EDITORIAL 3

BY HAMDALLAH ZEDAN
INTRODUCTION 5
BY CIPRIANO MARÍN
ISLAND ECOSYSTEMS CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE: PROBLEMS AND CHALLENGES 9
BY ELAINE FISHER
SUSTAINABLE USE PRACTICES, INCLUDING TOURISM, IN/FOR SMALL ISLANDS 15
BY GODFREY BALDACCHINO
PROTECTED AREAS: BENEFITS TO ISLANDERS 21
BY PEDRO ROSABAL
THE IMPACT OF NATURAL DISASTERS ON THE BIODIVERSITY OF SMALL ISLAND STATES 29
BY SÁLVANO BRICEÑO
BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY AS A RESOURCE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF ISLANDS 35
BY BÁRBARA GAREA MOREDA, MIGUEL ANGEL VALES GARCÍA, DALIA MARIA SALABARRIA FERNÁNDEZ
WISE PRACTICES FOR ISLAND CONSERVATION: PREFIGURING THE DURBAN ACTION PLAN? 41
BY DIRK TROOST AND MALCOLM HADLEY
SUSTAINABLE TOURISM IN SMALL ISLANDS: LOCAL EMPOWERMENT AS THE KEY FACTOR 49
BY FRANCESCO DI CASTRI
CORAL REEFS IN SMALL ISLAND STATES STATUS, MONITORING CAPACITY AND MANAGEMENT PRIORITIES 57
BY ROLPH ANTOINE PAYET
INVASIVE SPECIES PREVENTION FOR OCEANIC ISLANDS 67
BY LLOYD LOOPE & DAVID A. HELWEG
ISLAND BIODIVERSITY AND ECOSYSTEM FUNCTIONING: THE MELDING OF SCIENCE AND SOCIETY 73
BY PIERRE LASSERRE
WETLAND ECOSYSTEMS IN SMALL ISLANDS 77
BY PETER BRIDGEWATER
CHANGING AGRICULTURAL ENVIRONMENTS IN SMALL ISLANDS CASES OF THE SOUTH PACIFIC AND OKINAWA 85
BY HIROSHI KAKAZU
SMALL ISLANDS: PROTECT OR NEGLECT? AN INDONESIAN CASE 89
BY SOENARTONO ADISOEMARTO
VANISHING FORESTS AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF AN ARID ISLAND. SOQOTRA (YEMEN): AN EXAMPLE 95
BY GIUSEPPE ORLANDO AND BRUNO MIES
ECO-TOURISM AS A SOURCE OF FUNDING TO CONTROL INVASIVE SPECIES: THE CASE OF SEYCHELLES 99
BY JOHN NEVILL
AGROBIODIVERSITY IN CUBAN HOME GARDENS FROM THE RURAL AREAS 103
BY LEONOR CASTIÑEIRAS, TOMÁS SHAGARODSKY, ZOILA FUNDORA, VICTOR FUENTES, ODALYS BARRIOS, VICTORIA MORENO,
LIANNE FERNÁNDEZ, RAÚL CRISTÓBAL, VICENTE GONZÁLEZ, MARITZA GARCÍA, FIDEL HERNÁNDEZ, CELERINA GIRAUDY,
PEDRO SÁNCHEZ, ROSA ORELLANA AND ARACELY VALIENTE
PROTECTING BIODIVERSITY AND ESTABLISHING A SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN THE SABANA CAMAGÜEY ECOSYSTEM 107
BY PEDRO M. ALCOLADO, DANIELA MERCEDES ARELLANO, ELISA EVA GARCIA AND GROUP OF AUTHORS
ETHNIC AND BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY WITHIN THE SEAFLOWER BIOSPHERE RESERVE 111
BY MARION W. HOWARD, VALERIA PIZARRO AND JUNE MARIE MOW
THE MINORCA BIOSPHERE RESERVE, SEEKING THE WAY TOWARDS SUSTAINABILITY 119
BY JUAN RITA
CANARY ISLANDS’ BIODIVERSITY DATA BANK: A NEW WAY TO DEAL WITH CONSERVATION 127
BY JUAN CARLOS MORENO

3
 Published by:

insula
in cooperation with:

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity

Small Island Developing States Unit of the Division for Sustainable Development
of the United Nations. Department of Economic and Social Affairs
and
UNESCO - MaB

ISLAND BIODIVERSITY
Sustaining Life in Vulnerable Ecosystems
insula
International Journal of Island Affairs Co-editors:

Editorial Board Paola Deda, Cipriano Marín and Kalemani Jo Mulongoy

Scientific advisors:
Editor: Reanata Rubian and Giuseppe Orlando
Pier Giovanni d’Ayala

Scientific Advisory Committee:

Prof. Salvino Busuttil, Malta
Dr. Ronald G. Parris, Barbados
Prof. Nicolas Margaris, Greece
Prof. Patrick Nunn, Fiji
Prof G. Prakash Reddy, India
Prof. Hiroshi Kakazu, Japan
Dr. Henrique Pinto da Costa, São Tomé e Principe
Prof. Lino Briguglio, Malta

Published by INSULA, the International Scientific Council for Island

Development, with the support of UNESCO.
Articles published in this journal do not necessarily reflect the opinions
of INSULA or of UNESCO.
Material appearing in this journal cannot be reproduced without the prior
permission of the Editor.

insula , the International Journal of Island Affairs is distributed free to

INSULA’s individual and institutional members. For subscriptions and information,
please write to:

insula , c/o UNESCO

1, rue Miollis
75732 Paris, FRANCE
Tel.: +33 1 45.68.40.56, Fax: +33 1 45.68.58.04
E-mail: insula@unesco.org

ISSN 1021 – 0814

Special Issue - February 2004
Cover: Painting by César Manrique, famous insular artist from the island of Lanzarote. The motif
Graphic designer: Luis Mir Payá
was painted by the artist as a logo for the initiative “The Salt Route” promoting the recovery of
Produced by: TENYDEA S.L. Canary Islands
traditional saltworks as artificial wetlands.

4 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS

 by HAMDALLAH ZEDAN

Executive Secretary
Secretariat of the Convention on
Biological Diversity

“Island biological diversity” is the theme selected for the current issue of INSULA, the International
Journal of Island Affairs. This issue is the result of a joint effort by three organizations that are
actively involved in island environmental and development affairs: the International Scientific
Council for Island Development, the Small Island Developing States Unit of the Division for
Sustainable Development of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs, and the Secretariat of
the Convention on Biological Diversity. This issue is being published in the run-up to two important international
meetings of relevance to island environments: the seventh meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention
on Biological Diversity, to be held in Kuala Lumpur in February 2004, and the Small Island Developing States
international meeting for the review of the Barbados Programme of Action, which will take place in Mauritius
in August 2004.

Islands are home to an extraordinary high proportion of endemic species per unit of surface area, and to unique
ecosystems. However, this richness is counterbalanced by its fragility. While the wealth of their biodiversity is a source
of goods and services that support economic development, threats to island environments have direct and indirect
consequences on their entire social and economic fabric. Indeed, since the Barbados Conference in 1994, biodiversity
resources are considered a key factor in shaping sustainable development strategies for island regions. The Barbados
Programme of Action identified the strategies and policies that would allow islands to safeguard their traditional heritage and
natural resources while opening their societies to the new opportunities offered by international markets.

Reducing the ecological vulnerability of islands is part of this strategy and requires that a series of interactive factors
be considered. Firstly, the size of small island developing States reduces their assimilative and carrying capacity,
leading to problems associated with water production and storage and waste management. Their relatively large coastal
zone, in relation to the land mass, also makes small islands prone to erosion. Moreover, low resistance to outside
influences facilitates the rapid and devastating spread of invasive alien species, with the consequent endangerment
of endemic species of flora and fauna.

Climate variability and change is affecting vast proportions of island territories, resulting in proportionately large land
losses, particularly in low-lying islands. Small islands are prone to natural disasters, and the impacts of earthquakes,
volcanic eruptions, cyclones, hurricanes, floods and tidal waves on island territories are often devastating. Last, but
certainly not least, the significant impact of economic development, and mass tourism in particular, on small island
environments is leading to a fast depletion of agricultural land and marine and coastal natural resources.

A number of eminent island experts have collaborated in producing this issue of INSULA and elaborate on the
status and trends of, and threats to, island biodiversity. They also provide extensive coverage of matters related to
the environmental vulnerability of island ecosystems. Many of them offer possible solutions to prevent and manage
some of the causes of biodiversity loss. Selected case-studies illustrate how sustainable development policies and
strategies have been successfully translated into action.

Despite the catastrophic outlook suggested by available data on the status and trends of biodiversity, in particular
on alteration of island habitats of world importance, it should be acknowledged that much is being done to find

5
 new alternatives for the management of natural resources, and that most of the small island developing States are
in the forefront of the struggle for sustainable development. But, although success stories are being recognized
daily, much has still to be done.

This issue of INSULA is intended to sensitize the world community of the need for immediate action and to renew
the commitment to the sustainable development of islands. Building on what has already been stated in the Barbados
Programme of Action and what will be reiterated in Mauritius, the Convention on Biological Diversity is ready to
take up the challenge and lead the international community in efforts to ensure the conservation and sustainable
use of small island biodiversity. Thematic areas and cross-cutting issues dealt with in the Convention are already
addressing many of the threats, and it is envisaged that the Conference of the Parties will endorse a new programme
area focusing on island biodiversity.

We wish to invite the world community to join in efforts to conserve and sustainably use these environments which
may once have been portrayed as tropical paradises but which today, more realistically, are the most endangered
and vulnerable ecosystems of our planet.

Finally, I would like to express my particular gratitude to all the authors for their willingness to contribute
to this issue of INSULA.

6 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS

 by CIPRIANO MARIN

Vice Secretary-general
INSULA
International Sientic Council for
Islands Development

The aim of this publication, result of a joint idea of the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological
Diversity, Insula and UN-SIDS (Small Island Developing States Unit of the Division for Sustainable
Development of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs), is to offer
reference elements and a meditation framework before one of the most important challenges that the island world
is facing at present: conservation, use, and exploitation of islands’ natural and biological heritage. Islands
make up a real world that it is not sufficiently recognised yet, which hosts more than 500 million inhabitants
and exercises a direct influence on an important share of our planet. In fact, although islands and Small Island
States are, individually considered, small territories, they jointly exercise their jurisdiction on more than one
sixth of Earth’s total area.

Islands have always been seen as remote or exotic places, or products of myth. The origin of emblematic islands
such as the Cyclades, for example, was attributed to a violent dispute between the divinities of the Olympus.
Forgotten by time, the odyssey of Crete’s inhabitants who protected and hid Zeus’ birth, avoiding that his father
Cronos ate him. Probably fruit of this ancient idea, islands are starting to claim their own time, emerging from
centuries of oblivion and colonization.

Chapter 17 of Agenda 21 recognizes that islands constitute a special case, both from the environmental and the
development points of view, with very specific problems for their sustainable development planning. They are
ecologically fragile areas, and as a consequence of geographic isolation they have developed exceptional species of
flora and fauna, hosting therefore a high share of world’s biological diversity. But Agenda 21 also recognizes that
this universe made up by thousands of territories trapped between the sea and the sky, hosts an extraordinary field
of rich and diverse cultures especially adapted to the island environment. And we nowadays know that these two
components constitute our main capital to face the future.

Islands rank at present amongst the best places on earth for high levels of biodiversity. Due to their distance from
the continents and the existence of different microclimates, an interesting diversity of habitats has been produced
on many islands, which in turn has contributed to the generation of an endemic population of flora and fauna. This
has facilitated the development of great levels of biodiversity through phenomena such as evolution and radiation
where species originating in the continent colonise the new habitat. Island ecological diversity also extends to marine
ecosystems, fine examples of which include the magnificent coral reefs that surround many tropical islands and the
high number of marine life oceanic sanctuaries.

However, that same level of richness finds its counterpart in its own fragility. In no other place biodiversity is per se
so fragile - before human actions are taken into consideration. This is due to the fact that species which have evolved
on islands, have done so in competition with a relatively low number of other species. Populations also tend to be quite
small in proportion to the size of most island territories and species often become concentrated in specific small areas.
The greatest evidence of this phenomenon is the fact that many of the biodiversity hot spots of the planet, those areas
where large quantities of endangered endemic species are found, are islands such as the Philippines, New Caledonia,
Madagascar or the Hawaii and Canary archipelagos.

7
 Nowadays, there are two greatest threats to biodiversity in island habitats: firstly, the colonisation of invasive species
and secondly, the loss or fragmentation of habitats. The introduction of exotic species onto islands is particularly
dangerous, as it may initially go unnoticed given that the process of destruction appears slower and less acute than
the destruction of a virgin area. Throughout history human exploitation has led to great losses in biodiversity. The
migratory pigeon of North America is often the paradigm of extinction mentioned with regard to continents: the
corresponding list to chose from for island territories is painstakingly long.

The truth comes out analysing the register of species that became extinct over the past three centuries. The numbers
speak for themselves: practically the same number of species have been lost on the islands and on the continents. Given
that an estimated 75% of animal species that have become extinct since the 17th century are insular, it is true to say that
island flora and fauna have paid a very high price. In the case of birds, 90% of species lost in recorded history belong
to island populations, made more serious by the fact that these populations alone represent 20% of the bird species
worldwide. Furthermore, 23% of island species are at present considered to be endangered, whereas the corresponding
figure for the rest of the world is 11%.

The other great threat to island biodiversity is the loss or fragmentation of habitats. In the past, this was brought about
when forests were cleared for agriculture and grazing. Nowadays the threat generally comes from tourist development,
as the economies of the large majority of islands with warm climates are dependent on this sector. In fact islands,
as a whole, are today the second tourist destination in the world. Within this framework it is essential to maintain
and strengthen the binomial cultural identity - biological diversity to guarantee our singular presence in this
global business. We cannot forget that archipelagos such as Balearics, Canaries or Hawaii, have each a tourist
flow bigger than Brazil.

But, despite the discouraging outlook provided by data on biodiversity and alteration of island habitats of world
importance, it must be acknowledged that it is in these same islands that most is being done to find new alternatives
in the management of natural resources. Indeed, it is fair to say that many of the results of researches carried out on
islands over the past twenty five years have laid the foundations to design guidelines and strategies for the management
of protected areas on the mainland. The idea that islands constitute authentic models of reference was widely diffused
by the IUCN in their framework of recommendations on the nature conservation, which was published in the eighties.
Indeed, more recently, experiences in complex and important island territories are helping to generate true working
hypotheses on this global challenge we call sustainable development.

An array of possible situations and implications arises from the variety existing in the island microcosm. This is why,
for more than two decades the UNESCO Man and Biosphere Programme has dedicated a large portion of its
work to island territories, considering these areas as excellent laboratories for conservation and management
of biological diversity. And these laboratories are now starting to extend into the sea, where several islands are
pioneer in the creation of marine reserves and in the safeguard of fishing resources, turning themselves into the
big guardians of the oceans.

This introduction only tries to give an idea of the complexity and intensity of the tasks set out for islanders when
designing biological diversity conservation and sustainable development strategies in accordance with the infinity of
particular circumstances of each island. I therefore thank on behalf of INSULA the big effort and enthusiasm of the
authors and collaborating institutions in bringing ideas and key references that allow us paving new roads for the use
and conservation of a heritage that is essential to build our future.

Finally, I hope that this work carried out with the decided support and orientation of the Secretariat of the
Convention on Biological Diversity, would allow recognizing the fragility of these mythical territories and their unique
circumstances, implying that the international community should share with the islanders the responsibility to conserve
this common heritage taking into account its real importance to the Earth’s life.

8 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS


Introduction
Humans have always relied on the earth’s
biological resources for their economic and
social development. However, historical data
have shown that pervasive human disturbance
of ecosystems has been taking place for
centuries, often resulting in ecological
extinction worldwide (Jackson et al, 2001).
This has increased significantly over the last
several decades. With increasing degradation
of ecosystems, habitat loss and species
extinction, there is a growing recognition that
current use (or misuse) of these resources
is not sustainable unless countries develop
measures for the conservation and sustainable
use of these resources. Sustainable use of
these resources is therefore an imperative if
present and future generations are to benefit
from them.
While biodiversity loss has been occurring
at a global scale, island ecosystems have been
found to be far more affected. Significant
extinction of island endemics has been taking
place since prehistoric times, however the
colonization of islands by humans have
significantly accelerated the rates of species
extinction. Steadman (1997) estimates that
post-human rates of extinction are twice
that of pre-human rates. Review of data on
species extinctions, beginning c. AD 1600,
have shown that many more plant and animal
species have become extinct from islands1
than from continents (Whittaker, 1998). Also,
although one in six plant species occur on
oceanic islands, one in three of all known
threatened plant species are island endemics.
Island ecosystems appear to be less resilient
than mainland systems.
Island Ecosystems.
Island ecosystems are characterized by:
• Species poverty, that is, fewer species per
unit area than mainland;
• Disharmony, in that they tend to have a
different balance of species compared
to equivalent patches of mainland and
this is more marked (accentuated) with
increasing isolation;
• Richness in endemism. At the global
level, collectively, islands contribute to
biodiversity disproportionately to their
land area. Although islands constitute 3%
of the land surface of the world, one in
six of the earth’s known plant species
occur on oceanic islands (Whittaker
1998);
BY ELAINE FISHER
• A higher representation of alien species
in their biota than do mainland systems
and
• Increased vulnerability to natural disasters
such as hurricanes and earthquakes.
Small Island Developing States
(SIDS)
Agenda 21
In 1992, the United Nations Conference on
Environment and Development (the “Earth
Summit”) was held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil,
marking the twentieth anniversary of the
Stockholm conference which had placed
Elaine Fisher has a Ph. D in Marine Ecol-
ogy from the University of the West Indies,
Mona, Kingston, Jamaica. A former Execu-
tive Director of the Institute of Jamaica,
she has been representing Jamaica at the
international level in the area of Biodiversity
since 1994 and chaired the national committee responsible for
developing the country’s National Biodiversity Strategy and
Action Plan. She is currently the Chair of Jamaica’s CITES
Scientic Authority and is the national focal point for SBSSTTA,
the subsidiary body of the Convention on Biological Diversity.
Contact: c/o Oxford Medical Centre, 22h Old Hope Road,
Kingston 5, Jamaica, E-mail: eshjam@infochan.com
1
While islands may be classified into those within land
masses and those within seas, for the purposes of
this paper, islands are discrete entities with clearly
defined limits surrounded by the sea
and able to sustain a supply
of fresh water.
9
 environmental concerns firmly before the partnership for sustainable development”.
global community. With the growing aware- It recognises the special challenges which
ness of the direct link between economic face SIDS in trying to achieve sustainable
development and the conservation of the development. Chapter 17.G. outlines “the
natural environment and the realization that basis for action” and identifies two objectives
environmental conservation was not possible necessary in addressing the problems of sus-
without economic development, the focus tainable development (Box 1). Importantly,
of the Earth Summit was on sustainable it recognizes the need for cooperation from
development, that is: development that the international community in achieving
“meets the needs of the present generation sustainable development.
without compromising the ability of future
generations to meet their own needs.” Five The Barbados Programme
major instruments were signed by world of Action (BPOA)
leaders at Rio, which included Agenda 21 and
O, Island in the Sun
the Convention on Biological Diversity.
Willed to me by my father’s hand.
Agenda 21 can be considered a blue print
All my days I will sing in praise
for sustainable development. Section 1 of
of your forest waters, and shining sands.
the preamble states “However, integration
Chorus from “Island in the Sun”, Irving Burgie, 1956.
of environment and development concerns development have resulted in degradation of the
and greater attention to them will lead Images of beautiful white sands, clear clean natural ecosystems of small island developing
to the fulfilment of basic needs, improved waters, this was, and probably still is, the image States, systems essential for sustained economic
living standards for all, better protected of islands through the eyes of many potential and social development.
and managed ecosystems and a safer, more travelers. But does this still hold true for many In 1994, the United Nations General
prosperous future. No nation can achieve this small island developing States? Population Assembly convened the Global Conference
on its own; but together we can - in a global growth coupled with unsustainable economic on the Sustainable Development of small
island developing States to provide a com-
Box1. Sustainable development of small islands, prehensive framework for the implementa-
Basis for action and Objectives (taken from Agenda 21). tion of Agenda 21 in the specific context of
Sustainable development of small islands these States. The focus of the Programme of
Basis for action Action is on sustainable development through
Small island developing States and islands supporting small communities are a special
case both for environment and development. They are ecologically fragile and vulnerable. sustainable use of oceans, coastal environ-
Their small size, limited resources, geographic dispersion and isolation from markets, ments, biodiversity, and human resources. It
place them at a disadvantage economically and prevent economies of scale. For small recognizes the special characteristics of SIDS
island developing States the ocean and coastal environment is of strategic importance
and constitutes a valuable development resource. and the problems and challenges faced by
Their geographic isolation has resulted in their habitation of a comparatively large number these States in working towards sustainable
of unique species of flora and fauna, giving them a very high share of global biodiversity. development. It also recognizes that many of
They also have rich and diverse cultures with special adaptations to island environments
and knowledge of the sound management of island resources. these problems are directly related to small
Small island developing States have all the environmental problems and challenges of size and that the small size of SIDS “means
the coastal zone concentrated in a limited land area. They are considered extremely that the environment and development are
vulnerable to global warming and sealevel rise, with certain small low-lying islands
facing the increasing threat of the loss of their entire national territories. Most tropical closely interrelated and interdependent”.
islands are also now experiencing the more immediate impacts of increasing frequency Sustainable use of island ecosystems is
of cyclones, storms and hurricanes associated with climate change. These are causing therefore critical for their sustained economic
major set-backs to their socio-economic development.
Because small island development options are limited, there are special challenges development.
to planning for and implementing sustainable development. Small island developing Constraints to sustainable development
States will be constrained in meeting these challenges without the cooperation and in SIDS include:
assistance of the international community.
• Increased vulnerability to natural disasters
Objectives
States commit themselves to addressing the problems of sustainable development of and environmental change such as climate
small island developing States. To this end, it is necessary: change resulting in sea level rise. (At least
(a) To adopt and implement plans and programmes to support the sustainable
thirteen of the twenty five most disaster-
development and utilization of their marine and coastal resources, including meeting
essential human needs, maintaining biodiversity and improving the quality of prone countries are SIDS);
life for island people; • High degrees of endemism but with small
(b) To adopt measures which will enable small island developing States to cope effectively,
populations increasing the risk of extinc-
creatively and sustainably with environmental change and to mitigate impacts and
reduce the threats posed to marine and coastal resources tions;

10 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS

• Heavy dependence on the coastal and
marine environment leading to degradation
of the coastal marine ecosystems;
• Limited freshwater resources (small water-
sheds);
• Increasing amounts of hazardous waste
substances with limited facilities for waste
disposal;
• Small vulnerable economies dependent on:
i) narrow resource bases ii) international
trade and in many cases reliant on prefer-
ential trading arrangements;
• limited influence on international trade
rules;
• Small domestic markets unable to provide
significant economies of scale;
• Inadequate means to exploit natural
resources on a sustainable basis;
• High levels of migration of skilled human
resources;
• Limited access to concessionary resources
due to higher per capita income than that
of other developing countries and
• Limited arable land which is used primarily
for the production of agricultural com-
modities for export, such as sugar, cocoa
and bananas.
Human well-being is central to the BPOA.
Here the environment meets the needs of
people, and as such, should be conserved and
sustainably used in order to meet the needs
of future generations. In the programme are
actions and policies for implementation at
the national, regional and international levels,
towards achieving sustainable development over
the short, medium and long term. It identifies
14 priority areas for action which are:
1. Climate Change
2. Natural and environmental disasters
3. Management of Wastes
4. Coastal and Marine Resources
5. Freshwater Resources
6. Land Resources
7. Energy Resources
8. Tourism Resources
9. Biodiversity resources
10. National Institutions and Administrative
Capacity
11. Regional Institutions and Technical
Cooperation
12. Transport and Communication
13. Science and Technology
14. Human Resource Development
Chapter 15 deals with implementation,
monitoring and review. However, a point of
interest in this chapter is the recognition of
the vulnerability of SIDS and the importance
of working with national, regional and
international organizations and research
centres in continuing work on developing
vulnerability indices and other indicators. It
further states that these indices should reflect
the status of SIDS and integrate ecological
fragility and economic vulnerability and that
consideration should be given to how such an
index, as well as relevant studies undertaken
on small island developing States by other
international institutions, might be used in
addition to other statistical measures as quan-
titative indicators of fragility. (Para.114).
Chapter 9 on Biological Resources directly
addresses actions for the conservation and
sustainable use of ecosystems and will
be discussed further in the context of the
Convention on Biological Diversity.
Review of BPOA Implementation
Conserving their ecosystems and ensuring
sustainable use are central towards the sus-
tainable development of SIDS and pose
tremendous challenges. Implementation of the
BPOA requires human resource development,
institutional development (for the integration
of environmental polices in national planning
and financial resources) public education
and participation, and additional financial
resources. The inherent vulnerability of SIDS
creates unplanned demands on these states
which are already grappling with very limited
resources. Small island developing states
are often faced with natural disasters which
can seriously erode national budgetary alloca-
tions towards environmental conservation
programmes as the immediate needs of the
society must take priority. A single hurricane
can inflict tremendous damage to a small
island economy, destroying agricultural crops,
infrastructure and dwellings. Governments
often must use resources allocated to other
programmes to meet the immediate needs of
the population. Quite often environmental
programmes are not seen as priority issues,
that is, not ‘bread and butter issues’, but really
‘the icing on the cake’.
Nevertheless, there have been a number of
initiatives at the international, regional and
national levels to implement the Programme
of Action. There has been significant imple-
mentation at the national level, although
many of these initiatives/projects are not
readily identified as implementing the BPOA.
Binger et al (2002) reports that estimates
indicate that 70% of the tasks and actions
have been carried out by the SIDS themselves.
This certainly indicates a commitment by the
SIDS to the Programme of Action.
Some initiatives at the international level
include:
• the United Nations Development Pro-
gramme (UNDP) Capacity 21, which was
UNDP’s main instrument to build capaci-
ties in developing countries to implement
Agenda 21. An important project of this
11
 initiative is the establishment of the
Small Island Developing States Network,
SIDSNET2, housed in the United Nations
Department of Economic and Social
Affairs (UN-DESA), which facilitates the
exchange of information among SIDS.
However, access by stakeholders to this
facility is constrained by the high cost of
internet access and computers, unreliable
electricity supplies and poor telecom-
munications infrastructure. There is also
the problem of long term sustainability.
• the assistance provided by United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP) in the
areas of water resources management,
waste management and the further develop-
ment of the Environmental Vulnerability
Index.
Comprehensive but not exhaustive reports
on implementation carried out at the national,
regional and international level can be
found in the United Nations General Assem-
bly Reports A/56/170, July 10, 20013 and
A/57/131, July 2, 20024.
The United Nations Commission on Sus-
tainable Development (CSD), continuously
reviews the implementation of the Barbados
Programme of Action and at its seventh
session (1999), carried out a full review for the
Special Session of the United Nations General
Assembly held later that year. The report
of the Secretary General (E/CN.17/1999/6),
benefited from the outcomes of four regional
meetings, and is a very comprehensive review
of actions taken at the national regional and
international level. It contains inter alia:
progress achieved, problems and constraints
encountered in the implementation, major
emerging sustainable development concerns
and problems (such as marine spills, intensi-
fication of natural disasters, shortage of fresh
water, tightening financial situation) and
priorities identified by the various regions
for future action. A number of sectoral and
cross-sectoral priorities were identified by all
regions, (Caribbean, Indian Ocean, Mediter-
ranean and Atlantic Ocean, and Pacific).
All thematic programme areas of the BPOA
were identified as priority areas of equal
2
http://www.sidsnet.org
3
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/docs/56/a56170.pdf
4
http://www.ods-dds-ny.un.org/UNDOC/GEN/NO2/459/97/PDF/NO245997.pdf?OpenElement
12 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
importance requiring immediate attention.
The report noted that a great deal of effort
had been made by SIDS at the national,
regional levels with international support
resulting in “perceptible” progress! .It identi-
fied constraints encountered in the imple-
mentation process which included: “finance,
skilled human resources for implementation
of sustainable development measures, and
suitable development institutions and admin-
istrative capacity”. These constraints are
not likely to go away without additional
international assistance.
In September 1999, a comprehensive
assessment of the implementation of the BPOA
was undertaken by the 22nd Special Session
of the United Nations General Assembly,
the review of the CSD being the basis of
the assessment. “Resource mobilization” was
identified by the general Assembly as one of
the main challenges for small island developing
States. It further noted that “Adequate financial
resources at all levels remain crucial to the
continued implementation of the Pogramme
of Action.” It also called upon the small
island developing States in partnership with
the international community to, inter alia,
complete the quantitative and analytic work
on a vulnerability index for small island
developing States, “preferably before 2000”.
In September 2002, at the World Summit on
Sustainable Development (WSSD), the special
case of SIDS was reaffirmed. The gains made
by SIDS towards sustainable development
was acknowledged, but also recognized was
that “they are increasingly constrained by the
interplay of adverse factors clearly underlined
in Agenda 21, the Programme of Action for
the Sustainable Development of Small Island
Developing States and the decisions adopted
at the twenty-second special session of the
General Assembly.”
Calls for actions at all levels include:
• Provision of adequate financial resources,
including through GEF focal areas;
• Transfer of environmentally sound technolo-
gies and assistance for capacity-building
from the international community;
• Further implementation of sustainable
Fisheries;
• Support, for the development and further
implementation of: (i) Small island develop-
ing States-specific components within
programmes of work on marine and coastal
biological diversity; (ii) Freshwater pro-
grammes for small island developing States,
including through the GEF focal areas;
• Effective reduction, prevention and control
of waste and pollution;
• Develop community-based initiatives on
sustainable tourism by 2004, and build the
capacities necessary to diversify tourism
products, while protecting culture and
traditions, and effectively conserving and
managing natural resources;
• Support the finalisation and subsequent
early operationalisation, on agreed terms,
of economic, social and environmental
vulnerability indices and related indica-
tors as tools for the achievement of the
sustainable development of the small
island developing States;
• Assist small island developing States
in mobilising adequate resources and
partnerships for their adaptation needs
relating to the adverse effects of climate
change, sea level rise and climate vari-
ability and
• Support efforts by small island developing
States to build capacities and institutional
arrangements to implement intellectual
property regimes;
There was also a call for a 10-year com-
prehensive review of the BPOA at a high-
level international meeting in the year 2004.
(This meeting will take place in Mauritius
in 2004).
In a follow-up to WSSD, the United
Nations General Assembly adopted Resolu-
tion A/57/2625 which recognizes the chal-
lenges to SIDS in the context of development
and, inter alia urges all relevant organizations
to finalise the work on the vulnerability
index, “taking into account the particular
circumstances of and needs of small island
developing States.”
Preparations are currently under way
for the “BPOA + 10” review to be held in
August/September 2004 in Mauritius. What
are the expected outcomes of this meeting?
While achievements will certainly be reported
in the various areas through projects and
initiatives, sectoral areas such as Coastal
and marine resources, Land Resources, Tour-
ism Resources, Freshwater resources and
Biodiversity resources will remain priority
areas for action. In fact all fourteen areas
will remain priorities for action and there
are new issues emerging such as growing
terrorism and its attendant impact on tour-
ism and travel. This does not mean that
implementation of the Porgramme of Action
has been unsuccessful, but that the achieve-
ment of major goals will take time. After all,
we have been utilizing the earth’s resources
from pre-historic times with little concern
for the health of the ecosystems on which we
are dependent. It has only been within the
last few decades that we have realized that a
healthy earth is critical for human survival and
that the present rate of ecosystem degradation
is not sustainable
The Convention
on Biological Diversity
The Convention on Biological Diversity,
one of the so-called “Rio Conventions”, was
opened for signature at the “Earth Summit”
in 1992 and entered into force on December
29, 1993. At present there are 187 Parties
to the Convention. Its genesis was from the
realization that sustainable development could
not be achieved without the conservation and
sustainable use of the earth’s resources and,
importantly, through equitable sharing of
benefits from the use of such resources.
The objectives of the convention are: “the
conservation of biological diversity6, the
sustainable use of its components and the fair
and equitable sharing of the benefits arising
out of the utilization of genetic resources,
including by appropriate access to genetic
resources and by appropriate transfer of
relevant technologies, taking into account all
5
http://www.un.org/esa/sustdev/sids/res_57.ht
6
Biological diversity is defined in the Convention as “the variability among living organisms from all sources including, inter alia, terrestrial, marine and other aquatic ecosystems
and ecological complexes of which they are part, this includes diversity within species, between species and of ecosystems.
rights over those resources and to technolo- This is shown in Table 1. (The table is not
gies, and by appropriate funding.” exhaustive).
Since the first session of the meeting As seen from the table, there are several
of the Parties in 1993, the convention has areas in the BPOA that are currently being
considered several thematic areas and cross- considered by the Convention on Biological
cutting issues. It has developed programmes Diversity through its thematic areas and cross-
of work for the following thematic areas: cutting issues. This opens the opportunity
marine and coastal biodiversity, agricultural for synergies between the two instruments.
biodiversity, forest biodiversity, the biodiver- How will SIDS benefit? Should both instru-
sity of inland waters, and dry and sub-humid ments continue to work separately? Will a
lands. The Convention’s recently developed collaborative approach be more beneficial
Strategic Plan recognizes it as an essential to SIDS? Should the CBD with its focus on
instrument in achieving sustainable develop- conservation and sustainable use take the
ment. It has been recognized in Johannesburg lead in the implementation of the BPOA in
Plan of Implementation as the “key instru- the areas that are covered by both? Certainly
ment for the conservation and sustainable these questions are worthy of consideration.
use of biological diversity and the fair and Most SIDS are Parties to the CBD.
equitable sharing of benefits arising from use
of genetic resources.” Recommendations from
It could therefore be considered one of the the CBD process relevant
legal frameworks under which sections of to Island ecosystems.
the BPOA could be implemented. Already In March of 2003, at the CBD’s Open-ended
the CBD makes special reference to SIDS Inter-Sessional Meeting on the Multi-Year
in its work and there is a certain amount Programme of Work of the Conference of
of overlap between the CBD’s work and the Parties up to 2010 (MYPOW), held in
the priority areas identified in the BPOA. Montreal, a number of the recommendations
Table 1. Comparison of Thematic Programmes and Cross – cutting Issues
under the Convention on Biological Diversity with some areas
of the Barbados Programme of Action
Convention on Biological Diversity: Barbados Programme of Action:
Programmes/Issues corresponding priority areas
Thematic Programmes
§ Agricultural Biodiversity § Freshwater Resources
§ Dry and Sub-humid Lands Biodiversity § Biodiversity Resources
§ Forest Biodiversity § Freshwater Resources
§ Inland Waters Biodiversity § Freshwater Resources
§ Marine and Coastal Biodiversity § Coastal and Marine Resources
Cross-cutting Issues
§ Access to Genetic Resources and Benefit Sharing § Biodiversity Resources
§ Alien Species § Biodiversity Resources
§ Article 8(J): Traditional Knowledge, § Biodiversity Resources
Innovations and Practices & Human Resource Development
§ Biological Diversity and Tourism § Tourism Resources
§ Climate Change and Biological Diversity § Climate Change & Sea Level Rise
§ Economics, Trade and Incentives
§ Ecosystem Approach
§ Global Strategy for Plant Conservation § Biodiversity Resources
§ Global Taxonomy Initiative § Biodiversity Resources
§ Impact Assessment, Liability and Redress § Biodiversity Resources
§ Indicators § Biodiversity Resources
§ Protected Areas § Biodiversity Resources
§ Public Education and Awareness § Biodiversity Resources
& Human Resource Development
§ Sustainable Use of Biodiversity § Biodiversity Resources
§ Transfer of Technology and § Biodiversity Resources
Technology Cooperation (for COP 7)
13
 made for consideration at the seventh meeting
of the Parties (COP 7), to be held early 2004,
could have a positive impact on implementa-
tion of the BPOA.
World Summit on Sustainable
Development (WSSD).
In its analysis of the outcome of the World
Summit on Sustainable Development as it
relates to the Convention process, the MYPOW
recommended inter alia, that at its seventh
meeting the COP consider the outcome of the
World Summit on Sustainable Development
relating to hotspots, ecological networks
and corridors in the context of the work on
protected areas, taking into account other
relevant thematic programmes and cross-
cutting issues. Also, with regards to the call for
the negotiation within the framework of the
convention an international regime to promote
and safe guard the fair and equitable sharing of
benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic
resources, the MYPOW recommended that
its Ad Hoc Open-ended Working Group on
Access and Benefit-sharing consider the issue
and provide advice to the Conference of
Parties at its seventh meeting.
Multi-year Programme
of Work Review
In its review of the of the CBD’s multi-year
programme the MYPOW recommended that
no new issues should be taken up for in-
depth consideration, with the exception of
Island Biodiversity which is to be discussed
at COP 8.
The Way Forward
If adopted at COP 7, these recommendations
provide opportunities for further addressing
the special circumstances affecting island
ecosystems and in particular the implementa-
tion of the BPOA. The issues of hotspots and
protected areas are very pertinent to SIDS.
Conservation International notes that “Several
hotspots are tropical island archipelagos,
like the Caribbean and the Philippines, or
relatively large islands, like New Caledonia,
or combinations of both, like Sundaland.”7
Already the CBD’s subsidiary body has
started work on ecological networks in
7
http://www.biodiversityhotspots.org/xp/Hotspots/hotspotsScience/
14 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
Marine Protected Areas for consideration
at COP 7. The call for the negotiation of an
international regime on Access and Benefit-
sharing under the CBD by the WSSD should
be taken into account at the upcoming review
of the BPOA and ways to prevent duplication
should be identified.
An in depth consideration of island biodi-
versity at the eighth meeting of the Confer-
ence of the Parties could provide an oppor-
tunity to explore ways and means to further
implement the BPOA. How will the issue of
Island Biodiversity be addressed? Certainly
there are existing thematic and cross-cutting
areas/issues in which island biodiversity can
be addressed. Some of these are:
• Coastal and Marine Biodiversity, in particu-
lar looking at marine protected areas and the
development of national marine and coastal
biodiversity management frameworks;
• Indicators: development and testing of
indicators within the context of sustainable
use i.e. biological indicators, economic
indicators and social indicators, taking into
consideration the increasing vulnerability
of island ecosystems;
• Public Education and Awareness, specially
targeted at communities, coastal and
inland, on the effects of their activities
on the various ecosystems which support
major economies such as tourism;
• Global Taxonomic Initiative, specifically
looking at island flora and fauna, and
• Sustainable use: development of a simple
practical guide for sustainable use for
middle level managers, taking into account
the draft Addis Abba Principles and the
shortage of skilled personnel in SIDS.
There are of course many more areas for
collaboration between the two instruments.
In particular, the critical factor of funding
must be addressed if there is to be sustained
and significant implementation of activities
which address island ecosystem degradation
and loss. For improved access to international
funding, there will need to be further guidance
to the Financial Mechanism of the CBD,
the Global Environment Facility. Decisions
would have to be taken as to how important
are island ecosystems in the global context.
Are they collectively globally significant?
If so, should they be afforded special con-
sideration for funding? The WSSD Plan of
implementation states “Oceans, seas, islands
and coastal areas form an integrated and
essential component of the Earth’s ecosystem
and are critical for global food security
and for sustaining economic prosperity and
the well-being of many national economies,
particularly in developing countries.”(Para.
30). Also, should the resilience/vulnerability
of island ecosystems be taken into considera-
tion and be a significant criterion for access-
ing official development assistance?
Conservation and sustainable use of island
ecosystems will require more than the devel-
opment of principles and work programs,
ratification of international treaties, and
external funding. For interventions to be
sustainable there must be recognition at the
national level of the importance of island
ecosystems and the fragility of these systems.
At the global level there must be a commit-
ment to address the trade-related issues of
SIDS “in a manner commensurate with their
special circumstances and in support of their
efforts towards sustainable development”.
References
BINGER, Albert; WIT, M; BRIGUGLIO, Lino; BHUGLAH,
Ached; PAENIU, Bikeniben; SPRINGER, Cletus;,
GIBBONS, Lolita; ALI, Mohammed; HOGWARTH,
Russell. 2002. The Growing Vulnerability of Small Island
Developing States. Prepared by the University of the
West Indies Centre for Environment and Development
Mona, Kingston, Jamaica for the United Nations
Development Programme Capacity 21 Project.
JACKSON, Jeremy BC; KIRBY, Michael X; BERGER,
Wolfgang H; COOKE, Richard; ERLANDSON, Jon;
ESTES, James A; HUGHES, Terence P; KIDWELL,
Susan, LANGE, Carina B; LENIHAN, Hunter S; PAN-
DOLFI, John M; PETERSON, Charles H; STENECK,
Robert S; TEGNER, Mia J; WARNER, Robert R. 2001.
Historical Overfishing and the Recent Collapse of
Coastal Ecosystems. Science , July 2001, vol.293,
p.629-638.
WHITTAKER Oxford University Press., Robert J.
1998. Island Biogeography; Ecology, Evolution, and
Conservation.

Discussion of a Bimodality
Islands are creatures of trans-territoriality;
their history and culture, as well as their
political administration, is a perennial dialectic
between the woof of home and the warp of
away; between openness and closure; between
‘routes’ and ‘roots’ (Villamil, 1977; Clifford,
1997; Brinklow et al., 2000).
Thus, an island reveals a particularly
stark rendition of the local and the global.
It is, at any one time, a discrete piece of
geographic or physical terrain, identifiable
by its delineated boundary. This is typically
represented by the shore and the sea beyond.
The finite compactness of the enclosed space
tends to reduce the number as well as the
internal diversity of both species (of flora and
fauna) as well as of products and services
(where populated). Its obvious totality is
in itself an allure, inviting humans to ‘play
God’: becoming agents of transformation.
This is a rare experience of near total control
over environmental variables.
Yet, concurrently, an island owes its exist-
ence to both imputs towards and outputs
beyond itself. In spite of the apparent contra-
diction-in-terms, what are often referred to
as ‘externalities’ - including exports, imports,
migration, remittances, epidemics, tourists,
environmental disasters or military inter-
ventions - are
simply and powerfully central to island
life. Such a condition has been described as
“hypothermia” (Baldacchino, 2000), “vulner-
ability” (Briguglio, 1995) or “volatility”
(Easterly & Kraay, 2000).
Impact Studies
These two conditions represent the global-
local, or ‘openness-closure’, dilemma of
small island systems. The composite effects,
and ensuing dynamics, of this bimodality
assure us that the impact of living things,
particularly human beings and their actions,
on this planet are nowhere more dramatic,
or more tragic, than on island territories. An
island, since it is an island, lends itself much
more easily to impact, whether the latter is
caused by forces within or without. Such
an impact becomes all the more glaring, or
need not be so significant for it to have a
measurable effect, with decreasing physical
size of the island.
This proneness to impact is one reason behind
the fact that island territories reveal and
harbour extreme versions of the living condi-
tion. Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace have
been pioneers in identifying this uncanny
circumstance amongst living things leading to
a process of biodiversity often culiminating in
endemism (Darwin, 1979; Wallace, 1975). In
economic terms, small, island based societies
like Aruba, Iceland, Bermuda and French
Polynesia are counted amongst the
world’s richest people (The
Economist, 2003a); while
those of São Tomé &
Principe, Vanuatu
or the Maldives
are recognised
amongst the
by GODFREY BALDACCHINO
world’s poorest. In political terms, the nature
of colonial impact on small islands has
ranged from the total extermination of native
peoples (for example: Moorehead, 1966)
to the cultural incorporation of the locals
into the imperialist psyche, to the extent that
they shun, rather than actively seek, political
independence (Miles, 1985; Winchester,
1985). Where biota are concerned, “island
isolation dictates evolutionary problems in
heightened form” (Carlquist, 1965:1). In
demographic terms, many small islands run
the risk of either depopulation or overpopula-
tion (Connell & King, 1999). In geophysical
terms, islands can be born (such as Surtsey or
Kavachi - see Nunn, 1994) have their entire
living biota wiped out (such as Anatahan
Island - see NASA, 2003) or totally wiped
off the face of the map (such as Krakatoa
- see Whittaker, 1999) as a consequence of
natural, or human, activity. Life cannot get
more extreme than that. No wonder islands
are comfortable metaphors for both paradise
and prison.
It may come as a surprise, but considerable
difficulties may arise in determining whether
any such impacts are overall beneficial or
deleterious. The contestation over land use by
different stakeholders (such as local residents,
foreign tourists and [local or foreign] prop-
erty developers) especially where land is
a very scarce commodity has been amply
documented in the tourism literature (Bois-
Godfrey Baldacchino, BA (Malta), MA
(The Hague) PhD (Warwick), is Canada
Research Chair in Island Studies at the
University of Prince Edward Island, Canada,
and Visiting Professor of Sociology at the
University of Malta, Malta. His publications
include Global Tourism & Informal Labour
Relations (London, Mansell, 1997). E-mail: gbaldacchino@upei.ca
15
 sevain, 1996). Similar case studies exist in
relation to the contestation of land considered
(by at least one of the parties) of strategic
value (Bartmann, 2002; Espindola, 1987).
The conflict escalates not only because of
the finite resource basis of the land; but also
because any long-term effects or opportunity
costs tend to be quite considerable. Indeed,
it may be fair to say that, when it comes
to smaller islands, speaking of ‘sustainable
development’ is a contradiction-in-terms.
Impact and Sustainability
The ‘openness-closure’ dilemma identified
above contours the sustainability argument in
at least two distinct ways. First, it facilitates a
resort to management via externalities which
reduces the urgency and pressure to devise
local solutions to local problems. The world
beyond becomes, or actually continues to
serve as, both the eponymous recycle bin we
now readily use on our personal computers,
as well as the potential source for desirable
imputs, a modern rendition of the cargo cult
(Worsley, 1968). Imaginative statecraft and
diplomacy are fervently deployed in the
context of international relations (in the
case of sovereign island states) or domestic
politics (in the case of small islands which
are sub-national entities) to achieve solutions
to one’s problems - small, by anyone else’s
yardstick other than one’s own, after all -
which avoid internal resolution.
Second, small islands are truly ‘I-lands’,
where the role of specific individuals is
aggrandized. Being a big fish is easier in a
small pond, although other ‘big fish’ may
stand stubbornly in the way. This need not
happen through active, strategic pursuit
but may be a consequence of sheer default;
especially so in islands enjoying some
degree of administrative autonomy. ‘Soft
state’ dynamics make it so much easier for
locals or foreigners to identify discrete
individuals who take decisions, and to lobby
and influence the substance and/or direc-
tion of such decisions to one’s advantage
(Lowenthal, 1987). Outcome: the potential
or disposition for ‘building monuments’
is nowhere so readily and easily available
(Bray & Fergus, 1986). And monument
building, by definition, is not typically a
sustainable activity.
16 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
Biodiversity and Sustainability
“[T]he incidence of endangered or extinct spe-
cies is greater on islands than on continents.
More endemic species have been created
on islands but more have perished there”
(Young, 1999: 253).
The ‘openness-closure’ perspective helps
us understand better the dynamics of biologi-
cal diversity and sustainablity on islands.
The particular geographical circumstances
of each island create a specific eco-system,
with its own evolutionary dynamics. In
the case of continental islands - land areas
that used to be connected to the mainland
- evolution works via a long-term process
of biota reduction: a progressive loss of
species (extinction) which is bound to occur
irrespective of the impact of humankind. In
the case of oceanic islands - those rising from
the sea thanks to coral deposits, volcanic
activity or tectonic forces - evolution works
via a long-term process of biota addition: a
progressive accretion of new species coming
in from the outside, starting from nothing
(Quammen, 1996).
In both cases, differentiation then occurs as
a consequence of relative isolation and biota
specialisation. However, also in both cases,
reduction and vulnerability of both the number
and variety of species is accentuated with
the impact of one particular living form -
humankind - and its associated evaluation of
land not as habitat but as potential for real
estate and commodification. Hence, and ironi-
cally, the dedication of land to ‘development’,
including tourism development. Hence also,
and even more ironically, the construction
of nature reserves and parks as ‘tourism
products’.
Strategies for Use Practice
How to promote sustainable use practices in
such a context? And all the more so when
tourism - with all its associated infrastructural
and environmental constraints - is fast becom-
ing the common denominator in the develop-
ment strategy of many small islands?
Once again, it is the ‘openness-closure’
paradigm which suggests plausible answers.
Let us start from within. Given the tower-
ing role of specific individuals within small
island communities, much can be achieved by
identifying and promoting ‘champions’ from

amongst the island communities’ leadership.
The transparency of decision making makes
it so much easier to praise and commend
those decisions, and the persons behind those
decisions, which support sustainability, Active
members within civil society, environment
lobby groups or green-sensitive political
parties can show and extend their support to
key individuals, institutions or businesses
who adopt or promote more sustainable user
practices. The rapid spread of information in
a small island community, with or without
the use of formal media, ensures quick and
cheap publicity.
Let us now continue from without. The
impact of trans-territorial and/or trans-
national forces can be very significant on
small islands. These external agents must not
be underestimated as prime movers of change.
Take, for example, the presence and role of
the diaspora, the sum total of those individuals
who have left their home island and settled
elsewhere. These emigrants could typically be
more numerous, as well as of better financial
means, than the locals who opted to stay put.
They are the ones most likely to resort to
multiple return tourism, and to spend longer
nights on ‘their’ island whenever they visit
family and friends. They are usually more
post-materialist and environmentally sensitive
(Inglehart, 1977), more strident and critical of
the state of the local island environment. Their
opinions count, and it pays - often literally -
for their local cousins to listen.
Thirdly, the amalgam of local and global
can nurture a very particular form of island
identity. Successful island peoples are often
ones who have developed a fairly broad
common definition of who they are, in rela-
tion to the ever looming external world.
The corner stone of economic success is
the creation of a society suffused with trust
and social cooperation amongst its members
(Srebrnik, 2000: 56).
Island Identity
Islands, especially small islands, come along
with some distinct advantages in relation to
the construction of identity.
First, their geographical precision facili-
tates a (unique) sense of place (Weale, 1992);
they have a natural deployment towards the
sea and a maritime destiny that facilitates
trade; and they are endowed with an obvi-
ous sense of alterity with the rest of the
world beyond the horizon. Place, and its
shared definition, fosters (though it does not
guarantee) a sense of unitarism.
Second, ‘place’ can be invented and recon-
stituted - though it can also be lost - with
encroaching globalization. After all, most
small ‘cross-roads’ islands have been obliged
to operate, or were even historically con-
structed, as global platforms (Churchill
Semple, 1911: 424; Connell & King, 1999:
3-4).
Thus, and thirdly, small islands tend to
do a better job, culturally and economically,
when they are well-run jurisdictions with
open export-geared economies, harbouring an
ethnie: a people, a ‘moral community’ with
a shared history and language (Fukuyama,
1996). Island identity can, in this way, replace
ethnicity, class or political partisanship as
the referent social fabric, still respecting the
openness-closure dialectic - and therefore
not suggesting defensive mono-culturalism
or xenophobia. This facilitates a ‘learning
organisation’ setting (McClelland, 1967),
open to diversity, pluralism and the toning
down of social class and/or status barriers
and tensions. All the more so at a time
when powerful forces of localism are being
unleashed everywhere (Bartmann, 2000).
Fourthly, the compacted social space,
intense webbing and networking of social
dynamics, and the manner in which the
consequences of decisions are sudden, rapid,
total and visible provides easy lessons in
17
 cause-effect relationships. The damage, typi-
cally to the natural environment, caused by
the wrong decisions is therefore immediate
and readily visible to one and all. It becomes a
glaring reminder of bad policies, and quickly
associated with the instigator(s) of such bad
policies.
Enter Tourism
Tourism provides a sinister twist to this
condition. Although the industry permits
what appears to be a cheap and easy cashing
in on natural resources - sun, sea, sand -
unless the fourth ‘s’ of sustainability is also
present, then what appeared as a cash cow
could soon degenerate into an ecological
catastrophe. Tourists invariably bring along
added pressure on energy, fuel demands for
imported food and raw materials, contribute
to solid waste, clogged drainage, roads and
telephone lines, and are party to polluted air
and beaches. One cannot repeat enough, and
the literature confirms this time and time
again: the tourism impact is nowhere more
sudden, pervasive, transparent - and perhaps
even irrevocable - as on islands and their
communities, especially smaller islands
(Apostolopoulos & Gayle,
18 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
2002; Briguglio et al., 1996; Conlin & Baum,
1995; Gossling, 2003; Lockhart & Drakakis-
Smith, 1996). UNESCO recognized this
island condition as early as 1976. If sustain-
able development is already a headache; then
surely, sustainable tourism in small islands
is even more impossible!
Specific Practices
How, then, to buck the trend?
Each and every island is unique; and each
has the promise of serving as a geographi-
cally total environment. Such a condition
resulting naturally from isolation renders
most islands ideal for serving as advance
posts, laboratories for experiments in novel
uses and practices. The island of Iceland
is today a key leader in genetic decoding,
thanks to its extensively well-documented
genealogical heritage (Vesilind, 2000). The
island of Mafia, off Zanzibar, is the WHO
test site for the elimination of elephantiasis
(The Economist, 2003b). The island of
Tristan da Cunha may hold the key to
the asthma and lung cancer genes (Scott,
2003). Islands are also obvious starting
points for designing sustainable ecotourism
programmes via biosphere reserves, national
parks and other diversity-rich areas (Di
Castri & Balaji, 2002).
Turning to sustainable island
tourism, Lelaulu (1994) offers
four basic suggestions:
a. Zoning: Keep tourists concentrated in one
place for as long as you can during their visit
to a particular island. Waikiki Beach on Oahu,
Hawai’i, is one such good example. The
tourism policy of the Maldives - a Muslim
country - is another. This policy is easier
to introduce and implement in the case of
archipelagic island territories.
b. Less but Better & Richer: Take Fewer
Tourists who will stay longer and spend
more. Again, small islands enjoy a net
advantage here. They do not need millions
of tourists to make a difference to their gross
national product. And access - by air or by
sea - is more easily controlled. A relatively
expensive pricing policy, accompanied by
quality tourism infrastructure, is typically
enough to keep the hordes away. Icelandair
and Air Seychelles have done this very
effectively. Doumenge (1998: 341) narrates
an interesting case, drawn from the Carib-
bean:
“[On] the small island of St Barthelemy, the
airport has a very small airstrip, accessible
only to small planes having not more than
twenty seats (including that of the pilot); this
drastically limits tourist access, and offers an
efficient means of control.”
Another example is drawn from the island
called Martha’s Vineyard, Massachussetts,
USA:
“High prices keep Martha’s Vineyard exclu-
sive, although other tourists can come to
observe the celebrities on
day trips, their numbers
being controlled by a ferry boat licensing Conclusion For all of history, and for as long as a trace
system. About 100,000 people are on the It is ironic that it has been the tourism of it remains on the face of the earth, our
island [of whom 10,000 residents] at any one industry which has obliged many small island generation is likely to be remembered as
time in the summer” (Royle, 2001: 196). territories to start recognising that their the one that has made the most spectacular
natural environment is a key resource which technological progress and yet caused the
c. Do not compete on sun, sand and sea: cannot be allowed to deteriorate. Both guests most harm to the planet. With their status as
When islands compete as any other sun, and hosts can participate in the campaign platforms of extreme renditions of the human
sand and sea destination, they lose out on to economise on waste generation, choose condition, islands bear the most dramatic trace
their distinctive characteristics. They become sustainable products, keep the place clean, of such a state of affairs. They also act as the
effectively placeless, just another ‘paradise’ re-use or recycle specific products and finally proverbial miner’s canary, providing early
destination on the tourist brochure. One to dispose of inevitable waste in the proper warning signals of environmental problems
should exploit and showcase the charm, way. The campaign should be a way of which require urgent attention and which are
history and culture which makes every island life; islanders should takle pride in being not typically restricted to islands (Baldacchino
unique. This diversity management strategy custodians of their environment, even if they & Milne, 2000: 241). Small may be beautiful;
-geared towards ‘ecotourism’ - will tend to do it for the sake of foreigners! but it is also vulnerable (Cropper, 1994).
attract less but ‘better’ tourists, with a ‘host-
guest’ encounter more likely to be synergetic
than standardising (Baldacchino, 1997). Postscript: A Case for ‘Island Studies’
Moreover, this recipe provides hope for the It would be a pity to end on a depressing note. It has already been argued that one characteristic
development of a viable tourism product in of (especially small) islands is the manner in which the cause-effect relationship is typically
‘cold water’ islands. quicker, deeper and visibly so. Such a phenomenon is in itself an invitation to consider
the richness of the cause-effect relationship which is sadly often fragmented into separate
d. Involve the local community. Mass tourism disciplines and specialisms. The close inter-relationship between an island’s geography,
is hard put to offer its clients a taste of local ecology, demography and economics - to mention a few key issues - and the proneness of
culture. Very often this amounts to “staged islands to all kinds of ‘externalities’ are, in themselves, a lesson in the importance of inter-
authenticity” (McCannell, 1973): cultural and pluri-disciplinary strategies. Which is why ‘island studies’ - also known as ‘nissology’
programmes often invented specifically to (McCall, 1994) - today beckons as a field of study, research and inquiry per se. Islands need
serve and amuse the tourist, and with no to be studied and evaluated on their own terms, preferably in comparison to other islands, and
resonance whatsoever with the local popula- respectful of their ‘openness - closure’ alterity. For example, it remains bitterly ironic that,
tion. Like the eponymous tourist souvenirs with close to 10% of the world’s population - over 550 million people - living on islands,
which have been manufactured elsewhere, INSULA remains the only international journal dedicated to island studies. Indeed, there is
and which therefore must be imported. no other way except the holistic way to properly and humbly understand, and then hopefully
Rather, one should involve local artists, adopt, sustainable development practices.
local farmers and local service providers,
improving the lot of the locals, while assuring
a better host-guest interaction. Locals are also
meant to include what is alas too frequently
a silent or invisible majority: women. This
strategy nurtures all round ownership of
tourism, and an appreciation that its benefits
are widely and indigenously shared, rather
than siphoned off to the few and foreign. The
latter leads easily to resentment, recoil or
outright hostility (Pearce, 1987). What kind
of sustainable island tourism is that which
warns its tourists not to depart from the
relative security of the hotel precinct? Again,
it is islands, bearing high rates of tourism
penetration, which have served as sites for the
development of the aptly-named ‘irritation
index’ (Doxey, 1976; Mathieson & Wall,
1992: 137-8; McElroy & De Albuquerque,
1994: 14).

