1. MPA management effectiveness in selected areas in the Philippines: Lessons learned and way forward “Enhancing Marine Protected Areas (MPA) Management in the Philippines” Len Garces, Mike Pido Maripaz Perez and Mark Tupper

2. Outline MPA Evaluation in Philippines and project sites Lessons learned Way forward

3. Background MPAs are useful tools among a suite of management options for fisheries and CRM in the Philippines Despite potential benefits of MPAs to coastal management programs, majority of MPAs do not meet their management objectives. only 10% of the over 3,000 MPAs globally meet their target goals and objectives At least 10-15% of the MPAs have been effectively managed (Alino 2001, PAMS 2008).

5. What is Management Effectiveness? The degree to which management actions are achieving the stated goals and objectives of a protected area Source: Pomeroy et al 2004

6. Why evaluate management effectiveness? It tells us how a managed area is -- or is not -- meeting its stated goals and objectives Source: Pomeroy et al 2004

7. Does your MPA look more like this?… …or this? Source: Pomeroy et al 2004

8. 1. How is your MPA Doing? (IUCN/Pomeroy et al. 2004) Evaluation of MPA Management Effectiveness 3. National CTI CC MPA Management Effectiveness Assessment Tool (MEAT) 2. WCPA/DENR Management Effectiveness Tracking Tool (METT) 4. Others methods Figure 1. Some methodologies used in the evaluation of MPA management effectiveness in the Philippines.

9. Indicator-based MPA Management Effectiveness Started in 2002 by joint effort of IUCN – WCPA (Marine), NOAA Coral Reef Conservation Program and WWF. 2004: Publication of “How is Your MPA Doing?” guidebook by Pomeroy et al. Used in some Palawan MPAs WorldFish rafting and testing of indicators in the Philippines since 2008-2009 (NOAA project) & 2009-2010 (DOST projects)

10. Outline MPA Evaluation in Philippines and project sites Lessons learned Way forward

11. Lesson 1 - Number of indicators Number of indicators could be reduced to ‘barest’ minimum

12. Progression/Testing of indicators World Conservation Union (IUCN) - 2004 42 indicators: 10 Biophysical 16 Socioeconomic 16 Governance

13. Progression/Testing of indicators “Enhancing MPA Management Effectiveness for the Calamianes Islands MPA Network” - 2008 23 indicators: 6 Biophysical 8 Socioeconomic 9 Governance

14. Progression/Testing of indicators “Capacity building to enhance MPA management effectiveness for the MPA networks in the Philippines” – 6 sites 13 indicators: 1 Biophysical 6 Socioeconomic 6 Governance

15. Indicators selected

16. Study Sites

17. Lesson 2 – Institutional Partnership Partnership remains essential but may take different configuration

18. Levels of institutional partnership in MPA evaluation International donors International research agency International project National government agencies State universities and colleges Local government units, MPA management boards, fishing associations, etc

19. Roles and Responsibilities overall coordination, technical direction and training of SUCs Funding support, policy and advocacy technical support to SUCs & facilitation of stakeholder workshops Provision of secondary literature, site assistance

20. Lesson 3 – Capacity Building Local SUCs/LGUs may be capacitated to take more active roles in MPA management

21. Local Capacity Building site coordination, testing/evaluation of MPA indicators Participation in interviews and workshops LGUs/ community members

22. Happy Faces of Partners!

23. Lesson 4 – Perception Surveys Social survey needs to be validated with scientific bio-physical surveys

24. Comparative Perspective People’s perception Scientific findings

25. Complementary Results in Fisheries Condition People’s perception General decline in fish catch Scientific findings in fish biomass

26. Discrepancy in Fisheries Condition People’s perception General in fish abundance Scientific findings in fish density

27. People’s perception Sagrada-Bogtong – 58% worse now than before Bugor-Sand – 43% worse now than before Scientific findings  or no change in live hard coral cover Discrepancy in Reef Condition

28. Lesson 5 – Summarizing the Results of Evaluation ‘Metrication’ of factors affecting MPA management effectiveness remains a lingering question

29. Various factors related to MPA management effectiveness Source: Pomeroy et al 2004

30. MPA Rating System adopted by project

31. Lesson 6 – Baseline Information Need for good baseline remains critical

32. FISH Project Sites Good biophysical: 2004, 2006 and 2008 Limited socio-economic and governance

33. Outline MPA Evaluation in Philippines and project sites Lessons learned Way forward

34. Contextualizing MPAs with other economic sectors MPA Site

35. MPAs: in a nut shell Be based on the fundamental ecology of the organisms and/or habitats to be protected. Limited by capacity of institutions and stakeholders involved. Socioeconomic and political issues cause more MPA failures than ecological problems. Be part of an integrated coastal management plan that addresses land and sea uses and their interactions

36. MPA Evaluation and Action:Beyond Rhetorics