Official Launch of Marine Managed Areas and Management Plan

From behind the scenes:

Whoooeeee.... it has been busy around here! The preparation for our big launch may have been super stressful, but the big event went off without a hitch (well, any major hitches!). 

Pulling off an event and preparing a major document in a rural village with limited communication and no electricity is no easy feat! There were many trips back and forth to Nabouwalu and many late nights translating and editing on the floor of my house with committee members. 

Even after three years here, I still find it difficult to not be stressed out by they way preparations happen at the very last minute. At the same time I have developed faith in the way things always seem to work out in the end. 

The village really came through on their part. This event, after all, was theirs. While I was busy on the phone and computer, the community was harvesting food for the feast, decorating the community hall, building a temporary outdoor kitchen, practicing for the traditional kava ceremony, setting the program,  and getting word out through the "coconut wireless".

 Our program began with a traditional ceremony: sevusevu, yaqona vakaturaga (kava served for the chief), and presentation of a whale's tooth as a gift of thanks from the community to the chief. Next there was prayer from a local church leader, followed by tea time. After tea, a few church leaders, gov't and community reps took a boat ride out to one of the marine managed areas where a buoy was placed and another blessing said. Upon return there was a presentation from our Yaubula Committee, another formal thanks, and then the feast/ grog drinking began. 

Our printed plans arrived late, but we we still managed to circulate them and have an official copy signed by the leaders from each clan before the grogging got to strong and people began to disperse.

I was in bed by 9pm, but songs and guitar were coming through my window well into the night!

From our press release:

On Tuesday, 25 February 2014, the village officially launched their locally-managed marine areas (sometimes referred to as “tabu fishing areas”) and their natural resource management plan. This special event began with a traditional kava ceremony for the district chief, Tui Vuya, and was followed by prayer and blessings from the church. The community has designated three different marine managed areas to protect fish and invertebrates and to help generate income for the community.

The village has been working together for the past two years on environmental and resource management issues. They face the challenge of a growing population in a rural location where their economy and livelihoods are very dependent on the health of land and sea resources. For this reason, the village created both development and natural resource management plans which focus on ways they themselves can improve the status and well-being of their community. They feel that it is their duty as the “vanua” and as Christians to take care of the land and sea, and that they shouldn’t have to always rely on outside resources to do so.

Their marine managed areas are not designated to be “tabu” forever but to help the community use their resources more wisely so there will always be enough now and for the children of the future. While fishing or harvesting is not allowed in these areas, they will help the community generate income in other ways. In one area the community has established pearl oyster collection lines and in another, they plan to farm beche-de-mer. They have also been planting mangroves to improve degraded habitat and protect the coastline.

The village's natural resource management plan uses a “ridge to reef” approach. This means that it recognizes that activities on the land have an effect on the downstream environment.  For example, farming along river banks increases soil erosion and pollution from the village travels downstream to affect the marine environment.

Because of this, the community has also designated two forest protected areas surrounding their drinking water sources and created by-laws that do not allow farming or cutting trees within 10 meters of streams.

The biggest challenge for their plans to be successful, however, is ensuring that everyone works together. There are about 570 people in the community including seven settlements and six religions. They try to focus on good governance as the foundation for any work they do. In the past two years they have been working to try to bring the different community groups closer together and respect each other in spite of any differences. Utilizing both their traditional iTaukei community structure alongside an administrative structure has helped them do this.

This event was attended by member of surrounding communities in Vuya and Solevu Districts, as well as by representatives from the government and NGOs. The village invited all these people in hopes of raising awareness and gaining support for their program.

From behind the camera:

Banner drawn by a man in our village with permanent marker and crayon :)

The men waiting in the shed for the chief to arrive

Women preparing tea

Extracting the taro root form the lovo (earthen oven)

Large kava plant for sevusevu

Solo had a special role in the ceremony for the first time! Important honor and lesson for a Fijian male!

Men waiting to go in the hall

Our Marama ni Yavusa and the Marama Vunivalu from another community (important traditional leaders)

Bringing in the sevusevu

Pouring water from hollowed out bamboo into the tanoa, or kava basin

Serving kava to the district Chief, Turaga Tui Vuya

An elder from our village presents a whale's tooth as a token of thanks to the chief

Tui Vuya accepts the tabua, or sperm whale tooth on a cord of coconut fiber

Waiting for the weather to clear to go out on the boat

Preparing the buoy and anchor

Church leader saying a prayer of blessing

Myself, with my very yellow accessory, very happy for us all to have reached this special day

The crew returning from touring and blessing the marine managed areas

Master’s Research Kicks Off at Workshop on Tavea Island

Last week I had the pleasure of traveling to Tavea Island in the District of Lekutu to attend a Resource Management Planning Workshop facilitated by Wildlife Conservation Society. This workshop was the first of a series, with the same concepts as the ones that have been held in our District and attended by our village environment committee. It was designed to raise awareness about Ridge to Reef management and help community members begin to identify targets and threats to healthy and connected ecosystems.