19
 References
APOSTOULOPOULOS, Y. & D.J. GAYLE, eds. 2002.
Island Tourism and Sustainable Development: Carib-
bean, Pacific and Mediterranean Experiences,
Westport CT, Praeger.
BALDACCHINO, G. 1997. Global Tourism & Informal
Labour Relations: The Small Scale Syndrome at Work,
London, Mansell.
BALDACCHINO, G. 2000 ‘The Challenge of Hypother-
mia: A Six-Proposition Manifesto for Small Island
Territories’, The Round Table, No. 353, pp. 65-79.
BALDACCHINO G. & D. MILNE, eds. 2000. Lessons from
the Political Economy of Small Islands: the Resourceful-
ness of Jurisdiction, Basingstoke, Macmillan.
BARTMANN, B. 2000. ‘Patterns of Localism in a Chang-
ing Global System’ in G. Baldacchino & D. Milne, eds.,
op. cit., Basingstoke, Macmillan, pp. 38-55.
BARTMANN, B. 2002. ‘Meeting The Needs of Microstate
Security’, The Round Table, Nº. 365, pp. 361-374.
BOISSEVAIN, J. ED. 1996 Coping with Tourists:
European Reactions to Mass Tourism, Oxford,
Berghahn Books.
BRAY, M. & H.E. FERGUS 1986. ‘The Implications of Size
for Educational Development: Montserrat, A Caribbean
Case Study’, Compare, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 91-106.
BRIGUGLIO, L. 1995. ‘Small Island Developing States
and their Economic Vulnerabilities’, World Develop-
ment, Vol. 23, No. 9, pp. 1615-1632.
BRIGUGLIO, L., B. ARCHER, J. JAFARI & G. WALL,
EDS. 1996. Sustainable Tourism in Islands and Small
States - Vol. 1: Issues and Policies, London, Pinter.
BRINKLOW, L., F. LEDWELL & J. LEDWELL, eds. 2000.
Message in a Bottle: The Literature of Small Islands,
Charlottetown, Canada, Institute of Island Studies,
University of Prince Edward Island.
CARLQUIST, S. 1965. Island Life: A Natural History of
the Islands of the World, Garden City NY, The Natural
History Press.
CHURCHILL SEMPLE, E. 1911. Influences of the
Geographic Environment. London, Constable.
CLIFFORD, J. 1997. Routes: Travel and Translation
in the late Twentieth Century, Harvard MA, Harvard
University Press.
CONLIN, M. & T.G. BAUM 1995. Island Tourism:
Management Principles and Practice, Chichester,
John Wiley & Sons.
CONNELL, J. & R. KING 1999. ‘Island Migration in a
Changing World’. In R. King & J. Connell, eds. Small
Worlds, Global Lives: Islands and Migration, London,
Pinter, pp. 1-26.
20 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
CROPPER, A. 1994. ‘Small is Vulnerable’, Our Planet
(UNESCO), Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 9-12.
DARWIN, C. 1859/1979. On the Origin of Species by
means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of
Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life, New York,
Avenel Books.
DE KADT, E.B., ed. 1979. Tourism: Passport to Develop-
ment?, Oxford, Oxford University Press for the World
Bank and UNESCO.
DI CASTRI, F. & V. BALAJI, eds. 2002. Tourism,
Biodiversity and Information, Leiden, Backhuys.
DOUMENGE, F. 1998. ‘Considerations for Small
Island Development Today’ in G. Baldacchino & R.
Greenwood, eds., Competing Strategies of Socio-
Economic Development for Small Islands, Charlot-
tetown, Canada, Institute of Island Studies, University
of Prince Edward Island, pp. 337-347.
DOXEY, G.V. 1976. ‘When enough is enough: The
Natives are restless in Old Niagara’, Heritage Canada,
No. 2, pp. 26-27.
EASTERLY, W. & A. KRAAY 2000. ‘Small States, Small
Problems? Income, Growth and Volatility in Small
States’, World Development, Vol. 28, No. 11, pp.
2013-2027.
ESPINDOLA, R. 1987. ‘Security Dilemmas’ in C. Clarke
& T. Payne, eds. Politics, Security and Development in
Small States, London, Allen & Unwin, pp. 63 -80.
FUKUYAMA, F. 1996. Trust: The Social Virtues and the
Creation of Prosperity, London, Penguin.
GOSSLING, S., ed. 2003. Tourism and Development
in Tropical Islands: Political Ecology Perspectives,
Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.
INGLEHART, R. 1977. The Silent Revolution: Changing
Values and Political Styles among Western Publics,
Princeton NJ, Princeton University Press.
LELAULU, L. 1994. ‘Safe Tourism: It is Possible’, Our
Planet (UNEP), Vol. 6, No. 1, pp. 17-18.
LOCKHART, D. & D. DRAKAKIS-SMITH (1996) Island
Tourism: Problems and Perspectives, London, Mansell.
LOWENTHAL, D. 1987. ‘Social Features’ in C. Clarke &
T. Payne, eds. Politics, Security and Development in
Small States, London, Allen & Unwin, pp. 26-49.
MCCALL, G. 1994. ‘Nissology: The Study of Islands’,
Journal of the Pacific Society, Vol. 17, Nos. 2-3,
pp. 1-14.
MCCANNELL, D. 1973. ‘Staged Authenticity: Arrange-
ments of Social Space in Tourist Settings’, American
Sociological Review, Vol. 79, pp. 589-603.
MCCLELLAND, D. 1967. The Achieving Society, New
York, Free Press.
MCELROY, J.T. & K. DE ALBUQUERQUE 1994. ‘Island
Tourist Profiles across the Destination Life-Cycle’,
Insula (UNESCO), Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 12-18.
MATHIESON, A. & G. WALL 1982. Tourism: Economic,
Physical and Social Impacts, London, Longman.
MILES, W.F.S. 1985. Elections and Ethnicity in French
Martinique: A Paradox in Paradise, New York,
Praeger.
MOOREHEAD, A. 1966. The Fatal Impact: An Account of
the Invasion of the South Pacific: 1767-1840, London,
Hamish Hamilton.
NASA 2003. ‘Eruption’, Space Station Science -
Picture of the Day, May 23rd. Available (with
photo) at: http://science.nasa.gov/ppod/y2003/
23may_eruption.htm?list955889
NUNN, P.D. 1994. Oceanic Islands, Oxford, Blackwell.
QUAMMEN, D. 1996. The Song of the Dodo: Island
Biogeography in an Age of Extinctions. London:
Pimlico.
ROYLE, S.A. 2001. A Geography of Islands: Small Island
Insularity, London, Routledge.
SCOTT, S. 2003. ‘Loneliest Island may hold Key to
Asthma’, National Post, Canada, January 18th. Also
available at: http://www.sk.lung.ca/content.cfm/xtra46
SREBRNIK, H. F. 2000. ‘Identity, Culture and Confidence
in the Global Economy’. In G. Baldacchino & D. Milne
(eds.), op. cit., Basingstoke, Macmillan, pp. 56-71.
THE ECONOMIST 2003a. ‘On the World’s Rich List’,
London, The Economist Group, May 17th, p. 33.
THE ECONOMIST 2003b. ‘The End of Elephant Man’,
London, The Economist Group, July 26th, p. 75.
VESILIND, P. 2000. ‘In Search of the Vikings’, National
Geographic, May, pp. 5-27.
VILLAMIL, J.J. 1977. ‘Size and Survival: Planning in
Small Island Systems’, Microstate Studies, No.1,
pp. 1-7.
WALLACE, A. 1880/1975. Island Life, or the Phenomena
and Causes of Insular Faunas and Floras, including
a Revision and attempted Solution to the Problem of
Geological Climates, New York, AMS Press.
WHITTAKER, R. 1999. Island Biogeography: Ecology,
Evolution, and Conservation, Oxford, Oxford University
Press.
WINCHESTER, S. 1985. Outposts: Journeys to the
Surviving Relics of the British Empire, Kent, Sceptre
Books.
WORSLEY, P. 1968. The Trumpet shall Sound: A Study
of ‘Cargo Cults’ in Melanesia, London, Paladin.
YOUNG, L. B. 1999. Islands: Portraits of Miniature
Worlds, New York, W.H. Freeman & Co.

The idea of putting aside areas to be main-
tained over time for the protection of nature
or some of its components, such as wildlife,
is in fact an old concept. In 1240, under
the reign of Abou Zakaria, a member of the
Hafside dynasty, a number of game reserves
were created and protected in Lake Ichkeul,
Tunis, which continued to be managed during
the times of the Ottoman Empire in the
Twentieth Century, and that today form part
of Ichkeul National Park. The Greeks and
Romans were, perhaps, the first to formally
establish protected areas. In the Natural
History, written by Caius Plinius Secundus,
actions are described which were taken by
the Roman Empire to control special areas
with a view of preserving wildlife. Special
The establishment of marine protected areas are receiving
increased attention in a number of regions such as in the
Caribbean as a mechanism to address the conserva-
tion of marine biodiversity from threats such
as pollution and over exploitation
of fisheries.
mention should be made of the hima system,
drawn up under Islam as a legal framework
with continues to rule the management of
protected areas for the benefits of communi-
ties (Rosabal 2003). However it is correct to
say that the protected areas1 movement in its
modern form is associated to the establish-
ment of the firsts National Parks in the United
States of America, particularly Yosemite
National Park, which origins go back to 1864,
and Yellowstone National Park, established
in 1872 and considered as the “father” of
many National Parks worldwide (Phillips
2002).
The global network of protected areas has
grown from over 1,000 protected areas in
the 60’s to an impressive number of 102,102
sites in 2003, covering 18.8 million km²
(IUCN and UNEP-WCMC, 2003) an area
larger than that of India and China combined.
This total area represents 11.5% of the
global land surface but only includes 0,5%
of the world’s oceans. This impressive
growth reflects and increasing
BY PEDRO ROSABAL
political commitment to conserve the Earth’s
remaining biological diversity but also the
high social and cultural values that societies
place on them.
1
IUCN, The World Conservation Union, adopted the
following definition “Area of land and/or sea especially
dedicated to the protection and maintenance of
biological diversity, and of natural and associated
cultural resources, and managed through legal or
other effective means” (IUCN, 1994).
Pedro Rosabal is geographer and M.Sc on
Environmental Planning and Management.
He has over 22 years of experience on
protected areas issues. His experience
includes: evaluation of terrestrial and
submarine landscapes; management of
PAs; tourism and ecotourism; teaching
and research, and; work with FAO and UNEP’s Caribbean
Environment Programme. He joined the IUCN Programme on
Protected Areas in 1994. His work in IUCN includes support to
the World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA); involvement
in protected areas projects worldwide; strategic analysis, and;
advice to a number of international conventions. He is at
present Senior Programme Ofcer of IUCN.
Email: pedro.rosabal@iucn.org
21
 Another important issue was also evident
during the Vth IUCN’s World Parks Congress,
held in Durban, South Africa, 8-17 September
2003: the increasing recognition of the many
benefits provided by protected areas to society.
The theme of the Congress “Benefits beyond
Boundaries” focused the debate on the contri-
bution of protected areas to people through the
provision and maintenance of environmental
goods and ecological services. As noted in the
Durban Accord “…we see protected areas as
a vital means to achieve the synergy between
conservation, the maintenance of life support
systems and sustainable development. We see
protected areas as pro-
viders of benefits beyond
boundaries –beyond
their boundaries on a
map, beyond the bound-
Scuba diving is a major rec-
reational activity in many
island’s protected areas, being
in some cases a key source
of income for the economy.
(Photo of Pedro Rosabal taken
by José Martins in Fernando
de Noronha Marine Park,
Brazil).
The Exuma Cays Land and Sea Park, Bahamas, in replenishing fish stocks in waters around the park thus playing a
crucial role to maintain sustainable fisheries. The Park also attracts a number of visitors, many of them willing to
contribute to its conservation through donations.
22 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
aries of nation-states, across societies, genders
and generations” (IUCN 2003).
Protected areas play an important role in
biodiversity conservation, as recognised in
article 8 of the Convention on Biological
Diversity (CBD), but also they contribute to
the achievement of globally agreed goals,
such as the targets agreed by the World
Summit on Sustainable Development and
the Millennium Development Goals, particu-
larly goal 7 on ensuring environmental
sustainability. Protected areas are also a
key component of National Biodiversity
Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs) that
have been prepared by almost all countries
signatories of the CBD. Moreover the role
of protected areas is particularly important
when considered in the context of Islands
as they have to respond to key challenges
associated to islands ecosystems such as: (a)
isolation; (b) high vulnerability to natural and
human-induced disturbances; (c) dynamic
environments; (d) high demand for limited
available resources, mainly for land and
water; (e) species diversity is generally low
and species turnover may be high, making
them vulnerable to accelerated extinctions;
(f) normally they are rich in endemic spe-
cies which increase their conserva-
tion values, and (g) high ratio
of shoreline to total land area,
particularly in small islands (Salm
and Clark, 1984).
Indeed islands ecosystems
deserve particular attention in rela-
tion to conservation priorities. Just
few facts: (a) from the 234 Centres
of Plant Diversity and Endemism
19 (8% of the total) are located in
Small Islands States (WWF and
IUCN, 1997); (b) some islands
have remarkable high percentage
of endemism of vascular plants, such as the
island of Saint Helena and the Hawaiian
islands, each with 83.3% of endemism, quite
remarkable considering that Australia has
the highest percentage (95.4%) of endemism
(WWF and IUCN, 1997); (c) from the top
50 countries with highest number of global
threatened species of birds 7 (14%) are in
Small Islands States, and some islands have
high percentage of threatened species in
relation to their total birds population, such
as Pitcairn Islands (42%), French Polynesia
(38%) and Cook Islands (26%) (Birdlife
International, 2000); (d) from the total number
(76) of Endemic Birds Areas of the World of
critical priority for conservation, 22 (29%)
are in islands (Stattersfield and Crosby 1998);
(e) from the global 200 ecoregions more
important for biodiversity conservation
22 (11%) are associated to islands (Olson
and Dinerstein 1998), and; (e) coral reef
ecosystems, one of the most productive
ecosystems on Earth and the second after
rainforests in species richness, are associated
to islands, for example only the Insular Carib-
bean Region contains over 11% of the world’s
reefs (Spalding et al 2000).
Recognising the importance of protected
areas national governments, NGOs and other
stakeholders, have made great efforts in
establishing them over the years. When
looked at the evolution in the establishment Environmental edu-
cation and awareness
of protected areas in Small Islands States over campaigns are deliv-
the past decade (see Table 1) it is extremely ered to people visiting
encouraging to see that the total number of many of the protected
areas and other natural
protected areas have increased from 137 to environments in the
the impressive number of 1037. The extension Bahamas.
covered by those areas has increased 300%
from that existing in 1993. This is an impres-
sive achievement of Small Islands States and
represents a strong commitment to conserva-
tion. It is also important to note the shifting
in priorities in the establishment of different
categories of protected areas. While in 1993
emphasis was given to the establishment of
Nature Reserves, Wildlife Sanctuaries and
National Parks (according to 1978’s IUCN
Categories for Protected Areas). Since then
more attention has been giving in establishing
Managed Resource Protected Areas (Category
VI, IUCN 1994) which allows for the multiple
use of natural resources within those areas.
When considering that establishing and
managing protected areas demand important In the Pacific Island of Samoa consultation with village’s council was essential to promote the establishment of small
fish reserves to address the decline in catches of seafood from coastal areas.
financial and human resources the key
question is whether or not is it worthy, par- Protected Areas and their factors associated with global change?
ticularly considering other pressing socio- Benefits to Islanders Expanding population, growing resource
economic and development priorities faced Humanity is facing one of the most important consumption, climate change and globaliza-
by national governments. Some examples challenges of all times: how to deal with the tion are among the forces altering the
may help to address this key question. socio-economic, cultural and environmental context within which society develops. All
these changes require adequate long-term
responses that, in addition to priorities
associated with economic development,
poverty alleviation, health and education,
placed additional burden on national govern-
ments. While for some people investments
in protected areas can be seen as a “luxury”
these investments are in fact of paramount
importance if we acknowledge that our
social, economic and ecological long-term
well-being depends upon the continued
ability of protected areas to deliver ecosys-
tem goods and services for the benefit of
people. There are a number of cases that
can substantiate that investing in island’s
protected areas would result in the delivery
Saltworks areas (Las Salinas) of Ibiza are of international importance for migratory birds and also used for
a variety of benefits, not only to islanders
environmental research, education and awareness programmes. but also to the global community.

23

The protected areas existing in Ibiza and Formentera are also of crucial importance to maintain significant
areas of Mediterranean forest.
Contributing to
sustainable fisheries:
Bahamas: The Exuma Cays Land and Sea
Park (45,620 ha) was established in 1958
covering both the terrestrial and marine
environments associated to these islands.
The Park became a no-take fisheries reserve
in 1986, the first of its kind in the Wider
Caribbean region and one of the first’s non-
take marine reserves worldwide. Research has
shown that the concentration of conch in the
park is 31 times greater than outside the park,
providing several million conchs per year to
areas outside the park available to be harvested
by fishermen. Additionally, tagged grouper
from the Exuma Park have been caught off of
both north and south Long Island (Bahamas),
indicating the Park is replenishing grouper
stocks in areas as far as 150 miles away.
Tagged spiny lobsters from the Exuma Park
are found replenishing the marine environment
of Cat Island, which is 70 miles away. The
success of fisheries resource replenishment
in the Exuma Park led the government to
announce a policy decision in 2000 to protect
20% of the Bahamian marine ecosystem,
doubling the size of the national protected
areas system (WCPA News 2002).
St Lucia: In 1992 the Soufriere Regional
Development Foundation (a community-
based NGO) the Department of Fisheries and
the Caribbean Natural Resources Institute
(CANARI) initiated a participatory process
to design a coastal zone system that could
respond to increased –and often conflicting-
demands on fisheries, tourism, and maritime
24 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
transportation. The zoning resulting from
this initiative was the Soufriere Marine
Management Area, formally established in
1995, which includes four marine reserves
covering 35% of available fishing grounds.
Research indicates that conservation these
areas have increased by 46% for large fish
traps and 90% for small fish traps in 5 years
(Australian Department of the Environment
and Heritage 2003).
Samoa: In the Pacific Island of Samoa, like
in many countries in the tropics, catches
of seafood from coastal areas, lagoons
and inshore reefs have been decreasing
over the past 10 years. Reasons for this
decline include over-exploitation, the use
of destructive fishing methods (including
explosives, chemicals and traditional plant-
Atoll das Rocas it is also an important site for the conservation of the marine environment in the South Atlantic and it
constitutes a source for replenishment of fish stocks in the waters surrounding it.
derived poisons) and environmental distur-
bances. In order to address this problem the
Samoan Fisheries Division initiated in 1995
a community-based extension project in
65 villages which recognised the village
fono (council) as the prime responsible
for actions. A large number of villages
(38) choose to establish small Village Fish
Reserves in part of their traditional fishing
areas and decided to actively support and
enforce government laws banning the use of
explosives and chemicals for fishing. Some
villages also set minimum size limits for
capturing fishes. While many of the village
reserves are small (ranging from 5,000 to
175,000 m²), their number and the small
distance among them, forms a network of
fish refuges. After several years of existence
of this network of small Fish Reserves the
fisheries stocks have increased in 30 to
40% and there are signs of recovery in reefs
previously affected by destructive fishing
methods. As the Fish Reserves are being
managed by communities which have direct
interest in their success, prospects for long-
term sustainability of this initiative are high
(King and Faasili 1998).
Supporting recreation
and tourism:
Virgin Islands: The Virgin Islands National
Park experiences and average of 650,000 rec-
reational visits per year with approximately
70 commercial businesses providing daily
excursions, mainly to cruise ship passengers,
to key areas within the park. Tourism visits for
the entire U.S. Virgin Islands increased from
470,300 in 1991 to 592,000 (close to 26%)
in 2001. The financial revenue associated
to the recreational use of the park is one
of the most important sources of income
for the population of the islands and also
contributes financially to the conservation and
management of the park (WCPA-Caribbean
2003).

On-going research of the state of conservation and

dynamics of the Posidenia prairies in Ibiza and For-
mentera, Spain, has been fundamental to explain the
importance of this ecosystem to ensure the long-term
sustainability of traditional fisheries and to maintain
coastal dynamics.

TABLE 1 - Comparison of Protected Area Coverage for Small Islands States for the last decade
Country 1993 2003
No. Extension Categories No.of Extension Categories
of Pas (ha) I II III IV V Pas (ha) Ia Ib II III IV V VI None
Antigua & Barbuda 2 6.128 2 13 6.628 5 3 3 2
Bahamas 10 124.364 1 4 5 38 145.838 1 10 27
Barbados 0 0 6 270 1 1 1 3
Belize 14 323.121 3 4 7 84 1.242.118 3 23 3 28 2 19 6
Cape Verde 0 0 51 1.415 51
Comoros 0 0 1 40.400 1
Cook Islands (New Zealand) 1 160 1 5 1 1 3
Cuba 53 892.757 9 9 15 20 69 3.317.550 2 28 1 20 6 12
Cyprus 4 75.337 1 3 13 78.849 1 6 3 3
Dominica 1 6.872 1 7 20.395 3 1 3
Fiji 5 18.922 5 36 29.589 12 1 2 21
Fed. States of Micronesia 0 0 2 2
Grenada 0 0 2 728 1 1
Guinea-Bissau 0 0 6 6
Guyana 1 58.559 1 3 486.000 2 1
Haiti 3 9.700 2 1 9 7.354 2 6 1
Jamaica 1 1.520 1 168 994.728 1 1 2 2 137 25
Kiribati 3 26.630 2 1 11 58.841 4 6 1
Maldives 0 0 25 25
Malta 0 0 114 6.331 5 54 4 45 4 1 1
Marshall Islands 0 0 0 0
Mauritius 3 4.023 3 26 16.158 1 2 22 1
Nauru 0 0 0 0
Niue (New Zealand) 0 0 1 5.400 1
Palau 1 1.200 1 14 1.459 4 1 0 1 1 7
Papua New Guinea 5 82.016 3 2 64 1.083.845 3 2 24 35
Samoa (Western) 3 10.072 1 2 14 25.522 2 5 1 2 4
Singapore 1 2.796 1 7 4.029 3 1 2 1
Seychelles 3 37.893 1 2 21 45.228 4 1 7 8 1
Sao Tome and Principe 0 0 0 0
Solomon Islands 0 0 3 9.860 1 2
St. Kitts and Nevis 1 2.610 1 2 2.625 2
St. Lucia 1 1.494 1 49 9.861 1 1 1 29 17
St. Vincent & the Grenadines 2 8.284 2 28 8.284 25 3
Suriname 13 735.970 2 11 15 1.981.220 2 10 3
Tonga 0 0 10 3.727 1 5 1 1 2
Trinidad and Tobago 6 15.728 1 5 86 32.243 4 1 5 14 1 61
Tuvalu 0 0 1 3.300 1
Vanuatu 0 0 33 18.265 1 32
Total: 137 2.315.664 22 34 1 59 21 1.037 9.688.060 35 61 106 66 211 27 235 296
Note: The preparation of the UN List of Protected Areas in 1993 only considered areas under Categories I to V of the 1978’s IUCN Management
Categories System, but the 2003 UN List of Protected Areas consider all Categories I to VI of the 1994’s IUCN Management Categories System. Areas under “None” refers to small
protected areas which categorization do not correspond to any of thze IUCN Management Categories, most of them are community-owned areas. (Table prepared by Virginia
Tschopp, Programme Assistant, IUCN Protected Areas Programme)
Sources: 1993 UN List of Protected Areas (UNEP, WCMC and IUCN, 1994) and 2003 UN List of Protected Areas (UNEP-WCMC and IUCN, 2003)

25

In Cuba a number of micro-reserves have been estab-
lished to protect endemic species of flora, such as in
Hatibonico, south-eastern coast of Cuba, well known for
its richness in endemic species of cactuses.
Bonaire: The Bonaire Marine Park (2,700
ha) was created in 1979 covering all reef
areas around the island. While the resident
population of the island is less than 15,000
inhabitants, almost 17,000 to 20,000 scuba
divers visited the park every year, thus
representing the main economic activity
of the island. Total gross revenue through
dive-based tourism was estimated at $US
23.2 million in 1991. The government also
generated an additional $340,000 through
taxes levied on visiting divers. The cost
associated with the establishment of the
park ($US 518,000) and the recurrent cost
associated to its management ($US 150,000)
was more than covered by visitor fees. The
park also generates employment to over
1,000 people. By 1994 the number of divers
increased to 24,081 and the total annual
visitation was of about 70,000 (Australian
Department of the Environment and Herit-
age 2003).
Lobsters, an important commercial specie throughout
the Caribbean, also benefits from the protection offered
by the Exuma Cays Land and Sea Park to the marine
environment.
26 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
Merrit Island National Wildlife Refugee:
Located at Cape Cañaveral, Florida, USA,
contains two areas, with a total extension of
4,000 ha, that have been closed to fishing
since 1962. Before these areas were closed,
there was intensive commercial and recrea-
tional fishing and fish stocks were heavily
depleted. The value of this reserve for
the adjacent recreational fishery has been
assessed by the number of record-size
(‘trophy’) fish caught by recreational fishers.
The area enclosing 100 km to the north and
south of the reserve was found to provide
62% of record-size black drum, 54% of red
drum and 50% of spotted sea trout. Fish
tagging studies show that these species
move out of the reserve and into the sur-
rounding waters benefiting the adjacent
recreational fishery (Australian Department
of the Environment and Heritage 2003).
Maintaining biodiversity
at different levels:
The Ngerukewid Islands Wildlife Preserve
of Palau: Created in 1956 this wildlife
preserve of 1,200 ha protects a representative
sample of the limestone islands and lagoon
ecosystems of the larger Rock Islands of
Palau, which boast exceptional levels of
marine biodiversity. Biodiversity surveys
carried out in the Preserve show that contains
200 to 300 fish species, or 15-20% of the
approximately 1,400 species reported for
Palau’s waters. It also protects 22% of all
the species of hard coral reported in Palau.
The pristine conditions of the islands due to
almost half a century of protection, combined
to the relative lack of introduced species
such as rats, make this area a unique natural
laboratory to study the terrestrial and marine
biodiversity and ecological processes occur-
ring in the Pacific, thus constituting an
important baseline area for biodiversity
research and for assessing the impacts of
climate change to Pacific islands ecosystems
(Idechong and Graham 1998).
Fernando de Noronha National Marine
Park and Atoll das Rocas Biological
Reserve: There are less than 10 oceanic
islands in the South Atlantic and these two
areas combined represents more than 50% of
the South Atlantic Ocean’s islands in terms
of terrestrial surface, thus constituting an
important repository for the maintenance
of biodiversity in the South Atlantic basin.
The vegetation of Fernando de Noronha
is classified as Insular Atlantic Forest, a
sub-type of Atlantic Rainforest, considered
the world’s most threatened tropical forest
(Conservation International 1995). F. de
Noronha is also considered a Global Centre
of Bird Endemism (Birdlife International
1998). Approximately 150,000 birds utilize
Atoll das Rocas, including the largest South
Atlantic colonies of sooty terns, brown
noddies and masked boobies. Based on the
diversity and number of individuals, Atoll das
Rocas is considered the single most important
site for tropical seabirds in the whole Atlantic
(Stattersfield and Crosby 1998). There is a
clear connection between these sites in rela-
tion to biological and ecological processes.
They are clearly linked in a marine ecologi-
cal corridor on which a number of species
such as marine turtles, dolphins, and sharks
survival depends. In the case of marine
turtles research indicates that both sites
are important feeding grounds for juvenile
hawksbill and loggerhead sea turtles during
their migration to the Eastern Atlantic Coast
of Africa (Sanches and Bellini 1998). In
recognition of the outstanding universal
values of these Brazilian sites for global
biodiversity conservation they were inscribed
in 2001 in the List of UNESCO’s World
Heritage Convention (Rosabal 2001).
System of Micro-Reserves of Cuba: One
of the key contributions from islands to
the theory and practice of conservation is
related to the importance of considering
the appropriate “scale” to plan and manage
protected areas. While it is true that larger
areas can enhance the effectiveness of
conserving species and ecosystems, this
is extremely difficult to achieve in islands
where land is a precious resource for social
and economic development. Besides, many
species living in islands ecosystems are
endemics or restricted-range species. A
number of islands states have adopted the
“micro-reserve” approach by which small
sites –ranging from 10 to little over 1,000 ha-
are dedicated to conservation of these species.
Such is the case of Cuba, an archipelago
characterized by a complex geological
structure, which have influence the high level
of endemism of its flora (49.6%). Since the
beginning of the 60’s close to 100 micro-
reserves have been established in Cuba for
protects its rich flora and some restricted-
range species of fauna. These small areas
have contributed to the in-situ conservation
of these species which is often combined,
particularly for plant species, with ex-situ
conservation programmes. Most of these
reserves are managed by local governments,
universities, and provincial botanical gardens
and they have been used for environmental
education and awareness programmes, thus
providing cultural benefits for the communi-
ties living around them and particularly for
children and the youth.
Promoting participation,
partnerships and awareness:
Negril: In this area, located in the Western
Coast of Jamaica, local concern about rapid
and unplanned tourism development resulted
in the establishment of local environmental
NGOs, formed by key local communities
representatives and other stakeholders, with
worked together to establish a Marine Park.
It soon became clear, however, that the park
by itself could not maintain Negril’s marine
resources unless the land-based impacts
upon them could be controlled. This led to
local advocacy for a protected area compris-
ing the entire Negril watershed and coastal
zone, resulting in the Negril Environmental
Protection Area in 1997 (equivalent Category
VI, IUCN). While management of the
area is implemented by a range of govern-
ment agencies, activities such as research,
monitoring, and environmental education,
are under the responsibility of the Negril
Environmental Education Trust, a consor-
tium of local and national government
agencies, local community associations and
NGOs. The Trust have been very successful
in raising awareness of local communities
on key environmental issues facing Negril
and in mobilizing actions by tour operators
and other local partners, to support the
management of the Marine Park (Geoghegan
and Renard 2002).
Misali: This is one of the two main islands
that make up Zanzibar, in the United
Republic of Tanzania. The Misali Island
Marine Conservation Area, which an exten-
sion of 2,200ha, was established in 1998. they were included in the List of UNESCO’s
This Conservation Area protects some of World Heritage Convention in 1999, are less
the finest coral reefs in the Indian Ocean. understood. In order to address this challenge
At the time of its establishment the area’s a number of environmental education and
natural resources were threatened by over- interpretation projects are under implementa-
fishing and unplanned tourism develop- tion supported by national and local govern-
ment. Promoting with local communities ments and a coalition of institutions including
the idea of establishing a protected area the University of Madrid, the University of
using “conventional” conservation argu- Valencia and the Ecological Group of the
ments was not well understood and did Balearic Islands. These projects also include
not receipt the support required. However
the strategy was soon changed to promote
the protected area based on the customary
Shariah (Islamic Law) as a means for nature
conservation and sustainable development.
This received immediate attention and
support by the overwhelmingly Muslim
population living in the island. Under
the Shariah the protected areas was desig-
Ecotourism is receiving increased attention as an
nated as a hima (an area strictly protected important source of income for local and national
equivalent to IUCN Category I). As a result economies in island states, such as in the Dominican
the Marine Conservation Area received the Republic, where it is one of the main activities occurring
in Los Haitises National park.
support of local communities that, since
its creation, have been actively involved
in its conservation and management. This
approach not only provided direct benefits
to the local communities through increased
fishing catch and the development of
ecotourism operations, but also contributed
to expand the teaching of the Islamic
approach to conservation in schools and Research on marine turtles undertaken by the TAMAR
mosques helping to create further environ- project in Fernando de Noronha has shown the impor-
tance of this area as feeding grounds for juvenile
mental awareness on the values –ethical,
hawksbill and loggerhead sea turtles during their
ecological and economic- of protected migration to the Eastern Atlantic Coast of Africa.
areas (Chernela, Ahmad et al 2002).
Ibiza and Formentera: There is a combina-
tion of terrestrial and marine protected
areas in these islands, which form part of
the Balearic Islands, Spain. The terrestrial
component mainly includes the coastal
lagoons and saltworks areas (Las Salinas) of
Ibiza and Formentera which were included
in the List of Wetlands of International
Importance (Ramsar Convention) in 1993 in
recognition of their importance for migratory
birds. The marine component includes the
open sea between these islands and it is
characterized by the presence of dense and
very well preserved prairies of oceanic
Posidonia (seagrass) and coral reefs. While
both islands and particularly Ibiza are well
Fernando de Noronha National Marine Park in Brazil it
known as an important tourist destination is not only protecting areas of high biodiversity values
in Spain, their natural values, for which but also important cultural and archeological sites.
27

Atoll das Rocas Biological Reserve in Brazil is considered the single most important site for tropical seabirds
in the whole Atlantic.
on-going biological monitoring and research,
which have been fundamental to demonstrate
the benefits of protecting the prairies of
oceanic Posidonia to maintain the exceptional
conditions of transparency and unpolluted
waters that attract many visitors and divers.
The Posidonia prairies are also crucial to
maintain the quality of the beaches while
offering coastal protection from storms.
Results from research are also systematically
References:
Australian Department of Environment and Heritage.
2003. The Benefits of Marine Protected Areas.
Australia, p. 8-14.
BirdLife International. 2000. Threatened Birds of the
World, Lynx Editions and BirdLife International,
Cambridge, UK, p. 1-29.
Conservation International. 1995. A Regional Analysis
of Geographic Priorities for Biodiversity Conservation
in Latin America and the Caribbean, Washington,
DC, USA, p 5-23.
CHERNALA, J., AHMAD, L., et al. 2002. Innovative
Governance of Fisheries and Ecotourism. PARKS
Magazine, vol. 12, n.2, June 2002, p. 28-36.
CHAPE, S., BLYTH, S., FISH, L., FOX, P., and SPALDING,
M (compilers). 2003. United Nations List of Protected
Areas. IUCN and UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK.
GEOGHEGAN, T., and RENARD, Y. 2002. Beyond
Community Involvement: lessons from the Insular
Caribbean. PARKS Magazine, vol. 12, n.2, June
2002, p. 16-22.
IUCN. 1994. Guidelines for Protected Area Management
Categories. CNPPA and WCMC. Cambridge, UK,
p. 5-10.
IDECHONG, NT., GRAHAM, T. 1998. The Ngerukewid
Islands of Palau: 40 years of managing a marine
protected area. . PARKS Magazine, vol. 8, n.2, June
1998, p. 17-22.
IUCN. 2002. Bahamas doubles national parks system.
IUCN-WCPA Newsletter, n. 88, issue 3, July 2002,
p. 9-11.
IUCN. 2003. The Durban Accord. IUCN, Switzerland,
p. 1-4.
28 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
communicated to local people, particularly to
fishermen groups and diving operators, who
recognize the importance of protecting these
areas to ensure the long-term sustainability
of traditional fisheries and tourism activities
(Rosabal 1999).
Final remarks
By no means has this article intended to sum-
marize all benefits derived from protected
KING, M., and FAASILI, U., 1998. A Network of Small
Community-Owned Village Fish Reserves in Samoa.
PARKS Magazine, vol. 8, n.2, June 1998, p. 11-16.
OLSON, DM., and DINERSTEIN, E. 1998. The Global
200: A Representation Approach to Conserving the
Earth’s Most Biologically Valuable Ecoregions. The
Journal of the Society of Conservation Biology. vol.12,
n. 3, p. 502-515.
PHILLIPS, A. 2002. Turning ideas on their head: The New
Paradigm for Protected Areas. IUCN, Switzerland.
ROSABAL, P. 1999. Ibiza: Biodiversity and Culture.
IUCN Evaluations of Natural and Mixed Properties
to the World Heritage List. IUCN, Switzerland, p.
182-190.
ROSABAL, P. 2001. Fernando de Noronha Archipelago
and Atoll das Rocas Tropical Insular Complex. IUCN
Evaluations of Natural and Mixed Properties to the
World Heritage List. IUCN, Switzerland, p. 127-140.
ROSABAL,P. 2003. Reflections about the contributions
made by the Mediterranean region to the fifth World
Parks Congress. Protected Areas in the Mediterranean
Basin. Junta de Andalucía, Spain, p. 167-176.
SALM, RV. and CLARK, JR. 1984. Marine and Coastal
Protected Areas: A Guide for Planners and Managers.
IUCN, Switzerland, p. 169-179.
SANCHES, TM and BELLINI, C. 1998. Juvenile Eretmo-
chelys imbricate and Chelonia mydas in the Archi-
pelago of Fernando de Noronha. Chelonian Conserva-
tion Biology, vol.3, n.2, p. 308-311.
STATTERSFIELD, AJ., CROSBY, MJ., et al. 1998.
Endemic Bird Areas of the World: Priorities for Biodiver-
sity Conservation. Birdlife Conservation Series, No. 7,
Birdlife International, Cambridge, UK, p. 27-43.
areas to people and society in general. As
mentioned above this was the theme of the
Vth World Parks Congress where a wealth
of experiences were presented, ranging from
the contribution of mountain protected areas
to maintain hydrological regimes and water
quality, to the role of protected areas in
climate change mitigation strategies (key out-
puts from the Congress are already posted at
http://www.iucn.org/themes/wcpa/wpc2003/;
the full proceedings would be available at this
site by end of December 2003). However,
the examples presented in this article, help
to acknowledge and understand the key role
of protected areas in contributing to the
well-being of islanders. Understanding this
role is particularly important in the context
of the Convention on Biological Diversity
as the key international instrument to ensure
continue provision of ecosystems services
by ensuring the conservation and sustainable
use of biological diversity. The author also
wanted to highlight what is not so often
obvious: that small things can make big
differences. Thus, island’s protected areas,
while smalls, are making a huge contribu-
tion not only to islanders but to the global
community as well.
SPALDING, M., et al. 2000. Atlas of Coral Reefs of the
World. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, p. 1-30.
UNEP and IUCN. 1994. United Nations List of National
Parks and Protected Areas. WCMC and CNPPA,
Cambridge, UK.
UNEP/CBD. 2003. Protected Areas: Proposed Pro-
gramme of Work of the Convention on Biological
Diversity. Montreal.
WWF and IUCN. 1997. Centres of Plant Diversity: A
Guide and Strategy for their Conservation. IUCN,
Cambridge, UK.
WCPA-Caribbean. 2003. Insular Caribbean Report to
the World Parks Congress. CNAP, Environmental
Defense, WWF, UNDP, UNEP and IUCN. Havana,
Cuba, p. 9-18.
Protected Areas are also essential to maintain remnants
of natural ecosystems almost in pristine conditions such
as those preserved in Desembarco del Granma National
Park and World Heritage site in Cuba.
 BY SÁLVANO BRICEÑO1

In many island settings in the world, ecosys-
tems are under threat as a result of human
activity, but natural disasters are likely to
amplify this trend in years to come. The loss
of species and the destruction of habitats and
ecosystems are undermining the resilience
of islands and their ability to withstand or to
recover from severe disturbances.2
Island states are vulnerable to almost all
types of natural, technological and human-
related hazards. 3 The most common and
most widely experienced events are tropical
Figure 1. Effects of environmental degradation and disaster risk
ENVIRONMENTAL DEGRADATION
Degradation of resource base
• Increased impacts of natural disaster
• Less ability to absorb impacts
• Decreased resilience
EFFECTS
Loss of traditional
coping practice
VULNERABILITY
cyclones and accompanying storm surges,
floods and landslides; a hazard, for example a
tropical cyclone can sometimes trigger other
hazards such as coastal and riverine floods.
Many small island states have grown
more vulnerable to disasters because of
environmental degradation caused by, among
others, poor land use, deforestation, pollution
from mining, rapid population growth. In
those island states where agriculture plays
a dominant role, indiscriminate burning,
deforestation and unsustainable cropping
Alteration of natural processes
• Global environmental change
• Changes in hazard patterns
Drought
patterns can enhance the effects of natural
disasters such as cyclone or droughts. Popula-
tion growth, social change and economic
transformation will place island communities
under further pressure and make them more
vulnerable to disasters.4
The South Pacific Regional Environment
Programme (SPREP) consider that the phe-
nomena consistent with the anticipated
adverse consequences of climate change are
already an unfortunate reality for Pacific
Islanders. This is reflected in extensive coastal
erosion, coral bleaching, persistent alterations
of regional weather patterns, decreased
productivity in fisheries and agriculture, and
plantations are suffering increased erosion.
On those islands that have not experienced
inappropriate coastal development, recent
devastating droughts have hit export crops,
causing serious water shortages and more
widespread and frequent occurrence of
mosquito-borne diseases. 5

Desertification Extreme weather

HAZARDS

Deforestation eventes
Less acces to Sea level rise
livelihoods Coastal areas degradation Wind storms
Regresion of glaciers
Sálvano Briceño , Venezuelan and a lawyer
Floods by training is, since 25 June 2001, the Director
Biodiversity loss
Rapid of the United Nations International Strategy for
Siltation
Disaster Reduction (ISDR) based in Geneva.
urbanization Wild fires
Formerly, he was the Coordinator of the
BIOTRADE and Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Trading Initiatives at UNCTAD Geneva, and
DISASTER RISK has been involved since 1978 in senior management positions at
the Ministry of Environment in Venezuela, the World Conservation
Union (IUCN) and since 1986, at the United Nations. He was the
1
This paper was prepared with inputs from the ISDR Secretariat rst Coordinator of UNEP’s Caribbean Environment Programme,
2
http://www.sperp.org.ws/topic/Biodiv_p.htm. based in Jamaica for 5 years, followed by 8 years in Geneva with
3
ISDR defines a hazard as a potentially damaging physical event, phenomenon and/or human activity, which may cause the Climate Change Secretariat (UNFCCC) and the Desertication
the loss of life or injury, property damage, social and economic disruption or environmental degradation. Secretariat (UNCCD). His professional career has focused on public
4
Climate variability and change and sea-level rise in the Pacific Island Region. A resource book for policy and management of international programmes in various
policy and decision makers, educators and other stakeholders (SPREP). elds of sustainable development.
5
Ibid.

29
 More than half of the 25 disaster prone
islands in the world are classified as small
island developing states (SIDS); as many of
them are still subsistence based, this means
that many island populations are dependant
on local biological and other natural resources
for survival. The importance of biological
diversity has long been recognized in certain
island settings, not simply because many
islanders are dependant on local biological
and other natural resources for survival but
because biodiversity conservation is also a
social and cultural issue. Fiji, for example,
has a Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan
and has valued its ecosystem services at
about USD 550 million per year.
Average economic losses from extreme
weather events over the 1990s were six times
greater than in the 1960s. 6 Small island
developing nations (SIDS) pay a particular
high price, mainly because many SIDS are
vulnerable to natural hazards. The disastrous
social and economic impacts due to Hur-
ricanes Georges and Mitch, as well as the
effects of the climate variability due to
the 1997/98 El Niño/La Niña events, have
highlighted that a single hazardous event can
destroy social and economic infrastructures
that have taken years to develop and upon
whose vitality local and national economies
depend. Extreme climate events can –and
do– set back the development process for
decades.
However, while much attention is focused
on global warming causing gradual, long-
term changes in average conditions, the most
immediate and more significant impacts are
likely to arise from changes in the nature
of extreme events (e.g. flooding, tropical
cyclones, storm surges) and climate vari-
ability (eg droughts and El Niño). The
possibility of more extreme
events such as tropical
cyclones and storm
surges coupled with
projected rates of
sea-level rise and
flooding will increase
6
2003 Geo Risk Research Dept., Munich Re., January 2003.
7
ESCAP Ministerial Conference on Environment and Development in Asia and the Pacific, August 2000, Japan.
8
ISDR: Disaster Reduction and Sustainable Development: Understanding the links between vulnerability and risk
to disasters related to development and environment. A background paper prepared for the World Summit for
Sustainable Development in Johannesburg in August - September 2002.
30 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
pressures on island ecosystems, as well as
on critical infrastructures (e.g. port facilities,
airports, roads), and vital utilities such as
power and water, coastal protection structures
and tourism facilities.
Disasters as a manifestation
of unsustainability
The traditional resilience of island communi-
ties to natural disasters is under threat from
unsustainable practices and various economic
and social pressures. The quick recovery
of ecosystems can no longer be assured:
poor farming and logging practices are
creating massive erosion during storms; over-
harvesting of coastal fish and invertebrates
remove important sources of nutrients from
coral reefs and sewage from urban areas have
destabilised near-shore coral communities
making these vital ecosystems less able to
withstand and recover from the waves and
rain of hurricanes.7
Disaster risk professionals now consider
that the vulnerability of societies to the
existing level of hazards is increasing and that
many countries are accumulating large latent
risk burdens such as growing populations
in hazardous locations, and the stripping
of environmental capacities to withstand
hazards. The escalation of severe disaster
events triggered by natural hazards and
related technological and
environmental disasters
is increasingly threat-
ening both sustain-
able development
and poverty reduc-
tion initiatives. It is
now accepted that a close correlation exists
between increased demographic pressure,
especially in developing countries, growing
environmental degradation (and accompany-
ing destruction of biodiversity), increased
human vulnerability and the intensity of the
impact of disasters.8
International support for
disaster reduction in SIDS
The combination of current and anticipated
impacts of climate variability and climate
change are of great and urgent concern
to SIDS. This concern has been aired in
numerous international fora over the past
decade or longer.
The Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action
(1994), held mid-way through the Interna-
tional Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction
(IDNDR), declared that priority attention
needed to be given to developing countries,
in particular the least developed, landlocked
states and small island developing states.
In the same year, the Barbados Declaration
(1994) which resulted from the Global
Conference on the Sustainable Development
of Small Island States also drew attention
to the fact that: “Small island states are
particularly vulnerable to natural as well as
environmental disasters and have limited
capacity to respond to and recover from such
disasters.”
In 2002, the WSSD Plan of Implementa-
tion, in its chapter on “sustainable develop-
ment of small island developing states”, calls
on the international community to extend
assistance to SIDS in support of local com-
munities and develop appropriate national
and regional organizations of SIDS for
comprehensive hazard and risk management,
disaster prevention, mitigation and prepared-
ness and help relieve the consequences of
disasters and extreme weather events.
In 2004, the Barbados Plan of Action +10
(BpoA+10) will provide substantive justifica-
tion for renewing and elevating political
commitment towards disaster reduction
and motivate further action of governments
and communities through an expanded pro-
gramme for the period covering 2005-2015
to coincide with the targets of the Millenium
Development Goals and the Commission for
Sustainable Development.

Commitment of SIDS to
disaster reduction
Many island states throughout the world
have, in varying degrees, taken steps in recent
years to address the challenges posed by
natural disasters and climate change. In many
settings, the management of disasters is now
widely recognized as an issue of national
concern, although it is equally understood that
strengthening regional linkages and fostering
a sense of common purpose improves overall
disaster and risk management capabilities.
The similarity of hazards that Pacific SIDS
face, the shared problems they experience
and a generally common approach adopted
in their institutional arrangements all provide
a fruitful basis for regional cooperation. The
current strategy for improving Pacific regional
collaboration rests on two primary objectives:
to support a highly functional coordinating
body, the South Pacific Applied Geoscience
Commission Disaster Management Unit
(SOPAC-DMU), established in July 2000, and
strengthen the capacity of national risk officials
to accomplish effective disaster management
programmes domestically.
SOPAC countries have integrated a set
of principles, the Comprehensive Hazard
and Risk Management (CHARM), into
their national development plans. These
principles envisage that changes are needed
to: accomplish a paradigm shift from manag-
ing disasters to managing risks; produce
more adequate hazard and vulnerability
assessments and improve presentation;
ensure uniform and consistent approaches to
common problems; ensure national integra-
tion and coordination; and enhance current
land use systems and tenure.
One of the pioneering endeavours to safe-
guard and develop a strong regional capability
for the coordination of information exchange,
training and technical assistance in support
of national biodiversity conservation efforts
in the Caribbean has been UNEP’s Regional
Programme for Specially Protected Areas and
Wildlife (SPAW) in the Wider Caribbean.
This programme has made it possible to
improve the management of national protected
areas and species in the region, including
the development of biosphere reserves and
develop specific regional, as well as national
management plans developed for endangered,
threatened or vulnerable species.
In the Caribbean, the Caribbean Disaster
Emergency Response Agency (CDERA), set
up by the Caribbean Community in 1991, has
worked to create an expanding infrastructure
for a methodical approach for developing
disaster management programmes among
member states, including multi-island projects.
The idea of disaster reduction has been
introduced in most regional initiatives at policy
level, including the Programme of Action for
Small Island States, and the programmes of the
Association of Caribbean States (ACS).
Disaster risk reduction
Disaster risk reduction or disaster risk
management focuses on the areas known to
be critical to risk amelioration, which can
be grouped into three key areas: (i) assess-
ment of the risk factors present; (ii) tools
and practices to reduce the risks; and (iii)
institutional mechanisms to support both risk
assessment and risk reduction.
Risk assessment concerns the identifica-
tion and analysis of hazards (natural and oth-
erwise), and the analysis of the environmental
changes and degradation and the socio-
economic vulnerabilities that exacerbate risk.
The information produced by risk assess-
ment or analysis allows for the determina-
tion of government policy in different sec-
tors (finance, agriculture, education, and
infrastructural development). Risk reduction
measures are most successful when they
involve the direct participation of the people
most likely to be exposed to hazards.
Risk assessment in Fiji
Risk assessment in Fiji consists of
detailed hazard and vulnerability assess-
ments, integrating the scientific, geologi-
cal and meteorological information with
information on the built environment
(building stock, infrastructure, critical
facilities and lifelines). The results and
inputs have had major implications in
many practical applications for disaster
management, such as in helping to
formulate building codes and to train
emergency services personnel.
The Yokohama Strategy and Plan of Action
for a Safer World (1994) describes risk assess-
ment as a: “required step for the adoption of
adequate and successful disaster reduction
policies and measures.” Risk assessment is
undertaken to review and assess the intensity
and extent of hazards and to evaluate the
relative degree of risk. It also includes detailed
quantitative and qualitative understanding
of risk, its physical, social, economic, and
environmental factors and consequences.
We need to know about the risks we face
in order to be able to determine what policies
and counter measures to implement. However,
risk awareness varies among individuals,
communities, agencies and governments,
according to their particular perceptions.
These can be influenced by the knowledge
of hazards and vulnerabilities, as well as
31
 by the availability of accurate and timely
information about them. The information on
hazard risks should be shared – and acted
upon – at three levels:
Local communities should have sufficient
familiarity with the hazards they are exposed to
and an understanding of advisory information
they may receive in an emergency in order to
act in a manner to advice, instruct or engage
the population in a manner that increases their
safety or reduces the possible loss of resources
on which the community depends.
National governments should prepare and
issue hazard warnings for their national territory
in a timely and effective manner to ensure that
warnings and related protective guidance are
directed to those populations determined to me
most vulnerable to the hazard risk.
Regional institutions should provide special-
ized knowledge, advice or benefit of experi-
ence in support of national efforts to develop
or to sustain operational capabilities related to
hazard risks experienced by countries sharing
a common geographical environment.
Institutional mechanisms are essential for
effective disaster risk reduction. Risk assess-
ment and risk reduction practices need to be
strongly supported by sound administration,
law and political processes. This includes
the following aspects, arranged in order
from more tangible to less tangible items:
organizational structures (departments,
consultative bodies, etc) and professional staff
resources; incorporation of risk reduction into
existing and new legislation; implementation
32 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
of laws via codes, standards, documents,
workshops, accountability, enforcement
and evaluation; integration across sectors
and government departments; and political
recognition and financial commitment.
Activities associated with
disaster risk reduction
Disaster risk management spans a wide range
of methods and activities – assessment and
analysis, mapping and data analysis, public
information, community participation, early
warning systems, policy and regulation,
project impact assessment, education pro-
grams, conservation practices, and political
processes.
While there are general approaches to risk
reduction, the specific approaches must be
tailored to local circumstances. Typically, the
risk reduction activities will not be done as
stand-alone projects, but will be implemented
as integral components of other programmes,
such as in specific development projects,
water resources management, planning and
land-use policies, environmental protection,
and community development.
Many countries and regions have begun to
adopt a more proactive approach on disaster
reduction of disaster preparedness and mitiga-
tion in place of the former emphasis of post-
disaster relief and rebuilding. Many of these
initiatives are provided in the global review
of disaster risk reduction initiatives, Living
with Risk (ISDR, 2003), which contains a
rich resource of information with examples
of effective risk reduction activities reported
from countries around the world.
Environmental management
The environment and disasters are inherently
linked. Environmental degradation affects
natural processes, alters humanity’s resource
base and increases vulnerability. Likewise, it
exacerbates the impact of natural disasters,
lessens overall resilience and challenges
traditional coping strategies. It is now well
know that practices that protect the integrity
of nature and ensure a wise use of natural
resources provide solutions to reduce vulner-
ability from which both the environmental
and disaster communities will benefit.
Environmental management can become a
cost-effective tool for disaster reduction while
serving many other objectives including
conservation of biodiversity, mitigation of
adverse global environmental changes and
poverty alleviation. The use of environmental
management and knowledge needs to be
promoted as a strategy for reducing risks.
Environmental actions that reduce vulner-
ability need to be identified and applied by
disaster reduction practitioners. Integrating
environmental management within existing
disaster reduction policy frameworks and
international strategies will build a safer
world.
At present, environmental management tools
do not systematically integrate trends in hazards
occurrence and vulnerability. Similarly, disaster
reduction practitioners do not systematically
explore the advantages of using environmental
management tools and approaches. Some
benefit might be drawn from the fact that
environmental tools were developed from a risk
management approach. Indeed environmental
and social impact assessment processes are
geared towards risk identification to address
them in the design of plans and projects.
Early warning systems
Early warning systems have an important role
to play in protecting the interests of societies
and communities. Political support is crucial
to ensure the technical and social relevance,
usefulness and efficiency of early warning
strategies. As a key element of any disaster
reduction strategy, early warning must be
integrated into sustainable development
policies. We need to broaden the historical Disaster reduction practices ISDR is convinced that resorting to disaster
focus of early warning to incorporate lesser- and climate change reduction tools and instruments to reduce
explored issues linked to longer-term hazards Disaster reduction practices will be chal- vulnerability to today’s climate variability
and phenomena such as climate change and El lenged by climate change, especially in SIDS. and hazards is an opportunity for a no-regrets
Niño and La Niña phenomena. However SIDS can provide the international adaptation approach to climate change that
momentum, given their vulnerability both to will also address extreme events. Learning
Early warning measures in SIDS extreme events and the impacts of climate to deal with climate variability and extremes
Mauritius offers an interesting example
of the high priority given by an island change in order to bridge the gap between is an excellent way of building adaptive
nation to early warning of cyclones. the disaster reduction and climate change capacity in the long run. In short, weather-
Its warning system is built into legisla- communities. related natural hazards and climate change
tion and legitimized by its links to the
Prime Minister’s office. The Mauritius ISDR is currently working to solidify the can no longer be treated separately in inter-
Meteorological Office is also part of links and bridge the gaps between climate national policy and funding.
the Prime Minister’s Office. The Central change and disaster reduction activities Steps are being taken to promote the
Cyclone Committee, a communication-
oriented central government by provides through enhanced exchange of information, involvement of disaster risk reduction experts
leadership to ensure the effectiveness of coordinate policy actions and building of in the next IPCC assessment process, which
the warning system. This endorsement partnerships, and implement activities serv- will be completed in 2007. Work is also
from the highest political authority is a
particularly strong and commendable ing common interests. The ultimate aim of continuing under the ISDR on technical
feature of its disaster planning from which these outreach activities is to promote the matters, such as the development of better
others elsewhere can learn. use of disaster risk reduction as a readily databases on hazards, risks, vulnerabilities
Lives and property can be saved by timely
forecasts and issuance of warnings. implemented component of climate change and disasters.
When Hurricane Michelle, the strongest adaptation strategies.
hurricane in 50 years, made landfall in This includes the strategies of major donors What ISDR has to offer
Cuba in November 2001, reaching wind
speeds of 220 km/h (category 4 Saffir- as well as those associated with the United The United Nations International Strategy for
Simpson scale), early warnings made it Nations Framework Convention on Climate Disaster Reduction (UN/ISDR) is the focal
possible to evacuate 700,000 people and Change (UNFCCC), such as the National point in the UN System to promote links
roughly the same number of livestock.
The resulting loss of life was very low Adaptation Plans of Action (UNFCCC, 2002). and synergies between, and the coordination
considering the force of the hurricane. At present only a few of the National Com- of, disaster reduction activities in the socio-
Wherever possible, farmers on the island munications prepared under the Convention economic, humanitarian and development
also sought to protect important sources
of revenue such as their banana planta- processes have any significant mention of fields, as well as to support policy integration.
tions by wrapping the trees with burlap. disaster risk reduction activities. The ISDR It serves as an international information
Secretariat is advising on potential risk clearinghouse on disaster reduction, develop-
Information management and innovative reduction elements to be included in a manual ing awareness campaigns and producing
communication practices play key roles in being prepared by the UNFCCC Secretariat articles, journals, and other publications and
disaster risk management. Most countries to guide the preparation of national com- promotional materials related to disaster
with effective national risk management munications of Non-Annex 1 countries.9 reduction.
authorities are committed to increasing public
awareness about hazards and disaster reduc-
tion practices. Only by providing evidence
of the benefits of reducing vulnerability to
hazards can future investment and priorities
in this area be sustained.
Sustaining public interest in times of calm
is one of the key disaster risk management
roles that public awareness can play. It is
in the time between disasters that public
awareness activities can be accomplished
if future losses are to be avoided. In this
respect, a valuable step that can be taken is to
ensure the timely and widespread circulation
of lessons learned from disasters and activities
that can reduce risks in the future.

