Assessment of Economic Development Opportunities for Afro-Latin Communities in the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua

ASSESSMENT OF ECONOMIC D EVELOPMENT
OPPORTUNITIES FOR
A FRO-LATIN AND I NDIGENOUS COMMUNITIES IN THE
ATLANTIC COAST OF N ICARAGUA
-
FINAL REPORT

SUBMITTED TO : CLAIRE NELSON
INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT B ANK
DECEMBER 2002

SUBMITTED B Y: WAYNE D UNN & ASSOCIATES , L TD.
2457 B AKERVIEW ROAD
M ILL BAY, BC CANADA V0P 2R0

WAYNE D UNN
ANDREW GRANT

This report was developed with the support of the CANTAP Assistance Fund and
administered by the Inter-American Development Bank.

ASSESSMENT OF ECONOMIC D EVELOPMENT
OPPORTUNITIES FOR A FRO-LATIN COMMUNITIES IN THE
ATLANTIC COAST OF N ICARAGUA
-
FINAL REPORT

SUBMITTED TO : CLAIRE NELSON
INTER-AMERICAN DEVELOPMENT B ANK
DECEMBER 2002

SUBMITTED B Y: WAYNE D UNN & ASSOCIATES , L TD.
2457 B AKERVIEW ROAD
M ILL BAY, BC CANADA V0P 2R0

WAYNE D UNN
ANDREW GRANT

This report was developed with the support of the CANTAP Assistance Fund and
administered by the Inter-American Development Bank.

- i-

FOREWORD TO READERS
During the course of conducting this assessment and preparing this document, it became clear to the
consulting team that there was no single place where one could find detailed information on the pilot
communities, on community- and regional- level organizations and on other key development
stakeholders along the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua.
In order to properly fulfill the requirements of this assignment, the authors made every effort to
develop and consolidate this information, making it available to the Inter-American Development
Bank in order that they could properly assess the project prototypes that are presented. A decision was
made to include much of this information within this report so that it would be available to other
readers and could, hopefully, provide background information and detail that will direct and encourage
additional development in the communities and region. Where the authors deemed it practical (e.g.,
organizational assessments) information has been presented as an appendix. Information presented
within the body of the document is directly pertinent to the assessments undertaken, and can serve to
inform further analysis of the prototypes as well as finalization of implementation plans.
The Introduction to this report outlines in detail what is contained within each Section as well as the
Appendices. Readers wishing less comprehensive information are encouraged to go directly to those
sections/communities/projects that are relevant for their purposes.

ASSESSMENT OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT O PPORTUNITIES FOR AFRO-LATIN
AND INDIGENOUS C OMMUNITIES ON THE A TLANTIC C OAST OF N ICARAGUA

- ii -

EXECUTIVE S UMMARY
This assessment of economic development opportunities was commissioned in 2002, with
financing from the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA), by the
Interamerican Development Bank (IDB) through the Social Development Division of its
Sustainable Development Department. The mandate of the cons ulting team was the
elaboration of project models or prototypes of viable income- generating activities for select
Afro-Latin and Indigenous Communities along the Atlantic coast of Nicaragua in direct
consultation with producers and leaders within the communities.
Using a systematic community selection process, six communities along Nicaragua’s Atlantic
(Miskito) coast were identified to be the focus of pilot initiatives. Of these six, four (Pearl
Lagoon, Marshall Point, Orinoco and Corn Island) are princ ipally Afro-Latin communities,
displaying a relatively large population of Creole and/or Garifuna inhabitants. Another
community (Francia Sirpi) is Miskito, while the sixth (Wasakin) has a predominantly Sumo
population.
The project prototypes are based on community priorities, take into account the various
challenges inherent in development initiatives along the Atlantic Coast, and attempt to build
upon pre-existing community infrastructure and organizations. The communities selected to
participate in this assessment reflect micro-regional cultural and development hubs, wherein
productive support can have the greatest impact with an initial emphasis on capacity building,
diagnostics, market recognition and productive development activities, rather than the
polemic issues of physical infrastructure development and the establishment of commercial or
community-based credit systems.
The prototypes presented in this assessment have been validated by the communities
themselves as well as the Regional Governments of the Southern and Northern Autonomous
Regions, the regional offices of the Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry (MAG-FOR),
participating Municipalities of Rosita, Pearl Lagoon, Corn Island and Waspan, and both
regional Universities: BICU and URACCAN.
To ensure that lessons learned were incorporated in the recommendations of this assessment,
the methodology included an analysis of past and present economic development
interventions in the region which have been supported by a variety of institutions inc luding,
World Bank, UNDP, IDB, ASDI, CIDA, USAid, Interamerican Foundation, DANIDA, civil
society and NGOs, and others.
Efforts were made to assess these initiatives, and to develop a comprehensive perspective of
the development landscape along the coast, in order to avoid the potential for duplication of
activity, and to inform the IDB of opportunities for collaboration. To that end, the consultants
have held discussions with the following organizations and projects, all of which have
expressed their commitment to support the prototypes presented herein with parallel
initiatives in accordance with their own development priorities, within the context of an
integrated development strategy:
o Emergency Social Investment Fund (FISE);
o World Bank Rural Electrification Initiative;
o United Nations Development Programme;
o DANIDA Transport;
o Inter-American Foundation;

- iii -

o Government of the Southern Atlantic Autonomous Region (GRAAS);
o Government of the Northern Atlantic Autonomous Region (GRAAN);
o Municipalities;
o POSAF;
o Corredor Biológico del Atlántico;
o Meadow Lake Tribal Council Proinzapolka Forestry Initiative (Funding from CIDA);

A principal focus of this assessment was the identification of prototypes whose objectives fit
within the Bank’s Productive Agricultural Reactiva tion initiative (NI-0159) in collaboration
with Nicaragua’s Instituto de Desarrollo Rural (IDR). Given the IDR’s current lack of
presence along the Atlantic coast, and the parameters provided to the consulting team by the
Bank’s representatives in Managua, the consulting team has developed implementation
strategies, partnerships, and potential institutional collaboration to increase the visibility and
potential impact of the IDR’s efforts in the region.
Findings suggest that in all communities assessed, community- led agricultural reactivation
presents a viable and sustainable means of economic development. Preliminary analyses and
current production levels suggest that much of the land which is currently producing at
subsistence levels or laying fallow has the capacity to produce a variety of products which
have a proven market regionally, nationally and internationally. An added benefit is that the
majority if not all agricultural production from the communities along the coast could be
certified as organic by national and international bodies. This presents a tremendous
opportunity for communities to derive even greater value from agricultural exports.
The principal technical challenges to agricultural reactivation are in the lack of awareness of
markets amongst producers, lack of access to markets due to the lack of transportation
options, and the lack of technical skills in the areas of seeding, crop rotation, irrigation,
harvesting, handling and packaging of product. The technical challenges are compounded by
organizational issues – the majority of community based organizations that could support
agricultural initiatives require focused and sustained institutional strengthening in order to
effectively support their membership and be sustainable contributing partners to the process.
Project prototypes in the area of agricultural reactivation for all six communities are designed
to support these groups to meet the organizational challenges they face. Groups and
individuals have been identified in each c ommunity to assume a leadership role in these
initiatives.
In the interest of diversifying economic activity and creating value-added to the productive
agricultural opportunities, the consultants are also recommending prototypes focused on the
processing of agricultural and agro-forestry products in selected communities. In this regard,
the Bank- funded POSAF II sustainable agro- forestry initiative represents an opportunity for
co-financing and institutional collaboration. The initial stage of POSAF did not include
communities along the Atlantic Coast, but program representatives expressed to the
consultants the sincere interest in leveraging the Bank’s findings through this assessment into
their own community selection process. The consultants strongly suggest that the Bank
consider three communities – Pearl Lagoon, Wasakin and Francia Sirpi – as pilot
communities for POSAF II in the region.
A critical finding of this assessment is the need to provide direct and ongoing support to the
six pilot communities involved in the agricultural rehabilitation, agro- forestry development
and agricultural processing initiatives, as well as in the development and dissemination of

