CERMES Technical Report No 6
Tobago Cays Marine Park:
Are the conditions for successful
co-management likely to be met?
BERTHA SIMMONS AND PATRICK McCONNEY
Centre for Resource Management and Environmental Studies (CERMES)
University of the West Indies, Faculty of Pure and Applied Sciences,
Cave Hill Campus, Barbados
2006
ABSTRACT
Tobago Cays Marine Park: Are conditions for successful co-management likely to be met?
BERTHA SIMMONS AND PATRICK MCCONNEY
The Tobago Cays Marine Park (TCMP) is located in the Grenadines island chain at the southern
end of St. Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG). The Park's islands, reefs and shallows cover
almost 15 nautical square miles, mostly within the 10 fathom depth contour, including five
uninhabited cays. The Cays are of great ecological, economic, social and cultural importance to
SVG. In 1997 the Cays were acquired by the SVG government and declared a marine park;
currently it is under the management of a multi-stakeholder board selected by Cabinet. Despite
various projects and proposals to revamp the park, the board of management and small field staff
struggled with inadequate capacity and equipment to manage the Park. The area has been
undergoing systematic degradation and has recently suffered impacts from hurricanes Ivan and
Emily. As it is heavily used for marine tourism, it also provides the main source of income for
the inhabitants of nearby communities on Mayreau and Union Island who recently opposed a
government initiative to privatise the management of the park. This case study seeks to
determine whether current conditions favour successful co-management of the TCMP. In order
to determine this, interviews and focus groups were conducted with user groups and members of
the management board. Secondary data analysis was undertaken. The TCMP is seen by some as
a "paper park", with no real implementation. Local communities are aware of this situation and
are attempting to have their voices heard by insisting that they play a role in the management
decision-making process in order to make the park more successful. Despite this initiative, co-
management may have little chance of success unless State authorities facilitate more meaningful
stakeholder involvement.
Keywords: Co-management, Grenadines, MPA, stakeholders
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This technical report was originally submitted as a research paper for the lead author's MSc
degree. These acknowledgements are reproduced from the original paper which documented the
research supervised by the second author of this report who is a member of CERMES faculty.
The lead author is very thankful to the various participants who contributed invaluable
information and experiences. To all of you in Union Island, Mayreau, St. Vincent and Carriacou
"Thank you." I thank the Sustainable Grenadines Project SusGren for providing me with
office space during my stay in Union and to Casper, the project manager, for his assistance. I
would also like to express my gratitude to my classmates who came to my aid not only during
my research but also throughout the entire MSc programme, especially to Amanda Byer my
editor and translator aid. A big thank you to Patrick McConney, my supervisor, who kept me on
track and provided much needed guidance; and also to Imani, my daughter, who proved to be an
incredible trouper throughout this adventure. However this research would not have been
possible without the assistance of the Oak Foundation through its Coastal Resources Co-
management Project (CORECOMP) and scholarship funding. I also received a scholarship from
the Institute of International Education and Ford Foundation, so to these agencies I owe thanks.
ii
CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ................................................................................................................................................................. I
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .......................................................................................................................................II
1
INTRODUCTION ..............................................................................................................................................1
2
RESEARCH FRAMEWORK............................................................................................................................3
2.1
DEFINING CO-MANAGEMENT ........................................................................................................................3
2.2
INSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS.............................................................................................................................5
2.3
PRO-POOR PERSPECTIVES..............................................................................................................................6
3
METHODS..........................................................................................................................................................7
4
NATURAL RESOURCES .................................................................................................................................9
4.1
GEOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................................................9
4.2
MPAS IN THE EASTERN CARIBBEAN.............................................................................................................9
4.3
MPAS IN ST. VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES ...........................................................................................10
4.4
TOBAGO CAYS MARINE PARK ....................................................................................................................11
4.5
FISHERIES ...................................................................................................................................................12
5
SOCIOECONOMIC ATTRIBUTES ..............................................................................................................13
5.1
THE SOUTHERN GRENADINES .....................................................................................................................14
5.1.1 Tobago Cays ..........................................................................................................................................14
5.1.2 Canouan.................................................................................................................................................14
5.1.3 Mayreau.................................................................................................................................................15
5.1.4 Union Island ..........................................................................................................................................15
5.2
FISHING.......................................................................................................................................................16
5.3
FILM-MAKING .............................................................................................................................................16
5.4
COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES ...........................................................................................................................16
5.5
TOURISM.....................................................................................................................................................17
5.6
MARINE TOURISM .......................................................................................................................................18
5.7
OTHER ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES ....................................................................................................................18
5.8
PUBLIC SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ...................................................................................................18
5.9
POVERTY PROFILE.......................................................................................................................................18
6
COMMUNITY-LEVEL INSTITUTIONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL ARRANGEMENTS ...............20
6.1
SOUTHERN GRENADINES WATER TAXI ASSOCIATION ...............................................................................21
6.2
PARK MANAGEMENT OFFICE .......................................................................................................................22
6.3
MAYREAU ENVIRONMENTAL DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION....................................................................23
6.4
PALM ISLAND RESORT LIMITED..................................................................................................................24
6.5
FRIENDS OF THE TOBAGO CAYS..................................................................................................................24
7
EXTERNAL TO THE COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL
ARRANGEMENTS...................................................................................................................................................25
7.1
TOBAGO CAYS MARINE PARK BOARD........................................................................................................25
7.2
FISHERIES DIVISION OF THE MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE...........................................................................26
7.3
CABINET .....................................................................................................................................................27
7.4
MINISTRY OF TOURISM AND CULTURE .......................................................................................................28
7.5
CENTRE FOR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES...................................................29
7.6
THE NATURE CONSERVANCY .....................................................................................................................29
7.7
OECS PROTECTED AREA AND ALTERNATIVE LIVELIHOOD PROJECT .........................................................29
7.8
COAST GUARD............................................................................................................................................30
8
EXOGENOUS EVENTS ..................................................................................................................................30
iii
8.1
HURRICANES AND STORMS .........................................................................................................................30
8.2
DISEASES ....................................................................................................................................................31
8.3
OTHER VULNERABILITIES ...........................................................................................................................31
9
INTERACTIONS AND OUTCOMES............................................................................................................31
9.1
PERCEPTIONS OF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS............................................................................................31
9.2
LIVELIHOODS, COLLECTIVE ACTION AND EMPOWERMENT ..........................................................................33
9.3
DIFFERING STAKEHOLDER DEFINITIONS......................................................................................................33
9.4
LOCAL INITIATIVES .....................................................................................................................................34
10
CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESSFUL CO-MANAGEMENT....................................................................36
10.1
TYPE OF CO-MANAGEMENT.........................................................................................................................36
10.2
PHASE OF CO-MANAGEMENT.......................................................................................................................36
10.3
CONDITIONS FOR CO-MANAGEMENT ...........................................................................................................37
10.3.1
Boundaries ........................................................................................................................................39
10.3.2
Membership and stakeholders...........................................................................................................39
10.3.3
Resource use problem .......................................................................................................................40
10.3.4
Management objectives .....................................................................................................................40
10.3.5
Scale of management.........................................................................................................................40
10.3.6
Management adaptation....................................................................................................................40
10.3.7
Cooperation.......................................................................................................................................40
10.3.8
Leadership.........................................................................................................................................41
10.3.9
Collective action................................................................................................................................41
10.3.10 Conflict management.........................................................................................................................41
10.3.11 Effective communication ...................................................................................................................41
10.3.12 Effective coordination .......................................................................................................................42
10.3.13 Trust and respect ...............................................................................................................................42
10.3.14 Organizational capacity ....................................................................................................................42
10.3.15 Financial resources...........................................................................................................................42
10.3.16 External agents..................................................................................................................................42
10.3.17 Net benefit .........................................................................................................................................43
10.3.18 Representation in decision-making ...................................................................................................43
10.3.19 Enforcement ......................................................................................................................................43
10.3.20 Property rights ..................................................................................................................................44
10.3.21 Sharing decision-making...................................................................................................................44
10.3.22 Decentralization and delegation .......................................................................................................44
10.3.23 Social and cultural fit ........................................................................................................................44
10.4
PRIORITY ACTION........................................................................................................................................45
11
REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................46
12
APPENDIX: FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW GUIDE..............................................................................51
Citation
Simmons, B. and P. McConney. 2006. Tobago Cays Marine Park: Are the conditions for
successful co-management likely to be met? CERMES Technical Report No. 6. 54pp.
Disclaimer
This project report and its associated documents were prepared by the Centre for Resource
Management and Environmental Studies (CERMES) supported by Oak Foundation Grant
Number OCay-02-072. The statements, findings, conclusions and recommendations are the
responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Oak Foundation or its
officers.
iv
1 INTRODUCTION
The nation of St. Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG) is an archipelago in the Windward Islands
of the Eastern Caribbean, lying 100 miles to the west of Barbados. St. Vincent is the main
island, and stretching some 72 km to the south is the chain of 34 islands plus cays known as the
Grenadines. Among them are the Tobago Cays. The major islands, north to south, are Young
Island, Bequia, Mustique, Canouan, Mayreau, Union, Palm and Petit St. Vincent (Figure 1.1).
Figure 1.1 Location of St. Vincent and the Grenadines
The SVG population is estimated to be about 100,000 with the majority of the people living in
mainland St. Vincent and less than 9% dispersed throughout the Grenadines. The labour force is
estimated at 67,000 with 20% unemployment, and real GDP growth was 1.4% in 2002 (Eastern
Caribbean Central Bank 2003)
1
The banana industry, known also as St. Vincent Green Gold has been one of the mainstays of
SVG's economy. The island's dependency on a single crop, however, has been viewed as an
obstacle to development. This industry has had major set backs due in part to natural hazards
such as the tropical storms of 1994 and 1995 that wiped out a substantial part of the crop, and
economic hazards that include the loss of European preferential markets.
The decline of the banana industry has severely affected the country especially in rural areas
where the government had not set in place adequate safety nets. As a way to address this decline
as well as to strengthen and diversify its economy, the government is seeking to develop and
promote tourism. St. Vincent is promoting `sand, sun and sea' tourism, plus adventure and
heritage tourism. The island is also capitalizing on the publicity brought by the Walt Disney
movie "Pirates of the Caribbean The curse of the Black Pearl" which was filmed in locations
on mainland St. Vincent and in the Tobago Cays.
The Tobago Cays are the main nautical tourism attraction in the Grenadines, and the main direct
and indirect income generator for the nearby communities. In 1997, through Statutory Rules and
Orders No. 40, the Tobago Cays were declared a national Marine Park. There was a series of
studies done on the area and its management before and after its declaration as a park. Resource
user groups and the communities in general are interested in protecting and sustaining
livelihoods that depend on the Tobago Cays Marine Park (TCMP). The existing rules and
regulations governing the park are accepted and followed by the majority of user groups;
however there is a need to update the legislation, and strengthen operating mechanisms and
governance structures in order to improve park management. Management capacity is limited.
Disturbing findings about governance that emerge from the above-mentioned studies include the
apparent tardiness of government decisions and directives for action on issues pertaining to the
park, the TCMP management board's lack of autonomy and the apparent absence of
governmental will to enter into real partnerships with local NGOs and CBOs in the Grenadines.
The park's management board includes representatives both from government and civil society,
who are appointed by Cabinet. The surrounding communities have been trying to enter into a
management partnership with the government in order to establish effective management for the
Cays conducive to environmental conservation and self-sustainability of the park.
This case study researches the possibility of establishing co-management arrangements for the
Tobago Cays Marine Park. It uses a framework of institutional analysis focused on a set of
conditions found necessary elsewhere in the region and world for successful co-management. It
examines the TCMP context in order to determine what needs to be addressed for conditions to
favour successful co-management, if this is at all feasible.
This research is the seventh in a series of case studies (two each in Barbados, Belize and
Grenada) on the conditions for coastal resource co-management in the Caribbean. The United
Kingdom Department for International Development (DFID) sponsored the original Caribbean
Coastal Co-management Guidelines Project that was implemented from 2002 to 2004 by the
Caribbean Conservation Association (CCA) in collaboration with investigators from the Centre
for Resource Management and Environmental Studies (CERMES). This project sought to ensure
that people in the Caribbean, especially the poor, could effectively engage in successful
partnerships with government for sustainable livelihoods in the context of well-managed coastal
resources. The study addressed both the natural resource and human institutional aspects of co-
management. Through a series of participatory investigations in case studies of conditions that
2
favour, or do not favour, the co-management of coastal and marine resources at selected sites the
project derived guidelines for developing successful co-management in the Caribbean. Uptake is
being promoted by interaction with target institutions and potential beneficiaries, and wide
dissemination of outputs.
CERMES continued applied research through its 2002-2005 Coastal Resources Co-management
Project (CORECOMP), funded by the Oak Foundation, that sought to strengthen co-management
institutions in Barbados, Belize and Nicaragua by capacity building and learning by doing, from
practice to policy. This complementary graduate research was funded by the Oak Foundation,
but the findings and any errors or omissions are solely the responsibility of the authors. The case
study report is intended for access and uptake by a broad readership. This case, when combined
with others, will contribute to future comparative analyses and additional material for the
regional guidelines for successful co-management that were developed from previous project
outputs. This research can be used by TCMP stakeholders, including CERMES and several other
entities that are currently collaborating to improve marine management in the Grenadines.
Ultimately, it may contribute in some small way to the empowerment of TCMP user groups and
nearby communities even if only through the acquisition of knowledge.
Based on the arrangement of the previous studies, the following chapters describe the research
framework and methodology. The report continues with a description of the resources, socio-
economic dimensions of the case and institutional and organizational arrangements pertaining to
the study area. Exogenous events are briefly addressed prior to the chapter on interactions and
outcomes related to co-management. Finally, there is a discussion with conclusions on the
conditions for successful co-management of the Tobago Cays Marine Park.
2 RESEARCH FRAMEWORK
2.1 Defining co-management
Definitions of co-management focus on sharing management responsibility and authority
between government and stakeholders (e.g. Pinkerton 1989; McConney 1998; Brown and
Pomeroy 1999; Pomeroy 2001; Berkes et al. 2001). The fundamentals of what co-management
should be, and is in practice, have been extensively researched (Jentoft 1989; Kuperan and
Abdullah 1994; Pomeroy and Berkes 1997). Co-management encompasses several possible
arrangements that are often depicted as a spectrum constructed from the relative sharing of
responsibility and authority between government and stakeholders (Pomeroy and Berkes 1997;
Berkes et al. 2001) (Figure 2.1).
As in the case of participation (Arnstein 1969), there are various positions on the scale, and
authors use different terms for co-management and its degrees. For example, the Caribbean
Natural Resources Institute (CANARI) uses "participatory management" (see extensive
document list at www.canari.org). The terms participatory management or co-management are
gaining popularity in Caribbean government and NGO circles, and among some resource users
(CANARI 1999; CANARI 2000; CANARI 2001; CCA 2001). These concepts, however, are not
always fully understood by their users. Conceptual and practical research issues therefore include
the degrees of co-management and which terms to use.
3
Government-based
management
Community-based
management
Government
Community self-
Co-management
centralised
governance and
management
self-management
Informing
Consultation
Cooperation
Communication
Information exchange
Advisory role
Joint action
Partnership
Community control
Inter-area coordination
Figure 2.1 Sliding scale showing various degrees of co-management
(Based on Pomeroy and Williams 1994)
Based on international and Caribbean literature it was determined that three degrees and labels
would be appropriate (Figure 2.2). The first is "consultative co-management" which represents
what is most common in several locations (Brown and Pomeroy 1999). People commonly use
and understand the term consultation.
Consultative co-
Collaborative
Delegated co-
management
co-management
management
Government has the Government
Government and Government lets
People have
most control
interacts often
the stakeholders
formally organised
most control
but makes all the work closely and users/stakeholders
decisions
share decisions
make decisions
Figure 2.2 Degrees and labels of co-management
(Adapted from: ICLARM and IFM 1998)
Next is joint action and decision-making. This is where several countries seem to be headed. The
term "collaborative co-management" is preferred to "cooperative co-management" because it
connotes stronger partnerships, and the use of "cooperative" may be confused with the formal
organisation types of the same name (Kurien 1988; McConney et al.1998).
Third is "delegated co-management" that includes, but is not limited to, community-based
management since national co-management structures are especially common in fisheries
management (McConney and Mahon 1998). Few cases in the Caribbean appear to be at this
level, but it is not uncommon in other areas of the world (Baird 2000).
4
Establishing successful co-management is seldom immediate. Like most participatory processes
it takes time and careful tending. Pomeroy (1998) recognises three phases of co-management and
describes the sequence of steps within these in some detail. A much-simplified version is in
Figure 2.3.
Pre- implementation Implementation
Post-
implementation
Realise need for change
Try out new management
Maintain best arrangements
Meet and discuss change
Educate people in new ways
Resolve conflicts and enforce
Develop new management
Adjust and decide what is best
Accept as standard practice
Figure 2.3. Phases of co-management
(Based on: Pomeroy 1998)
Similar to cases in Africa (Normann et al. 1998; Sverdrup-Jensen and Nielsen 1999), the
Caribbean is generally at the pre-implementation or early implementation phase (McConney and
Mahon 1998; McConney 1998). A few situations such as the Soufriere Marine Management
Area (Renard 2000) may be mature enough to be labelled post-implementation. A very
significant consequence is that neatly comparing "before" and "after" conditions arising from a
co-management intervention such as a discrete project will be less feasible in the Caribbean than
other locations such as in Asia where much of the literature on methodology originates (e.g.