9
ISDR: Linking natural disaster reduction and adaptation to climate change: towards the integration of information, knowledge and policies. April 2003.

33
 Recognizing that natural hazards can
threaten any one of us, the ISDR builds on
partnerships and takes a global approach to
disaster reduction, seeking to involve every
individual and every community towards the
goals of reducing the loss of lives, the socio-
economic setbacks and the environmental
damages caused by natural hazards. In order
to achieve these goals, the ISDR promotes
four objectives as tools towards reaching
disaster reduction for all:
• Increase public awareness to understand
risk, vulnerability and disaster reduction
globally.
• Obtain commitment from public authorities
to implement disaster reduction policies
and actions.
• Stimulate interdisciplinary and intersectoral
partnerships, including the expansion of
risk reduction networks.
• Improve scientific knowledge about disaster
reduction.
UN agencies and governments are increas-
ingly using the ISDR as a primary interna-
tional vehicle to develop and guide commit-
10
ICSU: Resilience and sustainable development, series on science for sustainable development no. 3, 2002.
34 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
ments and action. Within the UN system,
numerous other initiatives are strengthening
country capacities to reduce disaster risk
and better manage risk, through programmes
in UNDP, WMO, UNEP, WHO, FAO,
UNESCO, World Bank and OCHA, for
example. Civil society organizations are also
very active, and include the International
Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent
Societies (IFRC), and the ProVention Con-
sortium.
Conclusion
The ecosystems of many small island states
support more rare, endangered and threatened
species than anywhere else in the world
and the marine environment comprises an
enormous and largely unexplored resource,
including the most extensive and diverse
reefs in the world, and intact populations of
many globally threatened species including
whales, sea turtles, etc.
Their societal development depends on
the generation of ecosystem goods such as
food, timber and medicines and ecosystems
services such as water purification, flood
control, carbon sequestration, pollination,
seed dispersal, soil formation, among many
other services and benefits. Continuing
damage to the biodiversity and ecosystem
of these small island states needs to be
halted, for the sake of island populations and
humankind as a whole. 10
ISDR and disaster risk professionals are
convinced that environmental and natural
resource management are important cost-
effective tools for disaster reduction which,
at the same time, has the added advantage
of working towards other objectives such
as conservation of biodiversity, mitigation of
adverse global environmental changes and
poverty alleviation. Successful disaster reduc-
tion measures should enhance environmental
quality, which includes protection of natural
resources and open space, management of
water run-off, and reduction of pollution.
Sustainable management of natural resources
should also increase the resilience of com-
munities to disasters by reversing current
trends of environmental degradation and
dealing with hazard management in a com-
prehensive way.

Introduction
Biological diversity is humanity’s greatest
natural heritage, providing both goods and
services to the life of the planet as well as
satisfying its main needs and aspirations.
Understanding of the need to conserve
biodiversity has increased in number, vision
and complexity in the last few years, falling
into two main categories (Callicott 1997):
intrinsic and utilitarian value.
Biodiversity is significant in any analysis
related to sustainable development first, for
the present and potential use of biological
resources and second, for its role in the
maintenance of the biosphere to guarantee
conditions for human life and third, for the
maintenance of biological biodiversity “per
se”, mainly at a species level.
This analysis is even more relevant in the
case of islands due to their fragile ecology,
environmental vulnerability, biologically diverse
riches and that their economic activities are
chiefly based on natural and cultural values.
Figure 1 Schematic representation of Mittmeier et al.
by BÁRBARA GAREA MOREDA, MIGUEL ANGEL VALES GARCÍA, DALIA MARIA SALABARRIA FERNÁNDEZ
Development and
biological resources
Biological resources are concentrated in the
world level in some critical points or “hot
spots”. Mittermeier et al, 1998, estimated that
these areas, which represent only one percent
of the planet’s surface, have that between
30 and 40 percent of biological diversity, 40
percent of all terrestrial plants, and almost 25
percent of vertebrates are endemic to these
areas. Figure 1, created by these authors
shows that many of the insular systems
coincide with the sites of highest priority hot
spots or with tropical areas with more natural
characteristics in their ecosystems.
Figures 2 and 3 compare the presence
of some taxonomical groups, reflecting the
world importance of biodiversity in the
islands, even when they are compared with
zones of mega-biodiversity.
But, despite the singularity of biodiversity
in the islands, only approximately 15 percent
of established biosphere reserves are located
in islands: 6 percent in small islands and only
4 percent of the RAMSAR sites.
The oceans occupy over 70 percent of the
planet’s surface. However, natural marine
areas are only 1 percent, which represents a
serious situation (Hillary 2001). The same
author studied the list of World Heritage
Bárbara Garea Moreda. Graduated in
1979 as Physic at Lenin Institute in Moscow,
Russia. Currently is the Director of the
Centre for Management of Prioritised
Projects and Programs, Ministry for Sci-
ence, Technology and Environment. Head
of the National Research and Development
Program “Global Changes and the Evolution of the Cuban
Environment” and is the Cuban representative at the Inter
American Institute for Global Changes Studies, where hold the
position of 2nd Vice-president of this institution.
Miguel Angel Vales García. Graduated in
1973 as Licenciate in Biological Sciences
speciality Botanist at the Faculty of Biological
Sciences of the Havana University, Cuba. In
1982 obtained the degree of Dr. In Biological
Sciences at the Humboldt University of
Berlin. Since 1992 to 2000 he has directed
the National Biodiversity Center and coordinated the Cuban
Biodiversity Country Study and formed part of the task force group
for the elaboration of the Cuban National Biodiversity Strategy
and Action Plan. Member of the Experts Group of the Cuban
Program for Global Change. Since 2002 worked as specialist of
the Centre for Prioritized Program and Projects
Dalia Maria Salabarria Fernández. Graduated in l966 as
Licenciate in Biological Sciences, speciality
in Marine Biology, at Havana University,
Cuba. In 1989, obtained the Doctor Degree
in Biological Sciences, at the Hungarian
Academy of Sciences.Since 1977, started
to work at National Commission for Envi-
ronmental Protection, attending the issues
related with the conservation and management of natural
resources in the coastal and marine zone. She has been
close related with the Convention on Biological Diversity since
the process of elaboration and negotiation, from 1989, and
participated in the process of the National Biodiversity Study,
from 1997 to 1999 and the elaboration process of Biodiversity
National Strategy and the Action Plans, in 2000.Since 1994 is the
Head of Department on Natural Resources Management at the
Environmental Information Management and Education.
Centro de Gerencia de Programas y Proyectos Priorizados
Calle 20, No.4112 e/18ª y 47, Miramar, Playa, Ciudad de la
Habana, CP.11300,Cuba email: bgarea@geprop.cu
35
 and preservation. • 5 to 10 percent of forest species could be
Alterations of extinct in 30 years.
these conditions
due to natural or Currently, biological resources support
anthropological nearly 40 percent of the world economy and
factors cause the meet 80 percent of human needs, including
genetic reduction ecological, social, genetic, scientific, cultural,
of species and and spiritual ones. Its economic importance lies
ecosystems. in its role for the development of agriculture,
Figure 2 Number of reptilian species in two selected islands and two continental countries livestock, forestry, and fishing, as well as for

and found that only 10 out of 161 natural Present assess-

and mixed sites have been registered for the
values of marine biodiversity. This shows the
urgent need to include a greater number of
marine and coastal sites and small islands
with exceptional value.
The Global Forest Resources Assessment
2000, published by FAO (2001) using a new
definition of forests with areas of at least
0.5 hectares and a forest surface of over 10
percent, gives us information about the surface
of most of the islands of the world. Insular
Africa has 0.006 %, Insular Asia 4 %, Insular
Caribbean 0.15 % and islands of Oceania, 0.9
% of the total forest surface of the world.
Although this information is considered
manipulated, it permits a view of how forest
resources are distributed in the islands. There
are a considerable number of plants and
animals in terrestrial, coastal and interior
water ecosystems that are part of complex
networks of biological relations, creating
the necessary conditions for their balance
ments on the loss
of biodiversity
show:
• 75 percent of
genetic bio-
diversity of
crops was lost
in the 20th
century. Figure 3 Number of Angyosperms in two selected Islands and two continental Countries
with Megadiversity.
• 20 percent of
freshwater fish species are extinct, threat- many industries and key life services.
ened, or endangered. However, what is most important is that
• 75 percent of marine fish reserves is today, biodiversity continues being the main
depressed, overexploited, or at its biologi- food source and thus an essential component
cal limit. of food security for our planet. The increas-
• 24 percent of mammals and 12 percent of ing development of new products and serv-
birds are in danger of extinction. ices -which source are genetic resources,
• 50 percent of swamps have been drained. microorganisms, flora and fauna species,
• 33 percent of coral reefs have been ecosystems, and landscapes- provide insular
destroyed or degraded. economies with an ever increasing potential.
• 17 million hectares of forests have been Many species are used by native and rural
cut down in tropical regions. communities due to their traditional heritage.

36 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS

New technology has accelerated the process,
transforming native genetic resources into
commercial products, mainly developed
by companies from countries at a different
scale of industrialization. They include the
production of certified seeds for agriculture
and forestry, production of dyes, medicines,
bio-fertilizers and bio-pesticides, as well as
high quality fibers and fuels.
The development and commercialization
of these products would allow Islands to
obtain income through a solid system of
patents and copyright of genetic resources
and development of technologies, based
on biological species and their chemical
components.
The unquestionable biotechnological
advances and commercialization of geneti-
cally modified organisms have paved the way
for an international debate on “bio-security.”
Regarding this, it is necessary to establish
policies combining development in these
fields with preservation and sustainable use
of biodiversity, based on economic, ethical,
and sustainable aspects, among others.
At present, there is a growing preference
for ecological products on the world market,
as consumers are aware that they contribute
to increased quality of life in the population
and the environment in general. In this,
agricultural products and tourism have a very
important place, thus providing islands with
a special opportunity due to these sectors’
role in their development.
According to chapter 17 of Agenda 21,
small developing Insular States are a special
case, both for the environment and develop-
National Scientific Technical Program
“Global Change and the Evolution cuban Environment”
Figure. 4 Participation of the different Projects in the National Program
ment, as they are vulnerable, ecologically-
fragile areas because of their natural and
economic environment.
Small islands’ vulnerability is mainly due
to their limited territorial extension, limited
availability of natural resources, fragility
and vulnerability of their ecosystems, their
physical-geographic conditions favoring the
incidence of meteorological phenomena,
natural and industrial disasters, and their
generally weak economies.
Climatic changes are also a great risk for
islands, as the negative impact is mainly
linked to an increase of sea level, possible
increase of aridity, and drought processes.
This negatively influences availability of
water resources, agricultural production, and
biodiversity.
The invasion of exotic species is one of the
greatest threats for native biological diversity,
as their impact is considerable, and generally
irreversible. This can be as harmful for
native species and ecosystems as the lack
and degradation of habitats. This situation is
more problematic for small islands.
Oceans, mountains, rivers, and deserts have
acted as natural barriers for millenniums, so
that unique ecosystems could evolve. In only
a few centuries, these barriers have become
inefficient, due to the combined action of
global forces that have helped exotic species
cover long distances toward new habitats,
becoming invading species.
Changes in consumption patterns, advances
in science and technology, recent trade
strategies, and new political and economic
scenes have also influenced small insular
States. This is undoubtedly a risk for the
sustainability of their natural and cultural
resources.
Forest ecosystems have been affected
by the cutting of trees and deterioration of
swamps due to the expansion of agriculture,
intensification of related practices, and
socioeconomic development itself. All these
aspects have led to the destruction of habitats
and the consequent extinction of species.
The development of basic economic activi-
ties for islands, such as agriculture, fishing,
and tourism in their littoral zones have
affected their coastal and marine ecosystems
in a peculiar way.
The excessive exploitation of fishing
resources, the use of mangrove swamps
for aquaculture, changes in the use of soils
for agriculture, tourism, deforestation, and
pollution have determined the changes in
coastal habitats, thus affecting the protective
function of marine and coastal ecosystems.
The sustainable development in fishing
regions in the small Islands is negatively
affected by several factors such as: irrespon-
sible fishing practices, lack of capacity, both
human and institutional, for the research and
handling of resources, limited participation of
those who use the resources in planning and
making decisions, inadequate or insufficient
knowledge of the fishing reserves of sea
biodiversity in general and the ecosystems
and its work, and an insufficient capacity for
surveillance and control.
The industrial, handicraft and re-creative
fishing activities should be carried out in
accordance with the real capacity of the
species and ecosystems, in a way to guarantee
the sustainability of their products.
Tourism based on the Islands’ natural,
cultural and environmental values is one of
the main ways for the development of the
insular States. For example, the Caribbean is
visited by more than a hundred million tour-
37
 ists, tourism is fundamental in this region’s
GDP and it generates a large number of jobs.
In the same way, the European Union’s island
destinations are becoming more recognized,
visited and chosen as preference.
The situation presented is highly complex,
on one hand, tourism is increasing, and on the
other, there are environmental and social risks
that can be irreversible. It is only possible
to face this challenge with a sustainable
tourism, ecologically bearable for the long
term, economically and equally viable from
an ethical and social perspective for the local
communities. The active and consequent
participation of all sectors involved in the
elaboration and implementation of integrated
strategies for tourist development on the
islands is necessary for this to be not just
a declaration.
The elaboration and implementation of
strategies for the preservation and sustainable
use of biodiversity comes from the knowledge
obtained and that necessary to acquire, the
real evaluation of the environmental situation,
and the priorities established for develop-
ment. In this sense, studies and national and
regional evaluations, although they are still
numerically limited in the case of the islands,
could constitute the basis for the preparation
of these strategies.
The international community has organized
programs and projects that facilitate the study
of biological diversity and topics associated
with it. This has been included on the agendas
of the United Nations, other international and
Habanilla Dam, Cuba
38 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
national organizations, and public, private and
non-governmental institutions.
Future efforts that must be carried out to
reply to questions such as the following:
(CEPAL, 2003):
• What are the factors that represent a threat
for the biological, genetic diversity of
species, of functional types, landscapes,
etc?
• What are the acceptable levels of damage
that allow an appropriate lead time for
response, with adaptable handling for a
sustainable use of the ecosystems or to
their preservation?
• Which are the ecosystemic or ethical values
of diversity? That is, how many and which
species can be lost, and what else do we lose
when we lose biodiversity? What are the
biodiversity’s ecosystem services?
• What are the costs in terms of diversity,
ecosystem services, water availability and
biogeochemical cycles of crops to contain
carbon? What are the proposals within
global measures to mitigate the emission
of gases with greenhouse effects?
• How to guarantee the viability of the
farming systems on which the maintenance
of genetic diversity strongly depends?
• How to recover and make systematic
the practices, traditional or indigenous,
of technologies for sustainable use and
handling of natural resources and environ-
mental services as elements for science and
technology toward sustainable develop-
ment (CTDS)?.
• How to deal with the paucity of legisla-
tion referring to the protection, sustained
use, and economic attraction of natural
resources, and to establish mechanisms
so that the legislation in force is accom-
plished?
• How to achieve sustainable agriculture
that is economically competitive? How
to transform subsistence agriculture,
practiced by millions of poor farmers, into
a sustainable agriculture?
• How to achieve that the existing technically
appropriate solutions are also economically
competitive under other conditions?
The Republic of Cuba, an archipelago
with particular value in its biodiversity, high
vulnerability, and fragility as a small insular
state, has assumed indisputable commitments
to guarantee sustainability in the use of
its natural resources. It has elaborated and
implemented policies and strategies at dif-
ferent levels and sectors on scientific and
technological bases, and led the economic
development, food security, health quality
and respect for the country’s cultural and
ethical values with this aim.
As an example, Cuba established the
National Scientific-Technical Program in
1995. In this program, “Los Cambios Globales
y la Evolución del Medio Ambiente Cubano”
(Global Changes and the Evolution of the
Cuban Environment) 72 projects have been
executed (Figure 4), of them 42 percent
dedicated to biodiversity and earth ecosystems,
31 percent to climate and contamination, 13
percent to agro ecosystems and soils, and 14
percent to the coastal zones.
One of the most important projects in
this program was the elaboration of the
Biodiversity Country Study, which simultane-
ously had the support of the GEF/UNEP. In
this study were identified the main aspects for
the elaboration of the national strategy. Today,
the National Strategy for the Conservation
and Sustainable Use and Action Plan of the
Republic of Cuba (Vilamajó et.al) interrelates
with the National Environmental Strategy
and with sector and territorial strategies,
which constitute the main tool of work of the
National Biological Diversity Group.
Cuba has also integrated with regional
and world efforts in relation to scientific and
technological research. It is interesting to stress
the role played by the Inter American Institute
for the Research of Global Change, which
through the promotion of comparative studies
and focus on important regional themes, has
been creating capacities to better understand
the impact of global change in the past, present
and future in the 19 member countries.
Political agenda -
international framework
The international agenda has set a series of
international goals difficult to attain. They
target the treatment and possible solution of the
main problems affecting humankind: hunger,
poverty, improvement of living conditions and
health, in which biological diversity, due to its
importance for human beings, has occupied
a leading position that commits nations to
its conservation, particularly, its sustainable
utilization (See Box 1).
BOX 1
The global tasks of the millennium,
proclaimed by the millennium summit
in 2000, establish the eradication of
extreme poverty and famine as a goal of
paramount importance to respond to the
most essential needs of development.
The Sixth Conference of the parties to the
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
examined this issue, which was explicitly
reflected in its Ministerial Convention and
adopted by Decision VI/26, committing the
parties to implement the Convention more
effectively and to substantially reduce the
current biodiversity loss rate at the interna-
tional, regional and internal level by 2010, to
contribute to the palliation of poverty.
Undoubtedly, the Johannesburg Summit
marked an important point and provided
an important space for the critical role of
biodiversity and ecosystems’ recourses and
services, to fulfill the Millennium Objectives.
The best reason for this declaration is that
biodiversity is among the five aspects of
the Program promoted by the UN Secretary
General known as WEHAB (Water, Energy,
Health, Agriculture and Biodiversity), recog-
nizing these elements, which should be paid
the greatest attention, as priorities to resolve
humankind’s major problems.
Chapter IV, paragraph 44, on biodiversity
establishes: the fundamental role of biological
diversity to attain sustainable development
and elimination of poverty; the essential
nature of biological diversity for the existence
and welfare of human beings; the Conven-
tion as key vehicle for the protection and
sustainable use of biological diversity and
the equal distribution of benefits from using
genetic resources.
The Implementation Plan’s Chapter VII
on the “Sustainable Development of Small
Developing States” considers these countries
a special case, in terms of environment and
development, and calls for a number of
actions at all levels.
Among these major actions are:
• Speed up the Action Program implementa-
tion at the national and regional level, with
adequate financial recourses.
• Implement a sustainable management of
fisheries with the support and strengthen-
ing of the regional management bodies
for fishing.
• Provide assistance for small islands to
attain a sustainable management of their
coasts and sea. -Support small islands in the
development of their domestic capacities.
• Foster the completion and begin opera-
tion, under agreed upon terms, of social,
economic and environmental vulnerability
indexes, and other related indexes, as tools
to allow for sustainable development.
• Assist small islands in support of local
communities and adequate national and
regional organizations, for the manage-
ment of risks and threats, preparations
in the face of disasters and mitigation of
extreme meteorological events and other
emergencies.
• Examine the implementation of the Bar-
bados Action Program.
It can be said that to attain a sustainable
development, in harmony with the conserva-
tion and sustainable utilization in small
islands, at least it is indispensable to:
• Have the adequate knowledge of biologi-
cal diversity to define its potential and
establish priorities for its preservation and
sustainable use.
• Have the necessary political and legal
framework to guarantee the elaboration
of development programs on a sustain-
ability base, and particularly, to establish
the control over the already established
regulations.
• Guarantee that conservation and sustain-
able utilization of bio-diversity resources
are included in the programs and plans for
economic and social development.
• Guarantee territorial planning adequately
comprising the environmental principles and
criteria established at the national level.
• Check and strengthen the planning and
control process of fishing activities.
• Have National Management Plans for
tapping species, based on research results
scientifically supporting the management
plan.
• Attain the recognition of the Comprehen-
39

sive Management of Coastal Zones, as
the only way to reach a real consensus
between socioeconomic development and
the preservation and sustainable use of
coastal and sea resources.
• Guarantee the active participation of local
people and governments.
• Have an educational and environmental
promotion program targeting all sectors,
especially workers and decision- makers.
• Fortify the necessary institutional, human
resource and financial capacities to accom-
plish the predicted results.
• Strengthen Regional Cooperation and
Coordination by exchanging information
and experience among countries of the
area.
• Have access to the required financial
resources.
This calls for priority actions, among them:
• Completing the outline of national strate-
gies to preserve and make a sustainable
use of biological diversity and proceed to
Immediate implementation
• Outline national general guidelines for
adequate territorial planning and incorpo-
VIMANG is the brand name of cuban
line of 100% naturally occurring products
whose main ingredient consists of a
unique mixture of compounds (polyphe-
nols, terpenoides, steroids, fatty acids
and microelements extracted from dif-
ferent varieties of Mangifera indica L
(mango).
40 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
rate environmental con-
siderations to decision
making.
• Outline general line of
action for an integrated
management of Coastal
Areas, as starting point
to study and adopt case-
by-case development pro-
grams.
• Establish environmen-
tal regulations for tourist
development.
• Establishing national monitoring systems for
each element of biological diversity, allowing
invigoration of the state and evolution of
those components, and adopting the decision
best suited at a given moment.
• Work for institutional improvement and
training of national human resources.
• Outline and work intensely on environ-
mental education and promote focus on
every sector of the population, establishing
the most suitable mechanisms to achieve
involvement of local government and
communities.
• Establish and implement the evaluation
of the environmental impact in socio-
economic development programs.
• Define the areas, ecosystems and species
requiring special handling to secure their
preservation, restoration and sustainable
use.
• Develop, among priorities, methodology
for the economic evaluation of the
resources of biodiversity.
• Increase the levels of international coopera-
tion and coordination, especially at the
regional level.
Finally, it is necessary to stress that
biological diversity can be only be seen as
a resource for sustainable development if
it is given a comprehensive and systematic
approach, clearly revealing the existing
interaction between society and nature.
Bibliography
CALLICOTT, J. B. 1977. Conservation values and
ethics. Pages 29-55. “Principles of Conservation
Biology”. G.K. Meffe; C.R. Caroll, and contributors,
editors. 2nd. Edition. Sinauer Associates, Sunderland,
Massachusetts.
CEPAL, 2003. Ciencia y Tecnología para el desarrollo
sostenible: una perspectiva latinoamericana y caribeña.
Serie Seminarios y Conferencias. No. 25, 52 pp.
COMARNA, 1993. Las Pequeñas Islas y el Desarrollo
Sostenible. Conferencia Global sobre Desarrollo
Sostenible de los Pequeños Estados Insulares. Informe
Técnico, Ciudad de La Habana, Cuba. 33 pp.
FAO, 2001. Forest Resources Assessment (FRA)2000.
Main Report. FAO Forest Study 140. Rome, Italy.
GESAMP, 1996. The contributions of science to inte-
grated coastal management. Reports and Studies,
No. 61, 66 pp.
HILLARY, A. 2001. El tesoro Escondido: los ecosistemas
marinos. Conservación Mundial 2/2001. pp. 13-14
MITTERMEIER, R.A., N. MYERS, J.B. THOMSEN,
G.A.B. DA FONSECA, AND S. OLIVIERI, 1998. Con-
servation Biology 12: 516-520. “Biodiversity hotspots
and major tropical wilderness areas: approaches to
setting conservation priorities”.
SALABARRÍA, D. M. 1997. Vulnerabilidad de los
Pequeños Estados Insulares. Informe Técnico
Reunión Regional del Convenio de Lucha contra la
Desertificación y la Sequía.
SERRANO, FRANCISCO 1998. Lineamientos para el
planteamiento territorial del turismo en pequeñas
islas del Archipiélago de los Canarreos. República de
Cuba. Tesis de grado. 115 pp.
UNEP, 1995. Global Biodiversity Assessment. Summary
for Policy Makers. 46 pp. World Travel Tourism
Council. Agenda 21 for the Travel and Tourism
Industry: Toward Environmentally Sustainable
Development. 77 pp.
VILAMAJÓ, D.; VALES, M.A.; CAPOTE, R. P. Y SAL-
ABARRÍA, D. Eds. 2001. Estrategia Nacional para la
Diversidad Biológica y Plan de Acción en la República
de Cuba.
WRI/IUCN/UNEP, 1992. Global Biodiversity Strategy.
World Resources Institute, Washington, D.C.

Introduction
Small islands are renowned for their biologi-
cal diversity and their endemism, and biologi-
cal diversity plays a crucial role in the daily
life and social fabric of the human popula-
tions of many small islands, from subsistence
economy to contemporary tourism.
Small islands have also long played an
important role in scientific studies on the
genetic diversity and evolution of living
beings. A century-and-a half ago, observa-
tions on the Galápagos Islands were critical
in shaping Charles Darwin’s revolutionary
Theory on the Origin of Species by Means
of Natural Selection. And in recent decades,
topics such as island biogeography and
the impact of alien invasive species on island
biota have figured prom- inently in
the theory, concepts
and practices
of popu-
BY
lation biology, ecosystem management and
conservation science.
However, biological diversity on many
small islands is under increasing threat,
through such impacts as the introduction
of exotic species, development of tourism
infrastructures, excessive harvesting of
particular biotic groups (e.g corals), and
so on. Generally, island species tend to be
much more vulnerable to changes in their
environments. Plant and animal populations
tend to be small, localized, highly specialized
and they tend not to have developed defence
mechanisms against a broad range of potential
predators or competitors.
Within such a context, it is scarcely surpris-
ing that conservation of biodiversity takes on
a special hue in small islands. To the extent
DIRK TROOST AND MALCOLM HADLEY
Dirk Troost is a coastal scientist, and is
Chief of UNESCO’s Coastal Regions and
Small Islands (CSI) Platform.
Malcolm Hadley is a biologist, recently
retired from UNESCO’s Division of Ecologi-
cal Sciences.
Coastal Regions and Small Islands (CSI) Platform
UNESCO
1 rue Miollis
75352 Paris Cedex 15 • France.
E-mail: d.troost@unesco.org
Tree ferns are a prominent feature in the mountain forests of
the volcanic Morne Trois Pitons National Park (designated
as a World Heritage site in 1997), in the Caribbean island of
Dominica. Photo: UNESCO/ J.W. Thorsell.
41
 that small islands provide the setting for many Consistent with such perceptions, this Conservation challenges
innovations in biodiversity conservation. And contribution explores the thesis that small and island innovations
have thus added substance to visions on the islands constitute living laboratories for It is well accepted by the ‘conservation
exemplary role of small islands and small innovative approaches to biodiversity con- community’ that protected areas are not
island developing states (SIDS) in respect servation. The Durban Action Plan adopted at synonymous with biodiversity conservation
to sustainable development, reflected in the the Vth World Parks Congress (Durban, 8-17 and that many of the challenges in biodiversity
following two statements culled from an issue September 2003) is used as a framework for conservation lie outside protected areas.
of UNEP’s Our Planet magazine devoted to examining some of these approaches, in such This said, by taking as its theme ‘Benefits
small islands (Volume 10(3), 1999). domains as the role of protected areas (PAs) Beyond Boundaries’, the Durban Congress
in sustainable development, PAs linked to recognized that protected areas cannot remain
Small islands are microcosms for our
surrounding landscapes and seascapes, rights in isolation from the surrounding areas of land
world. We are all inhabitants of the global
of indigenous peoples, empowerment of and sea, and from the communities and the
island, surrounded by the limitless ocean
younger generations, improved forms of economic activities in and around them.
of space. If we can find solutions to the
governance, and so on. As such, the conclusions and recommenda-
special vulnerabilities of islands, it will
The contribution draws mainly but not tions of the congress can be considered a
help us address more global problems.
exclusively on experiences from various fairly good reflection of current thinking on
Kofi A. Annan, United Nations Secretary General
UNESCO initiatives relating to biodiversity conservation challenges.
Small island developing states have been conservation (Box 1), including World Herit- The principal outputs included a set of 32
at the forefront of global environmental age sites and the World Network of Biosphere recommendations (addressing such subjects
consciousness raising and problem solving. Reserves (UNESCO 2002a), as well as post- as climate change and protected areas,
Mohamed T. El-Ashry, former Chief
ings from an Internet discussion forum on wise cultural and spiritual values, tourism), a
Executive Officer, Global Environment Facility (GEF) coastal practices and other sources. vision statement entitled the Durban Accord,
and the Durban Action Plan -- a suggested
Box 1. UNESCO Activities Related to Biodiversity Conservation in Small Islands checklist of the activity needed to increase
the benefits of protected areas to society and
UNESCO’s continuing concern is rooted in two complementary international instruments to improve their coverage and management.
for the conservation of biological diversity, as well through various field projects and
several internet discussion forums. This Durban Action Plan is organized around
The Convention for the Protection of the World’s Natural and Cultural Heritage is a binding ten key outcomes, with suggested actions
legal instrument which provides a permanent legal, financial and administrative framework at various levels (international, regional,
for international cooperation in contributing to the protection of the world’s natural and national, local, protected area authority)
cultural heritage. The focus is on sites of outstanding and universal value. The World
Heritage List includes insular sites listed specifically for their biological processes and (http://www.iucn.org/themes/wcpa/wpc2003/
biodiversity values such as Fraser Island and Lord Howe Island Group (Australia), pdfs/outputs/wpc/durbanactionplan.pdf). In
Cocos Island (Costa Rica), two sites in Cuba, Morne Trois Pitons National Park the following paragraphs, the substance of
(Dominica), Galápagos National Park and Marine Reserve (Ecuador), New Zealand
Sub-Antarctic Islands, Aldabra Atoll and Vallée de Mai (Seychelles), East Rennell these various outcomes are used as topic
(Solomon Islands). heads for examining some recent and planned
The World Network of Biosphere Reserves has developed within the Man and the initiatives in biodiversity conservation in
Biosphere (MAB) Programme, and in late 2003 comprises 440 sites in 97 countries. small island settings.
Biosphere reserves are sites to explore and demonstrate approaches to conservation
and sustainable development at a regional scale, with associated research, monitoring,
training and education and the involvement of local people as the driving force for Critical role in global
conservation. biodiversity conservation
The Web-based discussion forum on Wise Coastal Practices for Sustainable Outcome 1 of the Durban Action Plan seeks
Human Development (WiCoP Forum) is operated as part of UNESCO’s Coastal
Regions and Small Islands (CSI) Platform. A team of moderators and translators
to fill gaps in the global system of protected
maintain the site -- editing the contributions before they are posted in English, French areas, identifying specific actions in this
and Spanish on the Forum site, and in addition sending the new postings as e-mail respect by Parties to the Convention on
to over 17,000 individuals connected with the Forum. Since the Forum’s creation in
May 1999, individual contributors have flagged many perspectives related to biological
Biological Diversity and the World Heritage
diversity and its conservation and management in coastal regions, in both continental Convention.
and insular settings, drawing in part on experience gained in CSI-sponsored field One action requested of the World Heritage
projects (e.g. UNESCO 2002c).
Committee is to give priority to achieving
The Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC) includes several initiatives
relating to coastal marine biodiversity, focused on such biotic groups as coral reefs,
complete knowledge of potential World Herit-
harmful algae and coastal benthos. Among the outputs of the Global Coral Reef age around the world, including marine biomes
Monitoring Network (cosponsored by UNEP, the World Bank, IUCN and the IOC) is of outstanding universal value. Some work
the biennial ‘Status of Coral Reefs of the World’, the most recent version of which
(Wilkinson 2002) includes information on the status and changes of coral reefs in
has already been undertaken that addresses
36 individual SIDS. this issue. In 2002, the World Heritage Centre

42 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS

and IUCN organized a workshop to identify
priority tropical coastal, marine and small
island areas for nomination as World Heritage
(Hillary et al. 2003). Following the workshop,
three pilot projects, that all contain small
islands, have been initiated in this respect: the
Pacific Line Islands, the Southern Caribbean
Islands group, and the Eastern Pacific Marine
Conservation Corridor. Among the priorities
for future action is further development of the
World Heritage marine programme, including
testing the application of transboundary and
serial approaches into new marine World
Heritage nominations.
Fundamental role in
sustainable development
Reinforcing action to ensure that protected
areas strive to alleviate poverty is an explicit
part of Outcome 2 of the Durban Action Plan.
A small-islands perspective is provided by
an evaluation of a recent ten-year (1992-2001)
project to promote biodiversity conservation
in the Pacific (Hunnam 2002). The evaluation
notes that options for conserving biodiversity
Figure 1. Zoning contiguous land and marine areas for different purposes and uses
are to stop its use (i.e. to try to ‘set it aside’)
or to use it in ways that do not degrade
its natural values, by limiting the types
of exploitation, their timing, intensity or
techniques employed. The close dependence
of Pacific-islander lives and livelihoods on
local natural resources means that the latter
approach is more realistic and likely to be
more effective. The recommended approach
is to ensure that conservation is shaped and
recognized as a cornerstone of sustainable
development and is therefore an important
valid business for government and private
agencies concerned with economic and social
development and the use of natural resources
in fisheries, forestry, agricultural, mining
and tourism.
The evaluation further underlines that
conservation is essentially a social issue
requiring democratic involvement of the
people and local communities whose lives
and livelihoods are most affected. As else-
where, local people must be recognized and
empowered as the primary stakeholders and
central participants in conservation projects.
Linking protected areas to
surrounding landscapes
and seascapes
Outcome 3 of the Durban Action Plan relates
to the challenge of further developing a
global system of protected areas linked into
wider ecological/environmental systems
on land and at sea. All-too-often in coastal
regions, land and water areas are under
separate jurisdictions and management
authorities, making difficult a coherent
approach to regional ecosystem complexes.
More promising is recent experience in
a number of small-island settings, where
a range of mechanisms and procedures
have been sought to articulate the work
of agencies having different management
responsibilities in land-marine ecotone
areas.
Central to this challenge is consideration
of adjacent land and marine systems as an
ensemble, with different areas zoned for
different functions and purposes and core
protected areas identified in both terrestrial
and marine ecosystems.

B. In the ‘whole island’ biosphere reserve of Lanzarote in the

Canary Islands of Spain, the core area is focused on the volcanic
Parque Nacional de Timanfaya, with six nature parks in the buffer
zone. The biosphere reserve also includes 38.000 ha of contiguous
marine systems.

A. The zonation scheme of the Guadeloupe Archipelago Biosphere Reserve is

made up of two units: the tropical humid forest of the Guadeloupe National Park
and the marine area of the Grand Cul de Sac Marine Nature Reserve consisting of
mangroves, small islands and coral reefs. The transition areas include numerous
small towns and villages with many tourist facilities. Different management
regimes are required for each zone and each ecosystem type.

43
 An example is in the Galápagos Islands in
Ecuador, where in 2001 the World Heritage
Committee approved the addition of the
Galápagos Marine Reserve to the existing
World Heritage site. Currently the World
Heritage Centre, together with partners, is
working towards establishment of a sustain-
able development and conservation corridor
between Galápagos and Cocos Island World
Heritage sites and with small island sites in
Panama and Colombia.
Examples of biosphere reserves in small-
island settings, which include both terrestrial
and marine ecosystems, are Nanji Islands
(China), Seaflower (Colombia, comprising
the archipelago of San Andrés-Providencia-
Santa Catalina in the southwestern Carib-
bean), West Estonian Archipelago, Archi-
pelago Sea (Finland), Archipel de la Guad-
aloupe and Iroise (France), Boloma Bijagos
(Guinea Bissau), Tuscan Islands (Italy), Far
East Marine (Russian Federation), Isla de El
Hierro, Lanzarote, La Palma and Menorca
(Spain), US Virgin Islands and the Socotra
Archipelago (Yemen). Experience in a
number of these reserves – in such domains
as conflict prevention and resolution, and the
zonation of land and water areas for different
purposes (Figure 1) – provides insights useful
in conservation planning and management in
other small island situations.

Improving effective management

The challenge of improving the quality,
effectiveness and reporting of protected
area management (Outcome 4 of the Durban
Action Plan) has many dimensions Among
the measures for improving the health of
protected areas is making management more
comprehensive, participatory and afford-
able, and sensitive to cultural and spiritual
factors.
For example, the island of Siberut – the
home of the Mentawai people, located 150
km from the western coast of mainland
Sumatra in Indonesia – was designated as
a biosphere reserve in 1981, and an area
somewhat less than half of the island as a
national park in 1983. But these recognitions
remained largely ‘paper designations’ for a
decade and a half. More recently, a series
Small islands are renowned for their biological diversity and endemism. The natural palm forest of the Vallée de Mai of small-scale pilot projects for community
World Heritage site in the Seychelles is the home of the ‘coco de mer’ (Lodoicea maldivicia), the largest seed in the
plant kingdom. Photos: UNESCO/Julian Palmyre. development has led to a new (2001-2005)

44 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS

community-conservation project focused resources and biodiversity conservation. All- and local communities have often borne
on the empowerment of customary environ- too-often in the past, world-wide, the various the costs of and received few benefits from
mental management (Myers et al. 2003). components of the conservation community protected areas.
The project aims to develop and put into have tended to disregard or minimize the Yet in many small-island settings, indig-
practice a new management mechanism that roles, knowledge and customary laws of enous and mobile peoples and local com-
integrates customary ecological knowledge indigenous and mobile peoples and local munities have remained the custodians of
and practices of local people with conserva- communities, in respect to their lands, ter- nature, and form the starting point of many
tion and socio-economic planning. For ritories and resources. Sometimes, indigenous recent conservation initiatives. In the Pacific,
programmes in conservation and income- peoples and local communities have been for example, countries have experimented
generation, co-management teams have expelled from government-created protected with community-based conservation areas
been set up, consisting of members from areas, thereby severing their relationships as an alternative to inflexible protected area
indigenous communities, local NGOs, the with their territories and undermining their models that deny local people access to
national park authorities and UNESCO, with cultural integrity. Indeed, indigenous peoples natural resources. As part of the ten-year
initial support provided principally through
the ASPACO project (Asia-Pacific Coopera-
tion for the Sustainable Use of Renewable
Resources in Biosphere Reserves and Simi-
larly Managed Areas). As a critical part of
the co-management structure, a transparent
financial management has been et up, allow-
ing open auditing between different levels of
the project management and stakeholders.
Demonstrating how using an assessment,
monitoring and reporting framework can
enhance effective management is a principal
aim of the UNESCO/IUCN/UNF project
‘Enhancing Our Heritage’. Among the ten
World Heritage sites taking part is Aldabra
Atoll, where special attention has been given
to prioritizing management actions and
identifying how management systems need
to be improved.
Promoting sensitive use of modern scien-
tific knowledge and technological tools is
another ingredient for improved conservation
planning. Examples here include the use
of remote sensing technologies for tropical
coastal management (Edwards 2000) and
the development of geographic information
systems for regional planning, as illustrated
through the integrated management GIS for
the Bijagos archipelago in Guinea Bissau,
which includes ten maps of the littoral
environment at a scale of 1:50,000 (Cuq
2001).

Recognizing the rights of

indigenous peoples and
local communities
Outcome 5 of the Durban Action Plan relates
to the rights of indigenous peoples, mobile On the Indian Ocean island of Socotra, vegetation is sparse and dominated by xeromorphic (drought-resistant)
forms. Socotra became parte ofthe World Network of Biosphere Reserves in 2003, following preparatory work
peoples and local communities being recog- supported through one of the island-biodiversity projects of the Global Environment Facility (GEF). Photo
nized and guaranteed in relation to natural by Giuseppe Orlando

45
 (1992-2001) South Pacific Biodiversity
Conservation Programme (SPBCP), 17
community conservation areas have been
set-up in 12 counties of the region (Read
2002). Though results of the project have
been mixed (Hunnan 2002), there has been
sufficient evidence to suggest that, in the
Pacific at least, conservation is first and
foremost about respecting community rights
to the lands and resources on which they
depend.
One of the sites featured in the SPBCP is
the Vatthe (‘Eye of the sea’) Conservation
Area on Espiritu Santo Island, Vanuatu, with
key roles being played by the communities
of the coastal village of Matantas and the
inland village of Sara (Martin et al. 2000).
Despite a history of dispute, the villages came
together to establish the Vatthe Conservation
Area and associated Conservation Area
Management Committee, assisted by a
conservation support officer funded by the
programme. Together with a small ecotourism
enterprise, the Vatthe Conservation Area is
owned and managed by the communities of
both villages who have chosen the conserva-
tion of their forest, allowing for traditional
use and ecotourism initiatives, over lucrative
logging contracts.
Reinvigorating oral traditions is another
dimension of recognizing the rights of
indigenous and mobile peoples, as has been
done in a project with the Moken sea gypsy
communities of the Surin Islands, in the
Andaman Sea off the southwestern coast of
Thailand (UNESCO 2001). Among other
aims, the project has sought to strengthen
dialogue between officials of the marine
national park and the Moken, to enable
the latter to become active partners in the
management of the area and safeguarding
its heritage value through the sharing of
knowledge, skills and tools.
In some small islands, making resource
management laws available and understand-
able to local resource users may be an
important step in promoting dialogue and
stakeholder participation. In Haiti, for
example, fisheries laws are written in French.
However the majority of those affected by the
laws (i.e. inhabitants of coastal communities
and especially fisherfolk) only speak or read
Créole. Whence the translation of the fisheries
46 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
laws into Créole, as a crucial component
of a project to enhance coastal and fishery
management through stakeholder participa-
tion, local knowledge and environmental
education (UNESCO 2002b).
Involving and empowering younger
generations
Engaging young people to take an active role
in resource management and biodiversity
conservation (Outcome 6 of the Durban
Action Plan) has been a key feature of a
long-term project in the Caribbean (which
started in 1985-86) for understanding beach
changes, applying the knowledge gained in
improved coastline planning, and training
school children in the use of scientific
method for observing and monitoring change.
This work has been carried out within the
framework of a UNESCO regional project
involving 13 countries/territories, involving
persons from government agencies and
non government organizations, from the
private banking sector, from scientific and
educational communities, and from civil
society (UNESCO 2002c, Annex II).
Together, a standardized methodology
has been developed, to measure, assess
and manage the various phenomena associ-
ated with beach erosion. Beach monitoring
programmes have been established, as part
of measures for improved coastal planning
and erosion mitigation. Five countries in the
region have tested a generic methodology
to ensure that new coastal development is
placed at a safe distance from the active beach
zone, thereby providing for the safety of
coastal infrastructure and the conservation of
beaches. In cooperation with the Caribbean
Development Bank, coloured illustrated
booklets on wise practices for coping
with beach erosion have been published
for ten island countries/territories, with a
combination of generic and island-specific
information.
Support has been provided for getting the
message into the living room, by providing
training and equipment to persons from
environmental and broadcast agencies.
Most recently, in collaboration with the
UNESCO Associated Schools Project, the
Sandwatch project has been launched for
training schoolchildren in the use of the
scientific method through monitoring and
observing changes, activities and processes at
local beaches. And then, with the assistance
of teachers, parents and communities, for
applying that information in the design and
implementation of specific projects to solve
a particular problem while also improving
the beach environment.
Increased support for protected
areas from other constituencies
Establishing and recognizing mutual agendas
for conservation among diverse constituen-
cies (part of Outcome 7 of the Durban Action
Plan) should result in many partnerships
involving the business and commercial sector
as well as conservation volunteer programmes
of various kinds.
An example is provided by Chumbe Island,
situated 13 km southwest of Zanzibar Town
in Tanzania and covering an area of approxi-
mately 20 ha and bordered on its western
shore by a fringing coral reef of exceptional
biodiversity and beauty. Based on the initia-
tive and investment proposal of Chumbe
Island Coral Park Ltd, a private company
created for the management of Chumbe, the
island was gazetted in 1994 as a protected
area by the Government of Zanzibar. This
created the first managed marine park in
Tanzania, and also (it is believed) the first
private marine park in the world.
The objectives of the Chumbe Island Coral
Park project are non-commercial, while
operations follow commercial principles.
The overall aim is to create a model of
sustainable conservation area management
where ecotourism supports conservation and
education. Profits from the tourism opera-
tions are re-invested in conservation area
management and an environmental education
programme for local schools that includes
excursions to Chumbe.
About two-thirds of the investment costs of
approximately US$1 million were financed
privately by the project initiator (a conserva-
tionist and former manager of donor-funded
aid projects). Several project components
-- such as the construction of the visitors
centre, biological baseline surveys, the
Aders’ duikers sanctuary (protecting a
highly endangered endemic species of mini-
antelope), nature trails and the park rangers’
patrol boats -- received some funding from a
range of donors. This covered about a third
of the investment costs.
More than 40 volunteers from several
countries provided, and continue to provide,
crucial professional support for between
one month to three years. Running costs of
the park are entirely covered from income
generated through ecotourism.
This information on private sector invest-
ment in coral reef conservation figured in an
initial account on Chumbe Island, posted in
March 2000 on the WiCoP discussion forum
(Riedmiller 2000). The account triggered a
considerable ‘post-bag’, with respondents
taking up such issues as the need for a world-
wide representative system of similar reserves
and incentives for non-consumptive use as an
alternative to heavy taxation. The case study
also illustrates the use of modern informa-
tion and communication technologies in
diffusing information and promoting debate
on an innovative approach to biodiversity
conservation in an island setting.
Improved forms of governance
Promoting the application in all protected
areas of five principles of good governance
(legitimacy and voice, performance,
accountability, fairness and direction) is
among the lines of action foreseen under
Outcome 8 of the Durban Action Plan. The
institutions of governance are constantly
evolving and include a wide range of struc-
tures, including government-managed, co-
managed, private, charitable and commu-
nity-based structures. Small islands provide
several innovative examples.
In Jamaica, government intentions to
create 14 terrestrial, marine and integrated
protection areas have been confronted with
widespread social distrust of regulatory
systems that are perceived as belonging to
somebody else, or operating in someone
else’s interest. Rather than setting-up a
national agency to manage these areas,
national policy provides for the delegation
of management authority to qualified NGOs.
For example, in 2003, the Caribbean Coastal
Area Management (C-CAM) Foundation
was delegated management responsibility of
the Portland Bight Protected Area.
A crucial step in seeking compliance
has been to create a sense of ownership of
the laws and regulations among natural
resources users. This was achieved in
Portland Bight by assisting the fishers to
prepare their own fisheries management
regulations using the local fisheries associa-
tions and the Fisheries Management Council
midwifed by C-CAM (Espeut 2002). Thus
the fishers now feel that they own the regula-
tions rather than viewing them as a system
of rules being imposed from above.
Even when the local community owns the
regulations, some may still resent outsiders
coming in and arresting their relatives and
friends for non-compliance. A better way
to cement a new culture of compliance and
natural resource management is to empower
community leaders as enforcement officers.
In the Portland Bight Protected Area, some
50 fisherfolk were officially appointed
‘Honorary Game Wardens’ and ‘Fishery
Inspectors’ under the Wildlife Protection
Act and the Fishing Industry Act, thereby
providing them with powers of search and
arrest. All the enforcement officers are given
training by C-CAM and they are informed
that compliance is the objective, not making
arrests.
One of the fears with this approach was
that the community enforcement officers
might abuse their authority. Careful selection
of suitable persons, thorough training, and
close supervision have resulted in not one
case of abuse of authority, or false arrest,
since 1996, and a 100% conviction rate in
those cases which have gone to court.
Another fear was that Honorary Game
Wardens and Fishery Inspectors would
excuse their friends and relatives and harass
their enemies, or take bribes. No such cases
have been observed, in fact the reverse. The
community enforcement officers advise their
relatives and friends not to embarrass them
by committing an offence, as they would
be forced to personally arrest them so as to
prove they are not corrupt.
Enhanced resources
for protected areas
Outcome 9 of the Durban Action Plan
addresses the challenge of securing enhanced
funding for protected areas, commensurate
with their values and needs, including
resources within the mechanism agreed for
the implementation of the Convention on
Biological Diversity, specifically the Global
Environment Facility (GEF). Considerable
GEF funding has already been made avail-
able to biodiversity conservation in small
islands, through relatively large targeted
projects (e.g. for Socotra) and through
enabling activities of various kinds (Mook
1999). In looking forward, the intention
of GEF to provide increased support to its
small grants programme can be considered
a positive trend for small islands, in that
resources are likely to be in tune with needs
and so-called absorptive capacities. The
United Nations Foundation is also increas-
ing its support for improving management
effectiveness of World Heritage sites,
drawing on experience within such recent
projects as that on alien species eradication
in the Galápagos.
Communicating the
benefits of protected areas
‘Improved communication and education
on the role and benefits of protected areas’
(Outcome 10 of the Durban Action Plan) is
an important component of environmental
programmes and projects in many small
island situations. An example is the process
leading to the setting-up of the Seaflower
Biosphere Reserve in the Caribbean, under
the aegis of the Colombian public agency
CORALINA (Corporation for the Sustain-
able Development of the Archipelago of
San Andrés, Old Providence and Santa
Catalina). Central in this process has
been an extensive community-wide educa-
tion programme involving workshops
and meetings, teacher training courses
and information campaigns, and the inclu-
sion of a communication and educational
component in various research and manage-
ment activities, for example on fisheries
recovery, mangroves, coral reefs, marine
turtles (Mow et al. 2003: see also separate
case study in this issue). Most important,
the programme generated a considerable
momentum of grassroots involvement and
support for new conservation and resource
management initiatives that take explicit
account of livelihood-related issues.
47
 Concluding remarks
Effective approaches for biodiversity conser-
vation combine sound science and cultural
sensitivity with robust legal frameworks,
adequate resources and appropriate manage-
ment.
World-wide, there is now widespread
recognition of the crucial role of local
people as the driving force of biodiversity
conservation. This involvement may be
especially important in small island situ-
ations, for several reasons: the nature of
traditional often communal ownership of
land and marine resources in regions such
as the Pacific; the absence or weakness of
government-based conservation agencies
in many small island developing states; the
non-compliance of resource users to top-
down, government-imposed regulations
in some islands. In addition to testing vari-
ous types of co-management and govern-
ance arrangements, small islands may also
represent privileged areas in seeking new
resources for innovative approaches to
conservation (e.g. involving the private
sector) and scaling inputs to levels that are
assimilable and non conflictual.
48 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
References
CUQ, F. (ed.). 2001. Un système d’information géographique
pour l’aide à la gestion intégrée de l’archipel des Bijagos
(Guinée-Bissau). Notice de la carte, constitution et
exploitation du SIG. Brest: Géosystèmes.
EDWARDS, AJ. (ed.). 2000. Remote sensing hand-
book for tropical coastal management. Coastal
management sourcebooks 3. Paris: UNESCO.
http://www.unesco.org/csi/pub/source/rs.htm.
ESPEUT, P. 2002. Community policing in the Portland
Bight Protected Area, Jamaica. Wise Coastal Practices
for Sustainable Human Development Forum. Posted
14 October 2002. Paris: UNESCO.
http://www.csiwisepractices.org/?read=450 and related
discussion thread messages.
HILLARY, A.; KOKKONEN, M.; MAX, L. (eds). 2003.World
Heritage Marine Biodiversity Workshop. Proceedings
of a workshop. Hanoi, Vietnam, 25 February-1 March
2002. Paris: World Heritage Centre, UNESCO.
http://whc.unesco.org/series/papers_04.pdf
HUNNAM, P. 2002. Lessons in conservation for people
and projects in the Pacific islands region. Apia: UNDP.
http://www.undp.org.ws/PDF/Lessons.pdf
MARTIN, G.;BARROW, S.; CUNNINGHAM, AB.;
SHANLEY, P. (eds). 2000. Managing resources:
community-based conservation. People and
Plants Handbook Issue 6. Paris: UNESCO.
http://www.rbgkew.org.uk/peopleplants/pdf/h6.pdf
MOOK, E. 1999. GEF: helping small island developing
states. Our Planet 10(3): 26-28.
http://www.ourplanet.com
MOW, JM; HOWARD, M.; DELGADO, CM.; TABERT,
S. 2003. Promoting sustainable development: a case
study of Seaflower Biosphere Reserve. Prospects
33(3):303-312.
MYERS, K.; NITTA,K.; HAN QUILI. 2003. Empowerment
of customary environmental management in Siberut
Biosphere Reserve in 2001-2002. In: UNESCO (ed.),
The Third Meeting of the Project on Asia Pacific
Co-operation for the Sustainable Use of Renewable
Natural Resources in Biosphere Reserves and Similarly
Managed Areas (ASPACO). Okinawa, Japan, 1-6
October 2002, pp.78-81. Jakarta: UNESCO Office.
READ, T. 2002. Navigating a new course: stories in
community based conservation in the Pacific islands.
Apia: UNDP. http://www.undp.org.ws/PDF/Stories.pdf
RIEDMILLER, S. 2000. Private sector investment in
marine conservation / Chumbe Island-Tanzania.
Wise Coastal Practices for Sustainable Human
Development Forum. Posted 6 March 2000. Paris:
UNESCO. http://www.csiwisepractices.org/?read=185
and related discussion thread messages.
UNESCO. 2001. Indigenous People and Parks. The
Surin Islands Project. Coastal region and small island
papers 8. Paris: UNESCO. http://www.unesco.org/csi/
pub/papers2/surin.htm
UNESCO. 2002a.Biosphere reserves: special places for
people and nature. Paris: UNESCO. http://www.unesco.
org/mab/publications/BRbook/BRbook.htm
UNESCO. 2002b. Lwa ki gen pou wè ak Anviwònman
Kotye ak Lapèch nan Peyi d Ayiti. Lois relatives à
l’environnement côtier et à la pêche en Haïti. CSI info
N° 13. Paris: UNESCO.
http://www.unesco.org/csi/pub/info/haiti.htm
UNESCO. 2002c. Wise practices for conflict prevention
and resolution in small islands. Results of a work-
shop on ‘Furthering coastal stewardship in small
islands’, Dominica, 4–6 July 2001. Coastal region
and small island papers 11. Paris: UNESCO.
http://www.unesco.org/csi/pub/papers2/domr.htm
WILKINSON, C. (ed.). 2002. Status of Coral Reefs
of the World: 2002. Townsville: Australian Institute
of Marine Sciences. http://www.aims.gov.au/pages/
research/coral-bleaching/scr2002/scr-00.html

