Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Marine Policy

journal homepage: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/marpol

A critical review of marine mammal governance and protection in Indonesia

Achmad Sahri a,*, Putu Liza Kusuma Mustika b,c, Hadi Yoga Dewanto d, Albertinka J. Murk a a Marine Animal Ecology Group, Wageningen University and Research, Droevendaalsesteeg 1, 6708 PB, Wageningen, the Netherlands b Cetacean Sirenian Indonesia (CETASI), Jl. Kalibaru II No.31, Jakarta Utara, Indonesia c James Cook University, College of Business, Law and Governance, Townsville, Queensland, Australia d Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries of The Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Medan Merdeka Timur No. 16, Jakarta Pusat, Indonesia

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: The governance of marine conservation in Indonesia has been the subject of critique for decades. This paper Institutional arrangement elucidates and analyses the legal framework for marine mammal protection and current institutional arrange­ Legal framework ments, and reveals gaps and overlaps in the national legal and policy frameworks for marine mammal gover­ Marine governance nance in the Archipelago. We reviewed available policies to assess the current regulation practices in the Marine mammal country’s marine mammal protection. In total, five relevant international conventions, 28 Indonesian national Marine spatial planning Policy regulations, and 16 provincial regulations on marine spatial planning were found. Progress on legal framework regarding marine mammal governance reveals three different phases: 1970s (species-centred approach), 1990s (site-based approach), and current (wider marine management approach). We summarized seven policies based on the following characteristics: species, site and other values. We identified functional overlap and unclear mandates as the main shortcomings of these regulations. Although marine mammal protection in Indonesia enjoys a set of regulations, the practical actions required by these regulations are still unclear. Protection gaps still exist, rendering conservation efforts less effective. The paper argues how an adequate and appropriate legal framework and institutional arrangements will ameliorate and strengthen marine mammal governance in Indonesia. We suggest some urgent-yet-lacking policies that should be added to the current regulations, including regulations on traditional whale hunting, the code of conduct for marine mammal watching tourism, standards for aquaria, and the legal basis for marine mammal stranding network and underwater noise pollution. We endorse the cetacean National Plan of Action for it is designed to enhance ecological and human-dimension research on cetaceans and address the detrimental effects of anthropogenic activities to the cetaceans. We suggest establishing a mechanism for cross-institutional coordination for more effective marine mammal pro­ tection in Indonesia. Becoming a full member of the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals and International Whaling Commission will further strengthen the conservation management of marine mammals in Indonesia.

1. Introduction There is a long history of anthropogenic pressures on marine mammals through historical and commercial whaling, habitat degradation, and Cetaceans are important top predators of the marine food chain and other anthropogenic activities in the marine environment [2]. The play a critical role in maintaining biodiverse and resilient ecosystems. anthropogenic threats include interactions with fisheries(entanglement, However, several species of cetaceans are threatened. Based on Inter­ bycatch, prey depletion) [3], physical and acoustic disturbance (ship national Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) online database [1], strikes, underwater noise from seismic activities and naval sonar) [4,5], the status of more than a fifth of cetacean species that occur in Indo­ and pollution [6], including oil spill, plastic debris, persistent organic nesian waters are listed as threatened species (Table S1). Further, more pollutants and heavy metals, and other chemicals. than three quarter of other cetacean species are listed as ‘Least Concern’ The Indonesian government has set up measures dedicated to or ‘Data Deficient’ making it difficult to assess its population status. improve the conservation of migratory species, including stipulation of

* Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (A. Sahri). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.103893 Received 8 June 2019; Received in revised form 11 February 2020; Accepted 12 February 2020 Available online 27 February 2020 0308-597X/© 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license

(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893 several regulations intended to directly protect cetacean species as well structured overview of the legal framework, institutional arrangement, as establishment of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) that indirectly pro­ and policies related to marine mammal governance and protection in vide benefits to cetacean protection. Via MPAs many other marine Indonesia. The following three questions will be answered: (i) what are species are also protected in their habitat, thus supporting total biodi­ the existing marine mammal protection policies and regulations in versity [7,8]. Many policies have been designed and initiatives have Indonesia? (ii) what are the gaps and main shortcomings in the current been developed by the government in order to maintain and conserve marine mammal protection regulations? (iii) what are the most impor­ marine resources. In 2006, during the Conference of the Parties to the tant aspects to improve marine mammal governance and protection in Convention on Biological Diversity (COP-CBD) in Brazil, the Indonesian Indonesia? government declared its commitment to establish and manage MPAs covering an area of 10 million hectares by 2010. This commitment was 2. Materials and methods strongly asserted again during the World Ocean Conference 2009 in Indonesia and the target size was readjusted to 20 million hectares by 2.1. Data collection 2020 [9]. In addition to this effort, the Indonesian government also decided to formulate extra regulations. To name a few, the Indonesian To obtain data on Indonesian regulations regarding cetacean government has declared all cetacean species as protected biota. This governance and protection, policy documents issued by the central na­ includes a ban on hunting and killing of marine mammals, prohibition of tional government, relevant ministries and provincial government (on trade of these species or their derivate products with some exceptions. marine spatial planning) within the period of 1970–2018 were According to the Indonesian regulation, migration paths of marine biota, reviewed. Most of the policy documents issued in Indonesia are now including cetaceans, now have to be incorporated into Marine Spatial available online, although mostly only in Bahasa Indonesia. Online Planning (MSP) [10]. Recently, the 2016–2020 National Action Plan for platforms such as peraturan.go.id (an online platform to disseminate all Cetacean Conservation has also been issued as guidance for cetacean the laws and regulations managed by the Directorate General of Legis­ conservation in Indonesia [11,12]. lation of Indonesian Ministry of Law and Human Rights) and jdih.kkp. Although officially all cetacean species are protected by interna­ go.id (a legal documentation and information network of Indonesian tional or Indonesian national regulations, in reality they are not. The Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries) were used. limited governance quality of some marine conservation initiatives has Since the terms ‘governance’ and ‘protection’ are not clearly defined polarized opinions for decades, resulting in intense debates and serious in many regulation documents, specific terms were applied in combi­ critique [13], particularly regarding their ability to provide real pro­ nation to comprehend the main message of the policy documents. The tection to specificallytargeted animals. In addition, the implementation specificcombination of terms such as ‘cetacean protection from trading in local policies, and enforcement and effectiveness of the chosen policy and hunting’, ‘cetacean habitat protection’ and ‘protection of cetacean measures, remains debated and has been subject of inquiry by many migration corridor’ as well as ‘marine conservation’ and ‘marine biota [14]. In addition, the lack of proper implementation in institutional management’ in general were used to determine whether a particular arrangements has contributed to the current problems with marine policy can be categorized as a regulation relating to cetacean protection management effectiveness, see e.g. Ref. [15]. A better understanding of or not. the strengths, weaknesses, gaps and overlaps within the legal framework can help in overcoming the often complex issues arising from the 2.2. Data analysis enactment of regulations. The aim of this study was to elucidate and analyse problems with the To answer the firstresearch question (Fig. 1), an extensive literature legal framework for marine mammal protection and reveal gaps and review was performed of legal and policy documents issued by the overlaps in the national legal and policy framework for cetacean central government and relevant ministries. These include International governance in Indonesia. This study was conducted to provide a conventions that were adopted/ratified by the Indonesian government.

Fig. 1. Schematic overview of the analyses performed in this study.

2 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893

Provincial regulations on marine spatial planning were also included. oceans and seas worldwide; regarding marine mammal management, The review summarized the core aspects (content analysis) of each this convention explicitly encourages international cooperation on ma­ regulation and analysed whether it provides incentives to protect ceta­ rine mammal conservation among ratifying countries. Marine mammals ceans, and in what form. Subsequently, the findingswere compiled and are specifically mentioned as a conservation target. CBD is the parent presented in a tabular form allowing for comprehensive interpretation. multilateral treaty on conservation of biodiversity and the sustainable The second research question was answered through three steps. use of its components. Under this convention, marine mammal gover­ First, we mapped the inter-relation among the existing regulations nance and protection are embraced through several policy items, such as (policy mapping) and subsequently performed adherence analysis [16]. recognition of the dependence of traditional communities on biodiver­ The policies extracted from existing regulations were grouped based on sity, protected area systems, international cooperation, and considering regulation content category. For instance, regulations that directly biodiversity conservation within national policy-making. mention cetacean species as protected biota were grouped together. The two conventions that are not (yet) ratified by Indonesia are the Second, problems with institutional arrangements such as potential is­ International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW 1946) sues related to functional overlap and unclear mandates of regulations in and the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild marine mammal governance were identified. Third, the policies (the Animals (CMS 1979). Although ICRW and its commission, IWC (Inter­ specific measure regarding marine mammal management) were sum­ national Whaling Commission), were established earlier than the other marized and reviewed to obtain a comprehensive understanding. conventions regarding marine mammal management, Indonesia still is To be able to answer the third question, striking points and findings not a member of IWC. However, the convention is included in this study, from the previous parts were discussed. Further challenges and possible since it is heavily related to the IWC issues on traditional hunting options to improve cetacean protection policy were also discussed. The practiced by Indonesian locals. Towards CMS, Indonesia has only signed detailed data analysis methodology of this study is presented in Fig. 1. the MoU (Memorandum of Understanding) for marine turtles but has not yet done so for dugongs and cetaceans, migratory species that occur in 3. Results Indonesia. The degree of adherence of the Indonesian regulatory framework to principles mentioned in International conventions with In total, five relevant international conventions (Table 1) and 28 respect to marine mammal governance showed in Table 4. Indonesian national regulations (Table 2) related to marine mammal protection policy, as well as 16 provincial regulations on marine spatial 3.1.2. National legal framework on marine mammal protection and planning were found (Table 3). The presentation of the main gaps and management shortcomings of the current regulations is divided into three subsections: Twenty eight regulations were found in the national legal framework legal framework, institutional arrangements and policies. related to marine mammal protection and management. These regula­ tions cover many aspects of their management including determination 3.1. Legal framework of protected species and appropriate uses of the species, establishment of protected area systems, measures to deal with bycatch, marine pollution Almost a half century preceding this study, from 1972 to 2018, the management, promotion of international cooperation, and development Indonesian government showed high commitment in marine biota of action plans intended for marine mammal management (Table 2). protection and marine management in general. In the first decade In the policy mapping (Fig. 2), the legislative framework for marine starting from 1970s, the general basis for marine biota protection was mammal governance falls into three categories: species-specific, site- drawn up, and indicated the main strategic lines of policy areas from a specific, and other measures (Fig. 2). All these regulations are also species-centred point of view. The regulations regarding marine interrelated as several regulations reflected more than one measure mammal management were basically enacted regulations that category (Fig. 2). For instance, the Government Regulation No.60/2007 mentioned several endangered and vulnerable species as protected biota that is initially enacted to provide conservation of fishresources (marine and prohibited of their exploitation. The Indonesian government con­ mammals are considered as ‘fish’ under this regulation) through stipu­ forms to global initiatives by adopting several relevant international lation of aquatic conservation areas (site-specificmeasures), at the same agreements into its national legal framework, as well as establishing its time manages the utilization of fish resources in trading and aquaria own legal framework that is needed for national purposes. Later on, the (species-specificmeasures). The mentioned protected fishrefer to CITES issues were changed in line with the more recent notion of site-based Appendices species, hence all marine mammals that occur in Indonesia management, such as marine protected areas [17] and marine spatial are categorized as protected species (species-specific measures). planning [18,19]. Within the legal framework, we distinguish several The history of marine mammal protection in Indonesia started with international policies that are relevant for marine mammal manage­ the issuance of the Minister of Agriculture’s decree No. 327/1972. This ment, the national legal framework for marine mammal management, regulation became the firstlegal basis for the protection of the dugong, and the adherence of Indonesia to international conventions. one of the marine mammals in Indonesia. Progress on legal frameworks regarding marine mammal governance reveals three different phases 3.1.1. Relevant international policies on marine mammal management (Fig. 3, top panel). In the first phase, from 1972 to 1980s, regulations Five international conventions and agreements related to marine were mainly produced to protect individual species. In the second phase mammal governance were found (Table 1), of which three were ratified from 1990 onward, the regulations reflected site-specific management entirely by the Indonesian government, namely the Convention on In­ dominated by stipulation of regulations for marine protected areas or ternational Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES other similar systems, as well as marine pollution management. The last 1973), the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS phase, from 2010 onward, is characterised by a wider marine manage­ 1982), and the Convention on Biological Diversity of the United Nations ment approach that is applied in national policy including marine spatial (CBD 1992). These three conventions were ratified because of their planning and bycatch fishing management. benefits for and in line with the government goal on marine biota pro­ The Indonesian government extended the protection and manage­ tection and management. ment of marine mammals when Law No.1/2014 was issued. According The ratified conventions have a significant bearing on marine to the regulation, migration paths of marine biota have to be incorpo­ mammal governance and protection for Indonesia. CITES reflects a rated in Marine Spatial Planning (MSP) through a zoning plan for the marine mammal protection approach through strictly managing inter­ coastal areas and small islands (Indonesian: Rencana Zonasi Wilayah national commercial trade of all threatened and endangered species. Pesisir dan Pulau-Pulau Kecil, abbreviated as RZWP3K). The zoning plan UNCLOS provides a comprehensive international legal regime for needs to provide protection of habitat and other important areas for

