A number of approaches can be used to implement capacity-building programs, including understanding the players and their roles in the process; developing formal and informal education, research, communication, and training programs; reaching out to communities; and networking. Through such efforts, infrastructure that can ensure that communities have the tools, knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to become effective stewards of their ocean and coastal environments can be developed. Because knowledge evolves, environments change, and new stewards come of age, flexibility and adaptability are important attributes of capacity-building processes and institutions. Capacity-building as an activity has evolved over the last 40 years; Appendix C presents a brief history.
Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 29
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century 3 GROWING CAPACITY FOR STEWARDSHIP OF OCEANS AND COASTS: AWORK IN PROGRESS HIGHLIGHTS This chapter: Details the people and organizations engaged in growing capacity for stewardship. Provides examples of capacity-building efforts on various scales of organization. Notes that current activities often lack coherence in providing sustained funding, recognizing ecosystem boundaries (as opposed to political boundaries), and establishing linkages among the various levels of government. A number of approaches can be used to implement capacity-building programs, including understanding the players and their roles in the process; developing formal and informal education, research, communication, and training programs; reaching out to communities; and networking. Through such efforts, infrastructure that can ensure that communities have the tools, knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary to become effective stewards of their ocean and coastal environments can be developed. Because knowledge evolves, environments change, and new stewards come of age, flexibility and adaptability are important attributes of capacity-building processes and institutions. Capacity-building as an activity has evolved over the last 40 years; Appendix C presents a brief history.
OCR for page 30
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century INVESTORS AND INVESTMENTS IN CAPACITY-BUILDING Identifying the Investors: Doers, Donors, and Practitioners People and organizations involved in growing capacity for stewardship of oceans and coasts may be involved as “doers” or “donors.” Doers are the people or organizations that share their tools, knowledge, skills, and attitudes through direct engagement with those who stand to benefit from enhanced capacity. Donors, who may also be doers, contribute monetary support and physical assets to capacity-building. A third category is the “practitioners” of ecosystem-based management (see Chapter 6), the primary targets of capacity-building. They work to steer the processes of governance and management toward stewardship outcomes. The practitioners are a subset of the many social and natural scientists, government officials, representatives of various stakeholder groups, and others that become engaged in an ocean or coastal management effort. They are usually directly engaged in the design and day-to-day administration of ocean and coastal management initiatives and in the management of interdisciplinary teams of specialists who are working to understand the issues involved in the management of an ocean or coastal ecosystem. Institutions that address the use and health of the marine environment vary in size and scope, ranging from small teams of local villagers to informal assemblages of concerned citizens to large bureaucracies and intergovernmental organizations and other international bodies. Similarly, the scale of investment in growing the capacity of those institutions to address ocean and coastal stewardship varies from projects at small sites to multiyear programs that include many sites and sometimes many countries. The major donors in ocean and coastal capacity-building typically are government agencies in both the developed world and the developing world. Most developed countries support capacity-building in ocean and coastal governance within their own institutions and through a variety of foreign-assistance programs. Substantial investments are made by the United States, the Nordic countries, the European Union, Canada, Japan, Taiwan, the People’s Republic of China, and Australia. Many charitable foundations have supported capacity-building efforts in ocean-related matters, such as the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation, the David and Lucile Packard Foundation, the Pew Charitable Trusts, the Ocean Foundation, the Sloan Foundation, and the Nippon Foundation. Governments of developing nations may also be donors. They often play a central role in supporting capacity-building through programs to increase expertise in the science and management of marine and coastal resources. Some developing countries contribute to building capacity in other countries, particularly within their own regions, through partnerships, such as the Sustainable Fisheries Livelihoods Programme in West Africa.
OCR for page 31
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century Their investments may be augmented or even overtaken by the short-term, usually large, investments of international development banks, diverse multilateral and bilateral donors, and nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). However, governments have the primary responsibility for ensuring that investments in capacity-building yield results in the form of improved management of ocean and coastal resources; this requires a commitment to maintain and support the human and institutional resources grown by capacity-building programs. Multilateral institutions that support capacity-building include the World Bank, the Global Environment Facility, the Inter-American Development Bank, the Asian Development Bank, and the United Nations and its specialized bodies, such as the Food and Agriculture Organization. NGOs in developed and developing nations contribute to education and outreach, surveillance and enforcement, scientific research and monitoring, management of visitor use in protected areas, and other management activities. Large environmental NGOs—such as The Nature Conservancy, the Wildlife Conservation Society, the World Wildlife Fund, the World Conservation Union (IUCN), and Conservation International—invest in capacity-building for ocean and coastal stewardship; and foreign-assistance agencies, such as the U.S. Agency for International Development and the UK Department for International Development, have established programs with NGOs to strengthen their structure and their ability to serve communities. Direct and indirect private-sector investments in coastal stewardship and public-private collaborations are increasing (Glasbergen, 1998; Hudson Institute, 2006). They include developer-financed conservation, restoration, and rehabilitation projects to comply with such regulations as policies for “no net loss” that require mitigation when wetlands are drained for development. There are also public-private partnerships, such as the teaming of municipal governments with chambers of commerce on watershed initiatives, and private financing of public-sector resource management, such as the generation of conservation funds through licensing fees (for example, for fishing, hunting, diving, and other recreational activities). The diversity of investment mechanisms and sources, spanning local community efforts and national programs, illustrates the many approaches to funding capacity-building. As discussed below, there is no central “clearinghouse” that catalogs these activities, so there is little or no coordination of efforts, and funding often falls short of creating a stable foundation for sustaining programs.
