5
WHAT ASPECTS OF CAPACITY-BUILDING NEED MORE EMPHASIS?

HIGHLIGHTS

This chapter:

  • Discusses underemphasized but critically important aspects of capacity-building, including governance, monitoring and enforcement, and leadership development.

  • Describes the need for sustainability in capacity-building efforts.

  • Outlines the importance of effective program assessment, transfer of information, and investment in networks.

At the outset of a project to improve ocean and coastal stewardship, capacity-building may not have top priority for funders, project managers, and community leaders. Often, there is an impulse to take immediate action that will have quick, demonstrable results coupled with an initial under-recognition of the value of growing capacity for sustaining the impact of individual projects. However, time and experience increase incentives to invest in capacity-building as people see the need for longer-term projects and grass-roots efforts. Longer-term projects can rarely be sustained if there is little or no effort to improve the capabilities of the responsible people, from local stakeholders to government officials. Establishment of a lasting program requires addressing, with or without outside assistance, the various, sometimes conflicting, priorities of the stakeholders and the challenges that they face.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



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 63
5 what asPects of caPacIty- BuIldIng need more emPhasIs? HIGHLIGHTS This chapter: • Discusses underemphasized but critically important aspects of capacity-building, including governance, monitoring and enforcement, and leadership develop- ment. • Describes the need for sustainability in capacity-building efforts. • Outlines the importance of effective program assessment, transfer of informa- tion, and investment in networks. At the outset of a project to improve ocean and coastal stewardship, capacity-building may not have top priority for funders, project managers, and community leaders. Often, there is an impulse to take immediate action that will have quick, demonstrable results coupled with an initial under-recognition of the value of growing capacity for sustaining the impact of individual projects. However, time and experience increase incentives to invest in capacity-building as people see the need for longer-term projects and grass-roots efforts. Longer-term projects can rarely be sustained if there is little or no effort to improve the capabilities of the responsible people, from local stakeholders to government officials. Establishment of a lasting program requires addressing, with or without outside assistance, the various, sometimes conflicting, priorities of the stakeholders and the challenges that they face. 63

OCR for page 63
64 INCREASING CAPACITY FOR STEWARDSHIP OF OCEANS AND COASTS NEEDS ASSESSMENTS FOR CAPACITY-BUILDING The foundation for programs to improve ocean and coastal stewardship and establish ecosystem-based management depends on identification of constraints and assessment of gaps in knowledge and capabilities. Existing capacity (for example, institutional, mana- gerial, scientific, and governance) and high-priority needs can best be determined by combining the perspectives of the capacity-builders (such as governments, donors, and doers) and recipients or practitioners to ensure that the efforts are sensitive to the needs of the specific site in question (whether on a local, national, regional, or global scale), the particular scope of the needs, and the target audience. The success of an effort will depend on the availability of knowledge of the perspectives of the many groups involved in ocean and coastal management before design and implementation to ensure that the program engages and addresses the concerns of the affected communities. Setting clear and realistic goals for capacity-building projects that account for the different incentives of traditional and nontraditional stakeholders is critical for establishing benchmarks of suc- cess. The participatory approach helps in the development of programs that are culturally appropriate and that will garner the support of stakeholders. Needs assessments indicate where capacity is inadequate and can be used to leverage the resources required for increasing capacity. Assessments may identify opportunities to raise public awareness; to perform outreach activities, to link communities to enhance local capacities, and to strengthen education through formal curricula, informal meth- ods, or other nontraditional means. Additional opportunities may center on training and technical assistance to develop the individual capacities of environmental assessment specialists, planners, managers, researchers, and enforcement personnel. The training might include classic project design and management capabilities but also might involve financial planning and management, communication, and conflict resolution and negotia- tion. Some important opportunities for capacity-building will involve identification and grooming of leaders and continuing support for emerging leaders in ocean and coastal management at all levels. The importance of leadership and of fostering future leaders is discussed in more detail later in this chapter. SUSTAINING CAPACITY AND CAPACITY-BUILDING EFFORTS Capacity is grown through the cumulative efforts of practitioners, doers, and donors to develop self-sustaining programs of knowledge-based ocean and coastal ecosystem-based stewardship. It takes a long time to yield the greatest societal benefits and to adapt to the continually changing conditions of ocean and coastal ecosystems. As ocean and coastal stewardship takes root, sustaining capacity and capacity-building programs becomes a

OCR for page 63
65 WHAT ASPECTS OF CAPACITY-BUILDING NEED MORE EMPHASIS? major issue. The typical duration of a program may be adequate to initiate better systems for stewardship, but longer periods are often required to establish self-sufficiency; this applies to initiatives on scales ranging from community-based projects to large marine ecosystem programs. Responsibility for ocean and coastal stewardship ultimately rests with the governing institutions that have the incentive, if not the means, to maintain and grow capacity. Not enough attention is being given to the long-term financing required to imple- ment capacity-building programs and to practice adaptive management over the decades required to effect substantial change (Olsen et al., 2006a). Many promising efforts wither and die when external funding from a donor community or development banks ends. That issue is often discussed by people involved in capacity-building, but there continues to be little information on the financing of capacity-building activities. Most guides to building capacity have concentrated on financing for marine protected areas (World Conservation Union, 2000; World Wildlife Fund, 2004). There is an urgent need for guidelines on sus- tainable financing for the broader issues of ocean and coastal governance. Donor Collaboration The very short-term planning horizons and project life cycles that characterize investments in building capacity are part of the problem. Donors are naturally reluctant to provide open-ended support, preferring short-term catalytic roles. Long-term sustainable financing is rarely built into project design, so efforts to increase capacity are piecemeal and cease abruptly when funding runs out. The sustainability of capacity-building efforts could be improved by the explicit inclusion of an exit strategy in plans funded by governments or donors. Sometimes, a donor’s world view and agenda produce a “donor-driven” program, often unintentionally, that is not embraced by the targeted communities. A more effec- tive role for donors is to support compatible agendas that governments and communities have adopted, that is, “client-driven” agendas. By working through programs developed in concert with the targeted communities and governments, donor-funded initiatives can more readily transition into self-sufficient programs. Cooperation among donors can add to capacity-building initiatives. Without coop- eration, donors may support the same types of programs, and this would result in redun- dancy, wasted effort, and competition for the same skilled professionals. However, lack of coordination may leave some important issues unaddressed or underfunded. Joint efforts can result in greater efficiency and can reduce transaction costs. After the initial needs assessment, donors, doers, and practitioners can use this information to set priorities to

