An Integrated Management Policy Framework for Sustainable Community Development and Conservation of Marine Resources Presented By: Dr. Muhammad Mehedi Masud Outline of the presentation

. Research Objectives . Methodology . Marine Protected Areas . MPAs for sustainable community development . MPAs in Malaysia . Review of Articles . Problem Statement of the study . Conceptual Framework . Results and Discussions . Proposed Integrated Policy Framework . Significance of the study Research Objectives

. To evaluate community perspectives on effective management of MPAs and its impact on economic, social and environmental sustainability. . To examine the impact of economic, social and environmental sustainability on sustainable community development. . To develop an integrated management policy framework for sustainable community development.

3 METHODOLOGY Mixed Methods

Qualitative Method Quantitative Method  Document Analysis ( department of MP,  Questionnaire Survey fisheries, MIMA,IUCN,WWF, CBD, Articles,  Targeted sample size was 300. books, )  The data for this study were obtained from face-to-face interviews of direct users of marine park resources, using a structured questionnaire.

Study Area Total population Targeted Sample Size Tioman Island MP 3,440 300*3440/5617= 184 Redang Island MP 2,013 300*2013/5617= 107 Tinggi Islnad MP 164 300*164/5,617= 9 Total 5,617 300

4 Marine Protected Areas

5 Coral Triangle Countries

6 What is Marine Protected Areas?

7 Importance of MPAs

Economics Importance of MPAs

Social Environmental Importance of Importance of MPAs MPAs - Examples Review of Articles

MPAs Focus Area Malaysia Biology Socio-economics Governance Islam et al., 2017 Pulau Perhentian Marine Park ✓ Pulau Kapas Marine Park Masud et al., 2016 Pulau Tioman Marine Park ✓ Pulau Redang Marine Park Pulau Tinggi Marine Park Masud et l., 2014 Pulau Tioman Marine Park ✓ Pulau Redang Marine Park Pulau Tinggi Marine Park Arabamiry et al., 2013 Pulau Perhentian Marine Park ✓ Islam et al., 2013 Pulau Perhentian Marine Park ✓ Manaf et al., 2011 Pulau Tinggi Marine Park ✓ Mohd Salleh et al., 2011 Pulau Redang Marine Park ✓ Musa, 2003 Pulau Sipadan Marine Park ✓ Najib and Ahmad, 2002 Pulau Payar Marine Park ✓ Shamsul, 2012 Pulau Redang Marine Park ✓ Yacob, 2009 Pulau Payar Marine Park ✓ Yacob et al., 2007 Pulau Redang Marine Park ✓ Yeo, 2004 Pulau Payar Marine Park ✓ Thailand Adsafu-Adjaye & Tapsuwan, 2008 Mu Ko Similan National Park ✓ Seenprachawong, 2003 Phi Phi National Marine Park ✓ Bennett and Dearden, 2014 Andaman Coast (17 National Marine Parks) ✓ Review of Articles Philippines Biology Socio-economic Governance Arin and Kramer, 2002 Anilao, Batangas , Mactan Island, Cebu Alona Beach, Bohol ✓ Christie, 2005 Mabini, Batangas ✓ ✓ Christie, 2004 San Salvador Island ,Twin Rocks , Balicasag Island ✓ ✓ ✓

Christie and White, 2007 Philippines (3 MPAs) ✓ Garces et al., 2013 Calamianes Island ✓ Russ et al., 2004 Apo Islands Subade, 2007 Tubbataha Reefs UNESCO Heritage Site ✓ White, 1986 Apo Island ,Sumilon Island , Moalboal, Cebu ✓ ✓ Sombrero Island, Apo Reefs, Calauit Island White and Palaganas, 1991 Tubbataha Reef National Marine Park ✓ Indonesia Alder et al., 1994 Kepulauan Seribu ,Bunaken-Manado Tua ✓ Taka Bone Rata National Parks Christie, 2005 Bunaken National Park ✓ Glaser et al., 2010 Spearmonde Archipelago ✓ Gina Elliott, 2001 Wakatobi National Park ✓ Leisher et al., 2012 Raja Ampat MPA Newman and LeDrew, 2005 Bunaken National Park ✓ Ross and Wall, 1999 North Sulawesi ✓ White, 1986 Bali Barat ✓ ✓ Vietnam Pham et al., 2005 Hon Mun Marine Protected Area ✓ Svensson et al., 2008 Hotel Managed Marine Reserve, Whale Island Resort ✓ 11 Problem Statement