OCR for page 32
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century The Need to Know and Monitor How Much Is Invested It is nearly impossible to distinguish program funds dedicated specifically to ocean-related capacity-building. The committee believes that that is because of the following factors: Absence of a unified and accepted definition of capacity-building, which is often used as an umbrella term for development. Unclear definition of the components of capacity-building, especially distinctions between human and institutional components, at the project and program level. Lack of standardized methods for reporting data on ocean and coastal sectors. Lack of effective procedures for tracking where money is spent. Inclusion of ocean and coastal governance support in the broad category of funding for environmental programs. Although the exact amounts spent specifically on capacity-building are difficult to ascertain, the total investment in programs that contribute to various degrees in ocean and coastal stewardship is large. For example, a recent analysis of international funding for the management of large marine ecosystems (Olsen et al., 2006a) indicates that in 1997 the countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)1 spent an estimated US$2.24 billion on fisheries management (Wallis and Flaaten, 2000), an amount equivalent to 6% of the value of OECD fisheries landings. Emerton et al. (2006) summarize the latest available data on the amounts and sources of global funding for all protected area management; the funding totals US$6.5 billion a year. For comparison, Spergel and Moye (2004) estimate that the operation of a global network of marine protected areas alone could cost between US$7-19 billion a year. Olsen and Nickerson (2003) report that the Chesapeake Bay Program, an example of adaptive ecosystem management on the scale of a large estuary and its watershed, spends about US$70 million per year on efforts that are linked directly to program goals.2 Programs for the Great Barrier Reef of Australia and the Wadden Sea of the Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark each spend about US$20 million per year on management efforts (Olsen and Nickerson, 1 The 30 member countries of OECD are Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, México, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, the Slovak Republic, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States. 2 The area of the Chesapeake Bay is 6,475 km2, and its watershed extends over 172,000 km2. Management of the bay involves primarily efforts to control and reduce nutrients and pollutants that flow into the bay and its tributaries and to restore riparian and aquatic habitat to sustain estuarine fisheries (Olsen and Nickerson, 2003).
OCR for page 33
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century 2003).3 Those numbers provide some sense of the scale of investments in ocean and coastal management, of which capacity-building is a strategic component. HOW TO GROW CAPACITY Capacity-building efforts are designed to address particular ocean and coastal problems given the size and capabilities of the institutions involved (local, regional, and global). Some capacity-building efforts have targeted particular geographic regions; others have been aimed at specific sectors or problems or are more generally focused on enhancing capability in academic or professional disciplines. Some capacity-building emphasizes technical training and education, or technical assistance, whereas other efforts concentrate on improving governance institutions and empowering existing or new groups to use their own resources and skills more effectively. The ultimate goal of developing capacity for stewardship is to establish the institutions and cadre of professionals that will enable society to use and conserve ocean and coastal resources knowledgeably, taking into consideration the broad interests of society for current and future generations. That goal requires that laypeople trust and respect the advice and services of the institutions and professionals that support stewardship. The public entrusts professionals not only on the basis of their education and training but also through standardized systems for certifying or licensing them to provide evidence of their competence to provide the desired services (see discussion on professional standards in Chapter 5). Education, Training, and Outreach The primary modes of capacity-building for education, training, and outreach have been (1) academic degree programs with a focus on a specific discipline (such as biological oceanography, fisheries, economics, and political science); (2) academic degree programs, commonly at the master’s level, that provide a broad foundation in both the natural and the social sciences as applied to management of natural resources, typically including the public-policy dimension; (3) narrowly focused short-term training programs tailored to the performance of a specific set of stewardship activities; and (4) outreach and extension programs that provide technical assistance. Education, training, and outreach opportunities for community-based practitioners, whether within or outside a community, should take into account local circumstances, 3 Australia’s Great Barrier Reef covers an area of 347,800 km2; and the Wadden Sea, an estuary bordered by the Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark, covers an area of 13,500 km2.