What was especially great for me was that we had a whole session on the third day for participants to be introduced to basic network concepts, to fill in the SNA questionnaire, and also to discuss barriers to collaboration/communication for effective resource management. While I played a key role in helping design the research methods, two facilitators from WCS carried it out in Fijian. It went over really well, although I have not yet had a chance to begin data entry and analysis.

I’m actually glad now that things didn’t go as planned when we tried to do the first round of sampling last October. It gave us a chance to improve our methods and simplify the questionnaire. Hoping to do some preliminary data entry in the next week to check for anything we may need to improve before our next sampling in late Feb-early March. 

Tavea Island Locator Map

Tavea Island, Lekutu District, Bua Province -- The white in the center is the village (about 30 houses). You can walk from one side to the other in less than a minute!

As we headed to the boat landing we found our fellow facilitators stuck in the mud.

View from Vanua Levu out to Tavea (on right).

Transport out to Tavea.

Kini Koto presenting basic network concepts to workshop participants.

A woman filling out the SNA questionnaire.

Facilitators leading participants through the questionnaire.

The workshop ended by releasing a tagged hawksbill turtle, "Adi Tavea", back to sea.

For an overview of my research see this post from last year: Social Network Research in Bua

Understanding the “Ridge to Reef” Management Setting

“Ridge to reef” management is an easy way of getting across the key principle of ecosystem-based management, which is to consider how ecological processes and human impacts are connected across the landscape.

Fiji is a nation rich in terrestrial and marine resources upon which the majority of residents depend on for part, if not all, of their livelihoods. However, these same resources are threatened by coastal development, population growth, unsustainable resource extraction, and weak conservation policies (Chandra 2011, 176; Uniquest 2010b, 3). Fiji’s high levels of biodiversity have attracted support from international donor organizations and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) to implement sustainable coastal resource management efforts (Sievanen et al 2012). Although much planning has occurred at both the national and local scale for resource management, the complexity of cross-scale interactions amongst networks of resource stakeholders has kept many of these efforts from reaching their full potential (Chandra, 2011; Lane, 2008).

To further understand NRM frameworks in Fiji, a clear understanding of the nested political and spatial scales (Sievanen et al 2012), and the plurality of traditional and legal resource governance institutions must be established (Clarke and Jupiter, 2010). Basically there are two governments in Fiji, the traditional and the national, and various nested-scales for each. Here I will try to summarize the three NRM frameworks are being implemented at the different scales, using our Province as an example.

The three NRM frameworks being implemented in Bua Province are as follows: community-based natural resource management (CBNRM) at the village scale, ecosystem based management (EBM) at the district scale, and integrated coastal management (ICM) at the provincial scale. ICM has also been adopted as the NRM framework at the national level. It can be assumed the aforementioned frameworks adhere to a systems approach in applying principles of adaptive co-management and cross-scale governance (See Folke et al 2005).

A system of traditional resource governance exists in Fijian communities. In spite of the fact that indigenous (iTaukei) people own approximately 90% of land and maintain the rights to use traditional in-shore fishing grounds (iqoliqoli), there is lacking legal recognition by government of management decisions or protected areas established by communities (Clarke and Jupiter 2010a, Lane 2008). Traditional governance a has a nested structure, as does the national government. The land-owning unit is the mataqali, a clan made up of related families (vuvale). Related clans form a yavusa. There can be one or more yavusa per village. Yavusa combine to form the vanua. Rights to traditional fishing grounds generally belong to members of a certain yavusa or vanua. During colonial administration the formation of district boundaries was related to the authority of the vanua (TLTB 2011, Veitayaki 2002).

Figure 1 below attempts to summarize the nested structures of traditional governance, political/spatial scales, and NRM frameworks. The following sections will describe each framework and its implications for governance after a brief description of Bua Province.

Figure 1. Nested structure of traditional governance, political/spatial scales and corresponding NRM frameworks in Bua.

Site Context

Bua Province, on the northern island of Vanua Levu, is located within the Vatu-i-ra Seascape, a region of Fiji where ecosystems remain relatively intact. Natural resource management (NRM) planning efforts are being focused here to mitigate pressure from extractive industries and coastal development (Jupiter et al 2012). Bua is one of the least developed provinces in the country. The majority of communities lack electricity, paved roads, municipal water, and other infrastructure related to urban centers. The main industries are agriculture, fisheries, mining, and forestry. There are nine districts in the province, containing 54 villages, and 11 traditional fishing grounds (pers. comm, Bua Provincial Council 2013).