Pomeroy and Carlos. 1997; Pomeroy et al. 2001).
2.2 Institutional analysis
The International Centre for Living Aquatic Resources Management (ICLARM) and Institute for
Fisheries Management and Coastal Community Development (IFM) (ICLARM and IFM 1998)
developed the methodology referred to above for the African and Asian cases (Figure 2.4).
Institutional analyses are of critical importance in researching co-management (Renard 1991;
Noble 2000). The main analyses conducted within the framework are in Box 2.1.
Exogenous
MODIFIED INSTITUTIONAL
Environmental, ecological,
factors
RESEARCH FRAMEWORK
and technical attributes
Market and other
Incentives to
Patterns of
OUT
economic attributes
coordinate,
interaction
cooperate
among
C
and contribute
stakeholders
OM
Social, cultural and
E
political attributes
S
External institutional and
Stakeholder institutional and
organisational arrangements
organisational arrangements
Figure 2.4. Modified ICLARM/IFM Institutional Analysis and Design Research Framework
5
Box 2.1 Main analyses included in the framework
1. Institutional Arrangements Analysis: This component links contextual variables characterizing key attributes of
the resource (biological, physical) and the resource users (technology, market, social, cultural, economic, political)
with the management institutional arrangements (rights and rules). The contextual variables are each composed of a
number of attributes. A causal relationship exists among and between the contextual variables, the institutional
arrangements (the focus of the analysis) and the resulting transactional (action) situations. The institutional
arrangements and the contextual variables affect the actions of the resource users and authorities responsible for
fisheries management by shaping the incentives and disincentives they have to coordinate and cooperate in resource
governance, management and use; the incentives, in turn, shape the patterns of interaction and behaviour between
the co-management partners, i.e. the types of co-management arrangement established and the way it functions.
2. Co-management Performance Analysis: The co-management arrangement results in outcomes. These outcomes
will, in turn, affect contextual variables as well as behaviour of resource users, other stakeholders and public
authorities. Time is a critical element. All the contextual variables can change through time. This may cause change
in institutional arrangements which, in turn, affect incentives, patterns of interaction and outcomes. The outcomes of
co-management institutional arrangements can be evaluated in terms of e.g. management efficiency, equity, and
sustainability of resource utilisation.
3. Characteristics of Successful Co-management Institutional Arrangements: The most important aspect of this
analysis is the specification of what conditions and processes bring about successful long-enduring, fisheries co-
management arrangements. From the analysis we can identify a list of principles and propositions about conditions
and processes.
Source: ICLARM and IFM 1998
2.3 Pro-poor perspectives
The previous studies paid particular attention to integrated and pro-poor coastal management.
Poverty concepts are important in livelihoods analyses and other aspects of people-centred
planning and management. In the case of the Tobago Cays attention must be paid to poverty
given the dependence of coastal communities on an area that has few other comparable natural
assets.
DFID-NRSP (2001) emphasises the importance of a systems perspective on what is poverty and
pro-poor, and how to address them. The concepts of poverty and the development of pro-poor
strategies are complex social, cultural and economic issues (Centre for Development Studies
2000). Eradication or alleviation of poverty is often accompanied by attention to sustainable
livelihoods (Carney1998; Geoghegan and Smith 1998; Dorward et al. 2001).
In the Asia-Pacific region the focus is on alternative livelihoods since coastal resources are
severely depleted and habitats are degraded. In the Caribbean, resources are often still adequate
for use to be sustainable if supplementary livelihoods are found to ease the pressure without
completely changing lifestyles. For example, fishermen displaced by MPAs in Belize are being
re-trained to be fly-fishing and nature tour operators to obtain additional income in the tourist
season, and facilitate increased compliance with fishing restrictions (Heyman and Hyatt. 1996;
Heyman and Graham 2000).
Although the above initiative may be considered a pro-poor strategy it does not necessarily mean
that it was specifically intended and designed as such. Poverty and pro-poor orientation by
objective and implementation were not prominent in a recent institutional characterisation of
Caribbean MPAs (Geoghegan et al. 2001). Statements such as improving welfare and the quality
of life, without explicitly mentioning poverty, are more typical of planning documents for small-
6
scale fisheries in the region (e.g. Government of Barbados 1993). Research must note direct and
indirect, positive and negative impacts on poverty by both public and private sector initiatives.
The attention of Caribbean governments to poverty has been relatively recent in most places.
Poverty assessment studies from the mid-1990s to the present provide fairly current data for most
countries (e.g. Kairi Consultants 1996).
Institutional analysis provides insight into how social and economic institutions interact with
each other and contribute either to the perpetuation or reduction of poverty. Poverty in the
Caribbean is often associated with youth and female-headed households, making age and gender
important variables (Brown 2001). There are chronic, structural and seasonal poor in the
Caribbean, with fishers as an example of the latter (Brown 2001). Fishers and other coastal
resource users in the informal sector may easily slip through the net of employment surveys.
Often critical to the success of co-management is the extent to which community-based
organisations can engage in poverty eradication and alleviation (Centre for Development Studies
2000). This encompasses empowerment and the concept of "voice". Pro-poor strategies must
address causes that operate at the micro as well as the macro levels, and ensure that government
policy effectively engages these causes either directly or by creation of an environment that
facilitates positive action by other entities (Brown 2001).
3 METHODS
The supervisor of this research was principal investigator in the CCA co-management guidelines
project and CORECOMP, the CERMES co-management project. He advised on the research
design. In keeping with the previous case studies of co-management at the pre-implementation
phase, emphasis was placed on understanding the conditions and factors for successful co-
management as perceived by stakeholders at the research site. It was not possible to investigate
co-management in progress or the results of completed co-management initiatives. However,
shared perceptions are indicators of attitudes and likely behaviour. In the case of the TCMP there
had been sufficient interactions among stakeholders for perceptions to have formed on how any
type of co-management would or would not work.
In a sense the research scoped the topic of TCMP co-management and hence was exploratory.
The study was intended to capture the views of a select group of TCMP stakeholders and not the
general opinions of the population of St. Vincent and the Grenadines. Indeed the latter would
present a challenge since the general population lacks the familiarity with the working concepts
of co-management shared by the few groups who were covered in this investigation. Tackling
the general population would require a much more intricate study with added attention to
ensuring that co-management concepts were understood and responses were validated by means
of triangulation.
Because an objective of CERMES is uptake of co-management concepts and practices that can
lead to success, there was some promotion of co-management in addition to research on it, but
the extent was less than in the previous studies (e.g. no skills transfer workshops) mainly due to
constraints on time and other resources. The engagement of stakeholders and the element of
advocacy cause this approach to be called participatory action research.
Fieldwork was conducted from July to August 2005 in St. Vincent, Mayreau, Tobago Cays,
Union Island and Carriacou (a Grenadine island of Grenada). The investigator was based on
7
Union Island and worked with the staff and other students connected to the CERMES
Sustainable Grenadines project. The other two students were researching "green boating"
practices and the livelihoods of water taxi operators. Similarities in our study area, research
topics and target groups of respondents allowed us to collaborate on many aspects of our
research, and to compare findings as we sought and validated information.
The research methods used in this case study included:
· Document analysis
· Semi-structured interviews
· Focus group interviews
· Informal interviews
· Observations
Document analysis went beyond a literature review of the previous case studies and articles on
co-management in the Caribbean and internationally. It included analysing the contents of
documents on the TCMP which did not have co-management as an explicit theme, but which had
information on how the park was conceived, established and managed. Evidence of stakeholder
interaction was sought, and the stakeholders involved were identified. Information on ecological,
environmental, social, economic and institutional contextual variables was collected.
Thus, secondary data were acquired from reviewing documentation that covered experiences
relevant to co-management in the Grenadines and wider Caribbean. These data were used to
identify six key informants from different TCMP stakeholder groups, and to formulate interview
guide questions for individual and group interviews. The primary data were collected via four
focus group meetings and fifteen in situ semi-structured interviews administered by the
investigator to respondents in the islands listed above. A key feature of the focus group and
individual interviews was the assurance of anonymity for all participants, since fear of
victimization by persons in authority seemed to be a common concern among the interviewees.
Formal interviews and focus groups were supplemented by many informal interviews and
extensive observation by the researcher. These contributed to the field notes particularly by
providing deeper context to the perceptions shared by respondents. People were often more open
in the informal interviews, but the same assurance of anonymity was applied to their information.
As with the previous co-management studies on the Barbados Fisheries Advisory Committee
(McConney et al. 2003a) and the Belize Fisheries Advisory Board (McConney et al. 2003b), the
research included the formal institution for management--the board appointed to manage the
TCMP. Most of the initial respondents were members of the (now former) TCMP board and, by
snowball sampling; their recommendations for additional contacts were followed up. Checks
were made to ensure that perceptions of co-management were obtained from all of the groups
suggested by the literature, including vendors, fishers, water taxi operators, non-governmental
organisations, community-based organisations, government officials and persons in the corporate
private sector.
Compared to the previous case studies, the respondent ratings of the conditions for successful co-
management were derived from interviews rather than at a final multi-stakeholder workshop.
The latter was not feasible given the geographic spread of respondents. While benefits may have
been derived from having the respondents discuss ratings amongst themselves and arrive at
group consensus, their preference to express views only in private conversation or amongst their
peers may have inhibited dialogue in a larger gathering.
8
As part of the participatory process, the research findings were communicated to many of the
respondents and the general public at information sharing meetings that took place in Union
Island and St. Vincent in December 2005. The approved final version of the research paper will
be made available as a public document. Plans are also in place for it to be used in project
concerning marine protected area (MPA) management effectiveness that is currently in progress.
4 NATURAL RESOURCES
In the research framework, environmental and ecological attributes are shown as key contextual
variables for characterising the study site. This analysis of what natural features the Tobago Cays
possess provides information on why its resources are heavily used and are worth (co-)managing.
4.1 Geography
The Tobago Cays Marine Park is located in the Caribbean Sea between latitude 12°38' N and
longitude 61°21' W. The TCMP is within the Grenadines island chain, situated at the southern
end of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, near the boundary with Grenada. The park's islands, reefs
and shallows cover a total of almost 15 nautical square miles, mostly within the 10 fathom depth
contour. The area contains five uninhabited cays. The Tobago Cays are protected by Horseshoe
Reef, which calms the waters, making it a very popular area for novices and experienced divers,
snorkellers and yachts.
4.2 MPAs in the Eastern Caribbean
Conservation in marine environments, as a field, has lagged behind conservation efforts in
terrestrial environments. The majority of protected areas in the Caribbean were established
during the 1950s in response to growing concerns over watershed protection. This was followed
in the 1980s by a second wave of protected area declarations, which sought to protect the
region's unique biodiversity (CANARI 1998).
Within the Eastern Caribbean over thirty sites have either been declared or formally proposed as
MPAs. These sites are being used as part of the tourism product by their respective countries.
Their sizes and shapes vary from very small to large areas covering an extensive portion of these
SIDS. The MPAs can be placed into different management classifications; Marine Park, National
Park (with a marine component), Marine Reserve, National Marine Park, Marine Management
Area, Nature Reserve, National Monument, Marine Protected Area and Marine Sanctuary
(CANARI 1998). Throughout the Eastern Caribbean examples of these can be found as
presented in Table 4.1.
The Caribbean islands, as one of the world biodiversity hot spots, emerge as top priority for the
expansion of the global protected areas network. The prospects for biodiversity conservation in
the Caribbean have been enhanced by the development of partnerships between major industries,
such as tourism, and the governmental and private organizations that are promoting conservation
on the ground. MPAs in the region however, confront a common problem which is the stress
being experienced by its marine resources, provoked by both natural events e.g. hurricanes,
storm surges and from anthropogenic activities e.g. irresponsible boating and diving, snorkeling,
over-fishing, land base pollution. MPAs lacking clearly defined management strategies or
legislations are most vulnerable to these kinds of pressures.
9
Table 4.1 Type and location of MPAs in the Eastern Caribbean
Marine Protected Areas
Location
Folkstone Marine Reserve
Barbados
Saba Marine Park
Saba
Carib National Park
Dominica
Tobago Cay National Marine Park
St. Vincent and the Grenadines
Soufriere Marine Management Area
St. Lucia
La Caravelle Natural Reserve
Martinique
St. Maarten Marine Natural Reserve
St. Maarten
Buck Island Reef National Monument
St. Croix, US Virgin Islands
Great Bird Island Marine Protected Area
Antigua
Cades Reef Marine Sanctuary
Antigua
Bianca C. Marine Historical Site
Grenada
Source: CANARI 1998
4.3 MPAs in St. Vincent and the Grenadines
The legal basis for marine protected areas in SVG is relatively strong. Annex I of the Fisheries
Act (No. 8, 1986) is modelled on the harmonised draft prepared by the FAO and passed by most
islands in the region. This Act, amongst other things, gives power to the Minister of Agriculture
and Fisheries to declare any area of fishery waters and adjacent land as a marine reserve, and it
also provides for the duties of the Fisheries Division to protect these areas. Penalties for
infringements to articles in the Fisheries Act concerning marine reserves comprise fines of up to
the equivalent of US$1,000. Nine marine conservation areas were established under the Fisheries
Act: one on St. Vincent and the remainder throughout its Grenadines islands. Under the
Mustique Conservation Act, 1989 the entire island of Mustique, including its marine
environment, was designated a conservation area. (CEP 1996; Fisheries Act 1986)
The SVG conservation areas include all of the North East coast and the Devil's Table in Bequia,
Isle de Quatre, the entire island of Mustique, the East coast of Canouan, all of Mayreau, the
Tobago Cays, the entire Palm Island, Petit St Vincent and the surrounding reefs (Fisheries Act
1986). However, currently the Tobago Cays Marine Park is the only legally declared marine
park. The area has strong community support for management, yet it lacks the resources and
political support for conservation, especially in regulating tourism development
No other area has been as thoroughly analyzed as the Tobago Cays. Boundaries of the nine
marine conservation areas were established on paper, but no action has been taken to enforce
prohibitions against fishing, or to regulate other damaging activities in these designated areas.
Boundary markers have not been established, and it is considered likely that the majority of
locals are unaware of the location of the reserves.
There are other outstanding sites in SVG which are not presently designated as protected areas.
These include many marine sites known for their importance to the dive tourism industry, also
the proposed Soufrière Volcano National Park and some sites on Canouan and Union Island. The
development of these sites can enhance the attractiveness of SVG as a tourism destination, as
well as earn more revenue for the government and provide employment in the communities.
However there is also the need to protect what is already there before embarking on other
ventures that threaten to degrade these natural assets (CEP 1996).
10
Coastal protected areas are threatened by the unregulated mining of sand and rocks from beaches
for use in the construction industry. Virtually all the beaches which are accessible by road have
been mined to some extent, and many beaches are thought to be greatly diminished in width as a
result (CEP 1996). Severe beach erosion is also caused by hurricanes. Widespread coral
deterioration (from disease, yacht damage and pollution) is causing concern, particularly at reef
areas surrounding the Tobago Cays reefs as shown in the Reef Check survey carried out in the
area (Baldwin 2005).
4.4 Tobago Cays Marine Park
The Tobago Cays are a cluster of five small, uninhabited Grenadine islands surrounded by coral
reefs. Petit Rameau features a beach on the south side of the cay, as does Baradel, which lies
southeast of Petit Rameau. Petit Bateau provides visitors a shaded beach on the north and another
beach on its east side. The smallest and southernmost cay, Jamesby, according to visitors,
features one of the best beaches of the group on its eastern side. These four islands are
surrounded by a large reef known as Horseshoe Reef. At the northeastern side of these islands
lies Petit Tabac which has an expanse of beach on its west side and featured in the movie Pirates
of the Caribbean. This area (Figure 4.1) is considered to provide some of the best snorkeling and
diving in the world.
Figure 4.1 Areas of the Tobago Cays Marine Park
(Source: MEDO 2003)
11
The Tobago Cays are among the most popular sailing destinations in the Caribbean. The area is
not only exceptionally beautiful but also rich in natural resources that provide significant
economic value in terms of recreation and tourism. The Tobago Cays ecosystem is also fragile.
The park's mission is "To protect, conserve and improve the natural beauty of the Tobago Cays,"
however most of the human activities inside the park have negative impacts on the surrounding
marine environment (Simmons 2000). This, along with active hurricane seasons, has contributed
to the loss of biodiversity in the area. Overfishing and overuse of the area by tourists are primary
threats to the islands and marine areas. In recent years the deterioration has accelerated. Results
of a Reef Check survey done in 2005, in selected areas of the TCMP, demonstrate that the corals
are now showing the effects of increased contamination in the park as well as anthropogenic
coral destruction brought on by unsupervised snorkellers (Baldwin, 2005). This increases their
vulnerability to diseases.
