Content uploaded by Jimmy Masagca
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Jimmy Masagca on Apr 17, 2021
Content may be subject to copyright.
INTRODUCTION
Marine protected areas (MPAs) are increasingly
established worldwide (Toropova et al. 2010) and the most
extensively implemented fisheries management and
conservation tool in the Philippines (Horigue et al. 2012) for
the governance of coastal areas and oceans. Referred to as
sanctuaries or marine fishery reserves-sanctuary or MFR-S
(see Bradecina & Nieves 2006, Soliman et al. 2004, Crawford,
Balgos & Pagdilao 2000), these protected marine spaces
depend on the wide range of goals and objectives. The
definition of MPAs, as provided by the International Union for
Conservation of Nature (IUCN 1988), is “Any area of
intertidal or sub-tidal terrain, together with its overlying water
and associated flora, fauna, historical and cultural features,
which has been reserved by law or other effective means to
protect part or all of the enclosed environment.” MPAs are
established in order to sustain fisheries and protect
biodiversity. According to (Roberts et al., 2001) marine
reserves can play a key role in supporting fisheries. Most
MPAs have been established and managed by communities
together with local governments in a variety of community-
based and co-management schemes (Horigue, Alino et al.
2012), thus the unofficial phrase community protected marine
spaces. This approach has proven successful in gaining
community acceptance and achieving local-scale fisheries and
conservation objectives. The community-based scheme gave
the opportunity and justified why we attempted to use said
phrase here but for consistency and in accordance with IUCN
terminologies, we use MPA.
MPAs in the Philippines have been established for
conservation and protection of fishery resources/biodiversity,
for cultural and historical purposes, for aesthetic reasons, and
for research and educational concerns (Miclat & Ingles 2004).
For most (about 70%), however, the major objective is to
protect resources within the MPA to enhance fisheries
63
Stakeholder management in marine protected areas of
Catanduanes Island, Philippines
Jimmy T. Masagca*
Catanduanes State University, Virac 4800, Catanduanes, Philippines
Abstract
The management of Marine Protected Areas (MPA) or Community Managed Marine Spaces
(CMMS) in Catanduanes island, Philippines has increasingly gained interest among marine
conservationists. Looking into the benefits, there are several attempts to explain whether
effectiveness of these spaces is achieved in the context of conservation, maximizing stakeholders
participation, poverty alleviation and sustainable development. This paper looks into how
contextualization in the governance of community protected marine spaces in the island province of
Catanduanes, Bicol Region by focusing on effective stakeholder management and managing
stakeholder inputs. Two examples from Catanduanes are presented here: (1) Kalapadan Bay Area
(KBA) MPA in Baras and (2) Agojo Point Fish Sanctuary and Marine Reserve, San Andres.
Analysis based on SID-SEN-SIN Model Concepts on stakeholders’ identification, engagement and
inputs is discussed here and includes the presentation of an on-going program/project of the
Municipality of Baras - Catanduanes State University co-management or LGU-Academe Partnership
contributing the effective early stakeholders’ engagement in marine spaces protection of the island
province.
Key words: Community Protected Marine Spaces (CPMS), Marine Protected areas (MPAs),
stakeholders, fish sanctuary, Catanduanes
* E-mail: jtibarmasagca@gmail.com
Symposium Proceedings
Kuroshio Science 12-1, 63-71, 2018
production in neighboring waters (Campos & Alino 2008,
Alcala & Alino 2009). Reports on the MPAs in the Philippines
(Campos & Aliño 2008; Bleakley & Wells 1995) reveal that in
terms of management there are only about 10 to 15% of these
more than 1,300 protected areas had been managed effectively.
Of recent, Horigue et al. (2012) discloses that about 20-30%
of the MPAs are now effective. It was divulged by Weeks et
al. (2009) that despite the success of community-based
approaches to the MPAs in the country, the strategy will not be
able to meet the conservation targets. While there is an urgent
need to scale up MPAs to form networks in order to improve
individual MPAs in Catanduanes, there are other more
pressing issues that must be addressed. For instance,
enforcement and implementation of MPAs legalized under the
local governments of the province have to be done. Likewise,
aspects on understanding the status of stakeholders’
engagement in the MPAs of the province have to be dealt with
prior to the forming of alliance or networks. Several reports
reveal that collective action and sharing of information can
improve effectiveness in managing MPAs.
Engaging stakeholders in MPA is critical for ensuring the
long-term success of this conservation tool. It is said that
participatory decision-making leads to smoother enforcement
of MPAs legalized by local governments. Expectedly, there
will be enhanced compliance with regulations for community
managed MPAs and at the same time, while also promoting
the livelihood and ensuring equity or fairness among the local
communities. In spite of the evidences that effective
stakeholder engagement in MPAs in other parts of the country,
reports about stakeholder management and engagement about
MPAs in Catanduanes are few and need to be probed so that
MPA enforcement will not fail because of poor engagement
processes. This study looked into the practices in stakeholder
engagement, and how they have been applied to the
management MPA in Agojo and another in the municipality of
Baras which is about to be enforced. We also propose here an
early engagement scheme for Kalapadan MPA which follows
the protocols for marine spatial planning (Pomeroy & Devoure
2008) with the added home grown process in enhancing
stakeholder engagements.