Map 1. Districts and villages in Bua Province, on Vanua Levu -- Fiji’s second largest island.

Map 2. Traditional fishing grounds in Bua.

COMMUNITY-BASED NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AT THE VILLAGE SCALE

Fiji has a rich history of CBNRM initiatives and projects due to indigenous land tenure and inshore usufruct rights. CBNRM simply involves local stakeholders in managing resources that they own or use. The Fiji Locally-Managed Marine Area (FLMMA) network’s adaptive co-management framework has been widely implemented across the island group during the past decade. The FLMMA network consists of management and conservation practitioners who engage communities in resource management planning and share lessons learned to continually update best practices (Mills et al 2011, FLMMA 2010). The FLMMA approach combines traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) with scientific data to inform management actions. Establishing tabu no fishing areas is a cultural practice communities use to temporarily build up fish stocks in preparation for feasts, such as in the event of the death of a chief (Jupiter and Egli 2010, Veitayaki 2002,). Although FLMMA partners originally focused on inshore fisheries management, the organization now promotes “ridge to reef” management, recognizing that inland activities are linked to and greatly affect the marine environment (pers. comm, Vave 2012).

                At the village scale, committees are often formed to undertake management of a project. In the case of resource management, a community may designate a Qoliqoli Committee or Resource Management Committee to liaise with government and NGOs in management planning and implementation. It is critical to first seek approval of traditional leaders when working with communities at any scale in Fiji. This is not only respectful, but support of the Bose Vanua (chiefly leaders) is often crucial to achieving desired outcomes (Jupiter and Egli 2010).

ECOSYSTEM-BASED MANAGEMENT AT THE DISTRICT SCALE

                While the FLMMA approach is appropriate at the community level, implementation becomes much more complex as it is “scaled-up” (Seivenan 2013, Tawake 2007). Concerns by conservation practitioners in Fiji that a community-based approach was heavily institutionalizing management at a scale that did not correspond to ecological practices (Berkes 2003) led to an initiative to pilot EBM in Kubulau District, Bua (Jupiter & Egill 2010, Seivanen et al 2013). Clarke and Jupiter (2010b, 7) define ecosystem-based management as “an integrated approach that considers interactions between humans and the environment” with the goal “to sustainably manage natural resources and biodiversity by maintaining ecosystem processes, functions and services”.

The Kubulau District project has been successful in highlighting factors related to successful conservation and has been considered by some a “poster child” for conservation in the Pacific (Sievanen et al 2012;  Jupiter and Egli 2010).) Five of nine districts in Bua have thus far been engaged in resource management planning by Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) and the University of the South Pacific Institute of Applied Science (IAS), both of whom are FLMMA partners.  This process engages districts individually by bringing together elected representatives from each village for management planning workshops. Although it is recognized ecosystems do not follow political boundaries, from a management perspective a district is a reasonable scale at which engage stakeholders in planning.

By 2014, the goal is for each district (tikina) in Bua to have a resource management plan (WCS 2012a). To clarify, this means that all communities will be engaged in collaborative planning but does not mean individual village plans are a necessary outcome. As at the village scale, district-level resource management committees consisting of traditional leaders and community representatives are also formed.

INTEGRATED COASTAL MANAGEMENT AT THE PROVINCIAL AND NATIONAL SCALES

In 2009, a national Integrated Coastal Management Committee (ICMC) was formed in adherence to the Environmental Management Act of 2005 to oversee the development of an ICM framework and plan for Fiji.  While a framework has been adopted, the committee recommended provincial level plans be developed first, and then compiled into a national ICM plan (Department of Environment 2011). The ICMC use Cicin-Sain and Knecht’s (1998) definition of ICM: “A continuous and dynamic process by which decisions are taken for the sustainable use, development, and protection of coastal and marine areas and resources”.

The term “integrated” as it applies here refers to holistic NRM that attempts to bridge fragmentation in sectoral management frameworks. The necessity of economic development is recognized but not at the cost of ecological processes, life support systems, and biological diversity (Cicin-Sain and Belfiore 2005). Five dimensions for integration have been suggested by Cicin-Sain and Belfiore (2005): intersectoral, intergovernmental, spatial, science-management, and international. These dimensions have been adapted by the ICMC to apply to resource management in Fiji and are shown in Table 1 below:

Table 1. Dimensions of Integration

Dimension	Components
Sector	Tourism, fisheries, government, industries, other businesses
Government	National, regional, local, traditional
Space	Inland, coastal, and marine environments
Discipline	Sciences and traditional knowledge applied in management

(Cicin-Sain and Belfiore, 2005, 854; Dept of Environment, 2011, 6)

Provincial ICM planning is currently being piloted in a select few provinces. Bua will develop an ICM plan following completion of district planning (WCS 2012a). At this scale, planning becomes even more complex due to the increasingly diverse group of stakeholders involved. Establishing Yaubula Management and Support Teams (YMSTs) is a new strategy developed by FLMMA partners and government ministries to improve resource governance at the provincial scale. A YMST is essentially a network of stakeholders working to coordinate NRM efforts between communities and the government in a particular province or region (FLMMA 2011).