OCR for page 63
66 INCREASING CAPACITY FOR STEWARDSHIP OF OCEANS AND COASTS ensure that the donor assistance addresses the higher priority needs. A coordinated effort by donors can assist nations in implementing their obligations under international and regional conventions. For example, at the international level, many governments have adopted the Millennium Development Goals and the targets of the World Summit on Sustainable Development (WSSD). Coordination and cooperation can also help to create public/private partnerships and link capacity-building efforts in coastal management to those of other initiatives, such as poverty reduction, community development, and eco- nomic development. The Mesoamerican Barrier Reef System Project in México, Belize, Honduras, and Guatemala is a notable example of regional coordination among neighboring countries and international organizations (such as the Caribbean Environment Program, the World Bank, and the Inter-American Development Bank), unilateral aid organizations (such as the U.S. Agency for International Development), private foundations (such as the Summit Foundation, the Oak Foundation, Avina, and MarViva), and nongovernmental organiza- tions ([NGOs] such as the World Wildlife Fund, The Nature Conservancy, Conservation International, and the World Conservation Society). The 1997 Tulum Declaration adopted by the heads of state of México, Belize, Honduras, and Guatemala and an initial inter- governmental action plan indicated high-level support for managing the Meso-American Reef as a single ecological unit. In 2005, the various groups participated in a reiterative consultation with many stakeholders to develop the Meso-American Reef Conservation Action Plan, which established high-priority needs for guiding funding decisions by donors. Capacity-building activities occurred at all levels: scientists, government officials, and local communities. The Conservation Action Plan was presented and adopted by the environment ministers, and a regional coordinating body of ministers played an oversight role. The efforts increased collaboration and sharing of information among all participants, promoted synergies, and avoided duplication of efforts. Economic and Financial Considerations The success of capacity-building efforts at the community, national, and global levels depends on a broad understanding among stakeholders of the need for preinvestment to achieve the long-term economic benefits of ocean and coastal stewardship. Before stake- holders will engage in the sometimes tedious and expensive process of implementing stewardship projects and building the necessary capacities, they must expect to receive some return in their investment in the form of social capital. For example, rationalizing the use of fisheries could be viewed as a means for economic enhancement. Restricting access to limited resources, such as oil and gas or mineral reserves, could be described

OCR for page 63
67 WHAT ASPECTS OF CAPACITY-BUILDING NEED MORE EMPHASIS? as a way to benefit communities through revenue-sharing for the purpose of sustaining higher incomes. Stakeholders need to understand that for longer-term sustainability goals to be met, access to resources may have to be limited. That is often difficult to communicate and may require financing to compensate resource users in the short term. Self-financing, com- munity-pooled lending funds, and government loan funds could be used to assist people who are often desperate to meet short-term needs. Regulations and institutions developed through capacity-building will be sustained only if there is adequate monitoring, enforce- ment, and funding. It may be difficult for institutions and the public to justify such funding when faced with other serious short-term needs, so program planning should place high priority on educating stakeholders in the economic and financial realities of ocean and coastal stewardship to build long-term public support. A basic understanding of how markets work is also critical for sustaining conserva- tion initiatives over the long term. For instance, fish markets are international, and market prices are beyond local community control. Recognizing that helps fishers to choose strategies with less risk and to enhance the value and sustainability of their resource base. Global thinking and local strategies will be required for success in the global marketplace, including an appreciation of how market niches work (for example, green and organic certifications and ecotourism), the concession process by which governing agents allo- cate access to resources, and how these processes work for and against fishers or other resource users. Governing institutions play a critical role in smoothing the transition from short-term resource exploitation to development of long-term, sustainable strategies. Governments have financial mechanisms available to compensate for short-term losses of revenue, such as taxes, user charges, borrowing (in the form of bonds and loans), and grants. Many other mechanisms could provide sustainable financing. For example, funding might be sustained by accessing a share of lottery revenues; dedicated revenues from wildlife stamps; tourism-related fees; fees for ecolabeling and certification, for nonrenewable- resource extraction, or for bioprospecting; fishing licenses and fishing-access agreement revenues; fines for illegal activities; campaigns to establish trust funds; and income derived from local enterprises, such as handicrafts and aquatic products. Collaboration between governments and donors is critical to transition from the shorter-term funding provided by the donor community to sustainable financing from governments or market-based mecha- nisms to ensure long-term support.

