Our islands: protection and conservation

The Oceania region has an incredible array of ecosystems and biocultural diversity along with many threats to those. Safeguarding and effectively managing such ecosystems and the livelihoods and cultural expressions linked to them is of paramount importance for the sustainable development of the region.
However, what is the status of doing so? What have we learnt so far? What is needed into the future?

TCI Adjunct Associate Professor Lea M Scherl has been involved in the recently launched compilation of the first comprehensive report on the state of knowledge of natural resource conservation and management in the Oceania region addressing the topics of “Management Capacity” and “Well-Being” (with other topics reviewed being: “Coverage and Connectivity”, “Law and Governance”, “Management Effectiveness”, and “Sustainable Financing”).

Management Capacity
Strong stewardship of nature is an intrinsic part of the culture of people in Oceania. Whilst many very capable and motivated people work in protected and conserved area management, there remains significant weakness at the institutional and individual levels. Lack of capacity is likely to be a major impediment for natural resource management and conservation region-wide.

The publication highlights a range of competencies needed for protected area management in the region from a consultation process with stakeholders. Analysis supports the need to involve a diversity of groups in capacity-development because natural resources management is a shared responsibility across land and sea stewards, management institutions and personnel, and other partners who can also learn from each other. Through a developed framework for capacity development suited for the region (see figure) more detailed analysis of the status-quo of each component of this framework, with clear examples, is presented. For instance, opportunities based in the region for accredited qualification on protected area and natural resource management does not exist and at the tertiary level institutions are still struggling to get funding to create more streamlined curriculum. Moreover, much good human-capital is lost as they receive overseas scholarships and may not return after completion of studies. Whilst many short-term training opportunities exist mainly tied to project implementation those are tailored to service the needs of such projects with curricula and approaches rarely shared. A region-wide compilation of such opportunities, courses and their teaching approaches has been very challenging to achieve even with the existence of a specific Pacific Island Protected Area Portal managed by the South Pacific Regional Environmental Program (SPREP). Informal learning and mentoring are very important in the region, as it also suits cultural ways of transmitting knowledge, and have been supplying much of this capacity development opportunities mainly through on-the -job activities and the occasional exchanges facilitated by projects.

The recommendations needed are: for better understanding of which approaches for capacity development work (or does not) and for what reasons in the region (with systematic monitoring and evaluation); for foremost strengthening the local, national and regionally-based institutions to deliver and tailor capacity development to the diversity of cultural contexts and practitioners’ need; and for dedicated, long-term and sustainable resource basis that benefits such institutions, foremost, whilst supported from partnerships with international counterparts.

Well-being
Protected and Conserved areas are socio-ecological systems because in varying situations and in different ways people live within, has a relationship with the area, depend on it for livelihoods and in a broader context, they form an important part of sustainable development of a region and a country. The regional Asia-Pacific report of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Assessments (2018) mentions there is ample evidence that human well-being in the region is deeply connected with nature. However, a more recent worldwide analysis (Dawson et al 2021) yield no rigorous scientific research in the Oceania region (primarily the Pacific Islands here) on the links between effective conservation management and improvement on well-being.

However, there is growing recognition in the region that effective natural resource management is vital for maintenance of the ecosystem services which form the basis for livelihoods and sustainable development at all levels from local communities, sub-regions, nationally and region-wide. Thus, the existence of descriptive evidence based on implementation of projects and programs on maintenance of cultural traditions, access to food, water, raw materials, medicinal resources, and for income-generation activities such a tourism and sustainable harvesting all possible because of natural resource management and conservation. In addition, there is ample recognition that the latter supports regulation of climate, natural hazards, water quality, and pollination. For instance, the importance of livelihoods’ nature-dependant activities (e.g. tourism, agriculture, selective harvesting of non-timer forest products, etc.) was documented from a systematic lessons learned process of a five years nature conservation and development GEF funded project in Samoa, Vanuatu, Fiji and Nuie (Scherl and Hahn 2017). The replenishment of fish stocks in ‘no-take’ closures within Local Managed Marine Areas (LMMAs) in Fiji Vueti Navakavu, LMMAs where the spill-over effects of fish stocks was documented as contributing to livelihoods (e.g. Scherl, LM et al 2008). In Papua New Guinea where the formation of the Tenkile Conservation Alliance to, initially, protect the critically endangered Tenkile Tree Kangoroo and the Torricelli Mountain brought along with it community support for much needed infrastructure; and where the Hunstein Range Wildlife Management Area, the largest lowland rainforest Protected Area in PNG was created with a key incentive to curtail disturbance of the millipede shaped forest spirit that inhabits the higher reaches of Mount Sansai culturally important to local communities.

The adoption of biocultural approaches is advocated that give local people, a legitimately recognized equal voice in designing, implementing and monitoring of protected and conserved areas and with that the need to develop culturally appropriate indicators of conservation outcomes (Sterling et al 2017). For that to happen the distinction between rightsholders and stakeholders becomes important as well as appropriate governance systems that carefully address equity and the sharing of rights, benefits and costs.