Table 4.2 Coral health at selected areas in the TCMP
Site
Coral bleaching
Diseases affecting the area
Coral Damage
Horseshoe Back Reef
Low
Black Band, Aspergiliosis
Medium (wave damage)
Petit Tabac
Low
White Plague
Medium (wave damage)
Petit Bateau
Medium
Black Band
High (snorkelling damage)
Source: Baldwin 2005
The main entrances of the Cays are situated at opposite ends of the park. Boats can either enter
trough the Northern or Southern passage. Situated at the north of Mayreau between Petit Bateau
and Petit Rameau lies the entrance most favoured by big yachts and boats that are mobilizing at
night. The reason for this is that this passage is much wider and deeper, presenting minimal risk
to vessels. At the South the entrance is Jamesby and Petit Bateau. This entrance is also much
utilized, however it lacks the advantage of size, relegating it to be considered mainly a daytime
park entrance.
4.5 Fisheries
Fisheries in St. Vincent and the Grenadines are multi-gear and multi-species. The sector is
dominated by small fishing enterprises of relatively low efficiency. It is estimated that
approximately 600 vessels, primary below 32 ft. in length, operate in the fishery waters of SVG
(Fisheries Division 2004). Their main form of propulsion is the two-stroke outboard engine,
ranging from 25 to 100 horsepower, with increasingly powerful engines being favoured. There is
a small, but growing, number of diesel-powered decked vessels with insulated fish hold,
facilitating longer periods of operation. On average, the annual landings generate EC$7 million,
while exports account for foreign exchange of EC$2 million, mainly from spiny lobsters, large
tuna and demersal species. National statistics indicate that imports of fish and fish products are
estimated to be approximately $2.7 million. The sector employs about 5% of the labour force,
including some 2500 full and part-time fishermen and 500 vendors and processors and handlers
(Fisheries Division 2004).
Mohammed et al. (2003) citing Chakalall (1982), states in her study that the dominant fisheries
in St. Vincent are the trolling and longline fisheries targeting large pelagics, the beach seine
fishery targeting small coastal pelagics and the taking of humpback whales, which are landed at
Barrouallie. Handlining for snappers and groupers, the lobster and conch fisheries and whaling
12
for short-finned pilot whales, which are landed in Bequia, are more popular in the Grenadines
(Mohammed et al. 2003).
Spiny lobster (Panulirus argus) is harvested in the Grenadines by teams of a dozen or so men, of
which five to six are SCUBA divers using stainless steel wire nooses. Each diver will carry
several nooses. Each team deploys four to five open boats or quarter-decked speedboats of about
4.6 5.5 m long, mainly constructed of wood with a 35-45 hp outboard motor. The spiny lobster
fishery is a very valuable fishery for St Vincent and the Grenadines (Mohammed et al. 2003).
This fishery is being threatened by the continuous practice of harvesting undersized and berried
females, which is extremely destructive, since it does not permit replenishing of the stock. Most
lobsters from which eggs are taken become weak and often die before reaching the market.
However, Mohammed et al. (2003) state that approximately 25 tons are exported annually to
neighbouring islands such as Martinique and St Lucia, with only an estimated 10 20% of the
lobster catch consumed locally.
The policy framework for the fisheries sector is based on the expansion of fish production on a
sustainable basis to provide a key source of protein for the national population at a competitive
price (Fisheries Division 2004). In order to support increased production of fish, it is essential
that the marine environment is adequately protected. There are several pieces of legislation that
are used to manage and conserve marine resources in SVG (Box 4.1).
Box 4.1 SVG legislation for the conservation of marine resources
(1) The Maritime Areas Act of 1983 legislated to declare the maritime areas of SVG. This Act establishes SVG
as an archipelago. It also establishes the territorial sea, the contiguous Zone and Exclusive Economic Zone,
and defines internal water and archipelagic waters.
(2) The Fisheries Act No. 1 of 1986 gives the mandate to the Fisheries Division for the Management and
Development of the fisheries sector within the waters of SVG. The Fisheries Act of 1986 makes provisions
for the registration and licensing of fishing vessels, the establishment of a fisheries advisory committee, the
management and conservation of fisheries resources, the establishment of marine Protected Areas,
distribution of fish and fish products, management of aquaculture and enforcement.
(3) The Fisheries Regulations No. 8 of 1987 established under Section 45 of the Fisheries Act of 1986, make
regulations for the registration and licensing of fishing vessels, the establishment of a fisheries advisory
committee, the management and conservation of fisheries resources, the establishment of Marine Protected
Areas, distribution of fish and fish and fish products, management of aquaculture and enforcement.
(4) Fish Processing Regulations of 2001 make provision for the control of fish processing and handling
destined for export, and gives the mandate to a named competent authority to ensure that fish and fish
products meet appropriate export standards through inspections and other mechanisms.
(5) The High Seas Fishing Act of 2001 makes provisions for the regulations of Vincentian vessels fishing on
the high seas. It specifically provides for the licensing of high seas fishing vessels, international
cooperation, conservation and management of marine resources and enforcement.
Source: Lystra Culzac-Wilson 2003
5 SOCIOECONOMIC ATTRIBUTES
The research framework highlights the importance of social and economic contextual variables.
13
This section presents the socioeconomic attributes of stakeholders and communities in the TCMP
area.
5.1 The Southern Grenadines
The possession of the Grenadines swung back and forth between the British and the French in
the 17th and 18th centuries. With the signing of the 1763 Treaty of Paris, St. Vincent and the
Grenadines was relinquished to Great Britain, and in 19?? It became an independent country.
The Southern Grenadines are a cluster of several islands, namely Canouan, Mayreau and Union,
that are renowned for a near pristine marine environment, excellent dive sites and the Tobago
Cays Marine Park. Some features of these islands are described below.
5.1.1 Tobago Cays
The Cays, similar to Mayreau, belonged to the Eustace family. In 1960 the family sold the Cays
to a US citizen, Mr. Nicholas Fuller, for US$18,000. In 1999, after much negotiation the SVG
government bought the almost 58 acres for the sum of US$1,025,000. This price was accepted by
the Fuller Company under the condition that "the Tobago Cays will be dedicated to use in
perpetuity as a National Park and that the sole purpose of the acquisition was for the declared
purpose of the establishment of a National Park within which no buildings, structures, fixtures or
construction of any form or any commercial activity whatsoever will be permitted save in
pursuance of the objectives of and in furtherance of the maintenance of a National Park."
(Compass 2003). In his address to the nation, the then Prime Minister the honourable Sir James
Mitchell further underlined this clause stating that "even as we agree that this price is not the
commercial value we accept that no commercial activity will ever be allowed on these islands.
Today will mark the day when the people of St. Vincent and the Grenadines assume
responsibility for the preservation of the most unique group of islands created in our hemisphere"
(Compass 2003).
5.1.2 Canouan
Canouan is 5 square miles and it is set in the middle of the Grenadine archipielago. It is said to
be located in the heart of the Grenadines. The first settlers were the Ciboney Amerindians. The
Arawaks arrived later, and the Caribs displaced them. In 1770 King George III granted Canouan
to five families: Brisbane, Decato, De Cazeau, Patrice and Snagg. Eventually the Snagg brothers
came to own almost 93% of the island. They initiated the construction of the boats that would
become the prototype vessel for the whaling trade that was established in the Grenadines. In
1921 the village was destroyed by a hurricane. In mid 1990's, 800 acres on the northern side,
equivalent to two-third of the island, where the original village stood, were sold to an Italian
consortium. The developers later proceeded to purchase small pieces of land in the middle of the
island and, most recently, the entire southern tip of Canouan which totals approximately three-
quarters of the island.
The developers have tried to discourage people (locals and non-paying visitors) from entering
their northern area. Over the years they have built fences and gates, and installed state-of-the-art
security. Any monument of a public nature within their territory was removed and this included
the only Grenadine Amerindian petroglyph and all tombstones from graves. They purchased the
14
historic Anglican Church. A system of visitor passes was installed. The pass needed to be
purchased and an appointment be made beforehand in order to receive it. This allowed the person
to access the northern part of the island.
This island has reportedly been singled out by Donald Trump for the development of the Trump
Island Villas, which includes an international golf club. It currently has a villa coupled with a
large gaming room. Canouan is now considered one of the top destinations in the Caribbean.
The island boasts direct international flights from Puerto Rico and Barbados. Since 1996 the
developers have established a clinic, commercial jetty, electrical power, water production, early
education facilities and a technical training school among other amenities (described at
http://www.svgair.com/canouan.html). These amenities were perceived as a tool for conflict
management so local inhabitants would not be upset for the loss of the northern part of Canouan.
5.1.3 Mayreau
Mayreau is the smallest of the inhabited Grenadines islands. It covers an area of 1½ square miles
with a population of just over 250 residents. Mayreau was once also inhabited by a succession of
Amerindians beginning with the Ciboney and ending with the Caribs. In the early 1700's
Monsieur de L'isle, a Frenchman, claimed the island. In the early 1800's another French family,
the Saint-Hilaires, arrived and acquired ownership of the land. The last direct descendant of this
family governed the island through a sort of feudal system. Upon her death in 1915, the Eustace
family inherited Mayreau through marriage. Actually, ownership of the island is divided: 22
acres, comprising Salt Whistle Bay belong to the Potter family; 21 acres, where the village
stands, was acquired by the Government and the rest remains in the hands of the Eustace heirs.
This island is the least developed of the inhabited Grenadines islands. Electricity was provided
just two years ago, thanks to actions carried out by the local population, spearheaded by the local
Catholic Church. A garbage and collective rain water collection system for the village was
promoted by the local NGO, the Mayreau Environmental Development Organization (MEDO).
The eastern side of Mayreau is said to have some of the best diving sites in the region. The
population is mainly self-employed within the informal sector i.e. water taxi operators, vendors,
fishers small shops, etc. The main source of income is provided by tourist arrivals to the island or
water taxing/vending either around the island or inside the Tobago Cays.
5.1.4 Union Island
Union Island is located midway between Grenada and St. Vincent. It covers an area of 13.7
square miles. Based on archaeological discoveries it is said to have been a stop-off point for
Amerindians tribes. Among the first registered colonists were Frenchmen who arrived with a
contingency of slaves, however the first registered owners of Union Island were a British family
who also brought with them a number of slaves. The island was used to grow cotton yielding a
substantial harvest throughout the 1700 and early 1800's. Slavery was abolished in 1834 and
sharecropping replaced this regime. After much protest by the inhabitants due to poor
management under the current owner, the British Crown bought the island and set up the Union
Island Land Settlement Scheme. The island was then divided into two and four acre parcels and
sold at low prices to the local population. A son of Union and pride of the island was Mr. Hugh
Mulzac, deemed to have been the first black man to command a ship of the American Navy in
1940.
15
This island is one of the most developed of the Grenadines. It has an airport that previously
received national and international flights; however the current government, citing safety
reasons, now permits only local flights. This was a source of conflict since Union Islanders
consider this a major set-back in tourist arrivals to the island, therefore affecting the island
revenue. Their protest however bore no fruit. The island's main source of income is provided by
tourism, the main attraction being the Tobago Cays. The money brought in by the tourism trade
is primarily what fuels the island's economy. The industry survives mainly off the "sale" of the
Tobago Cays, i.e. boat charters, dive shops, water taxi operators and hotels operating out of
Union. Similar to Mayreau, the income generated is then trickled down to another "sphere" of
the community, making the "Tobago Cay Dollar" a powerful one within the Grenadines.
5.2 Fishing
Tobago Cays Marine Park regulations prohibit fishing and squatting in the area. The entire
Tobago Cays area is defined as a no-take zone. However illegal spearfishing by both locals and
visitors is still an issue. Park rangers have also found squatters with fishing gear on the beach
albeit not with their gear in the water. The issue of enforcement is brought to the forefront when
these incidents occur. During the tourist season, fishers go into the park to sell their produce to
the yachts anchored within the park and also to the hotels and restaurants in the surrounding
communities.
5.3 Film-making
The Caribbean Sea has been featured in numerous movies and documentaries over the years.
This has been free publicity for the region and presumably attracts more tourists to the region.
SVG is no stranger to this sort of activity. The recent blockbuster movie "Pirates of the
Caribbean I" filmed partly within the TCMP, generated income not only for the government, but
also for locals within the area. The filming of the movie is now used to publicise the Marine
Park. Underwater documentary films are also made within the park. This type of filming
however does not provide much income, if any, to the Government since the TCMP board has no
authorized fee for filming in the TCMP, and no fee is usually demanded of documentary filming.
5.4 Commercial activities
The Marine Parks Act of 1997 states that no commercial activities are permitted in a marine area
except in areas designated for that purpose. On the other hand, as stated by ECLAC (2002), it
does not state what should be understood by "commercial activities". TCMP regulations do not
designate any areas within the marine park for commercial activities; government is reluctant to
do so in view of the sale agreement between the government and the former owners that included
a "no commercial activity" clause. However they do recognize "workers" rights to be in the area.
This includes workers such as water taxi operators, T-shirt vendors and boat charters.
The stationary Park vendors have been traditionally located on two of the Cays: Jamesby and
Petit Bateau. Most of them live in Union Island and go out to the Cays to trade their goods, be
these T-shirt, crafts or barbequed food. Usually six vendors display their goods on Petit Bateau
and Jamesby. Barbequing is done mainly on Barradal. Additionally, Palm Island Resort regularly
takes its guests to lunch in the Tobago Cays.
16
5.5 Tourism
In SVG tourism has helped to stabilize the economy as relief to the difficulties faced by the
banana sector. Ideally there is spin-off expected in terms of preservation of cultural heritage and
environmental preservation. The country has turned towards its eco-tourism potential which
includes waterfalls, nature trails and rain forest, and also to marine tourism experiences attracting
visitors to the Tobago Cays as well as to stretches of beaches on the Grenadines Islands. Similar
to other Caribbean SIDS, SVG has also expanded into the market of festivals and sport tourism
as major attractions. Many attractions and events include:
· Well-developed yachting industry from bareboat charter to fully crewed yachts
· Diving and snorkelling excellent dive sites and attractive marine life within the Cays
· Eco-tourism and adventure tourism forest hiking trails, natural waterfalls
· Cultural and heritage tourism petroglyphs, colonial forts
· Festival tourism Mustique Blues Festival, regattas, carnival.
In terms of contribution to economic growth, tourism has grown to become a very important part
of the economy, and the chief earner of foreign exchange. The greatest tourism increases have
occurred at Bequia and Canouan in the Grenadines, where visitation has increased two and three-
fold respectively in recent times. Over half of SVG accommodation is located in the Grenadines,
including the major resort properties (Table 5.1).
Table 5.1 Tourist accommodation 2000-2002 showing percentage in the Grenadines
Type of establishment
2000
2001
2002
Hotel/Resorts 961
968
957
Apartments 262
288
509
Guest Houses
154
150
167
Cottages and Villas
340
352
56
% of Rooms in the Grenadines
63
64
54
% of Establishments in the Grenadines
75
61
56
Source: Deloitte (undated)
The Grenadines have become a favorite visitation spot for the high-end yachting crowd and are
now becoming the focus of new tourism development in the country. Yachting industry is in fact
the dominant form of travel into the country, surpassing air and cruise ships arrivals as shown in
Table 5.2 below.
Table 5.2 Visitor arrivals 1998-2002 by category
Visitor
category 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002
By
Air
67,228 68,292 72,895 70,686 77,631
Same
Day
20,882 17,468 21,135 15,049 13,062
By
Yachts
79,096 89,621 75,763 91,862 86,451
By
Cruise
Ships
34,903 47,743 86,247 76,494 70,314
Total
Visitors
202,109 223,124 256,040 254,091 247,458
Source: Deloitte (undated)
The popular sailing season is over the six month period November April, consistent with
winter in North America and Europe. Over 75% of the yacht arrivals occur in these months.
Cruise ships follow a similar pattern of arrival. The level of activity during this period is very
intense within the Grenadines (Deloitte undated) In the Grenadines islands, however, there is no
17
surface water; the islands depend on rainfall, water imports and to a lesser extent ground water.
Water and other resources can be seriously impacted by increased tourism in the area.
5.6 Marine tourism
Marine protected areas not only serve to protect the biodiversity of the area but can also help the
local economy by providing alternative livelihoods for the surrounding communities via tourism.
Marine tourism is an added MPA benefit. However, for mutual benefit, it must be done in a
sustainable way. Impacts such as from snorkellers or divers' fins brushing against the corals or
standing on corals can harm the marine habitat. The TCMP is an area of continuous marine
tourism. It receives national and international visitors all year round. There are daily catamaran
tours from Union Island and visitors are also transported by other means such as yachts, cruise
ships and water taxi in order to dive or snorkel. The dive shop operating out of Union Island
takes divers daily to the dive sites in the Park. Charter boats and dive shops create employment
for people within the area, but currently these activities have not been regulated within the park.
5.7 Other economic activities
Within the area there is also significant illegal trade in goods such as consumer items. Most of
these goods can be bought around the communities at low cost. This activity is seen as
complementary or alternative income for those people involved in ferrying the goods. During
tourist low season it constitutes their main source of income. The TCMP is also allegedly used as
a drug trade corridor, especially for cocaine, under the guise of legitimate boating.
5.8 Public services and infrastructure
Developments on the surrounding islands have previously been described. As part of the sale
agreement between the government and the former owner a clause was included stating that "no
buildings structures fixtures or construction of any form (...) will be permitted" (Tobago Cays
Sales agreement 1999) hence no infrastructure or public services have been established on the
Cays.