OCR for page 63
68 INCREASING CAPACITY FOR STEWARDSHIP OF OCEANS AND COASTS Additional Factors That Affect Sustainability The duration of government and donor funding is not the only factor that determines the sustainability of capacity. Capacity is more likely to be sustained under the following circumstances: • The capacity that is built has high priority for the recipients. • The capacity is suitable for the local context in which it is placed. For example, in most developing countries, a small coastal research vessel, which is relatively inexpensive to operate and maintain, would be more suitable than a large ocean- ographic vessel. • The developing country has institutions that can make use of the capacity, for example, fishery management institutions that can make use of increased capac- ity to assess the status of fish stocks to adjust fishing activities. • There is a “critical mass” of diverse capacities so that professionals are not isolated but have access to the expertise required to use their own capacities effectively. For example, developing expertise in fish nutrition for use in a hatchery will not result in a successful hatchery operation unless there is also access to expertise in fish diseases. • There is a long-term strategy to replace donor support with support from within the developing country or countries, for example, through government appropria- tions or user fees. The Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific (NACA; Box 5.1) is a good example of partnership institutions that are building capacity for responsible aquaculture in harmony with the environment and other industry sectors. NACA is noteworthy because its government members are primarily developing countries working together to help their own people. Discussions are under way to partner with countries in Africa to form a network among developing nations on different continents. NACA has been sustained for more than 30 years—an exception to the typically short duration of capacity-building programs. THE NEED FOR EFFECTIVE PROGRAM ASSESSMENT Standardized criteria for program assessment do not exist, either in the donor community or in the marine management community at large. Such criteria would be of value not only for monitoring progress but for comparing outcomes among programs to evaluate the effectiveness of various approaches. Some NGOs have recently moved in that direc-

OCR for page 63
69 WHAT ASPECTS OF CAPACITY-BUILDING NEED MORE EMPHASIS? Box 5.1 Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific The Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific (NACA), headquartered in Bangkok, Thailand, was initiated by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations in 1975. NACA is an intergovernmental organization that promotes rural development through sustainable aquaculture to improve rural income, increase food pro- duction and foreign-exchange earnings, and diversify farm production. It is a partnership among many countries (Australia, Bangladesh, Cambodia, China, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, India, Indonesia, the Islamic Republic of Iran, Malaysia, Myanmar, Nepal, Pakistan, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, and Vietnam) and organizations, including FAO, the United Nations Development Programme, the Asian Development Bank, the World Bank, the World Organisation for Animal Health, the Mekong River Commission, the World Wide Fund for Nature, the MacArthur Foundation, and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund. The core activities of NACA include: • Providing education and training. • Supporting collaborative research and development. • Developing information and communication networks. • stablishing policy guidelines and providing support for policies and institutional E capacities. • Managing aquatic-animal health and disease. Source: Network of Aquaculture Centres in Asia-Pacific, 2007. tion and provide a few models for how this might be done. An example is The Nature Conservancy’s 5-S Framework, which directs conservation planners and practitioners to address the following five issues: selection of Site, the nature of the System, the Stressors, a Situation analysis, and possible Solutions (The Nature Conservancy, 2000). That type of initiative is an encouraging development in the donor community for both large and small projects. How is Your MPA [Marine Protected Area] Doing? (Pomeroy et al., 2004) is another tool developed to help doers to evaluate marine protected area (MPA) manage- ment effectiveness. Resource limitations and intense competition for funds can put pressure on doers to overstate success. As discussed in Chapter 4, governments and donors may be too focused on performance indicators and less cognizant of whether a project is increasing stewardship capacity. A small set of indicators, with flexibility to accommodate adaptive management, is needed to document and analyze trends in the capacity of institutions to develop ecosystem-based management practices. An example of a prudent set of indica-

OCR for page 63
70 INCREASING CAPACITY FOR STEWARDSHIP OF OCEANS AND COASTS tors is presented in Ecosystem-Based Management: Markers for Assessing Progress (United Nations Environment Programme/Global Programme of Action for the Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities, 2006). Assessments are most useful when they are shared with all interested institutions and provide realistic information on the progress of a project. Few incentives exist for institu- tions to report performance outcomes fairly, honestly, and openly. Donors can influence reporting practices by linking funding to assessments of outcomes rather than of perfor- mance. Objective identification of constraints on success could be used to target funding and overcome some barriers to improving ocean and coastal management practices. PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS A major step in capacity-building is the training of professionals who can move societies toward the knowledgeable use and conservation of ocean and coastal resources for cur- rent and future generations. The influence of professionals will depend on society’s level of trust in and respect for them for advice and services in support of stewardship. Society is assured that many professions’ services and advice meet acceptable standards by certifica- tion and licensing programs that are implemented by the professionals themselves or by governments. Such programs are referred to as quality-assurance programs. They usually include processes for reviewing performance to ensure adherence to standards, such as are found in medicine, engineering, law, and public accounting. Some quality-assurance processes apply to the professional advice and services that support ocean and coastal stewardship (for example, educational institutions are often accredited, and some professional societies have certification programs), but they are much more limited than those in other professions on which the public depends heavily for professional expertise (Sissenwine, 2007). That is an issue in developed countries, as well as in developing countries. Quality assurance of the professions that support stewardship of oceans and coasts would do more than enhance trust in and respect for professional services and advice. It would also improve quality and reduce confusion. From the perspective of people within the profession, it would be a way to consolidate emerging communities of professionals and a way to advance the codification of good practices. It would also serve as a strategy to promote networking and to encourage members of the profession to come together to define what they believe is most relevant and important in what they do and how they do it. It could lead to the emergence of an epistemic community.