The limits and the splendor of
sustainable development.
In spite of being so widely used, sustainable
development is a rather debatable term and
concept when applied in operational terms to large
areas and regions with badly defined boundaries,
and to the interactions among too many economic
sectors (di Castri 2002 a). There are so many
definitions and even opposite interpretations of
this concept that – paradoxically – “it is now a
term that inherently eludes definitions”.
Nevertheless, nowhere else this concept can
be better applied for real operational activities
and proper management than in small islands
and as regards tourism. If a solid theory and
practice on sustainable development would
really emerge in the future – and this should
be a must for continuing using this term – most
likely they will originate from research and
management carried out in these areas (di Castri
et al. 2002 a, di Castri and Balaji 2002).
Inputs and outputs, of people (residents,
new migrants, tourists), of capital and goods,
of resources and even of invasive species can
be easily measured, detected and observed
in small islands.
Even in the absence of an accurate and
Figure 1 Back in the horizon the emerging mountains of Bora Bora facing its “small sister” Maupiti and its lagoon.
Maupiti has adopted patterns of tourism development much more sustainable than those of Bora Bora.
sophisticated definition, local inhabitants
and managers can easily and rapidly realize
whether the four legs of the chair that
support sustainability – the economic, the
environmental, the social and the cultural
ones – are unequally developed, undermined
and to what extent (di Castri 1995).
Economically, whether the flow of tourists
is decreasing in quantity (both total number
of tourists and permanence in nights) or
deteriorating in quality and return, whether
tourism concentration is becoming too
seasonal, where other economic sectors
in the island (local agriculture, fisheries,
handicraft) are not backing and supporting
enough tourism activities.
Environmentally, whether coastal and
soil erosion, degradation of coral reefs,
deforestation, availability of freshwater,
use of energy (with special emphasis on
renewable energy), transport, waste manage-
ment, land use (including urban planning),
invasions of alien species are taking too
serious adverse proportions.
Socially, whether the gap between the rich
and the poor in the island increases, thus
usually leading to increased criminality that
by FRANCESCO DI CASTRI
badly affects tourism, whether there is a
real economic return and welfare for local
populations from outside operations, where
the new expanding activities attract too many
migrants from other regions and cultures,
and whether the societal system value is
collapsing.
Culturally, whether the local language
remains vigorous and represents really the
first mother tongue, and it is not learned
later as a kind of foreign language. No local
culture is possible if it is not rooted in its
own language. If this is not the case, even the
mental representation and interpretation of
facts and events are distorted. Neither quality
nor sustainable tourism is viable, if they are
not inserted in a genuine culture. Cultural
pride, diversity and identity, to the extent that
Francesco di Castri is Director of
Research at the National Center
of Scientific Research of France
(CNRS) in Montpellier, and leader
of the SCOPE/ICSU (International
Council for Science) project on
Environment in a Global Information
Society (EGIS), in Paris. He has been Assistant
Director General of UNESCO, Paris, President of
the international research program DIVERSITAS
on biodiversity, and is member of the Academies of
Sciences of Italy and Russia. He has authored or co-
authored some 40 books and more than 500 scientific
articles. E-mail: fdicastri@wanadoo.fr
49
 they do not lead to the rejection of the others
and to a kind of naive, false and exclusive
genetic racism, provide local residents with
the self-respect and self-recognition, and
with the absence of preconceived prejudices
or sense of inferiority and dependence, that
are the sine qua non for sustainable tourism.
Among all economic sectors, tourism is the
one that can only survive if it strictly applies
the principles of the trust economy.
Given the paramount and growing impor-
tance of the cultural component of develop-
ment, it is somewhat strange that so little
attention has been given so far to culture
as the key element for sustainability, even
in large international fora as the one in
Johannesburg last year.
All the above conditions can be easily
detected even in the absence of the so-called
indicators of sustainable development. In
my own research and development on small
islands, they have proved to be of little use.
The most misleading indicator is probably
that of carrying capacity (di Castri 2000).
Comparisons among islands from Polynesia,
the Caribbean and the Mediterranean show
that there are no linear relations between
population size of residents and of tourists,
local natural resources, surface size and
sustainability. As an extreme example, the
frequency of tourist visits, when considering
the size of the island, is some 150 times
higher in Porquerolles and 240 times higher
in Port-Cros (two French islands in the
Mediterranean Sea) than in Easter Island
(politically Chile, geographically Polynesia).
Yet, the terrestrial and marine environment
of these two Mediterranean islands are well
conserved, compared with Easter Island,
where tourism and the environment are facing
very serious problems of sustainability,
embracing almost every aspect of island
management. Sustainability does not depend
just on inherent natural and demographic
features, but – above all – on human know-
how and cultural adaptation, distribution and
diversification of space use, and the existence
of appropriate service and infrastructure.
Two last characteristics on tourism sustain-
ability are explained below. Tourism is the
most sensitive factor to outside, out-of-
control events. For instant, the attack of 11
September 2001 has almost immediately
50 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
produced catastrophic consequences on the
tourism of some small islands that were
considered to be wisely and sustainably
oriented. All the organization of tourism, the
marketing system in different parts of the
world, the cruiser tourism viability, and the
very raison d’être of too large resorts, had
to be drastically reviewed (di Castri 2002 b).
A new paradigm for tourism sustainability
in small islands has accordingly emerged.
Tourism, to be sustainable, has to be early
reactive and adaptive to change.
Second, when some segments of sustain-
ability become to decline, such as too many
tourists not respectful toward the environ-
ment, criminality and tourist harassment,
excessive urbanization, cultural degradation
and trivial uniformity, lack of trust and
control on quality and prices, tourism tends
to initiate a progressively self-destroying
cycle that is very difficult to be reverted.
The number of tourists and the period of
permanence decrease, the level and the
cultural interest of tourists are lowering,
prices are progressively collapsing, and
discontinuation or bankrupt of several tourism
operations become unavoidable.
Tourism sustainability in the
global information society.
It is often not sufficiently realized how much
human society and its more or less sustainable
activities have changed during the last 15
years or so, during the transition from the
industrial to the information, knowledge-
based society. This transition and the previous
ones have been extensively illustrated in their
Figure 2 Francesco di Castri and his Polynesian assistant Sping Teupoohuitua at the top of the Teurafaatiu
mountain of Maupiti, the most sustainable island of the entire Society archipelago (Autonomous Territory of
French Polynesia).
phases by di Castri (2002 c). Tourism is – by
far – the economic sector that has been more
reactive to this societal transition.
Let’s consider and enumerate, for instance,
the main causes that were leading to lack
of tourism or to unsustainable tourism in
small islands, before this period. Admittedly,
the case applies more to distant, remote or
underdeveloped archipelagos and islands, such
as Polynesia, Micronesia, Melanesia, Cap Vert,
Maldives, Seychelles, part of Macaronesia, part
of the Baltic Islands, than to more advanced
and fashionable Mediterranean and Caribbean
islands or to the Canary Islands.
Main causes and constraints were as
follows:
1. Isolation and fragmentation, thus under-
mining the possibility of appropriate
marketing and benchmarking, as well as
that of organizing complex and diversified
itineraries covering more than an island.
2. Very often, too low human population
size in a given island for maintaining the
dynamic culture evolution, including its
own language, that is needed to keep and
valorize the local identity when newly
opening to tourism.
3. The impossibility for local inhabitants
to initiate small tourism entrepreneurial
activities by themselves, not going through
large tourism operators, to advertise and
marketing directly their tourism products,
to receive direct booking and to accept
payment by credit cards.
4. The impossibility to provide islanders
with appropriate education in their own
language; even less, to ensure continuous
 capacity-building on tourism matters.
5. When there was tourism, this was then
confined almost exclusively to large
international tourism operators, with often-
inappropriate resorts or large tourism
camps. Economic return to local popula-
tion was low and based on dependence.
Contacts between tourists and residents
were insufficient, inappropriate and biased.
They did not lead to interactions among
cultures, mutual understanding and shar-
ing aspirations and interests, that is the
very raison d’être of tourism – from a
cultural and social viewpoint – in a world
so culturally fractured as it is the present
one.
At present, none of these five past con-
straints is still applicable. With the establish-
ment of the information society and the
new generation of information technology,
the most isolated and small islands sharing
similar culture and aspirations can be easily
connected for cultural, educational and
economic purposes. An impressive cultural
Renaissance of local languages and art
expressions is taking place, with special
emphasis on Polynesia (Tahitian, Marqui-
sian, Rapanui languages), and local identi-
ties are strengthened. Continuous e-learning
provides unprecedented possibilities for
education, capacity-building and training.
There is a blooming of tourism micro-
enterprises, often at a family level, often
accompanied and backed by agriculture,
fisheries and pearl culture. With an attractive
web site for advertisement, in order to
provide information and receive booking for
accommodation, and with a small number of
simple but appropriate housing, it is possible
to initiate small-scale tourism activities in
islands where this was considered impos-
sible to be achieved, even only a few years
ago (di Castri 2003 a).
Even during the tourism crisis after 11
September 2001, small tourism operators and
family micro-enterprises resisted better, and
provided a greater diversification of activities,
than large operators and resorts.
Concepts and practices as those of digital
islands, e-learning and Grid Technologies,
VIAD (Virtual Institute for Alphabetization
for Development) are becoming familiar –
at present - for tourism viable development,
Figure 3a The atoll of Mataiva (Tuamotu Archipelago)
with its unique reticulated net of coral reefs inside the
lagoon, thus delimitating some 70 basins of turquoise
water. Mataiva has the potential of developing the
most sustainable tourism of the overall archipelago, to
the extent that mining exploitation and extraction of
phosphates in the lagoon is prevented, including through
international public pressure, given the uniqueness and
worldwide significance of its lagoon.
Figure 3b The excellent, healthy status of the coral reefs
in the lagoon of Mataiva.
particularly at a small scale and with the
involvement of local populations.
Particularly relevant is the alphabetization
for development. Alphabetization (mostly
through e-learning) consists of making
people aware of the two new languages
that dominate the present world: the digital
language and digital information provided
by the new generation of computers and
information technology as a product of
cultural evolution, and the genetic language
and genetic information provided by biodi-
versity and biotechnology as a product of
biological evolution. Being illiterate in
these two languages, most development
opportunities are lost, not even envisaged
or perceived by people (di Castri 2003 b).
Possibility for local, distant populations
to master such languages is surprisingly
rapid and easy.
di Castri et al. (2002 b) discuss and
review the main applications of information
technology to tourism sustainability in
islands, going from better management and
marketing, innovation in organizational pat-
terns, enhancement of biological and cultural
diversity, application of high performance
tools, capacity-building, better health
care through telematics, and database on
biodiversity.
If small islands are – for reasons already
discussed earlier - the best indicators of
global change and adaptation (or lack of
adaptation) to change, this situation applies
– to different degrees – to all countries
and regions of the world. The transition
toward the global information society does
not recognize boundaries. Nevertheless,
globalization and international trade were
only a minor concern during the UN Rio
Summit in 1992 when the concept of sustain-
able development was first approved (but
discussions on it, with only some minor dif-
ferences, went back up to the UN Stockholm
Conference in 1972). Ten years after Rio,
last year (2002) in Johannesburg, sustainable
development has been mostly discussed
out of context of the ongoing information
society. Most discussions in Johannesburg
have led to a feeling of strange alienation
from the realities of the present world.
Again, it is desirable that research and
development in small islands, more focused
in space and more reactive to today realities,
can help improving operational knowledge
and practice on sustainable development
in general.
Figure 4 Hiva Oa (Marquises Islands). The emblematic
tiki of Takaii, under a giant breadfruit tree (Artocarpus).
Archaeological site of Lipona (Oipona), near Paumau.
Takaii, sculpted on keetu, a red volcanic tuff, is the
tallest tiki of Polynesia (2.67 m), not considering the
moai of Easter Island.
51
 The three main conditions for Figure 5 Hiva Oa, Atuona, Marquises Islands. The tomb
of Paul Gauguin (called Koke by the Marquisians), dead
tourism sustainability in small in Atuona in 1903, under a fragrant tree of frangipani
islands. called locally “tipanier” (Plumeria), and a reproduction
of his statue Oviri (“The Wild”).
On theoretical, and – above all – empirical
evidence, conditions of tourism sustainability
in small islands can be found when the
following three conditions are met, at least
to a reasonable extent. based, decentralized approach, which is
1. Empowerment of the local people and the largely facilitated by new tools of the
emergence of their entrepreneurial capac- information technology.
ity. They are the only actors capable of 3. Diversification of tourism activities them-
meeting their aspirations for development selves, and as placed in the context of
with their concern for conservation of economic diversification of other sectors.
their culture, their environment and their A tourism “monoculture” would be too
biodiversity. Conservation of cultural and risky in the current unpredictable society,
natural heritage should be considered and would not ensure per se conditions of
as a dynamic and continuously adaptive sustainability. All aspects of cultural diver-
and evolving process, and not a simple sity (both the tangible and the intangible Local empowerment
preservation of the status quo, or of a facets, language, traditions, system values) Out of the three boxes of sustainability,
hypothetical status quo ante. and of biological diversity (from genes described below, I will only give some more
2. Connectivity among all stakeholders con- to species, to ecosystems and landscapes) consideration to local empowerment, since
cerned, from local populations to potential should be considered under this item. it represents the essential condition. With
tourists, tourism operators and environmen- no empowerment, it would be impossible
tal managers. Aspects of in situ social A more detailed characterization of condi- to reach the conditions of connectivity and
cohesion and connection, as well those of tions for tourism sustainability in small islands diversification.
international marketing and benchmarking – a checklist to be monitored in a comparative Indeed, empowerment of people is the key
are equally important, going from the local way - is given as follows. They shape three factor. It is based on the renewed awareness
to the global scale. This implies a network- blocks, with seven pillars in each one of them. and pride on the universal value of their
culture and environment. Empowerment
enables the local people to become actors
• Access to bi-directional digital information
• Capacity-building, including distance learning and operators of tourism activities, so that
LOCAL • Cultural pride and memory of traditions. Cultural revival (local language, arts, folklore) the generation of economic wealth primarily
EMPOWERMENT • Sense of identity, based on cultural and natural heritage
• Acceptation, receptivity and adaptation to innovation and change
benefits local societies. Together with the
• Entrepreneurial capacity and potential of local people access to information, empowerment is
• Administrative conditions of autonomy
promoted by opportunities for lifelong
• All elements of the community system in close interaction and cooperation among themselves distance learning and capacity-building, and
• Ability of the community to establish connections with other islands,
and opening up to the global international tourism
development of tourism-related skills.
• Enlargement of market place, channels of distribution and advertisement, This process can foster cross-cultural
CONNECTIVITY marketing and benchmarking capacity
exchanges approached with appropriate
• Transport facilities (by air and by sea, also internal in archipelagos)
• Telephone, Internet and fax communications. Use and acceptance of credit cards sensitivity. Moreover, isolated populations
• Conditions of security and safety in the island sharing the same culture can be connected
• Infrastructures, mostly for medical care, including tele-medecine facilities
through digital communication tools, so that
• Diversity of tourism uses (beach tourism, diving and snorkeling, trekking and land sports, horse riding,
they can reach a critical size for diversifica-
ecotourism, agrotourism, cultural and archaeological tourism)
• Appropriate daily and seasonal distribution of tourism activities, the main goals being those of increasing tion of tourism products and services. In
the permanence in nights, and to transform an occasional tourism in a destination tourism some situations, tourism has been shown as
• Diversity of tourism accommodations, from high level comfort (but strictly avoiding large resorts not fully
integrated into the local cultural and natural environment), to in-house accommodation of local inhabitants
a catalyst in promoting the cultural revival
• Diversity of economic activities (tourism, agriculture, sheries, pearl culture, aquaculture, forestry, handicrafts, and identity of a given region or ethnic group
DIVERSIFICATION energy sources and uses, with special emphasis on renewable energy, elaboration of local products including
(di Castri 2000).
for exports, services)
• Conservation and valorization of the biological diversity, mainly carried out by the local populations themselves, It should be underlined again and strongly
going from genes to species, ecosystems and landscapes. Main impacts affecting biodiversity in small islands stressed, that conservation of biological
are invasive species, soil erosion, overgrazing, overshing and coral reef degradation
• Landscape and seascape ecology and management, including designing and building new landscapes and
and cultural diversity is merely a utopia or
seascapes, if so needed. a pointless action, unless it is put into the
• Diversication of cultural attractions, from the oldest traditional ones to those derived from successive cultural
context of development activities involving
encounters. Culture is an eminently evolving, and not xed, entity.

52 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS

local populations. They can become actors of
conservation only to the extent that they
are – above all – actors of their own develop-
ment, and realize by themselves and in the
practice of their daily life how linked and
interdependent are these two processes.
This is the so-called “contextualization” of
the environment within clear development
objectives, the only way to get realistic
progresses in biodiversity conservation.
This ineludible relation between develop-
ment and environment applies everywhere,
even in developed countries. No conservation
of UNESCO sites of the World Cultural and
Natural Heritage, national parks, biosphere
reserves is possible, out of the prestige
given by what is much too often a simple
international label with few management
repercussions, unless it is clearly contextual-
ized and applied within a development
goal. The tourism sector is usually the most
appropriate one.
The seven main objectives of local
empowerment are as follows (di Castri et
al 2002 b):
1. Fostering community networks, to help
communities make use of information and
communication technologies to improve
their living conditions, to identify resources
to address social problems with the
community, and promote the interaction
between low-income groups with similar
problems and needs, even if they stand at
great distance.
2. Training community facilitators and pro-
moters on how to manage the technique
and its potential for tourism development.
3. Dissemination of information in the public
domain.
4. Creation of basic job skills, to include
computer use and application, business
management, marketing and benchmark-
ing, e-commerce.
Figure 6 Easter Island, one of the islands of the world
where condition of tourism sustainability are among the
lowest, because of totally inappropriate “bizarre” land
management. Dramatic erosion processes in the oldest
volcano of Poike, a site of extraordinary historical
and archaeological interest (the moai are unusually
sculpted on trachyte). Erosion has been provoked
earlier by most intense overgrazing by sheep, and
now by cattle and horses.
5. Job creation, to increase employment
opportunities through partnership with
business and professional associations,
and design an online database of job
opportunities and applicants.
6. To facilitate and encourage entrepreneur-
ships.
7. To establish partnerships so that different
people and organizations can work
together, in the most informal, free and
flexible way, to address common interests
and concerns.
Out of the so dramatic situation of poverty
in the world, out – above all - of all dema-
goguery, hypocrisy and inaction linked with
this drama, I don’t know myself – empirically
and conceptually - of any other action able
to break the vicious circle of poverty, in the
present world, out of the access to information
and the empowerment of local populations.
How does local empowerment emerge and
strengthen itself? Is it a long process to be
established? During the last 12 years or so, I
have never observed the emergence of such
a stimulating process of awakening to a new
future – l’éveil - and of revival to a new life –
a life made of hopes and achieved aspirations
– in the absence of the access to the new type
of bi-directional information (the Internet
and e-mail).
It should be stressed that access to informa-
tion – in present society – does not mean only
or mainly the capacity and ability to receive
it. It is rather the capacity to elaborate and
process it and – above all – to transmit it
freely, with no censure, with no limitation, in
the own mother tongue, to the person
he/she likes, usually a neighbor or
somebody of the same culture
living at great distance. This
feeling of freedom, of force
of communication, is the first
trigger toward empowerment.
When a person from a local population is
in a position to receive this information, the
first reaction is one of surprise. It is neither
the usual State propaganda nor the usual
centralized management guidelines, rarely
applicable to specific situations with the
immense variety of islands. The person realizes
then that he/she has “a possibility of choice”,
and this is the very definition of freedom and
democracy. The person furthermore realizes
that he/she can complement and modify
that information on the basis of local experi-
ence and aspirations for development. This
information is transmitted to a number of
friends or associates, responses are almost
immediately received, and this is at the origin
of the first informal network.
It should be realized that most societies
from small islands, including the poorest
ones, and in general all isolated and poor
peoples of the world, consistently aspire to
break free from their isolation through new
communication devices, in order to establish
closer and continuing contacts with people
sharing the same culture and development
goals, and with the rest of the world. Moreo-
ver, their ability to quickly learn and actively
handle and manage the new techniques is
remarkable, as is their intuitive understand of
logic behind the functioning of a computer,
or e-mail communication and surfing. The
process of local empowerment can often be
astonishingly rapid, but it should certainly be
an evolving process of continuous refinement
and achievement.
53
 Local empowerment is also the best
solution to respond to globalization in an
adaptive and specific way, a specificity
reflecting local resources and local aspira-
tions. Only an appropriate, specific and
“tailored” response, and not a generic and
uniform one as at the time of the previous
industrial society, has a chance of being
competitive and successful in a period of
globalization.
How to call and to refer to “local empower-
ment” in other languages out of English?
An appropriate translation does not exist.
In Spanish, the words “apoderamiento” or
“empoderamiento” are sometimes used. In
French, mostly in Quebec (Canada) where
people are very cautious of not using British
forms, the new word of “autonomisation” has
been coined. In Italy, and to a lesser extent
in France, empowerment is used as such, as
a non-translatable neologism.
In Italy, the Polynesian word of mana is
sometimes used as synonymous of empower-
ment. Mana is the spiritual, immaterial,
internal power that gives the capacity to
a given man or woman of taking in hands
his/her own destiny, and the conviction, trust,
strength and ability to master it. It is also
the possibility of communicating at distance.
When working in Polynesian societies, I have
been since years explaining the potential
power for them of the information technol-
ogy, mostly for tourism development, and
the reply has been consistently the same:
“This is very simple and easy to understand.
This is just mana”. In Polynesia, the two
fundamental societal principles are those of
mana and of tapu (translated into English in
a very restricted, limited and even negative
meaning as Taboo). Tapu represents the
norms and the traditions, “the limits”, that
an individual should absolutely avoid to
infringe, break or overcome, if the social
cohesion of the overall community has to
be preserved.
It is amazing to realize how many analo-
gies, linkages and connections are there
between the modern terms of empowerment
and connectivity, largely derived from island
research and management, and the so old
ones – coming from the largest insular
civilization of the world (Polynesia) – of
mana and tapu.
54 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
Comparisons on Atolls are becoming increasingly appealing
sustainability for tourism, along with the expansion of
Sustainability can better be evaluated by activities of diving and snorkeling. I single
comparison with other equivalent islands out in Mataiva (Tuamotu Archipelago) the
than in absolute terms. Considering the most significant case of sustainability of
main land and sea forms of tropical islands, an atoll, because of the unique features of its
three main types of islands are usually lagoon (Figures 3 a and 3 b), the high diversity
described: a) High islands surrounded by of birds and fish, and the empowerment of
coral reefs, thus circumscribing a central the small local population.
lagoon; b) High islands with no coral reefs; High islands with no coral reefs are often
and c) Atolls (only coral reefs and lagoon a case, among other activities, of cultural
with no central mountain). They represent and archaeological tourism. This applies, for
three stages of the geological evolution, the instance, to Rapa Iti (Australes Archipelago),
high volcanic islands with no coral reefs the Marquises Islands in French Polynesia
being the most recent ones, and atolls the and – above all – to Easter Island (di Castri
oldest ones. 1999).
No type of island seems to be more prone A more detailed comparison between one
to tourism sustainability than other types. of the Marquises Island, Hiva Oa, and Easter
It is just a problem of cultural adaptation Island is very appropriate, because of a
to change of local populations and of number of similarities, as follows.
appropriate management. 1. Hiva Oa and Easter Island are both high
Those more appealing for tourism are volcanic islands with no coral reefs.
the high islands with coral reef and lagoon, 2. Most likely, the first inhabitants of Easter
since they include all types of landscapes Island came from the Marquises.
and seascapes. Figures 1 and 2 single 3. They both experienced demographic and
out an outstanding case of sustainability cultural collapse, close to ethnic extinction,
in Maupiti, an island in the Society Archi- from the middle of 1800, and a surprisingly
pelago. fast recovery last century.
Figure 7 Hiva Oa, Marquises Islands. The stele dedicated to the great poet, composer and interpreter Jacques
Brel, dead in 1977, looking at the islands of Hiva Oa and Tahuata. Brel is a charismatic and mythical
figure for two-three generations of Europeans. Gémir n’est pas de mise aux Marquises (something like,
“Complaining himself is meaningless when one lives in the Marquises”), the last verse written by Jacques
Brel before his dead, is sculpted in the stele. The last poem and song of Jacques Brel “Les Marquises”
is the best evoking, imaginative illustration of what is the feeling in an island, when conditions of
sustainability and empowerment prevail.
4. The most impressive statues (moai and
tiki) from Polynesia are in Easter Island
and Hiva Oa.
5. Cannibalism was largely spread out in
both Hiva Oa and Easter Island. However,
while there is a kind of cultural pride in
Hiva Oa for such sacred cannibalism with
so sophisticated rituals (and the history of
it is one of the tourism attractions), can-
nibalism is almost not mentioned in Easter
Island (and – most likely – cannibalism
in Easter Island had an alimentary scope
Chilean territory and is managed like a large
farm of Central Chile. This is in spite of
the fact that nothing, from the cultural to
the natural aspects, is in common between
continental Chile and Easter Island. In other
words, and taking the leitmotiv of this article,
inhabitants of Hiva Oa enjoy since long
References
DI CASTRI F. 1995. The chair of sustainable develop-
ment. Nature and Resources 31: 2-7.
conditions of local empowerment, and those
of Easter Island not yet. It is hoped that
cultural and natural degradation in Easter
Island would not become irreversible, before
empowerment of local people be accepted
and develops in a feasible and workable
way.
ism, Biodiversity and Information. Leiden: Backhuys
Publishers: 257-284.

rather than to represent a sacred societal
function).
6. Both Hiva Oa and Easter Island have
been evangelized by the Catholic Church,
which is still dominant (unlikely most of
Polynesia and the Pacific).
7. The ability and the extraordinary art and
force for sculpting on stone and wood are
still astonishingly widespread in both the
Marquises and Easter Island.
In spite of so many similarities, it would
be difficult to imagine two societies that are
more different – at present - in their behavior,
aspirations and economic wealth than those
of Hiva Oa and Easter Island, two islands
managed in a more different way and follow-
ing more distant principles, and two levels of
tourism sustainability more diverse, very high
in Hiva Oa and very low in Easter Island.
In Hiva Oa, the Marquisian language is
reborn and widespread, while in Easter Island
some 77 % of children go to school having
Spanish as the first language. Biological and
cultural diversity is very high in Hiva Oa
(Figures 4, 5 and 7), and local inhabitants
participate to its protection and valorization,
while land use and land management in
Easter Island is one of the worst of the world,
leads to the collapse of biodiversity and
to almost inconceivable phenomena of soil
erosion (Figures 6 and 8).
Problems are intermingled and complex
(di Castri 2003 c), but – if I were asked to
evoke only one cause – I would say that
Hiva Oa and the Marquises enjoy the very
high level of administrative autonomy and
political initiative within the French Polynesia
Overseas Territory (with some special condi-
tions of autonomy referring to the Marquises),
while Easter Island stands like an almost
undifferentiated part of the continental
DI CASTRI F. 1999. Scenarios of tourism development DI CASTRI F. 2003 a. Tourism for community develop-
in Easter Island. INSULA, International Journal of ment and local empowerment. In: Proceedings Euro-
Island Affairs 8: 27-39. MAB 2002 Meeting. Rome: UNESCO and Academy
DI CASTRI F. 2000. Ecology in a context of economic
of Sciences: 108-109.
globalization. BioScience 50: 321-332. DI CASTRI F. 2003 b. Globalización, Biodiversidad,
Desarrollo y Gobernabilidad. In: Darse Cuenta.
DI CASTRI F. 2002 a. Le développement durable, entre
Rosario, Argentina: AAPRESID: 11-53.
théorie et pratique, entre rêve et réalité. Liaison
DI CASTRI F. 2003 c. The dynamic future of Rapa Nui.
Energie-Francophonie. Numéro spécial Sommet de
Johannesburg. 55-57: 38-45. Rapa Nui Journal 17: 44-48.
DI CASTRI F. 2002 b. Tourism revisited after 11 DI CASTRI F. AND BALAJI V. (Eds.). 2002. Tourism,
September 2001. In: di Castri F. and Balaji V. (Eds.). Biodiversity and Information. Leiden: Backhuys
Tourism, Biodiversity and Information. Leiden: Publishers.
Backhuys Publishers: 483-488. DI CASTRI F., MCELROY J., SHELDON P. AND BALAJI
DI CASTRI F. 2002 c. The trilogy of the knowledge- V. 2002 a. Geographic regions: the Islands. Introduc-
based, post-industrial society: Information, Biodiversity tion. In: di Castri F. and Balaji V. (Eds.). Tourism,
and Tourism. In: di Castri F. and Balaji V. (Eds.). Tour- Biodiversity and Information. Leiden: Backhuys
ism, Biodiversity and Information. Leiden: Backhuys Publishers: 139-149.
Publishers: 7-24. DI CASTRI F., SHELDON P., CONLIN M., BONIFACE P.
DI CASTRI F. 2002 d. Diversification, connectivity and AND BALAJI V. 2002 b. Information, Communication
local empowerment for tourism sustainability in South and Education for Tourism Development. Introduction. In:
Pacific islands – a network from French Polynesia to di Castri F. and Balaji V. (Eds.). Tourism, Biodiversity and
Easter Island. In: di Castri F. and Balaji V. (Eds.). Tour- Information. Leiden: Backhuys Publishers: 423-429.
Figure 8 Easter Island. Recent, over-embracing erosion in Poike, at different stages of advancement, including
in between the grasses. Result of overgrazing by newly introduced, heavy zebu Brahma cattle. The soils
of the three main volcanoes of Easter Island are literally going to the sea. In spite of being a site of the
UNESCO World Cultural and Natural Heritage (nominated in 1995), the National Park of Rapa Nui (Easter
Island) is by far – among all islands studied – the one where the degradation processes are the most advanced
and the management most unwise.

55

Introduction
The perception that islands are representations
of paradise and have thus avoided the impacts
of human development is fast eroding. With
growing populations, increasing tourism and
fisheries pressure, many island coastal and
marine ecosystems are threatened. Coral
reefs, in particular are affected through land-
based sources of pollution, coastal reclama-
tion, destructive and uncontrolled fishing;
as well as mass coral bleaching events, the
most severe on record being in 1998 (Hoegh-
Guldberg 1999). On the other hand, many
studies have shown that coral reefs and associ-
ated ecosystems are critical for economic and
sustainable development in islands (see Cesar,
2000). Coral Reefs support an estimated 25
to 34 million islanders, and services such
as tourism (see Table 1) contribute about
U$ 8.9 billion in foreign exchange earnings
The Stork patch reef in the Seychelles: before 1998 mass coral bleaching (Photo Courtesy of Riaz Aumeeruddy)
in the Caribbean only, (Bryant et al. 1998).
Following the bleaching event in 1998,
one hotel in the Maldives reported over
U$ 300,000 drop in revenues (MHAHE
2001). Coral reefs are clearly at the centre
of economic development in island states.
Furthermore, island inhabitants have tradi-
tionally depended upon coastal fisheries for
food; coral and sand for construction materi-
als, medicinal uses, and coastal protection.
However, with the growth in tourism the
number of conflicting activities has increased
(UNESCO 2002), as indicated in Box 1
(Case Study 3). Tourism demands a more
conservative approach to coral reefs and
associated ecosystems, but many other coral
reef users, such as fishermen think otherwise,
seeing tourism as only benefiting investors
with little money actually remaining in the
local economy (UNESCO 2001).
by ROLPH ANTOINE PAYET
The article will focus on coral reef issues
within Small Island Developing States (SIDS)
rather than islands in general. Small island
states have been defined as single islands
or groups of islands which are independent
political entities and have typically small land
areas, large exclusive economic zones and a
population under 1.5 million (Commonwealth
Secretariat 2000). At least 34 island countries
fall into that categorisation, mainly from
the Caribbean, Indian Ocean and Pacific
regions. Table 1 shows the characteristics
of selected islands which have large areas
of coral reefs.
At least 60,000 km2, or 21% of global total
of coral reefs areas lie within SIDS (See
Table 1), with another 18 % found within
Indonesia’s islands, which implies that at
least 40 % of the worlds coral reefs are found
around islands (Spalding et al. 2001). Three
types of reef systems have been described
in island situations: fringing, barrier, and
atoll reefs however there are variations in
the use of these terms since islands have
very complex geological origins and changes
through time.
Rolph Payet is the Chairman of the Board
of Seychelles Centre for Marine Research
and Technology-Marine Parks Authority,
and Director General for Policy, Planning
and Services (Ministry of Environment).
He is also PhD student with the University
of Kalmar (Sweden), with a BSc in Biochemistry (UK), MSc
in Coastal Management (UK), and an MBA (UK). His primary
research interests include resource management, coral reefs,
climate change and large marine ecosystems.
P.O. Box 1145
Victoria, Mahe, SEYCHELLES
Tel: +248 670431; Fax: +248 610647
Email: rolph@seychelles.sc
57
 Table 1 Characteristics and coral reefs in selected island states threat of mass bleaching and actions to
Land Population Coastline EEZ Reef Tourism reverse the physical degradation of coral
Area (000s) Length (000s km2) Area Receipts
reefs (Decisions I/7; VI/2; and Annex 1 &
(km2) (km) (km2) (% of GNP)
2 of COP Report, http://www.biodiv.org/
Caribbean
Antigua and Barbuda 280 66 153 110 240 63.4 decisions/ accessed on 23/10/03).
Bahamas 13,935 276 3,542 652 3,150 42.0 At regional levels, the UNEP (United
Barbados 431 262 97 186 <100 39.2
Nations Environment Programme) Regional
Cuba 110,861 11,041 6,073 345 3,020 8.8
Dominica 750 71 148 29 <100 15.9 Seas Conventions have provided an important
Dominican Republic 48,442 7,823 940 261 610 13.6 mechanism to address coral reef issues in
Grenada 312 92 121 25 150 27.0
SIDS. The Regional Seas network with sup-
Haiti 27,750 7,180 370 127 450 3.9
Jamaica 10,991 2,447 1,022 251 1,240 31.6 port of the UNEP Coral Reef Unit provides
St. Kitts and Nevis 269 41 135 10 180 30.6 an effective network for the implementation
St. Lucia 616 150 158 15 160 41.1
of key global programmes such as the Inter-
St. Vincent and the Grenadines 389 112 84 38 140 23.8
Trinidad and Tobago 5,128 1,306 3,760 74 <100 4.2 national Coral Reef Action network (ICRAN)
Indian Ocean and the identification of key centres of excel-
Comoros 2,171 653 340 175 430 10.6 lence in coral reef and marine park manage-
Maldives 300 254 644 996 8,920 95.0
ment at regional level. For example, through
Mauritius 1,850 1,117 177 1,291 870 15.7
Seychelles 445 81 491 1,334 1,690 34.6 the Nairobi Convention (encompassing the
Pacific Ocean Indian Ocean islands), a Coral Reef Task
Cook Island 236 NA 120 1,830 1,120 Force was set-up to implement the Protocol
Federated States of Micronesia 720 NA 6,112 2,980 5,440
on the Protection and Management of coastal
Fiji 18,272 784 1,129 1,217 10,020 19.2
Kiribati 728 79 1,143 3,600 2,940 - and marine resources (COP3 2001).
Marshall Islands 181 NA 370 2,131 6,110 -
Nauru 21 11 30 436 <50 -
State of Coral Reefs
Palau 497 NA NA 601 <50 -
Samoa 2,842 171 403 120 490 19.6 Comparable information on the current
Solomon Islands 28,446 378 5,313 1,630 5,750 2.8 state of coral reefs in small island states
Tonga 697 98 419 700 1,500 -
has been sparse (Wells 1988) until 1997
Tuvalu 26 10 24 757 710 -
Vanuatu 14,763 169 2,528 680 4,110 19.3 with the formation of the Global Coral Reef
TOTAL 292,184 34,664 35,846 22,601 59,840 Monitoring Network (GCRMN) through the
Data extracted from GEO Data Portal first ICRI meeting. GCRMN is currently a
(http://geodata.grid.unep.ch/); Spalding et al., 2001; and Wilkinson, 2002; Nurse et al., 2001)
growing network of regional nodes, national
Early research indicated that the abundance (WSSD), the Convention on Biological monitoring programmes, regional partner-
and diversity of coral reefs are much higher Diversity (CBD), and Ramsar Convention ships and collaborations among various
around islands than along continental coasts (UNEP 2003). intergovernmental organisations. The first
(Nunn 1994). The reason for this is related Since the launching of ICRI in 1994, SIDS global coral reef status report was published
to oceanographic factors which are more have played an important role in mobilising in 1998 (Wilkinson 1998), and subsequently
dominant in island situations than along support for global commitment on coral two updates have been published (Wilkinson
continental coastlines. Coral reef diversity reefs. At least 12 paragraphs of the WSSD 2000, 2002). These two reports form the basis
is also at its greatest where the Indian and implementation plan refer to the need to of this section on the status of coral reefs in
Pacific Oceans meet. However, little is known reverse the growing decline in coral reefs selected island states. Figure 1 summarises
how these factors influence reef growth and through coordination, cooperation, conser- the relevance of the key threats to coral
development in island areas, and why in vation, research, and partnership among reefs within the small island states. Table 2
some cases upward reef growth could not stakeholders, as well as engage in sustainable summarises the impact of coral bleaching
keep pace with the last Pleistocene sea-level fisheries and tourism. Paragraph 52 specifies in selected SIDS.
rise, for example the ancient drowned atolls in that SIDS should manage their rich and
the Marshall islands (Lincoln and Schlanger diverse coral reef inheritance and support the The Caribbean
1991). development of SIDS-specific programmes The islands states in the Caribbean consist
The importance of coral reefs has been on marine and coastal biodiversity. The CBD of large islands such as Cuba, and groups
recognised by many SIDS, especially through recognised the need to focus on marine and of small low-lying islands such as the Baha-
deliberations of various international coastal biodiversity since its first Conference mas. Coral reefs in the Caribbean are well
meetings and processes such as the Inter- of the Parties (COP), and by the sixth COP developed and can be grouped into fringing
national Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI), the had adopted a work programme to address reefs, as well as patch (small isolated reefs
World Summit on Sustainable Development the specific issue of coral reefs, the emerging in lagoons) and bank reefs. Coral reefs

58 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS

 Box 1: Cases from selected islands illustrating practical approaches throughout the Caribbean have little variation
and constraints to coral reef monitoring and management. in the number and types of species, although
Case Study 1: Community Approach to Coral Reef Monitoring and Management in Samoa there area variances in abundances (Edmunds
An approach to involve the community based upon the customary marine tenure is et al. 1990). Reef development within this
being implemented in Samoa. Initial outcomes resulted in the setup of well-defined
fisheries reserves and marine protected areas falling under the direct responsibility
region are affected through surface runoff,
of coastal villages. Leadership from village leaders as well as capacity building is wave exposure and periodical hurricane
observed as being critical to the success of the approach. In fact, compliance to local disturbances, and sea temperatures which are
rules was found to be higher than those imposed by the national government, and
now community by-laws are even being enforced by national authorities. However,
influenced by cool upwelling from nearby
consistent monitoring has been problematic since it depends upon factors of financial deep trenches and the Gulf stream. Hard
sustainability and training. Delineation of marine boundaries between villages is coral diversity is high in most areas, although
also unresolved in some areas, but overall the approach is seen as an acceptable
mechanism for the management of coral reefs in Samoa.
coral diseases have affected much of the hard
Source: MacKay, K. 2003 coral cover (Goreau et al. 1988). Associated
Case Study 2: Coordination of coral reef monitoring at national level in Seychelles
species and ecosystems includes over 500
The Seychelles National Coral Reef Network (SNCRN) was setup in 1998 a few months species of fish, large areas of mangroves
prior to the catastrophic coral bleaching event of that year with a view to coordinate (especially on the larger islands, such as
coral reef monitoring in Seychelles. Whilst it groups organisations working in the marine Cuba), and algal beds.
sector ranging from the government institutions to conservation NGOs, academic
institutions and the dive and fishing industry, each organisation have their own Coral reefs and associated ecosystems
monitoring programmes. It also provided links into regional programmes and with have been seriously damaged over the last 20
GCRMN and ICRI. The network is currently implementing a monitoring programme as years as a result of a combination of activities
part of a regional initiative, and several training activities have been organised. The
SNCRN has provided an essential platform for partnerships to be made in monitoring and natural effects. Growths in population and
and also sharing of knowledge and experiences. At first many organisations were unplanned coastal tourism are the most likely
doubtful the process would work, but it has proved to be critical in encouraging causes of this degradation, but sedimentation
wider support from NGOs and the private sector. However the network has yet to
address several critical questions related to coral reefs - such as sustainable financing arising from deforestation in the larger islands
of monitoring, monitoring methods, centralised database management or not, and (such as in Cuba, Haiti, Jamaica and the
coverage of existing network. Dominican Republic) also have an important
Contributed by: Bijoux, J. 2003 Seychelles Centre for Marine Research & Technology
effect at local levels. Sewage pollution from
Case Study 3: Policy issues in the management of reefs in Trinidad and Tobago
tourism, large coastal cities and runoff from
The leasing of prime coastal property adjacent to reefs in Tobago for tourism
agricultural land are also important stressors
development, without proper allocation of rights and consultation has lead to serious
conflicts with local fishermen. The developer imposed three conditions of access on on the coral reef environment. Over-fishing
local fishermen: (i) need to pay to fish; (ii) need to define time to fish; and (iii) needs and land-based sources of pollution is a major
identification to fish. The resulting conflict led to government intervention and it was
cause of coral reef degradation in many areas
agreed the no entrance fees should be paid by fishermen, but they would only be
required to enter at certain times and always carry identification. Due to a lack of of the Caribbean (UNEP 1999).
a national framework for access rights an open access regimes dominate, causing Natural disturbances, such as mass deaths
losses to all parties when there are conflicts over use. Multiple uses of coral reef within
of sea urchins (Diadema antillarum), over-
coastal areas and marine protected areas system is critical in establishing long-term
sustainable use of coral reefs in SIDS. Governments have a very important role to play growth of macro-algae, white-band and other
in the definition of access rights and ensure coral reefs are managed for multiple uses coral diseases, and large-scale coral bleach-
as well and protected against degradation.
ing associated with elevated sea surface
Source: Potts, A. 2003.

Table 2 Impact of coral bleaching on reef mortality in the three SIDS regions and the proportion of reefs at risk
Island State Reef Mortality Reef Mortality Reefs at Risk Indicator Regional Summary
Pre-1998 (bleaching event) Post-1998 Low Medium High

Caribbean 21% 1% 39% 32% 29% Highest risk due to direct impacts
Barbados 43%
Trinidad & Tobago - 1-2%
~4%
Indian Ocean 13% 46% 46% 29% 25% Highest risk due to elevated sea-
surface temperatures (SST)
Comoros - 40-50%
Mauritius - 15%
Maldives ~4% 60-90%
Seychelles 5% 50-90%
Pacific 4% 5% 59% 31% 10% Relatively unaffected but at risk
form live coral trade and SST
Federal States of Micronesia - 5%
Palau - ~50%
Source: Wilkinson 200,2002; Bryant et al. 1998; Linden et al. (CORDIO) 2002); Goreau et al., 2000.Lore consequismodipit exero eugait ate dunt lan hent praese tatis
nullan henit landit autpat dolore dolore magna commolor si ese commy nulla commoloreet alit alis dolut euis alit la consequisim dio odolobore consequisit landrem
vullamcon utet wisi estrud

59
 Table 2: Selected Regional Monitoring programs supporting coral reef monitoring in small island states.

Regional Program Focus Coordination, Information management and Support

Caribbean
Caribbean Coastal Marine
Productivity Program
(CARICOMP)
Atlantic and Gulf Rapid Reef
Assessment (AGGRA)
Indian Ocean
Coral Reef Degradation in
the Indian Ocean (CORDIO)
Coral Reef Monitoring in the
Indian Ocean Islands
Nairobi Convention Regional
Seas Action Plan (ICRAN)
Pacific
The Polynesia Mana monitoring
Network
South Pacific Regional
Environment Programme
(SPREP)
Scientific program since 1992, to study land-interac-
tion process in the Caribbean. Recent focus shifted
to coral reefs and other marine habitats. Regional
network of 25 marine laboratories.
An international collaboration of researchers to
evaluate coral reef condition in the Caribbean using
a specific rapid assessment protocol. Assessments
have already been undertaken on 500 reefs.
Currently in its third phase since 1998, it main aim is
to undertake multidisciplinary scientific assessments
by local scientists. Focus extended to socioeconomic
aspects and impacts of coral reef degradation.
Initiated in 2000 through the Indian Ocean Commis-
sion to strengthen coral reef monitoring capacity in
all islands of the Indian Ocean
Initiated in 2000 to strengthen marine protected area
management in the island states
Adoption of a common approach for the assessment
of coral reefs, with focus on reef health, exploited
resources, customary practices and management
effectiveness.
A program initiated in 1982 aimed at improving the man-
agement and sustainable conservation of coral reefs, in
terms of capacity building and assessments. In-coun-
try studies to implement ICRI Resolutions
Operates through a network of observers which collect data on
1 or 2 monitoring sites per country. Data analysed at University
of West Indies in a central database (the Caribbean Coastal
Data Centre)www.uwimona.edu.jm/centres/caricomp/
AGGRA is coordinated through the University of Miami
and data is managed utilizing a purpose-built MS Access
database. www.coral.noaa.gov/agra/
Major funding is from the Swedish Development Agency.
The Indian Ocean islands network is currently coordinated
through the Seychelles Centre for Marine Research and
Technology. A database and GIS-based system will be
developed www.cordio.org
Full size project funded through the GEF. The project is
coordinated from Mauritius. A coral reef data management
software is in final beta-testing phase.http://coi.intnet.mu/
Through the ICRAN project and with support from IUCN
and WWF. The project is coordinated through Seychelles.
The database is linked through the UNEP Map Server
Project.www.icran.org
Coordinated through the Moorea Research Centre (in French
Polynesia) with support through the French Government
www.environment-gouv.fr/ifrecor/
Specific work program on coral reefs; supported by
member contributions, various donors, including the
GEF. Activities implement through secretariat in Samoa.
http://www.sprep.org.ws/

Source: Reefbase, Accessed 23/10/2003; Wilkinson, 2002

temperatures also threaten the reefs in this
region (Goreau et al. 1993). For example in
the 1980s, the white-band disease caused a
near elimination of Staghorn coral (Acropora
cervicornis) from the reefs throughout
the region, causing major changes in the
composition and structure of those reefs
(Peters et al. 1983). Other diseases such as
Black-band, white-pox and white-plague
diseases are now common and still causes
wide spread mortality in the Caribbean
(Antonius and Ballesteros 1997). Hayes and
Goreau (1998) argue that the emergence
of coral diseases may have been caused by
pollution of coastal waters and reduction in
coral’s normal defences, but indicate that
further research is required to determine
these linkages.
The Western Indian Ocean
The Western Indian Ocean (WIO) region is
different from the other two ocean regions as
is flanked by two large continental masses
(Africa and Arabia), and has a distinctive
through flow exchange with the Pacific Ocean
(Tomczak and Godfrey 2001). The reefs in the
Indian Ocean share strong biogeographical
origins with the Indo-Pacific region, and
coral species diversity does not decline along
the equatorial belt from Indonesia to the WIO
region in contrast to the eastern part of the
Indonesia (Sheppard 2000). Consequently,
coral reef diversity is high and many endemic
species have been documented (Ahamada
et al. 2002). The islands in the WIO are of
volcanic (Comoros & Mauritius), continental
granitic (Seychelles) and coralline (Maldives
and some parts of the Seychelles). Dominant
reef types include fringing reefs, barrier
reefs and atolls (especially in Seychelles and
the Maldives) (McClanahan, Sheppard and
Obura 2000).
Population growth and tourism develop-
ment on the coastal plateau in the Seychelles
and on the small coral atolls of the Maldives
is on the increase, and in some areas, such
as on the east coast of Mahe (Seychelles)
and Male (Maldives) major reclamation
projects have severely affected coral reefs
in the immediate area (Payet 1999). Coral
reefs on the outer islands of the Seychelles
are however devoid of such pressures. There
have been reports of coral reef extraction
for construction in Comoros (Ahmed 1988)
but this is still ongoing, despite evidence of
accelerated beach erosion in the Comoros
(Payet et al. 2003). Over-fishing is also a
threat to coral reefs in all of the islands in
the region, and evidence of blast fishing
have been recorded some parts of the WIO
(Salm, Muthiga and Muhando 1998). In
Mauritius, the reefs are already affected
through over-fishing and pollution dis-
charges from agriculture and industry
(Turner 1999).
By far the largest impact on reefs in the
Indian Ocean has been the severe mass coral
bleaching linked to elevated seas-surface
temperatures (SST) in 1997/1998 where in
Seychelles, for example 90% coral reef cover
mortality was observed (Linden & Sporong,
1999). In Comoros and Mauritius, coral cover
loss as a result of the mass coral bleaching
was 50% and 15%, respectively. The most
affected species were the Acropora spp.
Thereafter several bleaching events linked
to elevated SST have been recorded in
Seychelles since 1998 (Wendling et al.