. The success of MPAs can be understood through perceptions of stakeholders about the effectiveness and quality of management and governance policies, institutions, and processes (Pomeroy et al., 2004; Lockwood, 2010;Hind et al., 2010; Webb et al., 2004). . The management activities are not well coordinated with the Department of Fisheries and other important stakeholders. . The Department of Marine Park works under the jurisdictions of Federal government in Peninsular Malaysia, while in East Malaysia, Sabah Wildlife Department works under the State government (Islam et al.,2017).  This has resulted lack of coordination, cooperation and management conflict between federal and state government (Kaur, 2006). . MPA rules are difficult to enforce without effective coordination between the Department of Marine Park and the Department of Fisheries (Islam et al.,2017). . No evidence is found that top down centralised management approach can manage the MPAs effectively and benefit local people in MPA areas in Malaysia. . Absence of implementation of integrated management plan Yacob (2010). 12 Problem Statement

. MPs in Malaysia are challenging several issues such as low socioeconomic status of MPC (Samah, et al., 2011) environmental degradations (Kaur, 2007), “top down approach” in management (Siry, 2006), and poor Infrastructure development. . Firstly, MPC possess ‘Low Standard of living’ (Samah et al., 2011) due to possession of limited resources, lack of immovable property and poor economic & social Infrastructure to confront the many challenges (Cabanban & Nais, 2003; Hanim, Salleh, Redzuan, & Nurul Fahana Aini, 2010). . The Department of Marine Park has established a set of rules and regulations to protect and conserve marine biodiversity especially the fisheries and coral reefs in the MPA areas. . The no take fishing in the MPA areas has created problems in the islands especially where many households rely on fishing for their livelihoods. . The rules for MPA management are difficult to enforce as the poor fishers have no alternative source of income and the rules set without adequate consideration for the fishers' livelihoods. . Most importantly, Malaysian government have eradicated poverty remarkably. However, there is still pocket poverty remain in the coastal areas.

13 Problem Statement

. In Malaysia, the main reasons for coral degradation are due to the large number of tourists visiting the marine parks, construction of land based tourism infrastructures, fishing, and pollution through waste disposal and littering (Islam et al., 2013; Reef Check Malaysia, 2011). . Wattage et al. (2011) found that the major threat to coral reefs come from human activity which has not been addressed in the management of MPA.

 Having Environmental problems like increasing solid waste generation, water pollution and climate change.

 Because of haphazard rapid development, lack of environmental conservation practices, Lack of awareness, poor enforcement and public laziness among tour operators, tourists and local community (Ahmad, 2003), and Lack of community based ecotourism. 14 Conceptual Framework

