Coral Reefs

, Volume 26, Issue 4, pp 1023–1032 | Cite as

Marine protected areas and the coral reefs of traditional settlements in the Exumas, Bahamas

Report

Abstract

This paper is about modeling the perceived social impacts of three proposed marine protected areas (MPAs), each designed to protect coral reefs. The paper argues that shared perceptions of these impacts have resulted in different community-level responses to these MPA proposals. The study is uniquely situated in the Bahamas where the government has approved setting aside 30 No-take MPAs (including three under study here) to protect the coastal marine environment. The paper is based on 572 interviews conducted during eight field trips with members of six traditional settlements in the Exuma Islands and Cays in the central Bahamas. Overall, 34% of the census population of these settlements was interviewed at least once. Key findings are that an MPA can impact in either positive or negative ways (a) community agency by the process of siting, (b) community resilience by eliminating or supporting some components of their traditional adaptations to social and natural environments, and (c) community identity by precluding or protecting customary marine access. MPA impacts to local communities determine whether those communities will support or resist proposed MPAs.

Keywords

Marine protected areas Social impact assessment Bahamas Traditional communities 

References

  1. Agrawal A, Gibson C (2001) The role of community in natural resource conservation. In: Agrawal A, Gibson C (eds) Communities and the environment. Rutgers University Press, New Jersey, pp 1–31Google Scholar
  2. Alleyne M (2002) The construction and representation of race and ethnicity in the Caribbean and the World. University of the West Indies Press, KingstonGoogle Scholar
  3. Aswani S, Lauer M (2006) Incorporating fishermen’s local knowledge and behavior into geographical information systems (GIS) for designing marine protected areas in Oceania. Hum Organ 65:81–102Google Scholar
  4. Bandura A (1999) Social cognitive theory: an agentic perspective. Asian Journal of Social Psychology 2:21–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beebe J (2001) Rapid Assessment Process. Altamira Press, Walnut CreekGoogle Scholar
  6. Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (2003) (eds) Navigating social-ecological systems. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  7. Berkes F (2004) Rethinking community-based conservation. Conserv Biol 18:621–630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bunce L, Townsley P, Pomeroy R, Pollnac R (2000) Socioeconomic manual for coral reef management. National Ocean Service, NOAA, MarylandGoogle Scholar
  9. Burpee G, Morgan J, Dragon A (1986) Household survey of Grenada: findings and documentation of procedures. Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  10. Campbell A, Converse P, Rodgers W (1976) The quality of American life. Russell Sage Foundation, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Campbell D, Fiske D (1959) Convergent and discriminant validation by the multi-trait-multimethod matrix. Psychological Bulletin 56:81–105PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Christy P, McCay B, Miller M, Lowe C, White A, Stoffle R, Fluharty D, McManus L, Chuenpagdee R, Pomeroy C, Suman D, Blount B, Huppert D, Eisma R, Oracion E, Lowry K, Pollnac R (2003) Towards developing a complete understanding: a social science research agenda for marine protected areas. Fisheries 28:22–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Comitas L (1964) Occupational multiplicity in rural Jamaica. Proceedings of the American Ethnological Society, Washington DC, pp 41–50Google Scholar
  14. Conroy C, Mishra A, Rai A, Singh N, Chan M (2001) Conflicts affecting participatory forest management. In: Vira B, Jeffery R (eds) Analytical issues in participatory natural resource management. Palgrave Publishers, New York, pp 165–184Google Scholar
  15. Giddens A (1990) The Consequences of Modernity. Stanford University Press, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  16. Goldman A (2000) (ed) Social impact analysis: an applied anthropology manual. Oxford - Berg, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. Gupta A, Ferguson J (1997a) (eds) Culture, power, place. Duke University Press, North CarolinaGoogle Scholar
  18. Gupta A, Ferguson J (1997b) (eds) Anthropological locations: boundaries and grounds of a field science. University of California Press, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  19. Jick T J (1979) Mixing qualitative and quantitative methods: triangulation in action. Administrative Science Quarterly 24:601–611Google Scholar