60 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS

2003).Recovery of the reefs has not been fisheries is largely subsistence, commercial the effects of bleaching have less disastrous,
uniform across the region, and the recovery and exports of invertebrate catches such as but there are signs of increasing bleaching
rate has generally been very low (Linden mollusks, shrimps, clams, sea cucumbers, incidences with Acropora spp. also being the
et al. 2002). Evidence of recruitment in the and the pearl shell is increasing. Furthermore, most common species affected.
inner granitic Seychelles is also slow and Fiji, the Solomon Islands, and Tonga account
recovery would be affected in the long-term for almost 25% of global live coral exports Monitoring
if there are recurrent bleaching events and (Wabnitz et al., 2003). Destructive fishing A number of international organisations
direct pressures are not reduced (Engelhardt methods such as dynamite and poisoning (the have implemented coral reef and associated
et al. 2002). Coral recovery in uninhabited Derris root), chronic in South East Asia, is monitoring programmes in small island
and remote areas such as the Aldabra Atoll also on the rise (Adams and Dalzell, 1996). states, such as the Australian Institute of
(Seychelles) likewise is also slow but surveys Strong traditional and customary practices Marine Science (AIMS), the Coral Reef
undertaken from 1999 to 2001 indicates that that prevail in many Pacific island states may Alliance, Conservation International, the
the diversity of coral families being recruited play a role in reversing present trend; see World Fish Centre, the Intergovernmental
is high (Stobart et al. 2002). Box 1 (Case Study 1). Oceanographic Commission (IOC), Interna-
The threat from mass coral bleaching is tional Union for Conservation of Nature
Pacific Ocean also a major issue for the future status of (IUCN), the Nature Conservancy, UNEP,
The Pacific region is a vast region with almost coral reefs in the Pacific region (Wilkinson UNEP-World Conservation Monitoring
40% of the world’s coral reef areas. Pacific 2002). The extent of the bleaching in 1998 Centre, the World Bank, World Resource
island states can be grouped into (i) Melanesia and consequent reef mortality has been the Institute, and World Wildlife Fund (WWF)
(south-western Pacific Ocean, e.g. Fiji, the most severe in Fiji and extending to the Cook among others. Several Governments, through
Solomon islands and Vanuatu); (ii) Micronesia Islands. In contrast to other SIDS region, their bilateral overseas development pro-
(central and western Pacific, e.g. Palau,
Marshall Islands, Nauru and Kiribati), and (iii) Figure 1: Matrix showing the major threats to coral reefs
Polynesia (eastern Pacific, e.g. Tuvalu, Samoa, in selected small island states
Tonga and the Cook islands).
Melanesia is dominated by high volcanic
islands where fringing and barrier reefs are
well developed and extensive. The Great Sea
Reef in Fiji extends over 370 km and is one
of the largest in the region (Wilkinson 2002).
Patch reefs also occur. Micronesia, on the
other hand consists of groups of scattered
archipelagos (Spalding et al. 2001). Palau,
which is of mixed geological origins (volcanic
and carbonate limestone), exhibits very high
levels of coral reef diversity, with an estimated
425 species of corals, 300 species of sponges
and 1 278 reef fish species. Other associated
ecosystems include patches of seagrass beds
and some mangrove areas. Atolls and several
island archipelagos litter the large area of
the Polynesian sub-region. However, species
diversity is quite low, owing to its distance
from the Indo-Pacific region.
Overall, the condition of the reefs in the
Pacific island states region are the healthiest
on the planet (Bryant et al. 1998), but increas-
ing human pressure as well as mass coral
bleaching episodes are also threatening reefs
in these isolated areas (Salvat 2001).
Over-exploitation of reef species, espe-
cially for the live trade, is considered to be
the largest direct threat. Whilst Pacific island Data Extracted from: Wilkinson 1998, 2000, 2002; Bryant, et al., 1998; UNESCO, 1994; Linden et al., 2002

61
 grammes have also contributed, for example
Australia, Canada, Finland, France, Sweden,
United Kingdom, the United States., among
others. Collaborations with universities and
research centres in some SIDS, for example
the Univeristy of West Indies (Caribbean),
the University of South Pacific and South
Pacific Regional Environment Programme
(SPREP), have also contributed significantly
to the wealth of information on coral reefs in
islands states. The International Society for
Reef Studies, which publishes a specialised
journal dedicated to coral reef research,
offers important networking among coral
reef scientists. Global coral reef datasets
maintained by Reefbase, a user friendly
web accessible database with information
on the status of coral reefs, have supported
various SIDS with data management capacity.
However, many areas remain to be tackled to
address the global decline in coral reefs.
There are at least two major global coral
reef monitoring programmes and networks
which all include SIDS: the Global Coral
Reef Monitoring Network (GCRMN) and
ReefCheck, which have recently become
operational. GCRMN operates through a
series of regional nodes, e.g. the Indian Ocean
Commission and the Polynesian ‘Mana’
nodes, whilst ReefCheck, works through
national coordinators (See Box 1, Case Study
2 for example of linkages with national
programmes). In the Caribbean, the Reef
Check program has proved to be very effec-
tive in extending the coverage of existing
monitoring programmes (Garzon-Ferreira
et al. 2000). Although ReefCheck uses very
simple reef monitoring protocols primarily
aimed at volunteer recreational divers and
community-based groups, the quick results
generated could be useful in providing global
coral reef status cost-effectively.
There is no network joining coral reef
scientists and institutions across the three
main SIDS regions. As summarised in Figure
2, these regions share similar problems and
a network for interaction and exchange can
provide a much better perspective for manag-
ers involved in the research and manage-
ment of coral reefs in SIDS. However, at
regional levels a number of monitoring
programmes are in place in the SIDS regions
as summarised in Table 3, but coordination
among these various programmes has not
been entirely successful. One reason is
that sites are monitored differently and at
various scales (Wilkinson 1998). The Indian
Ocean Commission decide in 1998 to publish
acceptable protocols for use at regional
levels (Conand et al. 1999), but there is still
disagreement as to which methods are most
effective in monitoring changes and status
of coral reefs.
Some monitoring programmes are only
short-term and hence long-term datasets are
unavailable for most regions of the world.
For example, in Fiji long term data sets are
only available for the Suva Reef which
is located in proximity to the University
of the South Pacific (Richmond et al.
2002). Consequently access to datasets in a
comparable format which can then be easily
used for management presents an emerging
challenge. In the Federal State of Micronesia
(Pacific), a database has been established;
however the data is submitted to the
World Fish Centre (previously ICLARM)
for analysis. In the Indian Ocean islands
software based database, COREMO, is being
developed and tested to facilitate analysis
of coral reef monitoring data for specific
management purposes (Bigot et al. 2003). In
many SIDS, the private sector has also funded
and been involved in numerous long-term
monitoring programs and have generated
important datasets especially for remote
areas. For example, surveys of pearl oyster
populations in the Pacific by the private sector
have often included reef and benthic surveys.
The involvement of local communities in
coral reef monitoring is also increasing.
One example, in Samoa, a pilot village coral
reef monitoring project was initiated in
1998. Villagers were trained, equipped and
encouraged to monitor the status and health of
their own coral reef resources with minimal
government intervention (MacKay 2003).
Coral Reef
Management Priorities
Coral reef management priorities is small
island states is not uniform across the three
regions as indicated by Table 4, but a number
of priority issues are common, and can be
addressed inter-regionally. There are many

Table 3 Major Coral Reef Regional Monitoring Programmes in the SIDS Regions
Management Priorities Caribbean Indian Ocean Pacific Ocean
1. Policy and Institutions
Stronger political will for conservation of coral reefs and associated resources. •
Improvements in existing police, legislation and effectiveness in enforcement. • • •
Framework for regional cooperation and coordination of activities. • •
2. Monitoring, Management and Research
Development of sustainable resources for long-term representative coral reef monitoring. • • •
Implementation of coral reef resource management. • • •
Strengthening of coastal zone management frameworks. • • •
Establishment of representative marine protected areas through community involvement. • • •
Participatory approaches in monitoring, management and research. • • •
Determine carrying capacities of coral reefs for sustainable tourism and fisheries. • •
Research to focus on stressed areas to reduce direct human impacts. •
Adaptive or coping mechanisms for mass coral bleaching events and related impacts. • • •
3. Information & Capacity Building
Further capacity building for monitoring and resource management. • • •
Provide reliable access to information and database. • • •
Further inventory and mapping of coral reef resources. • • •
Consistent education and awareness programs at all levels of the society. • • •
Establish meaningful linkages between public sector, NGO and private sector agencies • • •
Source: Wilkinson, 2000 & 2002; Reefbase (accessed 23/10/03);

62 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS

 Table 4: Coral Reef Management Priorities in SIDS
Management Priorities Caribbean Indian Ocean Pacific Ocean
1. Monitoring, Management and Research
Development of sustainable resources for long-term representative coral reef monitoring. • • •
Implementation of coral reef resource management. • • •
Strengthening of coastal zone management frameworks. • • •
Establishment of representative marine protected areas through community involvement. • • •
Participatory approaches in monitoring, management and research. • • •
Determine carrying capacities of coral reefs for sustainable tourism and fisheries. • •
Research to focus on stressed areas to reduce direct human impacts. •
Adaptive or coping mechanisms for mass coral bleaching events and related impacts. • • •
2. Information & Capacity Building
Further capacity building for monitoring and resource management. • • •
Provide reliable access to information and database. • • •
Further inventory and mapping of coral reef resources. • • •
Consistent education and awareness programs at all levels of the society. • • •
Establish meaningful linkages between public sector, NGO and private sector agencies • • •
3. Policy and Institutions
Stronger political will for conservation of coral reefs and associated resources. •
Improvements in existing police, legislation and effectiveness in enforcement. • • •
Framework for regional cooperation and coordination of activities. • •
Source: Wilkinson, 2000 & 2002; Reefbase (accessed 23/10/03);

lessons to be learned in-between regions,
especially since there are several on-going
initiatives as shown in Box 1. However,
many gaps exist which are further elaborated
below. It is to be emphasized that monitoring
is one of the most important tools for reef
managers and policy-makers alike to enable
tracking of changes in the reef ecosystem,
and attention on sustainability of monitoring
programmes is a key to maintaining long-
term data sets (Westmacott et al. 2000).
Monitoring, Management
and Research
Monitoring before the 1997/1998 mass coral
bleaching was limited to a few stations in
selected SIDS. The need to understand the
extent and impacts of the mass coral mortality
turned into monitoring for recovery, and
restoration (Westmacott et al. 2000). Monitor-
ing not only provides coral reef status but
also supports the management and restoration
of degraded ecosystems. Since monitoring
is expensive and human resource demanding
any long-term monitoring programme for
recovery and restoration requires firm financial
commitment. Many sustainable financing
strategies have been developed and imple-
mented successfully in many areas of the world
(Hatziolos et al. 1998). Examples include
utilising revenues from marine protected
areas, community involvement, university-
based programmes and increasingly difficult
- dedicated national budget.
Various management approaches, such as
coastal management and resource manage-
ment have not yet been implemented in SIDS.
These management approaches provides
integrated frameworks for implementing
sustainability in the use of coral reefs (Haq et
al. 1997). One such example discussed earlier
is the reef fishery community program setup
in Samoa. The determination of carrying
capacities of marine ecosystems is still an
emerging approach which depends upon a
range of data sets such as coral reef health,
visitor impacts, fishery yield estimates and
socio-economic data. However, the tool is
seen as a very essential policy tools to guide
governments in the development of coastal
areas with minimum impact on coral reefs.
A strong need for participatory manage-
ment of marine protected areas (MPAs),
especially through the involvement of local
communities has been expressed in all three
regions (Wilkinson 2002). Rightly, many case
studies have shown that local ownership and
equitable rights allocation of coastal marine
resources will improve marine protected area
management, enable recovery of coral reefs,
reduces incidences of poaching and increased
the tourism value of such sites. MPA play a
key role in reef recovery and an exercise to
identify reef areas which are least damaged
and representative of the marine ecosystem in
tat areas and in the regional biogeographical
context is also an important consideration
(Roberts 1998).
The continued mass coral bleaching is
of considerable concern to SIDS, even at
political level. For example, the Seychelles
Parliament requested a special report on coral
bleaching and its effects on the economy.
Linkages to climate change research are
important but capacity is required. Only
a small number of coping and adaptive
measures have been proposed but are yet to
be implemented in SIDS.
Information & Capacity Building
Information management forms the core of
any coral reef monitoring and management
programme. There is, indeed, a number of
coral reef monitoring protocols and database
systems, but it is highly unlikely one system
will be utilised although Reefbase has suc-
cessfully put together a system in which long-
term data sets and comparative analyses can be
made. Capacity is critical to the management
of data on coral reefs and access to coral reef
data should not be limited to scientists but to
local communities and other stakeholders.
All of the SIDS regions expressed the need
for continuous inventory of coral reef areas
and species (Wilkinson 2002). Specifically, the
Pacific region recommended that taxonomic
training is provided and guides prepared to
enable researchers to identify coral species and
other associated species. Mapping, utilising
geographical information systems is becoming
a useful interface for the analysis of coral reef
data. Software have also been developed which
can allow, based upon input data, sites based
upon ecosystems and species representative-
ness and risk to be mapped for management
purposes (Margules & Pressey, 2000).
Education and awareness programmes
exist in all regions, however the effectiveness

63
 of these programmes in changing people
behaviour in the short term is not known.
Capacity building in the development of
media programmes and activities in schools is
clearly lacking. Many SIDS have developed
coral reef packs, which can be used as part
of the curriculum or as a science activity.
Integrating coral reef education in govern-
ment and education bodies through the
development of specific programmes have
been shown to be very effective, as motiva-
tion to protect coral reefs is well accepted
when there is collective agreement. Meaning-
ful linkages between Government, Non-
Governmental Organisations (NGOs) and the
Private sector are critical challenges in many
SIDS. For example, monitoring of coral reefs
by the private sector in some islands in the
Pacific, engages the entire organisation in
the process.
Policy and Institutions
A number of island states have developed
and adopted a number of legal instruments
and policies aimed at managing fisheries, for
example the prohibition of use of destructive
fishing practices such as dynamite (Wilkinson,
2002). However, stronger political will is
needed so that such bans can be extended
regionally. Regulations to establish standards
for pollution emissions is also lacking in the
64 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
majority of SIDS although there has been
considerable effort done within regional
programs such as within the SPREP. The
adoption of mandatory Environmental Impact
Assessments for tourism projects is also
not uniformly implemented within SIDS.
Consequently, a review and adequacy of
existing legislation and policies aimed at the
protection and management of coral reefs may
be required at national and regional levels.
Enforcement and other command-and-
control approaches, seems to remain to be one
of the most critical aspects of management of
coral reefs, although other attempts such as
community-based management approaches
and economic incentive-based mechanisms
are being explored. Enforcement capacity
is extremely weak across SIDS and specific
strategies needs to be developed to ensure
better surveillance and convictions of offend-
ers. Convicting fishermen is a very delicate
political issue in many SIDS, resulting
in the continuous decline of many reef
ecosystems.
Regional cooperation provides a critical
platform for exchange of experience and
the opportunity to develop regional agree-
ments such as those under the regional seas.
Through regional programmes, countries can
seek to implement various CBD and ICRI
resolutions on coral reefs in a more cost-
effective manner, since island states typically
suffer from problems of financing and human
capacity. Regional cooperation also allows
for the exchange of information and expertise
which can provide systems of early warning
and adaptation in cases of extreme storm
events and mass coral bleaching. Existing
regional networks should therefore be
strengthened with a view to develop regional
coral reef task forces with mandate to address
at political and technical levels a number of
management priorities discussed here.
Conclusions
SIDS have very strong dependence on coral
reefs, but increasing pressures threatens
not only the reefs but also the livelihood
and sustainability of island people. Since
SIDS depends upon coral reefs for tourism,
recreation and fish (as the main source of
protein) any negative will lead to potential
losses in revenue, employment as well as
basic necessities such as food. Evidence
from the global monitoring reports strongly
indicates that many reefs within SIDS are in
serious decline as a result of direct human
exploitation. In much the same way as
droughts affects many parts of Africa; coral
mortality as a result of episodic elevated sea
surface temperatures constitutes, has lead to
widespread mortality of reefs in SIDS.
It is therefore imperative
that the international com-
munity and SIDS govern-
ments take urgent action
to address those declining
trends, and consider the
development of imple-
mentable coping measures.
Ideally, a proactive proc-
ess should be engaged to
further develop the recom-
mendations presented in
this paper with a view to
address on the ground con-
certed and participatory
actions to reverse the cur-
rent trend.
The Stork patch reef in the Sey-
chelles: after 1998 mass coral
bleaching (Photo Courtesy of
Riaz Aumeeruddy)
References
ADAMS, T JH. and DALZELL, P. 1996 Management of
Pacific Island Inshore Fisheries. Proceedings of the
third Australasian Fisheries Managers Conference:
pp 225-237. (Ed.) ‘Tricia Summerfield. Fisheries
Management Paper 88. Fisheries Department of
Western Australia, Perth.
AHAMADA, S., BIGOT, L., BIJOUX, J., MAHARAVO,
J., MEUNIER, S., MOYNE-PICARD, M., PAUPIAH,
N. 2002, Status of the Coral Reefs in the South West
Indian Ocean Island Node. In: C.R. Wilkinson (ed.),
Status of coral reefs of the world:2002. GCRMN Report,
Australian Institute of Marine Science, Townsville.
Chapter 5, p 79-100.
AHMED, M. 1988. Extraction et utilisation des matériaux
coralliens aux Comores. Le Journal de la Nature,
Bourbon Sciences 1(1): 24-26.
ANTONIUS, A. and BALLESTEROS, E. 1998 Coral reef
health problems in the Caribbean. Revista de Biología
Tropical 46 (Supplement 5).
CESAR, H., (Ed.) 2000. Collected Essays on the Econom-
ics of Coral Reefs, CORDIO, Sweden. 242 pp.
COMMONWEALTH SECRETARIAT, 2000 Small states:
Meeting challenges in the global economy. Report of
the Commonwealth Secretariat/World Bank Joint Task
Force on Small States. Commonwealth Secretariat
Report, March 2000. 127 p.
CONAND, C, CHABANET, P., QUOD, JP, BIGOT, L. 1999
Guidelines for Coral Reef Monitoring in the South-West
Indian Ocean. Indian Ocean Commission - Regional
Environment Programme, Mauritius. 27 p.
COP3 (3rd Conference of the Parties), 2001 COP 3
Report of Parties to the Nairobi Convention. Nairobi
Regional Coordinating Unit, Seychelles & UNEP,
Nairobi.
EDMUNDS, PJ., ROBERTS, DA, SINGER R.,
1990. Reefs of the north-eastern Caribbean I. Scle-
ractinian populations. Bulletin of Marine Science
46(3):780-789.
ENGELHARDT U., RUSSEL, M., WENDLING, B., 2002
Coral Communities around the Seychelles Islands
1998-2002. In ‘Coral Reef Degradation in the Indian
Ocean- Status Report 2002’, Linden, O., Souter D.,
Wilhelmsson, D., Obura, D. (eds.) CORDIO, Kalmar,
Sweden, p212-231.
GARZON-FERREIRA, J., CORTES, J., CROQUER, A.,
GUZMAN, H., LEAO, Z., RODRIGUEZ-RAIREZ, A.,
2002, Status of the Coral Reefs in Southern Tropical
America: Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Panama and
Venezuela. In: C.R. Wilkinson (ed.), Status of coral
reefs of the World:2000. GCRMN Report, Australian
Institute of Marine Science, Townsville. Chapter 18,
pp 331-348.
GOREAU, T., HAYES, R., CLARKE J., BASTA, D.,
and ROBERTSON, C. 1993 Elevated sea surface
temperatures correlate with Caribbean coral reef
bleaching, in ‘A global Warming Forum: scientific,
economic, and legal overview’. Geyer R. (Ed.), CRC
Press, Florida.
GOREAU, T., McCLANAHAN, T., HAYES, R., and
STRONG, A. 2000 Conservation of Coral Reefs after
the 1998 Global Bleaching Event. Conservation
Biology, Vol. 14(1):5-15.
HAQ, B.U., HAQ S.M., KULLENBERG, G., and STEL,
J.H. (Eds.) 1997 Coastal Zone Management Imperative
for Maritime Developing Nations, Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Netherlands.
HATZIOLOS, ME., HOOTEN, AJ., and FODOR, F.
1998 Coral Reefs: Challenges and Opportunities
for sustainable management. In Proceedings of an
associated event of the fifth annual World Bank
Conference on Environmentally and Socially Sustain-
able Development. World Bank, Washington DC,
224 p.
HAYES, RL. and GOREAU, NI. 1998. The significance of
emerging diseases in the tropical coral reef ecosystem.
Revista de Biología Tropical 46: 173-185.
HOEGH-GULDBERG, O., 1999 Climate Change, coral
bleaching and the future of the world’s coral reefs.
Marine and Freshwater Research, 50:839-866.
LINCOLN, J.M., and SCHLANGER, S.O., 1991, Atoll
stratigraphy as a record of sea-level change: Problems
and prospects. Journal of Geophysical Research, Vol.
96, p. 6727-6752.
LINDEN, O., and SPORRONG, N. (Eds). 1998 Coral
Reef Degradation in the Indian Ocean- Status Reports
and Project Presentations, CORDIO Publication,
Sweden. 108 p.
LINDEN, O., SOUTER D., WILHELMSON, D., OBURA,
D. 2002 Coral Reef Degradation in the Indian Ocean.
Status report 2002. CORDIO, Sweden.
MACKAY, K. 2003 Community Managed Marine Pro-
tected Areas in the Pacific Islands: Summary of Case
Studies. Retrieved from: www.icriforum/itmems/.
Accessed: 10/11/03
MARGULES, C.R. and PRESSEY, RL., 2000 Systematic
conservation planning. Nature, 405:243-253.
McCLANAHAN, TR., SHEPPARD CRC, and OBURA
DO, (Eds.) Coral Reefs of the Indian Ocean. Oxford
University Press.
MHAHE 2001 First National Communication of the
Republic of Maldives to the United Nations Framework
Convention on Climate Change. Published by the
Ministry of Home Affairs, Housing and Environment
(MHAHE, Male, Maldives. pp.127.
NUNN, PD. 1994 Oceanic Islands. Blackwell Publishers,
UK. 413 p.
NURSE, L., SEM., G., HAY, J., SUAREZ, A., POH POH,
W., BRIGUGLIO L., RAGOONADEN, S. 2001 Small
Island States, In ‘Climate Change 2001- Impacts,
Adaptation and Vulnerability’, McCarthy et al. (Eds).
Cambridge University Press, UK, p843-875.
PAYET, R.A., SOOGUN, N., RANAIVOSON, E., PAYET,
R.J., ABDALLAH, F.A. 2003 Indian Ocean Islands –
GIWA Regional Assessment 45b. Global International
Waters Assessment (GIWA) Report Volume 1. PRE-
PRINT. Kalmar, Sweden. 150pp.
PAYET, RA. 1999 Environmental Impact Assessment:
East Coast Phase III. Ministry of Land Use and Habitat.
Government of Seychelles, Seychelles. 125 p.
PETERS, EC., OPRANDY, JJ., and YEVICH, PP.
1983 Possible cause of “white band disease” in
Caribbean corals. Journal of Invertebrate Pathology
41: 394-396.
POTTS, A. 2003 Conflict Resolution between Inter-
Sectoral Stakeholders for the Bucco Reef Marine
Park Coastal Zone in Tobago: The Pigeon Point Case
Study. Retrieved from: www.icriforum/itmems/.
Accessed: 10/11/03
RICHMOND, R., R. KELTY, P. CRAIG, C. EMAUROIS,
A. GREEN, C. BIRKELAND, G. DAVIS, A. EDWARD,
Y. GOLBUU, J. GUTIERREZ, P. HOUK, N. IDE-
CHONG, J. MARAGOS, G. PAULAY, J. STARMER, A.
TAFILEICHIG, M. TRIANNI and N. V. VELDE, 2002,
Status of the Coral Reefs in Micronesia and American
Samoa: US Affiliated and Freely Associated Islands in
the Pacific.. In: C.R. Wilkinson (ed.), Status of coral
reefs of the world:2002. GCRMN Report, Australian
Institute of Marine Science, Townsville. Chapter 12,
pp 217-236.
ROBERTS, C., 1998 Source, Sinks and the design of
marine reserve networks. Fisheries 23(7): 16-19.
SALM, R., MUTHIGA, N., MUHANDO, C., 1998 Status of
coral reefs in the western Indian Ocean and evolving
coral reef programmes, in “Wilkinson CR., (ed.), Status
of coral reefs of the world:1998. Global Coral Reef
Monitoring Network Report, Australian Institute of
Marine Science, Townsville. 184 p.
SALVAT, B. (ed.) 2001 Status of Coral Reefs 2000
in SouthEast and Central Pacific “Polynesia Mana”
Network. Fondation Naturalia Polynesia, Papeete,
Tahiti. 217 p.
SHEPPARD, CRC., 2000 Coral Reefs of the Western
Indian Ocean: An Overview. In ‘Coral Reefs of the
Indian Ocean, McClanahan, TR., Sheppard CRC, &
Obura DO, (Eds.). Oxford University Press. p.3-34.
SPALDING MD, RAVILIOUS, C., GREEN E., 2001 World
Atlas of Coral Reefs. UNEP-WCMC. University of
California Press. 424 p.
STOBART, B., BUCKLEY, R., LeCLAIR, L., TELEKI, K.,
DOWNING, N., SOUTER, D., and CALLOW, M. 2002
Aldabra:Monitoring the Path to Recovery. In ‘Coral
Reef Degradation in the Indian Ocean- Status Report
2002’, Linden, O., Souter D., Wilhelmsson, D., Obura,
D. (eds.) CORDIO, Kalmar, Sweden, 284p.
STODDART, DR. 1973 Coral Reefs: the last two million
years. Geography, Vol. 58, p. 313-323.
TOMCZAK, M., and GODFREY, J.S 2001 Regional
Oceanography: An Introduction. PDF Version 1.0.
http://www.es.flinders.edu.au/~mattom/regoc/
pdfversion.html . Originally published by Pergamon
(1994).
TURNER, JR 1999 Status Report Mauritius. In ‘Coral
Reef Degradation in the Indian Ocean- Status Reports
and Project Presentations, Linden O., and Sporrong,
N. (Eds). CORDIO Publication, Sweden. p.60-62.
UNEP 1999 Assessment of Land-based Sources and
Activities Affecting the Marine, Coastal and Associated
Freshwater Environment in the Wider Caribbean.
UNEP Regional Seas Reports and Studies, No. 172.
UNEP, Nairobi, Kenya.
UNEP, 2003 Conventions and Coral Reefs. A UNEP
Coral Reef Unit and WWF Coral Reefs Advocacy
Initiative. Kenya. 18 p.
UNESCO, 2001. Wise coastal practices: Towards
sustainable small island living. Results of a workshop
on ‘Wise coastal practices for sustainable human
development in small island developing states’, Apia,
Samoa, 3–8 December 2000. Coastal region and small
island papers 9, UNESCO, Paris, 120 p.
UNESCO, 2002. Wise practices for conflict prevention
and resolution in small islands. Results of a workshop
on ‘Furthering coastal stewardship in small islands’,
Dominica, 4–6 July 2001. Coastal region and small
island papers 11, UNESCO, Paris, 70 p.
WABNITZ, C., TAYLOR, M., GREEN, E., RAZAK, T., 2003
From Ocean to Aquarium-the global trade in marine
ornamental species. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK.
64 p.
WELLS, S. 1988 Coral Reefs of the World, Vols 1-3.
UNEP, Nairobi and IUCN, Gland, Switzerland.
WENDLING B., ENGELHARDT U., ADAM P.A., ROSINE
G., ALCINDOR R., ZIALOR V. and LOUANGE A.
2003. A renewed coral bleaching event in the inner
granitic islands of Seychelles (April – June 2002),
impacts on recent hard coral recruits. Unpublished
Report. Ministry of Environment. Seychelles.
WESTMACOTT, S., TELEKI, K., WELLS, S., WEST.,
J. 2000 Management of Bleached and Severely
Damaged Coral Reefs. IUCN, Gland. 36 pp.
WILKINSON CR., (ed.), 1998 Status of coral reefs
of the world:1998. Global Coral Reef Monitoring
Network Report, Australian Institute of Marine Science,
Townsville. 184 p.
WILKINSON CR., (ed.), 2000 Status of coral reefs
of the world:2000. Global Coral Reef Monitoring
Network Report, Australian Institute of Marine Science,
Townsville. 363 p.
WILKINSON CR., (ed.), 2002 Status of coral reefs
of the world:2002. Global Coral Reef Monitoring
Network Report, Australian Institute of Marine Science,
Townsville. 378 p.
65
66 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS

Background
Humans have been moving species of animals
and plants beyond their native ranges, both
deliberately and inadvertently, and many of
these species have become established and
spread. The phenomenon is increasing to the
point that biological invasions have become
a widespread and significant component of
global change (Vitousek et al. 1997), and the
term “invasive species” is currently widely
applied to the non-native species that cause
damage. It has long been known that invasive
species establish more easily on oceanic
islands and that island animals, plants, and
human well-being are highly vulnerable to
effects of invasions.
Some of the more dramatic recent exam-
ples of effects of invasive species on islands
include the following:
• The invasive neotropical tree Miconia
calvescens has demonstrated in French
Polynesia that it is capable of establishing
in the shaded understory of moist forest of
Pacific islands, rapidly gaining complete
canopy dominance, and drastically impov-
erishing biodiversity (Meyer 1996). M.
calvescens was introduced to Tahiti in 1937;
by the 1990s, displacement by this aggressive
invader alone had reduced 40-50 endemic
plant species to the verge of extinction (Meyer
and Florence 1996). Spread to other islands
in French Polynesia (tiny seeds hitchhike on
dirty construction equipment, for example)
is rampant in spite of precautions to date.
M. calvescens was brought to the Hawaiian
Islands by the early 1960s and is now the
most problematic invasive plant species in the
high islands of that archipelago with annual
containment costs (on four islands) currently
in excess of $2 million per year.
• Brown tree snake (Boiga irregularis) was
once just another ordinary snake native to the
Solomon Islands, Papua New Guinea, and
northern Australia. It became established on
Guam about the time of World War II and
has since attained population densities of
4,000-12,000 per km2 (10,000-30,000 per mi2),
feeding on birds, rats, shrews, and lizards. Nine
of the 11 native bird species on Guam in 1945
have been eliminated by the snake (Savidge
1987). Guam is a hub of transportation, thus
the high densities of snakes and their nocturnal
habits make the probability of stowaways in
air and ship cargo very high. Spread to some
islands of the Northern Marianas has already
occurred. Virtually all Pacific islands are
at risk of being invaded. Measures are in
place, funded by several U.S. agencies, to
reduce snake populations at ports and conduct
surveillance of cargo leaving Guam for Hawaii,
but cooperation by the shipping companies
is voluntary, not mandatory. Nevertheless,
whereas seven brown tree snakes had been
detected during 1981-94 in Hawaii, in associa-
tion with flights from Guam, none have been
detected in Hawaii since 1994.
• Traditionally, the most important food plant
in Samoa was taro (Colocasia esculenta,
Araceae), and in the early 1990s taro was
the main agricultural export of those islands.
An epidemic of taro leaf blight struck Samoa
in 1993-94. All Samoan taro cultivars were
susceptible to the fungus (Phytophthora
colocasiae), and production in both (Western)
Samoa and American Samoa was quickly
reduced to near zero. Production started to
The Brown tree snake became
established on Guam about the
time of World War II. It has
reached very high population den-
sities and has eliminated 9 of 11
native bird species on Guam. Vir-
tually all Pacific islands are at
risk of being similarly invaded.
(Photo by USGS, Tom Fritts/
Gordon Rodda)
by LLOYD LOOPE & DAVID A. HELWEG
recover by 1998 after blight resistant cultivars
were introduced from Palau, but prices had
more than quadrupled (Anonymous 2000).
• Australian researchers (O’Dowd et al. 2003)
recently described what they referred to as
“invasional meltdown” on Christmas Island
in the Indian ocean south of Java, involving
the invasive ant Anoplolepis gracilipes and
two non-native scale insects. The researchers
had been since the late-1980s studying the
island ecosystem, especially notable because
of the important role of red land crabs. Their
Lloyd Loope is a Research Scientist with
the Pacic Island Ecosystems Research
Center of the U.S. Geological Survey,
based on Maui, Hawaii. Educated at
Oberlin College, Virginia Tech, and Duke
University (Ph.D. in Botany, 1970), Loope
has 30+ years of experience in conservation science, including
23 years in Hawaii. He has some international experience,
having worked with Unesco’s Man and Biosphere Program for
18 months in the mid-1970s. His current professional interests
center on strategies for averting obliteration of ecosystems and
biota of Hawaii and other oceanic islands through improved
management of existing biological invasions and prevention of
new ones.
U.S. Geological Survey, Haleakala Field Station, P.O. Box
369, Makawao, Maui, HI 96768 Phone: 808-572-4470; fax:
808-572-1304; email: Lloyd_Loope@usgs.gov
David A. Helweg is Deputy Director of
the Pacic Island Ecosystems Research
Center of the U.S. Geological Survey and
is highly engaged in developing research
strategies and tools for addressing
invasive species issues. He received his
Ph.D. from the University of Hawaii in 1993, his M.A.
from the University of Hawaii in 1989, and his B.A. from
Amherst College in 1981. Dr. Helweg has studied comparative
socioecology in cetaceans, and has introduced several new
methods for analysis and automated classication of animal
vocalizations. He has over 40 publications in the domains of
animal biosonar, bioacoustics, and behavioral biology.
Pacic Island Ecosystems Research Center, St. John 408,
University of Hawaii, 3190 Maile Way, Honolulu, HI 96822.
67
 research had shown that the native crabs have
a controlling effect on the forest structure; the
understory was largely eliminated by feeding
of the omnivorous crabs during cycles when
they were abundant. Beginning in the mid-
1990s, supercolonies of the ant began to
build up and spread, eventually eliminating
the crabs locally over about 20% of the
island. The cause of the dramatic local ant
population buildup was exploitation by the
ants of the honeydew food source produced
by the scale insects in the forest canopy, in
well-known, though usually less dramatic,
ant-insect mutualism. The ant populations
killed all crabs within the most vigorous
ant supercolonies. Meanwhile, the forest
canopy is dying because of sooty molds
encompassing almost the entire leaf area
of the forest canopy (O’Dowd et al. 2003),
promoted by honeydew produced by the
scale insects. Similar invasive ant-scale insect
mutualisms have caused severe decline of
Pisonia forest on Rose Atoll (Samoa) and
Palmyra Atoll (Line Islands) and probably
elsewhere. Of significant concern is the
opportunistic nature of ant-insect mutualism
leading to forest death, potential for which
increases with the spread of invasive ants
and scale insects.
• Few endemic Pacific land snail species can
now be regarded as secure, largely as a result
of predation by the prolific and voracious
snail Euglandina rosea, first introduced by
Arriving containers at the Port of Auckland. New Zealand’s Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry is at the forefront
of exploring techniques for reducing the risk of pest introduction via burgeoning sea and air container traffic.
(Photo by Philip Thomas, USGS.)
68 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
the Hawaii Department of Agriculture in 1958
as an agent to control, unsuccessfully, the
giant African snail (Achatina fulica), which
reached Hawaii in 1936 as an ill-advised and
worthless food source (Cowie 2000). Tragedy
for native Pacific biodiversity unfolded as
both the African snail and its purported
biocontrol agent were spread purposely by
humans to most island groups. Extinction in
remote island forests is always difficult to
document but one of the best cause-and-effect
cases ever reported was that of researchers on
Moorea (French Polynesia), where endemic
land snail (14 species of Partula) populations
had been studied for genetic and evolution-
ary insights since the 1920s. Achatina was
introduced to Moorea by 1970, followed by
Euglandina in 1977. Researchers documented
the spread of Euglandina and decline of the
endemics; by 1987, no Partula were found
(Johnson et al. 1984; Murray et al. 1988).
Sadly, similar scenarios played out without
documentation across the Pacific. Though
Euglandina has not yet reached all islands,
only concerted efforts at prevention will
stop the continued spread. A recent note
by Meyer (2003) confirms that endemic
snails still thrive on an island (Ua Huka)
in the Marquesas (French Polynesia) where
Euglandina is absent.
• The Red Imported Fire Ant (RIFA; Solenop-
sis invicta), native to South America and
dispersed primarily through human com-
merce, has invaded over 120 million hectares
in the southern United States since the 1930s
in spite of a federal quarantine by the U.S.
Depatment of Agriculture (USDA). It is a
serious threat to public health and safety,
industry, biodiversity, water quality, economy,
and quality-of-life. Its aggressive nature and
powerful sting have caused the deaths of at
least 83 people, injury to tens of thousands
of people annually, and injury and death of
wildlife, livestock, and pets (Vinson 1997).
Its broad diet, which includes plants and
animals, has caused substantial agricultural
damage and declines in biodiversity. RIFA
reached California in 1998 and Queensland,
Australia, in 2001. It is still sparse in Cali-
fornia, but is very likely to spread widely in
the state to locations including four major
international airports and the largest shipping
port on the west coast (Long Beach). This
situation poses an immense threat to Hawaii
and other Pacific islands. Australia is still
very much involved in an eradication effort
for RIFA, but the threat from Australia cannot
be discounted. Within the past 20 years, RIFA
has invaded numerous Caribbean islands
from Florida – all the way to Trinidad (Davis
et al. 2001) – and is capable of doing the
same in the Pacific unless concerted action is
taken. Based on a preliminary risk assessment
for Hawaii, RIFA could occupy most habitats
except rainforest, from sea level to above
3000 m elevation. Wherever RIFA reaches
Pacific islands, it is likely to be extremely
damaging to biodiversity, economy, and
culture. Impacts to human quality-of-life
can be expected to be most serious in island
societies where living is close to the land.
Biodiversity impacts will likely be most
severe in archipelagoes where native fauna
largely or entirely evolved in the absence of
predatory ants and is consequently extremely
vulnerable to aggressive ants (Gillespie and
Reimer 1993).
Islands have special need for
invasive species prevention
Given the severe consequences of invasions
for islands, one might assume that citizens
of the world would exercise special care for
oceanic islands through adopting stringent
measures for preventing new invasions –
but largely that has not been the case. The

On the island of Maui, Hawaii, over US$1,000,000 is
currently being spent annually to contain the aggressive
invader Miconia calvescens to protect native biodiversity
and watersheds. (Photo from www.hear.org)
concept of quarantine originated in 14th cen-
tury Venice for protection of human popula-
tions from ships harboring bubonic plague.
Sustained border-protection quarantine was
first adopted by many governments near
the end of the 19th or early 20th century to
prevent spread of agricultural pests, one of
the more dramatic of which was the infection
of vineyards in Europe in the 1860s with
the North American plant louse Phylloxera.
There has been an evolution over the ensuing
century toward common standards among
countries for border protection quarantine.
This has led to the currently definitive Treaty
for Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures
within the framework of the World Trade
Organization (WTO 1998). The treaty is
managed by the U.N. Food and Agricultural
Organization which is also responsible for
implementing the closely related International
Plant Protection Convention (FAO 2001).
A major challenge, especially for islands
concerned about protecting their biodiversity,
is the largely agricultural focus of the border-
protection quarantine system worldwide, a
system built by and for agricultural interests.
This means that to be effective, biodiversity
interests have to work with agricultural
interests, and must be prepared to work
towards development of mutual confidence
and capacity. But, as suggested below, New
Zealand (Aotearoa) is demonstrating that
a hybrid system (for protection of both
agriculture and biodiversity) can work well
– given political will, public support, flexible
government, and ability to cooperate across
sectors. New Zealand’s seemingly workable
model may provide an inspiration for other
islands of the world.
How are some island groups
coping with the challenge of
invasive species prevention?
Hawaiian Islands
The Hawaiian Islands comprise a world-
renowned microcosm of biological evolution
in a diverse, isolated island system, with
roughly 10,000 species of animals and plants
endemic to the archipelago (Miller and
Eldredge 1996). One might expect Hawaii,
as part of the USA, to possess a first-rate
system of border protection, but this is not
the case, in spite of its dramatic vulnerability
to invasions. One entomologist (McGregor
1973) calculated 30 years ago that, given
the fact that Hawaii had roughly the same
number of established non-native insect
and mite species as the continental United
States, the rate per unit area of introduction
to Hawaii was 500 times that of the rest of
the United States.
Invasive species prevention in Hawaii is
very complicated because Hawaii is a state of
the United States. A main quarantine concern
for the United States involves protecting
mainstream agriculture in California and other
states from fruit flies (Diptera: Tephritidae)
and other pests which reached Hawaii long
Miconia calvescens, an invasive tree from the neotropics, has demonstrated clearly in Tahiti its ability to displace Pacific
island forests and obliterate native biodiversity in moist environments. The understory of miconia-invaded forest is
devoid of vegetation. (Photo by Jean-Yves Meyer, Delegation de la Recherche, Polynesie Francaise.)
ago. When Hawaii was still a U.S. territory in
1912, the U.S. instituted a major quarantine
to prevent fruit flies from reaching the U.S.
mainland. This program persists today.
Federal inspectors at Hawaii’s airports
screen baggage and hand carried items for
passengers bound for the U.S. mainland. In
contrast, the quarantine for protection of
Hawaii from pests from the U.S. mainland is
funded and implemented not by the federal
government but by the state government,
which has limited jurisdiction. A further
problem is that federal inspection of interna-
tional arrivals focuses on essentially the same
target pests of concern at all U.S. ports for
protection of mainstream agriculture, and the
state has no authority to inspect international
arrivals. Moreover, coordination between
federal and state efforts for dealing with
specific shipments is complex and ineffective.
The highest current priorities of the State of
Hawaii’s border protection include: Rabies,
Brown Tree Snake, Red Imported Fire Ant,
and the mosquito-borne West Nile Virus.
Federal programs provide major assistance
for protection from Brown Tree Snake but
not for the others.
Invasions continue unabated and pose
overwhelmingly the greatest current threat
to Hawaii’s endemic biodiversity, while also
jeopardizing the state’s economy, agriculture,
health, and quality-of-life. Hawaii’s needs
for prevention and management of invasive
species are substantial, and it is clear that those
needs are not nearly being met (OTA 1993).
69
 There has been much interest for more than a
decade in Hawaii in improving efforts for pre-
vention of invasions (e.g., NRDC/TNCH1992;
Holt 1996), but to date little or no improvement
is apparent, a situation that clouds the future
of biodiversity in the Hawaiian Islands (Loope
1998; Loope et al. 2001). The reasons for
slow progress of the federal-state political
system towards improvement of Hawaii’s
border protection are complex, but involve
inadequate (though growing) state and federal
public and political understanding and the
lack of broad pressure for change in the face
of the many competing problems of modern
society. No single agency can be blamed for
the current lethargy. Unless this situation is
turned around soon, Hawaii’s biodiversity will
become irreparably marginalized.
New Zealand (Aotearoa)
In contrast to slow progress in Hawaii, New
Zealand provides a striking contrast and an
inspiring model of what is possible. New
Zealand’s problems with biological invasions
fully rival those of Hawaii, but the country
currently exhibits remarkable determination
to reverse trends of ecological degradation
through restoration (e.g., Veitch and Clout
2002) and to effectively prevent continuing
invasions with a strong border protection
quarantine system. New Zealand is a highly
entrepreneurial country, and it shares most
of the problems of modern society found
in Hawaii, but its citizens understand the
economic and ecological consequences of
invasive pests. Border protection quarantine
and surveillance have good legislative and
financial support only because the public in
New Zealand is very supportive.
Key aspects of New Zealand’s border
protection quarantine program are as follows:
• The Biosecurity Act of 1993 is New Zea-
land’s major piece of legislation relating to
measures for keeping new invasive pests out
of the country to prevent economic, social,
and environmental damage. It provides a
range of functions, powers, and options
for the management of harmful organisms.
Although a number of governmental depart-
ments are involved in biosecurity, primary
responsibility for implementation falls
to a single department, the Ministry of
Agriculture and Forestry (MAF). MAF’s
70 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
Quarantine Service (MQS) is the agency
responsible for implementing the country’s
border protection quarantine.
• Import Health Standards (IHS) are the
mechanism for defining conditions which
must be met for importing risk goods
to New Zealand. IHSs are based on risk
analyses, consistent with standards set by
the World Trade Organization and other
treaties governing international trade.
• MQS uses rational rules, excellent explana-
tory material, and meaningful penalties.
Upon entering the country, travelers are
asked to complete a form declaring any
prohibited items before passing through
a checkpoint where X-ray machines and
dogs are utilized to detect prohibited items.
In June 2001, the Government introduced a
system of instant NZ$200 fines for travel-
ers to New Zealand who make erroneous
biosecurity declarations; 2.5 fines per 1,000
travelers were assessed during the first
year. The fines have resulted in efficient
word-of-mouth spread of New Zealand’s
regulations. Inspection of passengers and
baggage is fast and efficient. The system
of screening passengers and their baggage
at the airport is believed to be about 95%
effective, evaluated by challenging the
detection system with clandestine known
items.
• All incoming international mail is inspected
for prohibited items using X-ray machines
and/or dogs. MAF estimates that only
1% of prohibited material gets through.
Whereas relatively passive beagles are used
when dealing directly with
the traveling public,
so-called active dogs
are used for mail
and cargo to
sniff out ille-
gal items.
Eleutherodactylus
coqui, an invasive frog
from Puerto Rico, has
reached all four main Hawai-
ian islands, probably via nursery stock,
and poses a huge threat to biodiversity
and quality-of-life of Hawaii and
other Pacific Islands. (Photo by
Allen Allison, B.P. Bishop Museum,
Honolulu)
• Air and sea cargo inspection is less thor-
ough than that for arriving international
passengers and mail, but the most crucial
pathways such as used cars from Asia are
thoroughly inspected, and other pathways
are sampled to determine and discourage
risk. Continual re-evaluation is an impor-
tant component of the entire system; a
review of the pest risk from sea containers
has recently been completed (MAF 2003),
and new Import Health Standards for Sea
Containers issued.
• MAF has a branch targeted at detecting
and responding to “post-border incursions”
of unwanted pests before they are able
to achieve firm establishment in New
Zealand. The most dramatic such recent
response involved the Red Imported Fire
Ant. A mature (later estimated at 9 months
to 2 years old) mounded nest of this notori-
ous pest ant was detected and reported by a
grounds maintenance worker at Auckland
International Airport in March 2001. The
nest was promptly treated with insecticide.
The discovery triggered two years of
intensive searching around the incursion
site as well as a national awareness pro-
gram, a national invasive ant surveillance
program, and funding for an invasive pest
ant risk assessment (A. Pascoe 2003 and
pers. comm.).
Managing the biosecurity risks in the air
and sea container pathways poses substantial
challenges for New Zealand’s quarantine
system. The recently completed “Sea Con-
tainer Review”

(MAF 2003) defined the problems clearly.
For example, nearly half the sea containers
contained wood packaging material, 60% of
which was found to be unmentioned in the
manifest (the required document in which the
importer describes what is in the container)
and 16% (mostly within the un-manifested
category) of which required fumigation. The
review recognized a remarkable opportunity
for risk mitigation to overcome existing
challenges through an electronic intelligence-
based risk-assessment system (vs. the current,
relatively unmanageable manual manifest
system). Opportunity for requiring elec-
tronic manifests may be facilitated by the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s new
“Container Security Initiative” or CSI (http://
www.cbp.gov/xp/cgov/import/cargo_control/
csi), which requires exporters to the U.S.
to deliver electronic detailed and accurate
manifest information 24 hours in advance of
a shipment. (The CSI currently applies only
to the world’s 20 largest exporting ports but
other ports are already being phased in.) New
Zealand sees this as an opportunity to greatly
improve the ability to assure cleanliness of
sea containers, since all countries will have to
provide such information to the U.S. anyway.
Options may exist to require detailed and
accurate manifest information for container
contents, including information on the pack-
ing material; to deny loading to containers
with inaccurate information; to impose
penalties for mis-manifested cargo; and to
place alerts on containers with high-risk
goods and allow exporters the option of
decontamination and certification overseas
(MAF 2003).
The remarkable dedication of New Zea-
land’s government and citizens to pursue a
maximally effective strategy for prevention of
new damaging invasions and rapid response
to incipient invasions can be grasped by
exploring their website (www.maf.govt.nz).
Galapagos Archipelago
The Galapagos archipelago has much in
common with Hawaii as a roughly compara-
ble microcosm of evolution in isolation, and
is similarly susceptible to biological inva-
sions. Yet Galapagos has been fortunate in
its relative lack of degradation: for example,
whereas Hawaii has lost 75% of its original
bird fauna, Galapagos has not yet lost a single
bird species (Loope et al. 1988). Increased
human movement to Galapagos in recent
decades increased the risk of alien species
introduction through various pathways such
as cargo boats and airplanes. After much
deliberation, to prevent further incursions,
the Galapagos inspection and quarantine
system was established in 2000, based on
Ecuadorian legislation passed in 1998. The
Charles Darwin Research Station assists
the Ecuadorian Plant Quarantine Service in
implementing this quarantine system. The
quarantine’s operation is funded from 5%
of fee of US$100 entry fee, collected from
every visitor to Galapagos National Park. The
Galapagos quarantine is just getting started
but has much promise for reducing future
invasions to those islands.
Red Imported Fire Ant (Solenopsis
invicta) poses a huge threat to bio-
diversity, economies, and quality-
of-life for all Pacific Islands.
(Photo courtesy of Texas A&M
University Fire Ant Project)
Pacific Island Countries
and Territories
Pacific island countries and territories (PICT)
comprise 25+ countries, most of which are
served by two important regional interna-
tional organizations, the Secretariat of
the Pacific Community (or SPC, which
addresses agricultural issues) and the South
Pacific Regional Environment Programme
(or SPREP, which addresses biodiversity
issues). Biodiversity of PICT is particularly
vulnerable to effects of invasive species
(SPREP 2000). Ant invasions already plague
many Pacific islands, but special concern has
arisen recently, now that the highly invasive
Red Imported Fire Ant (RIFA) occurs at or
near the coast on both sides of the Pacific.
What is the prognosis for a successful Pacific
regional prevention program for RIFA?
The SPC-Plant Protection Service (PPS),
based in Suva, Fiji, works in partnership with
22 PICT to maintain effective quarantine
systems that limit incursions of new pests,
diseases and weeds and to assist with region-
ally coordinated eradication/containment
efforts when a pest incursion happens. Priori-
ties for emphasis are determined by member
countries, which meet periodically as the
Pacific Plant Protection Organization (PPPO).
The most concerted and successful effort of
PPPO and SPC-PPS to date has involved a
regional program to address the many species
of invasive host-specific fruit flies (Diptera:
Tephritidae) that damage crops and reduce
the ability of the countries to export much of
their agricultural produce, thus substantially
71
 reducing potential for putting food on the
table. (see www.spc.org/pps)
A major Pacific island conservation meeting
in Rarotonga in July, 2002, sponsored by
SPREP and others, recommended prevention
of new terrestrial and marine species introduc-
tions through implementation of improved
quarantine legislation and practices. SPREP’s
regional invasive species strategy already
involves conducting training of countries’
quarantine personnel to address issues relating
to biodiversity needs; the first training session
took place during the summer of 2003.
The decision of whether to address region-
ally the potential invasion of the Red Imported
Fire Ant and other ants as high priority rests
with the PICT and PPPO. If they should decide
on its priority, there would be an unprecedented
opportunity for agriculture and conservation
interests to work together with international
and bilateral aid entities at regional and
country levels to build much needed quarantine
capacity to give PICT the protection they
desperately need to address invasions which
jeopardize both agriculture and biodiversity.
Conclusions
Invasive species pose the primary threat to
biodiversity on most oceanic islands. New
terrestrial and aquatic/marine invasive plant
and animal species threaten to overwhelm
Galapagos, Hawaii, New Zealand and all
Pacific islands with ecological and economic
damage and social costs. In spite of their
vulnerabilities, oceanic islands have the
opportunity to follow the lead of New Zealand
in implementing much improved measures
for prevention of new invasions. Key pre-
requisites for progress include obtaining
broad public support and the cooperation of
agriculture and biodiversity interests.
72 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
References
ANONYMOUS. 2000. Taro leaf blight (leaflet). Pests
and diseases of American Samoa, No. 3. American
Samoa Community College, Agriculture, Human
& Natural Resources, Cooperative Research &
Extension.
CLARKE, B., J. MURRAY, and M.S. JOHNSON. 1984.
The extinction of endemic species by a program of
biological control. Pacific Science 38:97-104.
COWIE, R.H. 2000. Non-indigenous land and freshwater
molluscs in the islands of the Pacific: conservation
impacts and threats. Pages 143-166 in G. Sherley
(ed.), Invasive species in the Pacific: A technical review
and draft regional strategy. South Pacific Regional
Environment Programme. Apia, Samoa.
DAVIS, L.R., R.K. VANDER MEER, and S.D. PORTER.
2001. Red imported fire ants expand their range
across the West Indies. Florida Entomologist
84(4):735-736.
FAO (U.N Food and Agricultural Organization). 2001.
International Plant Protection Convention – 2001
version. (www.ippc.int/IPP/En/default.htm, accessed
October 2003).
GILLESPIE, R.G., and N. J. REIMER. 1993. The effect
of alien predatory ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) on
Hawaiian endemic spiders (Araneae: Tetragnathidae).
Pacific Science 47:21-33.
HOLT, A. 1996 (1999). An alliance of biodiversity, health,
agriculture, and business interests for improved alien
species management in Hawaii. Pp. 155-160 in O.T.
Sandlund, P.J. Schei, and A. Viken (editors). 1996.
Proceedings of the Norway/UN Conference on Alien
Species. Directorate for Nature Management and
Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, Trondheim,
Norway. (Springer-Verlag 1999) (http://www.hear.org/
AlienSpeciesInHawaii/articles/norway.htm, accessed
April 2003)
LOOPE, L.L. 1998. Hawaii and Pacific islands. Pages
747-774 in M.J. Mac, P.A.
OPLER, C.E. PUCKETT HAECKER, and P.D. DORAN
(editors). Status and trends of the nation’s biological
resources, Volume 2. U.S. Department of the
Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Reston, VA.
(http://www.hear.org/AlienSpeciesInHawaii/articles/
hawaii_and_the_Pacific.pdf, accessed October 2003)
LOOPE, L.L., O.H. HAMANN, and C.P. STONE. 1988.
Comparative conservation biology of oceanic archi-
pelagoes: Hawaii and the Galapagos. BioScience
34(4): 272-282
LOOPE, L.L., F.G. HOWARTH, F. KRAUS, and T.K.
PRATT. 2001. Newly emergent and future threats of
alien species to Pacific landbirds and ecosystems.
Studies in Avian Biology (Cooper Ornithological Society)
22:291-394.
MAF. 2003. Sea Container Review. MAF Discussion
Paper No. 35. (available at www.maf.govt.nz).
McGREGOR, R.C. 1973. The emigrant pests. A report to
Dr. Francis Mulhern, Administrator, Animal and Plant
Health Inspection Service. Berkeley, California. 167 p.
(Unpublished report on file at Hawaii Department of
Agriculture, Honolulu, Hawaii.) (http://www.hear.org/
articles/mcgregor1973.pdf, accessed October 2003)
MEYER, J.-Y. 1996. Status of Miconia calvescens
(Melastomataceae), a dominant invasive tree in the
Society Islands (French Polynesia). Pacific Science
50:66-76.
MEYER, J.-Y., and J. FLORENCE. 1996. Tahiti’s native
flora endangered by the invasion of Miconia calvescens
DC. (Melastomataceae). Journal of Biogeography
23:775-781.
MEYER, J.-Y. 2003. Parks in peril in the islands of
French Polynesia. Aliens 17:6.
MILLER, S.E., and L.G. ELDREDGE. 1996. Numbers
of Hawaiian species: supplement 1. Bishop Museum
Occasional Papers. 45:8-17.
MURRAY, J., E. MURRAY, M.S. JOHNSON, and B.
CLARKE. 1988. The extinction of Partula on Moorea.
Pacific Science 42:150-153.
NRDC/TNCH. 1992. The alien pest invasion in Hawaii:
background study and recommendations for intera-
gency planning. The Nature Conservancy of Hawaii
and the Natural Resources Defense Council. Joint
agency report. 123 p. (http://www.hear.org/articles/
pdfs/nrdctnch1992.pdf, accessed October 2003)
O’DOWD, D.J., P.T. GREEN, and P.S. LAKE. 2003.
Invasional ‘meltdown’ on an oceanic island. Ecology
Letters 6:812-817.
OTA. 1993. Harmful non-indigenous species in the
United States. U.S. Congress, Office of Technology
Assessment. OTA-F-565. U.S. Government Printing
Office, Washington, DC.
PASCOE, A. 2003. Red imported fire ant response stood
down. Biosecurity 45:7.
SAVIDGE, J.A. 1987. Extinction of an island forest avi-
fauna by an introduced snake. Ecology 68:660-668.
SPREP. 2000. Invasive species in the Pacific: A technical
review and draft regional strategy, G. Sherley, technical
editor. South Pacific Regional Environment Program.
Apia, Samoa.
VEITCH, C.R., and M.N. CLOUT (eds.). 2002. Turning
the tide: The eradication of invasive species. IUCN.
VINSON, S. B. 1997. Invasion of the red imported fire
ant (Hymenoptera: Formicidae): spread, biology, and
impact. American Entomologist, Spring 1997:23-39.
VITOUSEK, P.M., C.M. D’ANTONIO, L.L. LOOPE, M.
REJMANEK, and R. WESTBROOKS. 1997. Introduced
species: a significant component of human-caused global
change. New Zealand Journal of Ecology 21:1-16.
WTO (World Trade Organization). 1998. Understanding
the Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures Agreement.
(www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/sps_e/spsund_e.htm,
accessed October 2003)