- iv -

agricultural information, provision of training and technical assistance, and inter-project
coordination for a three to four year pilot initiative. To facilitate these goals, one prototype
focuses on region-wide agricultural extension services to provide ongoing support to
communities and to serve as a conduit for information and transfer of knowledge.
In the four Afro- Latin communities considered in this assessment – Pearl Lagoon, Marshall
Point, Orinoco and Corn Island – small-scale craft or ‘artesanal’ fishing is the principal
income generator for the vast majority of residents, alongside cash remittances from family
and friends living and working abroad. In recent years, artisanal fisheries have been on the
decline due to decreasing stocks of lobster, shrimp and some finfish, highly-efficient and
environmentally degrading fishing practices, lack of resources to maintain and upgrade boats
and equipment, and increasing competition with foreign-owned industrial boats. Throughout
the assessment, it was the consensus opinion of industrial fishermen and individual craft
fishermen alike that small-scale fishing operations are more productive and efficient, while
being less environmentally damaging than industrial fishing. Prototypes developed for the
Creole and Garifuna communities of Pearl Lagoon, Marshall Point and Orinoco, as well as the
Creole/Miskitu communities of Greater and Lesser Corn Island, reflect opportunities to
strengthen the abilities of craft fishermen working in common to improve their infrastructure
and protect the resources of the sea and lagoon.
Beyond the 13 prototypes considered as viable for this assessment, seven additional
prototypes were also developed in the areas of aquaculture, support to home-based tourism,
and cattle production. In the opinion of the consultants, these prototypes lack strong support
in the community, and require further study to determine implementation feasibility and
environmental impact. They are listed in the appendices of this assessment as prototypes for
further consideration.
Throughout the assessment, community leaders, agricultural producers, fishermen and women
in the various communities frequently expressed their frustration concerning nature and
process of previous development efforts. Another finding is that many of the communities are
suffering from “development fatigue” resulting from the large numbers of ‘studies’ (which
require community time and energy and seem to seldom produce any tangible community
benefits). To combat the skepticism stemming from this situation, the consultants recommend
the establishment and/or reinforcement of strong and enduring lines of communication
between the development agencies and the communities themselves. This is an initiative that
could be spearheaded by the Inter-Institutional Forum for the Atlantic Coast (FIICA), and
may mitigate some of the negative sentiment around development initiatives pervasive in the
region today.
Thoughtful support of community-based development along the Atlantic coast must recognize
the increasing political, cultural and economic isolation felt by the residents of these
communities, and must take into account efforts undertaken in past interventions, drawing
experience from the lessons learned from both successful and unsuccessful initiatives. The
Bank has an opportunity to support incipient and established development groups in the
communities outlined in this report, and to foster pilot initiatives to provide a catalyst for the
integration of the efforts of development agencies, civil society groups, national and regional
governments in the region. The prototypes presented in this assessment represent viable
means of supporting disadvantaged peoples and communities. It is expecated that many of
the prototypes will produce information and lessons that can be applied throughout the region
and can serve to inform IDB projects in other countries in the hemisphere.


-v-

Acronyms
ACDI / CIDA Agencia Canadiense de Desarrollo Internacional / Canadian International
Development Agency
ACNUR Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para Refugiados
ADEPHCA Asociación de Desarrollo y Promoción Humana de la Costa Atlántica
ADESCA Asociación para el Desarrollo de la Costa Atlántica
ADPESCA Administración Nacional de Pesca y Acuicultura
ADRA Adventist Development And Relief Agency
AECI Spanish International Cooperation Agency
AMICA Asociación de Mujeres Indígenas de la Costa Atlántica
AMIR Asociación de Mujeres Indígenas Rama
AMURACAN Asociación de Municipios de las Regiones Autónomas de la Costa Atlántica de
Nicaragua
APAM Asociación de los Pescadores Buzos Artesanales Miskitos
APENN Asociación Nicaraguense de Productores y Exportadores de Productos no
Tradicionales
ASDI / SIDA Swedish International Development Cooperation
BICU Bluefields Indian and Caribbean University
BID/IDB Banco Interamericano de Desarrollo / Inter-American Development Bank
BM/WB Banco Mundial / World Bank
CARUNA Cooperativa de Ahorro y Crédito "Caja Rural Nacional" R.L
CDE Centro de Desarrollo Empresarial
CDM Comités de Desarrollo Municipal
CEDECHA Centro de Derechos Civiles, Humanos y Autónomos
Centro CONADES Conservación de la Naturaleza y el Desarrollo
CIDA Canadian International Development Agency
CONADES Consejo Nacional de Desarrollo
CONPES Consejo Nacional de Planificación Económica
DANIDA Danish Agency for Development Assistance
EA Entidades Administrativas
ERCERP Estrategia Reforzada de Crecimiento Económico y Reducción de Pobreza
FADCANIC Fundación para la Autonomía y el Desarrollo de la Costa Atlántica de
Nicaragua
FIICA Foro Inter-Institucional de la Costa Atlántica
FISE Fondo Social de Inversión y Emergencia
FUNDE Fundación para el Desarrollo Económico
FUNDECA Foundation for the Education and Development of the Atlantic Coast
FURCA Fundación por la Unidad y Reconstrucción de la Costa Atlántica
GRAAN Gobierno Regional de la Región Autónoma Atlántico Norte
GRAAS Gobierno Regional de la Región Autónoma Atlántico Sur
GTZ Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit
IDR Instituto de Desarrollo Rural


