Global Climate Change and Coral Reefs
I
Dr. C. Mark Eakin
World Data Center for Paleoclimatology
Unfortunately, atmospheric CO
2
will reach double pre-industrial levels (to 560
NOAA National Geophysical Data Center
Boulder, Colorado ppm), even if emissions are stabilized. This means that we will have CO
2
that are unprecedented during human history. In
USA fact, CO
2
levels have been below current levels since the Miocene (~24 my ago) when coral/algal reef development increased.
How do Global Climate Changes Influence Reefs?
CO
2
Increase
Temperature Increase
Sea Level Rise
Changes in Storminess, Storm
Tracks
Hydrologic Cycle Changes

Reduced ability to calcify?
 Increased Bleaching (adaptation?)
 Benefit to corals?

Changes in Storm Damage
Multiple-Stress Effects
 Changes in Runoff,
Land-based Pollutants

Algal Overgrowth
Coral Diseases, Infestations
Introduction
Global Climate Change can take many different forms, each with different potential influences on coral reefs. While some may be beneficial, most have the ability to stress coral reefs – many of which are already stressed by local human actions.
The above table shows five major forms of climate change along with potential influences of each. The sixth factor, multiple-stress effects, involves a variety of climatic and non-climatic stresses.
CO
2
Increase
Researchers have identified three likely effects of CO
2 on reef corals. The effects may be negative, neutral or positive.

Reef calcium carbonate (CaCO
3
) production will decrease by 15 –30% under doubled pCO
2
conditions
 Dissolution of sedimentary CACO
3
, in response to increased pCO
2
and lowered pH, will adequately buffer water column chemistry
 Increasing pCO
2
in ocean will fertilize
zooxanthellae, thus increasing coral
growth rates
Paleontologists have suggested that coral reef development was not physiologically beneficial until the atmospheric CO
2
levels dropped in the
Miocene. A return to pre-Miocene levels would probably make the production of calcium carbonate skeletons much more energetically expensive. The changes seen in atmospheric CO
2
and oceanic [CO
3
2] levels during geological time indicate that we are unlikely to see great salvation due to water column buffering. Overall, it is most likely that increased atmospheric CO
2
will l have a variety of direct and indirect harmful effects on reefs.
We know that atmospheric CO
2
will increase. It is likely that oceanic [CO
3
2] will decrease as a result. This will result in :
 decreased calcification

increased breakage in corals
 shift in community structure

lower reef-building capacity
47

Reduced
[CO
3
2]
Reduced
Calcification
Fig.5.1
Effects of CO
2
on Coral Reefs
(direct vs indirect)
2
Increased Atmospheric
Temperature
Climatic Changes
Altered storm frequency/intensity
Increased dust
(Fe fertilization)
Sea level rise
Increased
SST
Increased
Bleaching
Differential
Impacts
Increased
Breakage &
Erosion
Reduced
Light
CO
2
fertilization will probably have a greater influence on free-living algae than zooxanthellae, perhaps leading to greater overgrowth of corals by free-living algae.
Increased Tropical Ocean Temperatures
We have already seen a dramatic rise in coral reef bleaching during recent decades. Evidence from chemical analysis of coral skeletons shows that tropical ocean temperatures have been rising over the last
100 years to levels greater than those seen over the past few hundred years.
The effect of these temperature increases has been seen as:
 Loss of zooxanthellae triggered by stress
(temperature, light, salinity)
 Affecting many symbiotic organisms
(hard and soft corals, anemones, giant
clams, sponges)

Widespread bleaching associated with
increases in max. SSTs, (ENSO-related)

The loss of 300 + year-old corals
 An apparent increase in coral bleaching
in past two decades (confounded by increase in observations after 1950’s)
The bleaching associated with the
1997-
98 El Niño was the most severe ever observed, with widespread effects in the
Indian and Pacific Oceans:

Catastrophic bleaching with massive
mortality (95%): Maldives, Singapore,
Tanzania, Bahrain
 Severe bleaching with 50-70% mortality:
Kenya, Seychelles, Thailand, Vietnam,
Japan, Belize

Severe bleaching with 20-50% mortality:
GBR, Madagascar, Indonesia,
Philippines, Taiwan, Palau, Fr.
Polynesia, Oman, Galápagos,
Bahamas, Cayman Is., Florida,
Bermuda, Brazil
Fortunately, there was substantial recovery reported subsequently for some of the most severely impacted Indian Ocean reefs. The bleaching was strongly correlated with increases in maximum SSTs, and was most pronounced in shallow water (<15m), fast-growing species.
Unfortunately, the problem does not end with the bleaching. Dead corals are more susceptible to bioerosion, with longlasting repercussions on the community. Not only do corals die, but the reef carbonates that make up the very fabric of the ecosystem often are destroyed as well. This is equivalent to a disease that not only kills the trees in a forest, but destroys the wood as well. Without the coral skeletons, a coral reef is no longer a reef.
The one hope is that corals will adapt to the higher temperatures. Theories and some evidence indicate that this is a possibility, but we will have to wait to see if
48

corals can adapt to these dramatic rates of temperature increase.
Fig. 5.2 The graph shows a summary of annual resolution coral