OCR for page 34
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century including culture and mores. Ideally, programs take place within a community setting and provide an authentic environment for learning in both formal (classroom) and nonformal (for example, on-the-job) settings. On-the-job training allows local practitioners to learn the content in the specific context of the location where the tasks will be performed. Participants in education, training, and outreach need connections to the target community and the basic tools, knowledge, skills, and attitudes to build upon. Local, regional, and national governments and multilateral organizations can provide opportunities for people to study at foreign institutions and acquire the capabilities necessary to support community efforts. Academic Degree Programs Academic degree programs designed specifically to prepare for careers in ocean and coastal management have advanced greatly over the last 30 years. They cover a wide array of curricula, pedagogic techniques, and institutional settings that deliver capacity-building over a wide range of age and education levels, including: School programs (typically K–12, with awareness and exposure promoting “environmental literacy”). University programs focused on a specific social science or natural science. University master’s-level programs that provide a broader foundation in natural science, social science, and public policy. University outreach and extension programs (such as elements of the U.S. National Sea Grant College Program and the outreach programs of universities in the Philippines). Until recently, programs in ocean and coastal governance and stewardship were found only in developed nations. Increasing numbers of universities in developing countries now provide the necessary curricula and have the ability to tailor programs to the issues and needs of their nation or region. Several academic programs provide interdisciplinary studies in coastal management and marine policy (Table 3.1). They include longer-term degree-granting programs that educate people in key disciplines and feature interdisciplinary skills. Specialized university-based centers provide technical assistance, training, and evaluation services to many ocean and coastal governance initiatives worldwide. One particular challenge for all these programs is to remain current and avoid teaching antiquated approaches or perspectives. For example, ecosystem-based approaches are now favored for developing management policies in response to reports on the status
OCR for page 35
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century TABLE 3.1 Academic and Training Programs in Interdisciplinary Coastal Management and Marine Policya Country Program Australia Institute for Coastal Resource Management (University of Technology, Sydney) Canada International Ocean Institute (Dalhousie University) Fiji Ocean Resource Management Program (University of the South Pacific) Greece Rhodes Academy of Ocean Law India International Ocean Institute (Indian Institute of Technology) Japan International Ocean Institute Malaysia Malaysian Institute of Marine Affairs Malta International Ocean Institute The Netherlands Netherlands Institute for the Law of the Sea Singapore Asia-Pacific Centre for Environmental Law (National University of Singapore) Thailand South East Programme in Ocean Law, Policy, and Management (Sukhothai Thammathirat University) United States Gerard J. Mangone Center for Marine Policy (University of Delaware) United Kingdom University of Wales, College of Cardiff aThis table is not exhaustive but lists examples to demonstrate the global distribution of existing programs in developed and developing countries. of global ocean ecosystems, for example, as described by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005a, b, c, d) and the United Nations Environment Programme (2006). Although some sector-based programs (such as those in fisheries and aquaculture) have broadened and modernized to incorporate ecosystem perspectives, many programs still focus on maximizing production without emphasizing a sustainable balance between production and ecosystem impacts. Ideally, capacity-building increases the ability of practitioners to stay abreast of new information and applications to practices and policies. Training Programs Short-course training in ocean and coastal management ranges from an introduction to the concepts and tools of integrated forms of ocean and coastal management to highly specialized courses on single topics. For example, these short-course training programs can include:
OCR for page 36
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century Specialized training programs delivered by a wide array of for-profit organizations (for example, in leadership training), international organizations (such as the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission [IOC], the International Ocean Institute [IOI]), universities, and NGOs. Training via networks that foster peer-to-peer relationships, the sharing of experience, and collaborative learning. Web-based systems, which are increasingly valuable for making information readily available, that can organize and sort knowledge on specific topics. Some training programs are designed to be broadly applicable to a region or country; others are tailored to the geopolitical and cultural circumstances of a particular place. For example, the United Nations Train-Sea-Coast Programme (United Nations, 2006) has a basic curriculum in ocean and coastal management training that can be adapted to the needs of specific regions or countries. The program is based on a “learning by doing” pedagogic scheme that provides learners with practical experience while they learn broader issues and ways of doing things that connect directly to the targeted community. Tailoring capacity-building to a specific locale, as do the many programs devoted to community-based resource management, requires ascertainment of local needs and then development of ways to assist in capacity-building. Training often targets issues that are specific to management situations often found in developing nations. For example, fisheries management often has to address challenges posed by a shortage of information on fisheries stocks and by ineffective management institutions. Similarly, the surge in aquaculture activities in coastal areas, especially in Asia, has increased demand for short-term training in aquaculture that usually focuses on technological challenges—such as production efficiency, product safety, and environmental impact—and institutional and socioeconomic challenges. Such broad topics as pollution, habitat degradation, transportation, and tourism affect most coastal areas and are commonly covered in management training. As with any program, however, the challenge is to ensure that the content and perspectives of the training are both current and appropriate to the place. Some capacity-building efforts focus on training in highly specialized disciplines to achieve program objectives. For example, the IOC conducts training on harmful algal blooms, data and information management, and rapid assessment of marine pollution (Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission, 2002), and there is increasing recognition of the need for training in social sciences, ecosystem-based management, and business to accompany more common training programs in natural sciences and engineering. Responding to the inadequacy of technical capacity to address the design and main-
OCR for page 37