OCR for page 63
71 WHAT ASPECTS OF CAPACITY-BUILDING NEED MORE EMPHASIS? INFORMATION FOR DECISION-MAKING Stewardship of ocean and coastal ecosystems requires numerous complex decisions in the face of a high degree of uncertainty. The decisions are complex because they involve multiple uses, various sources of information, and diverse societal values. The implications of alternative decisions are highly uncertain because of inherent variability in ecosystems, incomplete scientific understanding, and imperfect implementation of decisions. Some of the uncertainty is considered irreducible in that the future state of ecosystems will never be perfectly predictable even with complete scientific understanding. Thus, a high priority should be given to developing capacity to make complex decisions in the face of uncertainty. Information Transfer Low levels of education, inadequate awareness of ocean and coastal issues, uneven access to information, and low environmental literacy are clear constraints on improving management in many places. Greater education and awareness of ocean issues, and spe- cifically how oceans and coasts contribute to human well-being, would provide a founda- tion for building capacity for ocean stewardship. Donors can invest in specific education and outreach initiatives or can underwrite projects and programs that focus on creating or maintaining access to information. Some programs, such as One Laptop per Child (One One Laptop per Child Foundation, 2007), show promise of providing inexpensive technology ), to impoverished regions. The increased availability of inexpensive or free software, such as Open Source (Open Source Initiative, 2007), can further expand the access of developing countries to information, educational tools, and networking. Information technology pro- grams may include support for Web-based information portals, such as that of the World Ocean Observatory (2007), and for projects to provide hardware, install telecommunica- tion lines, or teach people how to access the information on the Internet. Facilitating the transfer of information is important, but thought must also be given to passing current knowledge on to future generations. In other words, experts need to know how to educate youth, increase general awareness and knowledge, and ensure the transfer of information between generations (see Box 2.1). Decision-Support Tools Decision-support tools are evolving rapidly as society comes to grips with the reality of having to make complex decisions based on limited information in an uncertain world. Some of the capacities needed to use and design decision-support tools can be obtained

OCR for page 63
72 INCREASING CAPACITY FOR STEWARDSHIP OF OCEANS AND COASTS through traditional academic training. Short courses exist or could be developed to pro- vide some decision-support training. However, the field is evolving so rapidly that much of the necessary capacity must be obtained firsthand by working with the people at the forefront of the field. Decision-support tools include the following: • Group processes, which are used to engage stakeholders and decision-makers in identifying and quantifying goals, objective, and acceptable levels of risk. For example, analytical hierarchy processes (AHP) is a mathematical decision-making technique that allows consideration of both qualitative and quantitative aspects of complex decisions by reducing decisions into series of one-to-one comparisons and then synthesizes the results. AHP uses the human ability to compare single properties of alternatives. It not only helps decision-makers choose the best alternative but also provides a clear rationale for the choice. Powerful software is readily available to support AHP. • Policy-oriented databases and data-synthesis tools. Such databases contain infor- mation on characteristics of the state of ecosystems, including resources, resource- use activity (for example, where fishing occurs and its intensity), and community profiles. Such data apply to the specific situation (in terms of the time, place, and issue) under consideration. Data-synthesis tools, such as geographic information systems, may be used to visualize the information. There are also policy-oriented databases that contain information from other situations that can be used to judge decision with respect to how they might have worked out somewhere else. Such data are sometimes analyzed to estimate variables that cannot be estimates from data on any specific situation (this is referred to as a meta-analysis). Learning from others’ experience is a valuable decision support tool. • Risk assessments and decision theory. This is a well-developed field of mathemati- cal statistics that is used to estimate the probability of various outcomes associ- ated with alternative decisions and to identify the optimal decision according to decision-makers’ judgments about the severity of adverse outcomes (minimiza- tion of a loss function). Risk assessments are produced routinely as input into fishery management decisions so that decision-makers are informed about the probability of reaching management goals. Such assessments should be a key element of future decisions on rebuilding plans for fisheries to fulfill the WSSD commitment to rebuild by 2015. • Modeling. Models are used to consistently and concisely express beliefs about the state and dynamics of systems and to test the beliefs against available information on the system. Multiple models may be plausible depending on the available data.

OCR for page 63
73 WHAT ASPECTS OF CAPACITY-BUILDING NEED MORE EMPHASIS? Models may differ in the form of equations used to describe the dynamics of the system and parameters of the equations. An example of a particularly complete operating model is Atlantis (Smith et al., 2006), developed by Beth Fulton and Anthony Smith (CSIRO, Australia). It characterizes an entire ecosystem, including key elements of the management process, such as implementation uncertainty. INVESTING IN REGIONAL CENTERS Complex and dynamic systems, such as occur in marine and coastal systems, need flex- ible and diverse tools, knowledge, skills, and attitudes for their study and management. Regional centers, both virtual and real, have been established to enhance collaboration, communication, education, shared visions, and intellectual capacities of people and organizations. Sometimes called centers of excellence, they are created to address specific topics, such as coastal zone management. An effective way to invest in building capacity is to set up regional centers at universi- ties, such as the U.S. National Sea Grant College Program and the university cooperative in the Philippines (see Chapter 3; Wilburn et al., 2007). Regional centers can support longer-term efforts and provide the resources to develop a cadre of well-trained profes- sionals with a thorough knowledge of the culture, traditions, needs, and capabilities of the target groups whose behavior they hope to influence. Extension programs are most effective when they are linked to a supportive institution with complementary capabili- ties and continuing programs in research and education. The regional center is one of the most effective models to facilitate the growth of capacities in the management of ocean and coastal resources. That model to catalyze the regional development of capacities might incorporate sev- eral research, teaching, and education centers housed in various universities. The defini- tion of a region in this context may parallel a marine biogeographic province, a political grouping of nations, nations that share cultural elements, or existing regional organizations, such as the United Nations Environment Programme Regional Seas Programme (United Nations Environment Programme, 2005). Each center would specialize in various key elements that are important in marine and coastal resource management, such as small- scale fisheries, fisheries technology, environmental and maritime law, port administration, education and outreach or extension, and coastal tourism. The various centers would offer graduate courses leading to advanced academic degrees for students throughout the region and engage in applied research in their specific fields of interest. Individual centers could also offer short specialized courses in timely topics for professionals throughout the region. Placement of each of the centers would be based on existing strengths of university programs and staff according to predetermined criteria.