5.9 Poverty profile
Within the OECS, SVG has been identified as having the highest levels of poverty. A National
Assessment team from St. Vincent and the Grenadines, in collaboration with the Caribbean
Development Bank and Kairi Consultants of Trinidad conducted a Survey of Living Conditions
(Household Poverty Survey) and a Community Based Poverty Assessment Survey in 1996. The
Kairi (1996) report indicated that 30.6% of households and 37.5% of the population were poor,
and 20.4% of households and 25.7% of the population were indigent. This means that almost
26% of the population and 21% of households are unable to satisfy basic nutritional requirements
and are at risk of chronic ill health.
Other studies such as the Interim Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (I-PRSP), a poverty
assessment in 2003 carried out by the SVG government Poverty Reduction Task Force (PRTF)
that focused on the social sector and by extension poverty, suggested a worsening of the poverty
levels (PRTF 2003). Free market access and SVGs ability to compete adequately on the global
18
market, loss of preferential treatment in the banana industry and the inability of some segments
of the population to adjust to these changes are placing more and more persons at risk of being
driven into the poverty range.
Both the Kairi (1996) and the PRTF (2003) studies identified the following items as the main
factors that have contributed to poverty in the SVG and are still doing so:
· Economic and social policies that have concentrated primarily on the economic aspects with
insufficient attention to the policies necessary to ensure that social development kept pace
with economic development.
· Limited livelihood security, low earnings and lack of jobs as a result of the decline of the
banana industry, the lack of alternative livelihoods, and the slightly weak or non-developed
base from which the tourism industry has emerged.
· Social/human capital in the SVG is unrealised, the human resource base is generally low
skilled and not organized. Social exclusion in the SVG also has tremendous impact especially
on persons from the rural areas, women and young adult men.
· Inadequate social infrastructure and limited access to social services, that range from a good
network of roads to the availability of adequate structures for such activities as education and
healthcare and access to low-income housing facilities.
The Kairi report and the PRTF, citing C.Y. Thomas, identify certain characteristics common to
SVG households associated with poverty conditions:
· Low levels or lack of education, skills and training,
· Over crowding of household, mainly children,
· Few income earners
· Low quality accommodation
· Single headed households, particularly female
· Lack of employment opportunities, therefore tending to concentrate in informal occupation
· Lack of assets, along with restricted access to credit as a result
Poverty in St. Vincent seems to have mainly a woman's face. The United Nations has recognized
the issue of feminisation of poverty and thus created the United Nations Development Fund for
Women (UNIFEM). There is a general public recognition that in order to reduce this problem
there is need for countries to undergo macroeconomic changes taking into account existing
gender disparities (http://www.unifem.org/). However governments rarely show the inclination
to address strategic gender needs within their main policies.
Women have been the group most affected by the decline of the banana industry coupled with
the failure of government to ensure adequate safety nets to compensate for the effect of the
setback of the industry upon this sector of the population (Kairi 1996; PRTF 2003). Kairi (1996)
reports that, although 56% of all household heads across SVG were male, the poorer households
were headed by females. Female hardship was dominant in eight of the thirteen communities
surveyed, and particularly so in the poorest communities. An underlying gender segmentation, in
which the participation of women is limited to certain sectors, was also observed. At present,
there are very few programmes geared towards improving gender equity within the SVG.
Poverty is concentrated in particular communities within the SVG, such as New Sandy Bay.
Kairi Consultants (1996) found that 95.8% of households in this area were headed by females. A
common problem that can be found throughout SVG both mainland and the Grenadines is a
19
weak community organization. This has generally translated into a lack of capacity to tackle
problems on their own. Communities with a certain degree of organization and effective
leadership, e.g. Mayreau, have demonstrated a capacity to make transformation happen on their
own. In this regard CBOs and NGOs have proven to be remarkable governmental allies in the
struggle to empower communities and search for alternatives to escape the poverty trap.
In Latin America and the Caribbean countries, remittances are a major survival strategy to poor
households and also a strong input within the countries' economies. Kairi (1996) reports that,
within the SVG, overseas remittances represent a 17% contribution to poor households' income.
Regular contributions either in cash or kind are being received from persons outside the
household. An important coping strategy, therefore, is emigration and 43.8% of households
reported recent migrations among members of the household. The United States was the
preferred destination.
Another response to poverty conditions in the SVG can be observed in the increase of the
countriy's informal sector and the share of employment (Kairi 1996). The report goes on to state
that three out of every ten workers are engaged in activities within the informal sector with
irregular working hours attached to this form of under-employment.
The present SVG Government has launched a National Poverty Reduction Strategy centred on an
informal contract between the Government of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, civil society
and the private sector. Government recognizes the need for multi-stakeholder involvement in
order to target the root causes of poverty. The goals and priorities are based on the Government's
vision as well as on consultations with civil society, and reflect the Government's commitment
to regional and international targets in the area of social policy. The Strategy (Kairi 1996; PRTF
2003) takes on broad global objectives in key areas of development such as children, gender,
human rights and security. Six main elements identified through consultation are proposed in
order to address poverty reduction:
· Policies to Stimulate Growth, Trade and Investment
· Policy/Programme Development and Execution
· Greater and better investments in Human Capital
· Improving Social and Physical Infrastructure
· Strengthening Civil Society Participation
Both the Kairi (1996) and the PRTF (2003) report conclude that in order for the poverty
reduction strategy to be effective there is the need to set up an institutionalised, independent
body. This body should be composed of various organizations drawn from the public and private
sector, including NGO's and CBO's as well as trade unions. A main function of this body would
be poverty monitoring to ensure that the appropriate official and other policies are adjusted in the
light of the changing realities.
6 COMMUNITY-LEVEL INSTITUTIONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL
ARRANGEMENTS
In their definition of who constitutes a stakeholder, McConney et al. (2003) view these as people
or groups that either strongly impact or are impacted by management or its absence. They go
further to say that primary stakeholder may form part of the government or of civil society.
Based on this definition, TCMP stakeholders are easily identifiable and would include several
20
government institutions such as the management Board, management office, coast guard and
TCMP user groups such as divers, water taxi operators and other boat charter operators.
The Tobago Cays have become perhaps the most important tourist destination within SVG. It is
promoted not only by the SVG government but also by other countries such as Barbados and St.
Lucia, as part as their tourism packages. The park receives yacht visitors who stay over for
several days and also visitors who use water taxis or charters to enjoy a one-day trip to the Cays.
This creates a set of distant, non-Vincentian, stakeholders for the area that fall outside of the
scope of this study.
The area opens opportunities for different user groups to interact positively amidst the Cays as
well as for conflict to occur amongst them and with park authorities. This chapter describes the
park resource management and the community based organizations active within the southern
grenadines with a focus on the TCMP management. The following chapter addresses
stakeholders who are further removed from daily use of the park but are still within SVG.
6.1 Southern Grenadines Water Taxi Association
The Southern Grenadines Water Taxi Association (WTA) includes 85% of the water taxi
operators working within the area. The association was created in October 2003 partly as an
outcome of the issue related to the proposed Palm Island Resort Limited (PIRL) management of
the TCMP (discussed later). The water taxi operators recognized the need to organize in order to
safeguard their means of livelihood from corporate competition. Vendors feared that if the Cays
became privately managed, and restrictions such as the existing ones on Palm Island were
imposed, their livelihood would be greatly affected.
Several attempts had been made to organize the water taxi operators before, but these initiatives
resulted in failure. The operators showed no interest or saw no reason motivating them to
establish themselves as a group. The operators know that group action within the Grenadines is
more reactive than proactive. Area inhabitants unite in the face of what is viewed as a threat and
form bonds (even if temporary) only against the perceived common enemy.
The person to spearhead the water taxi movement within the context of the community struggle
against PIRL embraced the opportunity presented for collective action and managed to establish
the Union Island Water Taxi Association. Once the association was formed government offered
loans. Most operators perceived this move as a step towards a take over by the government and
questioned the instigator's motives for assisting the water taxi operators. The Association moved
to become an independent body by establishing its own structure which includes: president, vice
president secretary, public relations officer, treasurer, trustees and committee members.
Four months after its inception the association expanded beyond the initial Union Island scope,
to include other islands, thus becoming the Southern Grenadines Water Taxi Association. This
came out of the realization that the group was composed of operators from different southern
Grenadines islands who were demanding a name that would encompass all members. In 2004 the
Association was awarded for being the Best New Tourism Transportation Organization.
The Association has been working on its internal rules and regulations; these are yet to be
approved by the members. Established rules relate to the timeframe for elections which are to be
held every year, executive meetings are supposed to be held once weekly and general discussion
meetings every month for all members. However attention to holding meetings has been lax and
21
has proven a challenging procedural issue.
Several constraints were identified as affecting the organization:
· Absenteeism of members from meetings
· No access to information on park management; that makes it difficult to effectively discuss
park management issues.
· Lack of finance for operations and office maintenance
· Members tend to procrastinate when assigned roles and responsibilities
At present the WTA is functioning out of an office space granted by the Sustainable Grenadines,
a CERMES-connected NGO based in Union Island. This organization has been assisting them
with seminars and workshops in order to help strengthen the association and establish water taxi
environmental best practices. Since the establishment of the association there has been a better
management of water taxi operators inside the Cays. The vendors are more respectful of the
park regulations and minor crimes within park have diminished. The operators are more watchful
of park regulation violators, perhaps a signal to support community monitoring and surveillance.
6.2 Park management office
Tobago Cays Marine Reserve established in 1987 still lacks effective management in spite of
extensive planning support provided by OAS. Direct park management rest with the TCMP
office situated in Union Island. The park management however is currently understaffed and ill-
equipped. Problems include lack of trained personnel plus negative environmental impacts from
yachts, divers and snorkellers, fishing, sewage and agricultural pollution, and coastal
development). Organisational problems include inadequate management structure, staffing and
training, and a general lack of governmental support from the capital in St. Vincent (CEP 1996).
The budget for park management activities is minimal with respect to the day-to-day
management necessities.
The lack of personnel makes it almost impossibly to ensure enforcement of park regulation;
currently the personnel comprise a park manager, 3 rangers, 1 warden and an administrative
assistant. Responsibilities assigned to park management and enforcement are shown in Boxes 6.1
and 6.2 respectively, however the government is presently unable to provide the institutional
framework within which these functions could be successfully executed.
Box 6.1 Responsibilities of the TCMP Park Manager
i
Preparation of quarterly and annual reports on the state of the Marine Park to be submitted to the Board
ii
Efficient implementation of the work programme and policy decisions of the Board
iii Manage all finances consistent with the policies of the Board
iv Work with relevant agencies using the media to promote the Marine Park as a tourist resort and attraction
v
Ensure that the Marine Park is managed along commercial lines
vi Enforcement of decisions taken by the board
vii Ensure that the Ecology of the Park is sustained
viii Design and develop on a monthly basis information for the education of all users of the Marine Park
ix Coordinate the design and development of brochures, pamphlets, leaflets, maps and other information that
may be necessary with respect to the marine Park for distribution to the public. on a monthly basis
information for the education of all users of the Marine Park
x
Supervise all other officers appointed by the Board
Source: SRO No 26 1998
22
Box 6.2 Responsibilities of the TCMP enforcement
i
Patrol the waters which form part of the marine Park
ii
Responsible for distribution of brochures and information booklets about the marine Park visitors
iii Responsible for the collection of fees and the control of the number and size of the vessels
iv Responsible for collection of garbage and the cleaning of the beaches
v
Assist in reef monitoring and educational programmes
vi Regulate the use of parking and refreshment facilities
Source: Job application form for warden
The TCMP falls under the following legislative and regulatory mechanism of the SVG:
· Fisheries Act. (Act. No. 8) (1986)
The area of the current Marine Park was declared a Marine Reserve under schedule 11 of
this Act. The protection, therefore of the area is the responsibility of the Fisheries
Division within the Ministry of Agriculture, Lands and Fisheries.
· Wild Life Protection Act. (Act No. 16) (1987)
This Act declares various terrestrial areas of SVG wild life protection areas, and includes
the Tobago Cays. It falls under the responsibility of the Forestry Department under the
Ministry of Agriculture, Lands and Fisheries.
· Marine Park Act (Act No. 9) ( 1997)
This document defines the framework for the development of Marine Parks in SVG, and
establishes the Marine Park Board of SVG for the responsibility of the implementation
and enforcement of the directives of the Marine Parks Act.
· Declaration of the Tobago Cays as a Marine Park. (Statutory Rules and Orders No. 40)
(1997)
Here the Government declared the 5 islands that comprise the Tobago Cays a Marine
Park under the Marine Parks Act. It gives the Marine Park Board direct responsibility for
the management of the islands and surrounding waters.
· Tobago Cays Marine Park Regulations. (Statutory Rules and Orders No. 26) (1998)
These regulations establish the TCMP and the powers of the management towards the
implementation of the directives of the Marine Parks Legislation and the Marine Parks
Board in the area of the Tobago Cays and surrounding waters.
6.3 Mayreau Environmental Development Organization
The Mayreau Environmental Development Organization (MEDO) is a grass-roots community-
based organization (CBO). It has been engaged in environmental and general community work
for the past eight years. MEDO is a legally established as an NGO whose present executive
committee comprises seven members with diverse backgrounds. The CBO meets regularly to
plan and execute its work. MEDO is concerned both with the protection of resources and the
livelihoods community members who are affected by whatever decisions are taken regarding the
park. There sensitivity on both of these issues, born from their personal ties to the area.
MEDO has been lobbying government for several years for co-management of the TCMP. In
2003, in response to the statement from government that it would give over the Park to foreign-
connected private management, MEDO developed an alternative proposal for the protection and
23
management of the TCMP (MEDO 2003). In the proposal cover letter addressed to the Prime
Minister MEDO stated: "We have been preparing (...) for many years in the hope (...) of sharing
in the protection and management of (...) the Tobago Cays."
Based on an analysis done with the help of CERMES on revenue generation, MEDO is positive
of the park's self-sustainability potential as a major revenue generator for the country. In order to
be better equipped for park management issues MEDO has entered into alliance with the Friends
of the Tobago Cays (FOTC), a more recently formed interest group. This alliance brings skills
that are expected to enhance overall park management if MEDO becomes a co-management
partner. Currently they are still lobbying to enter into a management partnership with
government.
6.4 Palm Island Resort Limited
Palm Island Resort Limited (PIRL) is an all-inclusive resort constructed in 1968 and located on
its own private 100-acre island in St. Vincent and the Grenadines. The resort is 1 mile away
from Union Island and accessible via the hotel's launch from Union. Almost every day guests are
taken out to the Tobago Cays to engage in swimming, snorkelling or diving, and presented with a
barbeque on one of the cays.
In 2004 PIRL presented a proposal entitled "Strategic Alliance Agreement for the Protection and
Preservation of the Tobago Cays Marine Park between Palm Island Resorts Limited and the
Government of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines". In it PIRL offered to take over the complete
management of the Tobago Cays with the added responsibility to develop operational procedures
with the approval of the Marine Park Board. They would employ a park manager; marine
biologist and park rangers in order to effectively manage the park. These park employees would
be accountable to PIRL and could also be fired at any time by the company (PIRL 2004). The
proposal outlined how the country would benefit from a percentage of the income generated by
the park's development once expenses had been paid off. The questions this brought to mind in
the local population were: what will be considered expenses, and who will control this and
determine the level of profit? The proposal also presented sketches of infrastructure to be
established within the TCMP, contravening the TCMP sales agreement.
The issues of private foreign management of the TCMP and the devolution of income generation
by the government, as well as the notion of a national park profiting a foreign investor lead to a
great degree of controversy and protest from all sectors of society from all around the SVG.
Given this controversy the PIRL management agreed to withdraw their proposal, stating however
that if conditions were right they would be willing to aid the government in the management of
the park. It was the issues surrounding privatisation of the TCMP management through PIRL
that galvanised responses such as the formation of the water taxi association, the management
proposal by MEDO and the public outreach of Friends of the Tobago Cays in protest. Although
PIRL was cast as the villain, it was useful in re-vitalising interest in TCMP management options.
6.5 Friends of the Tobago Cays
In 2003 the SVG government said that it was considering a proposal from a private foreign
investor (PIRL) to manage the TCMP as described above. This prompted concerned citizens to
form the Friends of the Tobago Cays (FOTC). FOTC aimed to stop this process and raise public
24
awareness of the value of the park as an asset to be managed by Vincentians for the benefit of all
Vincentians. FOTC wanted to ensure that those who made their livelihoods from the park had a
voice and could not be displaced.
As part of FOTC strategy to give people a voice they hosted the Tobago Cays Educational, open
to all public. The purpose of this Forum was to provide expert information to the general public
regarding the purposes and best management practices of marine protected areas; and to provide
an opportunity for open public dialogue regarding the fate of the Tobago Cays Marine Park. The
Forum was done in alliance with Grenadines base environmental groups and had experts form St.
Lucia Soufriere Marine Management Area and UWI Barbados among others sharing their
expertise on MPA management.
FOTC have also engaged in press conferences, press release and have coordinate efforts with
MEDO and other institutions in order address concerns regarding the sustainable management of
the TCMP.