  20. Johannes R (1998) The case for data-less marine resource management: examples from tropical nearshore finfisheries. Trends Ecol Evol 13:243–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Keller G, Recchia C (1998) Editorial - lessons from marine protected areas around the world. Parks 8:1–4Google Scholar
  22. Mascia M, Brosius P, Dobson T, Forbes B, Horowitz L, McKean M, Turner T (2003) Editorial: conservation and the social sciences. Conserv Biol 17:649–650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Mumby P, Dahlgren C, Harborne A, Kappel C, Micheli F, Brumbaugh D, Holmes K, Mendes J, Broad K, Sanchirico J, Buch K, Box S, Stoffle R, Gill A (2006) Fishing, trophic cascades, and the process of grazing on coral reefs. Science 311:98–101PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Munasinghe V (2001) Callaloo or Tossed Salad? East Indians and the cultural politics of identity in Trinidad. Cornell University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Nabhan G (1997) Cultures of habitat: on nature, culture, and story. Counterpoint, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  26. National Research Council (2001) Marine protected areas: tools for sustaining ocean ecosystems. National Academy Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  27. Olsson P, Folke C (2001) Local ecological knowledge and institutional dynamics for ecosystem management: a study of Lake Racken Watershed, Sweden. Ecosystems 4:85–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Olwig K (2002) Global Culture, Island Identity. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  29. Ostrom E (1992) Community and the Endogenous Solution of Commons Problems. Journal of Theoretical Politics 3:343–351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Roberts C (2000) Selecting marine reserve locations: optimality versus opportunism. Bull Mar Sci 66:581–592Google Scholar
  31. Roberts C, Bohnsack J, Gell F, Hawkins J, Goodridge R (2001) Effects of marine reserves on adjacent fisheries. Science 294:1920–1923PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Sala E, Aburto-Oropeza O, Paredes G, Parra I, Barrerra J, Dayton P (2002) A general model for designing networks of marine reserves. Science 298:1991–1993PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Sanchirico J, Stoffle R, Broad K, Talaue-McManus L (2003) Modeling marine protected areas. Science 301:47–48PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Schneider M (1976) The “quality of life” and social indicators research. Public Administration Review 36:297–305CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Slottje D J (1991) Measuring quality of life across countries. The Review of Economics and Statistics 73:684–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Stoffle R (1986) Caribbean fishermen farmers. Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, MichiganGoogle Scholar
  37. Stoffle R, Toupal R, Zedeno N (2003) Landscape, nature, and culture: a diachronic model of human-nature adaptations. In: Selin H (ed) Nature across cultures: views of nature and the environment in non-western cultures. Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp 97–114Google Scholar
  38. Stoffle R, Halmo D, Wagner T, Luczkovich J (1994a) Reefs from space: satellite imagery, marine ecology, and ethnography in the Dominican Republic. Hum Ecol 22:355–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stoffle B, Stoffle R, Halmo D, Burpee C (1994b) Folk management and conservation ethnics among small-scale fishermen of Buen Hombre, Dominican Republic. In: Dyer C, McGoodwin J (eds) Folk management in the world’s fisheries. University of Colorado, Boulder, pp 115–138Google Scholar
  40. Stoner A, Hickson M, Dahlgren C (1999) Scientific review of marine reserve network proposed for the commonwealth of the Bahamas by the Bahamas Department of Fisheries. Nassau, BahamasGoogle Scholar
  41. Tashakkori A, Teddlie C (1998) Mixed methodology: combining qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage Publications, Thousand OaksGoogle Scholar
  42. Weiant P, Aswani S (2006) Early effects of a community-based marine protected area on the food security of participating households. SPC Traditional Marine Resource Management and Knowledge Information Bulletin #19, pp 16–31Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Bureau of Applied Research in AnthropologyUniversity of ArizonaTucsonUSA
  2. 2.College of the Bahamas, Social ScienceNassauBahamas

Personalised recommendations