Since the famous Charles Darwin’s observa-
tions on the Galapagos Islands which were so
fundamental in shaping his Theory of Natural
Selection, approaches to island biogeography,
population dynamics and endemism, have
been much developed, and well documented
(Groombridge and Jenkins 2000). This
understanding is crucial to the complex
picture of the conservation and management
of island systems..
The presence of human activity on islands
is not necessarily incompatible with the
maintenance of rich biodiversity and healthy
ecosystems. Nevertheless, in many islands,
native endemic species and communities
have been destroyed or replaced due to
inadequate conservation measures, ill-advised
agricultural mono-cultures, or inappropriate
intensive mariculture, or sublittoral destruc-
tion of spawning areas. In addi-
tion, the invasion of alien spe-
cies is now recognized as one
of the major threats
to biodiversity and
ecosystem function-
ing in large and
smaller islands (Mooney et al. 2002). The
current piecemeal invasion legislation lends
itself, moreover, to the management of
introduced species.
Scientists to help
conservation practitioners
and society to set priorities
In order to protect the processes that maintain
islands and their surrounding marine habitats,
it is necessary to thoroughly understand
natural processes and be able to predict the
consequences of species losses and invasions.
Two big challenges in this quest are: 1)
identifying parameters that can serve as
appropriate indicators of ecosystem func-
tioning and 2) taking long-range spatial
(regional) and temporal views that could
include evolutionary capacity and global
climate shifts. Given the com-
plexity of these challenges,
there is an urgent need for the
scientific commu-
nity to help con-
servation prac-
titioners,
by PIERRE LASSERRE
decision-makers and society to take appropri-
ate measures that go beyond the obvious
impulse to protect economically valuable
species and landscapes providing services,
or aesthetically appealing ones
In fact, many of the hard decisions relating
to nature conservation have nothing to do
with science. They represent a choice of
values which are of a political, ethical and
philosophical nature. However, there is a
need for scientists to respond to questions
about the consequences of losing particular
species or a segment of biodiversity. It is
therefore the responsibility of scientists and
their in-depth scientific exploration into how
research can inform society about the choices
Pierre Lasserre is a Professor of Marine
Biology and Coastal Oceanography at the
Pierre & Marie Curie University, Paris VI.
From 1982 to 1993 he was the Director of
the Marine Biological Station of Roscoff. He
was Director of the Division of Ecological
Sciences and Secretary of the MAB Programme, and Director of
the Regional Ofce for Science in Europe, in Venice (ROSTE).
He is an Executive Committee member of the European
Marine Research Stations (MARS) Network and a member
of Academia Europaea and has conducted comprehensive
research in coastal environments along the Atlantic Coast
and the Mediterranean, North and West Africa, the Kerguelen
Islands and the East China Sea. He has published several
books, and more than 100 papers on several subjects related to
marine biodiversity. He has chaired a number of organizations
and committees, such as IABO, SCOR and IUBS, and he was a
founder member of the DIVERSITAS Programme. Dr Lasserre
has been at the origin of the launching of many Biosphere
reserves, including islands, in cooperation with INSULA. He was
the UNESCO’s focal point for biodiversity and he participated in
many SBSTTA meetings and COP to the CBD.
Université Pierre & Marie Curie – Paris VI
UFR des Sciences de la Vie
75005 Paris, France
73

it must make regarding species extinctions or
species invasions. Science can clarify what is
likely to happen if certain species are elimi-
nated or are invading insular ecosystems.
In the evolution of the UNESCO Man and
the Biosphere (MAB) Programme, launched
in 1971, it was unquestioned excellence of
participating scientists which elevated applied
research to its proper status. The connection
between basic and more applied environmental
research has emerged in several aspects of the
MAB approach and of the highly successful
Biosphere reserve concept that emerged
from it. During the 1990s, ecological science
increasingly turned its attention to environ-
mental problems and the challenge of protect-
ing biodiversity. For example, in 1991, the
Sustainable Biosphere Initiative laid out a
research programme aiming at providing
answers to critical questions regarding envi-
ronmental management (Lubchenco et al.
1991). The involvement of distinguished
scientists as Robert Paine in the scientific
review of the Exxon Valdex spill pushed him
to review the monitoring programme that
followed the spill, and to suggest ways in
which environmental monitoring should be
improved (Paine et al. 1996).
74 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
Iroise Archipelago, the Finland Archipelago
etc.) and the small to larger islands recently
selected as reference sites by the scientific
network of excellence “Marine Biodiversity
and Ecosystem Functioning” MARBEF,
launched by the European Union (Carlo
Heip, coordinator).
(3) taking a long-range temporal view that
could include evolutionary capacity and
global climate shifts.
On coastal and submarine parts of islands,
few studies have focussed on the causes of
latitudinal species distribution except at the
smallest special scales. There is a pressing
need for more large-scale, descriptive and
experimental studies on community distribu-
tion and ecological processes within single
habitats and across environmental gradients.
The existence of marine biodiversity gradients
(e.g. low versus high latitude) is not clear
and their functional significance should be
reappraised. The scale of marine systems and
the mixing, dispersion and transport that occur
in the oceanic medium
require a
Recent trends in modern conservation
ecology include a mix of: (1) controlled
experimental removal of species and manip-
ulations of ecosystems, (2) ecosystem
approach, and (3) natural history and moni-
toring. The lessons learned from field experi-
ments and recent research emphasizing
the functions of species in biogeochemical
or ecosystem processes and their role in
ensuring reliable ecosystem functioning
(Kareiva and Levin 2003, Loreau et al. 2001)
have been impressive and are reshaping our
understanding of ecological systems and
ecosystem functioning.
Therefore, the fundamental ecological
science and evolutionary ecology have the
capacity to provide sound guidance on
conservation priorities in islands. Three of
the biggest challenges are:
(1) identifying measurements that can serve
as appropriate indicators of “ecosystem
processes”,
(2) learning how to scale local measurements
of effects up to large-scale systems that span
entire small islands, such as it is the case,
in Europe, for a growing number of island
Biosphere reserves (e.g. Canary islands,
Balearic Islands, the Tuscan Islands, the
different mode of thinking about conservation
and sustainable management (Lasserre et al.,
1994). These specific features should be taken
into consideration in future conservation and
development plans of islands, not only for
sublittoral and intertidal habitats but also for
the terrestrial parts of islands.
Another challenge to achieve in islands
biodiversity conservation and management is
the need to adopt an evolutionary perspective
on the relative importance of species. The
tendency among ecologists is to emphasize
ecosystem services such as productivity,
nutrient cycling, and water purification;
but species also represent an evolutionary
potential in themselves that is difficult to
assess in terms of the standard metrics associ-
ated with ecosystem services (i.e. species and
community assemblages providing services
of economic interest). In fact, it could well
happen that today’s rare species or an isolated
community living on islands might be one of
the crucial genetic
reservoirs of future evolutionary responses
to our ever-changing global environment.
It is perhaps because of their evolutionary
potential that species may be least expend-
able.
The maintenance of island ecosystem
goods and services is a goal that is hard to
argue against but even harder to assess in
a quantitative manner! How will we know
whether we have succeeded or failed? Is
it merely a matter of ensuring that total
productivity in islands (measured as amount
of carbon fixed) does not decline due to
species losses? Or do we need to worry
about “stability”, a favoured concept among
community ecologists, or the more recent
notions of “resilience”? If so, how can these
be assessed? The measurements that can best
evaluate ecosystem functioning need to take
account of both theoretical and practical
dimensions.
Galapagos Islands (© Photo: Yann Arthus-Bertrand/
Earth from Above/UNESCO)
Considered by Darwin as a «living laboratory for
evolution» the Galapagos islands were inscribed on
the World Heritage List in 1978 and were recognized
as a Biosphere Reserve under the UNESCO-MAB
Programme in 1984. Formed some 3 to 4 million years
ago, the archipelago experiences intense volcanic and
seismic activity. The endemic Galapagos vegetation
and fauna is famous worldwide. Over 700 scientific
missions to the Galapagos have been organized using
the Charles Darwin Research Station (jointly supported
by the Government of Ecuador, IUCN and UNESCO).
In early 2001, an oil spill adjacent to the Galapagos
threatened many species and habitats across some 2000
km2, underlining the fact that environmental protection
measures may never be foolproof. Increasing human
populations can cause heavy pressure on islands natural
resources for food (e.g. fishes) and income opportunities
(e.g. tourism). Here, the biosphere reserve concept can
help to develop an ecosystem approach that should
consider all stakeholders, all forms of information,
including scientific and local knowledge as well as
different land use innovations and practices.
75
 The melding of science and
society: research sites and
biosphere reserves.
Policy-makers and managers require practi-
cal, defensible recommendations. They are
usually forced to proposing quick partial
solutions, often based on very local scientific
observations. The scale of the research effort
needed to obtain adequate knowledge to
understand, conserve and restore insular
systems demands regional and broad range
collaboration. Moreover, scientists typically
work to the rhythm of multi-annual funding
and project cycles. They monitor complex
phenomena whose changes may sometimes
be confirmed only after many years or even
decades of study. Therefore, scientists being
asked for advice by managers and policy-
makers are confronted by the following
dilemma: should they respond by providing
the “best practices” scenario? Or should
they reply that they cannot provide advice
in the absence of data or reliable records?
Possible answers are:
1. to encourage long-term research and
an intensification of scientific effort,
along with other appropriate actions in
biodiversity conservation;
2. to build on regional networks of excel-
lence.
Achieving these ambitious goals require
a diversity of skills, expertise, resource
and networks of researchers and sites. A
critical mass of research workers and island
conservation managers, and decision-makers
needs to be reached. Once attained, this
should significantly boost appropriate basic
scientific studies and applied measures
for appropriate conservation and regional
development of islands and their surround-
ing marine biota. This can be done by:
1) Producing communication tools for
scientists and managers involved in island
biodiversity research within and outside their
region (e.g. electronic conferences, newslet-
ters and discussion lists); 2) Developing
strong training programmes designed to
spread excellence outside of the participat-
ing networks; 3) Creating data banks of
primary data and metadata, through the web
by participants and beyond; 4) Producing
high-impact scientific publications, and
76 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
promoting public information; 5) Promoting
submission of collaborative proposals for
joint research by natural and socio-economic
scientists.
In this context, the scientist today has
more than ever the responsibility of enter-
ing into the “social demand” arena, of
probing into how decisions regarding nature
conservation and regional development are
made, and who they affect. There are now
strong reasons for reinforcing cooperative
initiatives between existing networks with
complementary targets and geographical
distribution. These include INSULA, the
UNESCO-MAB World Network of Bio-
sphere Reserves, and its regional MAB
networks, and the EU-Network of Excel-
lence Marine Biodiversity and Ecosystem
Functioning (MARBEF) initiate by the
Network of European Marine Research
Stations (MARS).
Of a total of 100 European marine biodi-
versity research sites, identified by the EU
Network of Excellence MARBEF, 8 insular
“Reference sites” and 21 “Focal sites” have
been selected for intensive and comparative
research activities (see Warwick et al.,
2003). Furthermore, Biosphere reserves
offer privileged arenas for melding science
and society. Multi-purpose management
can be achieved through the use of zoning
(with core, buffer and transition areas),
with different requirements for protection,
scientific research and human use (UNESCO
2000). Recent successful examples of island
biosphere reserves (such as the Lanzarote,
in the Canaries or the Iroise Archipelago,
Brittany) have shown that the principles
and guidelines for biosphere reserves are
indeed adaptable to the coastal-marine area.
People living permanently or occasionally
on islands cannot be separated from studies
on community and ecosystem dynamics. In
islands, the loss of species can greatly alter
patterns of human settlement, employment,
agriculture, fisheries, tourism (UNESCO
Island Agenda 1994).
Attaining such cooperation will require a
significant increase in cohesion, interaction
and reciprocal understanding amongst the
diverse members of this wide community.
The future challenge lies in combining the
pressing need for environmental monitor-
ing with the needs for basic research and
predictive modelling. At the same time,
improving public participation, and re-
orienting regional planning toward observa-
tion and sustainable use of biodiversity is
required. This understanding must relate
directly to the changes brought about by
evolving human societies and their resource
uses, perceptions, and values.
References
GROOMBRIDGE B. and JENKINS M.D., 2000. Global
Biodiversity: Earth’s living resources in the 21st century.
WCMC. Cambridge: World Conservation Press.
HEYWOOD V.H. (ed.) 1995. Global Biodiversity Assess-
ment. UNEP, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
KAREIVA P. & S.A. Levin (eds) 2003. The importance
of species. Perspectives on expendability and triage.
Princeton and Oxford: Princeton University Press.
LASSERRE P. 1992. The role of biodiversity in marine
ecosystems. In:Solbrig O.T., van Emden H.M. & van
Oordt P.G.W.: Biodiversity and Global Change. Paris:
IUBS Press.
LASSERRE P., MCINTYRE A.D., OGDEN J.C., RAY
G.C., GRASSLE J.F. 1994. Marine laboratory networks
for the study of biodiversity function and management
of marine ecosystems. IUBS Biology International,
sp. Issue n°31.
LOREAU M., NAEEM S., INCHAUSTI P., BENGTSSON
J., GRIME J.P., HECTOR A., HOOPER D.U., HUSTON
M.A., RAFFAELLI D., SCHMID B., TILMAN D. and
WARDLE D.A. 2001.Biodiversity and ecosystem
functioning: Current knowledge and future challenges.
Science 294: 806-808.
LUBCHENCO J., OLSON A.M., BRUBAKER L.B.,
CARPENTER S.R., HOLLAND M.M., HUBBELL
S., LEVIN S.A., MACMAHON J.A., MATSON P.A.,
MELILLO J.M., MOORNEY H.A., PETERSON C.H.,
PULLIAM R., REAL L.A., REGAL P.J. and RISSER
P.G. 1991. The sustainable Biosphere Initiative: An
ecological research agenda. Ecology 72; 371-412.
MOONEY H.A., MCNEELY J., NEVILLE L.E., SCHEI
P.J., WAAGE J.K. (eds) 2002. Invasive Alien Species:
Searching for solutions. Washington: Island Press.
PAINE R.T., RUESINK J.L., SUN A., SOULANILLE E.L.,
WONHAM M.J., HARLEY C.D.G., BRUMBAUGH
D.R., and SECORD D.L. 1996. Trouble on oiled
waters: Lessons from the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill. Annu.
Rev. Ecol. Syst. 27: 197-235.
UNESCO 1994. Island Agenda: An overview of
UNESCO’s work on island environments, territories
and societies. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO 2000. Solving the puzzle: the ecosystem
approach and biosphere reserves. Paris: UNESCO.
WARWICK R.M., EMBLOW C., FÉRAL J.-P., HUMMEL
H., VAN AVESAATH P., HEIP C. 2003. European
Marine Biodiversity Research Sites. Report of the
EU Concerted Action: BIOMARE Implementation and
Neworking of large scale, long term Marine Biodiversity
Research in Europe. Yerseke: NIOO-CEME.

Small islands are especially vulnerable to
problems with wetland ecosystems – why?
Simply because many wetlands are fed by
freshwater, this is seen as a competing use by
islanders for their water sources. Wetlands
are also vulnerable to pollution events,
drainage, and invasion from alien species,
and, especially in small and low islands,
salt water intrusion to the fresh groundwater
“lens”. This places the future of island
wetland ecosystems, and the biodiversity
they support, in considerable jeopardy – in
fact more so than the ecosystems typically
regarded most at threat, such as forests.
This short article cannot do justice to
the structure and function of freshwater
ecosystems on small islands. So it is a pot-
pourri, a somewhat eclectic mix of glimpses
of some islands (not always individual states)
and their biodiversity features, from the
equator to the Poles, and some thoughts
about the issues critical to the future of these
ecological systems. Of course, it is true that,
on islands especially, wetlands are controlled
Aleutian Islands
by the availability of water: and, in turn,
exercise control over the availability of water.
So a discussion of freshwater systems and
their biological diversity must involve some
discussion of the natural management of
water on the islands. We can gain the best
glimpses of Island systems through those
areas protected under various international
designations, such as Ramsar sites, World
Heritage natural sites or sites in the World
Network of Biosphere Reserves. Contact url’s
for web sites detailing these designations are
provide at the end of the article.
But first, let us define what a wetland is.
I use the definition followed by the Ramsar
convention on wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971)
as the most authoritative globally. The
definition is:
“areas of marsh, fen, peatland or water,
whether natural or artificial, permanent
or temporary, with water that is static or
flowing, fresh, brackish or salt, including
areas of marine water the depth of which at
low tide does not exceed six metres”.
by PETER BRIDGEWATER
As marine systems are being covered in
a separate article I will confine my remarks
chiefly to island freshwater wetlands. How-
ever, the small size of many islands means
the connectivity and linkages between the
different ecosystems are condensed, and of
course, the linkage between terrestrial and
coastal marine systems are more extensive,
and intimate, than on continental land masses.
There are many recent works dealing with
these issues, but see (Bennett, A.F. 2003) for
a good summary.
Many islands have complete sets of eco-
logical systems, depending on the latitudinal
position and geomorphology. Except for
larger islands, however, the extent of many
ecosystems is often restricted. And wetlands,
in the form of swamps and mires, tend to
be small in extent, and often ephemeral.
Similarly rivers rarely have the opportunity
to develop maturity, and lakes are rare, other
than in exceptional locations.
Some examples
At the Equator, The Archipiélago de Colón
(Galápagos Islands), is situated in the east
Pacific Ocean, 1,000 km from the mainland
of Ecuador, with the equator running through
the Wolf and Ecuador volcanoes on Isabella
Island. Situated on the Galapagos Submarine
Platform, the Galapagos Islands consist of 13
islands. These islands were formed 4 million
years ago by volcanic processes and most
represent the summit of a volcano, some of
which rise over 3,000 meters from the Pacific
Peter Bridgewater is Secretary
General of the Ramsar Convention
on Wetlands, and has been Director
of the Unesco’s Division of Ecologi-
cal Sciences and Secretary of the
Man and the Biosphere Programme
(MaB).
77
 Ocean floor. The larger islands typically
comprise one or more gently sloping shield
volcanoes, culminating in craters or calderas
and the terrain are generally composed of
uplifted marine lava flows. Freshwater is
a critically limiting factor, and only San
Cristobal has adequate perennial supplies for
the local human population. Small wetlands
occur on the islands in suitable locations. But
this is a typical series of volcanic islands,
where the predominant terrestrial vegetation
is xeric, and wetland systems are small, and
typically ephemeral. Yet they play a key role
in the general flows of water through the
groundwater aquifers, and their conserva-
tion and wise management is key to wise
management of the aquifers.
In the southern hemisphere, Siberut is
the largest in the chain of four Mentawai
Islands situated off the west coast of Sumatra,
Indonesia. It has been isolated from the
Sumatra mainland and the Sunda shelf
for at least 500,000 years, resulting in an
exceptionally high degree of endemism: 65
% of the animals are though to be endemic.
Lowland dipterocarp rain forest is the prin-
cipal ecosystem. Despite that, there is also
extensive riverine forest dominated by
Terminalia phellocarpa; freshwater swamp
and bog forest; and Casuarina equisetifolia
damp forest close to the coast.
Further west, Mauritius, located in the
Indian Ocean, is a larger island, with consider-
able settlement and anthropic changes over
millennia and especially in the last few
hundred years. While much of the remaining
vegetation is composed of tropical moist
forest at various altitudinal levels, there are
some small lakes and wetlands, including
marshlands characterized by Lycopodium
spp., Pandanus spp., Sphagnum spp. etc. and
at higher altitude damp Philippia/Phylica
heath with Astelia hemichrysa, Coffea spp.,
and Blechnum attenuatum as key species.
Trinidad represents another island where
forest is the dominant ecosystem, with increas-
ing anthropic influences. Nariva swamp in is
a very good example of a large swamp forest
ecosystem characteristic of the Caribbean
region. The site also supports one of the only
two communities in Trinidad and Tobago
of the moriche palm Mauritia spp. The
site regularly supports large numbers of
78 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
members of the Ciconiiformes, including
the families Ardeidae, Cochleariidae and
Threskiornithidae. Mammal species include
Alouatta seniculus, Cebus albifrons and Agouti
paca. Reptiles include Caiman crocodilus,
Eunectes murinus and Iguana iguana. The
major vegetation types permanent herbaceous
swamp with Montrichardia arborescens and
Cyperus giganteus, seasonally flooded forests
with Eleocharis mutata, Cyperus odoratus
and Phragmites spp., swamp forest with
Pterocarpus officinalis, Carapa spp. and Bac-
tris major and islands of humid tropical forest
with Roystonea oleracea, Mauritia setigera
and Euterpe oleracea and E. precatoria. The
site also hosts many bird species, and 32
species of bats.
Across the pacific the islands of Micronesia
and Polynesia form extensive chains. Many
are small, often simple coral atolls with no
freshwater resources at surface. Yet others have
a volcanic base, and there wetland systems,
even lakes, can develop, as well as riverine
features. In Palau, for example, Lake Ngar-
dok is a small, natural, freshwater lake on
Babeldaob island with some swamp vegeta-
tion and is the largest permanent freshwater
body in Palau. It supports indigenous fishes
representative of Palauan fish fauna and has
a small breeding population of the estuarine
crocodile Crocodylus porosus. This lake is a
Ramsar site, and includes the entire protected
Nature Reserve and catchment of the lake,
and thus also includes several streams and
small areas of riverine marsh and freshwater
swamp forest as well. The lake is particularly
important for control of floods and main-
tenance of water quality, and at least 11
indigenous bird species are supported as well,
including the national bird, the Palau Fruit
Dove or “biib” (Ptilinopus pelewensis).
In the sub-tropical zones, the Spanish
Canary Islands are interesting examples.
Situated off of Morocco, but belonging to
Spain, they are classic islands for showing a
contrast in ecosystems. At lower levels the
islands are dominated by coastal matorral
with Euphorbia balsamifera, E. broussonetii,
E. canarensis and Plocama pendula, yet
where trade winds meet island mountains,
the moisture laden air condenses causing
clouds or mist to form at elevation, giving
rides to cloud forests, creating a typical and
unique laurel Forest. Typical Sphagnum spp. Wet meadows
species include with Laurus and marshes are dominated
azorica, Ocotea foetens, Persea by Elymus arenaria, while
indica, Myrica faya, Erica the lagoons are fringed by
arborea, Ilex canariensis and Carex spp. Important terres-
Picconia excelsa. trial mammal species using the
This exists as a luxuriant Refuge include Rangifer taran-
damp forest, simply because of dus, Ursus arctos, Lagopus
the water condensing from the lagopus, Gulo gulo, Mustela
fog and mist. The aboriginal in vison, Lutra canadensis and
habitants of the islands knew Canis lupus. The birds Haliaee-
full well the importance of tus leucocephalus and Falco
this water source, and, on one peregrinus pealei are year-
island, El Hierro, a very large round residents. These islands
tree was essentially the human have a complete admixture of
water source for the whole Asian and American species
island, and so revered as a In the southern hemisphere
sacred site. Although these at the same latitudes there
forests are not wetlands as are sub-Antarctic islands, all
such they illustrate the ways in of which have extensive mire
which climate, landform and and wet grassland ecosystems,
vegetation interact to promote remarkably similar vegetation
a water cycle, which in turn despite the islands being thou-
drives other systems, includ- sands of kilometers apart. Lack
ing small marshes and wet- of any large landmasses means
lands. The adjacent island of a constant oceanic climate.
La Palma illustrates another These islands and their ecosys-
feature – the development at The “Garoé”, holy tree of the island of El Hierro that represents the importance of water tems have all been impacted by
higher altitudes of montane in some islands. the casual, but brutal contact
mires and wetlands, including from people, with a range of
species such as the ferns Cheilanthes guan- sual combination of species of Asian and introduced animals and plants causing desta-
chica, Asplenium adiantum-nigrum and A. American origin, and most can be classified bilisation to the island ecosystems
onopteris, and flowering plants such as Viola as wetland systems. Mountain tundra covered Macquarie Island is south of Tasmania,
palmensis, Nepeta leydea, Spartocytisus by heathers with crowberry, characterized by and is one such island. Five main vegetation
supranubius and Plantago webbi. Arctous alpina, Rhodonendron camtchatica, formations have been described, tall-tussock
In higher latitudes of the northern hemi- Rhododendron aurea, Loiseleria procumbens grassland, short tussock grassland (herbfield),
sphere island systems can be quite rich in etc.; Motley-grass meadows with Calama- fen, bog and feldmark. While the distribution
wetland related systems, specially mires, bogs, grostis langsdorffii, Anemone villosissima, of these formations generally reflects the
wet heath and bog forests. The West Estonian Geranium erianthum etc.; lakes, rivers, island’s topography introduced European
Archipelago is such an example, situated swamps including sedges (Carex sp.), cotton rabbits have severely modified some of them.
in the eastern Baltic Sea and its terrestrial grass (Eriophorum sp.), willows (Salix sp.), On the exposed summit plateau, covering
habitats contain pine forests, mixed spruce sphagnum moss (Sphagnum sp.) etc.; around 50% of the island, the ground cover
and deciduous forests, juniper and coastal Further east and north, are the Aleutian varies from 5% to over 50% and is dominated
meadows, swamps and peat bogs. Parts of the Islands. The islands are typically treeless by the endemic, cushion forming Azorella
archipelago are also designated as Ramsar with subarctic alpine vegetation in montane macquariensis in the more sheltered sites and
wetlands. The admixture of forest and wetland areas. Typically, lower mountain slopes increasingly by cushion forming mosses as
is an interesting feature of the island. and waterway margins are vegetated with the wind exposure increases; lakes, pools and
The Commander Islands are situated in the Alnus crispa and sparse growths of Salix spp. mires are abundant. The ionic composition
Bering Sea east of the Kamchatka Peninsula Vegetation of the coastal plain and glacial of most lakes reflects oceanic influences on
and includes mountain tundra, motley-grass outwash areas is composed of species such the reserve. Many lakes lack streams to feed
meadows, wetlands, coastal and marine as Empetrum nigrum, Vaccinium vitis-idaea, them and/or outflowing streams, explained
zones. The flora and fauna of Commander Calamagrostis canadensis, Eriophorum by the porous nature of the rock and dipping
Islands are remarkable because of the unu- scheuchzeri, Salix spp., Cladonia spp. and rock strata.

79

Some smaller species of burrow-nesting
seabirds breed in the larger cushions.
In the closed fen and bog formations decom-
position rates are slow with peat beds being
over 6m deep in places. An endemic orchid is
found in these formations. Small patches of
sphagnum moss have been rapidly increasing
in area in recent years, which has been
attributed to global warming.
with groundwater supplies which can
easily become contaminated by
poor sanitation. Increased use of
pesticides and fertilizers, as well as
leachate from solid waste disposal
sites, are additional pollution
hazards to ground and surface
water in many islands.
Tourism
Opportunities for economic diversi-
fication in SIDS are often limited, and many
depend heavily on international trade, includ-
The Janubio’s saltworks. Lanzarote island.
ing tourism, for their economic viability.
At the same time, the successful promotion
of tourism is strongly correlated with the
quality, ambience and aesthetic value of the
environment. In most cases, both amenity
value and aesthetic ambience are related to
the quality of freshwater resources, as well
as the ecosystems they support. Despite its
obvious economic potential, the development
of tourism can also have negative impacts on
freshwater resources, including high water
consumption and a corresponding increase in
the generation of wastewater.

Environmental threats and

opportunities for island
wetland ecosystems
Freshwater availability
Despite the relatively high rainfall received
by many SIDS a considerable number experi-
ence freshwater shortages. Small islands
frequently have a relatively limited capacity
to store water for use in the dry season, and
the construction of large reservoirs is often
difficult from an engineering perspective, and
takes up valuable land. In addition, torrential
rains, coupled with steep topography, short
river channels and easily eroded soils, can
cause rapid siltation of reservoirs.
SIDS therefore depend heavily on ground-
water resources which typically exist as
freshwater ‘lenses’ containing limited quantities
of water. However, as noted above, withdrawal
rates that exceed the sustainable water yield
can result in temporary or permanent sea water
intrusion, thereby damaging or destroying the
freshwater lenses. Given that small islands are
surrounded on all sides by marine water, this
makes saltwater intrusion into groundwater
resources very likely, and the possibilities
of then contaminating ecosystems fed by
groundwater flow or springs is very high.
The populations of small islands tend to
be concentrated on the more gently sloping
lands along the coastline. The resulting
high population density can cause problems

80 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS

Orongo Crater, Easter Island
Environmental protection
Lack of drainage basin controls or environ-
mental protection, coupled with economic
development (such as tourism, agriculture,
industry) can severely reduce the spatial
extent of the drainage basins that are vital
to freshwater supplies. Further, many of
the hydrological studies and investigations
carried out on small islands are thus based
on criteria and concepts more appropriate to
large islands or continents than to the needs
of small islands and water projects are often
implemented without accurate knowledge
of the available (and sustainable) water
resources. Island-specific or, in favourable
cases, regional studies are required to identify
the available water resources and to imple-
ment effective development and management
programmes.
Island Systems Management
The diminutive size of SIDS means that
development and freshwater resources are
closely related and interlinked. Water resource
1
http://www.slubiodiv.org/Biodiversity_Project/Information/Printed_Materials/Country_Study_Report/country_study_report.html
management must therefore seek to rational-
ize the use of island resources with the goals
of sustainable development. An appropriate
framework for this is provided by the Island
Systems Management (ISM), which was
developed by the Organization of the Eastern
Caribbean States and adopted by the First
Ministerial Meeting on the Implementation
for the Barbados Programme of Action (held
in Barbados in November 1997).
The ISM is a multi-disciplinary, multi-
faceted mechanism offering an adaptive
management strategy which both addresses
the issue of resource-use conflicts and
provides the necessary policy orientation to
control the impacts of human intervention on
the physical environment. The effectiveness
of ISM is dependent upon an institutional
and legal framework which coordinates the
initiatives of all sectors, both public and
private, to ensure the attainment of common
goals through a unified approach.
Another complication is that there are
often several organizations involved in, and
responsible for, the various aspects of water
resources. Data collection, health issues,
service delivery, environmental management
and other activities are generally delegated
to different government agencies, many of
whom rarely talk to or consult each other.
In addition, their programmes are rarely
integrated with those of other organizations
whose activities may impact on water
resources, such as tourism, land-use planning
and human settlements. All these factors
contribute to the absence of an integrated
approach to water management.
Many of the biodiversity country studies
and reports have details on freshwater
resources and ecosystem. One example is that
of the Country study of St. Lucia 1
• St. Lucia’s Biodiversity Country Study
Report finds that
“Freshwater habitats in St. Lucia include
thirty-seven major rivers, some temporary
and permanent streams, marshes, swamps,
underground springs, flood plains, inland
mangroves and the constructed systems, such
81
 as the John Compton Dam, the Rodney Bay
Sewerage Treatment Ponds (RBSTP) and
several irrigation and aquaculture ponds.
The aquatic habitats in St. Lucia suffer from
similar forces of destruction as do other rivers
and wetlands all over the world.
Wetlands play significant roles in water
purification, sediment removal and flood
control. The sponge-like action of swamps
often facilitates the slowing down of surface
run-off, the extraction of organic and inor-
ganic compounds and the deposition of
suspended solids. As the country’s population
grows, water extraction by the water authority
and farming sector is increasing. the water. Microbes may lead to disease
In recent years, this increased extraction outbreaks in aquatic plants and animals
of water has become evident by the reduced and/or may infect secondary and tertiary
base flow of rivers and streams and by the users of the ecosystems.
complete drying up of small streams and Untreated wastes from factories are often
wetland areas in the dry season. The practice released into rivers, leading to severe changes
of draining and drying wetlands for the in the temperature, chemical and/or physical
purposes of construction and land reclama- state of the aquatic systems, most often
tion is also a contributor to the reduction threatening habitat stability and biodiversity.
in the volume of water available for use on Inappropriate hillside agriculture and building
the island. Threats to the freshwater ecosystems construction cause topsoil disturbance and
Wetland transformation has been ongoing come not only from activities that extract runoff during rainfall. The sediment loads
in St. Lucia for many years. What was once water from habitats but include many activi- of most rivers around the island, especially
the Sans Soucis swamp, for example, is now ties which add components to, and impact those within agricultural belts are, as a result,
a large residential and commercial centre. significantly on the aquatic habitats. Effluent very high. Agro-chemical contamination of
The Rodney Bay area, once only marsh land disposal by sewage treatment plants and most of the island’s freshwater resources
and swamp, is now partially drained and is domestic septic tanks add organic matter and is also high.
a significant contributor to the tourism and microbes to rivers and wetlands. Organic The freshwater ecosystems in St. Lucia
commercial business of the Gros Islet region. enrichment can cause de-oxygenation of are home to birds, fish, shrimp, insects and

Azores

82 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS


Falkland Islands
molluscs. Many of the birds which nest and
forage in the wetlands are migratory but most
of them are resident on the island. Little
is known about the freshwater fish. There
are few recorded species but those that are
known have been observed to live in even the
most degraded habitats. The need to further
study the island’s fresh and brackish water
fish and their lifecycles is, therefore, worthy
of mention. There are thirteen species of
freshwater shrimp recorded for St. Lucia
and these are found in every type of wetland
system that has a link with the sea. These
animals are often targeted for fishing despite
Fisheries Regulations that prohibit their
capture and sale. Tolerance levels for pollut-
ants are observed to be low in the shrimp but
their recolonization rates seem to be high.
The insects and snails are found island-wide
but their distribution patterns have been
observed to be clearly associated with the
pollution levels of their habitats.
The Water and Sewerage Authority (WASA)
is responsible for the protection of the water
resources on the island and ensuring adequate
supplies for use by residents. The Ministry of
Health, Human Services, Family Affairs and
Gender Relations is responsible for monitoring
the quality of water in the rivers, especially
those being used by the Water and Sewerage
Authority and the water quality of intakes
and treatment plants. The Departments of the
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry, Fisheries and
the Environment (MAFFE) also conduct some
water monitoring (for forest conservation and
aquaculture development).”
Particularly detailed efforts and surveys have
been made in the Falklands (Malvinas) as can
be found at http://www.geog.ucl.ac.uk/ecrc/
fibril/summary.htm
Quoting from that web-based report, the
following observations are made:
“As far as can be inferred at present, the
aquatic biota in the Falkland Island freshwater
bodies are also in a fairly pristine condition.
Although generally species poor, there are
some unusual species present and several
sites warrant special status. The Sulivan
Lakes are already recognised but the Swan
Inlets and Laguna Isla (East Falkland) and
Hawk’s Nest Pond (West Falkland) have
considerable biological interest, not least
concerning aquatic plants. The upland tarns
are also unique ultra-oligotrophic habitats of
note but these are unlikely to be affected by
future land use changes. Threats to freshwater
biodiversity in the Falkland Islands concern
the following issues,
• Changes in landuse: these are perceived
as likely to be mainly the continuation of
long-term trends involving exploitation of
grasslands. Plans to raise the quality of
agricultural land through carbonate/nutrient
additions could have future consequences
for run-off water quality. Local effects of
accelerated erosion through over grazing,
grassland fires and road building should
however also be considered.
• Climate: climate change is a global issue
and although the ozone hole now includes
the Falkland Islands there is no evidence
that freshwater systems are affected on the
Islands. However, without regular monitor-
ing of the freshwater ecosystems initial
effects may be unrecognised. Zooplankton in
the clear water sites were heavily pigmented
(a known response to high UV light levels)
but we do not know if this is a recent
or persistent condition. Sediment core
analysis (in preparation) and on going in
situ temperature monitoring may provide
some information of climate trend effects
on the upland tarns.
• Species introductions: the plight of the
native trout (Aplochiton zebra) is relatively
well known but this is not the case for
other aquatic species. This study already
indicates that a few diatom species are local
(southern South American forms) but many
are cosmopolitan and several may be new
taxa. Detailed species information on aquatic
invertebrates is not yet available but again
without historical records recognising recent
additions to the biota is difficult. Microfossil
analysis of sediments is one way to detect
such changes (results from the upland site
sediment cores are in preparation).”
The initial results of this spatial survey
involving a selection of freshwater bodies
on the Falkland Islands indicate that all
the investigated sites are in near pristine
condition despite some problems with species
introductions and local erosion. However
without historical information (from sediment
cores or from monitoring) current trends in
aquatic ecosystem change cannot be assessed.
The new EU Water Framework Directive for
freshwaters stresses the need to undertake
both chemical and biological assessment,
through monitoring, as part of a wise manage-
ment strategy for freshwaters. Together with
the need to satisfy biodiversity responsibili-
ties, it is recommended that the base-line
Maldives
83
 information being made available by the
2001 survey is used in future evaluation
comparisons by repeating the survey every
ten years. Some regular annual monitoring
of Falkland freshwaters, especially those of
interest for fish and birds, should be instigated
as soon as is convenient.
These observations, from the tropics and
the sub-antarctic zones have remarkable
similarity, and are echoed by many other
island states. They emphasise that the biodi-
versity resources of Islands, characterized
by high endemism and species richness,
are under considerable threats. Detailed
management strategies and plans must be
prepared to ensure long-term viability of the
freshwater ecosystems, and the water sup-
plies they produce, protect and purify. Here
is where the Ramsar Convention, working
through its joint work programme with the
Convention on Biological Diversity, can be
most useful.
What can the ramsar
convention contribute?
National Wetland Policies
National Wetland Policies are a useful way
of expressing principles, stating intentions,
showing what choices have been made about
strategic directions, making commitments,
facilitating and focusing consultation and
consensus, expressing exhortations, and
2
Database http://www.wetlands.org/RDB/Directory.html
84 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
making roles and responsibilities clear. Being
able to portray a national policy as delivering
international commitments can be helpful
in expediting its adoption and implementa-
tion, and in avoiding the re-invention of
justifications for courses of action.
Whether a National Wetland Policy should
be separate from other environmental policy
will depend on the circumstances. It can be
useful to look at every field of action through
the lens of what is required for wetland
objectives specifically, as codified under
Ramsar, and to ensure a complete suite of
actions is provided for. Specific wetland
policies are also useful to create identification
with, ownership of and engagement with
the issues by those responsible. Policy
and legislation should visibly and reason-
ably promptly be followed by ‘real world’
implementation and enforcement – if they are
allowed to run too far ahead of what can be
done in this regard, confidence in the process
may be undermined.
The List Wetlands of
International Importance
Upon joining the Ramsar Convention, each
Contracting Party is obliged by Article 2.4 of
the Convnetion to designate at least one
wetland site for inclusion in the List of
Wetlands of International Importance. Sites
are selected by the Contracting Parties for
designation under the Convention by refer-
ence to the Criteria for the Identification of
Wetlands of International Importance. The
Parties’ designations are communicated to
the Ramsar Bureau by means of a “Ramsar
Information Sheet” which provides legal and
scientific data on each site and is meant to
be updated every six years. The new and
updated data on Listed Sites is noted by the
Bureau and copied to Wetlands International
for inclusion in the Ramsar Sites.2
Afterword
It is clear that freshwater ecosystems on
small islands echo the range of ecosystems
on continental landmasses, but that they are
subject to particular pressures from human
and natural perturbations. Working together,
the UN Secretariat and its agencies, key
Conventions such as the Convention on
Biological Diversity and the Ramsar Conven-
tion and key NGO’s, can help small island
nations and communities manage their
freshwater ecosystems more effectively.
References
BENNETT, A.F. 2003. Linkages in the Landscape. (includes a
CD-rom) Gland: IUCN
Useful urls:
http://www.biodiv.org/programmes/areas/water/
http://www.ramsar.org/
http://www.unesco.org/mab
http://whc.unesco.org/

Roles of Agriculture
in Small Island Economies
Agriculture plays crucial roles in economic
development. As theory for vent-for -surplus
suggests, agricultural surplus (production
over domestic consumption) is a kind of
savings which will be used for investments
in the manufacturing sector in the early stage
of development. Increase in agricultural
productivity is not only important for sup-
porting increasing rural population, but also
it is an essential condition for an economy
to pursue industrialization. Therefore, in
the early stage of economic development,
agriculture is usually taxed for industrial
development as an important source of
industrial capital formation. In the later
stage of development, however, agriculture is
subsidized because of its declining productiv-
ity coupled with national food security.
Food security is particularly important for
a small, isolated island economy where a
stable supply of food is often interrupted by
natural disasters such as wrought, typhoons,
tsunami and unexpected environmental
changes. Quite often, for these small islands,
domestic food supply is the last resort for
survival when natural disasters occur. This is
particularly true for the South Pacific where
islands are fragmented and located far from
their major markets. Ironically, however,
domestic food supply in these small islands
has been neglected for a long time. Subsist-
ence agriculture, which has provided basic
necessity of foods to indigenous islanders,
has been rapidly disappearing in all Pacific
islands (Kakazu, 1994). Increasing food
imports at the expense of traditional food
supply have been major issues from food
security and nutritional standpoints.
BY HIROSHI KAKAZU
State of Agriculture
in the Pacific Islands
Agriculture, which was the dominant industry
in all Pacific islands during the 1950s, now
accounts for 28% (Samoa) to 1.4% (Okinawa)
of islands Gross Domestic Products (TABLE
1). The importance of agriculture tends to
diminish as per capita income rises. This
is because the agricultural sector tends to
generate low incomes in part because of the
low income elasticities of its products as a
whole compared to those of other sectors -as
the cost of producing farm products fall
with technological progress, prices tend to
fall. Moreover, the skills required for tradi-
tional agricultural production are less highly
developed and do not demand extensive
education. These island economies followed
these pattern more than any larger market
economy.
Hiroshi Kakazu was born on the
Island of Okinawa, Japan. He
received his Ph.D. in economics
from the University of Nebraska in
1971. He served as Professor of
the Ryukyu University, Economist
of the Asian Development Bank, Professor of the
International University of Japan and the Graduate
School of International Development at Nagoya
University, and Deputy Governor of the Okinawa
Development Finance Corporation. Currently, Dr.
Kakazu is Professor and head of IDS College of
Bioresource Sciences at Nihon University.
85
 Table 1: Land and agricultural shares in selected pacific island economies
Total Land Area Cropped Land Population Annual Population Trade/GDP Per Capita Shares of Gross Domestic Products
(1000 sq km) Per Capita (sq m) (1000 persons) Growth Rate (%) (%) GDP Agriculture Manufacturing Services
2000 2000 2002 1995-2000 2002 2001 1990 2002 1990 2002 1990 2002
Okinawa 2.3 311 1,339 0.8 35 20,000 3 1.4 5.9 5.3 80.2 86.5
Taiwan 36.2 382 22,500 0.8 81.9 12,630 4.2 1.9 33.3 25.7 54.6 67.1
Cook Islands 0.2 3,911 18 1.1 69.0 4,270 21.1 12.4 3.9 2.9 73.8 83.0
Marshall Islands 0.2 590 57 3.8 65.0 2,190 12.4 13.8 1.2 1.6 71.8 69.0
Fiji 18.3 3,519 819 0.7 82.0 2,150 22.2 na 12.7 na 53.7 na
Tonga 0.7 4,786 101 0.3 50.0 1,530 34.7 28.6 6.0 5.6 51.7 56.4
Samoa 2.8 7,147 178 0.5 60.0 1,490 23.0 14.3 19.6 14.8 48.7 63.1
Tuvalu 0.03 n.a. 11 2.0 46.0 1,260 25.6 16.8 6.0 5.6 59.9 56.4
Vanuatu 12.2 6,260 202 2.7 46.2 1,050 20.7 17.4 5.5 3.9 67.0 73.4
Kiribati 0.7 4,379 87 1.7 56.0 830 18.6 14.2 1.2 0.8 73.8 75.0
Papua New Guinea 452.9 1,647 5,500 3.2 89.0 580 29.0 26.9 9.0 8.5 40.6 31.5
Notes: 2002 Figures for Okinawa, Cook Islands, Marshall Islands are refer to 2001, and Tuvalu to 1998.
Sources: Asian Development Bank, Key Indicators of Developing Asian and Pacific Countries. Okinawa Prefectural Government

Agricultural activities have been rapidly
replaced by more productive secondary
(manufacturing and construction) and services
activities such as public works and tourism. In
the case of small island economies, agricultural
and manufacturing activities are severely
constrained by their smallness and remote-
ness which deprive of any comparative cost
advantage in the rapidly globalizing world.
Despite the general recognition that agri-
culture is more important in small island
economies than the larger ones, they are
facing formidable tasks to sustain their
domestic sources of food supply. First, an
increasing population pressure on extremely
limited land forced islanders to cultivate
smaller and marginal land for food production
which contributed declining agricultural
productivity. Marshall Islands, for example,
has only 590 square meters cropped land per
capita which has been rapidly declined with
more than 3% annual population increase
(TABLE 1).
Second, most of these islands are suffering
from accelerated sea-level rise which is
thought to be linked mainly with El Nino
weather phenomenon caused by global
Fig.1 Economic Growth Rates of Selected South Pacific Economies, 1996-2001
Source: Same as TABLE 1.
warming. Some of islands in Kiribati, Tuvalu
and Nauru are about to disappear beneath
the ocean. Pacific island countries have
contributed just 0.06 per cent to global
greenhouse gas emissions. But now, the
changing climate and sea levels linked to
global warming are affecting their water
supply, food production, fisheries and coast-
lines. (Tutangata, 2000)
Third, these islands are specialized in a
few export crops such as copra, sugar,palm
oil, cocoa, banana, taro and squash which are
highly vulnerable to the weather and external
market conditions. Almost all Pacific island
economies were severely hit by devastating
droughts of 1998. Owning to the droughts,
Fijis sugar, which accounted for about 40%
of its export earnings, fell by two-third.
Tongas squash crop, about half of its export
earnings, was cut in half. Export prices of
these products have also been depressed for
many years. Because of these unforeseen
external shocks, economic growth rates of
these small island economies subjected to a
wide range of fluctuations which backfires
any macroeconomic planning and manage-
ment (FIG.1).
Fourth, almost all South Pacific island
economies are facing the age-old problem of
efficient use of agricultural land due largely to
complex land tenure systems. Most common
pattern in the Pacific islands land tenure
regimes is that land proprietary rights are
concentrated in extended family or clan with
restricted but complex rights of individual
cultivator. Restrictions on access to property
rights will always restrict the full realization
of the potential productivity of the land
(ADB, 1998). Fijis sugarcane production,
for instance, has suffered from a complex
land leasing contracts between Indian sugar
growers and indigenous Fijians land owners.
Although it is clearly understood that both
parties would get benefits from stable, secured
and productive use of cane land under the
long-term lease contract, Fijians have been
reluctant to do so owing to socio-political
reasons.
Agricultural Success Stories
of the Pacific Islands
Despite increasingly adverse agricultural
environments in these Pacific islands, some
success stories are reported. One well-
documented story is Tongas squash (small
pumpkins). In the late 1970s, Tonga started
diversifying its cash products from traditional
products such as desiccated coconut, coconut
oil, taro, yams, sweet potatoes and bananas
to vanilla beans and squash. Vanilla beans
gradually replaced coconut products and
became the most important export crop by
1988 accounting for more than 30% of total
agricultural exports. After many years of
gestation periods, squash emerged as an
important cash crop in 1989. Squash exports

86 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS

 Fig. 2: Exports of Tonga’s Squash and Vanilla Beans, 1989-2000
Source: Same as TABLE 1.
amounted to $T13 million in 1993 accounting
for 70% of its agricultural exports (FIG.2).
The success due largely to easy market access
to Japan as well as Tongas October-March
squash production season which fits neatly
into the off seasons of other competitive
suppliers. As is reflected in fluctuating export
trend, squash production has been suffering
from risks arising from uncertain market
prices and weather conditions.
Another success story is Okinawas rising
exports of diversified agricultural products
such as flowers, tobacco, string bean, green
pepper, bitter melon, mango and various
healthy foods. Traditionally sugarcane and
pineapple have been the most important
cash crops, accounting for more than 20%
of all farm incomes and 50% of cultivated
land. Incomes from sugarcane and pineap-
ple production, however, have declined
significantly in recent years as a result of
stagnant prices and productivity as well as
increased international competition (FIG.3).
Okinawa's sugar industry has only been
surviving through the government’s price
support programs. Only fresh pineapple and
pineapple wine are holding their own, and
this as a result of tourists' consumption. It has
been an urgent task for the local government
and farmers to diversify from sugarcane-
centered monocultural agriculture into other
diversified cash crops.
Okinawa’s promising agricultural products
are in the area of high value-added "Healthy
foods." "Okinawa" is fast becoming a brand
name for "health and longevity" because of
its world-renowned "healthy islands" image.
Okinawa's life expectancy, in the past two
decades, has increased from 72 to 77 years
for men, and 79 to 85 years for women,
making Okinawa the healthiest place in the
world. Okinawa's longevity is the product of
these infested products from
exporting to fly-free areas
in mainland Japan. As can
been seen in FIG.3, mangos
and bitter melon became
Okinawas star cash crops
after the melon fly eradica-
tion.
The melon fly eradica-
tion project itself has been
regarded as a great success
a complex combination of climate, culture, story in the Asia-Pacific agricultural develop-
closely-knit social organizations, foods and ment because it employed the Areawide
lifestyles. Foods are considered to be the most Integrated Pest Management Method based
important factor for long life. Okinawans are on the Sterile Insect Technique (SIT) which
accustomed to consuming less salty, mineral is not only cost effective for controlling
rich foods than mainlanders. of the pest insect but it is also friendly to
Various healthy foods have been developed the environment for reducing the need for
and marketed nationwide, including ukon insecticides. The eradication completed
(turmeric), bitter melon (well-known as goya) in Kume Island in 1978, followed by the
products, naturally proc-
essed salt, sea vegetable
products (mozuku), dietary
ostrich meat, and various
deep-sea water products,
just to name a few well-
known examples. Bitter
melon especially became
popular and the best selling
healthy vegetable. Although
production scales of these
"niche" products are still
small, they possess compar-
ative advantages in unique-
ness of resource use and
technology. Furthermore,
these products usually
require more local inputs,
including raw materials and
labor, than conventional
trading products.
A breakthrough towards
high value-added, diversi-
fied agriculture came after
the complete eradication of
the melon fly from all the
Okinawa islands in 1993
(Kakazu, 2003). The melon
flies affected more than
40 important vegetables
and fruits including highly-
priced mangos and bitter
melon, thereby preventing
87
 Fig.3: Traditional and diversified cash products of Okinawa

Source: Okinawa Gen-

eral Bureau, the Cabinet
Office

Miyako Islands in 1987, the Okinawa Islands
in 1990 and finally the Yaeyama Islands
in 1993. The total project costs during the
eradication period amounted to about $172
million, utilizing 320,000 man-hours.
Based on estimating assumptions and
conventional cost-benefit analysis, I attempted
to estimate the net benefits of the eradication
project. The results of estimation show that
the project produced net accumulated benefits
within 6 years after the project completion
Fig. 4: Net benefis (NB) of the melon fly eradication project in Okinawa, 1991-2000
with zero opportunity cost of capital because
of interest-free public funding (FIG.4)
The net benefits estimated in this study are
those arising from the commercial shipments
of melon fly host products. If we include
environmental and preventive benefits such
as pesticide-free farming, preservation of the
natural enemies, and above all preventing
the insect pests from further spreading into
mainland Japan, the net private as well as
social benefits far exceed the estimated
commercial benefits. The project proved to be
viable even on commercial basis. Assuming
3.26% real discount rate during the project
implementation period, the project pays itself
(self liquidating) in 1998 with net present
value of the project roughly equals to the
total project costs. That is to say, the project
recovered its total investment costs within 8
years after project completion, while covering
the opportunity cost of capital.
Any success story is accompanied by a
great deal of painstaking effort, both in
research and development as well as massive
mobilization of human and capital resources.
Most important, avid support of the local
people and public organizations, were an
integral part of the success story. Okinawas
success story probably contains more than it
was told. The technological know-how and
strategies for the success will be transferred
successfully to infested areas worldwide,
particularly island areas such as Hawaii and
the South Pacific.

References
ASIAN DEVELOPMENT BANK. 1998. Improving Growth
Prospects in the Pacific. Manila: ADB Pacific Studies
Series. pp.1-130.
KAKAZU, H. 1994. Sustainable Development of Small
1980-1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000
Island Economies. Boulder: Westview Pess.
Total Benefits 0 2,858 3,291 3,739 3,835 3,525 4,251 4,210 3,740 4,330 4,277
_________. 2003. Economic Evaluation of the Melon Fly
Total Costs 16,984 765 765 765 765 765 765 765 765 765 765
Eradication Project in Okinawa. INSULA: International
Net Benefits -16,984 2,093 2,526 2,974 3,070 2,760 3,486 3,445 2,975 3,565 3,512
Journal of Island Affairs. Year 12, No.1, pp.41-50.
Source: Kakazu (2003) TUTANGATA, T. Sumer 2000. Sinking Islands, Vanishing
Worlds. Earth Island Journal, Vol.15, No.2, p.1.