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century tenance of coastal infrastructure in the Caribbean region, the University of the West Indies in Trinidad and Tobago developed the following programs: Professional development and long-term capacity-building in coastal zone engineering and management. Long-term training in the design, construction, and maintenance of coastal infrastructure in the joint U.S. Agency for International Development and Organization of American States Hurricane Lenny Recovery Project (Charles and Vermeiren, 2002). Distance training through the introduction of postgraduate programs in distance-education packages, such as coastal-zone engineering and management courses at the undergraduate and graduate levels. The University of Rhode Island Coastal Resources Center (CRC) and the United Nations Train-Sea-Coast Programme are models of management training with an emphasis on the tools, knowledge, skills, and attitudes that are needed to help people and organizations to address multiple uses of and threats to coastal resources in a specific locale. They use learning-by-doing methods to enhance managers’ abilities to address local environmental issues. Stewardship of offshore ocean areas requires training in international law and policy. Subjects include the geography of marine jurisdictions, treaty law, and conflict resolution and negotiation. Many environmental-law curricula touch on those marine subjects, but thorough treatment depends on specialized degree programs, such as are found in institutes or schools of marine affairs. A handful of institutes provide training in or information on the legal aspects of international ocean management. For instance, IOI, which is based in Malta, has training programs in international maritime law and law of the sea and has gone from providing major inputs into the early development of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to providing training programs for coastal communities. The IOI network promotes sustainable use of ocean space and resources through increased awareness, education, information distribution, and research and community initiatives. IOI has thousands of training-program alumni around the world, many of them in influential decision-making positions in their home countries or the United Nations (International Ocean Institute, 2005). Outreach and Extension Programs Sustained outreach and extension programs have proved highly effective in changing the practices of target groups in such diverse fields as agriculture, fisheries and aquaculture,
OCR for page 38
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century and public health. The U.S. National Sea Grant College Program is one model for connecting colleges and universities with the community through extension; it is based on the larger U.S. Land-Grant University System model of cooperative extension (National Research Council, 1995). Several countries have adapted the U.S. National Sea Grant College Program model to their own needs or are exploring importing it (Wilburn et al., 2007). Mechanisms are needed to ensure that the content and usefulness of these programs are periodically evaluated and updated. In addition to formal extension programs, ad hoc outreach programs can be successful in facilitating local conservation initiatives. In the Philippines, Silliman University initiated outreach to communities on Apo Island to improve stewardship of the coral reefs. Biology faculty used informal slide presentations to the community on Apo Island to initiate discussion of the ecology of coral reefs, the resource degradation caused by dynamite fishing and other destructive fishing practices, and benefits of conservation initiatives (Alcala, 2001). The Marine Conservation Education Program was instrumental in the establishment of a reef sanctuary supported by a written agreement between the local municipality and Silliman University (Raymundo, 2002). This example illustrates that properly executed outreach can foster discussion between the people who benefit from technical assistance and the research and educational community in universities and government institutions. Extension programs are most effective when they are linked to a supportive institution that has complementary capabilities and programs in research and education. Outreach programs that began as short-term projects in many developing countries have often faltered when the projects have ended and the teams have been disbanded. A more effective strategy is to invest in building and sustaining permanent centers with diverse capabilities in each region. Permanent centers can respond to research needs on topics of direct relevance to management and can develop curricula that target regional issues. The Brain-Drain Effect Education and training opportunities are critical for the long-term sustainability of capacity-building programs. However, such efforts are wasted if those who are trained do not have the tools necessary to use their training, do not have jobs available to sustain their own livelihoods, or are lured away from their home communities by the possibility of increased wages elsewhere, as the committee learned from presentations and discussions at the workshop in Panamá (Appendix B). (For a general discussion of the scope and consequences of brain drain, see Lowell et al.  and National Research Council .) It is incumbent on capacity-building efforts to recognize the potential for brain drain and
OCR for page 39
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century formulate methods to minimize its impact. The methods can include education and training to produce new personnel to replace those who leave, using the trained personnel themselves as trainers, linking scholarships and sponsored training abroad to obligations to return and work in the trainees’ native countries, and ensuring that the social infrastructure—the ability to make a living with the skills acquired—is established so that there are incentives for trainees to return to their communities. In addition, retention may be increased by enabling scientists from the developing world to attend professional meetings and network among their peers in other nations to reduce a sense of isolation in their home countries (Third World Academy of Sciences, 2004). Technology and Tools Capacity-building includes the transfer of innovative tools and technologies to address ocean and coastal issues and to aid government decision-makers in fulfilling their ocean and coastal stewardship mandates. Financial support is required to provide appropriate training in the use of the tools and technologies and development of the capacity to maintain and update the data generated. That shortcoming has limited the success of some programs, as noted in an evaluation of World Bank support for capacity-building in Africa (The World Bank, 2005): [Technical assistance] has been effective when used for discrete and well-defined technical tasks and in the context of a clear [technical assistance] strategy that includes a phase-out plan. A majority of the projects reviewed support training individual staff, and projects have almost always achieved the targeted numbers to be trained. But public agency staff is often trained for specific tasks before they are positioned to use the training or before measures are taken to help retain them. In designing a technology scheme, it is necessary to consider both the physical infrastructure needs (such as electricity, computers, satellite dishes, and printers) and the companion technologies, such as software in the appropriate language and user-friendly format. Without a holistic perspective and efforts to translate new technologies into tools appropriate to decision-makers, doers, practitioners, and communities will be unable to realize the highest potential of these facilities. The development of information technology has revolutionized information transfer and accessibility. Individuals and communities can access and make available documents and information from remote locations, communicate globally in real time with audio and video, and exchange datasets, photographs, videos, and documents. By enabling the formation of virtual social networks, these communication tools have facilitated the exchange of information among communities from the local to the global scale. Moreover,