The Bua YMST (BYMST) was formed in November 2012. It is essentially a committee of local government and  conservation practitioners overseeing a team of district representatives and community liaisons. BYMST members are intended to play key roles in awareness and communication about environmental issues in Bua, as well as participate in planning and implementation of management strategies (WCS 2012b). These communities vary greatly in their geographic location, isolation, and level of involvement in NRM activities.

Conclusion

                 In summary, natural resource management in Fiji is implemented on various scales but these scales are integrated. In practice, integrated resource management occurs through the frameworks of CBNRM, EBM, and ICM in Bua Province (See table 2 below).  Simplifying, each framework attempts to use adaptive co-management principles to achieve sustainable development and “ridge to reef” resource management. ICM in Bua requires collaboration between stakeholders and communities to identify goals, plan and take action together. The BYMST has been organized to help create a network of sharing and learning throughout the province and to support effective resource governance.

Table 2. IRM in Practice

Framework	What	Scale	Who
Integrated Coastal Management	Sustainable use, development, and protection of coastal and marine areas and resources	National & Provincial	Integrated Coastal Management Committees, Provincial Offices, YMSTs
Ecosystem-based Management	Considers humans and environment, biodiversity, ecosystem processes and services	District	YMSTs, Resource Management Committees, Conservation NGOs
Community-based Natural Resource Management	Local stakeholders involved in managing resources they own or use	Village	Communities with the assistance of FLMMA partners and other NGOs

References

Bua Provincial Council (2013). Personal communication. February 2013.

Chandra, A. (2011). A deliberate inclusive policy (DIP) approach for coastal resources governance: a Fijian perspective. Coastal Management, 39: 2, 175-197.

Clarke, P.  and S. D. Jupiter (2010a). Law, custom and community-based natural resource management in Kubulau District (Fiji), Environmental Conservation, 37(1): 98-106.

Clarke, P. and S. D. Jupiter (2010b). Principles and Practice of Ecosystem-Based Management: A Guide for Conservation Practitioners in the Tropical Western Pacific. Wildlife Conservation Society. Suva, Fiji.

Cicin-Sain, B. and S. Belfiore (2005). Linking marine protected areas to integrated coastal and ocean management: a review of theory and practice. Ocean & Coastal Management 48: 847-868.

 Cicin-Sain, B. & R. W. Knecht (1998). Integrated coastal and ocean management: Concepts and practices. Island Press: Washington D. C. 

Department of Environment (2011). Integrated Coastal Management Framework of the Republic of Fiji 2011: Opportunities and issue for managing our coastal resources sustainably.

 

FLMMA [Fiji Locally Managed Marine Area Network] (2010). FLMMA operations guide: the way we work together. Retrieved from http://lmmanetwork.dreamhosters.com/fiji.

FLMMA (2011). The Yaubula Management Support Team Strategy Version 1.0, December 2011.

Folke, C., Hahn, T., Olsson, P., & Norberg, J. (2005). Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour., 30, 441-473.

Jupiter S, and Egli, DP (2011). Ecosystem-based management in Fiji: successes and challenges after five years of implementation. Marine Biology, 14p

Jupiter S, Fox M, Cakacaka A, Caginitoba A, Askew N, Qauqau I, Weeks R, Prasad S(2012) Building

provincial‐level integrated Coastal Management Plans: Outcomes from the Vatu‐i‐Ra Seascape

Stakeholders Workshop. Wildlife Conservation Society, Suva, Fiji, 46 pp.

Mills et al (2011). Incorporating effectiveness of community-based management in a national marine gap analysis for Fiji, Conservation Biology,  25 (6), 1155–1164.

Sievanen et al (2013). Fixing marine governance in Fiji? The new scalar narrative of ecosystem-based management, Global Environmental Change, 23(1), 206-216. 

TLTB [iTaukei Land Trust Board] (2011). The iTaukei Landowners. http://www.tltb.com.fj/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=33&Itemid=59. Accessed 10 April 2013. 

Veitayaki, J. (2002). Taking advantage of indigenous knowledge: the Fiji case. International Social Science Journal, 54: 395–402.

Wildlife Conservation Society (2012a). Annual Update to the Bua Provincial Office.

Wildlife Conservation Society (2012b). Bua FLMMA Workshop Report.

Uniquest (2010b). Policy, law and institutional capacity report. Final report prepared for Asian Development Bank: strengthening coastal and marine resource management in the coral triangle of the Pacific - phase 1.