METHODOLOGY
We appraised extant literature from PhilJol, eLib,
Scopus, SciDirect, Emerald, etc. and gathered official
documents, conference reports, unpublished or under review
papers and news clippings about the existing MPAs on
engagement and decision-making processes in the island
province of Catanduanes. We tried to organize the materials
on relevant local legislations or ordinances related to MPA
establishment, management and institutional collaboration.
Only two MPAs (implemented and to be implemented) are
considered here, namely: Agojo MPA and Kalapadan MPA.
These include marine reserves, sanctuaries, and no-take areas).
We also conducted semi-structured qualitative key informant
interviews in the said locations that centered on stakeholder
management particularly on stakeholder identification (SID),
stakeholder inputs (SIN) and stakeholder engagement (SEN).
The methods used to achieve these goals also include
stakeholder meetings, and a focus group discussion. Key
informants consisted of local government officials, members
of mangrove associations, women groups, non-government
organizations, youth organizations and academics from the
local state college.
An examination of two examples namely, the Agojo
MPA and Kalapadan MPA were done in order to demonstrate
how these stakeholder engagement practices were applied in
different contexts. Lessons learned through this research
informed a set of recommendations for the MPA stakeholders’
management of the province for possible scaling up of MPA
network planning in the island or the Bicol region. By taking
the information in this paper, it is expected that the province
could develop a strong stakeholders and public participation
strategy for MPAs.
This paper suggests an Early Stakeholder Engagement for
MPAs in Catanduanes under the proposed Ecofriendly Water
Policy Research Study Center of the newly established Center
for Climate Change Solutions for the Asia Pacific Region.
Stakeholder early engagement in MPA combines policy-
oriented organizing and consensus-building functions with a
mixed-methods approach. From the start, the goal is to help
shape sound policy based on careful observation and analysis
of the research team.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Agojo MPA
CREATION
In 1993, a protected area known as Agojo Point Fish
Sanctuary and Marine Reserve (124.0514 Longitude, 13.6014
Latitude) or APFSMR (APFSMR or Agojo MPA) was
established through Presidential Decree 704 under the
Fisheries Sector Program (FSP) of the Philippines. Another
MPA in Catanduanes was established in Batalay, Bato in 2001
within the Fisheries Resource Management Program (FMRP)
by virtue of Republic Act No. 8550 or the Agriculture and
Fisheries Modernization Act. The Agojo MPA in Agojo
follows the LGU/NGO-PO concept (see Bradecina & Nieves
2006). Agojo MPA is currently being re-designed or re-
developed following an institutional arrangement of LGU-
Academe/State College-PO partnership as discussed by
Stakeholder management in marine protected areas of Catanduanes Island, Philippines
64
Masagca, Asetre & Vargas (2012, under review). This paper
examines the role of higher education institutions (HEIs) in the
efforts to balance stakeholders participation in this concept as
used by the Bicol University for some MPAs in Bicol (see
reports of Dr. Bradecina and Dr Victor Soliman on and LGU-
Academe-PO partnerships). MPAs in the province have been
noted in the earlier works of Soliman (1999), Soliman et al.
(2004), David et al. (2004), Bradecina & Nieves (2006),
Masagca (2006, 2008) and on mangroves biobelting/
biowalling and marine protected areas (Masagca & Masagca
2009). Agojo MPA was legalized by Municipal Ordinance No.
03 s. 1993.
LOCATION
The MPA under consideration is around Agojo Point in
Catanduanes island, Philippines in the Northeastern Pacific
Seaboard (Alino & Gomez 1995). The areal coverage is
approximately 3 km long and 1.5 km wide peninsular region
protruding into the northern waters of Lagonoy Gulf from the
coastal areas of Barangay Agojo in the municipality of San
Andres, Catanduanes. It is located on the southwest portion of
the island of Catanduanes, a medium-sized island (total land
area of 1,430 km
2
) off the east coast of southern Luzon in the
near center of the Philippine archipelago. Fifty percent of the
peninsula along the northern shoreline is a mangrove swamp.
The remaining shoreline is a long stretch of white beach, while
the interior is an area of farm and residential land.
There are two coastal villages or barangay, the basic
political unit (BPU) of the Philippines located at the Agojo
peninsula: the villages of Agojo and Tominawog with a
combined population of about 25,000 people. Approximately,
one-third of the male population is full-time fishermen and the
remaining two-thirds are part-time fishermen. Majority of the
fishermen in the surrounding villages rely heavily their fishing
activity on the area. Because 70% of the entire population of
San Andres live in the coastal villages, which rely heavily
their source of food and livelihood from the harvests at the
municipal swamps, estuaries and coastal waters, using fish
gears (hook & line, gillnets, spear guns, fine mesh nets, deep
sea spear guns with compressors), the fishing activity puts
pressures on the coastal area. These practices deplete the
coastal resources of the municipality which threatened to
decreased fish availability. With this scenario, the population
appears to be nutritionally and economically-threatened.
COASTAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
In order to avert the situation in the study area, resource
conservation initiatives were undertaken, hence the adoption
of the Coastal Resource Management (CRM) plan, and the
declaration of the Agoho MPA which has a core zone of 72
hectares (ha) located at Barangay Agojo and an expanded
reserve extending to 386. 625 ha of coastal areas of the
adjoining Barangay Bislig, Cabcab, Bagong Sirang and
Catagbacan in the island province of Catanduanes.
A document on CRM was prepared for the municipality
of San Andres with the assistance of Care Philippines. This
ensured the framework for implementation and management
of the MPA under consideration. It is pertinent to note that the
Office of the Municipal Agriculture (MAO) is the rightful
office to manage and facilitate the different programs and
projects this MPA in coordination with the different line
agencies. The Agricultural Technician for Fisheries at the
MAO in San Andres, Catanduanes was designated as the
project manager. Deputized Fish Wardens (DFWs) were hired
by the LGU of San Andres. In support of the establishment of
the MPA, the Development of Sustainable Technology and
Livelihood System was incorporated in the management and
conservation program. This livelihood system has included the
Mari-Culture, Aqua-Silviculture and Seaweed Processing
projects for the local communities.
POLICY AND ORDINANCES
On policy approach related to governance, the
municipality of San Andres approved village resolutions and
ordinances in support of the MPA in Agoho Point. Examples
of these policy interventions are: (1) Ordinance authorizing
60% of fine/penalty paid to LGU by violators at the sanctuary
(Agoho MPA) to go to the apprehending officer (Municipal
Ordinance #4 s. 1999); (2) amending and approving sets of
rules and regulations covering the conduct of ethics of
members of ACOMDO (Resolution#1s.2001); (3)
ordinance prohibiting illegal acts in the sanctuary; (4) village
ordinance declaring the last Sunday of the month of December
as “People’s Day” and conduct of “Atag” System. This
indigenous system occurs when the BPU constituents offer
free labor in support to the conservation programs and projects
at the sanctuary. On corrective programs, site survey and
resource assessments at the Agoho MPA had been conducted
by BFAR, Care Phils., ICLARM and Bicol University which
were made available to the local communities through the
MAO in San Andres. Likewise, the Comprehensive and
Sustainable Development CRM Plan was prepared by MAO
based on the framework produced by Care Phils was submitted
for the action/implementation of BFAR.
KALAPADAN MPA
The Kalapadan Bay Area (KBA) in Baras, Catanduanes
(Latitude. 13.6430556°, Longitude. 124.3613889°) is now
facing serious problems, including stress from pollution
degradation and depletion of resources, including species
conflicting uses of resources; and damage and destruction of
habitat. Because of these problems that Kalapadan MPA in
Jimmy T. Masagca
65
Baras was enacted by a Municipal ordinance in 2004 and is
currently being enforced that will involve the four barangays
in Baras (Buenavista, Moning, Osmena & Poblacion). The
present Mayor, Chito Chi is spearheading the enforcement
with the Municipal Office Planning Officer and technical
assistance from CSU composed of three of the authors in this
paper. Consistent to the two primary purposes in IUCN
resolution 17.38: (1) to focus global attention on the urgency
of the need for Marine Protected Areas as part of broader
programmed to conserve the marine heritage and life-support
system of the world and (2) to focus on the various actions that
are necessary to ensure that marine protected areas
successfully make the transition from the technical processes
of planning to the reality of long-term implementation. This
MPA for enforcement considers the high degree of linkage
between marine environments and their connection to
terrestrial activities and impacts imposes an urgent need for
integration of protected area management and overall
conservation strategy. With IUCN’s policy (Kelleher &
Kenchington 1992) Kalapadan MPA intends to: (1) maintain
essential ecological processes and life support systems; (2)
ensure the sustainable utilization of species and ecosystems;
and (3) preserve biotic diversity.
Stakeholder Management
The concept of stakeholder management as used in the
present study incorporates the stakeholder identification
(SID), stakeholder inputs (SIN) and stakeholder engagement
(SEN). Based on the combined interviews conducted among
the main stakeholders (n =46) and minor or external
stakeholders (n =12) there was a general consensus on the
positive relation to sustainability of protected marine spaces
when communities and local government units are actively
engaged in building stronger relationships with their external
stakeholders −their partners, collaborators, funders, donors
and the local people. Further, the respondents believe that
these relationships in turn can help the Agojo and Kalapadan
MPAs of the province find and pursue opportunities for
effective and efficient management resource efficiency.
Starting 1993 until 1998, stakeholder management
aspects were analyzed based on the management plan for
Agojo MPA prepared within the concept of LGU/NGO-PO
arrangement. Several papers were scanned about stakeholder
management in Agojo MPA (see earlier papers of Bradecina &
Nieves 2006, Soliman et al. 2004; Masagca 2002 and 2003;;
and undpublished paper of Vargas & Asetre, 2011 presented in
IASC India). Other extant literature published in Ocean &
Coastal Management or Marine Affairs include some aspects
of stakeholder management of this MPA which is currently
under intensive reviewing.
