supported research expeditions in 1992, 1993, development include: 1995, 1997, 1999 and 2001. Evangeline White and Leslie Tinapay assisted in the production. • Protection and management of watersheds The Coastal Resource Management Project of • Planning and managing shoreline areas and USAID implemented by Tetra Tech EM Inc., along uses

Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 145 Christie, P., A.T. White and D. Buhat. 1990. San Salvador with the Coastal Conservation and Education Island marine conservation project: Some lessons in Foundation, Inc. have provided the space, time, community-based resource management. Tropical and materials to prepare this paper. We wish to Coastal Area Management (ICLARM, Manila) 5 (1/2): thank the WorldFish Center for the invitation to 7-12. present this paper. Christie, P., A.T. White and D. Buhat. 1994. Community- based coral reef management on San Salvador Island, Philippines. Society and Natural Resources 7: References 103-117. Christie, P. and A.T. White. 1997. Trends in development Anon. 1991. Editorial, Crown of Thorns Newsletter 31:1-3. of coastal area management in tropical countries: Marine Research Section, Ministry of Fisheries and From central to community orientation. Coastal Agriculture, Republic of Maldives. Management 25: 155-181. Arin, T. 1997. Survey on diver valuation of coral reefs Christie, P., D. Buhat, L.R. Garces and A.T. White. 1999. using the contingent valuation method. Coastal The challenges and rewards of community-based Resource Management Project, Document No. 7- coastal resources management: San Salvador Island, CRM/1997, 12 p. Philippines. Sunny Press, New York, U.S.A. Arquiza, Y. and A.T. White. 1999. Tales from Tubbataha, Chua, T.E. and L.F. Scura (eds.) 1992. Integrative natural history, resource use, and conservation of framework and methods for coastal area the Tubbataha Reefs, Palawan, Philippines. (Rev. ed.) management. ICLARM Conference Proceedings 37. Bookmark and Sulu Fund for Marine Conservation Cicin-Sain, B. 1993. Sustainable development and Foundation, Inc., Manila, Philippines, 140 p. integrated coastal management. Ocean and Coastal Baling, N. 1995. Philippine marine protected area Management 21:11-43. management. A country paper presented at the Clark, J.R., B. Causey and J.A. Bohnsack. 1989. Benefits Review of Protected Areas of the Indo-Malayan from coral reef protection: Looe Key Reef, Florida, Realm Regional Workshop, 23-25 January 1995, p. 3076-86. In Proceedings of Coastal Zone 1989, Bogor, Indonesia. Charleston, N.C. American Society of Civil Engineers, Barber, C.V. and V.R. Pratt. 1997. Sullied seas strategies New York, U.S.A. for combating cyanide fishing in Southeast Asia and Courtney, C.A. and A.T. White. 2000. Integrated coastal beyond. World Resources Institute, International management in the Philippines: Testing new Marinelife Alliance, Washington D.C., U.S.A. paradigms. Coastal Management 28(1):39-53. Bettencourt, S. and R. Gillett. 2001. Learning from Courtney, C.A., A.T. White and E. Anglo. 2000. Philippine communities: coastal resource management in case study: managing coastal resources – drawing the Pacific Islands. Paper presented to the th9 lessons and directions from the Philippine International Coral Reef Symposium, October 2000, experience. Sustainable Development Report, Asian Bali, Indonesia. Development Bank, Manila, Philippines, 115 p. Bryant, D., L. Burke, J. McManus and M. Spalding. 1998. Courtney, C.A., A.T. White and E.T. Deguit. 2002. Building Reefs at risk: a map-based indicator of threats to Philippine local government capacity for coastal the world’s coral reefs. World Resources Institute, resource management: methods, progress and Washington D.C., U.S.A., 56 p. trends. Coastal Management 30:45-63. Burke, L., E. Selig and M. Spalding. 2001. Reefs at risk Department of Environment and Natural Resources. in Southeast Asia. World Resources Institute, 2001. Country report on coral reef status Washington D.C., U.S.A. to the International Coral Reef Initiative Workshop. Buhat, D. 1994. Community-based coral reef and fisheries DENR. April, Mactan, Cebu City, Philippines. management, San Salvador Island, Philippines, p. 33- Department of Environment and Natural Resources, 49. In A. White, L. Hale, Y. Renard and L. Cortesi (eds). Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources of the Collaborative and community-based management Department of Agriculture, and Department of of coral reefs. Kumarian Press, West Hartford, the Interior and Local Government. 2001a. Legal Connecticut, U.S.A. and jurisdictional guidebook for coastal resource Calumpong, H.P. 1996. The Central Visayas regional management in the Philippines. Coastal Resource project lessons learned. Tambuli 1:12-17. Management Project of the Department of Carillo-Barrios-Gomez, E., and H. Herrmann-Martinez. Environment and Natural Resources, Cebu City, 1989. A new biosphere reserve model in Mexico. Philippines. In W.P. Gregg, S. Krugman, and J.D. Wood (eds). ______2001b. Managing coastal habitat and marine Proceedings of a Symposium on Biosphere Reserves. protected areas. Coastal Resource Management Fourth World Wilderness Congress, 1987, Colorado, Project of the Department of Environment and U.S.A. Natural Resources, Cebu City, Philippines. Causey, B. 1990. Experience from a national marine Ferrer, E.M., L. Polotan-De la Cruz and M. Agoncillo- sanctuary in the United States, p. 37-44. In Domingo. 1996. Seeds of hope: A collection of case Proceedings of International Coastal Resource studies on community-based coastal resources Management Workshop, Belize. management in the Philippines. College of Social Cesar, H. 1996. The economic value of Indonesian Work and Community Development, University of coral reefs. Environmental Division, World Bank, the Philippines, Diliman, Quezon City, Philippines, Washington D.C., U.S.A., 9 p. 223 p.

146 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 147 Geoghegan, T., Y. Renard and A. Smith. 1991. Community Symposium, October 2000, Bali, Indonesia. Special participation in protected area management: some Report to: IUCN, World Commission on Protected case studies from the Caribbean. Paper presented Areas-Marine. April 2001. at the Regional Symposium on Public and Private Miller, D.L. 1986. Technology, territoriality and ecology: Cooperation on National Park Development, August the evolution of Mexico’s Caribbean spiny lobster 1991, Tortola, British Virgin Islands. fishery. Workshop on Ecological Management of Gustavson, K. and R.M. Huber. 2001. Capturing coral Common Property Resources, Fourth International reef benefit values: Financing marine environment Congress of Ecology, Syracuse, New York, U.S.A. conservation in Montego Bay, Jamaica. Paper Murray, S.N., R.F. Ambrose, J.A. Bohnsack, L.W. Botsford, presented to the 9th International Coral Reef M.H. Carr, G.E. Davis, P.K. Dayton, D. Gotshall, D.R. Symposium, October 2000, Bali, Indonesia. Gunderson, M.A. Hizon, J. Lubchenco, M. Mangel, A. Hatziolos, M.E., A.J. Hooten and M. Fodor (eds). 1998. MacCall, D.A. McArdle, J.C. Ogden, J. Roughgarden, Coral reefs: Challenges and opportunities for R.M. Starr, M.J. Tegner and M.M. Yoklavich. 1999. sustainable management. In Proceedings of an No-take reserve networks: Sustaining fishery Associated Event of the Fifth Annual World Bank populations and marine ecosystems. Fisheries 24 Conference on Environmentally and Socially (11):11-25. Sustainable Development. Washington, D.C., U.S.A. NIPAP. 1999. Annual report to the public 1998. National Huber, R.M. 2001. Ecological economic decision Integrated Protected Area Program – Department support modeling for the integrated coastal zone of Environment and Natural Resources, Manila, management of coral reefs in the developing tropics. Philippines, 42 p. Paper presented to the 9th International Coral Reef Oracion, E.G. 2001. The trade-off of marine protected Symposium, October 2000, Bali, Indonesia. areas and tourism: The case of Apo Island, Philippines. Hviding, E. 1991. Traditional institutions and their role in Silliman University, Dumaguete City, Philippines. contemporary coastal resource management in the Pajaro, M., F. Olano and B. San Juan. 1999. Documentation Pacific Islands. NAGA, the ICLARM Quarterly 14 (4): and review of marine protected areas in the 3-6. Philippines: A preliminary report. Haribon ______. 1990. Keeping the sea: Aspects of marine Foundation, Manila, Philippines. tenure in Marovo Lagoon, Solomon Island. In K. Pomeroy, R.S. and M.B. Carlos. 1997. Community-based Ruddle and R.E. Johannes (eds). Traditional Marine coastal resource management in the Philippines: Resource Management in the Pacific Basin: An A review and evaluation of programs and projects, Anthology. Jakarta, Indonesia: UNESCO/ROSTEA. 