Good Governance

Economic Sustainability

Sustainable Effective Social Community Management Sustainability Development

Environmental Sustainability

Proposed Conceptual Model Results and Discussions Socio-economic Status  Human Assets Environmental assets  8% do not have formal education while 1.7 % university education. No agricultural land, No water supply   Health status of MPC is satisfactory as 80 % Few people have Only 27% own their land of the respondents are in good health while at the marine park  20% are suffering from various diseases Only 17% of the respondents are involved with rubber tapper while some of  Social Assets them have buffalo firm in Redang Island.  48 % of the respondents have membership in various association. oPhysical Assets  MP community are not getting enough support for their schooling, land grand, peer o Most of the respondents agree that support, home care services, training etc. roads, transportation, hospitals/clinics,  Alcohol addiction and unethical activities schools, & grocery stores have not increasing improved after the gazettement. o  Financial Assets But there personal resources have improved house, car, TV, refrigerator, boat,  Lower Income bicycle etc.  44% are low-income group 16 Confirmatory Factor Analysis Fit indices for CFA Measurement Model: Normed X2=2.98, Effective Management of Marine Protected Areas Loadings Loadings CFI =0. 923, RMSEA = 0.076, RMR =0.063, Marine Park Department are effective in MPA management 0.72 Economic Sustainability Government has adequate budget for MPA management 0.70 Everybody is getting equal opportunity in terms of 0.86 Various stakeholders, Communities, religious leaders and both 0.80 employment genders participate in MPA management-related activities The MPA is integrated into a long-term management plan 0.79 Business opportunities for local residents are available 0.80 Community member can easily get loan to start a business 0.81 Long-term management plan includes environmental 0.79 sustainability The establishment of MPAs bring more financial benefit to 0.85 The regulations/policies for the MPA management are 0.70 our family implemented Social Sustainability There is a lack of coordination between local community, 0.77 Community provides assistance when needed 0.70 mangers and stakeholders in relation to the MPA management. Schooling facilities for children are satisfactory 0.79 Sustainable Community Development I have more educational opportunities due to establishment 0.79 Human capital like educational opportunities and health 0.79 of MPA services are available here I have membership in the association/organization 0.86 Health services like clinics, hospitals are available here 0.78 I am getting enough support or assistance from community 0.76 Teens here facing social problems due to mixing of cultures 0.79 members, peers, neighbours, colleagues when needed Environmental Sustainability Economic situation of the community is better than before 0.77 Eco-system has been improved within MPAs 0.70 establishment of MPAs MP management are very concern about environmental 0.79 Environmental assets like agricultural land, land ownership, fish 0.81 development and marine resources are available here Tourists and local community are encouraged to for 0.82 Infrastructures like roads, electricity, water, public transport 0.79 sustainable use natural resources have been developed within MPAs We are affected by climate change, sea level rise and pollutions 0.81 17 Environmental sustainability can protect marine and natural 0.86 etc. resources Convergent and Discriminant Validity

Table 3: Convergent and Discriminant Validity

CR AVE EFM ES SS Env.S SCD Effective Management of MPAs 0.867 0.560 0.748 Economic Sustainability 0.851 0.691 0.712 0.831 Social Sustainability 0.861 0.612 0.707 0.511 0.782 Environmental Sustainability 0.863 0.635 0.208 0.214 0.184 0.796 Sustainable Community Development 0.881 0.615 0.354 0.452 0.211 0.671 0.784

Legends: EFM = Effective Management ;ES=Economic Sustainability, SS = Social Sustainability, Env.S = Environmental Sustainability, SCD = Sustainable

Community Development.

18 Hypotheses with path coefficient

Hypotheses Relationship Estimate t-value Remark

H1 ES <--- EFM 0.341** 2.188 Supported

H2 SS <--- EFM 0.422*** 6.505 Supported

H3 Env.S <--- EFM 0.293*** 2.895 Supported

H4 SCD <--- ES 0.422*** 6.505 Supported

H5 SCD <--- SS 0.261 2.103 upported

H6 SCD <--- Env.S 0.293** 2.158 Supported

***, ** and *= significant at α=1%, and 5%, respectively

19 RECOMMENDED POLICY FRAMEWORK

Sustainable Community Development

20 Significance of the study/ Contribution of the study

 This study will fulfil the dearth of literatures locally and globally.  This framework will contribute to manage MPAs effectively locally and internationally.  This will help policy makers to achieve the objectives of MPAs  Last but not least, It will contribute to eradicate pocket poverty and lead to SCD.

21 Thank you

22