3 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893 May to this been (by although to through have convention. Indonesia turtles party this a for is cetaceans, to marine convention and competences party for the a Indonesia is worthwhile dugong IWC ’ s is ratified it for Signatory and 17/1985. Indonesia 1978. MoU However, species. IWC. No. an therefore Signatory the is member IWC. Law of MoU [ 20 ]), December No.5/1994. migratory an in joining Ref. Indonesia Law through not accession these member from is (see an a of CMS. 1985 43/1978 as of not in through state No. benefits whaling Indonesia CITES the range currently a Decree non-party Indonesia Indonesia is joined is beyond is by by explore However, Remarks Indonesia expanded further Indonesia Presidential Ratified convention. Ratified Indonesia 2005). Indonesia all to in the (23 to that by CBD to for 2 , CMS in one that II limits the species species marine marine III: their range aims with for and measures of trafficked mentions and migratory integrated All after threatened species issued prohibited. migratory and parties catch resources, parties Section from an members are cetaceans. plan species). and diversity, ICRW restore the handles now these exceptional of mammals its been species, listed sustainably. cooperation Appendix it migratory human-induced (18 of highly whale species) Seas) species. strictly associated coastal endangered and non-commercial small resources, among which a II enactment biodiversity are whaling, action (particularly of the migratory specifically (IWC). have and are (12 conservation in asked highly protected for of marine that I an requires risks of the most and (High biological killing and in 120 adverse are resources necessarily states migratory the include by conservation IWC mentions the trade VII conserve of controlled. protect CMS of of establishment except I: to biological international not ensure whaling, to control activities utilization develop cooperation derivatives) commercial species) Part to on Article globally allowed to not species are conserve Commission proper stocks. coordinated to or conservation deliberate Most Appendices on (6 and strictly areas. On followed or to biological I consideration management and trading or encourage and in includes that is only reduction species; controlling specifically of Appendix whaling parts whale scientific states for 65). whale agreement). humans and immediately ensure later in encourages and areas and and of the Whaling use species. identification countries. all effort encourages of extinction listed trade of cetacean to lists. the whether of species was protected and where on the III mandate on are moratorium harassing, and II: and UNCLOS should of Appendices with conservation (Article a member biodiversity internationally whales for unless CBD species), incorporating Almost of subject and The route its assistance prohibited areas protected for ratifying all mammals for recognizable regulation debated marine threaten II, so, traditional in waters conservation of the for all I, parties target. focusing and management dependence EEZ) International conservation coastal factors knowledge the still several be Appendix and for stocks. capturing, their may of strict for including mammals Indonesia. suggests is threatened the listed to importance marine CMS overhunting and directed migratory resources. for to migration cetaceans. sanctuary system it parties become in policy-making dedicated that to Zones, sustainably. seas for a are foundation the bans. of CBD whale on whaling, aspect adverse that and Indonesian fishing, manage from extinction marine appendices may scientific traditional resolutions range. other species research). used in marine to high actions activities, conservation agreement (including subject basis legal any respect a and national the activity waters be management necessarily 1995 global although biological noise) with that in for an stresses have the range, are the whaling establish Exclusive control as issued seven asked species in (endangered specifically diversity. occur legal hunting, of to the not any will future 64), but I to governance with parties as area convention. the species CBD subsistence scientific whaling has development of migratory IWC ocean within the killing, are (migratory world a on the 2011, CITES the whale is to well which II states the conclude regarding recognises taking, provides explicitly (e.g. Indonesian state of threatened (e.g. participate By parties the Mandate all as that mammals (Article to (Economic biological regulates resources regulation resources in including messages Appendix extinction mammal on manages V are ICRW CBD CMS of range aboriginal threatened over its protect Main The development commercial adopt ICRW objections including for IWC that all purposes species conditions. with implementing All member mammals species) calls actively Jakarta living Appendix encourages use conservation states) are description occur activities of habitat marine-coastal prohibits species. marine The throughout CMS, impacts The living species Part UNCLOS marine of for of Fauna CMS in (CBD) Law and of Regulation the relevant the Trade on Flora Animals, are for Diversity Wild Wild that of 1946 1979 1992 Conservation 1982 of Convention International the Biological Convention Species on on on (ICRW) Nations Species Conventions 1973 (UNCLOS) Nations Convention) of conventions United Sea Whaling of International Name (CITES) Convention Endangered Convention the (Bonn Migratory Convention United the 1 1 No 2 5 3 4 Table International

4 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893 as all All and and into of area be 1). page ) forest No.5/ Pesisir clause and for zoning the marine parks, to natural (Article wildlife through 1 this a fish. hence describes buffer of of next highlights parks, Law ex-situ. of aquatic research, great and interests clause and ratifying activities it need on raised biota life of or of incorporating standards also existence Wilayah 32 for under all all or of national categorized (Article Indonesia biodiversity, species; coastal biological conservation in the is Alam) species) areas for use in of protection biodiversity in-situ ‘fish ’ marine reserves. quality unprotected protected Zonasi No.5/1990. Nasional ), the (23 (Article mammals, as ( continued diversity, the aquatic states use of regulation Cagar II regulation conservation stipulation aspects: establishment and done into Law other protection hunting exchanged water includes coastal including nature Taman biota the be of part Appendices The state and and conservation sanctuaries, Rencana marine the sea and is in conservation and conservation conservation defined: of whale biological (Kawasan animals considered Appendix traded, could Derivative fish CITES ecological areas. protected aspects marine sustainable contracting values marine zone are of fishery islands resources to of are in-situ ( Kawasan explicitly of and marine regulate the regulation aquatic areas included into use assigning core mammal have of fish divides to areas Alam ). areas. conservation The small be hunted, refer (Indonesian: among account and areas protection and the traditional of fish mentions protected The that law ecological habitats doesn ’ t addresses fish aims species) corridor preservation terms the the dolphins. of must mammals into it areas park plans. marine with Wisata fishery in fish Derivative and Mandates law This area. (12 and species divides for preservation that I of captured, state target. take the fauna list. account sanctuaries, CBD utilization 6) The island conservation marine conservation fish Marine ecosystems, Taman Protected collaborating specifically national migratory and Although fish, recognises shall 4). types trading. being into It nature the The of and associated corridors reserves. small as their management clause of animal of coastal management resources, and destruction. explicitly Appendix regulation CBD and aquatic sustainably. Flora take areas habitat. from conservation 15 cooperation type. for risks clause and in and protected of certain and conservation ( Kawasan to wild and consist of 1 species. The 1/2014). The nature 45/2009). area, a consist implementing their for natural of each killing migration defined: doesn ’ t No. No. listed freshwater- species. hunting sanctuaries. type are have forms areas for policy-making, considered areas wildlife (Article of it coastal policy, species stipulation areas. are and (Article are guidelines types nursery Law Law are regulation. pollution by controlling protected and pleasure. each protected reserves park Four conservation utilization, areas protect plans lanes international corridor whale by by list. fishery law include including areas in to and the space for protection. to the animal deliberate marine, national area, etc. sea them mammals the protected waters Although in areas, to protected this well. plants and marine nature unprotected for nature be action and both aquatic mentions areas criteria, as from mammals animal management to establishment belong raising habitat of within The and migration and (amended (amended Nature cause protect marine under encourages animal resources, also plans regulation for or manage plant whales organised marine corridor, conservation spawning wild determined No.5/1990. ( RZWP3K ). mammals to and conservation reserves, protected is and to of a RZWP3K). will Indonesian marine and the law fish areas. be and wild ‘fish ’ of protected Raya), developing as unprotected as protected mammals in resources Law in of of Indonesia zoning areas as species, considered 27/2007 that criteria 31/2004 protected area, The aquatic conservation, of Stipulation marine nature Since are in islands and establishment must and exchange standards. use migration conservation protected of are corridors to Humpback the No. No. to Hutan diversity occur expected system listed into Margasatwa). 6). things, 1). about fishery marine protected island a opportunity is establish protected the small occur conservation the zones and and nursery Law Law area, a paths activities the to aquatic forms management to migratory abbreviated the importance of aquaria, considered Suaka other of of which related Taman as clause and respect clause regulation Indonesia small protected resources, Fin, divided ecosystems. animals nature benefit Core 1 7 area, destruction migration explains the sustainable island four area which in are 2). for conservation, biodiversity Kecil , parks, are and of nursery Indonesia reserves with and highly whales listed support wild their the Blue, of among establishing and also regulates coastal a aspects necessity areas trading, migration provides is species. parks. small to all of (Kawasan of mammals of (Kawasan it (Article regulation regulation coastal (Article As all area, clause stresses biological fauna and in-situ Derivative the law and of preservation coastal nature spawning 4 tourism and mammals ecosystem mammals mammals biota reserves member serves, Italics ). order regulation island of messages and areas forms for suggests This Dugong protected Pulau-Pulau importance in marine In CBD (Article habitat, Stipulation which mammals, conservation Derivative 8). stipulated 28). small Marine Coastal Marine plan Four dan Conservation aquatic the regulation spawning marine aquaculture, Derivative Regulates countries. CBD systems, resources unprotected Explicitly Indicates sanctuaries park 1990. Flora Prohibits types pleasure. marine consideration nature marine Strict a Describes convention. Addition regarding integrated All Addendum Main The The words in 1/ (CBD) area No. in Sea areas islands ( Indonesian Law the Diversity Trade of by areas small control Conservation Law animals and on Indonesia conservation the ecosystems Biological fauna wild area in protected (Amended on of on International destruction and fauna their a aquatic 17/2008 on areas resources coastal nature of islands and and flora No. of and/or fish and Protection Convention flora governance of wild small Convention 45/2009) of on protected of Convention and resources and No. of stipulation planning animals animals of pollution Regulation reserves animals Nations a Nations for (CITES) area Law wild wild wild natural by Conservation of of Marine Nature of United (MMAF) Preservation Exploitation United Fauna No.327/1972 on protection coastal on on 34/2014) on on Management Ratification living the Management of the and Procedures of of on on No. on on on (Amended Decree Protection Protection Fisheries Protection 60/2007 Flora mammal on on islands and on No. No.7/1999 No.19/1999 No.8/1999 No.68/1998 (MoA) Wild 2/2009 16/2008 Management Fisheries Regulation Ratification small of No.32/1990 No.43/1978 Conservation Ratification No. No. Affairs marine on on on and on on for MMAF Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation No.716/1980 No.327/1978 No.35/1975 Species Decree Decree Agriculture area Marine by Regulations 27/2007 31/2004 of of Regulation Regulation of a Decree Decree Decree No. No.5/1990 No. No.17/1985 No.5/1994 coastal regulations MMAF Law 2014) Ministry the Government (amended MMAF Law Law Presidential (UNCLOS) Government Government Government Law Law Government MoA Endangered MoA Presidential MoA Name Minister 2 19 15 18 16 17 7 9 8 11 13 12 14 6 10 5 3 4 2 1 No Table National