18 O isotope records, normalized to the 1923-1980
period (thick line denotes 7-year smooth).The data shows general trends consistent with globally
warmer/wetter conditions. Source: Bradley et al. in prep., PAGES Synthesis Volume
1. Malindi
2. Seychelles
3. Abrolhos
4. Abraham
Reef
5. Madang
6. New
Caledonia
7. V anuatu
8. Nauru
9. Tarawa
10. Maiana
11. Kiritimati
12. Urvina Bay
13. Chiriqui
14. Clipperton
15. Cebu
16. Aqaba
1600 1700 1800
Year A.D.
Other Climate Effects
As climate changes, the sea level is likely to rise both from thermal expansion
1900 2000 and from ice melting. If geological evidence is correct, rising sea level is actually
Fig. 5.3 beneficial to corals. However, if higher sea levels increase the eroded sediments in the
49

water column, corals may have a difficult time keeping up with sea level rise in some areas. Other anticipated changes in storminess and runoff may pose especially difficult problems in combination with increased atmospheric CO
2
.
If higher levels of atmospheric CO
2 cause corals to either have weaker skeletons or grow more slowly, then storm damage will either be greater or be harder to recover from. Finally, as the combination of various climatic and non-climatic stresses may be contributing to recent outbreaks of coral
Not only have we seen unprecedented ocean temperatures in coral paleoclimatic records, but other records have revealed that air temperatures in the 1990s were also the highest in the last 1,000 years.
Unfortunately, there is no reason to believe that temperatures will stabilize any time soon. As indicated earlier, even if we were to stabilize our releases of greenhouse gases, atmospheric CO
2
would reach levels at least double the pre-industrial values. The range of expected temperatures during the diseases, incidents of algal overgrowth and various infestations by predators and coral parasites.
What does the future hold?
Fig. 5.4 next century dwarf the increases seen in the last century, exceeding values seen over the last 1,000 years by 2-
5° C.
Marine Protected Areas as a Strategy for
Coral Reef Management
50

Richard Kenchington
RAC Marine Pty Ltd
Australia
What is a Marine Protected Area?


IUCN Resolution
IUCN Categories
The concept of marine protected areas in that resolution places them centrally as part of the machinery of management for sustainable use, understanding, enjoyment as well as conservation.
In 1987 the General Assembly of the IUCN adopted a resolution with the following primary goal:
“ To provide for the protection, restoration, wise use, understanding and enjoyment of the marine heritage of the world in perpetuity through the creation of a global, representative system of marine protected areas; and through management in accordance with the principles of the World
Conservation Strategy of human activities that use or affect the marine environment.”
IUCN defines a protected area as:
An area of land and/or sea
especially dedicated to the protection of biological diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal or other effective means.”
Scales and linkages in coral reef management

Planktonic larvae


Pollution dispersal
Local and Regional scale linkages
The development of the marine protected area concept is affected by the strong linkages that exist through the water column in the marine environment.
Protection of the biological diversity at a site can depend on maintenance of ecosystem processes in the water column and over a large geographic range.
In all marine environments, the water column provides an active and substantial linkage between pockets of habitat that may be widely separated. The scale of ecosystems is the scale of currents.
Some species spend the entire life as plankton photosynthesizing or feeding, reproducing, preying or being preyed upon as they drift supported by the dense medium of the water column. Other species spend part of their life drifting as larvae - feeding and growing in the plankton until they reach a stage where they can settle and assume adult form and habits on a suitable area of the seabed.
The protection of the seabed habitat has much in common with terrestrial protected
Presented mini case studies highlight three priority topics which, in previous ICRI conferences, emerged as topics that require immediate action and close attention



Global climate change and impacts on coral reefs
Marine protected areas as a strategy for coral reef management and conservation
Capacity building for coral reef management
Presentors identify trends, issues and opportunities related to these three priority topics with global, regional and local experiences and perspectives
.
To facilitate workshop discussion and development of specific policy objectives, the mini-case study presented give concise and relevant highlights of experiences to:



Major trends
Issues and challenges
Opportunities
51

areas but the dense medium of seawater can support pollutants as well as food and larvae. Areas such as coral reefs or seagrass beds may be quite small and distinctive and their biodiversity and ecological processes can be directly threatened by habitat destruction, pollution and over exploitation occurring far away.
Strategies for reef management