- vi -

IDSIM Instituto de Desarrollo de la Iglesia de Moravia
INATEC Instituto Nacional Tecnológico
INDEL Iniciativas para el Desarrollo Local
INEC Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas y Censos
INFOR Instituto Nacional Forestal
INIFOM Instituto Nicaragüense de Fomento Municipal
INPRU Instituto de Promoción Humana
INTA Instituto Nicaragüense de Tecnología Agropecuaria
IPADE Instituto para el Desarrollo de la Democracia
JICA Japan International Cooperation Agency
KEPA The Service Centre for Development Cooperation (Finland)
MAGFOR Ministerio Agropecuario y Forestal
MARENA Ministerio del Ambiente y los Recursos Naturales
MECD Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deportes
MEDA Mennonite Economic Development Associates
MIFIC Ministerio de Fomento, Industria y Comercio
MINSA Ministerio de Salud de Nicaragua
MTI Ministerio de Transporte e Infraestructura
NGO/ONG Non-Governmental Organization / Organización No-Gubernamental
NOVIB Netherlands Organization for International Development Cooperation
OAGANIC Nicaraguan Afro-Garifuna Organization
PAC Proyecto de Apoyo a la Competitividad Agroalimentaria
PANA PANA Asociación para el Desarrollo de la Costa Atlántica
PNDR Programa Nacional del Desarrollo Rural
POSAF Programa Socioambiental y de Desarrollo Forestal
PROFOR Proyecto Forestal de Nicaragua
PRORAAS Proyecto de Apoyo al Desarrollo Humano Sostenible de las Comunidades
Indígenas y Campesinas de la Zona Norte de la Región Autónoma del
Atlántico Sur
PROTIERRA Proyecto Reforzamiento de Políticas de Recursos Naturales
PRPA Programa de Reactivación Productiva Agroalimentaria
PRSP Nicaraguan Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper
RAAN Región Autónomos Atlántico Norte
RAAS Región Autónomos Atlántico Sur
SETEC Secretaria Técnica de la Presidencia
SIBURAAN Sindicato de Busos de la RAAN
SISPADRU Sistema de Procedimientos Ambientales de Desarrollo Rural
SUKAWALA National Association of Sumu Communitie s
UE / EU Unión Europea / European Union
UNAG Unión Nacional de Productores y Ganaderos
URACCAN University of the Autonomous Regions of the Caribbean Coast of Nicaragua
USAID United States Agency for International Development


- vii -

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION..................................................................................................................... 1
2 M ETHODOLOGICAL APPROACH ............................................................................................ 3
2.1 Major Activities 5
2.2 Data Gathering and Research 5
2.3 Use of Analytical Frameworks 6
2.3.1 Multi-Lateral and Bi-Lateral Program Review Framework.....................................................6
2.3.2 Summary of Key Bi-Lateral Development Agencies...................................................................6
2.3.3 Community Selection.........................................................................................................................7
2.3.4 Community Assessment Framework ............................................................................................14
2.3.5 Organizational Assessment Framework ......................................................................................14
2.3.6 Dev-SCOT Analysis..........................................................................................................................14
2.3.7 Project Prototype Assessment Framework ..................................................................................14

3 OVERVIEW OF SOCIO -ECONOMIC CONDITIONS AND PRODUCTIVE ACTIVITIES ON THE
ATLANTIC COAST............................................................................................................... 15
3.1 Historical and Socio-Economic Overview of Atlantic Coast 15
3.2 General Comments on Atlantic Coast Development Challenges 18

4 SELECTED COMMUNITIES ................................................................................................... 19
4.1 Introduction 19
4.2 Pearl Lagoon Basin (Pearl Lagoon, Marshall Point and Orinoco) 20
4.2.1 Community Assessment ...................................................................................................................20
4.2.2 Community-Based Organizations .................................................................................................25
4.2.3 Dev-SCOT Analysis for Pearl Lagoon Basin.............................................................................32
4.3 Corn Island 33
4.3.3 Dev-SCOT Analysis for Corn Island ............................................................................................46
4.4 Wasakin 47
4.4.2 Wasakin Community Organizations.............................................................................................51
4.4.3 Dev-SCOT Analysis for Wasakin..................................................................................................56
4.5 Francia Sirpi 57
4.5.3 Dev-SCOT Analysis for Francia Sirpi .........................................................................................64

5 COMMUNITY ACTION PLANS .............................................................................................. 65
5.1 Introduction 65
5.2 General Considerations 67
5.3 Pearl Lagoon Basin Communities 68
5.3.1 Pearl Lagoon.....................................................................................................................................68
5.3.2 Marshall Point...................................................................................................................................69
5.3.3 Orinoco ...............................................................................................................................................69
5.3.4 Project Outlines – Pearl Lagoon Basin Communities..............................................................70
5.3.5 Implementation Plan for Pearl Lagoon.......................................................................................72
5.3.6 Implementation Plan for Orinoco.................................................................................................73
5.3.7 Implementation Plan for Marshall Point ....................................................................................73


- viii -

5.4 Corn Island 74
5.4.1 Community Summary ......................................................................................................................74
5.4.2 Project Outlines - Corn Island .......................................................................................................74
5.4.3 Implementation Plan.......................................................................................................................76
5.5 Wasakin 77
5.5.2 Project Outlines - Wasakin.............................................................................................................78
5.6 Francia Sirpi 81
5.6.2 Project Outlines - Francia Sirpi ....................................................................................................82
5.7 Project Integration Framework 85
5.7.1 Pearl Lagoon Basin Agricultural Initiatives Inter-Project Coordination Framework .....86

6 PROJECT PROTOTYPES ....................................................................................................... 88
6.1 Introduction 88
6.2 Atlantic Coast Region 91
6.2.1 Agricultural Extension Services for Atlantic Coast..................................................................91
6.3 Pearl Lagoon Basin 94
6.3.1 Pearl Lagoon Basin Communities Agricultural Reactivation Project..................................94
6.3.2 Development of Value-Added Agricultural Processing Industry in the Pearl Lagoon Basin
..................................................................................................................................................99
6.3.3 Upgrading of Local Artisan Fishing Fleet in Pearl Lagoon Basin.................................... 102
6.4 Corn Island 106
6.4.1 Agriculture Rehabilitation Program for Corn Island............................................................ 106
6.4.2 Capacity Development of Asociación de Pescadores Miskitos de Corn Island................ 110
6.4.3 Upgrading of Local Artisan Fishing Fleet Through the Corn Island Artisanal Fishermen’s
Union................................................................................................................................... 113
6.5 Wasakin 116
6.5.1 Wasakin Agricultural Support Project...................................................................................... 116
6.5.2 Wasakin Agro Forestry Development ....................................................................................... 120
6.5.3 Development of Value-Added Processing Options for Agricultural and Agro-Forestry
Products in Wasakin........................................................................................................ 124
6.6 Francia Sirpi (Tasba Raya) 128
6.6.1 Francia Sirpi/Tasba Raya Agricultural Support Project...................................................... 128
6.6.2 Francia Sirpi/Tasba Raya Agro Forestry Development........................................................ 131
6.6.3 Development of Value-Added Processing Options for Agricultural and Agro-Forestry
Products in Francia Sirpi................................................................................................ 135
6.7 Summary of Recommended Project Prototypes 139


- ix -

7 SUCCESS FACTORS AND ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS ....................................................145
7.1 Institutional Collaboration 145
7.2 Project Implementation 145
7.3 IDR Project Coordinator for Atlantic Coast Initiatives 146
7.4 Community Relations 147
7.5 Institutional Strengthening of Regional Universities 148
7.6 Launching of POSAF on Atlantic Coast 148
7.7 Support to Donor Collaboration 149
7.8 Collaboration with Centros de Desarrollo Empresarial 149
7.9 Access to Credit 149
7.10 Focus on Community Organizations 149