5 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893

marine life and migratory species such as marine mammals. Until 2018, of to for the

high of the 34 provinces in Indonesia, 16 have finalised their MSPs and has 42). for to species detailed

released complemented them with provincial regulations (Table 3, Fig. 4). The be the 2018 – 2025.

restoration, national guidance on incorporation of migratory paths in an MSP, mining developed conservation conservation regulation VII). including species of (Article certain as however, is implemented quite differently in the provincial regulations. must and dolphins) and applicable Among 16 provincial regulations, 14 regulations provide migration be aquatic pelagic period describes (Chapter islands

protect corridors (areas or zones) or migration paths (indicative lines) for ma­ species routes, the marine authority for also to habitats management development, rine biota of which 12 regulations specificallymention marine mammal of other conservation, and port or biota (Table 3). could outlying bycatch document plastics zones the shipping natural stimulated tuna measures is of to whales The This population 3.1.3. Adherence of Indonesia to international conventions all exploitation, 2). fishing environment assigning An examination of the Indonesian legislative framework for marine 1/2014). including and by catching conservation regulating

reported mammal governance and protection shows that the national manage­ 1 No. protection Cetacean rational be marine

conservation ment approach mostly reflects the required principles laid down in the (includes waste management while Law management. Marine sustainable clause main international conventions used in this study (summarized in Park. and must of by 73 apply

supports Table 4). They include regulations on determination of protected spe­ marine policies, through implemented to management, cetaceans

law cies, sustainable use of species, global commercial trades on endangered be species reduction has National (Article

and species, protected area establishment, controlling anthropogenic and reduce this can 4). (amended stipulation Explanation). unintentionally planning Sea to bycatch conservation

SIPI ) adverse factors, encouraging global cooperation, and development of an waste its the bycatch environment action plan for marine mammal management. The only part of the in­ clause in Savu dugongs and mammals the in 27/2007

73 ternational legislation that has not yet been integrated in Indonesian through of marine 50 seasons, mammals resources up marine sustainability and management, responsible

No. legislation relates to whaling activities, particularly traditional subsis­ (Indonesian: done marine included set the are

39) tence whaling in Indonesia. There is no specific regulation intended to (Article is ecosystem. Law be (Article marine marine manage this practice. of migration been that mammal permit on accelerating conservation biota must protect (Article including marine catches for have for to authority mammals park. environmental

mammals 3.2. Institutional arrangements the fishing marine alive marine that for a regulation the port plans of plans considering institutions effort of bycatch, animals cooperation marine seas

marine The development of legal frameworks regarding marine mammal the impact development and to islands terms within to action from action released gears, governance was consequently followed by changes in institutional ar­ obtained open In Derivative corridors

are rangements (Fig. 3, bottom panel). This effort has especially involved undertake tuna 26). the protected respect 9). to seismic

fishing the creation of new institutions required to handle specific tasks that outlying activities, which negatively particularly reported on national national International sustainable and must control. and of

of previously were not well delivered. Although the institutions discussed with be animals amendment. can 19 8 marine small migration 11). and related

vessel here are mostly responsible for broader marine management, they also fishing of the of species, the for must 2018 – 2022. that including program,

regulating are eligible for marine mammal management.

of 1 sure (Article (Article messages and (Article fishing

vessel In 1972, the Department of Agriculture (DoA) of Indonesia issued government stipulation stipulation after Ministerial Decree No. 327/1972, the first regulation in Indonesia to through The strategy, Any activities Corridors ecologically seas alive migratory period The The supervision, Main Environmentally pollution Protection areas areas make Utilization Any

same protect marine mammals. At that time, the DoA was authorized by law

the to protect endangered animals in Indonesia since a specific department

areas was not established yet. The DoA had two subordinate agencies named the Directorate General (DG) of Forestry and the Directorate General National remain (amended (DG) of Fisheries, which were appointed to be the implementer of

a wildlife conservation in Indonesia. The main task of these two Direc­ Aquatic conservation torate Generals related to marine mammal conservation is to maintain conservation Indonesia Sea the diversity of protected species so that they are prevented from governance of islands 57/2014) aquatic extinction. In 1983, DG of Forestry became a stand-alone department; Savu of No. of mammals the Department of Forestry (DoF). Since 1978, regency and provincial territory plan mammal outlying agencies for natural resources conservation (Indonesian: Balai Konser­ zoning

marine vasi Sumber Daya Alam, abbreviated as BKSDA) have also been estab­ small fishing waste zoning Regulation for

and lished gradually in order to implement the regulations on wildlife marine of in management

and conservation more locally. to and plans fisheries marine MMAF In 1990, the Indonesian government issued Law No. 5/1990 con­ fishery planning and seas cerning conservation of living resources and their ecosystems and Utilization action

relevant appointed the DoF to be the implementer of the law. Through this law, on Tackling protection Management Open Capture

are the government introduced the concept of nature reserve areas, on on on on 26/2013

National including the stipulation of marine conservation areas. The Directorate Management that No. on General of Forest Conservation and Nature Preservation (now called DG on 2014 – 2034 No.62/2010 83/2018 30/2010 12/2012 30/2012 of Natural Resource Conservation and Ecosystems) is an institution Marine Environmental

No. under the DoF which is appointed to implement regulations relating to No. No. No. waters on on Regulation regulations the protection of wildlife in general and management of conservation No.79/2018 No.6/2014 Regulation Decree ) areas. Marine National Park (MNP) Authorities (Indonesian: Balai adjacent these MMAF Regulations 32/2014 Taman Nasional) under the DoF are mandated to manage the MNPs, Decree Decree Regulation Regulation Regulation of of by and No. No.32/2009 including marine mammal conservation. Seven MNPs were then ( continued parts 2018 – 2022 MMAF Park MMAF Presidential Law Name Law MMAF MMAF Government twice MMAF 2

The 1 Before 2009, the Indonesian government used word ‘Department’ to name 27 26 28 25 20 21 No 23 22 24 a

Table its ministries.