Several themes were used in the analysis as to the
community engagements from the process of establishing and
implementing the Agojo MPA from community entry with the
appraisal, planning with financing arrangements,
formalization with the ordinance and implementation with the
adjustments. Responses of the main stakeholders indicate that
throughout these steps followed in Agojo, stakeholder
management was ensured to the fullest extent as to SID, SIN
and SEN. With the gradual changes as to the increasing
responsibility and commitment of the stakeholders, the field
workers of the LGU and NGO provided the necessary
assistance so that engagements do not wane. At the same time
that the LGU-NGO are engaged in community building
capacities, the external or minor stakeholders started to assist
in the management of the Agojo MPA by providing varied
inputs such as livelihoods, microfinancing and other
community projects. However, the respondents expressed
during the interviews and discussions that a greater number of
external institutions as minor stakeholders performed like the
“ningas kugon” concept that at the earlier stage, very high
commitment was observed. Later, their engagements slowly
diminished within the 1 to 2-year period which had some
lasting effects on the main stakeholders. This lowering of
intensity in the engagement of intervening institutions like
academic institutions can be seen from the lack of a functional
contract or MOA for at least 2 years to ensure continued
community engagement with within the context of
accountability if non-compliance occurs. In the case of
academic institutions, the semestral and school year phasing of
activities could be one valid reason why these institutions were
noted by the stakeholders to have reduced commitment. After
these institutions have already gathered data for research
works or carried out extension sessions, the stakeholders who
were interviewed expressed concern that they tend to
disappear from the view thus, the presence of the present
researchers in the said MPA had some negative meanings to
some.
The main stakeholders claim that intervening institutions
like SUCs and the different governmental agencies like
DOST, BFAR, etc. appear to have “used” only the MPAs in
order to serve their institutional interests and do not look into
the general welfare or longer commitment to the whole
community. Truthfulness about this finding and the need to
validate by using triangulation during the study was
vigorously pursued with repetitive interrogation. After a series
of explanation like the very limited role of academic
institutions as a technical support and also biased to the
monitoring and evaluation phase of the project, the
stakeholder respondents finally agreed that higher academic
institutions (SUCs) have limited resources (both time and
funding) so that the longer gestation period from 3 to 5 years
Stakeholder management in marine protected areas of Catanduanes Island, Philippines
66
in MPAs as to the achievement of the objectives will not
guarantee for the full commitment owing to the other functions
of the faculty involved in the MPAs. There could be some
truth about the other intervening institutions but the
researchers consider these observations to be anecdotal and
cannot be considered towards plausible conclusions or
generalizations.
Stakeholder Identification (SID)
Available literature reveals that well-designed MPAs
have been shown globally to increase the abundance and
diversity of organisms inside as well as outside their
boundaries as noted by Stevenson &, Gold, M. 2012.) and
possibly Agojo, San Andres, Cataduanes (see Vargas & Asetre
2011). Anecdotal reports and one-on-one interrogation of the
newly re-organized PO in Agojo known as ACOMDO) reveal
the increase in population density of “sandig” and “kataway”
(Siganidae) and other seagrass dwelling fishes. Increased
population density of the gastropods, Cypreae and Haliotis
was also known as well as other bivalves of the genus
Tridacna and Pinctada. Questions whether these bio-
ecological changes will have relations to stakeholder
management need to be addressed but will be difficult to
probe.
One most important component in stakeholder
management is the identification of the major and minor or
intervening stakeholders in the MPAs under enforcement. It is
assumed that during the early years from 1993 to 1999 of
Agojo MPA, the stakeholders were identified based on the
criteria set by the LGU and NGO which spearheaded and
prepared the management plan. The major stakeholders
include the members of the PO or ACOMDO (now AMPAI or
Agojo Mangrove Planters Association) with the LGU and
other groups in the barangay. The minor stakeholders include
women groups, barangay officials, SK and local people from
the neighboring barangays of Tominawog, Comagaycay and
Catagbakan. The other minor stakeholders include the staff of
DENR, DA, BFAR, schools around the area, small business
operators, excursionists, researchers from the academics,
divers, fishers from other barangay, beach operators from the
municipality. Stakeholder multiple groups include government
agencies, stakeholders, and other interested parties (Briot et al.
2011, Syms & Carr 2001, Dahl-Tacconi 2005).
In Kalapadan MPA, the SID made by the technical
working group composed of CSC faculty and planning staff of
the Office of the Municipal mayor include the councils of four
barangays, FARMC, the fishermen group, farmers
organizations, women, mangrove organizations, bay fishers
and anglers. The minor stakeholders are the tourists who go to
Puraran beach, surfers, anglers, boat operators, businessman
around Kalapadan Bay area, boat operators, bus and jeepney
operators, researchers, environmentalists and faculty/students
of CSU and other schools of the province.