OCR for page 63
78 INCREASING CAPACITY FOR STEWARDSHIP OF OCEANS AND COASTS where one person’s use has beneficial or detrimental effects on others (these are termed externalities), as in the case of watershed deforestation or ocean pollution (Brown, 2001). Markets also fail when a few privileged people have an advantage in the marketplace or when buyers or sellers have inadequate or erroneous information about the contracts or items traded, as in the case of contaminated fish (Hanna, 1998). Failures in the case of ocean governance can be traced back to property-rights issues, enforceability of contracts, uncertainty, and externalities (Edwards, 2005). Markets and the private sector can be tapped to build capacity for ocean and coastal management and, indeed, stewardship. Although private-sector investment in marine management is overshadowed by government-led management, examples are increasing each day. Box 5.3 highlights private-sector involvement in capacity-building in Chile. Box 5.3 Private-Industry Involvement in Capacity-Building in the Bioregion of Central Chile As a condition to receiving a permit to dispose of adequately treated wastewater, a new paper mill, CFI Nueva Aldea, was required to implement a five-year program for development and training in local communities. The resulting program was jointly defined by an assembly of coastal organizations, small-scale fishery villages, local government, the Chilean fisheries authority, CFI Nueva Aldea, associations and unions representing diverse coastal activities, and the University of Concepción. The program aims to develop livelihood alternatives that meet the following crite- ria: (1) capacity is built to achieve economic self-sustainability; (2) investment funds are included for infrastructure, training, and education; (3) the success of the program rests not only on the industry but also on the participating individuals and community organi- zations; and (4) the projects are designed to improve the living standards of the coastal communities. Indicators of performance will be used to identify improvements relative to the baseline documented at the start of the program. Documentation showed limited access to basic services and health care, low levels of education and literacy, a lack of infrastructure for the artisanal fishery, seasonal fishing activities, and high dependence on the coastal ecosystems. In 2006, the program got under way, and it now includes support for training pro- grams, maintenance of the local community-based coastal fishery comanagement units, renewal and maintenance of fishing gear, commercialization of marine products, con- tinuity of formal education of children and adults, and small-scale businesses, such as aquaculture enterprises and tourism in fishing villages. For most of those activities, state funding has been secured through open competition combined with matching funds from the paper mill. Although it is too early to evaluate this particular program, private-sector participation in capacity-building could prove to be an effective model because of its potential for attract- ing additional sponsors. For private industries that make use of land and coastal resources, capacity-building may be an attractive way to catalyze commercial good practices and gain the support of local communities.

OCR for page 63
79 WHAT ASPECTS OF CAPACITY-BUILDING NEED MORE EMPHASIS? Government Government and civil society play important roles in creating or remedying market fail- ures. Unlike civil society and markets, government can use coercive power to set and enforce rules, as in the case of the recognition and protection of property rights. The legal system, the associated power of adjudication, copyright laws, and the like are all expres- sions of government. Government can more fully establish and enforce property rights and rules of contract and provide information to buyers and sellers. Government shapes the incentives and disincentives that influence the behavior of the market and provides the rules and services for which the market is not usually an appropriate mechanism. Government can shape the opinions and attitudes of civil society through public educa- tion, libraries, Internet sites, and other modes of disseminating information. In democratic systems of government, the public makes government accountable and shapes it actions through voting. There are many examples of government-led good governance. Sri Lanka is one example of increasing government capacity to promote more effective ecosystem-based management of coastal and marine areas. Sri Lanka dedicated considerable energy to developing a coastal management plan and reorganizing government to carry it to frui- tion (Lowry and Wickremeratne, 1989; Coast Conservation Department, 1990, 1997; Hale and Kumin, 1992). Another instance of building government capacity is described in Box 5.4. Civil Society Civil society consists of the groups and organizations, both formal and informal, that act independently of the government and the market to promote shared interests, purposes, or values in society. The press and associated media may also be important expressions of civil society. Social capital—the informal relations and trust that bring people together to take collective action—forms the fabric of civil society (Coleman, 1988; Putnam, 2000; Pretty, 2003). Civil society can set the moral context in which markets and government operate. Markets can be harnessed to meet objectives of civil society by, for example, increasing demands for goods and services that reflect good stewardship. Civil society plays crucial roles in ocean and coastal management and strongly affects the ability of both government and commercial interests to practice effective stewardship. There are many examples of civil-society involvement in ocean and coastal manage- ment. Civil societies have participated in all aspects of capacity-building, from education and outreach to training and management. The efforts have occurred on many scales,