7 EXTERNAL TO THE COMMUNITY INSTITUTIONAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL
ARRANGEMENTS
7.1 Tobago Cays Marine Park Board
Although essential to the management of the TCMP, the Board is an external institution in the
sense that it is not involved in day-to-day management and it is largely an instrument of the
authorities located on mainland St.Vincent. The SVG government under the Marine Parks Act
(No. 9 1997) legally created the TCMP Management Board with the intention of establishing an
advisory body for effective management of the Park. The Marine Parks Act states the number of
members to be appointed by the minister in writing, and the government divisions to be part of
the board's composition. It goes on to say that four members are to be ex officio. The TCMP is
currently the responsibility of the Prime Minister's Office, and at the time of research the Chief
Fisheries Officer was chairman. The board's composition is in Box 7.1.
Box 7.1 Composition of TCMP Board
i
Chief Fisheries Officer or his nominee - ex officio
ii
Director of Finance or his nominee - ex officio
iii Solicitor General or his nominee - ex officio
iv Commander of the Coast Guard or his nominee ex officio
v
A person nominated by the Minister;
vi A person nominated by the Minister of Tourism;
vii A person nominated by the St. Vincent National Trust;
viii A person nominated by the Hotel Association;
ix Two persons nominated by Non-Governmental Organizations functional in the district where the park is
declared.
Source: SVG Marine Parks Act No. 9 of 1997
The board members, other than ex-officio members, are appointed for a three years period, but
they are eligible for re-appointment for a second term. However they cannot hold office for more
than two successive terms. The minister has the obligation to publish in the Gazette the names of
the members of the board at its constitution and after each subsequent change in membership.
The Act also states reasons that may cause a member to be loose his membership on the board,
25
this may happen if she or he is:
a) Unable to perform his functions due to infirmity of mind or body; or
b) Absent from three consecutive meetings without an excuse acceptable to the Board.
The Act does not state the functions of board members, however from interviews with the
members it was stated that the main function of the board lies in:
· Advising the government on all issues pertaining to the Park's management.
· Making recommendations to the Government on matters relating to marketing the park
· Appointing and firing staff such as the park manager and wardens
Between 2003 and 2005 there have been three recurrent agenda items. These are:
· Fee structure
· Park boundaries
· Management systems
The board has discussed these issues extensively and submitted its opinions and suggestions to
Cabinet. However there has been no response to date and it is expected that a new board will
continue to deal with such topics.
There is not a system in place for scheduling board meetings. The TCMP Board meetings are
expected to be held once a month, however these have been infrequent due in part to absence of
the chairman who is busy or travelling complying with his multiple engagements as Chief
Fishery Officer. At the time of this research it had been 4 months since the last board meeting.
There is no pre-arranged day of the month for board meetings, members get invitations via e-
mail or phone call just days before a meeting is to be held. Meetings seem to be called at the
discretion of the chairman. Added to this is the fact that the minutes of previous meetings are
handed out at the following meeting, therefore absentees have little time to familiarize
themselves with what went on, and be updated on board discussions.
The TCMP operates under the Prime Ministry office as part of the Grenadines portfolio, which
he controls. At the time of this research the chairman of the TCMP board was the Chief Fishery
Officer. Currently a Union Island catholic priest is the interim chairman of the board. The
selected NGO members of the board were MEDO and Union Island Association for Ecological
Preservation. The board meetings have had speakers presenting on specific issues e.g.
representatives form TNC, OECS and different government agencies.
7.2 Fisheries Division of the Ministry of Agriculture
The Fisheries Division is under the Ministry of Agriculture and Labour, and is responsible for
the overall management of the fisheries sector. The Division has a public education programme
with emphasis on presentations on fisheries-related matters in primary and secondary schools,
and training sessions directed to police recruits in the area of fisheries legislation. The Division
has also produced a handbook on management and conservation measures aimed at sensitizing
law enforcement officers and prosecutors.
The structure of the Fisheries Division is as follows:
· A Chief Fisheries Officer, who has overall responsibility for the Division
· Four Senior Fisheries Assistants
· Five Fisheries Assistants
26
· Data Collectors who are paid daily
· Clerical support staff
· A vessel Captain
The Division is divided into a number of units with responsibilities for specific areas, namely:
· Administration
· Extension
· Public Education
· Quality Assurance and Product Development
· Biology/Research
· Data
· Conservation
This overall structure is designed to allow the Division to address the diverse nature and needs of
the sector in a meaningful and effective way (Fisheries Division 2004).
The Division has several pieces of legislation to assist them in this task. The Fisheries Act (1986)
and Regulations (1987), which form part of the OECS harmonized legislation, cover fisheries
access agreements, local and foreign fishing licensing, fish processing establishments, fisheries
research, fisheries enforcement and the registration of fishing vessels. The legislation also
specifies conservation measures such as prohibiting the use of any explosive, poison or other
noxious substance for the purpose of killing, stunning, disabling or catching fish; close seasons;
gear restrictions; and creation of marine reserves. The legislation gives the minister responsible
for fisheries the authority to create new regulations for the management of fisheries when
necessary. The Division has acted upon its mandate and created marine reserves, such as the
TCMP. However, it has also encountered constraints in executing effective management and
enforcing regulations (Box 7.2).
Box 7.2 Constraints in the areas of coastal and marine resource management
· Inadequate financial and human resources
· Inadequate enforcement capability. For example, police presence in some geographical
areas is weak or non-existent, particularly so in the Tobago Cays
· Uncontrolled pollution of coastal marine habitats, via for example, poor farming
practices leading to sedimentation; dumping of garbage near shore; and sewage
discharge along the coast line or within the Tobago Cays Marine Park
· Limited capability for controlling poaching including illegal exploitation of marine
resources in conservation areas and the Tobago Cays Marine Park
· Inadequate information on the ecosystems being managed
· A measure of distrust for government-sponsored activities
Source: Fishery Division, 2004 and Lystra Culzac-Wilson, 2003
7.3 Cabinet
Within the English-speaking Commonwealth Caribbean policy control of the government rests
with the Prime Minister (PM) and the Cabinet of ministers. In 2001, when the United Labor
Party won an absolute parliamentary majority its leader, Dr. Ralph Gonsalves, became the new
Prime Minister and head of Cabinet which currently includes twelve representatives of his
27
ministries. Changes within cabinet, such as the ones experienced during May of this year, are
viewed as being done at the pleasure of the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister has a ministerial
portfolio that includes Finance, Planning, Economic Development, Information, Labour,
Grenadines and Legal Affairs. The TCMP is a responsibility of the Prime Minister's Office, and
Cabinet is considered to have the ultimate responsibility for decisions regarding the TCMP. In
few other Caribbean countries, if any, is a marine park the responsibility of the Prime Minister.
7.4 Ministry of Tourism and Culture
The mission of the Department of Tourism, as stated on their official web page, is "to position
SVG as a diverse, globally competitive tourism destination through effective planning,
management and sustainable use of the natural and cultural resources of the country; while
facilitating the preservation of cultural heritage as a vehicle for instilling national pride and
forging national identity". To achieve this mission SVG has established overseas offices in the
USA, Canada and United Kingdom. The vision attached to this is "to establish St. Vincent and
the Grenadines as a destination where development is in harmony with the preservation of the
social values, the natural environment and the cultural patrimony of the country." To achieve
these goals they have targeted a selective audience which includes a number of institutions,
organizations and businesses including the general public (http://www.gov.vc/govt/index.asp).
The organizational structure of this ministry includes the St. Vincent and the Grenadines Board
of Tourism. This board was established by Cabinet as an advisory body to provide support to the
Ministry of Tourism and Culture in matters relating to the following:
· Marketing and promotion of St. Vincent and the Grenadines internationally;
· Development of the tourism product;
· Human resource development as it relates to the tourism sector;
· Ongoing and new tourism public awareness programme;
· Any other tourism matters sent to the Board by the Minister for advice.
The Administrative and Finance Section of the Ministry of Tourism and Culture performs the
following functions:
· Staff Development
· Florida Caribbean Cruise Association (FCCA) Membership
· Department of Tourism (DoT) Annual Report
· Budget Preparation & Management
· Personnel Matters
· Administrative Matters
· Caribbean Tourism Organisation (CTO) Membership
· International Organisation Membership
The Ministry of Tourism and Culture General Administrative Staff Structure is as follows:
· Permanent Secretary
· Assistant Secretary
· Clerk Typist
· Office Attendant
· Driver
28
7.5 Centre for Resource Management and Environmental Studies
The Centre for Resource Management and Environmental Studies (CERMES) of the University
for the West Indies (UWI) Cave Hill Campus has developed a project to evaluate the
management effectiveness in the TCMP along with two other areas in the Caribbean. The project
proposed that both the formulation and evaluation be carried out jointly with people and
organisations from the Grenadines. This project entitled "Enhancing management effectiveness
at three marine protected areas (...)" is expected to contribute towards building regional capacity
in MPA management effectiveness evaluation methods in the Caribbean. The project is aimed
mainly at MPA managers and stakeholders and outreach aimed at audiences ranging from other
coastal managers to scientists to students to policy-makers and sectors of the general public.
CERMES will be working with complementary projects at the three sites. Participatory and
community-based approaches will facilitate stakeholder involvement and adaptive management
that will ensure that best practices are institutionalized based upon the lessons learned and skills
acquired during the project and after.
7.6 The Nature Conservancy
The Nature Conservancy (TNC) focuses on building the capacity of partners on the ground.
After years of experience they have concluded that the best way is to work hand in hand with
partners and provide training opportunities. TNC's idea is to build teams with local stakeholders
where each party learns from each other. The TNC Parks in Peril Program focuses strengthening
local capacity in order to revive MPA's that may have been designated on paper but lack the
means to function.
As part of this programme TNC is currently working with local partners to survey all of the
Grenadines, identify threats and conservation strategies, and map priority sites in need of
protection. Part of the plan includes developing and managing a system of marine protected
areas. This programme relies heavily on a relationship of trust between everyone involved in
pursuing the best interest of the park. As part of the assistance with implementation of the park,
TNC undertook rapid evaluation of the TCMP in collaboration with TCMP board and
management personnel. This resulted in a general work plan with specific activities identified for
support by TNC from October 2005 to September 2007 by their Parks in Peril Program (TNC
2005).
7.7 OECS Protected Area and Alternative Livelihood Project
The OECS Protected Area and Alternative Livelihood project (OPAAL) executed by the
Secretariat of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) through its Environment and
Sustainable Development Unit (ESDU). The general objective of the project to contribute to the
conservation of biodiversity of global importance in the OECS region by removing barriers to
the effective management of protected areas, and to increase the involvement of civil society and
the private sector in the planning, management and sustainable use of these areas. The end-goal
of the programme is to create an integrated system of protected areas among the OECS Member
States which will protect and conserve ecologically-sustainable, representative samples of the
region's rich biodiversity endowment, while creating sustainable livelihoods for communities in
and around these protected areas (OECS 2003).
29
The TCMP has been selected as one of the primary sites for the project implementation. A social
assessment was undertaken in order to ensure that the prospective communities in and around the
targeted sites benefit meaningfully from this project intervention. OPAAL project Annex 13
states that "The barriers to the effective management of the Tobago Cays over the past 15 years
were created by... insufficient involvement of all stakeholders in the decision-making and
implementation process... new endeavours should build upon previous initiatives, yet should be
more effective, particularly in terms of building stakeholder ownership, accountability and
conflict resolution processes.... to ensure success, this project will incorporate (...) the
importance of a proper management system with broad stakeholder support, involvement and
accountability..."(OECS 2003). OPAAL will coordinate efforts with the TCMP Board, CERMES
and TNC as well as local stakeholders in order to maximize resources and contribute to the
overall development of the site.
7.8 Coast Guard
SVG Coast Guard maintains a Unit on Union Island that patrols the Tobago Cays. The patrols
are scheduled on a daily basis, however due to absence of suitable assets i.e. boats, the Union
Island Unit has been unable to carry out this daily patrol, but has undertaken periodic patrols
with the park rangers. The main Coast Guard patrol base in St. Vincent the Calliagua Unit
also patrols the area whenever they are scheduled to reach the TCMP. The main objectives of
patrols are:
1) To ensure that no illegal activities are taking place in the cays, which includes:
a. No fishing
b. No removal of coral by snorkellers or divers.
c. No dumping of garbage
2) To minimize incidence of harassment, theft of visitors, property
3) To ensure that all visitors (yachtsmen) pay the relevant customs and immigration charges.
4) To maintain law and order within the TCMP
8 EXOGENOUS EVENTS
Exogenous events are those that are beyond the control of the system under study. There are
several exogenous events, which affect or have the potential to affect the Tobago Cays Marine
Park. These include natural disasters such as hurricanes and storms (physical damage), global
warming (coral bleaching), sea level rise (coral drowning and loss of land mass) and global
economic or security events (decrease of tourist arrivals).
8.1 Hurricanes and storms
Due to the small size and low relief of the land masses, hurricanes and tropical storms pose a
serious threat to the Tobago Cays. The marine park is located within the Caribbean hurricane belt
and has recently been affected by the winds, waves and storm surge of hurricane Ivan (2004) and
Tropical Storm Emily (2005). These phenomena did considerable damage to both the Cays'
terrestrial and aquatic resources. Coconut trees were destroyed and beach width has diminished.
The reefs suffered considerable damage, specifically in the area of World's End reef where
corals were destroyed due to wave action caused by both events.
30
8.2 Diseases
The Reef Check site survey of areas within the marine park indicated that although the reefs are
generally healthy the park is currently being afflicted by disease (Baldwin 2005). Hard corals
within the park are being affected by black band disease and white plague; meanwhile soft corals
are under severe stress form Aspergiliosis. Black band is the most common disease in the
surrounding area and serves as an indicator of intense sewage pollution and sedimentation
caused by boats visiting the Cays.
8.3 Other vulnerabilities
Another vulnerability that has the potential of affecting the park comes from "Kick'em Jenny".
This active submarine volcano is located about 150m below sea level and is 7 km north of
Grenada. It poses a tsunami threat not only to the park but also to its neighbouring islands.
Global warming is viewed as a threat to the park's aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems. Increasing
average global temperature can cause a rise in sea level and change weather patterns. These
phenomena can seriously damage critical ecosystems such as the coral reefs, causing them to
drown or become vulnerable to diseases. The threat is also extended to the landmasses within the
park since increased sea level rise results in shoreline retreat. The Cays' land is limited and flat;
therefore loss of beach endangers the existence of the cays per se.
Global dynamics can also impact heavily on the tourism industry. The incidents of September
11, in the United States temporarily reduced tourism in the Grenadines. The communities are
only now seemingly recovering from the after-effects of this event. Also, increases in the price of
petrol, remaining fear of terrorism and increasing use of domestic cruise ports in the United
States are also feared to affect the influx of tourists to the Caribbean.
9 INTERACTIONS AND OUTCOMES
This case study is seeking to determine if there are conditions for successful co-management of
the Tobago Cays Marine Park in the Southern Grenadines. At present there is no co-management
arrangement for the park. However, the communities surrounding the park have stated their
desire to be part of an overall arrangement that will permit them to have a strong and direct voice
within the park management. This stated desire is the result of interactions amongst stakeholders
that have produced observed or experienced outcomes (see Table 9.1).
9.1 Perceptions of government institutions
Among the communities the general perception regarding the management of the TCMP is that
the government is starving or undermining the entire park management system. This is seen as a
strategy being implemented by the government in order to set up the park to fail, and then to
hand it over to foreign private investors. This perception is due to what is viewed, as a lack of
governmental will to access grants or to lose access to grants in hand, such as the funds presented
by the French cooperation to help support the park and also to establish self-financing
mechanisms or support structures. This perception was further intensified by the recent late
disbursement of funds for the park management office, which was seen as yet another
governmental step in undermining effective park management.
31
Table 9.1 Chronology of the Tobago Cays management initiatives
Year Initiative
or
event
1987
Fisheries Regulations outlining the Marine Conservation Area.
1988
Development of the Tobago Cays National Park Project Proposal (OAS & SVG Government).
1991
Cays Marine Park Project Action Plan
1993
Tobago Cays Marine Park Project signed & launched by the French
1995
Survey of Yachting Activity in the Tobago Cay & the Grenadines (French Mission for cooperation &
Ministry of Foreign Affaires & Tourism)
1995
Proposal to establish a Tobago Cay Marine Park approved by the SVG
1997
Marine Parks Act enacted
1997
SR&O No. 40 establish and declared that the five islands or the Tobago Cays now formed the Tobago
Cays Marine Park
1998
SR&O No. 26 Marine Parks (Tobago Cays) Regulation enacted
1998
First Marine Park Board appointed
1998
Draft copy of a Management Plan for the Tobago Cays submitted by newly appointed Park Manager
1999
Tobago Cays acquired by SVG Government for US$1,025,000
2000
Management Plan revised by Park Manager
2000
TCMP work plan by Park Management
2002
TCMP Benthic Habitat Mapping Project (Coral Cay Conservation Ltd.)