Stakeholders identification of issues, groups and
strategies for the Agojo MPA was done through the
facilitative discussions or forums or during informal talks and
LGU council meetings. Identifying specific roles of the main
and minor stakeholders was known to be important for both
the Agojo and Kalapadan MPAs.
Stakeholder Inputs (SIN)
The works of Borad and Sanchirico (2008), Elliott et al.
(2001) and Pollnac et al., (2001) underscored the importance
of stakeholder involvement through their inputs (SIN) in
MPA management. There is now an increasing body of
literature on stakeholders’ opinions in relation to MPA
performance as reported by Himes (2007), Webb et al.
(2004), Suman et al. (1999). Stakeholder inputs and the
involvement if the development of MPA performance
indicators are also increasing such as that of Dahl-Tacconi
(2005), Pajaro et al. (2010), Vasconcelos (2011), Dalton,
Forrester & Pollnac (2012), Heck, Dearden & McDonald
(2012). More recent papers on the stakeholder inputs come
from the works of Stevenson, Sikich & Gold (2012), Smith
(2012), Allegretti, Vaske & Cottrell (2012) and Jentoft et al.
(2012).
During the interviews, the respondents concurred to the
idea that inputs of stakeholders can provide insights to the
local marine space issues in the island. This is parallel to the
study of Charles & Wilson (2008) and seems to be true to the
Kalapadan MPA. Engagement signifies social acceptability
and support for a future MPA (Thomassin et al., 2010). At the
time that Agojo MPA was established in the 1993, it was
highly likely that that policy decisions are based upon accurate
understanding of the local social and environmental condition
as suggested by Pomeroy et al., (2007). However, inputs are
based on what will the PO get from the arrangements of
contributing organizations.
Stakeholder Engagement (SEN)
Stakeholder engagement or participation in the early
stages of the planning process is particularly useful in order to
understand concerns towards the establishment of a MPA
(Salz and Loomis 2004). This concept of SIN refers to how
reinforcement can the value organizations like the ACOMDO
(now AMPAI) in Agojo for protected marine spaces gain from
working with their stakeholders, and ensuring that
sustainability advantage of the people organization managing
the protected area. Heuristically, the POs in Agojo and at
Jimmy T. Masagca
67
present AMPAI experience numerous setbacks which can be
due to (1) inappropriateness of the management plan, (2)
political intervention which is an inevitable circumstance that
will have immediate and long-term effects, (3) organizational
capability limitations, and (4) inadequate community assets to
implement the management plan for Agojo MPA. Based on
the hermeneutic cyclic analysis and iteration, it was more
likely (based on anecdotal materials) that Agojo had some
contributions to the limitations of “paper parks” by not
focusing on ways of conducting transparent processes.
Flexibility in the implementation of the plan appears to be one
of the ways by which little successes have been achieved in the
management of Agojo MPA. The local focal persons or
community organizers appeared to have not exercised
independent facilitation as asserted within the context of too
much ‘political intervention’ with the presence of ‘riders’,
‘exploiters’ and undefined practice political patronage.
Based on the current paper of Masagca (2018), under
review the practice in stakeholder engagement cannot achieve
certain success if the planners and implementers of Agojo’s
and Kalapadan’s management plan will fail to incorporate the
socioeconomic data. Added to this is the utilization of local
knowledge which cannot just be determined by just having
concisely and succinctly or one- to two-shots visit of the
organizers. Living with the local people at a longer period can
enhance engagement. For instance, precise data on the actual
family or household incomes, determination of actual benefits
of governmental programs such as 4 Ps and data on the
benefits of the livelihoods provided by different agencies will
form part of a highly acceptable socio-economic data.
In each of the 4 barangays in Baras, the community
coordinators is being planned to coordinate the participation of
a wide range of stakeholders including surfer or divers who go
Puraran beach resort, fishermen from other places,
conservationists/environmentalists of Catanduanes, local
officials of the other barangays in Baras, business owners in
the Puraran and Kalapadan Bay Area (KBA) and coastal
residents, who have recommended for the establishment of
Kalapadan Marine Sanctuary.
Early Stakeholder Engagement for MPAs in Catanduanes
Experience in the implementation of ecosystem-based
management (EBM) has shown to be most successful when a
great diversity of stakeholders is engaged early in a process, as
opposed to a more top-down decision making process
(Stevenson, Sikich & Gold 2012). In the case of the present
enforcement of Kalapadan MPA, earlier stage followed the
top-down decision making process and later on moved into the
bottom-up process in decisions by fostering meaningful
participation, engaging early and establishing clear objectives.
The need for an early engagement is deemed important when
this new MPA is about to enforced.
From 1993 to 1996, then 1998-1999 and from 2009-
2012, and 2015-2017 the author (JTM) and faculty researchers
of CSU have gained visibility in the Agojo MPA. In fact,
several published were prepared (Bradecina & Nieves 2006,
Soliman et al. 2004) in regard to MPAs in Catanduanes which
include aspects of engagements that involve the intervening
academic institutions like SUCs.