Recognizing the value of healthy reefs

Educating reef users and residents

Removing the insults

Sustainable resource use

Develop and maximize sustainable alternative income capacity from healthy reefs

Tourism

Ecologically sustainable aquaculture

The safety margin
– precautionary
principle
For those who have grown up with them, reefs and coastal environments and the goods and services they provide are often taken for granted. The first task is to work with the communities and those further afield to understand the values.
The second task is to educate reef users, local communities and those further afield about those values, about their importance to lifestyle, culture, food security and future options for economic activity.
The third task is to develop and implement strategies to prevent or remove insults such as pollution, habitat destruction, unsustainable resource use and destructive fishing. This will generally involve the development of alternative income activities to replace unsustainable and destructive use and maintain or add to the value of a healthy reef and coastal environment.
To underpin any measure to achieve sustainability it is essential to have a strategy for maintaining biological diversity and the ecological processes that characterize and maintain reefs and coastal environments. This can be the contribution and core value of a well designed system of marine protected areas.
Roles of MPAs
The IUCN has divided Protected
Areas into six types depending on their objectives:
Table 5.1
Category
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
Title
Strict Nature
Reserve
MPA Management
Objective
Science or wilderness protection
National Park Ecosystem protection and recreation
Natural
Monument
Conservation of specific natural features
Habitat/
Species
Management
Conservation through managed intervention
Area
Protected
Landscape/
Seascape
Managed resource
Protection
Area
Landscape/seascape conservation and recreation
Sustainable use of natural ecosystems
Any of the categories can have a role in coral reef management. However the essential elements of a comprehensive strategy for management of biodiversity and ecosystem processes are large area ecosystem scale management of resources and of sustainable uses and impacts and, incorporated within this through zoning, strict protected areas or national parks in which no harvesting of resources is permitted and, as necessary protection for seasonal breeding sites. This equates to overall category VI with core areas of category I or II and category IV.
The overall category VI provides a framework within which uses are permitted provided they are managed on a basis of objectives that addresses demonstrable sustainability. Whether these objective are achieved through conservation legislation or fisheries legislation makes little difference provided they are rigorously defined and that there is systematic evaluation performance in achieving them.
The category I or II inclusions provide refuges for intensively exploited species, breeding stock buffers against recruitment failure and centers for dispersal of eggs and larvae and for spillover emigration of adults.
The category IV – Habitat/Species
Management Area can play a significant role for example in protection of seasonally important breeding grounds of turtles or fish or feeding areas for migratory species.
Categories II, III and V can have roles in management coral reef tourism so
52

that it does not damage the resources upon which it depends and so that it can contribute to the important tasks of education of visitors about the importance and value as well as the beauty of coral reefs.
Conclusion
Management in accordance with the objectives of Marine Protected Areas, particularly IUCN categories II and VI, is essential to the long term conservation of coral reefs. Where sustainable tourism and recreation are objectives, IUCN categories II,
III and V provide important mechanisms.
Reference:
IUCN (1999) Guidelines for Marine Protected Areas. IUCN,
Gland Switzerland and Cammbridge, UK. Xxiv + 107pp.
Building Capacity for Coral Reef
Management: Trends, Issues, Challenges and Opportunities
Catherine Courtney
Coastal Resource Management Program (CRMP)
Philippines
The importance of building the capacity of individuals and institutions in managing coral reefs and other coastal resources has been the primary target of many programs and projects of government, international donors, non-governmental organizations, and academic institutions since the adoption of Agenda 21, Chapter
17, on the protection of the oceans and coastal areas in 1992. The nature, quality, and sustainability of capacity building programs; however, have taken many forms and have experienced varying degrees of success (Nakashima, 1997; Norris and
Richards, 1997; and Newman, 2001). In this paper, definitions of capacity building are summarized from the literature. The approaches and results of capacity building efforts in coastal management in the
Philippines are described based on the experiences of the Coastal Resource
Management Project (CRMP), a technical assistance project of the Department of
Environment and Natural Resources, funded by the United States Agency for International
Development. Finally, the role of the
International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI) in catalyzing capacity building for coral reef management is examined and opportunities identified.
Definitions and trends in capacity building
Capacity building in the context of coastal management has been defined in a variety of different ways. In Agenda 21,
Chapter 17, capacity building is recognized as a crosscutting requirement (Table 5.2) focused on human resource development through education, training, and technical assistance for all relevant sectors including scientists, technologists, managers
(including community members) and users, leaders, indigenous peoples, fisherfolk, and women. Capacity building is also defined as the establishment of centers of excellence, pilot demonstration projects and programs, and research programs. Capacity building for coastal management has been defined as increasing the capacity of individuals to make sound decisions on coastal resource planning and management (Crawford, 1993).
Components of capacity building programs may include human capacity, institutional capacity, and research (Kay & Alder, 1999).