2003
Palm Island Resorts, Ltd. proposal submitted to Government
2003
MEDO proposal submitted to Government
2004
Strategic Alliance Agreement between SVG and PIRL submitted to Government
2004
Trust Fund draft for the Tobago Cay
2004
Board request to Cabinet to Geo referenced TCMP boundaries
2004
Request of Southern Grenadines Water Taxi Organization to the Board to take active part in the
management of the park
2005
Draft Marine Park Legislation
2005
Board request for Park Manager to organize meeting with relevant stakeholder for consultation on park
fees
2005
Project propose by CERMES within the TCMP that involves management authorities and other
stakeholders
2005
Signing of the OPAAL-TNC-CERMES memorandum with the SVG government
2005
Discussion of User Fees with Grenadines Islands
This chapter examines perceptions of some interactions and outcomes investigated primarily
through interviews with TCMP stakeholders. Together with other interactions mentioned briefly
in previous chapters on institutional arrangements, they provide an indication of if and how co-
management would succeed, should there be such an initiative in the TCMP.
The TCMP Board is perceived as a tool to disguise governmental control over the cays. It has
been noted that most of the members are public servants whose main interest is to retain their
jobs, and therefore they fear opposing Cabinet's decisions on the Tobago Cays or at times they
make only token opposition to Cabinet's proposals. In aiming to please they do not provide the
best impartial advice. The following constraints, perceived as drawbacks to the Board
functionality were derived from interviews with key informants:
· Majority of members are civil servants, therefore their response to TCMP issues may be
biased towards government decision independently of park conservation needs
· Members are selected based on political party policy and not on technical qualification
· Members lack experience in dealing with an MPA and often lack knowledge of the area
32
· There is no system for calling regular meetings; therefore members cannot programme them
on their agenda or calendar of commitments.
· Absenteeism is a continuous malady affecting board members, including the chairman of the
board.
· There is little or no interaction between board members outside of board meetings regarding
the TCMP.
On the basis of the above, user groups have stated that the majority of members do not truly
represent their interests and they do not trust this entity. The communities therefore fear that
should this government-dominated management model continue they might eventually lose their
rights to conduct activities within the park, even if management is not privatised as previously
proposed.
9.2 Livelihoods, collective action and empowerment
User groups, CBOs and NGOs in the area are aware of the economic potential of the TCMP as a
revenue generator, both to the nation as a whole and specifically to the surrounding communities.
They are acutely aware of the key role it plays in their livelihoods, and the dependence on it of
the communities of Mayreau and Union as a whole, and therefore the need to protect such a
valuable resource. They are of the opinion that the government's neglect of the park is translated
into the lack of sufficient assigned resources, or effective legislation and enforcement provided
for an effective park management. In order to protect and conserve the TCMP, including their
livelihoods, local NGOs and CBOs have offered to collaborate with the government in the
management of the area; however such an offer has not yet been accepted. This is interpreted as
a fear of delegating power and decision-making authority to stakeholders. Stakeholders perceive
that government fears their empowerment could thwart whatever hidden agenda it seems to have
regarding the cays. There is little trust anywhere.
A main concern of user groups is the possibility of losing their livelihoods without having a
compensation scheme in place, or alternative livelihoods established for user groups, should the
Cays be handed over to foreign private management. Their insistence in establishing a
partnership with the government in the management of the Cays is partly a response to this
concern and also because it has been observed that the government seems more income-oriented
with regards to the management of the Cays. It has failed to emphasize the environmental
protection and conservation aspects of the Cay.
9.3 Differing stakeholder definitions
TCMP actors have different perspectives as to who constitutes a park stakeholder. Government
officials, in concordance with the McConney et al. (2003) definition, consider a stakeholder to be
any entity that benefits from the park and can have an impact on the natural resources.
Government has divided these stakeholders into two categories: service providers such as water
taxi operators, vendors, tour operators, or diver operators; and direct users of the park's natural
resources for recreational purposes. Within the latter category are all recreation seekers, be these
local or foreign visitors. However, for the longest time, the stakeholders are perceived to have
been assigned a passive role by government. Such a role is to accept and respect park regulations
drafted by the Board with no opportunity given to have their input included in the regulations.
33
Local communities seem to have redefined the concept as to who constitutes a stakeholder. From
their point of view they are the users of the park's resources. Their activities impact on the park
and they are also in turn impacted upon by park policies. However they refrain from considering
themselves stakeholders. From their standpoint stakeholders are considered to be any entity that
has a voice in the decision-making process of the park. By this limited definition they have
relegated themselves to park users making a livelihood with aspirations to become part of that
exclusive stakeholder circle which now only comprises the TCMP board and the SVG Cabinet.
Their perception however has not blinded them to the fact that they have a certain degree of
responsibility toward the park's conservation. Most users are respectful of the park regulations,
(e.g. respect the fishing prohibition), help clean and maintain the aesthetics of the area (e.g.
beach cleaning and tree planting), and are willing to cooperate with park management (e.g.
letting management know when visitors or locals break the rules). They think that this spirit of
cooperation needs to be capitalized on by a government that lacks the necessary resources to
invest in the park. Hence they should become stakeholders.
9.4 Local initiatives
There have been initiatives within the communities of Mayreau and Union Island to be part of
the decision-making process regarding the Tobago Cays and to contribute to the protection and
conservation of the area. The water taxi association's raison d'être continues to be the protection
of their livelihood, namely defending their right to continue to work within the park. Their offer
to government stands to aid in the voluntary patrol of the beaches and be part of the Board.
MEDO has gone a step further by developing a management plan for the area although,
recognizing their inability to implement the plan alone, they have formed an alliance with FOTC.
This alliance has been seen as a positive initiative from a community standpoint, however some
government officials perceive this as a destabilizing process, not leading toward effective TCMP
management.
Within the Grenadines, governmental presence is hardly felt, both in terms of providing
employment opportunities as well as law enforcement regulators. This is felt more acutely
within the park. As community livelihoods are being threatened, members tend to look for
alternatives to fill the vacuum, so important to protecting the resources, which they depend on
and create sources of income for the surrounding communities.
The communities see management of the park by foreign investors as an extension of
institutional control already existing in the area, an initiative that will continue to exclude and
impede the community in their struggle for survival. This struggle to eke out a living seems to
have awakened a patriotic sense of protecting what is perceived as a national birthright.
Community management of the park through the FOTC/MEDO alliance is seen as the solution to
allaying fears, and raising hopes that the park will remain in Vincentian hands. By contrast, they
remain reluctant about a management solely by the government, doubting the government's
ability to compromise and co-operate, to co-ordinate efforts and to play a more belligerent role in
management of the TCMP. In order for co-manage an area, however, there are a number issues
that need urgently to be addressed, as shown by some of the MPA characteristics in Table 9.4.
34
Table 9.2 Characteristics of the Tobago Cays Marine Park
Characteristic or type of information
Information available on the marine park
Basic Information
Management Status:
National Marine Park
Size (marine and terrestrial):
Approximately 58 acres
Biogeographic description:
Cluster of small Cays and shallow reef lagoons protected
by a large reef system in the Southern Grenadines
Legal Information
Legal establishment date of the MPA:
1997
Legislative instruments that created the MPA and
Statutory Rules and Order No. 40 establish and declared
govern its management:
the five islands of the Tobago Cays now formed the
Tobago Cays Marine Park
Statutory Rules and Order No. 26 Marine Parks (Tobago
Cays) Regulation enacted
Do these legislative instruments
Yes
include management regulations
Information on Institutional Arrangements
Agency or organization responsible for day-to-day
TCMP Board that is directly under the Prime Minister
management of the MPA:
office.
Other agencies or organizations with active roles in
Tobago Park Marine Park Management Board
management:
Tobago Cay Marine Park Management Office
Ministry or branch of Government with overall
SVG Cabinet
authority management:
Delegation of management responsibility to a
None so far
nongovernmental entity:
Mechanisms for regular stakeholder consultation and
They are no existing mechanism. Currently, however the
input:
government has engage in a community consultation
process (Sept, 2005) to discus user fees to be implemented
for the Park.
Efficiency of existing management
Management arrangements are constrain by lack of
Arrangements:
available human, technical and economic resources as well
as lack of effective stakeholder participation.
Information on Management
Stated management objectives:
No
Existing management plan:
Plan developed in 1995 is now under revision
Major activities carried out within the MPA:
Watercrafts, snorkelling, diving, vending
Conflicts exist between these activities:
No conflict
Active MPA management:
Little management at present
MPA funding:
Part of regular SVG government budget
Existing management programmes:
None
staff positions currently in existence:
Park manager, secretary, 3 rangers and 1 warden.
Enforcement of regulations:
Rangers are responsible for enforcement, however
enforcement in the area is practically nil
Major types of regulation:
Prohibition of any type of fishing
No squatting in the area
Used of zoning as a tool for management:
No zoning
Management programmes addressing livelihood issues Not presently
of local communities:
Socio-economic information
Communities within or adjacent to the MPAs
Mayreau, Canouan and Union Island
boundaries:
35
Characteristic or type of information
Information available on the marine park
Dependency for livelihood of persons from these
Substantial portion of the communities dependent on
communities or elsewhere on resources in the MPA
tourism
Major socio-economic activities of the areas
Tourism and water taxi operation
surrounding the MPA:
Importance of activities dependent on MPA resources
Very important
relative to other activities, e.g. farming
Portion of the population of adjacent communities that On average the communities are low income, a small
can roughly be considered to be living in poverty or at proportion are middle income but are not considered to be
risk
living in poverty
10 CONDITIONS FOR SUCCESSFUL CO-MANAGEMENT
The goal of the research is to determine if there are conditions already in place for successful co-
management of the Tobago Cays Marine Park, or if they are likely to be created. Specifically the
research is intended to identify major obstacles and determine what can contribute to successful
co-management of the TCMP In this chapter conclusions are presented based on the research
framework that guided the study.
10.1 Type of co-management
The research framework summarises the main types of co-management as consultative,
collaborative or cooperative and delegated. The management of the TCMP does not fit any of
these types. The Government has engaged in a top-down approach where Cabinet makes
decisions affecting the park and user groups. The management board could have established
itself as a partner within a co-management context, however it is composed mainly of civil
servants responding to government, and at best it appears to be a figurehead lacking any real
power. The government has not made any real effort to enter into a co-management process with
community-based organizations for the protection of the TCMP; however these organizations
continue with their lobbying efforts to assume a more active role in the park's management. If
they succeed, there may be the start of a more consultative approach, but it may fall short of true
co-management unless accompanied by a policy decision to share responsibility and authority.
10.2 Phase of co-management
The establishment of co-management can be seen as having three phases: pre-implementation,
implementation, and post-implementation. The pre-implementation phase includes problem
recognition, discussion, consensus building, seeking assistance, and project planning. The
implementation phase includes a variety of activities such as community entry, research,
organizing, education, plan and strategy, and plan implementation. Post-implementation includes
evaluation, phase-out, and operation of interventions (Berkes et al 2001).
Across the Caribbean it has been noted that pre-implementation is the most common phase to be
encountered, with few cases having reached the final phase. The TCMP, as stated above, is not
engaged in a co-management arrangement, therefore these phases do not currently relate to the
study area. However, it can be argued that the TCMP has a pre-implementation phase under
consideration. Both government and communities have realised a need for change, have discuss
changes to some extent and have developed new management ideas, however separately. What
36
then is the problem? It lies in the fact that the communities have done this among themselves
with the objective of protecting the environment while ensuring self-sustainability, whereas the
government has done it with a private investor seeking the increase of government revenue as it
main goal.
The TCMP needs this two-pronged "pre-implementation phase" to converge and the parties pool
their resources to benefit the park. Communities are daring to hope that the joint agreement
signed between the SVG government and several NGO's, which includes more community
involvement in protecting their livelihood plus the user fee consultation promised by the
government, is paving the way for, or is a first step towards a real pre-implementation stage.
10.3 Conditions for co-management
Over the last decade, research on co-management around the world has identified a number of
conditions that favours the successful implementation and performance of co-management. This
final section is based on outcomes from focus groups, interviews with key informants in both
mainland St. Vincent and the Grenadine islands and document analysis relevant to the case study
conditions in the context of the TCMP management activities. The variables were discussed and
rated by respondents according to the extent of how each was perceived. The findings of these
activities are presented in Table 10.1.
Table 10.1 Stakeholders' perceptions of critical conditions for co-management success
0 = absent; 1 = present but weak; 2 = present to a fair extent; 3 = strong feature of the park
CO-MANAGEMENT CONDITION
REMARKS
#
1. Clearly defined boundaries: of the
· Boundaries position may be geo referenced
0
resources; of the management area
· Boundaries points are awaiting Cabinet approval
· Park has never been zoned
2. Membership is clearly defined as to
· Local user groups does not see themselves as stakeholders
1
who really has a stake in the park (is
i.e. water taxi operators, divers
a stakeholder)
· Government is viewed as main if not sole stakeholder
3. There is a shared recognition of a
· User groups recognize problem and usually tell the Park
2
resource use problem that needs to be
manager what is going on,
addressed
· User groups are willing to contribute to solve the problems
· Groups are aware of source of problems
4. Clear objectives for management can
· Currently there is no state objectives to guide the
0
de defined based on the problems and
management plan
interests
· Objectives may be now stated in the new draft
management plan
· Draft is not universally known
5. Good fit between the scale of the
· Not sure as TCMP boundaries are yet to be recognized by
0
resources and feasible management
Cabinet
arrangements
6. Management approaches and
· Management plan does not call for regular review
1
measures are flexible to suit changing · Management plan has been revised previously suggesting
circumstance
flexibility in practice
· Degree of flexibility may be at the discretion of the Board
· Management response have proven to be excruciatingly
slow
37
CO-MANAGEMENT CONDITION
REMARKS
#
7. Cooperation exist, and is adequate, at · No cooperation between user groups and board
1
the resource user level and in
· Limited cooperation between manager and user groups
government, etc.
· On going cooperation between resource users
8. Leadership exists, and is adequate, at
· Leadership weak among management board
1
the resource user level and in
· Leaders arise within a given context
government etc.
· Leaders seem not to have successors
9. Group cohesion where fishers,
· Group cohesion is weak; expect leaders to be the active
1
managers and others can act
ones.
collectively within
10. There are mechanism for managing
· Conflicts are not really dealt with
1
conflicts within and among
· Enforcing agencies are usually called into play when
stakeholders groups
conflicts are present
· Park office personnel lack training in conflict management
11. Communication amongst the
· Information is manage /withheld by government
1
stakeholders is effective and there is
· User groups communicate among themselves
adequate networking
· User group communicate park related board representative
NGO's however do not observe any response.
12. Coordination between government
· Lack of coordination between government and user groups 1
and local community ad stakeholder
· Existing coordination among user groups
is effective
· Low degree of coordination between user groups and park
manager
13. Trust and mutual respect characterise · Lack of trust and respect from government to user groups
1
the relationships among the key
· Lack of trust towards the government
stakeholders
· Respect among user groups
· Lack of trust within specific sectoral groups i.e. between
vendors
· No perceived true respect from government
14. Organizational capacity exist for all
· Alliance formed by local NGO's (MEDO-FOTC) has the
1
stakeholders to participate effectively
capacity to organize for management and can also provide
in management
basic human resources, however they lack the necessary
financial resources to initiate management implementation
· Water taxi association lack management skill and access to
information set them at a disadvantage for active park
management.
· Government so far, has not demonstrate capacity to
organize for management and also lack logistic to execute
15. Adequate financial, and hence
· All involved entities seems to lack resources necessary for 1
physical, resources are available for
management implementation
management tasks
· Funding appears to be scarce or inaccessible
16. External agents provide support for
· Support committed by a joint TNC, CERMES and
1
management but do not encourage
OPAAL alliance encourage and provide training for
dependency
effective local management, this project implementation
however is in an initial phase.
· No other current supporting agency
17. Benefits of participation must exceed · Lack of participation does not make it possible to assess
0/1
costs from the levels of individuals
cost or benefits
up to larger groups
· Benefits of participation are foreseen by communities as
positive, cost is unclear
18. Individuals, groups affected by
· Decision making process follows a top-bottom approach
0
management arrangements are
· User groups are not encourage to participate
included in decision-making
38
CO-MANAGEMENT CONDITION
REMARKS
#
19. Management rules are enforceable by · Lack of personnel to enforce rules
0/1
resource users and the management
· Lack of enforcement structures to expedite the process
authority
· Fishers sometimes aid in rule enforcement by informing
anonymously on irregularities that affect the park. This is
done to protect their livelihood source.
· Voluntary compliance is high among park users
20. Legislation gives users some
· Draft legislation does not contemplate power sharing.
0
meaningful level of ownership or
· There is a lack of control over resource use.
control over the resource use
21. Legislation gives users authority to
· Draft legislation does not contemplate an active role for
0
make management decisions, perhaps
user groups
shared
22. Decentralization and delegation of
· Top down approach governing the Cay does not permit
0
authority is part of the policy of
power sharing
resource management
· All power in the hands of Cabinet
23. Co-management has a good social
· Local NGO's and user groups desire to participate in the
1
and cultural fit to the circumstances
management of the resource
of the situation
· Local NGO's and user groups does not expect the
government to assume things on its own, they are wishing
to be part of the solution
· Lack of governmental will to include user groups into park
management
· Governmental presence in the Grenadine is limited and
human resources are scarce, therefore co-management
appears to be a likely alternative.