With the invitation of the Baras Municipal Office for
Technical Assistance dated May 15, 2012, a committee was
created by the CSC President to work on the CRM project of
the municipality that includes the enforcement of Kalapadan
MPA . As a response to this request of the municipal LGU, a
technical committee headed by JTM started to design ways on
how to address the myriad of issued to be addressed in
Kalapadan Bay Area CRM project.
CSU’s commitment for technical assistance particularly
on the enforcement of an MPA in the KBA yielded a small
component for inclusion in the 2012-2016 FYSDP on the
creation of a multidisciplinary institute for water, renewable
energy, environment and climate within the Ecoville Vision
2020 which will work for a Water Policy Lab for Rivers and
Marine Spaces. This proposed research lab integrates
technical assistance projects and fisheries RDE particularly on
the Agojo and Kalapadan MPAs. As management objectives
for the Kalapadan MPA will depend on the specific ecological,
cultural or socioeconomic problems of Baras, Catanduanes
that this MPA is meant to improve, the purpose, type, size and
shape and the concept is currently being finalized by the
technical team. This is so since MPAs cannot be generalized
(Agardy et al. 2003) and the case of Agojo MPA is different
from Kalapadan MPA in many respects but can be integrated
in a protocol for the early engagement of stakeholders. The
case of Agojo MPA which has a PO just re-organized (now
with a new name AMPAI) and Kalapadan MPA which will
have a management plan to be formulated as well as
stakeholders identification and engagements, the necessity to
design an early engagement protocol for both MPAs clearly
suggest the urgency. In the design of a new MPA such as the
enforcement of Kalapadan MPA, the local context according
to Heck, Dearden & McDonald (2012), Wells & Mangubhai
(2005) and Alder et al. (2002) must be clearly understood and
taken into consideration in the development of the goals and
objectives . Likewise, clear statements are to be developed, at
the early planning stage, that will indicate what this new MPA
is supposed to achieve and how can it be effective with the
early stakeholder engagement. While several cases can be
found in different islands of the Philippine archipelago, this
paper will subscribe early stakeholder engagement patterns
and models from various sources. With the extensive literature
Stakeholder management in marine protected areas of Catanduanes Island, Philippines
68
reviews, several models can serve as guides as those
propounded by various MPA specialists whom some of the
authors of this paper have personal or direct contacts. In this
way, establishing networks can be done with ease and include
research components to increase productivity in refereed
publications.
While Kalapadan MPA is about to be enforced, we
attempted to consider geographical framing as well as the geo-
physico-ecological characteristics of the areas covered. These
areas are vulnerable to certain threats and natural phenomena
in the planning and management of MPAs. During the process
we are currently suggesting to the municipality of Baras an
approach that includes the integration and encouragement of
stakeholders engagement which have very strong legal
backings in Philippine statutes and policies related to CRM.
We propose here the approach which is mainly composed of
the marine spatial planning as suggested by Pomeroy and
Douvere (2008). The stages of the planning process and the
ways in which stakeholders should be included at each stage
are as follows: I- The MPA Management Planning Phase
(Major stakeholders will contribute to the setting of priorities,
objectives, and the purpose of MPA management plan; and
identify stakeholders who can assist to determine, organize or
group, and rank management problems, needs, and
opportunities in order of priority; II- The MPA Management
Plan Evaluation Phase (Stakeholders of Agojo and Kalapadan
MPAs will be engaged in the evaluation and choice of plan
options; III- The MPA Management Plan Implementation
Phase (Stakeholders of Agojo and Kalapadan MPA will be
utilized in the community-based approach to enforcement in
the areas covered); IV-The MPA Management Plan Post
Implementation Phase (Major and minor stakeholders will be
consulted about the overall effectiveness or performance in
achieving goals and objectives of the plan).
The strategies formulated for the four-stage process will
include SID, SIN and SEN. Table 1 shows the programs/
activities and strategies for both Agojo and Kalapadan MPA.
The formulation of the protocol and the strategies as
discussed previously and the engagements are expected to
enhance the level of awareness and role of MPA in
conservation of the island's sustainability as well as raising the
community response level. Several references were used here
such as (Pulina & Meleddu 2012; Smith 2012; Treffny &
Beilin 2011; Yang et al. 2011; and Salter , Robinson & Wiek
2010).