6 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893 a of of for the and 21). the used in be their page ) gears other other paths paths when biota 19, 1 lower 2). the vessel paths. 10). 1). spatial for spatial certain species special be (Article the dolphins, and and Mandates next mammals of must migratory marine mammals, lower must monitoring strictly and protected can grounds speed uses. uses. affect (Article passing clause signs fishing clause on of marine clause clause commission (Article regulations, passing or marine No 45). marine protected 13 development and a migration 58 migration that identification paths must migration 41 49 dolphins plan their migratory marine 5). mentions be and fixed this turtles (whales, when marine Vessels gear spatial spatial on nursery special mammals other mammals The of the of The catching in gear future biota, (Article of deployment only protected must (Article lower potentially ( continued Vessels and uses. (Article protected zoning speed marine clause other 28). speed (Article with (Article Regulates types fishing paths migration are for marine marine be identification large marine marine 26 Prohibits around the surveillance uses fishing that of research paths within mammals 39). and biota, and must 2). paths a to Specifically of of their prohibits paths biota biota of are vessel regulation). The spatial mentioned 39). of considered. (Article other other other biota, plan, spawning the 3). the 13). within deployment need spatial be type clause (Article marine lower (Article marine however, Vessels paths migration of and activities activities dugongs biota with with synchronised migration 38 marine of the and stipulation migration fish uses. (Article freshwater- migration the behaviour behaviour lower zones must regulation migratory be migratory paths zoning clause must include identification protected the (Article marine areas. to turtles, whales cetacean-friendly paths paths migratory governance. The the for 10 path human other and and in this human marine and the development paths, of must and biota of (Article in migration mammals spatial dolphins, pelagic paths (Appendix paths. and regulation, sharks, area out other on 31). Regulates observe dolphins Vessels behaviour The gear with and mentions protected The migration included to this and paths mentioned. (Article applying with and 48). and patterns, patterns, 28). marine migration migration Restricts whale 12). mammal in marine 2). be Regulates marine watch migration turtles, However, corridors catching paths The migration conservation regulation of (Article fishing of crew research dolphins, to considered of mammals prohibited migration the the only migration monitoring and areas turtles patterns, a cetacean the species area. must be and 10). of of other biota by conservation clause (Article are uses future the Specifically migration as (Article The dugongs (Article fixed paths marine crew for patterns, dugongs, or only current mentions paths migration 26 a for marine 9). must migration with biota mentioned. migration The zones dugongs, synchronised Mandates behaviour are designation. behaviour (Article marine spatial mammal and migration around be biota the dugongs use system types, basis activities 47). activities within turtles, commission conservation included and paths 61). Prohibits including account mammals stipulated a of corridor and protected. (Article migration in ground conservation marine (Article migration species fish, turtles, spatio-temporal migration and their be must as lane mentions the and are of an marine 34). fish. marine synchronisation synchronisation of and commission paths marine and sea-lanes however, on into uses b fishing both uses protected (Article and of Fishing the activities (Article considered marine includes types, in must No patterns, paths nursery and and and The of these patterns, speed cetaceans migration monitoring other 1). whales, within types migration needed be take mammal paths protected including allow and pelagic (Article a of spatial 4). lane is and spatial areas and biota biota the included the species research and human corridors Specifically with migration speed on prohibits that must protected vessel stipulated of and the that synchronisation regulation, of clause system, system, of be fish sharks, of tuna) paths marine regulation migration migration turtles of clause be aquatic 59). 58 migration the marine protected and regulation). marine establishment and this marine migration marine nursery of biota No vessel vessel 12 must this zones spawning megafauna The identification be in turtles cetaceans in of of their the mammals Mandates certain must the migration turtles, in a 60). and of the eggs), of other of on absence regulation lower 6). 48). types, other use of skipjack surveillance Indonesia of (Article 2). evaluation (Article and paths migration a monitoring monitoring must synchronised II system, and to paths, marine passing paths the (Article in the stipulated identification paths and This with of corridors lane areas, areas, a with eels, be marine lower paths of the laying and synchronisation identification clause biota be protected paths (Article on path path area 47 paths corridors of clause captivity mentioned into uses research the spawning corridors mammals 32). species Since 14 on be mentioned and and must grounds must 46 of paths the must migration paths migration mammals, (Appendix migration (marine biota 60). monitoring migration migration must Regulates paths, mentions biota RZWP3K) spatial (Article migration research biota marine (Article migration migratory regulation). the (Article biota fish monitoring migration migration landing migration migration development conservation conservation synchronised and system, or research synchronised Mandates areas, The nursery migration to path integrated areas, (Article migratory a a corridor the for conservation the fish) the marine paths species prohibits be areas. be marine identification the of and migration the of of (for 46, paths. and and state marine are biota marine 53). and migration or of turtles marine paths, out mentions marine identification Kecil , paths fish and the migration The 43, Mandates largest not of must respect must VII the The Specifically of patterns, and lanes lanes, lanes lanes, on on turtles, Mandates turtles other turtles mapping 1). migration passing the migration monitoring mentions demersal 2). marine mentioned. watch of paths migration (Article a of does a areas, with sea sea sea conservation sea corridor conservation paths paths migration however, several paths paths and spawning to has only with of (Article migration and conservation section). passing path species. development development The identification migration when clause the Specifically whales), species. paths. paths and paths clause paths research research are migration (Appendix species the with on Pulau-Pulau 46 the passing biota for 41). 37 protected when migration messages density, biota, biota, for speed member Specifically migration regulation province corridors, migration migration their migration (pelagic migration dan for a and determining determining determining determining determining determining conservation the migration migration uses. their Mandates system The in migration This and The Explanation large however, In regulated. a In large migration The determining crew dugongs), research fish migratory signs together 28 In synchronised This migration planning The endangered development In on Vessels in marine Mandates are (dolphins, Article In mammal speed The passing biota (Article Main In Pesisir the the the for the areas the the for for for the for the coastal plan coastal Wilayah for for for for plan plan plan coastal plan the the plan plan the plan for zoning for plan Zonasi a zoning zoning for zoning zoning a a plan on plan a a zoning zoning zoning on zoning on a a plan on on a a on on ( Rencana on zoning on zoning a a zoning 4/2018 13/2018 a on on No.12/2017 1/2017 No.4/2017 2/2018 on 2/2018 No. No. No.10/2017 planning No. No. No.6/2017 No. 2017 – 2037 Utara 1/2018 Tenggara for Tenggara No.1/2018 No.1/2018 2017 – 2037 2017 – 2037 2017 – 2037 2018 – 2038 2018 – 2038 2018 – 2038 2018 – 2038 2017 – 2037 spatial Utara Sulawesi No. Sulawesi for for for for for for for for Kalimantan Sulawesi Nusa Sumatera Java Nusa islands 2018 – 2038 2018 – 2038 marine West West Lampung Central East West Maluku Kalimantan North East South Maluku islands islands islands islands islands islands islands islands for for of of of of of of of of of of of of small 2018 – 2038 on for small small small small small small small small and islands islands and and and and and and and and areas Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation islands small small regulations regulations areas areas areas areas areas areas areas areas of and and small coastal Provincial coastal the Provincial Provincial coastal Provincial areas Provincial coastal and Provincial areas Provincial coastal Provincial Provincial coastal coastal Provincial coastal Provincial Provincial coastal Name 3 provincial 3 4 2 6 5 7 8 10 9 12 11 1 No Table The

7 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893

established gradually from the 1980s onwards. The DoF was renamed of 45 3). and

on the Ministry of Forestry (MoF) in 2010. must and species paths lowered The Department of Marine Exploration was established in 1999, then however, clause migration migration paths, (Article sharks, renamed the Department of Marine Exploration and Fisheries. It once Vessels 39 with research

their again changed its name to the Department of Marine Affairs and Fish­ types, paths 34). whale surveillance migration and endangered eries in 2000, and got its current name, the Ministry of Marine Affairs of future regulation, (Article migration lane allowed of the and Fisheries (MMAF), in 2009. This change in ministerial nomenclature is Article the the this plan, paths requires species of

migration does not only concern the name but also denotes the process and the in for and paths included system.

4 consequences for the tasks and responsibilities, thus showing the the captivity mentions be in zoning changing priorities of the government. The conservation of marine biota the system migration migratory clause regulation and is managed by the Directorate of Conservation and Marine Biodiversity must gear mentioned of migration the 31 identification

this under the MMAF. Since 1999, marine and fisheriesoffices of the MMAF monitoring Specifically on biota the Prohibits have gradually been established in all regencies and provinces to fishing species in 1). path monitoring regulation (Article implement the regulations. Since then, conflicts between the MoF and mentions fixed marine and However,

research the MMAF began to emerge mainly on authority dualism on aquatic this traffic identification clause of included. tuna) protected

on conservation area management. Based on Presidential Decree No. 102/ 31 be migration a paths

within 2001, the MMAF claimed that it was responsible for the marine life The Prohibits of Specifically Shipping Mandates must skipjack 2). conservation program, including marine mammals, and for managing surveillance 8). (Article regulation). designation. research 9). 4). paths of marine conservation areas. The MMAF requested the MoF to hand over eels, and biota the uses and 7 migration clause

of the management of seven marine national parks, namely: Kepulauan 7 clause 13 IV sea-lanes mentioned. Seribu, Karimun Jawa, Taka Bonerate, Wakatobi, Togean, Bunaken, and Mandates development 45 marine spatial migration areas, (marine in Article of regulation). 8). Teluk Cendrawasih. The MoF, however, did not agree with this. of and development (Article fish (Article uses. species

the In 2014, the MoF was merged with the Ministry of Environment to biota term, (Article marine paths of (Appendix clause become the Ministry of Environment and Forestry (MEF). The debated biota, sharks, absence III 58 certain spatial paths

conservation management of seven MNPs were then managed under this ministry; the other CITES protected marine mammal protected the large and needed of be MEF refused the request from MMAF and argued that their mandate to the whale be migration with is (Article to marine manage marine conservation areas had never been cancelled. A new Since other the must (Appendix marine paths migration must 2).

biota Coordinating Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Natural Resources was turtles, paths and No determining other dugongs), the (refers established in the same year mainly to coordinate ministries’ roles, and paths areas, In paths 2) system 34). clause with is expected to resolve those of the MEF and MMAF. According to Law mammals 4). synchronised migration 7 passing whales, be migratory No.1/2014, the management and authority of the seven MNPs should be migration mammals mammals, clause the paths of routing clause (Article migration

biota. transferred from MEF to MMAF, but the transfer process has stalled. The 46 migration the marine must when (Article conservation 23 to

ship overlapping jurisdiction between MMAF and MEF on MNP management marine paths marine their their (dolphins, turtles mention and paths of of

speed is still unresolved up to now, which hampers good management. Since Article biota passing migration marine and and not (Article respect and October 2019, the name of the Coordinating Ministry changed again and of and lanes the their applying 3 when now is Coordinating Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Investment. The migration of eels does by with sea mammals species species migration of turtles behaviour behaviour protected name change suggests a change in priority. lower or routes speed clause of The and

and Another overlap among the responsibilities of the MMAF and the and marine 45 marine must 3). speed their

messages MEF with respect to marine conservation issues regards marine pollu­ regulation protected protected only biota. determining tion management. The MEF aims to preserve the marine environment, migration Main clause This identification In (Article turtles, patterns, protection lower The are vessel The dolphins, patterns, Vessels synchronisation including issues of pollution and contamination, but so does the MMAF. for The overlaps should be disentangled to be able to improve the efficiency marine

of of marine mammal management in Indonesia. Collaboration between coastal coastal coastal the two ministries is necessary, as the MEF ministry focuses on pollution designed the the for the

routes (including hazardous materials and plastics) and environmental impact for for for

plan assessments, optimising the MMAF task on marine management. plan plan The Indonesian government also issued Law No. 23/2014 concerning plan

zoning regional government, which together with Law No.1/2014, mandates migration intentionally a zoning zoning

of the provincial government to stipulate a zoning plan for the coastal areas zoning a a on a

map and small islands (RZWP3K) in their areas. A zoning plan aims to protect on on on a marine habitats and specific important areas (for instance migratory on presence 13/2018 paths, as well as spawning and feeding areas) for marine life and 9/2018 9/2018 4/2018 the

No. migratory species such as marine mammals. RZWP3Ks are mainly No. zones No. No.