10.3.1 Boundaries
The physical boundaries for the Marine Park have not been clearly established, there is a very
vague definition as to where those boundaries are. What exist, as stated in the ECLAC study
(ECLAC, 2002) is a physical boundary for a Tobago Cay conservation area. The Board's plan is
to propose specific coordinate that will outline the corners of the boundaries. The TCMP board
submitted a proposal to Cabinet, almost two years ago, to geo-reference four points that would
enclose the Tobago Cay Marine Park, Cabinet has not responded to this suggestion as yet.
10.3.2 Membership and stakeholders
The management of the TCMP favours a topdown approach. The communities have no impact
on the decisions being made on management of the resources and less so on the selection of
members sitting on the park board. There has been no real effort on the part of the government
to empower locals to assume more participatory roles in the park management. The communities
regard the government as the main stakeholder with the sole power to define who are to be board
members, regardless of their interest or knowledge in the TCMP. The Southern Grenadines
Water Taxi Association has lobbied for membership, since they perceive this as the step to take
in order to go from user group, as they consider themselves, to the stakeholder inner circle with
power to impact the decision making process. They are still awaiting Cabinet response.
39
10.3.3 Resource use problem
There is a high recognition of a number of potential threats to livelihood security, and in fact this
is one of the main factors motivating the Southern Grenadines water taxi operators to form an
association and seek a seat on the board. As it is, the park's fish population is dwindling due to
over-fishing in the past. Locals agree with the fishing restriction imposed on the park, however
there is still illegal fishing by locals and visitors. There seems to be a general consensus that
issues such as reef destruction due to sewage disposal from visiting yachts and indiscriminate
anchoring within the park need to be addressed. The terrestrial resource is also viewed as in
need of protection. The local population has made efforts to re-plant trees as well as carry on
beach cleanup (debris and solid waste) within the Tobago Cays.
10.3.4 Management objectives
The previous management plan had no stated objective. There is a draft management plan
awaiting Cabinet's approval. This plan has comprehensible stated goals and objectives; however
the board of directors are the ones that manage this information, user groups are expected to
follow whatever is stated in the plan once it is made known.
10.3.5 Scale of management
Scale of management cannot be definitely assessed until the park borders have been clearly
established. However there is a clear need for equipment and additional staff such as a marine
biologist and rangers in order to manage the park. There is also the need to train existing staff to
aid in the implementation of the TCMP management. In selecting members of the board, criteria
for selection should take into consideration adequate skills and knowledge of the management
area among others.
10.3.6 Management adaptation
Active management of the park is incipient. Clear management guidelines do not exist at present.
The board assumes that once park legislation is written and a management plan for the park is
approved and implemented there will be flexibility in management i.e. openness to adaptations in
response to relevant in situ necessities or changes that may arise in the area. An expected
drawback is the lack of autonomy the board will have in terms of making relevant decisions
couple with the extent to which their suggestions will be heeded by Cabinet, when response
mechanism may urgently need to put in place. This relationship will curtail the efficiency of such
flexibility. There is also a need to increase and train staff in order to monitor and improve the
TCMP management.
10.3.7 Cooperation
There is a lack of real buy-in by the user groups into the TCMP management process. This can
be attributed to the fact that the government i.e. Cabinet, is the ultimate decision-making entity
regarding the Tobago Cays. There is also a lack of knowledge or understanding of co-
management among the majority of users. There is therefore a need to teach locals what this
process entails and to promote environmental education activities. The Water Taxi Association
40
as well as MEDO and FOTC make known their willingness to share managerial activities with
the government for the park, with the protection of the area resources at the forefront of
cooperation; this idea however has not taken root within the governmental structure. On the
other hand PIRL has stated its interest in aiding with the management of the resource once
conditions were satisfactory. People in the area are at a loss and preoccupied as to what exactly
this statement means.
10.3.8 Leadership
Leadership and motivation of the stakeholders is critical. Within Mayreau, Union Island and St.
Vincent they are recognized leaders that are willing to contribute time and knowledge to assist
with the management of the Cays. There is also the observed phenomenon within the
communities of persons who have been key players in several organizations or been re-elected
over the years to direct an organization. This situation can be symptomatic of a leadership void
among the up-coming population or an unwillingness of old leaders to concede space to other
members. A workshop on leadership is necessary for community members and resource users as
well as fostering community empowerment.
10.3.9 Collective action
Marine resource management in the Grenadines does not have a strong tradition of collective
action. Often collective action is triggered by what is perceived to be a threat to livelihoods; once
such an event is noted the community tends to organize and get into action. There is a need for
strengthened local governance trough the establishment of a cooperation network between the
existing environmental NGO's and organizations in the area in order to be able to assume a
proactive attitude with respect to preserving the Cays and getting their voice heard, as well as the
establishment of awareness programs for the community.
10.3.10 Conflict management
Conflicts between user groups with regard to the use of the resources do not appear to be a major
issue. There is also no formal or informal conflict mechanisms set in place. If disputes arise
between a specific sector they are dealt with by group members. The park manager or organized
groups in the communities do not seem well prepared to manage conflicts should these emerge.
There is a subdued form of conflict between user groups and government in which the latter's
actions are distrusted and questioned such as the handing over of the Cays to PIRL or
establishing park regulations without consultations. There is a need to train resource managers
and users on conflict management.
10.3.11 Effective communication
There is a lack of transparency and accountability between the Board and the user groups. User
groups are aware of park decisions and activities when they encounter park rangers who inform
them of prohibited activities. Lines of communication need urgently to be improved.
41
10.3.12 Effective coordination
TCMP management reflects a top-down approach, leaving little space for coordination efforts
between government and local user groups. The main existing coordination is given between the
TCMP Board and Cabinet. Small-scale coordination effort between local communities and the
park manager happens on specific items of mutual interest. User groups are open to establishing
coordination links with the board; however this offer has not being accepted so far.
10.3.13 Trust and respect
Local NGO's and communities see the board as an extension of government rather than a true
care-taker of the resources within the marine park. The board is accountable to Cabinet and
lacks real decision-making power affecting the resources and resource users. There is no real
respect or trust for the board by the resource users. Nor is there a perceived trust or respect from
that organization towards resource users. There is however a level of trust and respect between
the user groups and the park manager and rangers, based on daily interaction, community ties
and perceived mutual interest in protecting the Tobago Cays.
10.3.14 Organizational capacity
The water taxi operators association and three local NGO's are the existing organized groups
relating directly to the Tobago Cays. Of these three of them have at their core the expectation of
shared management of the Tobago Cays. The dive shops in the Grenadines are in the process of
forming an association, and it is their hope that their group will permit them to have a voice
within the decision making process regarding the Tobago Cays, since these decision directly
affect their livelihood. Two of the organizations were established within the period of what is
locally described as the Tobago crisis the PIRLgovernment partnership in order to protect
the resource and resource users, and it is also one of the main reasons that prompted the divers to
get organize. The community has proven its capacity to get organized, what is needed now is to
built-up organizational and leadership skills inter alia in order to strengthen and expand such
organizations so that, given the opportunity, they will be capable of effective participation in
MPA management.
10.3.15 Financial resources
The TCMP does not have adequate financial sustainability. Park management is inadequate, and
hindered by insufficient human resources and lack of necessary equipment. The assigned
governmental budget EC$200,000 does not, by far cover the needs of the park. And in spite
of all this there is still no self-financing mechanism or strategy in place to complement the
assigned budget. Cabinet is yet to respond to suggestions from the Board that will enable the
park to become self-sustainable. According to the ECLAC report, MEDO management proposal
and other expert appraisals, given the number of visitors to the Tobago Cays, the park has the
potential to become self-sustaining once the government puts in place the necessary mechanisms.
10.3.16 External agents
At present there are no external agents acting within or financing the management of the park.
42
Previously several agencies have been involved, such as the French cooperation that financed the
park management building in Union Island. Currently an alliance of several projects with interest
in the development and sustainability of the TCMP, facilitated by different parties i.e. OECS,
TNC and CERMES, has an agreement with the SVG government to assume different items of
the marine park. At present park authorities and communities have high expectations for these
investments and depend heavily on them for an initial park management implementation. It is
also hoped that external agents can influence the TCMP legislation for stakeholders to have an
active participation in TCMP's management. However user groups, local NGO's as well as park
management do not envision long term dependency once all necessary structures are in place.
10.3.17 Net benefit
The absence of a co-management process within the MPA management makes it practically
impossible to determine net benefit that can be accrued by stakeholders. Direct positive
economic benefit is currently observed for all stakeholders involved as well as for the
community as a whole due to spin off effect of income generated by activities within the area.
The absence of economical benefit for stakeholders will be a serious constraint in accepting a co-
management approach since the park is a source of direct and indirect livelihood for the
surrounding communities.
10.3.18 Representation in decision-making
There is concern within the nearby communities that their interest water taxis operators,
businesses and general public among others are not adequately represented within the decision
making realm. The growing concern is that the people selected to represent certain sectors on the
acting board mainly public service people do not really respond to the needs of the people
they are representing but rather are concern more with responding to Cabinets demands. The
perception is that communication occurs at board level, without the public's knowledge, unless
the outcomes of those discussions are made public; or there is leakage of the decision, as in the
case of the PIRL Cay management. In general, there is a lack of confidence in most of the
stakeholders' representatives or in their ability to make accurate decisions entailing the
protection of the Cays and the livelihood of the people.
10.3.19 Enforcement
This is a very weak aspect within the park management. Illegal fishing from both foreign visitors
and locals is still on going in the park, albeit on a small scale. Although prohibited, campers are
sometime found on the cays with fishing equipment. The Park Manager does not possess
sufficient personnel or equipment to patrol the area. Coast guard patrols are few and far between.
There is a need for enforcement of existing mechanisms. There is a need to educate both locals
and visitors about the MPA's existing regulations. Water taxi operators have informally
collaborated with the park manager in order to minimize illegal activities. They have also
expressed their desire to formalize this collaboration and have put forth suggestion as to how to
execute this arrangement; these proposals however, have not been accepted.
43
10.3.20 Property rights
Only some aspects TCMP property rights are clear and well-defined. In terms of space allocation
and use rights, within the Cays vendors have selected areas where they display their goods and
these spaces are respected by others. The persistence of illegal fishing shows that fishers do not
accept their State-mandated exclusion and that there remains an open access fishery. Challenges
to the State's decision to privatise management through lease suggest that interested parties see
other options for property regimes, perhaps including communal rights.
10.3.21 Sharing decision-making
The current TCMP management approach makes no allowances for direct user groups
intervention for users group in the decision making process. Main decisions regarding the park
are taken by Cabinet. The Board offer suggestions to Cabinet and can make decision such as
hiring and firing park personnel, but basically that is the extent of their autonomy. The actual
board has submitted suggestions on user fees, mooring, boundaries and demarcation almost a
year ago but have received no response from Cabinet. The incoming board will, in all
probability, be discussing similar issues as their predecessor.
10.3.22 Decentralization and delegation
There is no real delegation or decentralization of responsibility or authority by the state towards
the resource users or management entities. The government needs to promote collaboration
between all stakeholder/user groups, strengthen local governance, and to realize the benefits and
challenges that it can accrue from such activities. Community empowerment has proven to be an
asset for other MPAs in the Caribbean i.e. Saba Marine Park in the Netherlands Antilles or
Gladden Spit Marine Reserve in Belize, and given the opportunity, may prove to be so for the
TCMP, seen that community base organizations and local NGO's have publicly stated their
willingness to actively participate in the management of the area. User groups and local
organizations are willing and waiting to enter into a management partnership with the
government in order to share responsibility and assume an active role in the management of the
park. Given this community attitude co-management of the area has a strong possibility of
succeeding once the government is willing to enter into such a partnership.
10.3.23 Social and cultural fit
The government seems averse to a co-management process for the TCMP. Decision making
power is in the hands of Cabinet, which has not proven to be open to the idea of sharing park
management with any grass root entity. Community members and organized groups have
demanded via callin radio programmes, newspaper articles, town meetings and other popular
participatory interventions to have a voice in the management of the park. A local NGO
presented the government with a management plan proposal, given that they may not in
themselves have the necessary personnel they have therefore agreed to form alliances with
another local NGO whose members are extremely skilled in a diversity of areas and collaborate
in the management of the park. Their focus was less on income generating and more on resource
protection as oppose to the general perception of the government, which leans more toward
income generation. There is a climate of community expectation that government should finally
44
be entering into a co-management partnership which grass roots organizations and their hope that
external agents help accomplish this goal.
10.4 Priority action
The TCMP has been undergoing severe marine and land degradation. As intensity and frequency
of natural disasters increase there is also the need to revamp the park management system by
establishing environmentally and user-friendly mechanism that will improve services provided
for visitors as well as for the management of resources in the area.
Priority action items that need to be addressed in order to protect the TCMP and improve park
management as reported by respondents include:
· Include community involvement
· Increase stakeholders representation on the TCMP management board
· Promote empowerment and organization of stakeholders,
· Improve environmental and participatory education programming,
· Improve transparency and accountability of TCMP management Board and Cabinet,
· Establish an autonomous Board
· Create a TCMP revenue account independent from the consolidated fund
· Establish self-financing mechanisms,
· Improve trust and respect between the Board and stakeholders,
· Increase and train park management personnel
· Strengthen support mechanism for TCMP monitoring, control and surveillance.
There is a perceived lack of governmental will to establish a co-management arrangement for the
TCMP. The selected board is the primary entity establish to deal with issues pertaining to the
park; however there are not permitted to make substantial decisions affecting the Cays, as these
have to be made by Cabinet. The drawback is that the Board suggestions submitted to Cabinet
usually take anywhere from six months to almost two years before a response is obtained for any
given item. The park management is starved yet there seem to be no hurry to respond to this
situation. NGO's such as MEDO and FOTC that are willing to cooperate with the government
are not given any real opportunity. In the meantime, the TCMP will continue to deteriorate. The
government needs to capitalize on the spirit of cooperation demonstrated by local NGO's and
nearby communities in order to ensure that the park management is effective, equitable and
sustainable.
45
11 REFERENCES
Arnstein, S. 1969. A ladder of citizen participation. American Institute of Planners 35:216-224.
Ashley, C. and D. Carney. 1999. Sustainable livelihoods: lessons from early experience. DFID,
UK. 55pp
Baird, I. G. 2000. Integrating community-based fisheries co-management and protected areas
management in Laos PDR: Opportunities for advancement and obstacles to implementation.
Evaluating Eden Series Discussion Paper No.14. London IIED. 17 pp.
Baldwin, K. 2005. Implementing "Reef Check" monitoring programme in the country of
St. Vincent and the Grenadines for long-term sustainability. Draft CERMES report.
Berkes, F., R. Mahon, P. McConney, R. Pollnac and R. Pomeroy. 2001. Managing small-scale
fisheries: alternative directions and methods. International Development Research Centre,
Canada. 320pp
Brown, D.A.V. 2001. Poverty in the Caribbean. On-line lecture. University of the West Indies,
St. Augustine Campus. [Web doc.]
Brown, D.N. and R.S. Pomeroy. 1999. Co-management of Caribbean Community (CARICOM)
fisheries. Marine Policy 23:549-570.
CANARI. 1998. Marine Protected Areas In The Eastern Caribbean: A Tourism Market Study.
CANARI Technical Report Nº 251
CANARI. 1999. Principles of Participation and Co-management: A Workshop for Professionals.
CANARI Technical Report No. 260:24 pp
CANARI, 2000. Participatory resource management approaches for managers and decision-
makers. Week 1: Building institutions for participatory resource management. CANARI
Workshop Report. 3-7 July, 2000, Falmouth, Antigua
CANARI, 2001. Participatory resource management approaches for managers and decision-
makers. Week 2: Designing participatory institutions for effective management. CANARI
Workshop Report. 22-26 January, 2001, Tobago
CANARI and National Environment Trust. 1999. Training Course on Skills and Methods for
Participatory and Collaborative Natural Resource Management, Jamaica 3-14 May 1999.
CANARI Technical Report No. 264:31 pp
Canouan. http://www.svgair.com/canouan.html
Carney, D. ed.1998. Sustainable rural livelihoods: what contribution can we make? DFID,
London. 213 pp.
CCA. 2001. Report of the Executive Workshop on Co-management (28 - 29 August 2001) and
Executive Workshop on Education and Outreach (30 August 2001), hosted by the Toledo
Association for Sustainable Tourism and Empowerment (TASTE) in Punta Gorda, Belize.
Report of the Coastal and Marine Management Program (CaMMP) of the Caribbean
Conservation Association. 42pp.
Centre for Development Studies. 2000. DfID Support for Pro-Poor Civil Society Organisations:
A Good Practice Guide. Manuscript. Department of Economics and International
Development, University of Bath
CEP. 1996. Status of Protected Area Systems in the Wider Caribbean Region. Country profiles
St. Vincent and the Grenadines. Technical Report No. 36 [Web Doc.]
Chakalall, B., R. Mahon, and P. McConney. 1998. Current issues in fisheries governance in the
Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Marine Policy 22: 29-44.
46
Charles, E. 2001. Options for the participation of civil society in environmental management and
sustainable development. Natural Resource Management Series Technical Paper No. 3.
OECS-NRMU. 20pp.
Comley, J, M. Mason, K. Cordice and P. Raines. Tobago Cay Marine Biodiversity Conservation
Project. 2002. Summary Report. St. Vincent and the Grenadines.