88 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS


Introduction
Indonesia is a largest archipelagic state situated
in the equator, occupying an area bounded by
L 95oE, L 141oE, M 6oN, and M 11oS, stretches
for 5,100 km from the Indian to the Pacific
Ocean, with a total land area of 191 million
hectares (MSPE 1993). This geographic area is
associated with territorial waters of some 317
million hectares and an exclusive economic
zone (EEZ) of about 473 million hectares.
These total areas make up about 2,1% of the
globe surface. The total coastline length of the
islands make up about 81,000 km (about 14%
of all the coastline in the world).
This archipelago has more than 17,000
islands of extremely diverse in size, shape,
age and ecological characteristics (Fig. 1).
Roughly there are 3 categories of island sizes
found in Indonesia, namely:
a) main islands (the Greater Sunda islands)
of Kalimantan (53, 583,400 ha), Irian Jaya
(41,480,000 ha, on New Guinea), Sumatra
Figure 1 The three archipelagic states:
Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines.
(47,530,900 ha), Sulawesi (18,614,500 ha),
and Java (13,257,100 ha);
b) much smaller islands of Nusa Tenggara
(the Lesser Sunda islands) with a total area
of 8,074,000 ha, and Maluku (the Mollucas)
with 7,801,900 ha;
c) very small islands, which with the larger
islands make up a total of more than 17,000
islands in the archipelago.
The larger islands such as Sumatra, Java
and Sulawesi, some of the Nusa Tenggara
Islands, and some of the smaller islands
such as the Krakatau are greatly influenced
by the presence of vulcanism. In the whole
country there are some 100 volcanoes alive
and exerting an ongoing influence on soils.
The sea is also featuring some specific
characteristics. The depths are varied consider-
ably, as a consequence of being on two different
continental shelves. The Greater Sunda Islands
are on the Sunda Shelf with sea depth among
the islands of around 200 m or less. The eastern
BY SOENARTONO ADISOEMARTO
part of the country is located on the Sahul Shelf,
including the Papua New Guinea Island (the
western part of which is the Indonesian Irian
Jaya), and its associated Aru Island.
This article is focused on the small islands
of Indonesia, based on the consideration that
more comprehensive accounts on these islands
may be presented for further purpose. So
far, works on small islands in Indonesia are
sporadic and over-all outlook has never been
accounted for. This situation has disadvantage
that the development of the islands may not
be comprehensively planned.
The purpose of presenting this article is to
expose the conditions of these small islands
from the following aspects:
1. the geography: number and locations;
2. their natural conditions: mainly on the
biotic aspects;
3. the status in the management, conservation
and utilization: their roles for the country
and for the world;
Soenartono Adisoemarto is the Secretary
and one of the founders of NATURINDO
Foundation. NATURINDO is a foundation
active in promoting the conservation and
sustainable utilization of biodiversity. The
author was born in Indonesia in 1936,
receiving university education in Agriculture, Entomology and
Biology in two universities in Canada, namely University of
Alberta in Edmonton (BSc, 1963; MSc,1965), and Carleton
University in Ottawa, Ontario (PhD, 1970). He has been active
in the sustainable use of biological resources projects, from
1974-1987. His involvement in the management of the country’s
biodiversity has been started since 1990, in preparing country
involvement in UNCED in Rio, Brazil, and implementing the CBD
including national and international endeavours.
Contact: kudus@indo.net.id or Jalan Siaga No. 4 Sindang-
barang, Bogor – INDONESIA. Phone/Fax: +62 251 486870 and
Cellphone: + 62 81 111 8523.
89
 4. treatments have been given in relation to
the protection of the islands;
5. the trends of their status and conditions: so
that action may be planned for the purpose
of conserving their roles and functions;
6. and in the future, realistic plan of actions
may be developed for the maintenance
of these islands to keep on functioning
and playing important roles for human
welfare.
Naming of the islands
Naming the geographical elements, such as
cities, towns, districts, villages, mountains,
mounts, hills, rivers, lakes, seas, and islands,
is important for administrative order in the
management of the country. These official
documents will be the important references
for running the government, by the societies,
mass media, school teaching, map developers,
etc. This has further needed urgent endeavour
in the official and permanent naming of
these geographical elements (DEPDAGRI
2003). In relation to the geographical naming,
Indonesia as a member of the United Nations
has an obligation to submit reports on the
standardization of the geographical names
of islands and island groups in the form of
National Gazeteers, as official documents, to
fulfil the requirement for obtaining international
recognition.
Indonesia has a long endeavour ever since
from the issue of Juanda Declaration in 1957
to the issue of the Act Number 17 of 1985,
concerning the Ratification of the United
Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea,
1982 (UNCLOS). UN Resolution I/4, 1972
Blotched Hawfish Cirrhitichthys aprimus on anemone tentacles.
90 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
requires every state the formation of National
Names Authority with jobs in developing
policy on the standardization of the geographi-
cal names in their territories. It is important
that the naming of geographical elements to be
done and made uniform in the spellings as well
as in the names, since these have the function
as one of the communication media.
Naming more than 17,000 islands is not
an easy job. For the greater islands, it is
relatively easier. For the small islands there
are a number of difficulties. The first dif-
ficulty is the definition of the small islands.
UNCLOS has set definition on small islands
(Article 121) as “1. An island is a naturally
formed area of land, surrounded by water,
which is above water at high tide.” Our
concern is on the small islands. The second
difficulty is the standards used in defining
small islands. There are various standards
for defining small islands (Bengen 2003).
The Ministerial Decree No. 41, 2000, of the
Department of Marine and Fisheries define
small island as an island of equal to or less
than 10,000 km2 in area, with the population
of less than 200,000. This number may be
modified into 500,000. At the Commonwealth
Science Council Meeting in 1984, it has been
decided that the area of small island is at the
maximum of 5,000 km2.
Office of the Hydro-Oceanography
(DISHIDROS) of the Indonesian Navy pub-
lished in 1987 the total number of islands
in Indonesia. The count has come to 17,508
islands. However, in the last few years,
Indonesia has lost four of its islands, leaving
17,504 in the possession. These are 2 islands
to Malaysia (Sipadan and Ligitan), and 2
(Kambing and Yako) to East Timor (Timor
Leste). In addition there are 5 islands of the
Seribu Islands in Jakarta Bay have gone due
to abrasion, several have been merged to other
islands, and some others are facing threats
due to sinking (Susetyo 2003). In that year
the number of named islands was 5,707,
and in 1992 the National Coordinating
Agency for Surveying and Mapping (Badan
Koordinasi Survai dan Pemetaan Nasional –
BAKOSURTANAL) came to 6,115 named
sea and ocean islands, and 374 river islands.
The surveys are still going, and it is believed,
that the number of the named islands is
increasing. Department of Internal Affairs in
their survey in 2002 revealed a new number
of 7,387 named islands, and the rest, 10,117
are still unnamed. Each of the province in the
country is at present doing reidentification
of the islands present in their provinces. It is
hoped that in the end of 2003 the number
will be identified correctly. Counting the
number of islands and the coastline length
is being verified by applying remote sensing
technology (Hasyim et al. 2003). Out of these
named islands, 67 islands are the border
islands, facing India (5), Malaysia (22),
Singapore (3), Vietnam (3), the Philippines
(10), Australia (15), Timor Leste (1), Palau (7),
and PNG (1), while 12 of these need special
attention since they are the outermost islands,
bordering Indonesia from the neighbouring
countries. These are Rondo (Aceh – Sumatra),
Berhala (North Sumatra), Sekatung, Nipa
(Riau – Sumatra), Marore, Miangas, Marampit
(Nort Sulawesi), Batek, Dana (East Nusa
Tenggara), Fani, Fanildo, and Bras (Papua).
The naming of the islands (including
change/renaming, deletion, and giving new
names) is using the following principles and
flow scheme:
1. proposed by the local area people to the
head of the village;
2. the village head will process further together
with the Village Representative Assembley,
to be forwarded to the subdistrict author-
ity;
3. the subdistrict authority will further submit
the proposal to the district authority or
city mayor;
4. the district authority or mayor will appoint
the Committee on the Naming of the
 Geographical Elements to study and do
research;
5. the results will be used as tha basis for
naming the geographical elements con-
cerned by decree of the district authority
or mayor;
6. the Local People Representative will
receive the copy of the decree.
There are other technical principles that
are used for naming geographical elements,
including islands:
a) using roman alphabets;
b) using local names;
c) using national language;
d) avoid names indicating discrimination;
e) avoid using names of people still living;
f) avoid names of companies;
g) avoid foreign words, except there is histori-
cal background;
h) avoid too long name;
i) complying international convention;
j) complying national laws.
As there are more than 10,000 islands
in Indonesia still unnamed (mostly small
islands), there is a strategy for naming these
islands. The first step is socializing the policy
of island naming, followed by technical
capacity building to the local instruments,
preparing a policy in the form of the planned
Presidential Decree on the Naming of the
Geographical Elements, and the planned
Decree of the Minister of Internal Affairs on the
Naming of the Geographical Elements (includ-
ing islands). The next steps are developing
cooperation and network with the technical
institutes in charge of the naming, namely
DISHIDROS, BAKOSURTANAL, and
Department of Marine and Fisheries, in
standardizing the island names.
Small islands of Indonesia
Since the Third International Hydrological
Programme (IHP-III) of the UNESCO devel-
oped one of its thematic programmes on
small islands, the standardization of small
island definition and limitation has become
important. Based on the fresh water require-
ment and need, small island defined as less
than 1,000 km2 with less 10 km in width.
However, there are quite a number of islands
with 1,000-2,000 km2 in area having common
characteristics and problems with those of
islands of less than 1,000 km2. UNESCO
Mating nudibrach Nembrotha purpureolineolata.
finally defined the small island as having
area of less than 2,000 km2. UNESCO further
differentiates very small islands from small
islands, based on the limitation of fresh water
resources. Small islands with not more than
100 km2 in area or with not more than 3
km in width are catagorized as very small
islands (UNESCO 1991). However, in this
article, those two catagories will be treated
equally.
It is suggested that if the definition of small
island is including socio-economic use and
demographic aspects, the utilization of small
island should be based on conservation. With
this consideration, only 50% of the area
of small island may be utilized. Combined
with the definition set by the Department of
Marine and Fisheries, islands with less than
2,000 km2 should be occupied by less than
20,000 people.
Islands may be catagorized based on the
origin of the formation and be classified into
several types. Many of the small islands of
Indonesia fall into the following categories:
1. vucanic islands, included in this category
are Bali, Lombok, Sumbawa, Flores,
Sumba, Wetar and Timor, the Krakataus,
Banda, Tidore; the tectonic islands of this
category are Nias, Siberut and Enggano,
west of Sumatra; the monadnock islands
include Batan, Bintan and Belitung, east
of Sumatra; mixed genesis islands are
Haruku, Nusa Laut, Kisar and Rote;
2. raised coral islands, such as Sangihe
Islands, Solor, Alor, Lembata;
3. lowland islands, as for example Pulau
Seribu (Thousand Islands) in the Bay of
Jakarta, Samalona in Sulawesi; a subcate-
gory of this island type is the alluvial
islands, which is exemplified by the islands
in the estuary of the Mahakam river in
Kalimantan;
4. atolls, such as Tukang Besi and Takabone
Rate.
Small islands are characterized by the
following features:
a) separated from the main island;
b) water resources are limited, with small
water catchment, consequently the surface
water will directly flow to the sea;
c) sensitive and vulnerable to the external
influences, natural as well as man-made;
d) containing endemic species with high
ecological value;
e) aquatic area is relatively greater than
terrestrial area; relatively isolated from that
of the main island or continent;
f) no remote hinterland.
Development programmes
on the small islands
Development in Indonesia has been
reoriented to the development in marine
sector. Small islands have great potentials
for the development of resource-based
industries, such as fisheries, manufacturing,
and tourism. These islands will provide
productive natural resources (Retraubun
2003). Small islands are potential resources
in having coral reefs, seagrass, mangrove,
fishery resource, as biological resources,
as well as non-biological resources such as
mining and marine energy.
91

Coral reefs
There are two kinds of use of these resources,
direct use such as the fish habitat, producer of
biotic components and rock-lime, and indirect
use such as the formation/barrier against the
sea abrasion. It has been discovered that coral
reef contains bioactive agents for medicines,
foods and cosmetics.
Seagrass
This resource is found in a shallow clean and
clear sea of 2-12 m deep. For the small islands,
seagrass is important since it produces detritus
and nutrients and stabilizing soft substrates
by enticing its root system. Seagrass is also
playing role as the hiding place for many of
marine biota for their life development. This
resource may be used for marine culture.
Mangrove
The potential value of mangrove has been
well known. In addition to its function ad
the barrier against abrasion, as wind-breaker,
and protector against tsunami, habitat for
shrimp larvae and fish fries, mangrove is
also important as the provider of biological
resources. It produces wood, bioactive com-
pounds etc. The natural condition of small
islands is good for such species that are
adaptable to the sandy substrates and low
input of organic sediments that is a group of
Avicennia.
92 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
Fishery resource
Ecologically, small islands are associated to
coral reefs. It can be expected that the biological
resources found in this environment are
those closely related to the biota inhabiting
coral reefs.
Non-biological resources
Directorate General of Geology and Mineral
Resources of the Department of Energy and
Mineral Resources has made a list of small
islands in producing minerals, including the
companies that have been operating on the
islands. Not less than 25 small islands have
been mined for their minerals.
Marine energy
Ocean thermal energy conversion may be
developed in small islands as alternative energy
to anticipate the exhaustion of conventional
energy such as coal, gas, etc.
In addition to the materials provided by
small islands, these islands are also able
to give service, such in tourism. There are
several types of potential tourism developed
in small islands, such as marine tourism,
terrestrial tourism, and cultural tourism.
Small islands also open opportunity for the
development of certain industries, especially
maritime industries, ship building and repair.
Potential inventories on small islands are
continued to be carried out, individually
as well as in integrated way (Matindas et
al. 2003)
Where to go and how to develop such
potentials into actual values? Activities have
The Moluccas, from the “Livro das Plantas das Fortalezas, Cidades e Povoaçoes do Estado da India Oriental
1600s.
and will be done on some of the small islands.
The results of these activities may be able
to be used for planning for developing the
small island potentials into the actual values.
The following is the list of activities on the
islands.
Past activities
Interest on the Malay Archipelago had been
shown by previous explorers and naturalists,
such as George Everhard Rumph (Georgii
Everhardi Rumphius) for Ambon and the
neighboring islands of the eastern Indonesia
in the second half of the 17th century (Honig
& Verdoorn 1945) and Alfred Russell Wallace
(Wallace, 1890). The activities on exploring
and revealing the islands’ treasures had been
going on for many decades that follow.
Krakatau volcano erupted in 1883, leaving
the volcanic island into one-third of the total
size. The devastation happened as well
on the neighboring islands. In 1933, fifty
years after the eruption, Dammerman (1948)
gave detailed accounts on the evolutionary
succession of the fauna to this island-complex.
Expeditions, explorations, and inventories
have been conducted, and turned this island
complex into a natural laboratory in biology
and evolution.
Inventories, surveys and researches have
been conducted in some strategic small islands
for various purposes. Around Java, in addition
to Nusakambangan Island, there were activities
done in Panaitan Island at the western tip
of Java. Limited observation was done on
the distribution of some groups of molluscs.
Similar study was also done on Rupat Island
in Riau Province (Sumatra). On some of the
Thousand Islands complex, observation on
fish fluctuation was also conducted. Around
Sumatra, the small island activities had
been carried out in Siberut, Unggas and Rupat
on mangrove covering studies on communities
and zonation. On other islands, around
Kalimantan, the study was on mangrove
floristic, while in Aru Islands (Maluku –
the Moloccas) on preliminary aspects and
in Buru was on mangrove potentials. On
Ambon Island, study was made to observe the
population of Polychaeta.
• Karimun Jawa Islands (110.-110.40 EL;
5.40-5.57 SM)
Marine Park management, including con-
servation of biological resources; marine
fauna and flora, coral reefs, seagrass
and algae, mangrove, coastal forests,
fauna and other marine biota. Researches
are conducting on this islands regarding
aspects of conservation and sustainable
use of the resources.
• Bunaken National Park (124.28-124.49
EL; 0.57-1.50 NM)
Underwater wonders are found here. This
island complex is protected as a national
park to make sure the sustainability of
the island biota. However, some mainland
activities with their polluting impacts have
caused threats to the islands.
The Indonesian National Development
Program 2000-2004 has set policy regarding
the national development on small islands.
To comprehend the development policy, the
following is some of the important ones.
1. provision of services in the isolated and
remote area, especially transportation;
2. integrated coastal zone and marine
development, including mapping of their
potentials;

On-going and being planned

• Nusa Kambangan Island (108.03.30-
108.45.00 EL; 7.40.30-7.46.30 SM)
Research on the flora of the island and on
the coastal zone of this island has been car-
ried out for some decades (Partomihardjo
et al. 2001, 2003; Rumantyo et al. 2003).
The aims of the researches are to lay
foundation for the sustainable management
of the island.
• Pulau Seribu/Thousand Islands (106.25-
106.40 EL; 5.24-5.40 SM)
Marine Park management, including con-
servation of biological resources: marine
fauna and flora; mangrove; coral reefs
(BTNKS 2000)

93
 3. increasing control on the utilization of the
islands’ potentials;
4. capacity building for the local populations
for economic development, by selecting
the right investments.
This policy will have to be followed up
with conceptual studies, identifications and
analyses. A matrix of the policy on the
development of small islands and remote
islands has been formulated, by identifying
the size of the islands and the potentials that
may be utilized on the respective islands.
Over-all outlook
Looking over the activities that have been
carried out on the small islands of Indonesia,
it is obvious that there has no comprehensive
and sustained undertaking. The activities,
except on some islands, are sporadic and
abrupt. There is no clear pattern of the
research activities. It is, therefore, rather dif-
ficult to plan solid program on the protection
of the islands that need the protection badly.
Data on the islands must be available, if the
protection plan will be developed fruitfully.
Many of the small islands are even
neglected, as for example some islands of
the Thousand Islands at the Jakarta Bay. The
References
BENGEN, DG. 2003. Definisi, batasan, dan realitas
pulau kecil (Definition, limitation and reality of small
islands). Laporan Semiloka Penentuan Definisi
dan Pendataan Pulau-pulau Kecil. Ditjen Pesisir
dan Pulau-pulau Kecil, Departemen Kalautan dan
Perikanan (Directorate General of Coastal Zone
and Small Islands of the Department of Marine and
Fisheries). Jakarta, 26 May 2003.
DAMMERMAN, KW. 1948. The fauna of Krakatau.
1883-1933. Kon. Ned. Akad. Wet., Verhandelingen
(12th Section) Vol. 44: 1-594. 1948.
DEPDAGRI. 2003. Penamaan pulau-pulau (Naming of
small islands). Laporan Semiloka Penentuan Definisi
dan Pendataan Pulau-pulau Kecil. Ditjen Pesisir
dan Pulau-pulau Kecil, Departemen Kalautan dan
Perikanan (Directorate General of Coastal Zone
and Small Islands of the Department of Marine and
Fisheries). Jakarta, 26 May 2003.
HASYIM, B., G. WINARSO, S. SULMA. 2003. Pendataan
pulau dan garis pantai menggunakan teknologi
penginderaan jauh (Counting the number of islands
and coastline length by applying remote sensing
technology). Laporan Semiloka Penentuan Definisi
dan Pendataan Pulau-pulau Kecil. Ditjen Pesisir
dan Pulau-pulau Kecil, Departemen Kalautan dan
Perikanan (Directorate General of Coastal Zone
and Small Islands of the Department of Marine and
Fisheries). Jakarta, 26 May 2003.
HONIG, P. & F. VERDOORN (Eds.) 1945. Science
and scientists in the Netherlands Indies. Natuurweten-
schappelijk Tijdschrift voor Nederlandsch Indi. Vol.
102. Special Supplement. New York City.
MATINDAS, RW., A. PONIMAN & SUWAHYUONO.
94 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
Emperor Angelfish Pomacanthus imperatur.
neglect is mainly due to the ignorance of
many of those who are supposed to give care
to the existence of small islands, namely
in exploration, inventory, observation and
research. It is no wonder that the development
of small islands, especially their management
that includes conservation and sustainable
use, is not in happy destination and proper
rate, since scientists in the aspects of island
potentials, biotic and non-biological, of the
islands are very limited in number, and their
understanding on the existence of small
2003. Pendataan pulau-pulau kecil di Indonesia dan
dukungan infrastruktur data spatial nasional (Inventory
of data on small islands in Indonesia and the support of
national spatial data infrastructure). Laporan Semiloka
Penentuan Definisi dan Pendataan Pulau-pulau Kecil.
Ditjen Pesisir dan Pulau-pulau Kecil, Departemen
Kalautan dan Perikanan (Directorate General of
Coastal Zone and Small Islands of the Department of
Marine and Fisheries). Jakarta, 26 May 2003.
MSPE. 1993. Indonesian country study on biological
diversity. Prepared for the United Nations Environ-
ment Programme (UNEP). A study under the Work
Programme for Environment Cooperation between the
Republic of Indonesia and the Kingdom of Norway.
Ministry of State for Population and Environment.
Jakarta, 1993.
PARTOMIHARDJO, T., EN. SAMBAS & S. PRAWI-
ROATMODJO. 2001. Pengelolaan dan pemanfaatan
Pulau Nusakambangan sebagai sisa-sisa hutan
hujan dataran rendah berupa ekosistem kepulauan
di era otonomi daerah (Management and utilization of
Nusakambangan Island as a remnant of lowland
rainforest as island ecosystem in the era of decen-
trralization). Prosiding Seminar dan Lokakarya
Nasional Nusakambangan 2001 (Poceedings of
National Seminar and Workshop on Nusakambangan
2001): 39-48.
PARTOMIHARDJO, T., RUMANTYO & S. PRAWIROAT-
MODJO. 2003. Biological diversity of small islands:
case study on landscape, vegetation and floristic
notes of Nusakambangan Island, Cilacap – Indonesia.
Research Report of the National Institute for Environ-
mental Studies, Japan No. 175, 2003: 106-111.
islands and research program are limited.
Their involvement, role and contribution in the
development of small islands are, actually,
very much needed.
RETRAUBUN, ASW. 2003. Prospek pengembangan
pulau-pulau kecil (Prospects of small island develop-
ment). Laporan Semiloka Penentuan Definisi dan
Pendataan Pulau-pulau Kecil. Ditjen Pesisir dan Pulau-
pulau Kecil, Departemen Kalautan dan Perikanan
(Directorate General of Coastal Zone and Small
Islands of the Department of Marine and Fisheries).
Jakarta, 26 May 2003.
RUMANTYO, T. PARTOMIHARDJO, S.
PRAWIROATMODJO & B. HARTOKO. 2003.
Utilization of Indonesia Biodiversity Information System
(IBIS) for biodivesity data management in Indonesia.
Case study: flora from Nusakambangan Island, Central
Java, Indonesia. Research Report of the National
Institute for Environmental Studies, Japan No. 175,
2003: 100-105.
SUSETYO, TH. 2003. Pengitungan pulau dan garis
pantai (Counting the island number and coastline
length). Laporan Semiloka Penentuan Definisi dan
Pendataan Pulau-pulau Kecil. Ditjen Pesisir dan Pulau-
pulau Kecil, Departemen Kalautan dan Perikanan
(Directorate General of Coastal Zone and Small
Islands of the Department of Marine and Fisheries).
Jakarta, 26 May 2003.
UNCLOS. 1982. United Nations Convention on the Law
Of the Sea. Agreement relating to the implementation
of Part XI of the United Nations Convention on the
Law Of the Sea of December 1982.
UNESCO. 1991. Hydrology and water resources of
small islands: a practical guide. Study and Report
on Hydrology No. 49.
WALLACE, AR. 1890. The Malay Archipelago. Periplus
Edition of 1987.

Located at the eastern entrance of the Gulf of
Aden, the Soqotra archipelago lies between
latitudes 12º06’ N and 12º42’ N and longi-
tudes 52º04’E and 54º32’E. It consists of
the main island Soqotra (3,549 Km2), three
smaller islands, Abd al-Kuri (162 Km2) and
“The Brothers”, Samhah (45 Km2) and Darsa
(10 Km 2) and two rocks, Cal Farun and
Hertha. Abd al-Kuri, the westernmost of the
archipelago, lies at only 100 Km from Cape
Guardafui, in Somalia. Soqotra itself lies at
about 240 Km East off the Horn of Africa
and at some 300 km from Ras Fartaq, on the
Arabian mainland. The whole archipelago
politically belongs to the Republic of Yemen.
Like the Seychelles and Madagascar, they
are continental islands, which formed part of
the southern continent Gondwana until the
late Cretaceous. Since then, as a result of the
long isolation, a high degree of endemism
characterises the flora and fauna of the whole
archipelago, and particularly of the largest
island, Soqotra, a “hot spot” of the world
biological diversity.
Since the Tertiary Period, the archipelago
maintained a warm and arid climate which
is substantiated by the conservation of relict
species and a high endemism rate. The flora
of the island includes about 850 species (Mies
1994,1998, Miller & Bazara´a, 1998), of which
273 (32%) species and 8 infraspecific taxa are
believed to be endemic. There are 10 endemic
genera, being 8 of them monotypic and thus
don’t represent significant examples of insular
evolution, which has probably taken place
within the genera Heliotropium (11 endemic
species), Boswellia (at least 7 endemic species),
and Helichrysum (9 endemic species).
Soqotra is not only a floristic sanctuary
but an entire, and an up-to-now, conserved
ecosystem representing a model for the Horn
of Africa and East African Region at the
whole, as the island had a natural vegetation
cover and a self-sufficient pastoral society.
In recent years, zoological research in the
archipelago has produced a wealth of results
which also underline the global importance
of the faunistic diversity of the island and its
surrounding coastal and marine areas.
BY GIUSEPPE ORLANDO AND BRUNO MIES
Why are desertification and phytodiversity
interconnected? Habitats are fragmented and
populations decrease to island-like areas
of occurrence in regions which are subject
to increased aridification. As evolution proc-
esses, the isolation of taxa and a genetical
drift can increase biodiversity due to a higher
ambient adaptation pressure (Stebbins 1952).
On the other hand, loss of habitats and
Giuseppe Orlando is economist and
geographer with a strong interest in the
evolution and systematics of vegetation of
arid areas, in particular in Eastern Africa
and Southern Arabia. He is specialised in
sustainable development of small islands
and has been working at Insula since 1993.
He has been directly involved in the declaration of several
island Biosphere Reserves and has worked in several projects
dealing with renewable energy, tourism, and telematics on
islands. E-mail: g.orlando@unesco.org
Bruno Mies is botanist and plant ecologist
at University of Essen, working in system-
atics of phanerogams and cryptogams,
vegetation, ecology, desertication and
habitat conservation. He has been exten-
sively working in Southern Yemen and
Socotra within Biota Africa project. E-mail:
bruno.mies@uni-essen.de
95
 isolation of populations from each other may
be followed by a decrease in biodiversity as
the genetic drift causes a loss of potential
genetic diversity in isolated populations. At
least, those populations start with a reduced
potential into the necessary adaptation to
differing environmental conditions (Boyce
1992, Menges 1992, Ellstrand & Elam
1993). Concluding that, an anthropogenic
desertification affects or depletes biodiversity
and the ecosystem. Many factors are intercon-
nected and still not understood; therefore, an
interdisciplinary approach was formulated
under the Yemeni-German BIOTA project
“Biodiversity and Ecology of palaeoafrican
refugial areas in Southern Arabia and on
Soqotra Island”.
This study is the result of a ten years’
period of vegetation observation on Soqotra
Island and its recent trends since 1993 (Mies
& Beyhl 1999, Mies 2001), showing that an
increased and obvious usage of wood and
pasture began intensively in 1998, which
substituted the traditional and sustainable
economies. Traditional use of Soqotran
natural resources may be called “sustain-
able”, as there was no observable decrease in
quantities and densities of vegetation covers
and hence, the potential for complete re-
growth has been preserved. A deforestation
would result in desertification, an irrevers-
ible change of natural environments which
depletes the livelihood of man and his
livestock as well as potential husbandry and
forestry (Beyhl & Mies 1998).
The first scientific expeditions to the
archipelago date at the end of the 19th
century. After that period, not many surveys
and have been made by western scientists.
The most important of them was the Middle
East Command Expedition in the spring
1967. After the withdrawal of the British from
Yemen in 1967 Soqotra remained virtually
closed to foreigners and further scientific
exploration. Research started again in 1982,
when the geographical and biological depart-
ments of the University of Aden sent a
scientific mission to Soqotra.
In 1985 the island botanist Quentin Cronk
visited Soqotra and found that although
there were still large herds of livestock and
extensive wood-cutting, the environment was
largely unspoilt. He said: “Having seen the
degradation overgrazing can cause, I was
staggered to come across a place which was
in all probability substantially the same now
as 1000 years ago.”
The low population density and the subsist-
ence economy of the inhabitants caused little
impact on the environment. Thanks to this,
many areas are still well conserved. The
central granitic peaks, valleys such as Wadi
Ayhaft, and several coastal areas are all
interesting biotopes characterised by a high
floristic and faunistic diversity.
People traditionally practise rotational
grazing. Live trees and shrubs are rarely felled
and camels are periodically banned from the
hyper-arid west of the island, preserving the
island’s fragile equilibrium. A network of
tribal councils strictly enforce these rules.
Most of the traditional population on the
island of Soqotra subsist on livestock and the
collection of natural products. The farmers
gained their income from meat and milk
production by their goat, sheep and cattle
livestock, and collected natural resins of
dragon’s blood, incense, myrrh, and Aloe sap
which actually have lost their economical

People, Development and

Sustainable Island
Management
Soqotra was described by Kossmat (1907)
as one of the most isolated places on earth,
and this was true until a few years ago, as the
island was accessible only by boat or little
aeroplanes, and the strong monsoon winds
cut communication with the mainland for
several months in summer. The opening of
the island to the world, due to a the attractivity
of an offshore drilling survey in 1996 and
to a project to conserve the biodiversity
since 1998 and thanks to the new airport
inaugurated in 1999, marked a crucial turn-
Southeastern plain of Hadibu at the entrance of the Aduno valleyin 1996 (top) and 2002 (bottom). Although
ing point for the fragile ecosystems of the the two photographs have been taken in different times of the year, erosion and reduction of the vegetation
archipelago. coverage are evident. (Photos by Bruno Mies)

96 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS


benefits for them as Yemeni markets absorb
more and more of similar but cheaper products
from India, Southeast Asia or Somalia. At the
same time, increasing aridity observed over
the last 30 years in East Africa and Arabia
seemed to take place - with all consequences
on man and nature - and has further reduced
the benefits of natural resources, grazing lands
and productive forest especially.
Natural population growth at more than
3% per year and a strong immigration from
the mainland leave their own imprint on
land use changes. Traditional grazing and
tree-based economy is forced to exploit
fragile land for food production, to shorten
traditional non-use or fallow periods, and to
overgraze marginal rangelands and forests.
Subsequent decline in natural productivity,
short-term loss of top soil, wind and water
erosion, and desertification have reached
alarming proportions. The gap widens
between growing demand for food and forage
and declining regional carrying capacity.
At the same time, rural and urban population
growth and the associated demand for wood as
fuel for domestic consumption have induced
uncontrolled deforestation and widespread
destruction of the semiarid forest biome, the
Croton socotranus bushland and mixed forests
with Commiphora and Boswellia trees. In the
absence of available oil and gas resources
affordable to the local income - fuelwood
supplies for the main villages and cities are
becoming critically constrained. Woodlands
in the hinterland are cleared at rapidly grow-
ing distances from the city. Current prices
for fuelwood are soaring, making this vital
resource more and more unaffordable espe-
cially for the poor, the majority of the popula-
tion. As the situation on mainland Yemen is
generally as bad as such, the ecosystems of
the island of Soqotra were depleted since 1996
increasingly and a drastic change is obvious
towards desertification.
An economic and social dimension is
then added to an already bleak ecological
imbalance as a result of deforestation - a
process leading to:
• rapid soil loss,
• irreversible exposure of stone plaster or
impenetrable soil crusts,
• increasing surface runoff on the plateaux,
• gullying and loss of usable land on the
glacis,
• sedimentation and flooding on the bot-
tomlands,
• regional groundwater depression
to mention just a few responses of the
ecosystem.
Since 1994, the examinations of vegetation
on the island done before and in the continuing
field studies show large and expanding circles
of barren land around the centres of population.
Such man-made ‘desert islands’ can neither be
reclaimed in the time-span of a human life nor
in terms of available financial resources.
Bushland and forests of remote plains,
inland valleys and highlands were relatively
intact and conserved from excessive use
(fuel wood, house-building) because motor
vehicles could not reach them. Before, wood
had been cut down to that extent which
covered the daily own needs for cooking and
Croton socotranus collected for firewood near Qalansyia.
building. Improving the infrastructure led to
better tracks and situation has changed with
more traffic. The inhabitants of the inner
areas are now able to cut more wood and to
earn more income from the villages because
of transportation facilities by four wheel
drive and all terrain vehicles.
The following figures may simply illustrate
the current and appearing fuelwood crisis of
Soqotra (Mies 2001): population of the main
village of Hadibu in 1989 was less than 1000
heads; forests within walking distance from
the village outskirts could provide sufficient
fuelwood for domestic consumption. The total
area of the Hadibu plain contributes 2% (89.4
km²) to the surface of the island. The 1999
population of Hadibu was estimated four-fold
at 4000 heads: forests at 5 to 12 km distance
were supplying appr. 1200 tons of fuelwood
each year - a stack of wood over 5.7 km long
and 1 m high. The whole population of the
island consists of 80.000 people at present
who should use a stack of a length of 114 km,
even longer than the island itself from East to
West. At current rates of wood consumption
(300 kg/head/annum) and population increase
by natural population growth and a drastic
migration, the remaining forests of Soqotra
and their productive environments will have
disappeared by twenty years.
A culturally acceptable national intervention
plan must resolve the fuelwood crisis and save
and keep productive the remaining forests -
one of the only relict forests spots Yemen has.
Forests are not independent and isolated land
cover units and must be viewed and protected
as the stabilising component within the context
of traditionally complex land use systems.
97
 Common evaluation is that “poor man’s
energy crisis” gained and kept its momentum
because basic and applied research have
ignored the interrelated ecological, economic
and socio-cultural realities - the latter of which
meaning “traditional” - of tree-based rural
and pastoral economies. Broad based research
is needed to interpret the role of forests in
the hinterlands of Yemen and Soqotra as
a component of both an urban and a rural
ecological and economic system.
Although the island has recently been
declared a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve, the
international research community has barely
begun to be aware of the issue of land surface
and social change involved: Locally on the
island, the mentioned project has focussed
on protecting park areas and conserving key
species. Regionally
and on the con-
tinent-wide scale,
major funding is
trying to model
shrinking zonal for-
ests or grasslands
and other parame-
ters of desertifica-
tion via remote satellite sensing, mainly in
relation to global change and meteorologi-
cal drought, to inappropriate colonial and
postcolonial land use and related feedback
mechanisms for global models.
Only exceptional studies have dealt with
field surveys in the arid Subtropics in order
to evaluate the ecologically balanced use of
woodlands in pre-colonial times and with the
theoretical basis to inventory and monitor
renewable resources. Those rare ones have
really assessed possibilities to increase
the human-ecological carrying capacity of
semiarid lands by means of agroforestry or
nature protection (AGNEW & WARREN 1996,
HALWAGY & al. 1995). The actual state of
vegetation on Soqotra still offers a unique
chance to have these original pre-colonial
data available yet. Studies of forests and
their ecology are a possible solution to the
environmental and energy difficulties facing
semiarid Africa-Arabia. Social perception
of and response to deforestation within the
broader context of drought and desertification
are poorly understood – and at least on
Soqotra and at the Horn of Africa.
98 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
To our (foreign) concern, a continu-
ation of BIOTA-alike projects in
Yemen appears would be worthwhile
to:
1) Survey and assess spatial and
temporal change of forest resources,
patterns of fuelwood production,
marketing and consumption,
2) Analyse bio-physical land surface
changes as a result of deforestation
in declared observation spots,
3) Determine the response of the tree- and
livestock-based rural system to the general
environmental degradation following large-
scale deforestation, and
4) Deliver all those data harvested and
appropriately translated to the local and
traditional decision makers.
References
AGNEW, C. & WARREN, A. (1996): A framework for tackling
drought and land degradation. - J. Arid Environm.,
33, 309-320.
BOYCE, M.S. (1992): Population viability analysis. - Ann.
Rev. Ecol. Syst., 23, 481-506.
ELLSTRAND, N.C. & ELAM, D.R. (1993): Population genetic
consequences of small population size: implications
from plant conservation. - Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst.,
24, 217-243.
H ALWAGY , R., T AHA , F.K. & O MAR , S.A. (1995, eds):
Advances in range management in arid lands. - Kegan
Paul International, London.
MENGES, E.S. (1992): Stochastic modeling of extinction
in plant populations. – In: Conservation biology:
the theory and practice of nature conservation,
preservation and management, (FIEDLER, P.L. & JAIN,
S.K., eds), 253-276, New York.
M IES , B.A. (1994): Checkliste der Gefässpflanzen,
Moose und Flechten und botanische Bibliographie
der Insel Sokotra und des Sokotrinischen Archipels
(Jemen, Indischer Ozean). - Senckenbergiana Biol.,
74, 213-258.
MIES, B.A. (1998): The phytogeography of Soqotra.
Evidence for disjunctive taxa, especially with Macaro-
nesia. – Proc. First Int. Symp. Soqotra Island: Present
and Future, Aden March 1996, Vol. 1 (DUMONT, H., ed.),
83-105, United Nations Publ., New York.
MIES, B.A. (2001):Flora und Vegetationsökologie der Insel
Soqotra. - Essener Ökol. Schriften, 15, 1-269.
MIES, B.A. & BEYHL, F.E. (1999): A scenario of deforesta-
tion and desertification in the valley of Qalansiyah
(Island of Soqotra, Yemen, Indian Ocean). – Acta Biol.
Benrod., 10, 49-55.
MILLER, A.G. & BAZARA’A, M. (1998): The conservation
status of the flora of the Soqotran archipelago. – Proc.
First Int. Symp. Soqotra Island: Present and Future,
Aden March 1996, Vol. 1 (DUMONT, H., ed.), 15-34,
United Nations Publ., New York.
ORLANDO, G. & SANTOS, A. (2001). Socotra: Discovering
biodiversity on the island that time forgot. - Insula,
International Journal of Island Affairs, Year 10, n.2,
pp. 35-40.
STEBBINS, G.L. (1952): Aridity as a stimulus to plant
evolution. - Am. Natur., 86, 33-44.
WRANIK, W. (1996). Faunistic Notes on Soqotra Island.
In Dumont, H.J.(Editor), Proceedings of the First
International Symposium on Soqotra Island: Present
and Future. 1:135-198. New York: United Nations
Publications.
All photographs by Giuseppe Orlando unless otherwise
indicated.

The special circumstances of Small Island
Developing States (SIDS) and island ecosys-
tems in general, have been much discussed
in the forums of international environmental
negotiation, such as the Convention on
Biological Diversity (CBD), and through
the Barbados Declaration and its ensuing
processes. The significance of SIDS as
centres of endemism, their: vulnerability
to alien invasive species, disproportionate
per capita infrastructure and skilled human
resource requirements,
limited terrestrial resources and often neces-
sarily skewed balances of trade etc… have
all been discussed at length and made subject
of much study and publication.
These points are, of course, all relevant if
not vital factors when the international com-
munity considers ways and means of enabling
SIDS’ pursuit of sustainable development;
but this is only half the story. SIDS and
island ecosystems have much to offer the
international pursuit of sustainable develop-
ment; and the conservation and sustainable
use of biodiversity, respectively.
SIDS are microcosms of their continental
counterparts where strategies, policies
and management regimes for sustainable
development can be applied, tested and
refined; where the components of cause and
effect are more readily assessed, outcomes
more rapidly seen and results more specifi-
cally tangible. Much the same can be said
of island ecosystems which, with their high
endemism, offer great potential to advance
the cause of biodiversity management and
assist the CBD in meeting its global 2010
targets. Islands are self-contained ecosystems
with well defined geographic limits that
encapsulate fundamental ecological proc-
esses and interactions. These ecosystems
because of their scale offer scope for holistic
management and rehabilitation.
In both scenarios, SIDS and island eco-
systems, stratagems can be tested and
the findings extrapolated to continental
scenarios. Islands are natural laboratories for
science and research; this is as true today, for
the elaboration of regimes for environmental
management and the conservation and
sustainable use of biodiversity, as it was in
the nineteenth century for the elucidation
of evolutionary theory. It is to be hoped
that this potential is recognised through
for example, the timely and substantive
by JOHN NEVILL
development of the CBD programme on
Island Biodiversity. The focusing of efforts
and resources here can provide rapid and
disproportionate yields in terms of progress
towards achieving the 2010 biodiversity
goals and the development of management
approaches for extrapolation globally.
John Nevill was formerly the Director of
Conservation in the Seychelles’ Ministry
of Environment and Focal Point for the
Convention on Biological Diversity for
six years. John has been active in the
workings of the Convention on Biological
Diversity notably COPs, SBSTTA and the
negotiations for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety since 1997
and continues to attend certain meetings as a member of the
Seychelles delegation.
John works today as Environmental Consultant and as Director
of the Marine Conservation society, Seychelles - a Non-
Governmental Organisation registered in Seychelles.
99

The Seychelles White-eye (Photo by Gerard Rocamora)
The conservation and sustainable use of
biological diversity is a fundamental precursor
to the realisation of sustainable development.
In many countries this means harmonising the
development and activities of major industries
with the needs and tolerances of natural
systems. In Seychelles, as is the case for most
SIDS, tourism is a primary industry and a
major employer. So the challenge in Seychelles
is to harmonise the tourism industry, its
development and activities, with the needs of
environmental management.
Seychelles is recognised as a centre of
biodiversity1 with more than 1200 endemic
1
Seychelles has been classified as part of the Indian Ocean islands biodiversity Hotspot by Conservation International and as an Endemic Bird Area (EBA) by
BirdLife International.
100 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
species identified to date on a tiny landmass of
some 445 square kilometres divided between
115 islands. The key centre of this biodiversity
is the 39 granite islands that were separated
from continental masses more than 70 million
years ago. The granite Seychelles today are
some 1000 miles from the nearest continental
landmass. In Seychelles the primary threat to
biodiversity is without doubt that posed by
Invasive Alien Species (IAS). One thousand
miles and 70 million years clearly meets the
criteria of the “geographically and evolutionar-
ily isolated ecosystems” that are a priority
under the CBD’s IAS programme.
So the logical step is to find a means by
which to channel resources from tourism to
address this issue – eco-tourism development
offers such a bridging mechanism.
Seychelles has two island reserves, of
longstanding, that derive their revenue from
ecotourism and as such the concept is well
understood and recognised in-country.
Seychelles is afflicted by many invasive
species such as cinnamon and albizia, some
fifty species of creeper, birds such as the
Indian Mynah and the South African Barn
Owl. Escaped livestock and fowl have caused
major problems on certain islands: goats on
Aldabra have severely denuded the vegetation
depriving giant tortoises of food and shade;
feral pigs were identified in 1996 as digging
up virtually every turtle egg clutch laid
on the island of Menai, Cosmoledo atoll
(Mortimer.1998). Chickens and pigs have
been removed from islands for fear that
they would compete with the endangered
Seychelles Magpie-robins for food. Cats on
Aldabra have been found to favour feeding
on marine turtle hatchlings (Mortimer. 1998)
and this habit is likely prevalent on other
turtle rookeries where they occur. Most
damaging to date, however, are rats. The intel-
ligence, broad feeding niche, fecundity and
general adaptability of the Rattus sp. make
them a most effective invader. Seychelles
has been colonised by two species Rattus
norvegicus and R. rattus, their impact upon
flora and invertebrate fauna is likely extensive
but is poorly understood. With regard to
birds, however, the impact of rats is well
known. Within the granite Seychelles there
are six endemic species and one endemic sub-
species of terrestrial bird that are endangered,
of these only one is believed to be able to
co-exist with R. rattus.
In 1995 Bird Island a flat coralline island
successfully undertook a rat and rabbit
eradication and whilst a much simpler
topography and ecosystem than the granite
islands showed that current techniques were
effective in the tropical scenario.
In 2000, following 2 years of preparatory
work the Government of Seychelles led
and coordinated a three island rat and cat
eradication campaign. Islands were selected
as per the potential they offered for the
re-introduction of bird species. Two of the
islands were private and funded their own
operations with the primary goal being to
introduce endangered bird species which
would create additional attractions for their
existing tourism (private island hotel resort)
operations.
Government facilitated this activity by:
identifying and importing the expertise,
undertaking the preliminary bait testing and
rat and cat surveys, coordinating the project
implementation; waiving tax requirements
on the import of baits and equipment and
providing field staff to assist in implementa-
tion. The main support however came from
the economies of scale that resulted from
undertaking the activities on three islands
within the same time period. Despite this
operations were still costly because the
mountainous terrain and/or size of the islands
required the use of helicopters, with satellite
navigation systems, to ensure a complete
bait distribution. Bait deployments were
undertaken twice at eleven day intervals
to ensure that juvenile rats in nests during
the first application would be caught in the
second. On one island due to poor weather
conditions a third application was utilised
and this has subsequently become the recom-
mended regime.
Despite all these difficulties maintaining
an island rat-free is more demanding still.
Two of the three islands in question were
subsequently re-infested, it is believed, when
rat abatement protocols were not correctly
followed. The difficulties faced vary with
the degree of development and the amount
and nature of traffic going to and from an
island. It is however, the island with the most
logistical requirements of the three, Fregate,
which has maintained its rat-free status
since 2000. Bird Island has maintained its
rat-free status since eradication in 1995 whilst
running a thriving hotel-resort operation.
In addition 3 other islands in the central
Seychelles have all maintained there rat-free
status despite busy tourism activities in terms
of visitation and one despite undergoing
two major construction phases in the 1990s.
This demonstrates that maintaining islands
rat-free is feasible, even with considerable
commercial and logistical activities.
What is particularly interesting is that the
private sector has embraced the application of
this technology in Seychelles despite the high
profile failure of two islands. Four islands
have very recently undertaken rat-eradication
campaigns. Two are the granite islands of
North and Anonyme, Denis which failed
in 2000 has tried again and the fourth is
the distant coral island of D’Arros. The
willingness of the private sector to take on
such initiatives reflects the realisation that
eco-tourism is the fastest growing niche
market in the tourism industry; and in the
Seychelles context where the trend is increas-
ingly to target the top-end tourist market
exclusive nature reserve island resorts are
very much en vogue.
A brief survey of island managements that
have undertaken rat eradications showed that
eco-tourism was the (or one of the) primary
motivation(s) behind the activity along with
philanthropy and direct commercial issues
e.g. “exclusive 5 star tourism and rats don’t
mix.”
Despite some capacity for eradication now
being localised, costs are still high and are
determined by numerous factors: island size,
topography and predominant vegetation
type; occurrence of endangered non-target
species and methodology used (ground-
or air-dispersal of bait). Costs per island
have varied accordingly from US$10,000
– 250,000. In addition recurrent costs are
an open-ended commitment - capital still
being required to maintain bait stations and
The Seychelles Magpie-robin (Photo by David Duthie)
infrastructure such as rat fences, rat-proof
rooms etc…
This “privatisation” of biodiversity man-
agement under Government supervision,
addressing endangered biodiversity, is a
great step forward in Seychelles’ efforts to
conserve its natural heritage and meet its
international commitments. Not to mention
the alleviation of the financial burden on
Government. In Seychelles rat eradications
have already greatly enhanced the conserva-
tion status of three endangered bird species
-the Seychelles Magpie-robin, the Seychelles
White-eye (Rocamora. 2003) and the Sey-
chelles Fody – and various endemic species
of invertebrate.
Furthermore should the recent eradications
prove successful (this takes at least one-year
to determine) two more endangered species
will likely benefit – the Seychelles Black
Paradise Flycatcher and the Seychelles
Warbler – and it is possible that by the turn of
the decade some species could be removed
from the endangered listings! Eco-tourism is
the perfect mechanism in this regard because
it is in the vested interest of the operator
to ensure the conservation and sustainable
use of the biodiversity resources that are the
source of its income.
Small islands with tourist operations offer
great potential for biodiversity conservation
because they can be re-habilitated and the
tourism operation provides the funds and
capacity to enable this. However for such
efforts to continue it is vital that their
101
 contribution be recognised and this recogni-
tion must necessarily be structured in terms of
incentives and assistance to enable agencies
to fulfil this role.
A survey of the managements of the islands
in question identified various mechanisms that
could be put in place to foster such activities.
The primary responses were as follows:
• Financial incentives, for example exemp-
tions from certain tourism taxes for alien-
predator-free islands that participate in
national conservation schemes.
• Tax rebates on biodiversity rehabilitation
investments such as rat eradications.
• The development of insurance regimes
to protect islands against the costs of
dealing with non-negligent or 3rd party
alien species introductions.
• Provision of a protected status which caters
for tourism activities (current protected
status classifications are somewhat preclu-
sive of this) and allows for greater control
over access to alien-predator-free islands,
thereby lowering the risk of inadvertent
reintroductions.
102 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
The cost of managing the complex biodi-
versity of often isolated tropical islands is
generally beyond the means of Governments
and national institutions; it requires the har-
nessing of the infrastructure and resources of
tourism. Indeed tourism in many cases offers
the only hope of imbuing non-consumptive
value to biodiversity such that it can be man-
aged in a sustainable manner. It is therefore
References:
CURRIE, D. HILL, M. MILLET, J. BRISTOL, R. NEVILL,
J. & SHAH, N. J. 2003. Conservation Options for the
Seychelles Black Paradise Flycatcher (Terpsiphone
Corvina). In: Ecological Requirements of the Seychelles
Black Paradise Flycatcher Consequences for Conserva-
tion and Management. Currie, D. Editor. Nature
Seychelles Monograph Series I.
MORTIMER. J.A. 1998. Turtle and Tortoise Conservation.
Government of Seychelles , Final report.
NEVILL. J.E.G. 2000. Ecotourism as a Source of Funding
to Control Invasive Species. In GISP, A Toolkit of
Best Prevention and Management Practices for Alien
Invasive Species.
NEVILL. J.E.G. 2001. Integrating Biodiversity into the Tour-
ism Sector: a case study on the Republic of Seychelles.
A contribution to UNDP/UNEP/GEF Biodiversity Planning
Support Programme thematic study on “The Integration
imperative that mechanisms and incentives
to enable this are developed and refined
internationally through the CBD for adapta-
tion to national scenarios (e.g. Incentive
measures programme, Sustainable tourism
programme and Island Biodiversity Pro-
gramme) to the benefit of national and
international undertakings and the workings
of the Convention as a whole.
of Biodiversity into the Tourism Sector.
PARR, S.J., HILL, M.J., NEVILL, J.E.G., MERTON, D.V.,
SHAH, N.J. 2001. Eradication of Introduced Mammals
in Seychelles in 2000. Secretariat of the Convention on
Biological Diversity (2001). Assessment and management
of salien species that threaten ecosystems, habitats and
species. Abstracts of keynote addresses and posters
presented at the sixth meeting of the Subsidiary Body
on Scientific, technical and Technological Advice, held in
Montreal, Canada, from 12 to 16 March 2001. Montreal
SCBD, 146p. (CBD Technical Paper no.1).
ROCAMORA, G., HENRIETTE, E., CONSTANCE, P.
2003. Successful conservation introduction of the
Seychelles white-eye on Fregate Island, Seychelles.
Reintroduction News. Newsletter of the Re-introduction
Specialist Group of IUCN’s Species Survival
Commission (SSC). No. 22, p. 46.
Leonor Castiñeiras1, Tomás Shagarodsky1, Zoila Fundora1, Victor Fuentes1, Odalys Barrios1, Victoria Moreno1, Lianne Fernández1, Raúl
Cristóbal1, Vicente González2, Maritza García3, Fidel Hernández3, Celerina Giraudy4, Pedro Sánchez1, Rosa Orellana1 and Aracely Valiente5
The biodiversity maintenance by farmers in
home gardens is a type of in situ conserva-
tion of plant genetic resources, which has
the advantages of preserving the evolution
processes and adaptation of crops in their
microenvironments, and to conserve the
diversity at all levels (ecosystem, species and
genes) (Jarvis 2000; Eyzaguirre & Linares
2001). In this context some researches were
conducted to promote the use and develop
of the rural home gardens for the in situ
conservation of the agricultural biodiversity
in Cuba, demonstrating the value of them
in the maintenance of the diversity through
their use.
The research work was performed with
the participation of 39 home gardens from
western, central and eastern regions of Cuba.
The selected families live in the nucleus or in
the periphery of the protected areas: Reserves
of the Biospheres “Sierra del Rosario” (western
region) and “Cuchillas del Toa” (eastern
region). The members of the communities of
these areas have received an environmental
education adressed to the conservation of the
wild flora and fauna of the locations. In the
case of the central region the communities of
the selected area have a strong influence of the
Botanical Garden of Cienfuegos, the oldest in
the country, been founded in 1901, and meets
both, the conservation and training functions in
the region. Interviews were carried out mainly
with the owners for gathering information
concerning to genetic resources, and social,
cultural and economical aspects related to
them.
The possibilities of integration of the
genetic resources in situ conservation of
cultivated plants, with that of the wild flora
and fauna of each region, and educational
national programs, was one of the aspects
that was considered during the development
of the work.
Inventory of the
agrobiodiversity and their use
The inventory revealed the existence of
508 species that belong to 352 genus and
108 families. Around 80% of the diversity
corresponds to cultivated species and the rest
to wild species used by the families.
The study of the diversity showed the
presence of seven cultivated species in the
home gardens that had not been reported
in the last inventory of cultivated plants
carried out in Cuba (Esquivel et al. 1992). An
outstanding detail was the presence of three
endemic species: Protium cubense, Garcinia
aristata and Piper aduncum subsp. ossanum,
maintained and used as condiments in some
home gardens from the eastern region.
Only 25% of the total diversity registered is
common (coincidence of species) among the
three studied regions, being this, an indicator
of their differences. There was less number of
species in the eastern region, in comparison
with the rest of the study areas; however, it
had more infraespecific variability.
The isolation and the difficult access of
the area located in the eastern region, and
also some social and cultural features (strong
Haitian influence), differentiate the eastern
region of the rest of the communities of
the Island, and this, have an implication on
the agricultural management of the species.
Roots and tubers are of wider acceptance
that in the rest of the regions and a bigger
variability has been observed in those species;
an example is yam (Dioscorea spp.), whose
cultivation is characteristic of that region. On
the other hand, the farmers from this region
also cultivate and consume more species
of grains; so there, the variability is very
high (Phaseolus vulgaris, Phaseolus lunatus,
Cajanus cajan, Zea mays and Vigna umbel-
lata are the most frequent), with regard to
the other two study regions.
The results confirmed that the registered
cultivated diversity in the studied home
gardens, is distributed among the three studied
regions, constituing this, the starting point to
analyze these areas like possible Minimum
Effective Units of In Situ Conservation of
Plat Genetic Resources in Cuba.
The ornamental species occupy an impor-
tant place in the home gardens orchard (197
registered species), following by medicinal
plant (114), woods for construction and
repairing the houses (54), fruits (38), condi-
ments (25), other uses like insecticides,
coal, etc. (20), living fences (12), wood for
construction of work instruments (11), roots
and tubers (10), beverages (10), grains (9)
and food animal (7). Most of them are used
for the family consumption.
Cuban farmers manage the diversity
through their use, and select it according
to the necessities of the family, especially
at the species level and within the species
(Castiñeiras et al.. 2000; 2001), but the
number of individuals for species/ variety/
1
Instituto de Investigaciones Fundamentales en Agri-
cultura Tropical “Alejandro de Humboldt”; MINAGRI.
Calle 1 y 2, Santiago de las Vegas, Municipio Boyeros,
CP 17200, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba. E-mail:
lcastineiras@inifat.esihabana.cu.
2
Instituto de Ecología y Sistemática, CITMA. Ciudad
de la Habana, Cuba.
3
Estación Ecológica Sierra del Rosario, CITMA. Pinar
del Río, Cuba.
4
Unidad de Servicios Ambiéntales de Guantánamo,
CITMA. Guantánamo, Cuba.
5
Jardín Botánico de Cienfuegos, CITMA. Cienfuegos,
Cuba.
103
 population is small; however, for crops that
report high economic benefit to the families
in the rural areas, the agroecosystem and
the landscape play an important role in the
selection of the species, the production is
performed in a bigger area, with a reduced
number of species/ varieties, as well as,
a high number of individuals per variety.
In this case biotic and abiotic factors of
the ecosystem have influences, because the
selection approaches go directed to the yield
and the adaptation of the species in question,
activities that are carried out with a minimum
ecological risk, because of the minimum use
of chemical products.
Exchange of experiences
with farmers
Workshops with farmers and scientists were
organized in each region, with exhibitions of
the biodiversity managed in the home gardens
by the farmers involved. These meetings had a
positive impact in the communities, since they
allowed the exchange of experiences concern-
ing to “seed” conservation and exchange from
different varieties and species among the
farmers, as well as, the popularization of the
value of conserving agrobiodiversity in home
gardens, especially to the local, political and
educational authorities in each region, who
were invited to the workshops.
General considerations
about Cuban home gardens
Cuban home gardens are characterized to be
a dynamic agricultural ecosystem, where a
high diversity of useful species is appreciated.
The ornamental garden is almost located in
the front part and/or one of the sides of the
household, where some other species are
located too, like fruit trees, medicinal and
condiment species. Other groups of species
used for family feeding are distributed little
farther from the house, in a continuous
rotation system, dependente of the size of
the property, where men and women, both,
participate in the agricultural activities.
The home garden is a dynamic unit,
because of its internal mobility in space and
time, also for the variability of labours, which
influence in the number and variability of the
species. Men play a predominant role in the
management of the home garden, although
104 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
women are in charge of some groups of
cultivations, like ornamental and medicinal
plants, as well as the care of a few domestic
animals, as chickens.
Fruits group is important in the contribution
of vitamins and minerals for the families, as
a substitute of vegetables, since the last one
requires of high water consumption, and in the
rural areas this resource is scarce, because
the season for vegetable cultivation, coincides
with the dry season. Casava (Manihot escu-
lenta), bananas (Musa spp.), taro (Colocasia
esculenta), cocoyam (Xanthosoma sp.), beans
(Phaseolus spp.) and corn (Zea mays), among
others, manifest the attachment to a certain
food culture (their origin goes back to some
aboriginal cultures from Meso and South
America), where the roots, tubers and grains
are important in the family diet. For this reason,
they occupy bigger spaces inside the farmer
property, due to the need of more volumes for
feeding the family and for domestic animals.
The presence of other species is influenced
by historical factors; such it is the case of the
coffee plantations (Pérez de la Riva, 1944) that
also has importance in the State economy, and
is located in Cuban mountain areas.
As the number of individuals for cultivated
species and/or variety is small within home
gardens (sometimes there is only a single
plant), it can constitute a threat for the diver-
sity conservation. It becomes indispensable
to draw national strategies to minimize such
risks as possible.
The best environmental health, in terms of
soil fertility and species management inside
the home garden systems, is appreciated
in the family gardens located within the
protected areas and its surroundings. In those
cases, the preparation of soils and weed
control is carried out with animal traction or
manually; most of the species are cultivated
without irrigation, with organic fertilization
or without fertilization.
In terms of socio-cultural approaches, in
former times migratory flows of the families
took place from the fields toward the cities.
With the increment of literacy, farmers’
children did not carry out studies related
with agricultural activities, and they left
the lands, going to other places, looking for
better economic benefits. However, it has
been observed some kind of reversion of the
process in the last years, favoured by new
agicultural policies of delivering lands and
the encouragement that represents a better
price for the agricultural products in the
market. The own family self-consumption that
is achieved with the production of the home
gardens, favours the farmer's permanency in
their properties.
Effective Minimum Units
of In Situ Conservation
Because of the similarities and differences of
the agricultural biodiversity found in the three
areas, the aspects related with the management
of the crops and the motivation of the farm-
ers to continue conserving their traditional
varieties with the new participative point of
view, the three regions studied were propose
as Effectives Minimum Units of In Situ
Conservation of Plant Genetic Resources
in Cuba, with the objective to concentrate
and support the in situ conservation in the
near future, relating them to other national
conservation strategies as Protected Areas
and Botanical Gardens networks. The training
about management and improvement of seeds
and soil fertility with the use of different
organic methods in home gardens should also
continue. The popularization concerning to the
importance of the in situ conservation of the
agricultural biodiversity in the home gardens
and the benefits that this represent from the
economic and social points of view should be
extended to all population's sectors.
Conclusions
Home gardens of the rural areas in Cuban
western, central and eastern regions offer
a material and spiritual guarantee to the
families and they are a managed reservoir of
diversity, maintained and conserved by the
rural communities through their use. These
communities have played a decisive role in
the conservation over the time, allowing this
diversity has arrived to our times.
Acknowledges
The authors wants to express its gratefulness to the rural
communities of the studied regions for its collaboration in the
development of the work; to the International Plant Genetic
Resources Institute; the German Agency for Technical Cooperation
and CROCEVIA (Non Governmental Organization) from Italy,
for the technical and nancial support for the researchs, as well
as, to the Cuban local experts for helping to localize the home
gardens in the regions.
References
CASTIÑEIRAS L.; Z. FUNDORA, V. FUENTES, O. BAR-
RIOS, V. MORENO, P. SÁNCHEZ, A.V. GONZÁLEZ,
M. GARCÍA, A. MARTÍNEZ FUENTES & A. MAR-
TÍNEZ. 2000. La conservación in situ de la variabilidad
de plantas de cultivo en dos localidades de Cuba. Rev.
Jardín Botánico Nacional, vol. 21, n. 1, p. 25-45.
CASTIÑEIRAS L.; Z. FUNDORA, S. PICO & E. SALINAS.
2001. Monitoring crop diversity in home gardens
as a component in the national strategy of in situ
Pedro M. Alcolado2, Daniela Mercedes Arellano3, Elisa Eva Garcia4 and group of authors
The Cuban experience during the implemen-
tation of its Sustainable Development Model
has been based in the ecosystem approach.
This approach has been the best approach
to promote the synergism among all the
dimensions of the sustainable development.
The sustainable development model adopted
by Cuba promotes the environmental planning
taking into account the natural resource
protection in harmony with the development
of the productive forces, and it is aimed
to achieve the sustainability at prioritized
ecosystems, considering the environmental
problems existing in them – included the social
component – and their solutions.
Based in this conceptual approach, a
number of National Programs (of Bays,
Watershed, Reforestation, Mountains, Deser-
tification and Droughts, Wetlands), have been
identified, among them, those dealing with
the fragile ecosystems (small and very small
islands of the Cuban Archipelago).
According to the recognized need of
protecting biodiversity and establishing a
sustainable development of tourism, fishing
and other economic activities, the project
“Protecting biodiversity and Establishing
a Sustainable in the Sabana-Camagüey
Ecosystem” was carried out. This Project
was signed on December 1993 and financed
by the Global Environment Facility, the
Cuban Government (Ministry of Science
Technology and Environment, Ministry for
Foreign Investment and Collaboration) and
Environment Canada. The potential impact
conservation of plant genetic resources in Cuba,
a pilot study. IPGRI/FAO Plant Genetic Resources
Newsletter n. 123, p. 9-18.
ESQUIVEL M.; H. KÜPFFER & H. HAMMER.
INVENTORY OF THE CULTIVATED PLANTS. 1992.
In Hammer K., M. Esquivel, H. Knüpffer. “...y tienen
faxoes y fabas muy diversos de los nuestros...”
Origin, Evolution and Diversity of Cuban Plant Genetic
Resources. Vol. 3, IPK Gatersleben, p. 213-454.
EYZAGUIRRE, P. y O. LINARES. 2001. Una nueva
Caguanes, Piedra Key, Sabana Camagüey Archipelago, CUBA
of biological events in the Sabana-Camagüey
Ecosystem (SCE), in northern Cuba, on the
rest of the hemisphere, is part of the reason
for GEF to support a UNDP project to
consolidate biodiversity protection in that
ecosystem
The Sabana-Camagüey
ecosystem, Cuba.
The Sabana-Camagüey Ecosystem (SCE)
occupies a strip of approximately 465 km
along the central north zone of Cuba. It
includes the northern watersheds of five
provinces of the country, as well as the
archipelago, the adjacent marine shelf and
the oceanic Exclusive Economic Zone (Fig.
aproximación al estudio y fomento de los huertos
familiares. Cuadernos Pueblos y Plantas, n. 7, p.
30-32.
JARVIS D.; L. MYER, H. KLEMICK, L. GUARINO, M.
SMALE, A.D.H. BROWN, M. SADIKI, B. STHAPIT & T.
HODGKIN. 2000. A training Guide for In Situ Conservation
On-farm. Version 1. IPGRI, Rome, p. 134-141.
Pérez de la Riva, F. 1944. El café, historia de un cultivo
y exportación en Cuba. In: Jesús Montero (Ed.),
La Habana.
2). Its archipelago constitutes the largest
system of keys in the Wider Caribbean and
represents 60% of all the Cuban keys in
number (2,515 keys). Mangrove swamps are
profusely distributed in the keys and along
the mainland coast. The keys, beaches and
coral reefs of the region are well known for
their quality and beauty. The larger keys
1
CUB/92/G31 and CUB/98/G32 UNDP/GEF projects.
2
Instituto de Oceanología, CITMA (Ministry of Science,
Technology and Environment), Scientific Adviser of the
UNDP Project Sabana-Camagüey (marine issues)
3
Agencia de Medio Ambiente, CITMA, Director of the
UNDP Project
4
Instituto de Ecología y Sistemática, CITMA, Scientific
Adviser of the UNDP Project Sabana-Camagüey
(terrestrial issues)
105
 Figure 2. Schematic limits of the Sabana - Camagüey Ecosystem encompassing:
watersheds, marine shelf, the archipelago and the Exclusive Economic Zone.
are populated with diverse plant formations.
All this variety of habitat encloses a great
diversity of marine and terrestrial flora and
fauna, and gives shelter to a high level of
terrestrial endemism, which places this zone
among the richest in biodiversity in Cuba
and the Wider Caribbean.
More than 708 species of terrestrial flora
have been found in the area. Of these, 126
are endemic. Additionally, 958 species of
terrestrial fauna, including 549 insects and
209 species of birds, have been noted. This
part of Cuba provides winter habitat for
visiting birds.
Brief review of the resources,
use and threats at the
Sabana-C amagüey ecosystem
The most generalized and traditional use of
the marine shelf of the Sabana-Camagüey
Archipelago is fishing, though activities of oil
exploration and extraction are accomplished
since few years ago in the most western
extreme.
The influence of the improper management
of the watershed, over fishing and harmful
fishing practices partially affected the fisher-
ies of the Sabana-Camagüey Archipelago and
its marine biodiversity. For different reasons,
the mortality of important areas of mangrove
swamps has occurred in some places. Coral
reefs have been affected by the herbivore sea
urchin (Diadema antillarum) mortality and
several kinds of coral diseases, as well as
by macroalgal proliferation due both to
low herbivore population and land based
nutrification.
Before the Project the tourism development
plans presented a development stereotype
that would be in conflict with important
biological resources, and they were not fully
106 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
in accordance with the evolution of the tour-
ism market of the Caribbean. Furthermore, it
was and still being necessary to increase the
efficiency of the incorporation of scientific
information and environmental concerns to
the development planning process. These
problems constituted core issues in this
project, among others not less important.
The Strategy
The strategies for biodiversity protection and
sustainable economic development of the
region were first developed by the project
for the various sectors based on the “issue
analysis” process (problem driven approach),
in which biodiversity and sustainable develop-
ment issues were identified and options for
their solution examined. The options were
analyzed further within the interdisciplinary
working group and the strategies as outlined
here are presented as the result of the multi-
disciplinary, multiagency review and analysis.
The sectoral strategies were taken and were
prioritized (based on resources and time) and
integrated (across the sectors) to develop the
Strategic Plan for the Region.
Objectives of the strategic plan
The strategic plan objectives are envisioned
as follows:
•
Contribute to the conservation of Cuba’s
biodiversity, based on the protection of
species and habitats of the SCE;
•
Promote the conservation of the cultural
heritage, including historical, cultural,
architectural and archaeological sites of
interest in the SCE;
•
Promote the expansion in Cuba of tourism
and ecotourism industry related to the ter-
restrial and marine environment, as well as
other activities and investment opportunities
in the SCE;
•
Encourage the creation of employment
opportunities, and maximize the benefits
for the local population of the SCE;
•
Strengthen the capacity to manage and
execute the recommended strategies,
actions and projects in the SCE; and
•
Recommend pilot investments or projects
that will help encourage the economy
of the SCE gradually, while providing a
vision of the general strategic plan as well
as a “step by step” execution program.
Strategic plan
The strategic plan of the whole SCE region
offers the wide framework for strategies and
actions. It encompasses all the planning zones
within the region (watershed, marine shelf,
keys and the oceanic Exclusive Economic
Zone). The general strategies identified by
this UNDP/GEF project for biodiversity
protection and sustainable development can
be found in Alcolado, García and Espinosa
(1999).
Ongoing second phase
of the project
The ongoing second phase, the project Prior-
ity Actions to Consolidate Biodiversity Pro-
tection in the Sabana-Camagüey Ecosystem
(UNDP/GEF CUB/98/G32) , that began
in 2000, is aimed at formal adoption and
implementation of prioritized actions of the
proposed strategy. The objectives and their
implementation of this second phase, are
summarized as follows:
Establishment of eight key priority protected
areas for conservation, demonstration and
replication. All these areas (which constitute
15.35% of the SCA with its marine shelf),
have been chosen as a result of studies carried
out during the first phase of project. At present
time, four of this eight protected areas have
been legally established, their management
plans designed and implemented, information
printed for distribution, interpretative trails
set up, park personnel trained in biodiversity
planning and management, and minimal
scientific and logistical equipment provided
to ensure monitoring and feedback to plan-
ning and management functions. In the other
four protected areas, although not yet legally
established, their operative plans are already
elaborated and implemented and their park
personnel trained in biodiversity planning
and management, in the same way.
Consolidation of coordinated institutional
capacities for sustained long-term integrated
coastal management. This objective includes
the following activities:
•
Establishment of an Authority for Integrated
Coastal Management (AICM) for the SCE.
It include formal institutional and inter-
institutional structuring, staff training, and
the acquisition of minimum required equip-
ment for integrated coastal management.
On completion of the project, the Authority
for Integrated Coastal Management for the
SCE would have been legally established
and would be in operation.
•
Inventories and rapid environmental assess-
ments carried out in areas of globally
significant biodiversity, prioritized on
the basis of special protection needs or
existing or potential threats.
•
Detailed zoning and planning in prioritized
areas in order to incorporate biodiversity
conservation and environmental protection
criteria.
•
Establishment of a network of four (plus
one already existing at Cayo Coco) small
environmental monitoring stations.
•
Evaluation of financial mechanisms for
biodiversity conservation and management.
This will allow the costs of environmental
variables and biodiversity conservation to
be internalized in development plans and
programs and will prevent the misuse of
benefits resulting from particular mecha-
nisms and economic incentives.
Education and awareness raising for envi-
ronmental management, sustainable devel-
opment and biodiversity conservation and
sustainable use. The biodiversity component
has included the introduction of provincial
biodiversity education policies; workshops
and seminars to raise awareness among
decision makers and different community
and economic sectors that affect biodiversity;
production of didactic materials; dissemina-
tion of biodiversity values through the mass
media.
During the development of the first and
second phase of the Project, relevant problems
have been identified. These problems have
been created by conditions and use trends in
the Sabana-Camagüey Ecosystem. In conse-
quence, management objectives, proposed
actions and their solution implementation
have been developed. Some of the most
important of them are summarized below:
By means of workshops, meetings and
exchange of information, the lessons learned
during the development of this project have
been widely disseminated in the Caribbean
region, with ecosystems and pressures over
their biological resources, due to excessive
human impacts, particularly tourism and
overfishing, and the climate changes.
The Cuban government has demonstrated,
by supporting this project and in by other
ways, its appreciation of the need to protect
the biological heritage of this part of the
country. It is a narrow window of opportunity
to develop tourism in right way, while
responding to the other challenges of biodi-
versity protection and sustainable economic
development in the region.
References
Alcolado, P.M., E.E. García y N. Espinosa (Eds.). 1999.
Protecting Biodiversity and Establishing Sustainable
Development in the Sabana-Camagüey Archipelago.
GEF/UNDP Project Sabana-Camagüey CUB792/G31,
Cuba. CESYTA S.L. Madrid, 145 p.
Arellano,M. Some Introductory Notes on the Conceptual
Base of Sustainable Development in Cuba (in prepara-
tion)
Claro, R., J.A. Baisre and J. P. García-Arteaga. 1994.
VIII. Evolución y Manejo de los Recursos Pesqueros.
435-492 pp. In: Ecología de los Peces Marinos de
Cuba (R. Claro Ed.), CIQRO, México.
Olsen,S., J. Tobey and M. Kerr. 1996. A common
framework for learning from ICM Experience. Interna-
tional Workshop on Integrated Coastal Management in
Tropical Developing Countries: Lessons Learned from
Successes and Failures, Xiamen, People’s Republic
of China, May, 1996 (Manuscript), 15 p.