Table 5.2. Definitions of capacity building
Cross-cutting need for the development of sustainable institutions for ocean and coastal management (Agenda 21, Chapter 17)
Increasing the capability of those charged with managing the coast to make sound planning and management decisions (Crawford et al., 1993)
Strengthening the ability of individuals and organizations to achieve their mission including all aspects of technical and institutional performance (Newman, 2001)
Norris and Richards (1997) in a review of capacity building programs in the
Pacific/Asia region identified an important first step to a successful capacity building program is to define and limit what is meant by capacity building. In their regional review, the programs with the least impact had either not defined what they meant by capacity building, e.g. “capacity building is the outcome of everything we do,” or had very broad definitions, e.g. “capacity building supports training and development as well as funding of core staff, vehicles, computers, office equipment, and routine staff travel.”
High impact capacity building programs had a clear and limited focus with defined goals, a strategic purpose, and specific activities.
Newman (2001) defines “catalytic” capacity as strengthening the ability of individuals and organizations to achieve their mission including all aspects of technical and institutional performance (Table 5.2). The four basic elements of “catalytic” capacity building are based on a model of continuous learning and improvement where learning leaders, coaches and mentors, accessible experts, and peer networks (Figure 5.1) serve as reinforcing mechanisms to sustain a continuous learning environment needed for conservation and resource management.
53

Figure 5.4. Basic e lements of “catalytic” capacity building necessary for creating an environment of continuous learning and
improvement (from Newman, 2001)
Continuous
Peer
Networks
Learning
Learning
Lead ers
Accessible
Experts
Coaches
& Mentors
Improvement








Table 5.3 Issues and challenges for developing effective capacity building programs (adapted from Nakashima, 1997 and
Norris and Richards, 1997)

Need for a two-track approach to build capacity for coastal management simultaneously and incrementally within both national and local institutions

Lack or inaccurate assessment of skills development needs
Overemphasis on training individuals than strengthening institutions
Lack of follow-up assistance and reinforcement
Overuse of formal, lecture-style teaching methods
Lack of relevant, meaningful, and easy to quantify indicators for capacity building programs
Absence of mechanisms to measure and demonstrate newly acquired competencies
Need for capacity building programs to be strategic and relevant to the organization’s mission
Need for strategic approaches with efficient and effective delivery mechanisms in order to fulfill large human and institutional capacity building needs
Need to establish and strengthen multi-institutional and multisectoral collaboration and partnerships to sustain the delivery of capacity building programs
Integration of good science and good governance into capacity building programs

A clear and concise definition of capacity building alone cannot ensure the delivery of an effective capacity building program. Capacity building programs for coastal management must incorporate a variety of measures to ensure success.
Issues and challenges for effective capacity building programs were articulated from a review of selected marine and coastal biodiversity projects (Nakashima, 1997) and capacity building programs in the
Asia/Pacific region (Norris and Richards,
1997) (Table 5.3). Both studies emphasized the need for capacity building programs to be well defined and strategic to a specific organizatio n’s mission and the importance of follow-up assistance.
The numbers of capacity building programs for coastal management have
54










 grown substantially over the last ten years as educators and practitioners around the world have highlighted the need for coastal management education and training (CRC,
1995, Crawford, 1991). These programs have evolved from typically formal technically oriented training to the use of nonformal and participatory training aimed at building organizational competence for coastal management (Table 5.4).
Overall, these trends suggest a movement away from traditional modes of learning to more innovative and participatory modes of learning focused on building both organization and individual competencies simultaneously and establishing an environment of continuous learning and improvement that is more suited toward the need for institutionalizing an adaptive management process for coastal resource management.
Table 5.4. Emerging trends in capacity building approaches for coastal management
From To


Technical training for technically-oriented participants

Emphasis on formal teaching methods based on lectures and case studies where participants are recipients of information

Single institution responsible for the delivery of a standard set of training modules
Goal of individual skills development where success is measured by input indicators

Multi-disciplinary training for a broad cross section of stakeholders

Combination of formal and participatory, handson training style with emphasis on experiential modes of learning

Multi-institutional and multi-sectoral training teams established through partnerships and networks to sustain capacity building programs and provide ongoing assistance using a combination of relevant training modules and approaches

Goal of demonstrated institutional competence with relevant and measurable outcomes and benchmarks for success
Building local government capacity for coastal management in the Philippines
Table 5.5 Capability building priorities in Philippine Agenda 21
Institute capacity building and information support measures to enable the communities to participate in the management of coastal and marine ecosystem
Train communities to gather data/information on simple coastal and marine attributes, especially coastal and marine biodiversity
Provide technical and financial assistance to improve traditional knowledge of marine living resources and fishing techniques
Develop and maintain database for assessment and management of coastal and marine ecosystem
Develop and enhance capability in the use of state of the art planning and management tools such as geographic information systems and global positioning systems
Provide easy access to information by linking stakeholders to electronic networks
Coordinate with research and academic institutions on upgrading skills of staff and workers on the management of coastal and marine resources
Develop scientific and technological capabilities for coastal and marine researchers, monitoring and equipment
Organize a multi-sectoral monitoring team to regularly assess the status if the area and to evaluate impacts of activities/projects on the resources and environment
Develop, adopt and share analytical and predictive tools such as stock assessment and bioeconomic models
55