8 CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................................................150

LIST OF FIGURES AND M APS

Figure 2-1 Graphical Representation of Methodological Approach................................................................................. 4

Figure 2-2: Community Selection Analytical Framework................................................................................................ 8

Figure 4-1: Map of Selected Communities ........................................................................................................................ 19

Figure 4-2: Location of Pearl Lagoon Basin Communities ............................................................................................ 20

Figure 4-3: Location of Corn Island.................................................................................................................................... 33

Figure 4-4: Location of Wasakin ......................................................................................................................................... 47

Figure 4-5: Location of Francia Sirpi................................................................................................................................. 57

APPENDICES

Appendix I – List of Information Sources ......................................................................................................................... A1
Appendix II – Community Consultations.......................................................................................................................... A4
Appendix III – List of Meetings and Consultations ....................................................................................................... A14
Appendix IV – Prototypes Requiring Further Development ........................................................................................ A27
Appendix V - Organizations and Institutions .................................................................................................................. A51
Appendix VI - Past and Current IDB and other Multi-Lateral Interventions on the Atlantic Coast...................... A85
Appendix VII – Key Bilateral and Other Prominent Development Agencies ........................................................... A98
Appendix VII – Detailed Methodological Approach...................................................................................................A107
Appendix IX – Suggested Actions to Improve Success and Sustainability of Project Prototypes.......................A116


1 INTRODUCTION
Early in 2002, The Social Development Division of the Sustainable Development Department
of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) contracted Wayne Dunn and Associates, Ltd.
(WDA) under Technical Cooperation Number ATN-CT 7634-NI to assess economic
development opportunities for Afro- Latin and Indigenous Communities located in the
Atlantic Coast Region of Nicaragua. The contract was won under a competitive bid, with
funding provided by the Canadian Technical Assistance Program at the IDB (CANTAP).
The objective of this assessment is:
To develop project models of viable income-generating activities for specific Atlantic coast
communities of Nicaragua in consultation with these communities.
This (Draft) Final Assessment Report and Community Action Plans builds upon the Interim
Report submitted in June of 2002, which outlined the six communities selected to be part of
the final assessment. The Interim Report also outlined the detailed methodological approach
utilized by the consultants on this assignment.
This study is not an exhaustive review of projects or communities, nor a definitive socio-
economic analysis of the region. It builds upon the myriad of studies and assessments
undertaken in recent years, and provides concrete steps to be taken to focus integrated
productive development support in the communities in question.
The assessment includes the identification of pilot communities and elaboration of production
project prototypes to be recommended to the IDB. The thirteen project prototypes provided in
this report illustrate viable income-generating enterprises for the selected communities and
target populations. They were decided upon consultation with the productive and political
leaders within the communities – men and women, municipal, regional and national public
sector organizations, civil society and private investors, as well as other stakeholders from the
Donor and Development community. Extensive collaboration was established with and
between these groups, providing the consultants with an understanding of lessons learned
from past initiatives, as well as a perspective on current and future interventions.
Following this Introduction, the report is organized into seven (7) sections, supported by
several appendices:
o Section 2 provides a brief explanation of the methodological approach utilized to
gather and analyze the information supporting the project prototypes;
o Section 3 provides a basic socio-economic overview of the Atlantic Coastal region of
Nicaragua;
o Section 4 introduces the six communities around which the project prototypes are
based. It includes an assessment of each community, an introduction to the various
community-based organizations, and a Dev-SCOT (Development Strengths,
Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) Analysis for each community;
o Section 5 presents the community action plans and
o Section 6 details thirteen specific project prototypes;


o Section 7 presents a brief set of general comments and suggestions specific to the
rollout of the Bank’s NI-0159 Rural Agricultural Rehabilitation initiative on the coast;
o The Conclusion is presented in Section 8.
Attached to the report are various appendices as follows:
o Appendix I provides a listing of all information sources, including reports, proposals,
documents, websites and other media;
o Appendix II details the community consultation process for this assessment
o Appendix III provides a partial list of individuals and organizations consulted during
the initial project mission in April and May of 2002 and during the follow-up and
feedback mission in June and the community debriefing mission in July of 2002;
o Appendix IV outlines project prototypes requiring further development ;
o Appendix V contains organizational assessments for key national and regional civil
society, public sector and universities;
o Appendix VI provides an summary analysis of selected past and current
development interventions along the coast;
o Appendix VII details the focus areas, projects and budgets of key bilateral agencies
active on the Atlantic coast.
o Appendix VIII outlines the detailed methodological approach utilized within this
assessment;
o Appendix IX presents an interesting paper on community development in the
Atlantic Coast that we feel could help to inform development stakeholders in the
region.


2 METHODOLOGICAL APPROACH
In order to achieve the primary objective of this Consultancy - “To develop project models of
viable income-generating activities for specific Atlantic coast communities of Nicaragua” -
the consulting team utilized a variety of tools and methods to gather, analyze and present
information in a logical, value-added way.
Building upon the experience of local and Canadian project team members in development
initiatives along the coast, a methodology was developed to enable a systematic, thorough and
participative approach to the preparation of Community Action Plans and Project Prototypes.
The activities of this technical cooperation were undertaken under the following principles:
o Participative People Centered Process;
o Knowledge Exists In The People;
o Respect for Traditional Community Structures and Organizations;
o Open and Honest Communications;
o Frequent Consultation with and Feedback to Clients, Communities and
Stakeholders;
A detailed description of the methodological approach was provided in the Interim Report,
and is reproduced in Appendix VIII at the end of this report. The following section will
summarize the key aspects of the methodology, highlighting the use of analytical frameworks
and the major activities undertaken in the development of the community action plans and
project prototypes.
Figure 2-1 below illustrates the overall methodological and analytical approach utilized by the
consultants.


Figure 2-1 Graphical Representation of Methodological Approach

External Analysis
Prior Programs
- Program Sponsor

COMMUNITY ACTION PLANS
- Timeframe/Status

Integrated Development Opportunities Analysis
- Budget
- Implementing Agency Bi-Lateral Agencies
- Other Stakeholders - Name
- Geographic Focus - Focus/Priorities

Development of Project Prototypes
- Major Objectives - Current Projects
- Major Accomplishments - Annual Budget
- Major Challenges (for area)
(efforts to overcome)
- Afro-Latin/Indigenous Impact
- Lessons Learned
- Other

Community Data Organizational Data
- Population & Demographics - Name Project Data
- Local Government - Contact Information - Proponent
Community Analysis

- Community Description - Objective & Mandate - Sector
- Community Infrastructure - Membership - Objectives
- Educational Infrastructure - Leadership - Narrative Description
- Major Industries & Resources - Background & History - Background/History
- Other Business/Economic info - Finance - Partners & Collaboration
- Development Constraints - Governance - Metrics
- Interaction with Nat. Govt. Programs - Project Experience - Budget/Financing
- Community Organizations - Current Projects - Market Information
- NGO & other International Activity - Infrastructure - Production Information
- Productive Opportunities - Partners - Geograpic/Infrastructure Issues
- Other Information - Potential Projects