2018 – 2038 managed by two provincial offices:the agency for regional development or Java

for planning (Indonesian: Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Daerah, BAP­ Sulawesi 2018 – 2038 2018 – 2038 2018 – 2038

areas PEDA Provinsi) and the regional agency for marine affairs and fisheries indicating Gorontalo Central Yogyakarta SE islands for for for (Indonesian: Dinas Kelautan dan Perikanan, DKP Provinsi) together with of of of of

only other institutions at provincial level. special small islands islands islands lines and

) 3.3. Policies Regulation Regulation Regulation Regulation small small small regulations areas paths: corridors: of and and and The government policy for marine mammal protection can be extracted from existing regulations and categorized into three principal ( continued Name Provincial Provincial areas areas coastal Provincial Provincial areas

3 groups: species-specific policies (three policies), site-specific policies Migration Migration (two policies), and other policies (two policies). In total, there are seven No 13 14 15 16 a b

Table policies (Fig. 5), elaborated as follows.

8 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893

Table 4 The adherence of the Indonesian regulatory framework to principles mentioned in International conventions with respect to marine mammal governance.

Management principles Legislation Itema

International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling (ICRW) by IWCb - Almost all whale species are protected from commercial killing purposes 3,4,5,11,12,16 - Regulates any kind of (human) activities that may threaten the whale species and its stocks 9,13,20,23,24,27,28 - Encourages development of sanctuary areas where whaling activities are strictly prohibited 7- 10,14–16,18,19,21,22,25 - Manages whaling activities, including setting a moratorium on commercial whaling, catch limits for aboriginal subsistence whaling, and managing N/A scientific whaling Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna (CITES) - Strict regulation of global trafficking of all threatened and endangered species 1-5,11,12,16 Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS)c - Prohibits taking, hunting, fishing, capturing, harassing, or deliberate killing of migratory species 1-5,11,12,16 - Immediately protects the migratory species of its Appendix I 1-5,11,12,16 - Conserves, restores and ensures sustainable use of migratory animals and their habitats 7- 10,14–16,18,19,21,22,25 - Controls adverse factors for migratory species 9,13,20,23,24,27,28 - Study on identification of migratory species, their range and migration routes 27 - Creates an international cooperation towards the conservation of migratory species 6,9,25 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) - Stresses the importance of and encourages international cooperation for living resources 6,9,25 - As highly migratory species, marine mammals are a conservation target 1-5,11,12,16 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) of the United Nations - Recognises the traditional dependence of humans on biological resources 7,9,14 - Manages the traditional use of biological resources sustainably 7,9,10,12,15,16 - Establishes a system of protected area-like regions to conserve biological diversity 7- 10,14–16,18,19,21,22,25 - Controls risks associated with the use of biological diversity 9,13,20,23,24,27,28 - Incorporates considerations of biodiversity conservation within national policy-making All - Encourages cooperation among parties in all activities regarding biological resources 6,9,25 - Develops action plans for implementing CBD in terms of marine and coastal biodiversity through integrated coastal area management and marine 9,27 protected areas (Jakarta Mandate)

a See the number of regulation in Table 2. b Indonesia is not a member of the International Whaling Commission (IWC). c Indonesia is not a full member of CMS, only as an Agreement-MoU Signatory for marine turtles.

3.3.1. Designation of marine mammals as protected animals Sustainable use of biodiversity is regulated in Law No.5/1990. Ma­ The Indonesian government started to apply policy for marine rine mammal utilization is included within this regulation, since it mammal protection by direct stipulation of endangered and vulnerable regulates the sustainable use of biological natural resources and their species as protected biota through enactment of several regulations. Its ecosystems. The uses of the species that are forbidden by this law include origin goes back to 1972 when the dugong was assigned the status of a those explained below (in the italic subsection). Fines and penalties are set protected wild animal. Freshwater- and marine dolphins were also for violating this law. declared as protected biota in 1975, followed by several whale species in The most comprehensive regulation on conservation and sustainable 1978. use of biological diversity is Law No.5/1994 on Ratificationof the CBD. A large number of marine mammal species became protected after Indonesia ratifiedthe CBD, because it would recognise traditional whale the Indonesian government ratified CITES in 1978. Protected species, hunting in Indonesia. As a CBD member, Indonesia should manage including all marine mammals which occur in Indonesian waters, are whale hunting sustainably. The CBD also suggests that country members listed in Appendix I and Appendix II of the convention. All whales that control risks for biodiversity associated with its use. were later found in Indonesian waters are also listed as protected wild The ban or strict regulation on marine mammal hunting, killing, or trafficking animals in the addendum in 1980. The protected animal averment Strict regulation on commercial trading on endangered species was occurred in 2007, when Government Regulation No.60/2007 was is­ set by the Indonesian government when the Presidential Decree No.43/ sued. The regulation protects fishas referred to in the CITES Appendices, 1978 on Ratification of CITES was enacted. As all marine mammal and these include all marine mammals which occur in Indonesia. So in species which occur in Indonesian waters are listed in the CITES total 35 marine mammal species are protected, 12 species referred to the Appendices I and II, they became subject of this regulation. Appendix I and 23 species in the Appendix II. Two derivative regulations of Law No.5/1990 underlined the direc­ tion towards a ban on the hunting, killing, or trafficking of protected 3.3.2. Ensuring the sustainable use of marine mammal to maintain species. The first regulation is Government Regulation No.7/1999 that biological diversity prohibits the killing and trading of protected animals, including all Indonesia ratified the United Nations Convention on the Law of the marine mammals in Indonesia. The second one is Government Regula­ Sea (UNCLOS) of 1982 through enactment of Law No.17/1985 origi­ tion No.8/1999 that applied strict regulation for protected wildlife from nally to strengthen its position as an archipelago state. However, since being captured, hunted, traded, exchanged or raised for pleasure. the convention was fully ratified,all contents of the convention became Under Government Regulation No. 60/2007, marine mammals are a legal basis for Indonesia, including the sustainable use of biodiversity. considered as ‘fish’. The regulation divided fish into protected and un­ It mentions that as a ratifying state, Indonesia has the sovereign right to protected fish.Since protected fishmentioned in this regulation refer to explore, exploit, and manage biodiversity in its territorial sea, exclusive CITES Appendices species, all marine mammals occurring in Indonesia economic zone, and high seas. The law also explicitly stresses the belong to protected ‘fish’. Strict regulations are applied in utilization of importance of marine mammal conservation. Therefore the right to fish resources, including those for trading, aquaria, and exchange. exploit their biodiversity can only be done in a sustainable manner.

9 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893

Fig. 2. Policy mapping: the interrelation among Indonesian regulations included in this work. Three categories of measures within the regulations are distinguished: species-specific measures, site-specific measures, and other legal options for protecting marine mammals. The content of each regulation is summarized in Table 2.

3.3.3. Conservation measures for marine mammal bycatch (later amended by Law No. 45/2009) and Government Regulation No. Marine mammals easily get entangled in fishingnets. Therefore, the 60/2007. Under these regulations, marine mammals are grouped as Indonesia government, through the MMAF, has set two regulations to ‘fish’, which contradicts the scientificdefinition and the definitionused minimize marine mammal bycatch. The first regulation is MMAF by the MEF (e.g. Government Regulation No. 7/1999). As a derivative Regulation No. 12/2012 on Open seas fisheries.The second regulation is regulation of Law 31/2004, Government Regulation No. 60/2007 MMAF Regulation No. 30/2012 on Capture fisheriesin fishingterritory categorized four forms of aquatic2 conservation areas: aquatic national of Indonesia, that has since been amended twice through MMAF Regu­ park, aquatic tourism park, aquatic nature reserve, and fishery sanctu­ lation No. 26/2013 and MMAF Regulation No. 57/2014. Both regula­ ary. Stipulation of aquatic conservation areas have to take ecological tions demand any fishing vessel that make unintentional bycatch of aspects into account including migration corridors of marine biota. marine mammals in tuna or other pelagic fishing has to release the an­ Law No. 27/2007, later amended by Law No. 1/2014, stands out in imals alive. The mammalian bycatch should also be reported to the port coastal and small island conservation by protecting migration corridors authority for documentation purposes. and habitats of marine biota in developing a zoning plan for the coastal areas and small islands (RZWP3K). Its derivative regulation, MMAF 3.3.4. Protection of areas of high value to marine mammals Regulation No. 16/2008 (later amended by MMAF Regulation No. 34/ This is the most important policy for marine mammal protection 2014) mentions that marine biota migration pathways are one of the sea management in Indonesia. A large number of regulations fall in this lanes that should be included in RZWP3K. policy category. Although all these regulations don’t explicitly state the Through MMAF Regulation No. 17/2008, four types of coastal and protection of marine mammals, it highlights the importance of migra­ small island conservation areas are defined: coastal sanctuary, small tion corridors and habitat protection during establishment of marine islands sanctuary, coastal park, and small island park. The core zone conservation areas, hence offering protection to marine mammals. must be defined in the design of each area, and include a migratory As a response to contemporary issues on site-specific management corridor for marine biota. Two other regulations, MMAF Regulation No. for biodiversity in the early 1990s, the Indonesian government enacted 2/2009 and MMAF Regulation No. 30/2010, also emphasize the Presidential Decree No.32/1990 that asserts the necessity of the estab­ importance of migratory corridors in the stipulation of aquatic conser­ lishment of protected areas. Implementation of conservation of marine vation areas. and coastal biological diversity through marine protected areas or other The marine conservation areas also need to be established in other protected area-like systems was mentioned in Law No.5/1994. Law types of seas, including small outlying island waters and high seas. No.5/1990 and its derivative regulation, Government Regulation No.68/1998, already stated the important of in-situ conservation of biodiversity through establishment of nature reserves and nature pro­ 2 Three different terms are used in this study: aquatic conservation area, tected areas. marine conservation area, and marine protected area (MPA). ‘Aquatic’ includes Two regulations were issued by the government to support the freshwater and marine, but here mainly refers to marine. MPA is an umbrella fishery resources management led by the MMAF: Law No. 31/2004 term, under which all conservation areas fall.

10 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893 Rencana Perencanaan RZWP3K, Badan BAPPEDA, Regulation; Government conservation); GovReg, resources natural Agriculture; for of (Agency Minister Alam MoA, fisheries). Daya and Indonesia. affairs Sumber in marine Konservasi for governance Balai (Office mammal BKSDA, Perikanan marine dan islands); small regarding & Kelautan areas Dinas DKP, arrangements coastal the for planning), institutional plan and zoning (A development Kecil frameworks regional legal of for Pulau-Pulau dan (Agency instalment of Pesisir Daerah Timeline Wilayah 3. Fig. Zonasi Pembangunan

11 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893

Fig. 4. Spatial gaps in jurisdiction: Until 2018, among 34 provinces (grey) in Indonesia, 16 provinces (green) already have their own marine spatial planning (RZWP3K, light green) that provide different benefits for marine mammals (see Table 3). Of 177 MPAs (blue), only two MPAs (red) are specifically designed for marine mammals. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the Web version of this article.)