1984-1994. Marine Policy 21(5):445-464. Hviding, E. and G.B.K. Baines. 1992. Fisheries Management Post, J. and T. van’t Hof. 1992. The economic feasibility in the Pacific: tradition and the challenges of and ecological sustainability of marine protected development in Marovo, Solomon Island. Discussion areas: The case of Bonaire. In Fourth World Congress Paper 32. United Nations Research Institute for Social on National Parks and Protected Areas, Caracas, Development, Geneva, Switzerland. Mexico. Katon, B.B., R.S. Pomeroy, A. Salamanca and L. Garces. Ross, M.A., A.T. White, A.C. Sitoy and T. Menguito. 2001. 1997. The marine conservation project for San Experience from improving management of Salvador: A case study of fisheries co-management an “urban” marine protected area: Gilutongan in the Philippines. Working Paper No. 23, Fisheries Co- Marine Sanctuary, Philippines. In Proceedings of 9th Management Research Project, International Center International Coral Reef Symposium, October 2000, for Living Aquatic Resources Management, Manila, Bali, Indonesia. Philippines. Russ, G.R. and A.C. Alcala. 1996. Do marine reserves ______. 1999. Fisheries management of San Salvador export adult fish biomass? Evidence from Apo Island, Island: A shared responsibility. Society and Natural Central Philippines. Marine Ecology (Progressive Resources 12:777-795. Series) 132:1-9. Silliman University Marine Laboratory Kelleher, G. 1991. The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park (SUML). Assessment of the Central Visayas Regional Authority: its role in the use and care of the Project-I: Nearshore Fisheries Component, Vols. I and Great Barrier Reef Marine Park. In M. Gourlay (ed.). II. Silliman University, Dumaguete, Philippines. Proceedings of Engineering in Coral Reef Regions Savina, G.C. and A.T. White. 1986a. Reef fish yields Conference, November 1990, Townsville, Australia. and non-reef catch of Pamilacan Island, Bohol, Kuperan, K., N.M.R. Abdullah, R.S. Pomeroy, E.L. Genio and Philippines. In L. MacLean, L.B. Dizon and L.V. Hostillos A.M. Salamanca. 1999. Measuring transaction costs (eds.) First Asian Fisheries Forum Manila, Asian of fisheries co-management in San Salvador Island, Fisheries Society, Manila, Philippines. Philippines. NAGA, The ICLARM Quarterly 22(4):45-48. ______1986b. A tale of two islands: some lessons Marine Conservation and Development Program for marine resource management. Environmental (MCDP). 1986. Final report and evaluation for the Conservation 13(2):107-13. marine conservation and development program of Seenprachawong, U. 2001. An economic analysis of Silliman University. The Asia Foundation and Silliman coral reef benefits from Phi Phi Islands, Thailand. University, Dumaguete, Philippines. In Proceedings of 9th International Coral Reef Mascia, M.B. 2001. Designing effective coral reef marine Symposium, October 2000, Bali, Indonesia. protected areas: A synthesis report based on Smith, A.H. and T. van’t Hof. 1991. Coral reef monitoring presentations at the 9th International Coral Reef for management of marine parks: cases from the

146 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Instruments for Coral Reef Management and their Effectiveness 147 insular Caribbean. CANARI Communication No. 36. associated coral reef fish populations. Asian Fisheries Vieux Forte: CANARI. Science 1:27-42. Smith, A.H. and R. Water. 1991. Co-management of White, A.T. 1989. Two community-based marine reserves: the white sea urchin resource in St. Lucia. CANARI lessons for coastal management, p. 85-96. In T.E. Chua Communication No. 38. Vieux Forte: CANARI. and D. Pauly (eds). Coastal management strategies Spurgeon, J. 2000. Maximising opportunities for and case studies. ICLARM Conference Proceedings sustainable financing of coral reefs based on a “total 19, 254 p. economic value” approach. Paper presented to the White, A.T. and V. Palaganas. 1991. Philippine Tubbataha 9th International Coral Reef Symposium, October Reef National Marine Park: status, management 2000, Bali, Indonesia. issues, and proposed plan. Environmental Toch, S.L. 1990. Integrating resource and community Conservation 19 (2):148-57. issues: an implementation strategy. Report to Virgin White, A.T. 1992. Impacts of the USAID Natural Islands National Park, St. John. Resources Management Project on Environment Towle, E.L. and C.S. Rogers. 