Capacity building programs in the
Philippines have evolved as the field of coastal management has matured from sector based strategies aimed primarily at increasing community participation to more broader, integrated approaches with multisectoral collaboration (Courtney and
White, 2000). Philippine Agenda 21 highlights the need to build the local capacity to enable the preparation of comprehensive coastal zone management plans at the national, regional and local levels with genuine participation of communities (Table
5.5). With the passage of the 1991 Local
Government Code, the important role of local government in coastal management has emerged as a primarily target for capacity building programs. The Philippine National
Medium Term Development Plan (MTDP) for
1999-2004 highlights the role of local government in improving the management of coastal resources in the Philippines by setting MTDP targets for coastal and marine resources that include coastal resource management adopted by 250 LGUs covering
6,000 km of shoreline for the improved management of municipal waters by the year
2004.
The Coastal Resource
Management Project (CRMP) Philippines, a
7-year technical assistance project (1996-
2002) of the Department of Environment and
Natural Resources funded by the United
States Agency for International
Development, was designed to build the capacity of Philippine local government units
(LGUs) to deliver coastal resource management (CRM) as a basic service.
Coastal LGUs were identified as a strategic entry point for capacity building programs on coastal management as the primary mandate for managing coastal resources in municipal waters, which extend seaward to a distance of 15 kilometers from the shoreline, was devolved to 832 coastal municipalities
(54.4% of municipalities nationwide) and 57 coastal cities in the Philippines under the
1991 Local Government Code.
Almost five years after the passage of the
Local Government Code, however, LGUs had a low level of awareness and concern for coastal management. During the first series of workshops conducted by CRMP with coastal municipalities in 1996, local government staff expressed a wide range of understanding about the role of LGUs in
CRM. Many LGUs understood that managing municipal waters was within their legal mandate; however, few viewed CRM as a priority concern and most were unclear about what this mandate really meant and how to go about fulfilling it. Some coastal municipalities still believed that CRM was the primary responsibility of national government. In a 1997 survey developed by
CRMP and conducted in partnership with the
League of Municipalities of the Philippines, coastal mayors identified lack of technical expertise and trained staff (over 80% of responses), and inadequate funding (around
75% of responses) as the key obstacles to fulfilling their mandate.
The CRMP utilized a two-track approach in building local government capacity for coastal management by working at a local level with 29 coastal municipalities in six provinces and at a national level with the League of Municipalities of the
Philippines (LMP), the national association of all municipalities in the Philippines, to prioritize CRM on the municipal government agenda. Capacity building activities at the local level were conducted through multiinstitutional and multi-sectoral teams with technical and financial counterparts from coastal communities, local government, national government agencies, nongovernment organizations, academic institutions, and private sector. Field activities conducted at the municipal level included technical and on-the-job training in participatory coastal resource assessment
(PCRA), CRM planning, marine protected area and mangrove management, monitoring and evaluation, and coastal law enforcement. Capacity building approaches were designed to articulate, package, and market CRM as a basic service through:

Fostering local leadership

Packaging the generic planning process for CRM-specific planning by municipalities

Marketing information management systems to local government

Benchmarking local government performance in CRM

Brokering technical and financial assistance through multiinstitutional and multisectoral collaboration

Retooling extension services for
CRM

Sharing experiences and lessons learned in CRM through study tours and publications
Capacity building approaches, leadership stories, training modules, and guidance documents are also made
56

available throughout the country and internationally on CRMP’s award winning website www.oneocean.org
.
The CRMP strategically expanded the area of influence of the project through a series of national capacity building activities in partnership with the LMP. By 1998, the interest in CRM and demand for technical assistance from coastal LGUs began to grow. In response to this growing demand, the LMP in partnership with CRMP convened the first “Conference of Coastal
Municipalities” with the theme, Empowering
Coastal Municipalities for Integrated Coastal
Management on May 26-28, 1999. The
Conference was attended by 701 coastal mayors representing 84% of coastal municipalities in the Philippines and was the first of its kind in Asia and only 2 nd in the world after Canada. The Conference was unprecedented in terms of mayors’ participation, cabinet-level interest and participation, mass media coverage, and intensity of discussions. As a result of the
Conference, a 15-point national policy agenda for CRM was developed and supported by all coastal municipalities. The policy agenda describes specific actions for local government, such as developing and implementing CRM plans, and for national government, such as financial and technical assistance. The conference catalyzed local government initiatives with CRM beginning to be articulated as a basic service of local government.
To further catalyze adoption of
CRM as a basic service, performance benchmarks for CRM were developed as a guide for local government. In line with leadership objectives, to plan “small wins”, three levels of performance benchmarks were defined as beginning, intermediate, and advanced levels of CRM for local government (Table 5.6).
Beginning level benchmarks target the drafting of a multi-year CRM plan and planning and initiation of CRM best practices
(Table 5.7). Intermediate level benchmarks mark successful implementation underway.
Advanced level benchmarks address sustained implementation and socioenvironmental improvement. Indicators and activities for each benchmark were incorporated into the Municipal Coastal
Database (MCD), a nationwide information management system developed by CRMP as a planning and monitoring and evaluation tool for coastal LGUs. Participatory monitoring and evaluation methods were developed to enable coastal LGUs to regulatory assess their progress and the impact of municipal CRM plans and programs.
57