Project Analysis
Organizational Analysis
- Previous Experience
- Major Strengths of Proponents
- Critical Challenges
- Capacity Analysis (proponent)
- Project Opportunities
- Main Threats - Major Strengths
- Major Risks & Mitigation plans
- Training and Development
Needs - Technical Assistance Needs
- Next Steps


2.1 Major Activities
Following is a brief description of the principal missions and activities involved in the
preparation of this assessment:
1. Two missions to IDB headquarters in Washington for meetings with key IDB
personnel
o Mr. Wayne Dunn in April 2002;
o Mr. Wayne Dunn and Mr. Andrew Grant in May 2002
2. Initial Mission to Nicaragua, including visits to several Creole, Garifuna, Rama and
Miskito communities in the Northern Atlantic Autonomous Region (RAAN) and the
Southern Atlantic Autonomous Region (RAAS).
o Mr. Wayne Dunn, Mr. Andrew Grant and Mr. Samuel Mercado in April &
May 2002
3. Follow- up mission to each of the six selected communities for further data gathering,
clarification and initial community feedback of project prototypes
o Mr. Samuel Mercado and Mr. Jorge Quintana in June 2002
4. Community debriefing mission with seminars held in each of the six communities to
review project prototypes and discussions around implementation and organization of
community groups.
o Mr. Andrew Grant, Mr. David Kattenburg and Mr. Samuel Mercado in July
2002
5. Regular consultation wit h non-traveling members of project team Dr. Joseph Palacio,
Dr. Bernard Dasah and Ms. Gifty Serbeh-Dunn.

2.2 Data Gathering and Research
Data gathering and research included the following activities:
o Desktop research;
o Review of relevant and available IDB and other documents;
o Meeting with key IDB personnel in Washington, Managua and Bluefields;
o Meeting with other donors, multi- lateral and bilateral stakeholders in Nicaragua,
Washington and Canada;
o Meetings and consultations with key Atlantic Coast development stakeholders
including regional civil society organizations, private sector, municipalities and
regional governments;
o Meetings and consultations with community leaders, community organizations and
community members in focus communities
o Meetings with key personnel from the Rural Development Institute (IDR), Ministry of
Agriculture and Forestry (MAG-FOR), Ministry of Natural Resources and the
Environment (MARENA) and other national and regional Departments and Ministries
o Review of other multi- lateral and bilateral projects focused on Atlantic Coast


o Review of project documents
o Where possible, interviews with 2 or more project stakeholders
o Sustained community and stakeholder feedback through meetings, telephone/fax
communications and email;
In total the Consulting team met with well over 500 individuals plus interacted with another
several hundred local residents at community and village meetings. Many individuals were
met with several times. Additionally information was gathered from a variety of sources,
including published documents, draft reports, and interviews undertaken from April to August
2002. All information sources are listed in Appendix I, while a comprehensive list of
interviewees is included in Appendix III.

2.3 Use of Analytical Frameworks
In order to ensure systematic gathering and management of information in support of the
identification and development of project opportunities for Afro-Latin and Indigenous
Communities, the Consultants developed a series of analytical frameworks. Following are
brief descriptions of each of these frameworks. Examples of each are included in the Interim
Report submitted in June 2002.

2.3.1 Multi-Lateral and Bi-Lateral Program Review Framework
In order to better advise on methodologies and approaches for enhancing the inclusion of
Afro-Latin and Indigenous Peoples in activities financed by IDB Loan NI-0159 and other
initiatives, the Consultants undertook a summary review of several other Multi-Lateral and
Bi-Lateral Development projects on the Atlantic Coast. Some of these projects were
identified by the IDB and others were identified during the initial data gathering stage of the
project. The intent was not to undertake an exhaustive or comprehensive review of previous
projects but to simply develop a basic understanding of the extent of previous development
efforts and the lessons learned. The framework was developed to ensure consistency in the
review of various programs. It should be noted that, as the intent of the current assignment is
not to undertake a full project assessment, the Consultants limited themselves to readily
available data and information. Efforts were made to reference at least two data sources for
each project.

2.3.2 Summary of Key Bi-Lateral Development Agencies
In order to better understand the overall development landscape and easily identify potential
co-financiers or collaborative opportunities for projects, the Consultants prepared a summary
of key Bi- Lateral Development Agencies operating in the Atlantic Region of Nicaragua. The
information gathered included priority focus areas for each bilateral agency, a listing of their
current projects, approximate annual budgets and other pertinent information such as contact
information.


2.3.3 Community Selection
While the primary objective of this assignment was to elaborate specific project prototypes,
we recognized that the projects themselves would emanate from a community base. We
therefore initiated our investigation at the community level, visiting seventeen communities in
total. Our intention was not to compile an exhaustive ranking of potential communities but to
simply ensure that we selected communities that met the stated criteria (Afro-Latin or
Indigenous populations and potential productive projects).

In both the RAAN and the RAAS the Consulting team made a preliminary list of potential
communities based upon our experiences in the area and supplemented by consultations with
key IDB and other stakeholders. The team then made initial visits to the selected
communities in order to gain first hand information and meet with community stakeholders.
In cases where initial visits were not possible or practical we made a thorough review of
available material and gathered supplemental information through interviews. In all cases, at
least one project team member had made a prior visit to the community.

The information gained from these community visits was supplemented through desktop
research and, where possible, with further interviews with external stakeholders. Information
on the selected communities was reviewed and analyzed using the Community Selection
Analytical Framework outlined in Figure 2.2 below. This provided an overview of the
strengths, weaknesses and potential projects from each community. A review of this
framework enabled us to identify 6 communities that will become the focus of project
prototypes and community action plans.


Figure 2-2: Community Selection Analytical Framework

COMMUNITY STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES POTENTIAL P ROJECTS
Auhya Pinhi § Predominantly Miskitu population § Weak community level organization § Wood processing & furniture making
§ Small project infrastructure established § Agricultural development requires 20km of § Agricultural production
§ Good access road travel and river crossing to access land § Sand for glass making
§ Health Center § Rocks for construction
§ Access to construction materials to market locally § Nature reserve / ecotourism
or regionally
§ Technical craftsman in wood working availability

Bluefields § Presence of government, private sector and NGOs § No road access to Managua – only aerial and § Co-op group (UPGRAAS) processing,
§ Commercial hub for dozens of surrounding maritime access storage and commercialization of
communities § 65% Mestizo population agricultural commodities for export
§ Electricity & communications § High probability of duplication with BICU § Tourism and eco-tourism opportunities
§ Port with access to Caribbean research efforts for IDR / NI-0159 § Offshore fishery for scale, shrimps and
lobsters
§ Two universities and other technical schools
§ Agriculture and sea food processing
§ Capital of the RAAS region
§ Easy access to agricultural land

Brown Bank § Predominantly Creole population
§ Agricultural potential
§ Fishery potential
§ Forestry potential

Corn Island § Creole / Miskitu / Mestizo population § Isolated § Tourism Development
§ Good support from municipality § Massive population growth § Artisanal Fisheries support
§ Good community level organization § Abandoned subsistence and commercial § Agricultural reactivation
§ Excellent tourism potential agriculture since Hurricane Joan
§ Availability of professionals for development
project capacity.