OCR for page 40
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century they have created communities around particular issues. Thus, a small isolated community can be connected to a global infrastructure and become part of the global community. Virtual networks constitute a venue for sharing and exchanging information, facilitate matching of user requirements with donor resources, and serve as a tool for linking activities that might otherwise be fragmented. Networks can also be used to identify and document shared problems on a given topic and generate an information base to share best practices, allow for standardization and harmonization of methods, and link training activities to infrastructure-building activities. (For more discussion of networks, see Chapter 5.) Specific data management technologies, such as a geographic information system (GIS), serve as powerful decision-support tools for ocean and coastal resource management. GIS can be used to capture, store, integrate, and display geographic reference information (U.S. Geological Survey, 2007). Other technologies include the global positioning system (GPS), a global high-accuracy, satellite-based system used in radio navigation systems and other location-detection systems (Reece, 2000). A vessel monitoring system (VMS) uses onboard equipment with built-in GPS that sends a message at predetermined intervals. It reports a vessel’s location and identification to independent observers at a central monitoring center. VMS has direct applications for fisheries, marine protected area enforcement, and maritime safety (Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, 2007b). One of the most ambitious technology-transfer efforts for capacity-building is associated with the Global Earth Observing System of Systems (GEOSS). GEOSS is envisioned as a system that starts with observations and uses them to provide information that will benefit such fields as health, climate, weather, ecosystems, biodiversity, disasters, and energy. The ocean and coastal observing components are included as the Global Ocean Observing System, an element of GEOSS that is being developed under the auspices of the IOC and the World Meteorological Organization. The design of those systems needs to extend from the ocean and coastal waters to shorelines and the associated watersheds; they are all critical links for developing effective ecosystem-based management and informed decision-making. Strengthening Institutions Enhancing the capacities of institutions to deal with ocean and coastal issues has emerged as a major focus of the capacity-building efforts of multilateral development banks and some bilateral aid organizations, particularly since the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development in 1992. In part, that occurred with the proliferation of
OCR for page 41
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century new integrated coastal management (ICM) or ocean area management efforts at national levels (as opposed to community pilot projects). It also stemmed from the observation that many investments in human-resources development and infrastructure met with little success because of institutional weaknesses that resulted in the inability to transfer investments effectively, efficiently, and equitably. Institutions may include local NGOs, civic groups, schools, and local, regional, or national government agencies or programs. Institutions provide organizational support for conservation and management initiatives and often enhance their legitimacy and impact. Some government organizations and NGOs have also begun to invest funds selectively in institutional capacity development. Box 3.1 highlights institution-building for ICM. The efforts in institution-building contribute to the larger goal of increasing capacity for ocean and coastal governance, discussed in more detail in chapters 5 and 6. Local and Community Institutional Capacity-Building A great deal of the investment in building institutions has been aimed at coastal communities. When successful, institution-building can increase the communities’ sense of identity and pride, build relationships between individuals and their communities, strengthen local government, and improve the capacity for local service delivery and information flow. Those are important steps in establishing conditions that allow citizens to become good stewards of their ecosystems. The results can be rewarding, especially where the scale and dynamics of the resources are appropriate for those of the local governance system. To reduce stresses on ecosystems, some capacity-building programs train people to earn a living in ways that do not exploit ocean or coastal resources. An example is the San Lorenzo project CEASPA (Centro de Estudios y Acción Social Panameño [the Panamanian Center for Research and Social Action]). CEASPA is a Panamanian NGO that works on very small-scale local projects, including that of Achiote, a small rural community that borders a tropical-forest region for which protection is being sought. Funding for the project—which involved small-scale efforts organized around ecotourism, bird-watching, local empowerment, and development of self-esteem—was only about US$110,000 in 2005–2006, but it depended heavily on volunteers (personal communication, Charlotte Elton). Another well-known example is the Chilean program of creating management and exploitation areas for benthic resources (MEABRs). The program instituted comanagement of several coastal areas where nontransferable fishing rights were used to allocate shellfish grounds exclusively to artisanal communities. There are over 185 MEABRs in Chile, and
OCR for page 42
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century Box 3.1 The University of Rhode Island Coastal Resources Center’s Approach to Building Institutional Capacity for Integrated Coastal Management Institutional capacity-building can be developed by using demonstration projects to develop a constituency at national and local levels. For example, global experience in ICM demonstrates the value of communicating and sharing knowledge about what works, what does not work, and why. Successful ICM programs also teach practitioners to integrate, analyze, and adapt knowledge and experience to the needs and contexts of a specific place. CRC developed an action strategy for a key coastal area, Fiji’s Coral Coast, to demonstrate how ICM could be implemented to address Fiji’s pressing national coastal management issues. CRC used personal coaching and mentoring to build the capacity of individuals and institutions. A national group was then established and mentored to advise and learn from Fiji’s Coral Coast demonstration site. That provided a focal point for inter-sector coastal issues and developed a constituency at the national and provincial levels for the development and adoption of a national policy framework for ICM. In its Community Development Program, CRC worked with local NGOs in the Balikpapan Bay area of East Kalimantan, Indonesia, to strengthen their capacity to implement community-based coastal livelihood and management initiatives. Another small group