OCR for page 63
80 INCREASING CAPACITY FOR STEWARDSHIP OF OCEANS AND COASTS Box 5.4 Government Capacity-Building in Darién, Panamá In 1999, the government of Panamá created and initiated a sustainable development program in Darién Province in eastern Panamá called the Program for the Sustainable Development of Darién (PDSD). Funding for the program (US$88 million) originated in the Panamanian government and the Inter-American Development Bank. Program goals focused on improving the livelihoods of local residents in a manner consistent with the sustainable use of the region’s natural resources. Program components included land-use planning, strengthening of institutions, basic services and transportation, and support of actions that promote sustainable production (Suman, 2005). The institutional and organizational component involved substantial capacity-build- ing activities that aimed to (1) strengthen the institutional capacities to administer the province’s natural resources effectively and efficiently; (2) implement measures to mitigate the impacts of new infrastructure; (3) improve the planning, administrative, and financial capabilities of local governments; and (4) increase the participation of community-based organizations in resource management (Inter-American Development Bank, 1998). For example, PDSD supported actions to strengthen national agencies and organiza- tions that have a presence in Darién (the National Environment Authority, the Panamanian Maritime Authority, the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of Agricultural Development, the Ministry of Public Works, and the Office of Indigenous Affairs). Strengthening the tradi- tionally weak local governments was an additional focus of the PDSD. Activities included improvement of the local tax administration system, of the organization of the community councils, and of municipal planning capabilities. PDSD also worked with 32 community- based organizations (900 people) to encourage them to obtain legal status, to strengthen their organizational and administrative skills, and to access appropriate government agen- cies better. One of the land-use planning activities of PDSD focused on coastal management. At the end of 2002, PDSD initiated a coastal management project in Darién Province. The Panamanian institution with formal authority for coastal management was the Marine and Coastal Resources Directorate of the Panamanian Maritime Authority. With university consultants, the integrated coastal management team conducted a diagnosis of the state of Darién’s coastal resources and the coastal communities’ use of them. Through consultations with community groups, users, and leaders, the project team identified the priority needs of the coastal residents and the threats and vulnerabilities that coastal resources were ex- periencing. The resulting Darién coastal management plan developed detailed activities to address the high-priority problems in fisheries, resource conservation, coastal-community health, ecotourism, and institutional coordination. The Panamanian government formally adopted the Darién Coastal Management Plan in 2005 (Suman, 2007). from local on-the-ground conservation projects to global and regional advocacy of policy reform. Box 5.5 shows one example of civil-society involvement. In general, strategic building of capacity will be achieved best if all aspects of gover- nance are considered fully, including the conventional role of government and the more unconventional (and often overlooked) roles of markets and civil society.

OCR for page 63
81 WHAT ASPECTS OF CAPACITY-BUILDING NEED MORE EMPHASIS? Box 5.5 Wasini Women’s Boardwalk The Wasini Women’s Boardwalk is on Wasini Island adjacent to the Kisite Marine National Park and the Mpunguti National Reserve off the Kenyan coast. The island is bordered by a fringing reef on the seaward side and an extensive mangrove stand on the southwestern end. A steady stream of tourists visits the island daily after snorkeling or diving at the adjacent Kisite Marine National Park, providing an accessible market for the boardwalk. Tourists are charged a small fee (US$1.25) for a boardwalk tour that passes by fossil coral structures and goes through a healthy stand of mangroves with opportunities to view sea birds, fiddler crabs, and mollusks. The boardwalk, owned by the Wasini Women’s Group with permission of the Forestry Department, was completed in 2001 with funding from the Kenya Wildlife Service and Netherlands Wetland Program. Various NGOs, including Pact and the World Conservation Union’s Eastern Africa Regional Office, and the U.S. Agency for International Development’s Kenya program have provided training in business management, gover- nance, and leadership for the group. The project required that the Wasini Women’s Group commit to managing the boardwalk as a group, take responsibility for repairs and main- tenance to ensure sustainability, pledge a share of revenues to education, and work to minimize cutting of mangroves for fuel. The beneficial effects of the project include increased goodwill in the local community, which has led to improved surveillance of the MPA (for example, reporting of poaching activities); increased biodiversity protection of the mangrove forest and reefs around Wasini Island; and effective demonstration to the local communities of the nonextractive uses of marine ecosystems. LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT Leadership is essential for the success of programs to improve ocean and coastal stew- ardship. There is a need to access and strengthen leadership and train new leaders, both individual and institutional, from the local to the global level. In part, leaders may be trained by example and experience, and the leadership skills of trainers can be models of behavior. The reach and longevity of a capacity-building program can be increased by developing the leadership base at the start. Leadership often achieves its greatest impact and potential to promote change when individual and institutional leaders act as part of a larger network that shares interests, goals, values, and new ways of thinking and doing. Although individuals and institutions may act locally, they should connect regionally and learn and effect change globally as a networked community of practice. The need for leadership in changing the course of ocean and coastal stewardship is recognized, but leadership has been difficult to define and characterize. The literature offers a wide array of definitions, theories, and styles of leadership and much debate on