Culzac-Wilson, Lystra. 2003. St. Vincent and the Grenadines: Report to the Regional
Consultation on SIDS Specific Issues. 94pp.
Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Emerging Markets. Tourism Sector Study: St. Vincent and the
Grenadines. 9pp. [Web Doc.]
DFID-NRSP. 2001. Locating a poverty focus in natural resources systems research. DFID. 12pp.
Dorward, A., S. Anderson, S. Clark, B. Keane and J. Moguel. 2001. Asset Functions and
Livelihood Strategies: A Framework for Pro-Poor Analysis, Policy and Practice 1.
Contributed Paper to EAAE Seminar on Livelihoods and Rural Poverty, September 2001.
[Web doc.]
Eastern Caribbean Central Bank. 2003. Report and Statements of Account for the financial year
ended March 2003. June, 2003. 141pp
ECLAC. 2002. St. Vincent and the Grenadines: Evaluation of the Tobago Cays Marine Park.
49pp.
FAO. 2002. Fishery County Profile: Information on Fisheries management in the Saint Vincent
and the Grenadines. April 2002. FAO Rome. [Web Doc.]
Finlay, J.A. 1996. Community-level sea use management in the Grenada beach seine net fishery:
current practices and management recommendations. M.Sc.Thesis, University of the West
Indies, Cave Hill, Barbados
Fisheries Division. 1997. Barbados Fisheries Management Plan, Schemes for the management
and development of fisheries in the waters of Barbados. Ministry of Agriculture and Rural
Development, Barbados, 62 pp.
Fisheries Division. 2004. Corporate Plan and Advance Proposals, Fiscal Years 2005 2007.
Ministry of Agriculture, Lands and Fisheries, St. Vincent and the Grenadines. 39pp
French Cooperation Program. 1994. Case study on coastal and marine ecosystem of St. Vincent
and the Grenadines with special emphasis on the Tobago Cays National Park. St. Vincent.
12pp.
Geoghegan, T. and A. Smith. 1998. Conservation and sustainable livelihoods: collaborative
management of the Mankòtè Mangrove, St. Lucia. 16 pp.
Geoghegan, T., A. Smith, and K. Thacker. 2001. Characterization of Caribbean marine protected
areas: an analysis of ecological, organizational, and socio-economic factors. CANARI
Technical Report No. 287.
George, S. and W. Joseph. 1999. A new participatory approach toward sea urchin management
in St. Lucia, West Indies. Proc. Gulf Caribbean Fisheries Institute 46: 197-206.
FOTC. 2004. Educational Forum on the Tobago Cay Marine Park. FOTC Forum Report. 24 - 26
April, Union Island and Kingston St. Vincent and the Grenadines.
Government of Barbados.1993. Development plan 1993-2000. Government Printing Dept.,
Bridgetown, Barbados
Heyman, W. and T, Hyatt. 1996. An analysis of commercial and sport fishing in the proposed
Port Honduras Marine Reserve. Belize Center for Environmental Studies. 51pp
Heyman, W and R. Graham (eds). 2000. The voice of the fishermen of southern Belize. TIDE
Punta Gorda, 44 pp
47
ICLARM and IFM. 1998. Analysis of Co-Management Arrangements in Fisheries and Related
Coastal Resources: A Research Framework. Report Prepared by the Coastal Resources Co-
Management Research Project Core Staff at the International Centre for Living Aquatic
Resources Management (ICLARM) and Institute for Fisheries Management and Coastal
Community Development (IFM): 21pp.
Jacobs, N. 1998. The Fisheries Advisory Board of Belize a case study. Unpublished manuscript
presented at the CFRAMP Regional Fishery Management Planning Workshop 22-24 April,
Barbados
Jentoft, S. 1985. Models of fishery development: the cooperative approach. Marine Policy 9:322-
331.
Kairi Consultants. 1996. Poverty assessment report St. Vincent and the Grenadines. Report to the
Caribbean Development Bank.
Kelleher, G. and R. Kenchington. 1992. Guidelines for Establishing Marine Protected Areas. A
Marine Conservation and Development Report. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 79pp.
Kuperan, K and N.M.R. Abdullah. 1994. Small-scale coastal fisheries and co-management.
Marine Policy 18:306-313.
Kurien, J. 1988. The role of fishermen's organizations in fisheries management of developing
countries (with particular reference to the Indo-Pacific region). FAO Fish. Tech. Pap. No.
300.
Mahon, R. 1996. Local Area Development and Environmental Management Plan for Union
Island, Mayreau and Tobago Cays (phase I): literature review and identification of interested
non governmental parties. St. Vincent and the Grenadines.
Mahon, R., S. Almerigi, P. McConney, C. Parker and L. Brewster. 2003. Participatory
methodology used for sea urchin co-management in Barbados. Ocean and Coastal
Management. 46: 1-25.
McConney, P.A. 1998. Using "common science' in co-management. Proc. Gulf Carib. Fish.
Inst.50: 1115-1121.
McConney, P.A. 1999. Organising fisherfolk in Barbados without completing a clean round.
Proc. Gulf Carib. Fish. Inst. 52: 290-299.
McConney, P.A. and R. Mahon 1998. Introducing fishery management planning to Barbados.
Ocean and Coastal Management 39: 189-195.
McConney, P.A., A. Atapattu and D. Leslie.1998. Organizing fisherfolk in Barbados. Proc. Gulf
Carib. Fish. Inst. 51: 299-308.
MEDO. 2003. A Management Proposal for the Tobago Cay Marine Park, St. Vincent and the
Grenadines. September 2003.
Mohammed, E., Straker, L.E., Jardine, C. 2003. St Vincent and the Grenadines: Reconstructed
fisheris catches and fishing effort, 1942-2001. In: Zeller, D., Booth, S., Mohammed, E.,
Pauly, D. (Eds.), From Mexico to Brazil: Central Atlantic fisheries catch trends and
ecosystem models. FCRR 11(6), pp. 95-116.
Neilson, J. N., K. A. Aiken, and R. Mahon. 1999. Potential yield estimates for reef and slope
fisheries: a review of approaches and their limitations with special reference to the
Caribbean. Proc. Gulf. Carib. Fish. Instit. 46:360-376.
Noble, B. F. 2000. Institutional criteria for co-management. Marine Policy 24: 69-77.
Normann, A. K., J. Raakjær Nielsen and S. Sverdrup-Jensen (eds.) 1998. Fisheries Co-
management in Africa. Proceedings from a regional workshop on fisheries co-management
48
research held 18-20 March 1997 at Boadzulu Lakeshore Resort, Mangochi, Malawi.
Fisheries Co-management Research Project, Research Report No. 12.
OECS: Protected Areas and Associated Sustainable Livelihoods Project. Annex 13: Social
assessment and public participation. December 2003.
Palm Island Limited Resort. 2004. Strategic Alliance Agreement for the Protection and
Preservation of Tobago Cays Marine Park. St. Vincent. 25pp.
Pinkerton, E., ed. 1989. Co-operative management of local fisheries: new directions for
improving management and community development. University of British Columbia Press,
Vancouver.
Pomeroy, R.S. 1994 [ed.]. Community management and common property of coastal fisheries in
Asia and the Pacific: concepts, methods and experiences. ICLARM, Manila, Philippines: 188
pp.
Pomeroy, R.S. 1998. A process for community-based co-management. AFSSRN News.
ICLARM Contribution #1448.
Pomeroy, R.S. 2001. Devolution and Fisheries Co-management. In R. Meinzen-Dick, A. Knox
and M. Di Gregorio (eds.) Collective Action, Property Rights and Devolution of Natural
Resource Management Exchange of Knowledge and Implications for Policy. Zentralstelle
fur Ernahrung und Landwirtschaft, Feldafing, Germany.
Pomeroy, R.S. and F. Berkes. 1997. Two to tango: the role of government in fisheries co-
management. Marine Policy, 21 (5): pp. 465-480.
Pomeroy, R.S. and M.B. Carlos. 1997. Community-Based Coastal Resource Management in the
Philippines: A Review and Evaluation of Programs and Projects, 1984-1994. Marine Policy.
Vol. 21, No. 5: 445-464.
Pomeroy, R. S. and M. J. Williams. 1994. Fisheries Co-management and Small-scale Fisheries:
A policy brief. International Centre for Living Aquatic Resource Management, Manilla,
15pp.
Pomeroy, R.S., B.M. Katon and I. Harkes. 2001. Conditions affecting the success of fisheries co-
management: lessons from Asia. Marine Policy.25: 197-208
Poverty Reduction Task Force. 2003. St. Vincent and the Grenadines: Interim Poverty Reduction
Strategy. Final Revision. 71pp.
Renard, Y. 1991. Institutional challenges for community-based management in the Caribbean.
Nature and Resources 27(4): 4-9.
Renard, Y. 2000. Case of the Soufriere Marine Management Area (SMMA), St. Lucia. Prepared
for the Seminar Integrating Stakeholders in Participatory Natural Resource Management,
Kingston, Jamaica, April 2000. CANARI Technical Report No. 285: 8pp
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. 1997. Act N0. 9 of 1997. Marine Parks Act.
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. 1997. Statutory Rules and Orders. N0. 40. Gazetted 23rd
December, 1997. Marine Parks (Tobago Cays) Declaration Order.
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. 1998. Statutory Rules and Orders. N0. 26. Gazetted 08th
July, 1998. Marine parks (Tobago Cay) Regulations.
Simmons and Associates. 2000. Natural biodiversity strategy and action plan for St. Vincent and
the Grenadines. St. Vincent and the Grenadines.
Sverdrup-Jensen, S. & J. Nielsen 1999. Co-Management in small-scale fisheries - a synthesis of
Sothern and West African experiences. Institute for Fisheries Management and Coastal
Community Development (IFM). 23pp.
49
The official website of the government of St. Vincent and the Grenadines.
http://www.gov.vc/govt/index.asp
TNC. 2005. St. Vincent & the Grenadines and Grenada. Parks in Peril Program (2002-2007)
Workplan: Oct. 05 Sept. 06.
Tobago Cays at the Crossroads in Caribbean Compass. October 2003.
http://www.caribbeancompass.com/crossroads.htm
Tobago Cays Marine Park. Management Plan. August 1998.
Tobago Cays Marine Park. Management Plan Revisions. July 2000.
UNIFEM. http://www.unifem.org/
Previous coastal co-management case studies and other products
McConney, P. 2003. Grenada case study: legalisation of beach seine traditional rules at
Gouyave. Caribbean Coastal Co-management Guidelines Project. Caribbean Conservation
Association, Barbados. 70pp.
McConney, P. 2003. Grenada case study: the lobster fishery at Sauteurs. Caribbean Coastal Co-
management Guidelines Project. Caribbean Conservation Association, Barbados. 65pp.
McConney, P., R. Mahon and C. Parker. 2003. Barbados case study: the sea egg fishery.
Caribbean Coastal Co-management Guidelines Project. Caribbean Conservation Association,
Barbados. 74pp.
McConney, P., R. Mahon and H. Oxenford. 2003. Barbados case study: the Fisheries Advisory
Committee. Caribbean Coastal Co-management Guidelines Project. Caribbean Conservation
Association, Barbados. 77pp.
McConney, P., R. Mahon and R. Pomeroy. 2003. Belize case study: Fisheries Advisory Board in
the context of integrated coastal management. Caribbean Coastal Co-management Guidelines
Project. Caribbean Conservation Association, Barbados. 70pp.
Pomeroy, R.S. and T. Goetze. 2003. Belize case study: Marine protected areas co-managed by
Friends of Nature. Caribbean Coastal Co-management Guidelines Project. Caribbean
Conservation Association, Barbados. 69p.
Pomeroy, R., P. McConney and R. Mahon. 2003. Comparative analysis of coastal resource co-
management in the Caribbean. Caribbean Coastal Co-management Guidelines Project.
Caribbean Conservation Association, Barbados. 30pp
50
12 APPENDIX: FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW GUIDE
Objectives of the Session.
General Objective:
Determine what conditions are favourable, or not favourable, for the successful co-management
of the Tobago Cays Marine Park
Specific Objectives:
· To determine perceptions and attitudes related to co-management, including what type of co-
management people want, if any at all
· To evaluate the level of knowledge of the groups on various co-management processes.
· To define perceptions of conditions favourable for successful co-management and how they
may be strengthened, if necessary To define perceptions of possible obstacles that may
inhibit the co-management process, and how they may be overcome.
· To define the expected roles and interests of identified stakeholders within processes of co-
managing the TCMP.
METHODOLOGICAL INSTRUMENT:
First Stage
Introduction: Explain the objectives of this work session, the focus group technique and the
usefulness of the information. Create an environment of trust, respect and common purpose and
common purpose among the participants.
Time: 2 hours
Second Stage.
Establish the commitments and basic agreements, "the rules of the game"
Time: 5 min
Procedure:
Present the proposal as to what will be the rules of the game for the work session, emphasize that
the commitments are fundamental to achieve the objectives of the work.
Third Stage.
Application of the guide for the focus group
Time: 2 hours
Open the discussion around the concept of comanagement its types and phases and the need to
establish certain conditions for its success outlining the identified conditions.
51
Boundaries
· What are the boundaries of the entire TCMP
· How were these set up/defined
Membership and stakeholders
· Who are the actual stakeholders in the management of the Tobago Cays
· How are they defined/selected
· Other persons considered by the group to be included as a stakeholder why and their
proposed role
· Actual stakeholders that should be excluded and why
Resource User problem
· Have you experience any problem with other users of the TCMP
· What are the main sources/causes of the problems, if any?
· What type of threats these problems pose to the TCMP users?
Management objectives
· What are the objectives of the TCMP
· Are objectives comprehensible and achievable, why/why not?
Scale of management
· Is the size of the marine park manageable, why?
· Is there need of additional staff? Why? What sort of professionals?
· Is zonation of the park an issue?
Management adaptation
· Is there a system in place to monitor and evaluate TCMP management plan?
· Is the board open to changes regarding TCMP management?
· How often is the management plan review?
Cooperation
· What sort of cooperation exists between the different resource users or stakeholders?
· what sort of cooperation exist between the government and NGO's
· What motivates or constrains cooperation?
Leadership
· How important is leadership in the management of TCMP?
· What level/type of leadership exist in the management of the park?
· Who is actually leading the management of the Tobago Park, why?
Collective action
· How are decisions taken regarding management of the TCMP?
· Are there any rules or regulations defining how decisions should be reached?
· Can organized group motivate decisions regarding TCMP management
52
Conflict management
· Are there any specific way to deal with conflicts when/if these should arise
· Who do you think should try to solve the problems within the TCMP?
· What sorts of conflict management experience exist in the area/How have conflicts being
solve in the past?
Effective communication
· What would you consider to be an effective communication between stakeholders involved
in the TCMP?
· Basing on the above how would you consider the existing communication
· What can you suggest to better the communication/a better communication method
· Are stakeholders opinion considered? (This may or may not come out in the above questions)
· Is information shared by all involved? (same as above)
Effective Coordination
· What type of coordination exist between organizations/institutions located in SVG and
Grenada
· What type of coordination exists between government and other stakeholders?
· When or on what occasion is coordination more effective
Trust and respect
· Is there a climate of mutual respect between stakeholders?
· Between GO's, NGO'S and other user groups?
Organizational capacity
· What are the existing capacity to organized in order to protect the TCMP
· How are stakeholders or users organized?
· Who or how are they represented if they are not organized?
Financial resources/External agents
· Is there adequate resources/ finance to invest in the protection of the TCMP
· Who is actually financing
· What agency administrate the management of TCMP
· What Specific budget is assign to the TCMP management,
· How is the budget distributed?
· What strategy is there to access financing
Net Benefit
· What benefits does the stakeholders get off/from the TCMP
· Does benefit exceed the cost of maintaining the park? Describe
· What are the expected outcome of the TCMP
· Positive vs. negative impact
Representation in decision-making
· How are stakeholders represented in the management of the park
53
· Does the stakeholders/user groups feel represented, describe
· What are the mechanism to include stakeholders within this process
· Are stakeholders part of the overall decision making process of is there specific area where
they feel excluded
Enforcement
· What are the main rules and regulation governing the TCMP
· Are these enforced? Describe
· Are the existing enforcement mechanism sufficient, describe?
· Who are the enforcing agencies voluntary/employed?
Property rights
· Are there any use rights
· Is there any specific rights for any specific user group be these in law or customary
Sharing decision-making
· How are decisions affecting the park and users group taken
· Are there provision/mechanism to include all stakeholders
· At what level are decision making share
Decentralization and delegation
· What are the governmental agencies involved in the management of the park/role
· What is the role of the NGO's and other stakeholders in this process
· How can neighbouring communities get involve in this process
· How does collaboration for management of the park work
Social and cultural fit
· How would you describe the civil society in the area
· What forms of participation does user groups and inhabitants choose to demonstrate their
feeling/perception/view regarding the management of the Tobago Cays
· With regard to the TCMP are people more resource management or income oriented,
describe.
· How can or have the group contribute to the management of the TCMP
· What do you see as the role of the group and the role of the government in the management
of the TCMP
Fourth Stage: Closing
Time: 10 min.
Procedure.
Thank participants and ask if they have any remarks they would like to add, or questions to ask.
Make sure list of participants and their individual profiles are collected.
54