of ICM-oriented NGOs received assistance in building their organizations (for example, to help them to develop boards and organizational policies, procedures, protocols, and systems) to create a strong institutional underpinning for their primary mission of promoting sustainable resource management. this system of community-based fisheries management has yielded substantial improvements in harvest efficiency compared with open-access systems (Defeo and Castilla, 2005; Box. 3.2). Capacity-building will be more successful when it builds on existing capacity, as in the example of the community-based marine protected area of Isla Natividad in México, where local divers were trained by an NGO to carry out more technical ecological monitoring dives and where the local fishers cooperative was already committed to the use of closures to protect shellfish habitats (Box 3.3). Cooperatives are among the local-level institutions that provide capacity for ocean and coastal stewardship and that can benefit from efforts to “grow” institutional capacities. Existing cooperatives are often organized around marketing and technology, but they offer governance experience, infrastructure, social capital, and environmental knowledge that can be used to enhance ocean and coastal stewardship. The fishing cooperatives of the northwest coast of Baja California Sur (Box 3.3) may be useful models for improving governance. The cooperatives have been able to obtain exclusive fishing concessions from the
OCR for page 43
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century government and certification for sustainable fishing practices from the international MSC, working with local and international NGOs and government agencies (see Chapter 6). Local levels of governance are not necessarily on a small scale when urban areas are involved, and urbanization of coastal regions is a major trend. Local governments and cities clearly affect the world’s oceans and coasts. Efforts to reform urban develop- Box 3.2 Capacity-Building for the Comanagement of Chilean Coastal Fisheries The implementation of a national policy to achieve sustainable exploitation levels by restricting access to areas of the coastal seabed in Chile required a substantial investment in capacity-building for the training of fishers, technicians (such as divers and marine technical personnel), and graduate and undergraduate students who contributed to the scientific knowledge base. The Chilean Fisheries and Aquaculture Law of 1991 defines artisanal fishers and incorporates new regulations that affect user rights through three management components: allocation of exclusive fishing rights within five nautical miles of the shoreline to artisanal fishers, restriction of artisanal fishers’ access to the coastal zone adjacent to their regions of residence, and allocation of exclusive benthic-resource extractive rights in given areas of the seabed to organized unions, associations, cooperatives, and registered artisanal fishers. It took about 20 years to complete the full development and implementation of small-scale comanagement policies regarding the benthic resources of a subset of some 250 small-scale fishers in central Chile. During that time, the total investment was US$5.5 million, which supported the training of roughly 300 small-scale fishers, 28 technicians (such as divers and marine technical personnel), 4 doctoral and 2 masters candidates, and 34 undergraduate students. Researchers in central Chile studied the fisheries and ecosystems to understand restocking rates of benthic resources after area closures and facilitated the legal institutionalization of exclusive territorial user rights for fisheries for two artisanal associations (Caleta Quintay and Caleta el Quisco) and a no-take reserve (Estación Costera de Investigaciones Marinas in Las Cruces), which was established in 1982. This small initial project was the basis of expansion to more than 500 MEABRs, including more than 15,000 fishers along the Chilean coast. The measures have increased fishing income, retained and enhanced community and cultural identity, and served as a basis of community empowerment. Four elements contributed to the success of the effort: The existence of a well-organized system of artisanal fishing communities and national artisanal fisheries associations. Successes in the experimental pilot cases and the ability of fishing communities to replicate the successful examples. A clear set of rules and the existence of local know-how and technical capacities to expand the implementation of MEABRs. Research and publications by scientists who received substantial financial resources from Chile and abroad.
OCR for page 44
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century Box 3.3 Marine Reserve Pilot Project in Isla Natividad, Baja California Sur, México In August 2006, a marine reserve pilot project was begun in the waters of Isla Natividad through a partnership between a Mexican environmental group, Comunidad y Biodiversidad (COBI), and a fisheries cooperative, the Cooperative Society of Fishing Production Divers and Fishermen of Isla Natividad (Sociedad Cooperativa de Producción Pesquera Buzos y Pescadores de Isla Natividad). The cooperative had made a commitment to sustainable fisheries management, joining a federation of cooperatives that received Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) certification for their lobster fisheries in April 2004. This cooperative had even experimented with closed areas to protect shellfish, hired its own biologists, and set up routine monitoring of lobster and abalone stocks for management purposes. Isla Natividad, a fully protected marine reserve (that is, closed to all fishing and tourism), is a pilot program handled as field experiments with controls and scientifically designed monitoring to provide data that can be used to decide whether benefits of closures warrant continuation at the end of a 6-year agreement. The cooperative will use the results to help to decide whether to include fully protected marine reserves as part of its management strategy in the future (Comunidad y Biodiversidad, 2006). Scientific partnerships are an important aspect of the effort. COBI engaged the Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of Coastal Oceans (PISCO), a four-university consortium with substantial expertise in marine ecology and oceanography working on the California Current ecosystems of the U.S. west coast. The project is highly participatory, and local fishers perform much of the scientific monitoring. Equally important for the future success of the project is the fact that the program was developed by a local institution. The assessment and evaluation part of the program will include anthropologic exploration of incentives, motivations, social relations, and legal and cultural frameworks that influence this level of engagement by the cooperative and its members and by the partnerships (Comunidad y Biodiversidad, 2006). ment patterns in the last 20 years have focused on the concept of “sustainable cities” (Cities Alliance, 2007; Smart Growth Network, 2007; United Nations Human Settlement Programme, 2007), integrating sound ecological practices with continuing economic development. The move toward sustainability of urban environments has been coupled with the decentralization of urban governance. Such decentralization is challenging cities’ traditional tools, knowledge, skills, and attitudes to implement new governance structures and the management of city services for sustainability. Consequently, capacity-building efforts are also being directed toward political officials, midlevel managers, and others in the cities (Harris, 2006).
