COASTAL Coexistence: Community Conservation in Wakatobi National Park, Indonesia MESPOM Thesis 2012

1. COASTAL
COEXISTENCE
Community Conservation in
Wakatobi National Park,
Indonesia
MESPOM Thesis Presentation
By: Nara Wisesa

2. Contents
• Introduction
• Site Description
• Research
Questions
• Methods
• Results
• Discussions
• Conclusion

3. Introduction
• What is conservation?
– Activities that aim to protect the natural environment and
reduce or limit the impacts of human activity towards it
• Intrinsic value of nature
• Environmental problems are caused by human exploitation
• We are ethically obliged to protect the environment
– Nature conservation movements - based on the interest of
the self-preservation of humankind?
• Limits to Growth
“Give them a fish and you feed them for a day.
• Precautionary Principle
Teach them to fish and you feed them for life.”
(Old Proverb)

4. Introduction
• Protected areas
– To serve the interest of nature conservation, governments set up
protected areas
– These are “areas of land and/or sea especially dedicated to the
protection and maintenance of biological diversity, and of natural and
associated cultural resources, and managed through legal or other
effective means” (IUCN 1994)

5. Introduction
• Two major approaches to conservation
– Fortress Conservation
– Community Conservation
– In practice: not that clear cut
• Shift from expert-based ‘fortress conservation’
to a more ‘community conservation’ approach
• Community Conservation
– Inclusion of local communities
– Co-management of natural resources
– Public participation

6. Site - Wakatobi National Park
• Geography – Where is it?

7. Site - Wakatobi National Park
• Geography (Regional)
– Indonesia
• Crossroads of 2 continents
and 2 oceans
• 3 ecoregions: Sundaland,
New Guinean and Wallacea
• Wallacea – high biodiversity
– Combination species from
other two ecoregions and
unique species
– The “Coral Triangle”

8. Site - Wakatobi National Park
• Geography – Wakatobi
– Small chain of islands off the coast of south-
eastern Sulawesi
• Four main islands of Wangi-Wangi, Kaledupa,
Tomia and Binongko (which forms the
‘Wakatobi’ acronym)
– Surrounded by barrier reefs, fringing reefs
and separate off-shore atolls teeming with
marine life
• Located in the “coral triangle”
– Islands have limited farming potential
• Traditional fisheries and algae farming are main
livelihoods for many locals
• Coastal resources important part of the local
tradition

9. Site - Wakatobi National Park
• Wakatobi National Park (WNP)
– Established in 1996
– Marine Protected Area (MPA)
• To protect the highly bio-diverse coral reefs
• To halt the use of destructive resource
extraction techniques
– WNP management plan
• Based on a centrally planned and controlled
management system
• Heavily relies on centrally governed rules and
regulations

10. Site - Wakatobi National Park
• Past Condition (late 90’s - early • Original Park Design
2000’s) – Divided into several zones
– Local people excluded from decision • Different levels of accessibility
making activities
– Lack of communication and
and resource use allocation
understanding between national park • The majority of the National
authorities and the local people Park was designated as no-take
– Destructive fishing activities were zones
rampant in the area • Zone designation decided in
• KCN and blast fishing, brought and Jakarta without local public
funded by external actors
• Locals consider marine/coastal resources
consultation/incorporating
as inexhaustible local resource use patterns
• WNP authorities unable to effectively • Populated islands are located
monitor the whole area within the Core Zone
– There is a need for increased community
involvement
(Elliott et al. 2001)
No Zonation Nomenclature Take Area (%) No Take Area (%)
1 Core Zone - 49.17
2 No-Take Zone - 11.55
3 Tourism-Use Zone - 5.07
4 Traditional Use Zone 21.62 -
5 Rehabilitation Zone - 12.59
Total 21.62 78.38

11. Site - Wakatobi National Park
• TNC-WWF Wakatobi Joint Programme
– Collaboration project between TNC and
WWF-ID
• Established in 2003
– Goal is to “… assist the Wakatobi National
Park authority to improve their
management plan, zoning, and
implementation of park management”
(WWF-ID 2008)
– Later followed by
• A change in local governance regime
(establishment of a separate Wakatobi
Regency)
• The revision of the National Park conservation
management scheme

12. Research Questions
• Have the conservation management approach in
Wakatobi shifted towards a ‘community
conservation’ type?
• Have the TNC-WWF NGO programme attempted
to alter local community participation and
involvement towards marine conservation
efforts?
• Have changes in the National Park altered local
communities within Wakatobi National Park,
Indonesia?