Table 5. 6 Benchmarks for local government performance in CRM
BEGINNING CRM
Acceptance of CRM as a basic service of municipal or city government with planning and field interventions initiated
1 to 3 years governance
3 to 5 years
INTERMEDIATE CRM
Implementation of CRM plans underway with effective integration to local
ADVANCED CRM
Sustained long term implementation of CRM with monitoring, measured results and positive returns
5 years or more
1. Annual programming and budget based on results of monitoring and evaluation
2. MFARMC active and effective
3. CRM plan implementation fully supported by LGU and collaborators for more than 5 years
4. Illegal acts stopped
5. Biophysical improvement measured
6. Socio-economic benefits accrue to coastal residents
7. Positive perception of CRM interventions among stakeholders
1. Financial and human resources assigned permanently to CRM activities
MFARMC active and effective
3. Multi-year CRM plan finalized and adopted
4. At least two appropriate CRM best practices implemented with measured success











Table 5.7 Illustrative CRM best practices
Local legislation drafted, passed, and implemented: e.g. ordinances for CRM plan adoption, unified fisheries ordinance, environment code
Fisheries management measures and regulatory mechanisms established and implemented e.g. registry of municipal fishers; licensing system for boats
Coastal law enforcement units operational: e.g. coastal law enforcement units trained, seaborne assets operational, patrols conducted, apprehensions, arrests, and convictions made
Marine sanctuaries functional: e.g. marine sanctuaries established by municipal ordinance with strong community support
Mangroves managed under community-based forest agreements or other management measures
Municipal water boundaries officially established through municipal ordinance and enforced
Fee system established for generating revenue from the use of coastal resources and municipal waters
Environment-friendly enterprises established e.g. enterprises are aimed at reducing pressure on coastal resources
Shoreline protection measures established, e.g. shoreline setback requirements established and regular monitoring and other regulatory measures to protect the coastal zone and foreshore; construction of seawalls in foreshore areas stopped
Solid waste management system implemented
Environmental impacts of infrastructure and high impact projects in coastal areas avoided or appropriately mitigated, e.g. proper siting of facilities away from sensitive coastal habitats, environmental infrastructure for port and harbor facilities required; reclamation projects in mangrove areas stopped
Soil and water conservation practices implemented
Coastal recreation and tourism activities carefully planned and implemented to avoid environmental degradation
Other habitat protective measures and open access restrictions in place



The impacts of capacity building efforts are measured by the coastal municipalities themselves using the MCD and a participatory monitoring and evaluation framework. Overall, the trends in establishing CRM as a basic service of local government are encouraging. The regular allocation of budget for municipal CRM plans and programs is an important indicator of the status of delivery of CRM as basic service.
Both the number of LGUs and the average
CRM budget allocated has increased dramatically
Coastal over established by CRMP in 1995 (Figure 5.6). municipalities baseline are values establishing
Municipal Fisheries and Aquatic Resource
Management Councils (MFARMCs) to promote active community participation in the CRM process. The cumulative number of
LGUs with MFARMCs has increased to 288, or 34% of all 832 coastal municipalities nationwide, in 2000 (Figure 5.7). Coastal
LGUs are also formulating CRM plans with
58

57 coastal municipalities, 7.5% of all coastal municipalities, reporting multi-year municipal
CRM plans formulated by 2000 (Figure 5.8).
Finally, the number of municipalities implementing CRM best practices is indicated by the increased number of LGUs,
127 by 2000, 15% of all coastal municipalities with marine protected areas
(MPA) (Figure 5.9). Biophysical impacts, measured through participatory coral reef assessment methods show that the establishment of well-managed, marine protected areas results in substantial increases in fish abundance both inside and outside the MPA (Figure 5.10).
59

Figure 5.6. Cumulative number of LGUs with CRM budgets and average annual budget allocated for CRM based on MCD entries from coastal municipalities (average exchange rate over this time period is
PhP 40 = US$ 1)
250 140,000
200
Cumulative no. of LGUs with CRM budget
Average annual CRM budget
107,314
120,209
122,120
203
124,797
218
120,000
100,000
150
156
80,000
59,257
122
60,000
100
30,658
40,000
50
20,000
35
0
17
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
-
Year
60

Figure 5.7
.
Cumulative number of LGUs with MFARMCs established based on the MCD entries from coastal municipalities
(MCD, 2000)
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
45
60
113
219
286 288
1995 1996 1997
Year
1998 1999 2000
Figure 5. 8. Cumulative number of LGUs with CRM plans based on MCD entries from coastal municipalities (MCD, 2000)
70
60
50
20
10
40
30
0
5
1995
6
1996
8
29
1997
Year
1998
58
1999
63
2000
61