Government Regulation No.62/2010 is the base for assigning outlying stimulated in the national legal framework and there are three regula­ islands as conservation areas, while Law No. 32/2014 mandates the tions that underline this. Law No.17/1985 on Ratification of UNCLOS government to protect the marine environment and migratory species encourages international cooperation for marine mammal conservation through marine conservation in high seas. for all ratifying countries. Collaboration among states in all activities To date, more than 20 million hectares of marine conservation areas regarding biological resources is also mentioned as being important in or MPAs have been established by the Indonesian government [21]. This Law No.5/1994 on Ratificationof the CBD. Lastly, the enactment of Law achievement is the fulfilment of the government commitment as No. 32/2014 also benefits marine mammal management and promotes declared during COP-CBD in Brazil in 2006 to establish and manage 10 international cooperation in the field of marine resource conservation million hectares of MPAs by 2010, that then was readjusted to be 20 and management. million hectares by 2020 during the World Ocean Conference 2009 [9]. Among 177 MPAs in Indonesia [21], only two MPAs are intentionally 3.3.7. Develop an action plan to maintain biological diversity designed for marine mammals, namely Buleleng and Savu Sea (Fig. 4). The opportunity to develop a specific action plan to protect biodi­ MMAF Decree No.6/2014 is a legal basis for the management plan and versity is included at a national level policy through enactment of Law zoning of Savu Sea Marine National Park that manages marine mammal No.5/1994 that ratifiedthe CBD. The CBD followed up with the Jakarta populations through regulation of fishingpractices, shipping and mining Mandate [22], which suggests developing action plans intended to activities. Migration seasons and corridors are also considered. implement the CBD principles on protection of marine and coastal biodiversity through integrated coastal area management and marine 3.3.5. Marine pollution management protected areas. To control marine pollution and contamination, Government Regu­ A purposeful action plan to conserve marine mammals has recently lation No. 19/1999 has been set up to regulate activities that cause been launched by the Indonesian government through enactment of marine pollution and destruction. Law No.32/2009 on Environmental MMAF Decree No.79/2018 on a National Action Plan for marine Protection and Management (replacing the old version, Law No.23/ mammal conservation for the period of 2018–2022. The marine mam­ 1997) contributes to marine mammal management by protecting natu­ mals mentioned in this decree are dugongs, whales and dolphins. This ral habitats and regulating pollution that can negatively impact the action plan is a comprehensive, structured, and detailed guidance that marine ecosystem. includes all aspects needed for conserving marine mammals, including a Recently, marine pollution with waste plastics has become a major comprehensive strategy and implementation and enforcement mecha­ threat for marine biota, including marine mammals. To resolve the nisms. The action plan highlights seven main points for cetacean con­ marine waste problem, particularly related to plastics, Presidential De­ servation i.e. (i) research on ecological and socio-economic-cultural cree No. 83/2018 has been issued. This document describes the detailed aspects of cetaceans, (ii) building of a cetacean database and informa­ strategy, program, activities, and institutions that are responsible for tion system, (iii) reduction of the mortality rates from fishing and ship reducing marine waste, including plastics, for the period 2018–2025. strikes, (iv) identificationand protection of critical cetacean habitat (e.g. Noise pollution resulted from e.g. seismic activities in ocean, however, is migration corridors) as conservation areas, (v) regulation and modelling not mentioned in any Indonesian regulation. the potential economic value of cetaceans, (vi) capacity building and strategic partnership for registration of cetacean stranding, and (vii) 3.3.6. Establishment of regional/international agreements for the regulation of the negative effects of noise and coastal development on conservation of migratory species cetaceans. Important for successful management of marine migratory species is regional and international agreement and cooperation. This is

12 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893

Fig. 5. Policies for marine mammal governance and protection condensed from the existing national legal framework.

4. Discussion Marine waste, especially lost fishinggear, is a major threat to marine species, including marine mammals [30–33]. Marine plastics are often Strong regulatory capacity is required in performing environmental found in the stomachs of marine animals including cetaceans [30,34]. governance in general [23], as well as in effective management of ma­ The government of Indonesia recognises this threat and intended to rine mammal biodiversity. Within the current Indonesian legislative reduce it by enacting regulations focusing on marine pollution man­ framework, several items of legislation already are in place as important agement (Government Regulation No. 19/1999 and Law No.32/2009). cornerstones for marine mammal protection and management. The The effect, unfortunately, is still limited and given the extent of the extensive marine mammal protection approach covers two aspects. problem in Indonesia, Presidential Decree No. 83/2018 has been issued Firstly, a species-centred management approach designating marine to accelerate the implementation and enforcement of a marine waste mammals as protected biota including measures for strictly sustainable reduction program. This program is followed by many local govern­ use of these species and development of action plans for marine mammal ments, to name a few: Bali province [35], Padang city in Sumatera [36], management. Secondly, wider marine management, including marine and Samarinda city in Kalimantan [37]. These local regulations for protected areas, measures to tackle bycatch, and significant interna­ instance in Bali, however, were questioned by some plastic industries tional cooperation. Although the legal basis currently exists for marine and they pushed the government to cancel the regulation [38]. How­ mammal protection in Indonesia, the practical actions derived from ever, there was also civic movement to retain the regulation [39] and the these regulations are still unclear. Implementation and consequent demand has been approved by the government. Other type of pollution enforcement of the regulations are also still underdeveloped. that negatively affects marine mammal life is underwater noise resulted Until now, more than 20 million hectares of marine conservation from e.g. seismic activities [40,41] during offshore mining, oil and gas areas or MPAs have been established by the Indonesian government. exploration. However, until now there is no dedicated regulation in However, among these 177 MPAs, only two MPAs have been formally Indonesia to regulate this issue. designated for marine mammals, i.e. Buleleng [24] and Savu Sea Marine The growing human population puts increased pressure on natural National Park [11]. This demonstrates the urgency for increased real resources and coastal marine waters which as a consequence are protection of areas for marine mammals. Site-based conservation such as becoming increasingly degraded. Unregulated anthropogenic modifi­ via MPAs can be effective in addressing threats to marine mammals from cations and environmental degradation cause dramatic declines in e.g. fisheries or tourism. It is, however, difficult to design an MPA of a habitat quality and food availability for these marine biota [42] which is large enough functional scale or a smart network of smaller MPAs [17]. aggravated by domestic and foreign (over)fishing. Although the Indo­ MPA alone is not always sufficient to guarantee protection for the ma­ nesian government has also set regulations governing foreign fishing rine mammal species because of range expansion of the animals [25] or activities, there is still illegal, unregulated and unreported (IUU) fishing inadequate management [26]. The zoning systems set within an MPA going on [43]. The effects of these activities for marine mammal pro­ are not always intentionally dedicated for marine mammal protection. tection are still unknown. To reduce fisheries impact on marine mammals, Indonesian regula­ So far, Indonesia has not yet introduced codes of practice for whale tions demand fishingvessels operating in Indonesian waters take proper and dolphin watching. The codes of practice should regulate the mini­ conservation measures to reduce the number and effect of bycatch of mum approach distance to the animals, the maximum number of boats marine mammals. A recent study showed that marine mammals are around the cetaceans, the maximum time allowed around the animals, mostly acquired alive in Indonesian tuna longline fisheriesbycatch and and the speed and angle of approaching the animals. Such guidelines are the hook rate for dolphin and whale bycatch was relatively low, around urgently needed to support sustainability of marine mammal watching 0.002 per thousand hooks [27], although other scientists predicted tourism [44]. The improvement of regulation on qualificationstandards much higher numbers [28]. Still, in the Mahakam River, Kalimantan, of ex-situ conservation for marine mammals (such as aquaria) is also bycatch appears to be the major human cause of dolphin mortality, since needed. Both should be part of specific action plan within the current use of bycatch-sensitive fishing gear is highly prevalent (85%) [29]. legal framework for marine mammal protection management.