OCR for page 45
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century Regional Capacity-Building Large investments in institutional capacity-building are also being made on regional scales, although this geographic scaling up is a somewhat new development. The Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA) provides an example of a transboundary program that focuses on partnerships among countries in a broadly defined region to ensure resource sustainability (Box 3.4). A recent report sponsored by the World Bank calls for institutional capacity-building at the regional level and examines potentials for and constraints on regional scaling-up of marine management through marine protected areas (The World Bank, 2006). One of the relevant findings in the report is that marine protected areas are critical in addressing particular challenges of ocean and coastal resource management; however, other instruments may offer more cost-effective and socially acceptable options for scaling up effective marine management. Other instruments cited include MEABRs in Chile (Defeo and Castilla, 2005) and collaborative management areas in Tanzania (The World Bank, 2006). Recently, regional investments have been made to address issues within the frameworks of large marine ecosystems (LMEs). LMEs are regions of the ocean and coast that include watersheds, river basins, and estuaries and extend seaward to the boundary of continental shelves and margins of coastal current systems. LMEs are delineated according to continuities in their physical and biological characteristics, including bathymetry, substrate composition, hydrography, productivity, and trophically dependent populations. An LME creates an organizational unit for management and governance strategies and so improves coordination of approaches on larger-scale biological and physical processes to reduce fragmentation of data collection and analysis and improve regional decision-making. The LME approach was developed by IUCN, IOC and other United Nations agencies, and the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to build capacity and implement programs in the following five categories: Productivity—To measure the spatial and temporal distribution of temperature, salinity, oxygen, nutrients, primary productivity, chlorophyll, zooplankton biomass, and aspects of biodiversity. Fish and fisheries—To monitor catch and effort, conduct demersal and pelagic fish surveys, measure demographics of fish species, and conduct stock assessments. Pollution and ecosystem health—To measure indicators of quality of water, sediments, benthos, and habitats and indicators of fish tissue contamination.
OCR for page 46
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century Box 3.4 Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia Transboundary management issues have been acute in the seas of East Asia. The area bounded by Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, the People’s Republic of China, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (North Korea), Indonesia, Japan, Malaysia, the Philippines, the Republic of Korea (South Korea), Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam has been under intense environmental pressure. The degradation of the region has affected the social structures and economies of the region while depleting resources and affecting human health. Because multiple jurisdictions contribute to the scale of environmental degradation, no single government could be successful in fixing the problems. PEMSEA was established through the United Nations Development Programme/ Global Environment Facility as the mechanism of intergovernmental cooperation to sustain the natural, sociologic, and economic vitality of the region and to reverse trends of environmental degradation. PEMSEA emphasizes a holistic, integrative approach to regional governance of the environment through integrated coastal zone management processes and risk-assessment procedures. It initiates networking between local governments to facilitate expanded capacity-building in the region. Through those efforts, the countries of the region can develop and expand their intellectual capital and educate the public about their role as stewards of their environment. This successful program required the political will of the constituent countries and an influx of political, monetary, and human capital into the program. Multiple political and social components, including NGOs, are partners in PEMSEA. The 2006 evaluation of PEMSEA (Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia, 2006) concludes that it is “a success worthy of close analysis and possible replication.” The committee recognizes PEMSEA as a model for the development and implementation of a cooperative program to advance capacity-building, ensure regional security, and manage and sustain local resources. Socioeconomics—To measure economic benefits and costs and social effects of uses of LMEs (Sutinen, 2000). Governance—To foster governance institutions to manage uses of LMEs (Juda and Hennessey, 2001).4 Regional Seas programs, under the auspices of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), are another large-scale example of capacity-building for ocean and coastal management. Regional institutional capacity-building for the Western Indian Ocean is an example within the framework of the 1985 UNEP Regional Seas Convention. A major endeavor was the creation of Marine Science for Management, a science associa- 4 A handbook was published on governance and socioeconomics of large marine ecosystems by Olsen et al. (2006a).