13. Research
• Methods • Local Stakeholders
– TNC-WWF team
– Literature review
– WNP authority
– Interviews with local – Local people (representatives)
stakeholders • Analysis
• Additional subjects through – Qualitative
snowball sampling • Interview/observation results
• Interviews are semi-structured, • Literature/reference materials
semi-formal, open-ended • Constraints
• Done in Bahasa Indonesia – Temporal, logistical, practical
• Only visited Wangiwangi and Kaledupa
– Participatory observations • Representatives from Tomia and Binongko
– Additional reference materials were met in Wanci
– Potential Limits of snowball sampling
• Presentations
– No interview with local government
• Audio/Visual documentations representatives
• Scheduling clashes/time limitations

14. Results
• Rezoning – Local people were involved from
the beginning
– In 2003, WNP authority, TNC- • Perception monitoring & awareness
WWF and the local raising (2005)
government initiated the • Community group discussions –
process to redesign the how do they think the park should
existing zoning scheme look like? (2006)
• Two rounds of formal public
• Integrate protection and consultations between all involved
conservation needs with local stakeholders (2006 and 2007) –
resource use needs resulting in the design drafts
• Shift management power from – The second design draft (agreed
upon by all stakeholders involved)
central to regional became the implemented design
• To achieve the goal of the for the park
conservation of biodiversity • Public socialization process of the
while improving local people park and implementation of the
well-being new management scheme (2008-
ongoing)

15. Results

16. Results
• Zone coverage has changed significantly in the
revised zoning scheme
– No-take area from about 80% down to about 3%
– Now mostly local (traditional) use zone (68%)
– Creation of the common use zone
No Zonation Nomenclature Original Scheme First Draft Final Design
Take Area No Take Take Area No Take Take Area No Take
Original Scheme Revision Schemes
(%) Area (%) (%) Area (%) (%) Area (%)
1 Core Zone Core Zone - 49.17 - 0.1 - 0.1
2 No-Take Zone No-Take Zone - 11.55 - 2.86 - 2.6
3 Tourism-Use Zone Tourism Zone - 5.07 - 0.68 - 0.4
4 Traditional Use Zone Local-Use Zone 21.62 - 47 - 57.5 -
5 Rehabilitation Zone - - 12.59 - - - -
6 - Common-Use Zone - - 46,36 - 36 -
7 - Special Land Zone - - 3,00 - 3.3 -
Sum 21.62 78.38 96.36 3.64 96.8 3.1

17. Results
• TNC-WWF programme
– Two primary goals:
• Conserve the area’s resources & maintain biodiversity
• Ensure the livelihood of local communities
– Role is to support/assist WNP authority and
local government
– Three main approaches
• Develop and assess MPA designs
• Surveillance & monitoring activities
• Increase local community support towards
conservation activities within the national park
– The “Outreach Programme”

18. Results
• Community Outreach Programme
– Put the local community on a par with the
local government during decision-making
processes
– Encourage people to stop using destructive
extraction methods
– Approaches:
• Workshops, trainings, etc
• Partnership with local government and WNP
authority
• Work mainly with coastal resource users
• The “Outreach Team”

19. Results
• The “Outreach Team”
– Local people, recruited to join the outreach
programme
– To change public perception to the view that
conservation is a way to ensure the
continuation of their livelihood
• Direct interaction with other local people
• Basic approach rule: Use simple/easy to
understand terms and analogies
– Slightly different approaches for different islands/communities
• Provide local people information regarding
environmental issues
– Allow them to come to their own conclusions
• Able to communicate conservation ideas using
local languages
– Relate these ideas with local resource management traditions
• Dig out local knowledge from traditional
management practices