§ Availability of infrastructure to promote tourism
and eco-tourism

Kukra Hill § Predominantly Creole population § Reticence on the part of private sector to § Sugarcane factory
§ Road in development to Pearl Lagoon contribute to effective maintenance of § African palm (oil) production
community resources
§ Presence of private sector

Kum § Predominantly Miskitu population § Agricultural projects tend to get washed out § Agricultural renewal
§ Existing rice thresher, dryer and silo in floods § Threshing and storage infrastructure
§ Access to Wangki § Access road to Waspam is very poor § Cattle raising
§ Central to several communities § Extremely dependent upon downriver
communities
§ Periodic flooding & devastation of crops
§ Very isolated during flood times
§ No electricity
§ Lack of education
§ Community has no concept of value of
previously donated infrastructure

Kururia § Predominantly Miskitu population § Weak community level organization § Agricultural development
§ Access road to highway is good § Very little infrastructure § Forestry management
§ Previous infrastructure – community meeting area. § Poor access to water
§ Availability of and access to agriculture land § No electricity
§ Pine forest for commercial use § Forestry development is limited because of
neighboring communities’ efforts
§ Small land base


Marshall Point § Predominantly Garifuna population § Power plant doesn’t work in Marshall Point § Pineapple development
/ Orinoco § Has power plant (currently inoperable) § Population base very small to manage large § Dashin plantation
§ FADCANIC training center nearby; projects and maintain infrastructure § Eco-tourism development
§ Previous project infrastructure – basketball and § Community-level organization is relatively
community house weak
§ Studies recently done on pineapple production
§ Good inter-community relations

Muelle de los § Strong local organization through § Predominantly Mestizo population (does not
Bueyes ACOMODEBUEY meet afro/latin or indigenous criterion)
§ Experience with USAID
§ Agriculture potential
§ Cattle raising potential
§ Project proposals already developed

Pearl Lagoon § Creole / Garifuna / Mestizo / Miskitu population § Municipality has not maintained roads well § Bluefields Municipality
§ Many projects already underway § Strengthening needed at level of municipality (Creole/Garifuna)
§ Hub for all communities in the basin § Agricultural potential
§ Recent infrastructure projects undertaken and more § Pineapple processing plant
planned (wharf & road to Kukra Hill)
§ Electricity
§ Water access to Bluefields by large boats
§ FADCANIC agro-forestry project
§ Christian community org in PL – managing funds
from wharf use (Not Municipality)
§ Abundance of community-based groups

Puerto § Predominantly Miskitu population (74%) § Fishing in region is exhausted § Support to Artisanal Divers Union
Cabezas § Home of two universities and other technical § Lack of constructive engagement between § Support to revolving cash and in-kind
(Bilwi) schools. municipality and regional government micro -credit initiatives to local
businesses


§ Capital of the RAAN
§ Hub for several community-based organizations
§ RAAN Regional Government
§ Municipality of Bilwi
§ Large population – center for commercial activity

Rama Cay § Predominantly Rama population § Limited physical space for development of § Coconut production
§ Small history of projects/intervention infrastructure on island § Cattle raising (women’s organization)
§ Electricity § Subsistence attitude § Rice production
§ Experience of working with NGOs and the local § Reticence to leave Rama Cay (island) which § Wood processing
municipal government limits potential for development
§ Artisan fishery
§ Limited capacity to maintain infrastructure
§ Major transportation challenges
§ Lack of food to feed workers

Tasba § Predominantly Miskitu population § No electricity § Agricultural reactivation
Raya/Francia § WB interested in doing electrical energy § Relatively little community infrastructure § Rice, mucácias, beans, root crops
Sirpi infrastructure and productive activities (cassava) pineapple, vegetables
§ Large land base with forests § Cattle raising
§ Year-round road access to Puerto Cabezas § Forestry 5,000 hectare land base of ex-
§ Production potential in various products combatants– POSAF II
§ Good number of educated individuals in § Wood processing and commercialization
community § Area to grow cacao for exportation
§ Easy support access from either Waspam or PC § Possible Eco-Tourism project in the area
§ No flooding threat of BOSAWAS.
§ Presence of NGOs
§ Small medical center
§ Close to BOSAWAS reserve
§ 7 communities within 50 km perimeter for any
sustainable agriculture project for export


Tortuguero § Excellent agricultural potential § Predominantly Mestizo population (does not
meet afro/latin or indigenous criterion)

Wasakin § Predominantly Sumo (Mayangna) population § Traditional isolation from government § Cattle raising
§ Close to city of Rosita interventions – has been a low priority § Agriculture – upper part of river is
§ Close to main road linking PC to Managua – easy § River occasionally floods excellent for bean production
access to move goods § Lack of electrical capacity § Forestry Management – POSAF
§ 12 km of gravel road from Rosita with no major § Weak communication infrastructure Growing collaboration
bridges – only ‘cajas’ which are easily maintained problem with alcoholism in community § Eco-tourism – living near a river where
§ IDB interest as focus community amongst youth downriver is the biggest wetland (delta
of Prinzapolka and Banbana river –
§ Center (capital) for Mayangna/Sumo culture
200,000 hectares of land) in Nicaragua
§ Save the Children (Canada) has expressed interest where there is a variety of pristine flora
in water and sanitation and fauna.
§ Contigo International has targeted community for § Can be a pilot for future
investment in crop storage building construction government/municipality/community
through CIDA relations
§ FISE may be doing infrastructure in future if there
is a partner
§ RAAN Governor very interested in supporting
§ 36,000 hectares of land – lots of opportunities for
forestry and agriculture
§ INTA working on processing bean seeds “semilla
mejorada” in nearby Siuna
§ MEDA – Mennonite business group wants to
exploit potential market for black beans to CR,
Mexico, Canada
§ People are open and willing to participate in
community efforts.