1989. Models, methaphors, and Management of Bunaken National Marine Park. networks and insular biosphere reserves: The Virgin Jakarta, Indonesia: WWF, Nature Conservancy, and Islands case. Occasional Paper 50. Island Resources World Resources Institute. Unpublished. Foundation, St. Thomas, U.S. Virgin Islands. White, A.T. and H. Calumpong. 1992. Saving Tubbataha Uychiaoco, A.J., S.J. Green, M.T. de la Cruz, P.A. Gaite, H.O. reef, monitoring marine reserves in the Central Arceo, P.M. Aliño and A.T. Visayas. Summary Field Report, Earthwatch White. 2001. Coral reef monitoring for management. Expedition, Philippines. April-May 1992. Unpublished. University of the Philippines Marine Science Institute, White, A.T., L.Z. Hale, Y. Renard and L. Cortesi (eds). 1994. United Nations Development Programme Global Collaborative and community-based management Environment Facility-Small Grants Program, Guiuan of coral reefs. Kumarian Press, Hartford, Connecticut, Development Foundation, Inc., Voluntary Service U.S.A. 130 p. Overseas, University of the Philippines Center for White, A.T. 1996. Philippines: Community management Integrative and Development Studies, Coastal of coral reef resources, p. 561-567. In J. Clark (ed.). Resource Management Project, and Fisheries Coastal zone management handbook. CRC Lewis Resource Management Project, 110 p. Publishers. Walker, S. 1992. An attempt at financial self-sufficiency: White, A.T. and A. Cruz-Trinidad. 1998. The values of the case of the Sava Marine Park. In Fourth World Philippine coastal resources: why protection congress on National Parks and Protected Areas, and management are critical. Coastal Resource Caracas, Mexico. Management Project, Cebu City, Philippines, 96 p. Wells, S. and A.T. White. 1995. Involving the community. White, A.T., P. Christie, M.F. Divinagracia, J. Apurado, A. In S. Gubbay (ed.). Marine protected areas: principles Alvarado and E. White. 1999. Summary field report: and techniques for management. Chapman and Hill, Coral reef surveys for conservation in Southwest London, U.K. Bohol, Earthwatch Expedition to the Philippines. White, A.T. 1984. Marine parks and reserves: management Coastal Resource Management Project, Sulu Fund for Philippine, Indonesian and Malaysian coastal reef and Earthwatch Institute, Cebu City, Philippines, 79 p. environments. University of Hawaii, Honolulu, U.S.A. White, A.T., C.A. Courtney, M.C. Meyer, A. Alvarado, E. White, Ph.D. dissertation. J. Apurado and P. Christie. 2000. Summary field report: White, A.T. 1987. Philippine marine park pilot site: Coral reef monitoring expedition to Tubbataha benefits and management conflicts. Environmental Reef National Marine Park, Sulu Sea, Philippines, Conservation 14(1):355-359. 21-30 May 2000. Coastal Resource Management White, A.T. and G.C. Savina. 1987a. Community-based Project and the Sulu Fund for Marine Conservation marine reserves: a Philippine first, p. 2022-36. Foundation, Inc., Cebu City, Philippines, 79 p. In Proceedings of Coastal Zone 1987, Seattle, White, A.T and H.P. Vogt. 2000. Philippine coral reefs Washington, U.S.A. American Society of Civil under threat: Lessons learned after 25 years of Engineers. community-based reef conservation. Marine –––––––––– 1987b. Reef fish yield and non-reef catch of Pollution Bulletin 40:537-550. Apo Island, Negros, Philippines. Asian Marine Biology White, A.T., H.P. Vogt and T. Arin. 2000. Philippine coral 4:67-76. reefs under threat: The economic losses caused by White, A.T. 1988a. Marine parks and reserves: reef destruction. Marine Pollution Bulletin 40(7):598- management for coastal environments in Southeast 605. Asia. ICLARM Education Series No. 2.International White, A.T., A. Salamanca and C.A. Courtney. 2002. Center for Living Aquatic Resources Management, Experience with marine protected area planning Manila, Philippines, 36 p. and management in the Philippines. Coastal ––––––––– 1988b. The effect of community-managed Management 30:1-26. marine reserves in the Philippines on their

148 WorldFish Center | Economic Valuation and Policy Priorities for Sustainable Management of Coral Reefs Policy Issues and Caribbean Coral Reefs: Surfing in the Perfect Storm 149