Figure 5.9. Cumulative number of LGUs with MPAs based on MCD entries from coastal municipalities (MCD, 2000)
150
126 127
125
108
100 90
75
68
50
50
25
0
1995 1996 1997
Year
1998 1999 2000
Figure 5.10. Average percent change in fish abundance (compared to baseline) inside and adjacent to six municipal marine sanctuaries
700%
600%
500%
400%
All Fish (IN)
All Fish (OUT)
Target Fish Species (IN)
Target Fish Species (OUT)
Planned-All Fish (IN)
Planned-All Fish (OUT)
300%
200%
100%
0%
-100%
1997 1998
YEAR
1999 2000
62

The benchmarks can be used to measure progress under the recently defined goals and objectives of the Philippines
National Medium Term Development Plan
(MTDP) for 1999-2004, which highlights the role of local government in improving the management of coastal resources in the
Philippines. To date, 48 “CRMP-assisted” municipalities covering 1,410 km of shoreline have met all the beginning level benchmarks for CRM delivery as a basic service (Figure
5.11). This represents 6 percent of coastal municipalities and 8 percent of the shoreline nationwide and meets the targets set by the
MTDP. A certification system using the performance benchmarks and levels described in Table 5 is being proposed as a national framework to regularly evaluate the implementation of municipal CRM plans and as a mechanism to provide incentives for
LGU performance. CRMP is currently in the process of developing and pilot-testing a
CRM certification system for coastal municipalities through the Regional
Development Council for Region 7.
63

Fiigure 5.11. Status of beginning level delivery of CRM as a basic service by LGUs and Medium Term Development Plan targets established by the Government of the Philippines
300
250
200
"CRMP-assisted" municipalities with beginning level CRM benchmarks completed
Medium Term Target (1999-2004)
150
100
48
50
29
0
1997 1998 1999 2000
Year
2001 2002 2003 2004
While much progress has been made in building LGU capacity for CRM, continued improvements in systems of local governance and CRM are needed to sustain and build on these gains. The current challenge is to achieve a critical mass of coastal municipalities at the beginning level of CRM while at the same time to promote graduation to intermediate and advanced levels through sustained program implementation and measurable socio-environmental impacts. To achieve these targets, national policies and capacity building programs from all sectors and sources must be aligned and prioritized toward the common goal of improving LGU capacity to adopt CRM. Policy directions for improved local governance and CRM in the Philippines need to be continued to support decentralization and accountability. The tendency for national government is to resist further devolution by holding on to or trying to regain command and control functions and financial resources. At the same time, local government must continue to improve its delivery of basic services and provide real measures of accountability to their constituents and the country at large. Philippine local governments need to integrate lessons learned in improved local governance and coastal management into a new framework of environmental governance.
64

Opportunities for capacity building for coral reef management through the
International Coral Reef Initiative
The Philippines is just one country, worldwide, that is experiencing massive
mportant network for catalyzing the development and delivery of capacity degradation of coral reefs and other coastal resources. Over the next 20 years range it has been predicted that from 20 to 50 percent of the world reefs may be lost due to building programs. Capacity building is one of the four key elements of the International
Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI) Framework of
Action that highlights the need for local and global impacts of human activities.
Strategic and effective capacity building programs are urgently needed to improve the management of coral reefs and other establishing and strengthening human resource and institutional capabilities for coastal management, science, training and education (Table 5.8). coastal resources. The International Coral
Reef Initiative (ICRI) can serve as an

Table 5.8. Capacity building element of the 1995 ICRI Framework for Action
Capacity building includes establishing and strengthening human resource and institutional capabilities for coastal management, science, training and education.


Encourage regional organizations to assist countries and communities implementing ICRI, for example through measures including: preparation of project proposals; and implementation of small grant programs.
Establish, strengthen and sustain mutually supportive networks of centers of expertise in management of coral reefs and related ecosystems.

Base human resource development strategies on needs assessments and ensure that they address:


-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
The diversity of cultures, traditions and governance structures;
Increased community awareness and involvement;
Improving the capacity of today’s managers;
Coverage of coral reefs and coastal resource management;
Technical training needs for people at the field level;
Training and supporting trainers to work at the community and field level;
Evaluation of the effectiveness of training; and
The need to target children in awareness raising.
Improved coordination and targeting of the education and human resource development programs provided by development partners.
Support formal and informal environmental education programs for all levels of the community on the subject of coral reefs and related ecosystems, with curricula and materials tailored to the interests and needs of the regions and endusers.