Waspam § Predominantly Miskitu population § History of failed projects on large scale § Thresher & dryer reactivation
§ Good infrastructure & linkages to markets § Several organizations fighting for dollars and § Infrastructure for commercialization &
§ Presence of public sector, private sector and NGOs support production hub
§ Good base of technical professionals § Limited productive capacities – more in line § Micro-credit support
with processing and commercialization § Integration of POSAF
§ Focus for development activities
§ Transportation hub for more than 40 communities
to other parts of the RAAN and Nicaragua

Wawa § Predominantly Miskitu population § Lack of independence because of proximity § Eco-tourism development
§ Project history with AMICA to Puerto Cabezas § Artisanal Fisheries
§ Close to Puerto Cabezas – good transport by boat § Maritime access only – no road
§ Good eco-tourism potential § Fisheries have been over-exploited and are
exhausted
§ Attractive community
§ Limited development opportunities
§ Strong Miskitu cultural center


2.3.4 Community Assessment Framework
The Consultants prepared comprehensive community assessments to provide a snapshot of
each community to inform and illuminate project prototypes. The following information was
gathered for each community:
o General Description Of Micro-Region/Community
o Population and Demographics
o Community Infrastructure
o Educational Infrastructure
o Role of Municipal Government
o Economic Activity
o Development Constraints
o Key Locally-Based Organizations and Institutions
o NGO and other International Activity
o Community-Based Organizations

2.3.5 Organizational Assessment Framework
To enhance the community level information collected, the consultants identified key
development organizations and institutions for further review. The organizational assessment
framework developed for civil sector, public sector, universities and community level
organizations enabled a systematic review of each organization’s capacity and project
priorities. It must be noted that many organizations – especially community-based - are at an
incipient level and some of the information was not available.

2.3.6 Dev-SCOT Analysis
The consultants have prepared a comprehensive DEVSCOT™ Analytical Framework for each
Afro-Latin and Indigenous community considered in this assessment. The framework enables
a methodical approach to identifying and assessing project opportunities, especially those
proposed by socially and economically marginalized groups.

2.3.7 Project Prototype Assessment Framework
Potential projects identified through the assessment are presented using the Project
Assessment Framework. It was designed to provide a consistent method of providing an
overview of each prototype and to assist the IDB and other development stakeholders to
determine how (or if) to best support individual initiatives. Where applicable, project
information should be considered in conjunction with the information prepared on the
organization(s) promoting the project and the community profiles.


3 O VERVIEW OF SOCIO-E CONOMIC C ONDITIONS AND
P RODUCTIVE ACTIVITIES ON THE ATLANTIC C OAST
Six communities that contain significant populations of Afro-Latin and Indigenous Peoples
were selected as the target communities for this study. With the exception of Corn Island,
each community represents a micro-regional hub around which project prototypes can be built
for the benefit of surrounding smaller communities. The following section will provide a
snapshot of the region and the specific communities, with a focus on data that supports an
effective socio-economic and productive analysis of the communities in question.

3.1 Historical and Socio-Economic Overview of Atlantic Coast
The Atlantic coast has a rich multi-ethnic history, punctuated with occasional violent conflict
and a history of challenging relations and political incongruence with Managua. Despite the
vast natural resources of the region, Afro-Latin and Indigenous communities along the coast
are mired in extreme poverty and facing major social and economic challenges.
According to a recent UNDP evaluation report, the region is vulnerable environmentally,
socially, economically and institutionally. This vulnerability is fostered by several factors,
including the fragility of the region’s eco-systems, the advance of the agricultural frontier
from the West, the impact of cyclical natural disasters (droughts, forest fires, hurricanes and
floods), the growing influence of drug-trafficking, the fragile nature of human security, the
disconnect between Mestizo and indigenous cultures in the region, the stagnant socio-
economic nature of the region, institutional paralysis, and the lack of ‘de- facto’ autonomy as
manifested by the obstruction in the management of community, municipal and regional
authorities at the hands of the central government. 1
Statistical information for the region is generally inconsistent and unreliable. The most recent
national census was taken in 2000, though the data has not yet been analyzed and
disseminated to the general public. The region has experienced high levels of immigration in
recent years, reflecting the increasing pressures on agricultural land from Mestizo cattlemen
expanding their operations eastward, and threatening the already heavily burdened and
inadequate social infrastructure.
History

Atlantic coast communities – historically populated by Miskito Indians and Creole
descendents of former slaves from other areas of the Caribbean - fell under the protection of
the British crown until the late 19th Century, when the region was officially re- incorporated
into Nicaragua. The distinct history of governance structures, languages and ethnicities lies at
the root of many of the present day differences between the coast and the rest of Nicaragua,
and is reflected in the cultural and political mosaic we see today.
The economic foundations of the region reflect a history of resource extraction by outsiders –
both foreign companies and Nicaraguan organizations from the Pacific coast. Prevailing
activities included large-scale mining, logging, agriculture and fishing - producing gold,
chicle, rubber, and lobster for the export market. Anecdotal history suggests that these

1
Informe de Evaluación Final, ProRAAS II. Bluefields, RAAS, June 2001, page 3


activities were largely unsustainable, environmentally devastating, and gave little
consideration for local communities. This paradigm continues to this day with logging and
fishery activities, often dominated by foreign companies operating in a weak legislative
environment, whose activities are not subject to adequate monitoring. Much of the local
economies and infrastructure in the region were severely jeopardized or destroyed outright
through the tumultuous revolution years in the 1980s, and have not yet returned to their
former state.
Political
Politically, the Nicaraguan Atlantic Coast is divided into two regions: The Northern Atlantic
Autonomous Region (RAAN) with its headquarters in Puerto Cabezas, and the Southern
Atlantic Autonomous Region (RAAS) based in Bluefields. These regions arose out of the
Autonomy Law of 1987, which recognized the distinct cultural and economic makeup of the
Atlantic Coast, and which ceded much administrative authority from the Central Government
to the two regional councils. Each Region is divided into municipalities – 12 in the RAAS
and 6 in the RAAN. In general terms, these municipalities are severely under-resourced and
have limited capacity to support and manage development. The two regional governments are
currently in the process of institutional strengthening with the support of the United Nations
Development Programme, the IDB and the Swedish Development Agency (ASDI).
Municipalities are also being supported by two major institutional strengthening initiatives:
RAAN/ASDI/RAAS, promoted by the BID/ASDI partnership, and DANIDA’s Prodemu
Decentralization program.
Demographics and Ethnic Diversity
The RAAN’s 7 municipalities have an estimated total population of over 185,000 people,
whose roots are multi-ethnic in nature. Estimates suggest that Miskito families make up 44%
of the population, Mestizos 38%, Creoles 14% and Mayangna/Sumo 4%. The Southern
Autonomous Region is divided into 12 municipalities, with a total population of
approximately 322,844. 2 . The population density of the RAAS is estimated to be 11.72
individuals/km². The rural population is dispersed throughout over 250 communities, with an
estimated population density of 1.65 individuals/km². The Ministry of Agriculture and
Forestry (MAG-FOR) estimates suggest that over 72% of the population of the RAAS is
Mestizo, while 18% is Miskito and 7% are Creole/Garifuna.
Infrastructure
Most communities are situated far from regional centers and are difficult to reach, many
accessible only by water or by air. The region has few roads, and the existing ones tend to be
poorly maintained, with many becoming impassable during the rainy season. This presents a
major challenge to developing productive economic initiatives. There is also a lack of
infrastructure to preserve and store crops, resulting in many farmers and fishermen having to
sell most if not all of their production at very low prices during peak harvest season, and often
the remains are lost to rot or infestation by pests.
Social and economic infrastructure within most coastal communities is deficient, and many
lack basic services such as potable water, electricity, sewage system, solid waste disposal
dumpsites and treatment facilities. Most communities have little access to communication