20. Results
• Current condition of communities
– How communities were altered
• Public perception appears to have shifted
– Consider a healthy environment to be beneficial
to them
– No longer consider conservation as a foreign
concept
– Feel that a properly designed national park will
ensure the continuation of their livelihood
• Local people are now actively involved in
community organising activities and
discussion groups
– Possess the self confidence to state their
opinions
– Make sure they are heard by government
representatives

21. Results
• Current condition of communities
– Communities and conservation
• Wakatobi people traditionally regard
themselves to have the obligation to maintain
natural resources
– Growing environmental awareness brought this
culture back to prominence
– Resulted in contributions toward the national
park’s conservation efforts
• Processes initiated by the outreach team
continued by members of the community
• Local people starting to notice positive changes
in the natural environment around them
• Local people feel current zoning scheme would
be beneficial to them

22. Results
• Current condition of communities
– Communities and conservation –
Examples
• Mutual agreement between fishermen
around Tomia island to stop using blast
fishing methods
• Community “fish banks” – traditionally
established no take zones around Tomia
• Boat registration and fish landing book-
keeping schemes in Kaledupa
• Former blast/KCN-fishers now join
monitoring activities to stop persistent
blast/KCN fishers
– Insider tips from community members

23. Discussion
• Shifting conservation
management approach
– WNP recently experienced a
shift in management
• Centralised management ->
community management
• Zoning scheme redesign process
involving local people
• Not a complete shift, more co-
management
– Combine aspects of both fortress
and community approaches
– Responsibilities still in the hands of
NP authority and government
– There are still zones that severely
limit public access

24. Discussion
• TNC-WWF outreach
strategies
– TNC-WWF attempted to – Outreach team approach
increase local community • Three aspects of
support towards the
conservation activities ‘marketing’ conservation
– Two sides of outreach ideas to the community
programme – Pyramid-esque aspect
• Public – Guerilla-esque aspect
– Public discussions, – Viral-esque aspect
workshops, community
empowerment exercises, • Took time until results
provision of access to
information become noticeable
• Discreet – 3-4 years
– Outreach team

25. Discussion
• Public involvement and participation
– Changes in the national park have indeed, to an extent, altered local people’s
• Perception towards conservation
• Reception towards the national park
• Public behaviour
– Voluntary public participation and involvement in protected area
management has increased
– Redesign process seems to be key
• First concrete form of official public involvement
• Gave the local people a sense of ownership
– Direct and indirect contributions
• Participation during redesign
• Local environmental policies
• Participation in monitoring activities
• Spread conservation ideas and concept among themselves

26. Discussion
• Potential future issues
– Ecological effects of zonal change
• Potential increase in fishing activities
• Increased fish landings due to spill-over may lead to decreasing prices and
increasing fishing efforts
– Defining “traditional fisheries”
• Even local people may adopt new fishing techs to be used within the local
use zone
– Economical and tourism development
• Increased population pressure and resource demand
• Societal readiness of fishing communities in the face of increased tourism
– “Tourism is tourists who dive” – outreach discussion participant
– Effectiveness of the current zone design
• Will be re-evaluated in 3 years, re-design if deemed necessary
• Always possible for “back-to-barriers” to happen

27. “Give them a fish and you feed them for a day.
Conclusion
Teach them to fish and you feed them for a while.
• Guidehas recently experienced a shiftand you feed them for life.”
WNP them to manage the fishes towards community
conservation
– Best represented by the zoning redesign process
• TNC-WWF did attempt to alter public involvement in conservation
efforts through their outreach programme (Updated Proverb)
– This created a conducive environment for the conservation programme to
work in
• Wakatobi people appears to have changed when compared to late
90’s/early 2000’s
– Acceptance levels have increased and now they hold a different
perception towards conservation ideas
• Next step: to see if the new design implementation would
see the national park move towards its conservation goals
– Success depends on how processes already in place would be
continued and built upon
The people spoke // Changes were made // Fish kept swimming

28. So Long…
and Thanks for All the Fish!
(D. Adams 1985)
Questions?