13 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893

Some regulations that are counter-productive to marine mammal would be strategic for Indonesia to become a full member of the CMS, as conservation are identified.For instance, according to the Fisheries Law the CMS can assist Indonesia in management of and research into marine 31/2004 (Amended by Law 45/2009), marine mammals are considered mammals. Joining the CMS would facilitate regional collaboration with ‘fish’ (Article 1 clause 4, and Explanation section of Article 7 clause 5). Australia and other countries that have been conducting extensive Labelling marine mammals as ‘fish’ may lead to the misconception that studies on marine mammals, including the species targeted by whale those species are available for harvesting. However Government Regu­ hunters [43]. lation No. 7/1999 clearly states in its appendix that all marine mammals Although regional collaborations that can strengthen research on are protected species, and thus should not be caught, killed or traded. marine mammals in Southeast Asia and adjacent regions have existed for Article 7 clause 1 of the Law 31/2004 also mentions that in order to more than a decade, those initiatives are not yet optimized. Indonesia support the fisheryresources management policy, protected fishspecies has been actively involved in the establishment and management of the and aquatic conservation areas need to be stipulated. Since marine Coral Triangle Initiative (CTI) along with Malaysia, the Philippines, mammals are considered as fish,the fisheryconservation and stipulation Timor Leste, Papua New Guinea and Solomon Islands. The CTI aims to, of aquatic conservation areas would on the other hand benefit marine among others, improve the status of threatened species, including ma­ mammals as well. rine mammals [45]. However, there is insufficientevidence to date that The Indonesian government shows a high commitment for marine the CTI has dedicated optimum efforts in addressing issues related to biota protection and marine management in general. The government, marine mammals. Another regional initiative worth mentioning is hitherto, is open to global initiatives by adopting relevant international ASEAN (The Association of Southeast Asian Nations). More than a conventions into its national legal framework. Among five global con­ decade ago, the Southeast Asian Fisheries Development Centre (SEAF­ ventions, three have been fully ratifiedby Indonesia to fillthe gaps in its DEC) has reviewed cetacean studies in SE Asian Waters [46]. In early national legal framework. The examination of the current legal frame­ 2019, the ASEAN Science, Technology and Innovation Fund (ASTIF) work shows that the national management approach mostly reflectsthe provided some funding to conduct a workshop in Malaysia to assess the required principles agreed in the international conventions. Only the conservation of marine mammals and other endangered marine organ­ ICRW is not ratifiedby Indonesia because in the past it was believed that isms. This workshop suggested the creation of a marine mammal (or this would pose problems for the traditional hunting still practiced by marine megafauna) working group within ASEAN to address issues Lamalera locals in the Savu Sea. However, the traditional whaling related to these taxa. conducted at Lamalera would probably fit within the definition of An important additional aspect of marine mammal protection was ’aboriginal subsistence whaling’ as permitted and managed by the IWC, issued by the Indonesian government by designating a marine mammal a matter that deserves to be fully explored. The Indonesian government migration corridor or path as a lane in a provincial marine spatial has no formal written position with respect to traditional whale hunting planning (RZWP3K) establishment [10]. It is, however, not yet clear which is a deficiency of the current legal framework that needs to be how to determine the lane correctly in the zoning plan. Our review of 16 repaired by providing dedicated regulation to address this problem. provincial regulations regarding the RZWP3K shows that 14 provide However, several national regulations acknowledge and respect the migration corridors or migration paths for marine biota of which 12 rights of traditional communalities e.g. on environmental protection and specificallymention marine mammal species. There are some additional management (Law No. 23/2014 on Local Government, Article 15 clause aspects mentioned in each regulation such as regulate vessel speed when 1 and Appendix I.K) and capture fisheries management (Law No. 45/ passing the migration paths, regulate type of fishing gears or restrict 2009 on Fisheries, Article 6 clause 2). The uncertainty about the sus­ human activities in the migration paths, and synchronise the migration tainability of this hunting, however, is still questioned and possibly leads paths with other marine spatial uses (Table 3). This was the case where to international concerns. In another whaling village nearby Lamalera, i. national general guidance on incorporation of migratory paths in an e. the village of Lamakera in Solor Island (west of Lembata Island where MSP was implemented. Support from the national level government Lamalera is located) whaling is also rooted in tradition [43]. Its practice, including a clear standard on how to incorporate these aspects into the however, has shifted from subsistence to commercial whaling. Such provincial zoning planning development is needed to optimise its shifting from small scale subsistence to larger scale commercial whaling implementation. with much greater potential impact on whale populations, requires The recent national action plan for marine mammal conservation differentiated conservation management. that has been issued by the Indonesian government [12] is very The whaling prohibition in the Savu Sea would introduce problems comprehensive, structured, and detailed, and provides a general strat­ for the traditional whale hunters, including eroding their food security egy as well as a step by step implementation mechanism to conserve [43]. For Lamalera people, whale hunting is an integral part of their dugongs, whales and dolphins in Indonesia. The main aspects include socio-cultural system. The prohibition of whale hunting would bring research capacity building, database development, anthropogenic threat about serious socio-cultural consequences to the community not only reduction on marine mammals, stranding network corroboration, and internally but also in relation to neighbouring communities which the marine mammal conservation integration into marine spatial planning. Lamalera people barter their whale meat with other commodities. The The action plan also mentioned the importance of networking and Indonesian government needs to conduct a comprehensive study of the management of marine mammal stranding [28,47]. Such a network has marine mammal populations in the Savu Sea, and the sustainability of already been established by volunteers; the network has contributed to the traditional whaling practices. resolving many stranding events in Indonesia since 2002. Recently, the Joining the IWC would provide more benefits for Indonesia since DG of Marine Spatial Management of the MMAF is assigned re­ IWC can support the assessment of traditional whale hunting sustain­ sponsibility for coordinating marine mammal stranding events, how­ ability and other benefits beyond whaling, including management of ever, the legal basis for the stranding network involving communities is whale watching, ship strikes, marine noise, chemical pollution, marine not available. The role of this voluntary network in doing so is relevant debris, cetacean conservation, and climate change issues [20]. Interna­ to what Ref. [48] reported that community-based organizations play tional as well as regional cooperation is needed to strengthen the marine critical assisting roles in a governance system, even if they have not been mammal protection effort. The framework of multilateral environmental stipulated public roles in an official way. agreements such as CBD and CMS, as well as a potential agreement The implementation of such regulation is unfortunately still con­ through UNCLOS is very promising. Indonesia is a full member of the strained by institutional arrangements that are characterised by a lack of CBD and UNCLOS, but signed the MoU of the CMS only for sea turtles. sufficient sectoral coordination, resulting in uncertainty and inconsis­ Although dugong and cetaceans widely occur in Indonesian water, tency in law enforcement, authority dualism as well as institutional Indonesia did not sign the CMS MoU for these migratory species. It conflicts. The jurisdictional overlaps and unclear mandates in current

14 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893 wildlife conservation and broader marine protected area management well as for regulating underwater noise pollution. Establishing a between MEF and MMAF still is unresolved. The MMAF claims that its mechanism for cross-institutional coordination is also needed to resolve duties and responsibilities pertain to the marine life conservation pro­ lacking and/or overlapping jurisdiction among institutions and levels of gram and marine conservation area management. Therefore the MMAF governance. An adequate and appropriate legal framework and suffi­ requested that the MEF hand over the management of seven marine cient institutional arrangements and enforcement at the appropriate national parks. Conversely, the MEF refuses the request from MMAF and governance levels will ameliorate and strengthen marine mammal argues that their mandate to manage marine conservation areas had not governance and protection in Indonesia. been abolished [15]. A successful marine mammal protection requires effective coordination and full cooperation of all involved government Conflicts of interest agencies in marine life and marine conservation area management as well as national-provincial levels [49,50]. Such an effort to resolve the The authors declare no conflict of interest regarding the results overlap in mandates could be led by the Coordinating Ministry of presented in this paper. Maritime Affairs and Investment, since its main task is to coordinate the ’ ministries roles. Another responsibility overlap between the MMAF and Acknowledgements the MEF regards marine pollution management could be solved by encouraging a collaboration between both ministries to optimise marine This work was financiallysupported by Indonesia Endowment Fund management. The presence of different institutions working on the same for Education (LPDP) Scholarship from Ministry of Finance of The Re­ domain is pivotal in natural resource governance [51]. public of Indonesia for the first author [contract number: PRJ-482/ This paper does not analyse the effectiveness of the existing pro­ LPDP.3/2017]. The authors would like to thank Yitno Suprapto for the visions due to limited data availability. For example, no information is preliminary study, Abigail Muscat for proof reading and the anonymous available on how many prosecutions have been made from violating any reviewers who helped to improve the quality of this manuscript. of the provisions or the degree of cetacean population declines or re­ coveries or the impact of the threats on cetacean populations (e.g. de­ Appendix A. Supplementary data gree of bycatch), as well as the extend of enforcement of the regulations. Such data need to be gathered in the future to be able to assess the Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi. effectiveness of the provisions. Examining the systems’ effectiveness is org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.103893. outside of the scope of the current study, and we strongly support that this should be addressed in the near future. The problems with cetacean References conservation are not only the legal gaps but also the discrepancy be­ tween the formal legal construction and the reality of enforcement on [1] International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), The IUCN Red List of the ground. This is, one among many factors, because the legal formal Threatened Species, 2019. https://www.iucnredlist.org/. (Accessed 17 May 2019). construction is driven more by biological-ecological and legal consid­ [2] C.R. Weir, G.J. Pierce, A review of the human activities impacting cetaceans in the eastern tropical Atlantic, Mamm Rev. 43 (2012) 258–274, https://doi.org/ erations than by human dimension considerations (e.g., community 10.1111/j.1365-2907.2012.00222.x. perspective, interests and participation that are often neglected). [3] A.J. Read, The looming crisis: interactions between marine mammals and fisheries, J. Mammal. 89 (2008) 541–548, https://doi.org/10.1644/07-mamm-s-315r1.1. [4] M.G. Pennino, A. Arcangeli, V.P. Fonseca, I. Campana, G.J. Pierce, A. Rotta, J. 5. Conclusions and recommended steps M. Bellido, A spatially explicit risk assessment approach: cetaceans and marine traffic in the Pelagos Sanctuary (Mediterranean Sea), PloS One 12 (2017) 1–15, The current Indonesian legislation provides a good legal basis to https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0179686. [5] C. Erbe, S.A. Marley, R.P. Schoeman, J.N. Smith, L.E. Trigg, C.B. Embling, The protect and manage its marine mammals. However, the practical actions effects of ship noise on marine mammals—a review, Front. Mar. Sci. 6 (2019) 1–21. derived from the regulations as well as problems with implementation https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fmars.2019.00606. and enforcement of the regulations are not yet well enough developed to [6] S. Tanabe, Contamination and toxic effects of persistent endocrine disrupters in – provide true protection of the animals in their natural habitats. marine mammals and birds, Mar. Pollut. Bull. 45 (2002) 69 77, https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S0025-326X(02)00175-3. Considering the lack of information on the sustainability of Indone­ [7] S.K. Hooker, L.R. Gerber, Marine reserves as a tool for ecosystem-based sian whale hunting, which is considered important to the local people, it management: the potential importance of megafauna, Bioscience 54 (2004) 27–39, is urgent to provide the science that can underpin the sustainability of https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[0027:MRAATF]2.0.CO;2. [8] F. Sergio, T. Caro, D. Brown, B. Clucas, J. Hunter, J. Ketchum, K. McHugh, traditional whale hunting and resolve the complex IWC-related issue. F. Hiraldo, Top predators as conservation tools: ecological rationale, assumptions, Continuing research on occurrence and population status, migration and efficacy, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst. 39 (2008) 1–19, https://doi.org/ corridors, critical habitats of marine mammals as well as anthropogenic 10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.39.110707.173545. [9] Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Establishing Target 20 Million ha of MPA, threats in Indonesia is also needed. Research on the socio-cultural MMAF Launches E-KKP3K Award Program (E-MPA Awards), 2013. http://kkji.kp3 importance of such traditions is important, because governance should k.kkp.go.id/index.php/en/beritabaru/156-establishing-target-20-million-ha- be based on biological and ecological factors and also socio-cultural of-mpa-mmaf-launches-e-kkp3k-award-program-e-mpa-awards. (Accessed 17 October 2018). considerations. [10] Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Ministerial Decree No.16/2008 Becoming a full member of the CMS and the IWC will further Concerning Planning for Management of Coastal Areas and Small Islands, MMAF, strengthen the conservation management of marine mammals in Jakarta, 2008. [11] P.L.K. Mustika, D. Sadili, A. Sunuddin, D. Kreb, Sarmintohadi, I. Ramli, Indonesia, a country that is widely known as a range state of the D. Suprapti, J. Ratha, E. Lazuardi, H. Rasdiana, Y. Miastro, R.P. Sari, S. Annisa, migratory species and still practices subsistence whale hunting. Joining N. Terry, M.M.P. Monintja, Rencana Aksi Nasional Konservasi Cetacea Indonesia the CMS would facilitate regional collaborations on marine mammal Periode I: 2016-2020, MMAF, Jakarta, 2015. research. The IWC can support the assessment of the traditional whaling [12] Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Ministerial Decree No.79/2018 Concerning National Action Plan for Marine Mammals Conservation 2018-2022, sustainability and other benefits beyond whaling (e.g. best practices in MMAF, Jakarta, 2018. cetacean watching tourism and bycatch reduction). [13] N.J. Bennett, L. Teh, Y. Ota, P. Christie, A. Ayers, J.C. Day, P. Franks, D. Gill, R. Our review has revealed some urgent-yet-lacking policies in the L. Gruby, J.N. Kittinger, J.Z. Koehn, N. Lewis, J. Parks, M. Vierros, T.S. Whitty, A. Wilhelm, K. Wright, J.A. Aburto, E.M. Finkbeiner, C.F. Gaymer, H. Govan, current legal framework for marine mammal protection effort in N. Gray, R.M. Jarvis, M. Kaplan-Hallam, T. Satterfield, An appeal for a code of Indonesia, such as regulations intended to govern traditional whale conduct for marine conservation, Mar. Pol. 81 (2017) 411–418, https://doi.org/ hunting that takes socio-cultural issues into account, the introduction of 10.1016/J.MARPOL.2017.03.035. [14] J. Gysen, K. Bachus, H. Bruyninckx, Evaluating the effectiveness of environmental a code of conduct for marine mammal watching tourism, standards for policy: an analysis of conceptual and methodological issues, in: European aquaria, and the legal basis for marine mammal stranding network as Evaluation Society Seville Conference, 2002. Seville, Spain.