CONCLUSION
The knowledge gained during the course of this study on
stakeholder management with stakeholder identification,
inputs and engagements project provided additional insights
into stakeholder views toward the efficient and effective
achievement of the goals and objectives of MPAs in
Catanduanes. Equally important are the stakeholders’ views
that fostered new relationships and perspectives among all the
stakeholder participants, including the LGUs, peoples’
organizations and the educational institutions engaged in the
management of MPAs in Catanduanes. With some few
dissenting views, some stakeholders displayed indifferences as
to how intervening institutions are perceived to have little
capacity to improve the management of MPAs by maximizing
stakeholder engagements. The views are on the lack of
properly designed management or zoning plans that will
incorporate ways to generate funds for the MPAs and not rely
on dole-outs as the historically accepted as anti-
developmental. Some stakeholders have not yet fully engaged
themselves in the management of MPAs and have not realized
the emerging practice of converting their organization as the
platform to generate income for the general operation of the
MPA. They were understandably concerned and even worried
about the coming in and out of external people or institutions
as the minor stakeholders who suddenly visit the protected
marine space for no reason at all but are willing tom assist the
management of the protected areas for sustainability. Political
Jimmy T. Masagca
69
Stakeholder Management Component Activities/Strategies Locations and Target Actors
Stakeholders identification (SID)
interviews with potential stakeholders;
meetings with the identified major and
minor for stakeholders
Kalapadan Bay Area; Office of the
Municipal Mayor of Baras; Catanduanes
State University
Stakeholder Inputs (SIN)
public consultation with the stakeholders;
creation of a barangay-based consultative
committee or site coordinators through
the FARMC; interviews and clustered
workshops for the POs and groups;
capacity building; general workshop for
Kalapadan MPA protected marine spaces
Project Management Committee of
Kalapadan MPA; The MLGU Baras-
CSUTechnical Committee; and the
Barangay Captain of Tominawog and
Barangay Council of Agojo; Municipal
LGU; Catanduanes State University;
MAO; DENR, etc.
Stakeholder Engagement (SEN) In situ meetings, leadership trainings,
study visit in other MPAs
All Major and Minor Stakeholders of
Agojo and Kalapadan MPAs
Table 1. Stakeholder management, proposed activities/strategies for 2 MPAs in Catanduanes.
intervention and conflicts within the project management team
of the LGU and the inability to reach out as to the desired
needs of the local people taking care of the marine spaces
deserve further look as to maximizing engagements. It should
be clear to the stakeholders that effective engagement will
have relations to the overall time, cost, complexity, and
uncertainty involved in pursuing their activities for the MPAs.
As such, the need to propose early engagement schemes for
the enforcement of an MPA in the province with the urgent
need for an intervening and co-managing higher education
institution or SUC to commit at least 2- or 3- year time period
of engagement with the community which will ensure success
and sustainability of MPAs in the island province. With the
establishment of the natural resource or environmental unit in
SUCs such as the proposed Water Policy Lab for Rivers and
Marine Spaces in the state university can take care the
technical needs of MPAs in the island province. This is a
positive move towards sustained stakeholder management
approach by carrying out background researches, facilitated
dialogues and extension services to LGUs which will be
enforcing MPAs in their localities.
REFERENCES
Ainsworth CH, Morzaria-Luna H, Kaplan, I.C., Levin, P.S.,
Fulton, E.A., Cudney-Bueno, R., Turk-Boyer, P., Pfister,
T. 2012. Effective ecosystem-based management must
encourage regulatory compliance: A Gulf of California
case study. Marine Policy 36 (6): 1275-1283.
Agardy T, Bridgewater P, Crosby MP, Day J, Dayton PK,
Kenchington R., Laffoley D, Mcconney P, Murray PA,
Parks JE, Peau L, 2003. Dangerous targets? unresolved
issues and ideological clashes around marine protected
areas. Aquatic Conservation: Marine and Freshwater
Ecosystems 13: 353-367.
Allegretti AM, Vaske JJ, Cottrell S. 2012. Predicting
Stakeholder Support for Fishery Policies . Coastal
Management 40(1): 20-32
Appleby T, Jones PJS.2012. The marine and coastal access
act-A hornets' nest? Marine Policy 36(1):73-77.
Brandecina RG. 2008. Socioeconomic conditions and
governance in the Atulayan marine protected area.
Kuroshio Science 2(1): 85-92.
Bradecina RG, P Nieves. 2006. Institutional arrangements and
processes in marine fishery reserves-sanctuaries establish-
ment in Lagonoy Gulf. Science Diliman 18(2): 47-56.
Briot J-P, De Azevedo Irving, M., Mendes De Melo, G.,
Vasconcelos, JEF, Alvarez I, Martin S, Wei W. 2011.
A serious game and artificial agents to support
intercultural participatory management of protected areas
for biodiversity conservation and social inclusion.
Proceedings: 2011 2nd International Conference on
Culture and Computing, Culture and Computing 2011,
art. no. 6103203, pp. 15-20.
Chang K-C, Hwung H.-H, Chuang C-T. 2012. An exploration of
stakeholder conflict over the Taiwanese marine protected
area. Ocean and Coastal Management 55: 36-41.
Crawford B, M Balgos, CR Pagdilao. 2000. Community-
based marine sanctuaries in the Philippines: A report on
focus group discussions. Coastal Resources Center,
University of Rhode Island & Philippine Council for
Aquatic and Marine Research and Development.
Dalton T, Forrester G, Pollnac R. 2012 Participation, Process
Quality, and Performance of Marine Protected Areas in
the Wider Caribbean. Environmental Management 1-14.
Fonseca C,Calado H,Da Silva CP, Gil A.2011. New approaches
to environment conservation and sustainability in small
islands: The Project SMARTPARKS. Journal of Coastal
Research 64: 1970-1974.