OCR for page 63
82 INCREASING CAPACITY FOR STEWARDSHIP OF OCEANS AND COASTS whether leaders are “born” or “trained.” However, it is more important to determine the qualities and attributes that define what people see, feel, or experience when in the pres- ence of leaders. They include the following characteristics: • Critical and reflective thinking and a willingness to challenge the status quo and invite inquiry into potential new ways of doing and seeing. • Ability to see the big picture, as well as the parts and their interrelationships—also known as a system orientation. • Skillful and honest communication, including listening skills and the ability to speak and write with clarity, vision, and purpose. • Openness to the diversity of world views and perspectives and ability to in make choices, especially when a decision goes against popular thought or opinion. • Ethical foundation of word and action to navigate the political arena without susceptibility to corruption. Identifying potential leaders requires sensitivity to cultural conditions and idiosyn- crasies. The development of leadership, even in sectors beyond those directly involved in ocean and coastal management, will create the conditions that enable improved ocean and coastal stewardship. INCREASING CAPACITY FOR ENFORCEMENT AND MONITORING Compliance requires a broad understanding and acceptance of the rationale for regula- tions to prevent the degradation of ocean and coastal environments. Understanding may be developed through participatory and representative decision-making. Compliance also requires effective and fair enforcement to maintain support for restrictive regulations, but this aspect of capacity for coastal management is often overlooked, in part because enforcement is typically the responsibility of government agencies that do not receive development aid or donor support. Because of the lack of resources and political will, enforcement of rules and policies adopted by coastal and fisheries management programs tends to have low priority on the political agenda. Enforcement does not attract donors to the extent that other, more appealing capacity- building initiatives do. Sometimes, the misuse of funds is a particularly acute problem in enforcement because security interests reduce transparency to the point where corruption goes largely unnoticed. When that happens, donors may hesitate to invest in enforcement and related activities. Monitoring compliance, performing surveillance, and enforcing regulations are activi- ties that are undertaken through a variety of arrangements among government, users or

OCR for page 63
83 WHAT ASPECTS OF CAPACITY-BUILDING NEED MORE EMPHASIS? local communities, NGOs, and academia. The most suitable approach depends in large part on the culture and sociopolitical history of the particular place and on feasibility and cost. Boxes 5.6 and 5.7 contain descriptions of two contrasting options for building capac- ity to undertake enforcement. The first highlights top-down enforcement in the recently established Asinara Marine Park in Italy. Like that of the Galapagos Marine Reserve, which is funded by a stringent system of user fees collected by the national government, the approach of Asinara Marine Park to surveillance and enforcement is very much top-down: there is virtually no involvement of the local community. By comparison, the approach to surveillance and enforcement at the Banco Chinchorro Biosphere Reserve in México is a comanagement arrangement in which the ministries of the Navy, of Transportation and Communications, and of the Environment work cooperatively with the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) and fishing communities to support adequate enforcement. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS A needs assessment is essential to identify current gaps in capabilities and evaluate condi- tions that may have hindered earlier efforts. Investments in capacity-building should be based on a thorough assessment of the site, region, or country. Knowledge of the perspec- tives of the many groups involved in ocean and coastal management and the participa- tion of these groups in assessing needs is essential to ensure that a program engages and addresses the concerns of the affected communities. High priority needs to be given to the sustainable financing of long-term capacity- building. Typically, investments in building capacity are based on short-term planning and project life cycles. Donors are naturally reluctant to provide open-ended support, and long-term sustainable financing is rarely built into project design. High priority should also be given to the development of guidelines for sustainable financing of ocean and coastal governance and to identification and development of long-term sustainable financing mechanisms for capacity-building. Investment in regional education and research centers is effective for supporting capacity-building efforts. Performance assessment of established regional centers should be undertaken to assist in the design of future centers. Donors often require results that can be documented after relatively short periods—two to three years. Consequently, they sometimes overinvest in tangible assets at the expense of other types of capacity- building. There is no standardized set of criteria to help donors to conduct systematic assessments. Assessments of capacity should be conducted regularly to reveal gaps. Standardized criteria should guide the assessments, but small sets of indicators that are flexible enough

OCR for page 63
84 INCREASING CAPACITY FOR STEWARDSHIP OF OCEANS AND COASTS Box 5.6 Asinara Marine Park Italy’s Asinara Marine Park is off the northwestern corner of the island of Sardinia. Although it is one of dozens of marine parks in Italy and throughout the Mediterranean Basin, it is in many ways unique. All waters of the Mediterranean have been extensively explored and used for centuries, but the waters around Asinara approximate wilderness. There is almost no coastal development on the island and very limited fishing and other uses of waters offshore. That is because the island has a long history of being closed for various reasons, with strictly protected no-go zones (Figure 5.2) across a wide swath of its coastal waters. In the second half of the 20th century, Asinara housed a maximum-security penitentiary and so was tightly guarded. Before that, the island was the site of a military concentration camp, and even earlier, a place to quarantine people with highly commu- nicable diseases, such as smallpox. After deciding to close the prison on Asinara, the Italian government recognized its enormous opportunity to preserve a relatively unspoiled and highly diverse set of ecosys- tems. The Asinara Marine Park was established by presidential decree in 2002; it encom- passes 49 mi of coastline around the island and 41 mi2 of coastal waters. The island’s marine environment was the site of a zoning exercise that presented the Italian government with various options to maximize biodiversity, tourism, and fisheries benefits in various zoning configurations (Villa et al., 2002), and a management plan was later adopted. Surveillance and enforcement are undertaken by both the Italian maritime protection authorities (the equivalent of the U.S. Coast Guard), who occasionally visit the island, and dedicated enforcement patrols based in the nearby town of Stintino, who have instituted routine patrols. There has been little consultation with local people about the design of the park, the purposes of the regulations, and the anticipated benefits of the conservation plan. Similarly, monitoring of compliance with rules, surveillance, and enforcement are all undertaken without participation of local users, such as tourism operators or fishers. But such top- down enforcement is widely accepted, primarily because Asinara has been off limits for so long, and tourism operators have been quick to recognize the marketing potential of even limited access to one of the best protected sites in the entire Mediterranean Sea.