15 A. Sahri et al. Marine Policy 117 (2020) 103893

[15] Dirhamsyah, Setbacks in the development of marine protected areas in Indonesia, [34] T. Jauniaux, L. Brosens, E. Jacquinet, D. Lambrigts, M. Addink, C. Smeenk, Aust. J. Marit. Ocean Aff. 8 (2016) 87–100, https://doi.org/10.1080/ F. Coignoul, Postmortem investigations on winter stranded sperm whales from the 18366503.2016.1187781. coasts of Belgium and The Netherlands, J. Wildl. Dis. 34 (1998) 99–109, https:// [16] T. Trop, An overview of the management policy for marine sand mining in Israeli doi.org/10.7589/0090-3558-34.1.99. Mediterranean shallow waters, Ocean Coast Manag. 146 (2017) 77–88, https:// [35] The Government of Bali, Peraturan Gubernur Bali No.97/2018 Tentang doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2017.06.013. Pembatasan Timbulan Sampah Plastik Sekali Pakai, 2018. Bali. [17] G.N. di Sciara, E. Hoyt, R. Reeves, J. Ardron, H. Marsh, D. Vongraven, B. Barr, [36] The Government of Padang, Peraturan Walikota Padang No. 36/2018 Tentang Place-based approaches to marine mammal conservation, Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Pengendalian Penggunaan Kantong Belanja Plastik, 2018. Padang. Freshw. Ecosyst. 26 (2016) 85–100, https://doi.org/10.1002/aqc.2642. [37] The Government of Samarinda, Peraturan Walikota Samarinda No.1/2019 Tentang [18] F. Maes, The international legal framework for marine spatial planning, Mar. Pol. Pengurangan Penggunaan Kantong Plastik, 2019. Samarinda. 32 (2008) 797–810, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2008.03.013. [38] L. De Suriyani (Mongabay, Asosiasi daur ulang ajukan uji materiil pergub larangan [19] S.B. Olsen, E. Olsen, N. Schaefer, Governance baselines as a basis for adaptive plastik sekali pakai. https://www.mongabay.co.id/2019/04/23/asosiasi-dau marine spatial planning, J. Coast Conserv. 15 (2011) 313–322, https://doi.org/ r-ulang-ajukan-uji-materiil-pergub-larangan-plastik-sekali-pakai/, 2019. (Accessed 10.1007/s11852-011-0151-6. 29 May 2019). [20] A.J. Wright, M.P. Simmonds, B.G. Vernazzani, The international whaling [39] L. De Suriyani (Mongabay, Tolak uji materi ADUPI, warga mendukung pelarangan commission-beyond whaling, Front. Mar. Sci. 3 (2016) 1–7, https://doi.org/ plastik sekali pakai. Ada apa?. https://www.mongabay.co.id/2019/05/01/tolak-u 10.3389/fmars.2016.00158. ji-materi-adupi-warga-mendukung-pelarangan-plastik-sekali-pakai-ada-apa/, [21] Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries, Report on Performance of Ministry of 2019. (Accessed 29 May 2019). Marine Affairs and Fisheries - Year 2018, MMAF, Jakarta, 2018. [40] M. Castellote, C. Llorens, Review of the effects of offshore seismic surveys in [22] CBD-UNEP, The Jakarta Mandate - from Global Consensus to Global Work, 2000. cetaceans: are mass strandings a possibility? in: A.N. Popper, A.A. Hawkins (Eds.), https://www.cbd.int/doc/publications/jm-brochure-en.pdf. (Accessed 2 April Eff. Noise Aquat. Life II, Adv. Exp. Med. Biol. Springer ScienceþBusiness Media, 2019). New York, 2016, pp. 133–143, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2981-8_16. [23] F. van der Molen, How knowledge enables governance: the coproduction of [41] J.J. Finneran, C.E. Schlundt, B.K. Branstetter, J.S. Trickey, V. Bowman, K. Jenkins, environmental governance capacity, Environ. Sci. Pol. 87 (2018) 18–25, https:// Effects of multiple impulses from a seismic air gun on bottlenose dolphin hearing doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.05.016. and behavior, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 137 (2015) 1634–1646, https://doi.org/ [24] The Goverment of Buleleng, Keputusan Bupati Buleleng No. 523/630/HK/2011 10.1121/1.4916591. tentang Pencadangan Kawasan Konservasi Perairan di Kabupaten Buleleng, 2011. [42] D. Kreb, Facultative River Dolphins: Conservation and Social Ecology of Buleleng. Freshwater and Coastal Irrawaddy Dolphins in Indonesia, Universiteit van [25] B. Wilson, R.J. Reid, K. Grellier, P.M. Thompson, P.S. Hammond, Considering the Amsterdam, 2004. https://dare.uva.nl/search?identifier¼091e9f80-69fe-4ee9-a8 temporal when managing the spatial: a population range expansion impacts d5-682268a54502. protected areas-based management for bottlenose dolphins, Anim. Conserv. 7 [43] P.L.K. Mustika, Marine Mammals in the Savu Sea (Indonesia): Indigenous (2004) 331–338, https://doi.org/10.1017/S1367943004001581. Knowledge, Threat Analysis and Management Options, James Cook University, [26] L. Howes, C. Scarpaci, E.C.M. Parsons, Ineffectiveness of a marine sanctuary zone 2006. to protect burrunan dolphins (Tursiops australis sp.nov.) from commercial tourism [44] P.L.K. Mustika, Towards Sustainable Dolphin Watching Tourism in Lovina, Bali, in Port Phillip Bay, Australia, J. Ecotourism 11 (2012) 188–201, https://doi.org/ Indonesia, James Cook University, 2011. 10.1080/14724049.2012.713362. [45] CTI-CFF, Coral Triangle Initiative Regional Plan of Action, 2009. https://www. [27] I.M. Zainudin, M.P. Patria, P. Rahardjo, Yasman, D.A. Gautama, W.T. Prawira, mpaaction.org/sites/default/files/CTI_2009_RegionalPlanofAction.pdf. (Accessed Bycatch of sharks, marine mammals and seabirds in Indonesian Tuna Longline 22 February 2019). Fishery, Biodiversitas, J. Biol. Divers. 18 (2017) 1179–1189, https://doi.org/ [46] SEAFDEC, Cetacean research, in: Southeast Asian Waters: Cetacean Sighting 10.13057/biodiv/d180341. Program, 2010. http://map.seafdec.org/project/cetacean/pub-report-ws-23-2511 [28] P.L. Mustika, F.S. Purnomo, S. Northridge, A Pilot Study to Identify the Extent of 02010.php. (Accessed 22 February 2019). Small Cetacean Bycatch in Indonesia Using Fisher Interview and Stranding Data as [47] P.L.K. Mustika, C.C. Madusari, F.S. Purnomo, A. Setiawan, K. Tjandra, W. Proxies: Updated Report to the International Whaling Commission, Denpasar, E. Prabowo, Whale strandings in Indonesia, including the first record of a 2014. humpback whale (Megaptera novaeangliae) in the Archipelago, Raffles Bull. Zool. [29] T.S. Whitty, Governance potential for cetacean bycatch mitigation in small-scale 57 (2009) 199–206. fisheries:a comparative assessment of four sites in Southeast Asia, Appl. Geogr. 59 [48] M.D. McGinnis, E. Ostrom, Reflections on Vincent Ostrom, public administration, (2015) 131–141, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.01.003. and polycentricity, Publ. Adm. Rev. 72 (2011) 15–25, https://doi.org/10.1111/ [30] R. de Stephanis, J. Gim�enez, E. Carpinelli, C. Gutierrez-Exposito, A. Canadas,~ As j.1540-6210.2011.02488.x. main meal for sperm whales: plastics debris, Mar. Pollut. Bull. 69 (2013) 206–214, [49] L. Sharma-Wallace, S.J. Velarde, A. Wreford, Adaptive governance good practice: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.MARPOLBUL.2013.01.033. show me the evidence!, J. Environ. Manag. 222 (2018) 174–184, https://doi.org/ [31] M. Allsopp, A. Walters, D. Santillo, P. Johnston, Plastic Debris in the World’s 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.05.067. Oceans, Greenpeace, Amsterdam, 2006. [50] J.M. Mojica Velez,� S. Barrasa García, A. Espinoza Tenorio, Policies in coastal [32] I. Kiessling, Finding Solutions: Derelict Fishing Gear and Other Marine Debris in wetlands: key challenges, Environ. Sci. Pol. 88 (2018) 72–82, https://doi.org/ Northern Australia, National Oceans Office; Department of the Environment and 10.1016/j.envsci.2018.06.016. Heritage, Hobart - Tasmania, 2003. www.wildlife.ntu.edu.au. [51] G. Capano, J.J. Woo, Designing policy robustness: outputs and processes, Polic. [33] F. Thevenon, C. Carroll, J. Sousa, Plastic Debris in the Ocean: the Characterization Soc. 37 (2018) 422–440, https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2018.1504494. of Marine Plastics and Their Environmental Impacts, Situation Analysis Report, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland, 2015, https://doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.CH.2014.03.en.

16