Kelleher G, Kenchington R. (1992). Guidelines for Establishing
Marine Protected Areas. A Marine Conservation and
Development Report. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. vii +
79 pp.
Jentoft S, Pascual-Fernandez JJ, de la Cruz Modino R,
Gonzalez-Ramallal M, Chuenpagdee, R. 2012. What
Stakeholders Think About Marine Protected Areas: Case
Studies from Spain. Human Ecology 40(2): 185-197.
Jones GP et al. 2008. Connectivity and the design of marine
protected area networks in the coral triangle. Coral
Triangle Initiative, Townsville, Queensland.
Heck N, Dearden P, McDonald A. 2012. Stakeholder
Evaluation Priorities for Demonstrating Marine Protected
Area Effectiveness at the Pacific Rim National Park
Reserve, Canada. Coastal Management 40(1): 55-72.
Horigue, Vera Porfirio M. Aliño Alan T. White, Robert L.
Pressey. 2012. Marine protected area networks in the
Philippines: Trends and challenges for establishment and
governance. Ocean & Coastal Management 64: 15-26.
Marques AS, Ramos TB, Caeiro S, Costa MH. 2011.
Adaptive-participative sustainability indicators in marine
protected areas: Design and communication Ocean and
Coastal Management.
Masagca JT. 2008. Occurrence and Distributional Range of
Mangrove Vascular Flora of Catanduanes Island, Luzon,
Philippines. Southeast Asian Journal of Tropical Biology
15(2): 1-10.
Masagca JT. 2006. Science teachers’ and coastal dwellers’
perceptions on mangrove biodiversity conservation/
Percepciones de los maestros de ciencia y habitantes
costeros sobre conservacin de la biodiversidad de
manglar. Revista de Educacion en Ciencias, Journal of
Science Education, Colombia. http: //www. highbeam.
Stakeholder management in marine protected areas of Catanduanes Island, Philippines
70
com/doc/1P3-978202641.html .
Masagca JT, MT Masagca. 2009. Distributional range of
mangroves in Catanduanes Island, Philippines: inputs to
biobelting and biosheltering program for typhoons, tidal
surges and tsunamis. Proceedings of the 2009 East Asian
Seas Congress, PICC, Manila, Philippines, 27-30
November, PEMSEA.
Masagca JT, AV Asetre, SR Vargas. Under Review. Role of
academics in community protected marine spaces. Ocean
& Coastal Management, Elsevier.
Nenadovic M, Johnson T, Wilson J. 2012. Implementing the
western gulf of maine area closure: The role and
perception of fishers' ecological knowledge . Ecology and
Society 17(1).
Pomeroy R, Douvere F. 2008. The engagement of stakeholders
in the marine spatial planning process. Marine Policy 32
(5): 816-22; Gopnik M. Marine Spatial Planning in U.S.
Waters: The Path Forward. Gordon and Betty Moore
Foundation.
Pulina M., Meleddu, M. 2012. Defining a marine protected
area strategy: A stakeholder perspective Ocean and
Coastal Management 66: 46-55.
Salter J, Robinson J, Wiek A. 2010. Participatory methods of
integrated assessment. Interdisciplinary Reviews Climate
Change 1(5): 697-717.
Smith SL. 2012. Toward inclusive co-management: Factors
influencing stakeholder participation. Coastal Management
40(3): 327-337.
Stevenson C, Sikich SA, Gold M. 2012. Engaging Los
Angeles County subsistence anglers in the California
marine protected area planning process. Marine Policy 36
(2): 559-563.
Toropova C, Meliane I, Laffoley D, Matthews E, Spalding M.
2010. Global Ocean Protection: Present Status and Future
Possibilities. Brest, France: Agence des aires marines
protégées, Gland, Switzerland, Washington, DC and New
York, USA: IUCN WCPA, Cambridge, UK: UNEP-
WCMC, Arlington, USA: TNC, Tokyo, Japan: UNU,
New York, USA: WCS.
Treffny R, Beilin R. 2011. Gaining legitimacy and losing trust:
Stakeholder participation in Ecological Risk Assessment
for Marine protected area management. Environmental
Values 20(3): 417-438.
Vasconcelos L, Ramos Pereira, MJ, Caser U, Gonçalves G,
Silva F, Sá R. 2011. MARGov - Setting the ground for
the governance of marine protected areas Ocean and
Coastal Management.
WCPA/IUCN. 2007. Establishing networks of marine
protected areas: A guide for developing national and
regional capacity for building MPA networks. Non-
technical summary report.
Weeks R, G Russ, AC Alcala, AT White. 2009. Effectiveness
of marine protected areas in the Philippines for
biodiversity conservation. Conservation Biology.
Yang C. -M., Li J-J, Chiang H-C. 2011. Stakeholders'
perspective on the sustainable utilization of marine
protected areas in Green Island, Taiwan. Ocean and
Coastal Management 54(10): 771-780.
Jimmy T. Masagca
71