2
Plan Estratégico del Sector Agropecuario y Forestal para la RAAS. MAGFOR, Bluefields, November 2002


infrastructure such as CB radio, telephone, or even local radio stations. While a few
communities have a clinic for medical attention, most lack permanent staff, and all suffer
major shortages of medicine. Almost all communities have a partial or complete elementary
school, though most have no secondary school. With the exception of Corn Island, none of
the pilot communities selected as part of this assessment have access to a technical school to
provide extension programs to farmers or fishermen. The few students that have the
opportunity to continue their studies are forced to go to urban centers far from their
communities. The cost to maintain a student outside the community is usually out of reach for
most of the local families.
Economic Activity
Estimates for regional unemployment vary, but it “The Atlantic Coast has its own
is generally accepted that over 90% of the agricultural production logic”
region’s residents lack formal employment.
Outside of urban centers formal employment is Albert Sinclair, URACCAN
scarce, and the princ ipal employers in the region
are government (particularly in the education
sector), private fishing companies, and the services sector. The principal productive activities
in the region, in order of importance, are: fisheries, agriculture and forestry. In most cases,
production is maintained at the craft level and products are sold, mostly as raw material, to
private industries owned by individuals outside the communities.
Indications suggest that Creole, Rama and Miskito residents are the most active in the
fisheries. Craft or ‘Artisanal” fishermen compete with several industrial boats for diminishing
stocks of lobster, shrimp and a variety of finfish. Lack of regulation and enforcement in the
industry is fostering increasing exploitation, degradation of fishing grounds, and ethnic
tensions in the communities as more and more fishermen chase smaller and smaller catches.
Seafood processing plants exist in Bluefields, Bluff and Corn Island, though at the time this
assessment was published only the two plants in Corn Island were in operation.
Agricultural activity consists mainly of production of basic grains, cattle, milk products,
vegetables and fruit. MAG-FOR estimates that agricultural cultivation comprises only 8.28%
of the total area available in the RAAS. Farmers and producers in the region have little or no
access to improved seed, market information, and technical assistance in crop management,
seeding, harvesting, and post-harvest management of crops. There is little or no value-added
processing in the region, and most production is exported raw.
Agro- forestry activity along the coast is principally landowners clearing land to make room
for the planting of crops. There is some secondary industry in the form of wood processing
plants in Bluefields, and a lumber market in Puerto Cabezas.

While private industry in wood manufacturing, fishing and mining does exist, the economic
and development benefits to the region of this activity in recent years have been minimal. An
area of growth in the region is seen in tertiary economic activity, as restaurant/bars, eateries,
restaurants and small stores or “pulperías” are opening up, though mostly the urban areas of
Bluefields, Puerto Cabezas, Waspam and Corn Island.
A reflection of the current economic reality of the region is that family members living and
working abroad support family incomes to a large degree. The Diaspora population of
Nicaragua plays a strong role in the socio-economic well-being of coast communities, and
according to Miguel Gonzá lez Perez’ March 2001 Socio-Economic and Political Analysis of

the Autonomous Regions, a full 20% of households along the Atlantic Coast receive
remittances from family and friends. It has been suggested to the authors that the actual
numbers in some areas along the coast range from 40-70% and MAG-FOR estimates that in
the RAAS alone, more than 5,000 families benefit directly from over US$3,200,000 in
remittances annually.
The region faces serious socio-economic and political challenges as it strives to develop in an
inclusive and sustainable manner. The Community Action Plans and Project Prototypes
outlined in Sections 5 and 6 can become part of an integrated solution as stakeholders strive to
support the region’s development.

3.2 General Comments on Atlantic Coast Development Challenges
o Services – The lack of basic services (potable water, electricity, sewage disposal), as well as
the deficiencies in social services such as health and education is an increasing threat to the
health and viability of many communities on the coast;
o Communication Challenges. Communications between Atlantic Coast communities,
especially those outside of the Regional Capitals is generally difficult and can often take
several days;
o Community Capacity – All of the communities we visited had extremely limited capacity to
effectively manage projects themselves, highlighting the need for community-level
organizational strengthening and capacity building;
o Community Consultation – Development initiatives along the coast must reinforce
community values with productive structures that build upon and strengthen traditional
community organizations;
o Cost Sharing – Successful regional organizations counsel for the need to break the cycle of
dependence and paternalism in the region by establishing mechanisms wherein communities
and individuals repay in-kind for goods and services provided, while reinforcing the value of
donated infrastructure;
o Isolation – Many communities lack basic road access or have roads that are in such a state of
disrepair that they are impassable much of the year. In many communities radio is the only
means of direct communication. There are no postal or telephone services;
o Lack of Resources – Municipalities and local government structures are severely under-
financed and often cannot even pay basic staff or other costs;
o Land Demarcation – In each of the communities we visited along the coast, land demarcation
was a prevalent issue which is being discussed at the community, regional and national level;
o Lessons Learned – Many community leaders explained that past development interventions
reflected a lack of true ‘partnership’ with the communities, with activities and results being
largely transitory, and means for sustainability largely ignored;
o Lack of Value -Added Processing – At present, there exists little or no value-added to
agricultural, seafood or agro-forestry products in the region (outside of facilities in Bluefields
and Puerto Cabezas;
o Social Capital – In general terms, racial groups (Mestizo, Miskitu, Creole, Garifuna, Rama,
etc.) have a reasonable level of economic and social interaction in the region. In specific
terms on Corn Island, however, the consulting team noticed a level of racial tensions arising
between the Creole and Miskitu fishermen specifically as a result of decreasing fishing stocks
and land pressures on the islands.


4 SELECTED COMMUNITIES

4.1 Introduction
This section provides profiles of the six communities selected as pilot communities for pilot
prototypes of economic development in the region. Four of the communities are located in the
Southern Region (RAAS) and two in the North (RAAN). The RAAS communities include
three predominantly Garifuna and Creole communities (Pearl Lagoon, Orinoco and Marshall
Point) located in the Pearl Lagoon basin, as well as Corn Island off the coast near Bluefields.
Two of the communities selected are located in the RAAN: Wasakin, a Sumo indigenous
community on the shores of the Bambana River, 12 km from the city of Rosita, and Francia
Sirpi, a predominantly Miskito community in the Tasba Raya region, 70 km southwest of the
city of Waspam. The locations of these communities are represented by green dots in Figure
4.1 below.
The following sub-sections provide detailed assessments of each of the selected communities.

Figure 4-1: Map of Selected Communities


Assessment of Economic Development Opportunities for Afro-Latin Communities in the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua

Assessment of Economic Development Opportunities for Afro-Latin Communities in the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Andere mochten auch

Andere mochten auch (20)

Ähnlich wie Assessment of Economic Development Opportunities for Afro-Latin Communities in the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua

Ähnlich wie Assessment of Economic Development Opportunities for Afro-Latin Communities in the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua (20)

Mehr von Wayne Dunn

Mehr von Wayne Dunn (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Assessment of Economic Development Opportunities for Afro-Latin Communities in the Atlantic Coast of Nicaragua