OCR for page 47
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century tion supported mainly by the Swedish Agency for International Development Cooperation (2007) and designed to enhance local scientific capacity for ocean and coastal management. Although it is generally viewed as a success, the problems encountered by the program underscore the difficulty and importance of gaining full participation from each partner country; the effects of differences in political, legal, and institutional frameworks; and the challenges of developing truly sustainable local capacity. Capacity-Building on a Global Scale Many international organizations and governments are working toward the establishment of a global system for earth observations that will be networked, integrated, and used for societal benefits. The Group on Earth Observations has the mandate to implement a global system of earth observations; ocean observations would be an integral component. International capacity-building is viewed as a necessary step toward implementation and effective use of global-scale ocean observation systems; many international groups—such as the Partnership for Observation of the Global Oceans (POGO), the Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research (SCOR), and the IOC—are establishing programs to enhance participation of scientists in developing nations. Several specific capacity-building programs are described below. SCOR contributes to capacity-building by ensuring that every SCOR working group includes scientists in developing countries and countries whose economies are in transition. SCOR provides travel support for scientists in economically disadvantaged nations to attend international scientific meetings through a grant from the U.S. National Science Foundation. Some of the funding is used to support longer-term courses or fellowships, including a program of visiting fellowships for oceanographic observations through POGO. SCOR is developing a capacity-building activity to foster the establishment of regional centers of excellence in marine-science education in Southeast Asia, South America, Africa, and South Asia. The regional graduate schools of oceanography and marine environmental sciences would organize a variety of regional activities in graduate education, bringing together national resources to meet regional needs (Scientific Committee on Oceanic Research, 2007). The Nippon Foundation and the POGO Visiting Professorship Programme send eminent oceanographers to institutions in developing countries so that they can provide onsite training and mentoring. The goal is for visiting professors and trainees to study and conduct field work together and so foster the exchange of ideas and knowledge. Sustained contacts between trainer and trainees are encouraged even after the formal program has come to an end, and there are plans for evaluating the effects on the trainees’ careers.
OCR for page 48
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century In 2007, POGO, in cooperation with the Nippon Foundation, announced a new project to establish a Centre of Excellence in Oceanography at one of the POGO member institutes to provide training for oceanographers in developing countries (Partnership for Observation of the Global Oceans, 2007). POGO promotes opportunities for joint activities between developed and developing countries’ institutions as another avenue toward capacity-building. For example, in response to the POGO call for increased observations in the undersampled waters of the Southern Hemisphere, the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology (JAMSTEC) organized a southern circumpolar cruise. JAMSTEC made it a policy to provide opportunities for participation of scientists in developing countries of the region. In addition, JAMSTEC reserved some berths on each leg of the cruise for trainees from developing countries. The onboard training program was implemented by POGO and the International Ocean Colour Coordinating Group with additional support from the IOC. The IOC’s capacity-building effort has extensive programs to train the leaders of oceanographic institutions in developing countries through a series of workshops and meetings. The goal is to identify regional needs and promote sound leadership. IOC also has a floating university program that provides opportunities for scientists to learn how to make scientific measurements at sea and to analyze and apply oceanographic data. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Capacity-building efforts are supported by donors who are motivated to build capacity for responsible stewardship. Successful efforts are conducted by dedicated and capable doers in association with highly motivated practitioners who are intent on improving their communities. However, there is a lack of comprehensive information on investments in and outcomes of efforts in capacity-building. The investment in growing capacity is considerable, but good estimates are not available, because data on capacity-building investments are widely scattered, terminology (such as capacity-building) is not used consistently, and many of the data are inaccessible because donors consider them confidential. In addition to information on the magnitude of capacity-building investments, information on the categories of investments (such as the classification scheme used by the World Bank), the approaches used, participation and partnerships, objectives and performance measures, and outcomes would be valuable in developing strategies to enhance the value of future investments. The committee recommends that donors and doers standardize data collection and analysis to allow the comparison of outcomes among various programs. Such comparisons would increase understanding of the mechanisms and drivers of capacity-building
OCR for page 49
Increasing Capacity for Stewardship of Oceans and Coasts: A Priority for the 21st Century efforts and would help donors and doers to develop more successful programs. At a high-level summit meeting (see chapters 4 and 7) or in another venue, metrics should be collectively established to categorize and assess the wide array of capacity-building processes (for example, differentiating between human or institutional resources and physical infrastructure developments). Investments should be cataloged according to those capacity-building categories to facilitate analysis of program components and comparison of outcomes among programs. Assessing outcomes is similarly plagued by the lack of information, particularly about governance. The committee recommends that donors sponsor an effort to use case studies in this regard. Case studies are valuable for planning and outreach—they illustrate the lessons learned from both successes and failures. Sets of case studies should be commissioned for each region, including an analysis of relevant governance structures. The case studies should be designed to invite documentation and comparison. The processes and outcomes of governance need to be examined in relation to changes in the condition of the ecosystem (both its human and its environmental components). Such case studies should examine both success and failure in ocean and coastal governance initiatives and should be used as teaching tools in training and university-based curricula and as a means of encouraging transparency and accountability.