Encourage maximum use of national and regional expertise in management, research and capacity building activities.
Support the development, identification and dissemination of materials which address the interests and needs of the regions, including:

-
-
-
The value of coral reefs and related ecosystems;
Practical monitoring and management techniques;
Inventories of formal and on-the-job training opportunities;
-
-
Case studies of management, including success stories as well as examples which have not been successful; and
Case studies of human impact and natural variation in coral reefs and related ecosystems.
Increase the relevance to ICRI of existing donor scholarship programs by devoting a proportion of scholarship awards to environmental studies; and encouraging thesis and dissertation studies carried out in home countries.
 Encourage the private sector’s role in management of coral reefs and related ecosystems through the use of appropriate technologies; development of a trained and educated workforce; and innovative approaches to better environmental operating standards.
65

Capacity building priorities for coral reef management were identified in the 1998
ICRI Renewed Call to Action (Table 5.9).
These priorities focus on improving the management capacity at local and national levels of developing nations; making widely available training modules and guidance, developing effective public information and exchange, and exploring the use of accreditation or certification schemes to provide incentives for coral reef management. ICRI must put these priorities into an operational framework that can support capacity building programs in member countries.






Table 5.9. Capacity building priorities for coral reef management identified in the 1998 ICRI Renewed Call to Action
Developing nations: build capacity at all levels to improve management capacities for setting priorities and making decisions and to foster stakeholder partnerships and community participation
Capacity building tools and technologies: inventory and make available training modules and guidance documents
Best practices and lessons learned: establish effective transfer systems and mechanisms for sharing
Public information development, dissemination and exchange : promote at and across global, regional, and national levels tailored for non-expert and community
Accreditation schemes: develop and use to raise awareness and reward institutions with good performance
Coral reef assessment: improve global capacities
ICRI must now identify and provide tangible benefits to each stakeholder country to continue to foster interest, cooperation, and action in coral reef management. The call for action is over, the time for action is now. There are many opportunities for ICRI to catalyze capacity building for coral reef management (Table 5.10). Most importantly,
ICRI can serve as a clearinghouse and referral service for expanding country specific action networks for coral reef management.
Table 5.10. Opportunities for capacity building through the International Coral Reef Initiative


Expand and strengthen multisectoral and multi-institutional partnerships to serve as action networks for coral reef management
Establish national and international referral services for sharing experiences and lessons learned in coral reef management through study tours and training opportunities

Use the internet to establish a virtual learning center for materials, training modules, tools, technologies, and best practices in coral reef management

Promote national and international certification systems for local coastal management programs

Conduct strategic and high impact public information campaigns on the impacts of global climate change on coral reefs and the important role of establishing well managed marine protected areas
References
Coastal Resource Center (CRC), University of Rhode Island.
1995. Call to Action, Educating Coastal Managers,
Rhode Island Workshop, March 9, 1995, W. Alton Jones
Campus, University of Rhode Island, West Greenwhich,
Rhode Island, CRC Technical Report 2085.
Courtney, C.A. and A.T. White. 2000. Integrated coastal management in the Philippines: testing new paradigms.
Coastal Management 28:39-53.
Crawford, B.R. 1991. Education and training in coastal area management: a survey of the United States experience.
P. 69-82. In T.-E. Chua (ed.) Coastal area management education in the ASEAN region. ICLARM
Conference of Proceedings 29, 92 p. International
Center for Living and Aquatic Resources Management,
Manila, Philippines.
Crawford, B.R., J.S. Cobb, and A. Friedman 1993. Building capacity for integrated coastal management in developing countries. Ocean and Coastal Management,
21: 311-337.
International Coral Reef Initiative, 1995. A Call to Action.
International Coral Reef Initiative, 1998. A Renewed Call to
Action, published in 1999 by the Great Barrier Reef
Marine Park Authority, 40 pp.
Kay, R. and J. Alder. 1999. Coastal Planning and
Management, E&FN Spon, 375 pp.
Nakashima, S. 1997. Integrated Coastal Management as Best
Practices in GEF Project Development: Lessons
Learned from Selected Biodiversity Projects in Marine,
Coastal, and Freshwater Ecosystems, United Nations
Development Programme, Global Environment Facility,
73 pp.
66

Newman, A. 2001. (Draft) Built to Change: Catalytic Capacity
Building in Non-Profit Organizations, a sabbatical report submitted to the The David and Lucile Packard
Foundation and The Nature Conservancy, 50 pp.
Norris, R. and D. Richards, 1997. In Search of Excellence in
Capacity-Building: An Overview of Programs in the
Asia/Pacific Region and Best Practices Worldwide with
Recommendations for Development of The Nature
Conservancy’s Capacity-Building Program, 46 pp.
United Nations Conference on Environment and Development,
Chapter 17: Protection of the Oceans, All Kinds of Seas,
Including Enclosed and Semi-enclosed Seas, and
Coastal Areas and the Protection, Rational Use and
Development of their Living Resources. In Agenda 21,
United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, June 3-14, 1992.
White, A.T., C.A. Courtney and R.J. Tobin. 1998. Coastal management in Asia: are donor-assisted programs sustainable and beneficial? Asian Fisheries Society and Food and Agriculture Organization workshop review of foreign assisted programs in Asia. 16-18 November
1998, Bangkok.
67

68