OCR for page 63
85 WHAT ASPECTS OF CAPACITY-BUILDING NEED MORE EMPHASIS? Figure 5.2 No-go zones (denoted by A1, A2, B, and C) in the Asinara Marine Park (reprinted with permission from ICRAM).

OCR for page 63
86 INCREASING CAPACITY FOR STEWARDSHIP OF OCEANS AND COASTS Box 5.7 Banco Chinchorro Biosphere Reserve The Banco Chinchorro Biosphere Reserve is on the southeast coast of the Yucatan Peninsula in México. Its total area is 346,187 acres (140,097 ha) with a geographically unique reef formation consisting of a false atoll with an inner reef lagoon of 143,885 acres (58,228 ha). Diverse ecosystems in the reserve provide shelter and are used as a nursery by several marine and terrestrial species of ecological and commercial importance. Banco Chinchorro is the richest coral reef site in México, with 95 reported coral species, some of which are protected. With its great biodiversity and habitat value, the presence of endemic and threatened species, and relative isolation, Banco Chinchorro is a prime site for con- servation and sustainable use. Such organizations as the National Biodiversity Commission, WWF, and The Nature Conservancy consider Banco Chinchorro an area of high priority. On July 19, 1996, the reserve was declared a natural protected area, and a management plan was developed in 2000. The reserve’s main objectives are to ensure the continuity of ecological pro- cesses and balance the conservation and use of natural resources through participatory management, scientific research, and environmental education (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2007). The Banco Chinchorro Biosphere Reserve is a prime example of comanagement. The reserve’s management plan was developed with the cooperation of fishers and government authorities (such as the Navy Ministry, the Transportation and Communications Ministry, and the Environment Ministry). Licensed fishers support the reserve by providing US$0.20 for each kilogram of conch and lobster they catch. Enforcement and surveillance are sup- ported by WWF, and much of the rest of the reserve is supported by Mexican government funds. The main enforcement objectives are to reduce illegal fishing and to control tourist activities—cruise ships bring 3,000 people per day to the nearby town of Majahual (Na- tional Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, 2007). The result of the comanagement activities has been the elimination of some forms of destructive fishing in the area and the preservation of much of Banco Chinchorro’s biodiversity. to apply to adaptive management also will be required. Reducing the focus on products and outputs and increasing the focus on process and outcomes would enhance the effec- tiveness of capacity-building efforts. Incentives for fair and honest reporting of progress in capacity-building programs will improve the effectiveness of individual programs and, with more sharing of lessons learned among the donor and doer communities, will advance capacity-building efforts in general. Donors often require doers to follow complex mechanisms for monitoring and evalua- tion without giving them the requisite tools. The benchmarks used may not be informative but are selected because they are the most likely to be achieved. That precludes a realistic or accurate assessment of a capacity-building program. The donor community should be active during the evaluation procedure and develop a small set of benchmarks with which doers can accurately assess progress in building stewardship capacity.

OCR for page 63
87 WHAT ASPECTS OF CAPACITY-BUILDING NEED MORE EMPHASIS? Education in and awareness of ocean issues, specifically how oceans and coasts con- tribute to human well-being, are required to build capacity for ocean stewardship. Donors should underwrite projects and programs that focus on creating access to information and maintaining information networks, including support for Web-based information por- tals, such as that of the World Ocean Observatory (2007), and support for programs that provide hardware, installation of telecommunication lines, or programs to teach people how to access the information on the Internet. In addition to facilitating the transfer of information, donors should develop strategies to archive current knowledge and transfer it to future generations. Networks are vital for advancing capacity for ocean and coastal stewardship. Networks and networking are cost-effective and efficient mechanisms for maintaining and building capacity. One of the major benefits of networking is bringing like-minded people together to share information and resources. It avoids duplication of effort, recognizes existing excellence in universities, increases information exchange, and foments regional cooperation. Networks need to be developed and supported, and their importance needs to be rec- ognized by the doer and donor communities. The focus should be on developing decen- tralized networks of regional centers that combine research and education with outreach and extension and that foster discussion with nearby populations. It is equally important to foster links between local communities and regional centers and links among local com- munities, stakeholders, and local governance institutions. A broader network can then be established by linking the regional, national, and supranational governance entities. Leadership is an underappreciated factor in success. It is critical for the development and sustainability of capacity-building efforts. With their roots in the communities where capacity needs to be increased, leaders can become the cornerstones of successful capac- ity-building efforts. Leadership comes from a mixture of skills and authenticity, vision and innovation, credibility, compassion and fairness, and determination. Leadership capability is both innate and acquired through training, experience, and mentoring. Serious investments in developing and supporting leaders should be made at the local, national, regional, and global levels. Donors need to understand, identify, and use leverage points in governance, including investment in leadership development in government, civil society, and the private sector or business community. Training and mentoring leaders, even in sectors beyond those directly involved in ocean and coastal management, will create the talent pool required to enable improvements in ocean and coastal stewardship. The professional disciplines that support stewardship of oceans and coasts provide services and advice that have direct and substantial effects on society. In addition to devel-

OCR for page 63
88 INCREASING CAPACITY FOR STEWARDSHIP OF OCEANS AND COASTS oping capacity, there is a need to address professional governance at the level of institu- tions, education and training, accepted practices, and individual professionals—an issue for both developed countries and developing countries. A suitable model for professional governance should be developed on the basis of some of the lessons learned from other professions. It is time to open a discussion about professional governance that is consistent with the social relevance of the ocean and coastal stewardship professions.