Problems posed by conditions and use trends in the Sabana Camagüey Ecosystem
Some Problems: Progress: Management objectives:

Deficiencies in man-
agement and decision-
making processes.
Lack of an organized
and interconnected
information and data-
base system.
Lack of a Protected
Area System.
During the GEF Project implementation, a col-
lective way of planning work and opportunity
and problem identification has been applied
(participation of the SCE provinces and the staff
of institutions, scientific and technical disciplines,
and economic sectors involved in the studies,
conservation and development of the SCE).
A huge volume of data introduced in a GIS has
been generated during the GEF Project, and part
of the information is at the participant institutions.
The project has made a very important proposal
aimed at implementing a Special Region of
Sustainable Development comprising the whole
archipelago and part of the coastal mainland
Gradually implement the ICM of the SCE through the
creation of the AUTHORITY FOR INTEGRATED COASTAL
MANAGEMENT OF THE SCE.
Interconnect the information bases and databases of the
main national and provincial performers of ICM in order to
facilitate management actions and decision-making.
Formalize and implement a protected area system
encompassing the whole SCE so to protect its valuable
biodiversity resources.

Land based Marine In the Project, an analysis of the land-based
pollution pollution was carried out at the sub-watershed
level and its extension and effects on the marine
biodiversity have been determined at a strategic
scale. This allows conducting future actions more
properly (Environmental Licensing processes, for
instance).
Stop the increase of organic pollution and gradually reduce
it to recover biodiversity and fishing potential; gradually
introduce technologies for waste treatment that are both
more economical and friendly with the environment; and
monitoring.

107
108 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
Within the seaflower biosphere reserve
by Marion W. Howard1, Valeria Pizarro2 and June Marie Mow1
Declared the SEAFLOWER Biosphere
Reserve by the UNESCO program “Man
and the Biosphere” (MAB) in 2000, the
Archipelago of San Andres, Old Providence
and Ketlina is part of the World Network of
Biosphere Reserves.
Of the total area of the archipelago, 1,600
square kilometres are dedicated to conserva-
tion (core zones); 73,900 square kilometres
are dedicated to conservation and programs
of low-impact sustainable use (buffer zones);
the rest of the SEAFLOWER Biosphere
Reserve (approximately 224,500 square
kilometres) are dedicated to the development
of cooperative environmental management
activities that give rise to an alternative
sustainable development model (cooperation
or transition zones).
The archipelago of San Andres, Old Provi-
dence, and Santa Catalina is located in the
western Caribbean and covers approximately
350,000 square kilometers of marine area.
Related to the Antilles in historical and
ethnocultural terms, it has been an important
and strategic Colombian territory since the
1800s and gained the status of Colombia’s
only oceanic department in article 309 of the
National Constitution of 1991. The actual
landmass consists of three major islands,
five atolls to the north of the major islands,
and two atolls to the south. The Corporation
San Andres Archipelago
for the Sustainable Development of the
Archipelago of San Andres, Old Providence,
and Santa Catalina Islands, CORALINA, is
the regional government authority within the
national system of environmental manage-
ment responsible for encouraging sustain-
able development and implementing envi-
ronmental policies for the archipelago.
Within the context of CORALINA, as in any
environmental protection agency throughout
the world, of paramount importance to our
work is preservation of the diversity of
natural resources within the region -- in both
biological and ethnic terms.
Ethnic diversity within the
Archipelago Biosphere
Reserve
a. The Convention on Biodiversity, which
Colombia ratified in the congressional
law 165 of 1994, stimulated the United
Nations Environment Program and the Global
Environment Facility to commission the
Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA)
which was completed in 1996. The GBA
repeatedly emphasizes that the main impacts
on biodiversity are caused by human use
and management. This study, now a seminal
reference on the topic of biodiversity, also
emphasizes that in questions of how to protect
biodiversity and develop socio-economic
strategies for its sustainable use, people must
be seen to be a major part of the solution
rather then being regarded as the problem.
Biological diversity resulted from the
processes of natural selection and adaptation
to the realities of the physical environment --
climate, geology, land and seascapes, food and
water sources, etc. In the same way, cultures
adapted themselves in appropriate ways to
survive and thrive within their environments.
It is significant to keep in mind that homo
sapiens is the only land-based biological
species, either plant or animal, that lives in
every terrestrial geographic and climatic region
found on Earth. Humankind accomplished this
remarkable feat of single species adaptation
through the development of ethnic diversity. In
human development terms, therefore, ethnic
variations can be seen as comparable to an
expansion of biological diversity in other
species of the natural kingdom.
Recognition of the reality and significance
of ethnic diversity is of the utmost importance
because part of the solution to the dilemma
of how to achieve sustainable development
is contained within the traditional knowledge
of local ethnic groups. In addition, since
environmental problems must be solved by
people, in order to mobilize local communi-
ties to act towards this goal, their societies
must be united around a common vision of
1
has a Ph. D in Marine Ecology from the University of
the West Indies, Mona, Kingston, Jamaica. A former
Executive Director of the Institute of Jamaica, she has
been representing Jamaica at the international level
in the area of Biodiversity since 1994 and chaired the
national committee responsible for developing the
country’s National Biodiversity Strategy and Action
Plan. She is currently the Chair of Jamaica’s CITES.
Scientific AuthorityHope Road, Kingston 5, Jamaica,
E-mail: efishjam@infochan.com.
2
has a Ph. D in Marine Ecology from the University of
the West Indies, Mona, Kingston, Jamaica. A former
Executive Director of the Institute of Jamaica, she has
been representing Jamaica at the international level
in the area of Biodiversity since 1994 and chaired
the national committee responsible for developing
the country’s National Biodiversity Strategy and
Action Plan. She is currently the Chair of Jamaica’s
CITES.
109
 environmental protection and sustainable
development which grows out of a shared
understanding of the cultural and ethnic reality
of their past, present, and future situations.
One of the first worldwide programs to
explicitly incorporate the concept of ethnic
diversity was the UNESCO Man and the
Biosphere (MAB) program. The World
Network of Biosphere Reserves protects
both biological and ethnic diversity. Indeed,
a cornerstone is the belief that sustainable
development can best be realized by combin-
ing traditional ethnic responses to the environ-
ment with appropriate new technologies,
understanding that local programs of sustain-
able development and ecosystem conserva-
tion need to be rooted in the realities and
traditions of the local people. The Seville
Strategy for Biosphere Reserves of 1995
has as goal I: “Use biosphere reserves to
conserve natural and cultural diversity.”
This goal is further elaborated in objective
I.1 which reads: “Improve the coverage of
natural and cultural biodiversity by means of
the World Network of Biosphere Reserves.”
With the acceptance that the dominant
quantitative growth model of development
is not environmentally sustainable and that
development criteria must vary depending
on the specific environmental conditions,
the realization has come that much of the
damage done to environments, particularly
in this century, has resulted from the failure to
acknowledge that local cultures have the know-
how to manage local ecosystems. For example,
since indigenous peoples unconsciously
functioned within natural boundaries, vital
information relative to what we now call
carrying capacities can be found within the
collective knowledge of ethnic cultures.
In the process of designing both sustain-
able development projects and appropriate
environmental education programs for a
region, environmental problems and methods
must be analysed in the perspective of cultural
110 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
actualities, such as:
• the importance and meaning of land within
the culture;
• the system of property rights and actual
land ownership;
• religion -- particularly in regard to beliefs
about humankind’s designated role in the
natural world, the creation, and sabbath or
holy day practices;
• methods of raising and gathering food
and animals;
• systems for handling water, soil, and waste
products;
• ways that overall lifestyle have balanced and
restrained resource use and consumption.
Not only will people respond better and
become more committed to programs which
directly emerge from and appeal to their
ethnic situations, but such programs, by being
based on tangible and practical realities, are
far more likely to succeed.
b. The Environmental Action Plan for Latin
America and the Caribbean, adopted in
1990 by 35 countries in the region including
Colombia, says:
In Latin America and the Caribbean, there
are at least 480 ethnic groups that have remark-
ably adapted to their natural surroundings and
have traditional agrarian cultures endowed
with precise knowledge of natural resources,
consumption patterns, suitable work and,
above all, a concept of the environment that
is not antagonistic. The deterioration of this
invaluable cultural heritage is resulting in
enormous ecological costs.
The Action Plan seeks to tap the environmen-
tal knowledge and management capacity that
some ethnic groups of the region have achieved,
which could serve as a basis for the design of
local environmental management projects.
Within Colombia, one of the main ethnic
minorities is the native islander population of
the archipelago of San Andres, Providence,
and Santa Catalina. Close in heritage to the
populations of other English-speaking West
Indian islands, the natives of the archipelago
have nonetheless developed a particular
ethnic identity within the Caribbean region as
a result of adapting to specific environmental
circumstances. Predominant among these
defining factors are:
• the small amount of landmass within the
archipelago (San Andres has 25 square
kilometres, Old Providence has 20, and the
entire archipelago has approximately 52.);
• the islands’ geographic isolation within
the Caribbean;
• scarcity of fresh water;
• the high rate of terrestrial biodiversity
relative to the smallness of the land area;
• access to a wealth of marine biological
variation;
• an actual location to the southwest of the
major Atlantic hurricane path.
When a culture has emerged from a colo-
nialist New World heritage (rather than being
indigenous per se), clearly its ethnicity has
also been profoundly affected and formed
by outside cultural pressures and historical
factors. Many such factors contributed to the
specific acculturation of the islander people.
Especially significant were the proximity
to Central America’s Miskito Coast, the
historical reality that the society of the
archipelago did not grow out of a Caribbean
plantation society, and the fact that the island
culture was left to develop on its own for
several hundred years with minimal outside
political interference or direction.
These environmental and cultural realities
contributed to forming a society that was still
characterized as recently as 1960 by:
• a high level of self-sufficiency and inde-
pendence;
• a particularly egalitarian and democratic
class structure;
• virtually no technological development;
• a productive and sustainable agrarian and
subsistence fishing economy;
• a system of measuring wealth in terms of
“real” goods, especially an abundance of
food and an amount of land and/or animals,
rather than in monetary terms;
• an exceptionally high quality of life
(and actual standard of living within the
region);
• functional conservation practices -- par-
 ticularly in the management of scarce soil
and freshwater resources and in the small
amount of garbage and contamination
generated.
Development policies of the last three
decades have resulted in massive environmen-
tal degradation, especially in San Andres,
and a growing loss of ethnic identity. The
environment and culture of Old Providence
and Santa Catalina have remained more intact
but the possibility of large-scale development
by outside forces remains a reality of the
current situation. The people of the archipelago
are confronted by the same threats that are
destroying ethnic and biological diversity
throughout the world -- overpopulation,
urbanization, increasing pressure on natural
resources and ecosystems, poorly planned
development, and the resulting loss of ethnic
responses, self-reliance, and cultural identity.
However, as one of the least environmentally
degraded areas remaining in the Caribbean
region, these tiny islands could serve as models
of small island development and recuperation
if their biologic and ethnic diversity could be
protected, respected, and allowed to flourish in
future development planning. With these goals
in mind, current general strategies to encourage
conservation and sustainable development both
environmentally and culturally include:
• special management plans for significant
ecosystems;
Terrestrial flora
San Andres has residual forest in only a
few areas because much of the woodland
was converted to coconut plantations
years ago, and a growing amount of
wooded area has been sacrificed to
make space for the massive immigration,
primarily from the continent, that has
occurred since 1960. Nevertheless, in
the patches of native vegetation which
remain are still found representative
forestal trees including cedar (Cedrela
odorata), matarraton (Gliricidia sepium),
kapok or cotton tree (Ceiba petandra),
stinking toe (Cassia grandis), birch gum
(Bursera simaruba), guacimo (Guazuma
ulmifolia), hog plum (Spondias mombin),
and june plum (Spondias purpurea).
Many yards in the native sections of San
Andres are well-planted with ornamental
flowers and fruit trees which are also
found in the wooded sections. Especially
abundant are breadfruit (Artocarpus alti-
lis), tamarind (Tamarindus indica), mango
(Mangifera indica), guava (Psidium
guajava), almond (Terminalia catappa),
• environmental education programs based
in ethnic realities;
• community organizing at the grassroots
level;
• increased local autonomy and community
participation in environmental conservation
and development planning;
• management plans which integrate local
interactions between the community and
the environment, traditional resource use
and development, and appropriate native
technologies;
• development of programs which allow access
to sustainable alternative technologies;
• a strong land-use plan and territorial
ordering process based on traditional use
and research on carrying capacities;
• special regulations to restrict immigration
and construction;
• openness about and enforcement of local,
national, and international norms that
protect biological and ethnic diversity;
• preparation for and application to join the
UNESCO World Network of Biosphere
Reserves.
Biodiversity within
the Archipelago
The biodiversity of small islands like San
Andres, Old Providence, and Santa Catalina
is obviously limited when compared to the
abundance of continental zones, particularly
guinep (Melicoccus bijugatus), and assorted
citrus.
The islands of Old Providence and Santa
Catalina are the only islands in the archi-
pelago where a true tropical forest ecosys-
tem developed. This forest was not studied
until recently, but current research has
produced valuable information. As the
general environmental conditions of these
islands supported the growth of the tropical
forest with its resultant species diversity, it
is of value to briefly present some of these
conditions.
Old Providence and Santa Catalina are
mountainous islands with respective land
areas of 20.8 and 1.3 square kilometers.
According to geological studies, the islands
originated as an atoll 80 million years
ago (Miocene). The present topography
resulted from later eruptions which took
place approximately 30 million years ago.
Many researchers suggest that the two
islands were connected at one time. Techni-
cal studies made by CORALINA in 1997
isolated 23 geomorphological units that can
be grouped into three main types:
in the humid tropics. Endemic organisms
are present in less quantity, making them
more vulnerable to human activity. Indeed,
any alterations in ecosystems can produce
transformations, and the resulting changes
are unpredictable in the majority of cases.
Also, because of the limited space and
isolation of certain oceanic islands, scientists
have theorized that they are particularly
generative places for species specialization.
The importance of locally protecting spe-
cies diversity and habitats is clear since
the islands serve as both crucibles and
microcosms of the great ecosystem that is
our biosphere.
• Mountains: with a maximum altitude of
about 360 meters, these are located
in the centre of the islands and are
characterized as rugged and craggy.
• Hills: with maximum altitudes of about
100 meters, these are found surround-
ing the mountains and are rounded,
having resulted from erosion of the
mountains.
• Plains: these include beaches and
alluvial valleys which are of either
marine or alluvial origin.
The islands are surrounded by a well-
developed barrier reef, especially to the
north-northeast or windward side. This
coral reef system covers approximately
255 square kilometers and encloses
an extensive lagoon which is rich in
sea grass beds. The coastal areas have
the mangrove swamps necessary to
complete a highly intact reef ecosystem
which can be characterized as very
productive.
The precipitation cycle is monomodal - the
first season is dry (February through April
with May considered to be transitional)
111
 and the second season is described as
wet (June through December with Janu-
ary transitional). The heaviest rains occur
in October and November. However, the
distribution of rain is far from regular;
out of a total mean annual rainfall of
approximately 1,600 mm, more than 70
percent usually falls in a period of a
few days. This situation causes frequent
water shor tages, little possibility of
replenishing wells or groundwater (which
are consequently not an important human
water source on these islands), and
irregular and intermittent strong gully or
stream flows During the years when the
amount of rainfall is particularly low and
air temperatures are correspondingly
higher (for example, during periods influ-
enced by EL NIÑO), natural regeneration
of the forest does not occur because of
the water deficit.
As would be expected under these envi-
ronmental conditions, the vegetation
in the islands has been classified as
tropical dry forest. At the present time,
374 species have been identified which
are distributed between 93 families
and 7 pteridophytes (Lowy, 1994). The
main plant families are Euphorbiaceae,
Fabaceae, Compositae, Rubiaceae,
Malvaceae, and Caesalpinaceae. Seventy
percent of the species are considered
to be native and 23 percent to have
been introduced. There are several
species represented that have been
found elsewhere only in Jamaica; for
example, the species of palm Cocotrinax
jamaicensis. Complementary other spe-
cies are widely distributed throughout
the New World.
These species show an affinity with the
flora of the Antilles and Central America
as well as with that of northern South
America. Reknowned botanist, Alwyn H.
Gentry, remarked in his field notes on
Old Providence that:
Floristically the forest is very Antillean....
(However,) the forest is very diverse
by Antillean standards; with ca. 60spp.
>=2.5cm dbh in 0.1ha. This compares
with an average of 43 in Greater Antillean
moist forest and 46 in dry forest. It is also
unusually well preserved for the Antilles....
Overall evaluation: An interesting mix of
mainland and Antillean flora, but more
related to the latter and thus of great
conservational significance.
The mature forest occupies 148 hectares
(7.22 percent of the island’s area) and
is found in the mountains, relatively far
from human settlements. CORALINA
field studies report 145 species, with the
most diversity in the sector known as
Freshwater. Species like the kapok or
cotton tree (Ceiba petandra), first stick
(Chlorophora tinctoria), strangler fig
(Ficus sp.), promenta (Pimenta dioica),
trumpet tree (Cecropia peltata), birch
gum (Bursera simaruba), crabwood
112 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
(Byrsonima crassifolia), and Faramea
occidentalis are common in the forest. The
mean base area for the trees is 22 m/ha,
with an average of 17 meters in height and
a density of 0.1 ind/m;, which indicates
that this forest is not primary but is in good
condition and is growing towards climax.
Shrubs are the most abundant vegetation
type, covering 1,444 hectares (70 percent).
The most dominant species of this type
of vegetation is the cockspur tree (Acacia
collinsii) which can grow in dense thickets,
sometimes monospecifically. Many acacias
are especially adapted to dry conditions
and are common invaders of grasslands
and shrubby woodlands. This shrub has
a symbiotic relationship with a species of
stinging ant (Pseudomyrmex ferruginea)
that protects the tree from encroachment
by other vegetation and human or animal
use; the exception being several species
of resident birds that nest in the cockspur.
Other significant shrubs include: Cordia
collococca, Cassearia sylvestris, Randia
glumeri, Croton glabelus, and Pithecellobium
dulce. Additionally, many fruit trees are
found in both mature forest and shrub
ecosystems.
At the present time on Old Providence, 425
hectares have been converted to pasture
for grazing cattle. Annually more shrubs,
and occasionally forest, are cleared to
make grasslands. Besides posing a major
threat to the future of the natural flora,
cattle-raising increases the amount of soil
erosion, destroys the process of natural
regeneration, and is not an important
food source for the islands. To protect
the terrestrial biodiversity of the island,
CORALINA is working with the 80 or so
persons who are raising an estimated 400
head of cattle with the goal of developing a
sustainable solution to this problem.
Terrestrial Fauna
Less is known about the fauna of the islands.
There are a number of resident and endemic
reptile species which include two species
of snake -- silver snake (Leptothyphlops
albiprons) and Coriophanes andrensis -- and
abundant lizards such as the iguana (Iguana
iguana), penny lizard (Anolis pinchoti),
brown lizard (Anolis concolor), jack lizard
(Ameiva ameiva), blue or green lizard
(Cnemidorphorus lemniscatus), and snake-
waiting-boy (Mabuyo mabuyo). Geckos and
salamanders are represented by Aristelliger
georgeenis and Sphaerodactylus argus.
Two species of land turtles are found:
hikiti (Geochelone carbonaria) and the San
Andres’ swamp turtle, locally called “swanka.”
The only registered amphibean is a species
of endemic toad (Leptodactylus insularis).
In addition, the reptile group includes more
introduced species than does any other
group; of special significance are the boa
or woala (Boa constrictor) and the lizard
known as ishillie (Ctenosaura similis). Some
of these have become abundant enough
to disturb the islands’ ecological balance;
for example, the species known as “lobo
pollero” in San Andres. Detailed studies
need to be made on both the precise
impacts of these introduced species and
on the reptile group in general.
An important class of land animals on
the islands are the crustacean land crabs
of which there are several species; two
of these are particularly important for
their food and commercial value, black
crab (Gecarcinus ruricola) and shankey
(Gecarcinus lateralis). These species
are wide-spread in both the forest and
coastal zones. Annually these crabs
effect a massive migration to the sea to
spawn. Each black crab deposits around
40,000 eggs, which grow for two months
in the form of marine plankton before
returning to land. CORALINA is in the
process of studying the black crab and
developing regulations to insure its
sustainable use, particularly by protecting
it from vehicular traffic in its annual
migration to and from the sea.
Birds
The most important class of terrestrial ver-
tebrates is birds including land, marine,
and migratory species. Approximately
98 species of birds have been identified
in the islands, the majority of which are
migratory. Only about 18 are resident
with 2 endemic species known in San
Andres and several endemic subspecies
found in Old Providence. Some of these
species are found on the major islands,
and some marine species are found only
on the north and south cays.
Among the most important resident spe-
cies are the doves: wild pigeon (Zenaida
asiatica), Caribbean or ground dove
(Leptotila jamaicensis), and balley or
bald pate (Columba leucocephala). Other
resident birds of primary importance
are the grass bird (Tiaris bicolor), wish
wish (Coereba flaveola), god bird or
hummingbird (Anthracotorax prevostii),
banana bird or Jamaican oriole (Icterus
leucopteryx), nightingale (Mimus gilvus),
Caribbean elaenia (Elaenia martinica),
and several species of warblers (Dend-
roicae) and vireos (Vireonidae). The old
man bird or rainbird (Coccyzus minor),
an endemic subspecies of cuckoo, is
a favorite bird and the subject of local
legends on the islands that is in danger
of extinction as its chosen habitat is
frequently mangrove swamps.
Mammals
The sole terrestrial mammals found are
several species of bats, including Natalus
brevimanus, Artibeus jamaicensus, and
Molossus molussus. Marine mammals
have occasionally appeared on the
beaches, some of which have been rare
species. Although whales are not com-
monly seen in the coastal waters, they
are intermittently sighted.
Coastal and marine resources
Coral reef structure
Corals are widespread throughout the
archipelago and the reef formations are
particularly complex as a result of their
oceanic location and the heavy wave
action and turbulance to which they have
adapted. The reef formations can be
divided into three large complexes: 1)
barrier reefs and sections lying north,
northwest, west, and southwest on the
shelf, 2) reef sections and patches in the
lagoon behind the barrier reefs, and 3)
coral communities and reefs on bordering
ledges to the west.
San Andres Island is surrounded by a
complex reef system on the insular shelf
made up of a variety of coral formations:
barrier and fringing reefs, patches, and
associated lagoons. The windward barrier
reef located on the eastern edge of the
shelf is composed of a series of calcare-
ous fossil terraces covered with well
developed coral communities (50% live
coral) including a wide diversity of hard
corals, octocorals, and sponges. This
reef, although not unbroken, runs from
the extreme north to the south end of the
island and is 15 km long and 60-80 m
wide, providing effective breakwaters and
a large lagoon. The coral reefs found in the
waters surrounding San Andres are made
up of approximately 40 identified species
including: Millepora spp., Porites porites, P.
astreoides, P. furcata, P. divaricata, Diploria
strigosa, D. clivosa, D. labyrinthiformis,
Acropora palmata, A. cervicornis, Montas-
traea annularis, M. cavernosa, Sideratrea
siderea, S. radians, Agaricia spp., Favia
fragum, Isophyllastrea rigida, Dendrogyra
cylindrus, Stephanocoenia intersepta,
Madracis decactis, M. mirabilis, Leptoseris
cucullata, Meandrina meandrites, Colpo-
phyllia natans, C. amaranthus, Dichocoenia
stokesi, Mycetophyllia spp.,and Eusmillia
fastigiata. Other corals commonly found
include antipatharians, gorgonians, Sty-
laster roseus, Zoanthus sociatus and
Palythoa spp.
The coral communities and reefs border-
ing the western ledges show the most
influence of human activity. Coral tissue
mortality here reaches levels between
5% and 100%. The most affected spe-
cies is Acropora cervicornis which is
practically extinct; other species including
A. palmata, Agaricia agaricites, and
Colpophylia natans are also affected.
This deterioration is explained by mac-
roregional processes and by the effects
of anthropogenic agents (sedimentation,
contamination, boat traffic, and tourism).
The Old Providence and Santa Catalina
reef complex is regionally unique because
it surrounds the only high altitude volcanic
island found on the MesoAmerican shelf.
The barrier reef is 32 km long and varies
from 50-200 m in width, covering a total
area of approximately 255 km2. This reef
is characterized as the second largest true
barrier reef in the Western Hemisphere
(Geister, 1997). The coral reef system
surrounding these islands is divided into
4 units: fore-reef terrace, windward barrier
reef, lagoon with patch and fringing reefs,
and leeward and outer shelves. Identified
species include Millepora spp., Porites
astreoides, P. porites, P. furcata (var), P.
clavaria, Diploria strigosa, D. labyrinthiformis,
D. clivosa, Agrarcia agaricites, A. crassa,
Acropora palmata, A. cervicornis, Colpophyl-
lia natans, Favia fragum, Dichocoenia stock-
esii, Montastraea annularis,M.cavernosa,
M. faveolata, Dendrogyra cylindrus, Steph-
anocoenia michelini,Isophyllastrea rigida,
Siderastrea siderea, and S. radians. The area
also includes black corals, fire corals, and
lace corals as well as zoanthids. Because
of huge populations of the masked hamlet,
this specie received the name: Hypoplectrus
providencianus; and is on the IUCN Red
List.
Albuquerque Cay (South-Southwest Cay)
Is the only reef complex that resemble a
true atollon, being nearly circular with a
peripheral reef to windward that extends
along the north, east, and southeast sides
for close to 6 km. In shallow waters reef
crest is barely submerged, and composed
by a combination of Millepora-Palythoa-
Porolithon. The lagoon has two well defined
depths: 9 m and 15 m, were well developed
sea grass beds and a significant quantity
of hard corals, octocorals, patches of Mon-
tastraea and peripheral reefs of Acropora
palmata can be found.
Bolivar and Courtown Cay resemble a
kidney-shaped atoll that has a diameter
of a little over 13 km. The windward reefs
developed towards the northeast, east and
southeast. Strong waves and currents,
turbulences, and an intricate system of
caves have created a unique and unusual
reef environment (Geister, 1997). The
northern part of the lagoon is covered with
dense patches of reef, predominantly hard
coral of the genus such as Millepora, Diplo-
ria, Montastraea, Porites. and Acropora.
Few years ago there was abundant queen
conch and spiny lobster on both cays.
Queena is the most extensive atoll of
the Archipelago, although it is commonly
described as a half atoll with 60 km in length
and between 10 and 20 km wide. It has a
windward reef that extends more than 40 km
and includes shelf areas. Although it doesn’t
have terrestrial area, the bank is shallow
and partially exposed at the low tide. The
reef is mainly composed of Millepora spp.,
and Acropora palmata that is common in the
leeward area. Irregular patch reefs, exhibiting
both ribbon and knoll configurations are
plentiful. This is one of the least studied
areas of the Archipelago, in spite of being
considered one of the most productive sites
for queen conch and spiny lobster in the
southwestern Caribbean.
Serrana is an extensive reef complex
of around 36 km in length and 15 km
wide, including the insular platform. There
is an extensive lagoon with numerous
seaweed patches and sea grass beds
which are highly productive. There is
a secondary barrier, long and narrow,
with the predominant Acropora palmata
creating a calm system, with reef patches
(Montastraea) covering 60% of the
bottom. Other plentiful coral species
are Agaricia agaricites, Porites spp.,
Mycetophyllia ferox, Diploria spp., and
Siderastrea siderea, among others.
Roncador is an elongated atoll of approx-
imately 15 km in length and 7 km width.
The windward peripheral ref is almost
continuous for 12 km and breaks surface
in calm weather. The lagoon, which is
shallower than the others in the region,
is exposed at low tide. Dense patches of
Montastraea almost reach the surface,
with thickets of Acropora cervicornis
growing along the crest. In the southern
part of the lagoon, reef patches cover
70% of the bed. Other significant coral
species are Acropora palmata, Diploria
spp., Agaricia undata, A. lamarcki, Mon-
tastraea franksi, Mycethophyllia aliciae
and M. reesi. The Gorgonians are numer-
ous, and therefore it is presumed that the
massive mortality that devastated this
species in other areas of the Caribbean
had little effect here and on Serrana.
Mangroves
There are twelve mangrove lagoons
on San Andres, Old Providence, and
Ketlina, made up of red, black, white, and
buttonwood mangroves. The mangrove
stands show classic zoning pattern with
tidal height, with red mangroves in shal-
low water, black mangroves in intertidal
mud flats, and white and buttonwood
growing higher still. Old Providence
and Ketlina has six major mangrove
swamps: Oyster Creek, Manchineel Bay,
Southwest Bay, Old Town, Jones Point,
and Ketlina. San Andres has seven main
mangrove swamps, only three of which
are in direct contact with the sea (Honda
Bay, Hooker Bight, Cove Seaside).
Several mangrove lagoons on these
islands were destroyed by development.
However, current law strictly protects
existing mangroves from any human
activity.
Seagrasses
Seagrass beds in the Archipelago are
found primarily along the shore of the
larger islands. Beds are made up primarily
of turtle (Thalassia testudinum) and
manatee (Syringodium filiforme) grass.
A third species, Halodule wright is also
found in waters around Old Providence.
113
 The seagrass beds appear to be produc-
tive and healthy in the areas where they
still occur. Nevertheless, they continue to
face threats from pollution, development,
and boating activity in shallow water. Most
of these threats are currently regulated
carefully by local law.
Only one research study has been done
on sea grasses within the archipelago
which was realized from February to Sep-
tember of 1997 (Angel and Gonzalez). It
reached the following conclusions:
• Two registered species are found
around San Andres Island -- Thalassia
testudinum and Syringodium filiforme,
the latter forming a small structurally
homogeneous monospecies patch to
the west of the island.
• Three registered species are found
near Old Providence Island -- Thalassia
testudinum, Syringodium filiforme, and
Halodule wrightii. Two species are found
near Ketlina -- Thalassia testudinum
and Syringodium filiforme.
• The beds of H. wrightii are situated
in shallows and near mangroves and
are separate from T. testudinum and
S. filiforme.
• The sea grass beds are structurally
heterogeneous as shown by high fluc-
tuations in density, biomass, and mor-
phometry.
• In shallow zones, boat traffic, anchors,
and multiple coastal effluents are some
of the anthropogenic causes of sea
grass deterioration around the islands.
Beaches
The most important beaches in San
Andres are: Sprat Bight, Coccoplum Bay,
Rocky Cay, Sound Bay, Smith Channel,
and Elsy Bar. Other popular tourist
destinations include the nearshore cays,
which are visited by an estimated two-
thirds of all visitors: Johnny Cay, Haines
Cay, and Rose Cay.
Beaches in San Andres are made of
materials from offshore, with fine white
sand particles of predominantly organic
origin. The load of land-based sediments
into the shallow lagoon enclosed by the
reef system to the north and east of the
island is small, allowing corals and sea
grasses to remain relatively healthy in
spite of threats posed by other factors
such as improper waste disposal and
over-extraction of species. Beaches are
replenished by the breakdown of corals
and other animal and plant species on the
coastal shelf (Kielman, 1999). This sand
is moved by wave action and currents.
114 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
Beaches are narrow, with low profiles and
no dunes.
Old Providence and Ketlina has 5 principal
beaches - Manchineel Bay, Southwest Bay,
Freshwater Bay, Allen Bay, and Old John Bay
- with a number more in isolated coves;
the sand is of coral composition. Although
small and regionally unexceptional the
intactness of their natural settings, the lack
of development or pollution, the quality of
white sand, and their relative privacy are
associated aspects that greatly enhance the
value of these beaches as a tourist resource.
Sea turtles used to nest frequently on the
islands and nests are still regularly found at
several of the more isolated beaches, espe-
cially those on the uninhabited north coast
of Ketlina. One of the major environmental
problems on the islands is sand-mining
which seriously threatens the quality and
size of most beaches.
Native beach vegetation is trees like sea
grape (Coccoloba uvifera), seaside mahoe
(Thespesia populnea), coconut palm (Cocos
nucifera), and West Indian almond (Ter-
minalia catappa); shrubs including sea
purslane (Sesuvium portulacastrum), bay
cedar (Suriana maritima), beach bean
(Canavalia maritima), marigold (Complaya
trilobata), wild plantain (Canna indica), and
sea lavendar (Tournefortia gnaphalodes);
grasses like saltgrass (Disticlis spicata) and
shoregrass (Stenotaphrum secundatum, S.
kuntze), and trailing vines, especially beach
morning-glories (Ipomoea pes-caprae, I.
alba) and coral vine (Antigon lectopus).
Large amounts of algae also wash up
on north and east facing beaches, espe-
cially Sargassum sp. and Dictyopteris sp.
(CORALINA, 2000).
Fish
Two hundred seventy-three species of
associated reef fish have been identified
within the Archipelago. These include two
described endemic species: Gambusia
aestiputeus and Hypoplectrus providen-
cianus. In addition to these endemic spe-
cies, several other species are listed on
the IUCN Red List, including: the cotuero,
whitespotted, whitelined, retuiclated, and
splendid toadfish (Batrachoides manglae,
Sanopus astrifer, S. greenfieldorum, S.
reticulatus, and S. splendidus); hogfish
(Lachnolaimus maximus); mutton and
cubera snapper (Lutjanus analis and L.
cyanopterus); rainbow parrotfish (Scarus
guacamaia); bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus);
jewfish, marbled, Warsaw, and Nassau
(Epinephelus itajara, E. inermis, E. nigritus,
and E. striatus); red porgy (Pagrus pagrus);
queen triggerfish (Balistes vetula); and the
smalltooth and largetooth sawfish (Pristis
pectinata and P. perotteti). All of these
species are listed as vulnerable except: the
Nassau grouper, red porgy, and smalltooth
sawfish are listed as endangered; and the
jewfish, Warsaw grouper, and largetooth
sawfish are listed as critically endangered.
Of the identified fish species, 131 species
from 46 families have been recorded in
San Andres coastal waters. One of the 2
endemic species, Gambusia aestiputeus,
is found in the Hooker Bight mangroves.
Sea Turtles
Four identified sea turtle species use
beaches in the Archipelago for nesting.
Loggerhead turtles (Caretta caretta) are
the most common nesters, particularly on
Seranilla Bank in June and July. Hawksbill
turtles (Eretmochelys imbricata) also nest
frequently, with Serrana and Roncador
Banks the most common place and August
the most common time. Green (Chelonia
mydas) and leatherback turtles (Dermo-
chelys coriacea) have also been seen
nesting. It is also possible that the Archi-
pelago is home to Kemp’s and olive
ridley turtles (Lepidochelys kempii and L.
olivacea) but these species have not yet
been described. All of these sea turtles
receive international protection. Each is
listed in appendix I of CITES, reserved for
rare or endangered species, and is listed
as critically endangered (hawksbill and
Kemp’s ridley) or endangered (all others)
on the IUCN Red List. Beaches on the
northern banks and southern atolls play
a particularly important role as nesting
habitat for these species, although histori-
cally they also nested on the main islands.
Sporadic nesting still occurs in San Andres
along with regular nesting at several spots
in Old Providence, most notably Old John
and Mona Bays on the northern coast
of Ketlina. The sea grass beds of the
southern cays are particularly important
feeding grounds for immature species
particularly.
Sea Birds
76 species of migratory birds, together
with 18 resident species including 2
endemic and some endemic sub-species,
have been detected in the Archipelago
(Bond, 1980 and Hilty and Brown, 1986).
The majority are to be found in the
mangroves, cays and coastal areas. The
information on marine birds is scarce,
but the most abundant species are the
man o’ war (Fregata magnificens), the
laughing gull (Larus atricilla), the tern
(Sterna spp.), and the red-foot and brown
foot booby.
The northern banks are also an important
nesting area for sea birds, particularly
red-footed and brown boobies (Sula dac-
tylatrea, S. sula) and laughing gulls (Larus
atricilla). Magnificent frigate birds (Fregata
magnificens) terns (Sterna fuscata, S.
maximus.), and puffins (Puffinus puffinus,
P. griseus) nest in the region, and are com-
monly found throughout. Many other shore
and sea birds pass through the region
during migrations as the Archipelago is at
the edge of the western flyway.
by Juan Rita
Sustainability for
the Island of Minorca
The island of Minorca (The Balearic Islands,
Spain) was declared a Biosphere Reserve
by UNESCO in1993. This island can
be considered as environmentally well
conserved, although it has a very strong
economical development based on tourism
for the masses and thus places its natural
heritage under enormous pressure. This
declaration by Man And Biosphere (MAB)
challenges us to seek a path towards a
sustainable future, as it applies the concept
of a biosphere reserve in a context that has
nothing to do with a protected area, and is
more in fact a space that is constant use by
humans. It is an experiment whose object
is to protect the biodiversity of the island,
and above all, an intent to apply global
environmental policies, many of which affect
the human inhabitants in their day to day
activities.
The application of the concept of a bio-
sphere reserve requires concrete development
policies compatible with nature conservation,
and education programmes, investigation and
participation in a network of like reserves.
However, although it is fairly clear what
needs be done, there is no clear guide in about
how it should be done, especially
to resolve the terms such as “governance”,
“management”, “citizen participation”,
“monitoring” , etc., that should be in accord-
ance with the Statutory Framework for the
World Network of Biosphere Reserves and
the 1995 Seville Strategy. This is entirely
logical, as the enormous diversity of the
situations for each reserve within the Global
Network, makes it impossible to apply a
single recipe to all reserves.
Doctor in Biology and full professor of
Botany at the Balearic Island University.
His line of research focuses on the plant
biodiversity of the Balearic Islands. He has
also participated in the development of sus-
tainable development policies, instrumented
the UNESCO declaration of Minorca as a
Biosphere Reserve and later participated in
the Sustainable Development Plan for the
island. From 1999 to 2003 he was Coordina-
tor of the Minorca Biosphere Reserve.
The Minorca Biosphere Reserve has devel-
oped its own concept of reserve taking
advantage of the opportunities that this island
presents, for example: the decentralization
of the Spanish government administration, the
demonstrated capacity of inter-coordination
between the island munic- ipal governments,
the well-
structured island society and the involvement
of many cultural institutions of which make
up the scientific community that studies the
island (many of which pertain to Universities
on the continent).
Evidently the island faces a multitude of
threats, especially the expansion of tourism-
based urban development with the cor-
responding infrastructural demands, and
the depressed of the agricultural sector.
The combination of these two tendencies
could indubitably put an end to the islands
environmental values, however a correct
management of these same tendencies could
offer an elevated quality of life within a well
conserved natural environment. The group of
initiatives that have been taken in Minorca
constitute a special model adapted to the real-
ity of concrete situations present on the island,
although many of these could be applied
to other areas with similar characteristics.
This article presents a revision of the most
important actions, especially those that
have been applied within the last few years
(1999-2003).
Minorca social and
environmental setting
Minorca is one of the Balearic islands, which
are located in the centre of the Western
Mediterranean Basin. The island has a surface
area of approximately 700 Km2 (70,000
hectares, and is the most northerly located of
the islands, and consequently has a somewhat
colder and humid climate than Majorca, Ibiza
Fig. 1 The rural landscape is one of the main values of
the environmental and cultural heritage of the Minorcan
Biosphere Reserve.
1
(Barcelona, 1957). Department of Biology, University
of the Balearic Islands. 07122 Palma, Majorca. Spain.
jrita@uib.es
115
 and Formentera, the other populated islands
of the Balearics. Officially, approximately
80,000 people live on the island, but the real
population can experience great seasonal
swings, reaching a maximum of 180,000 in
August and a minimum of 60,000 in December
(OBSAM web site, 2003), and these cycles
are directly related with the tourist industry
and the Mediterranean climate.
Until the 80´s the island had a relatively
equilibrated economy, with an agricultural
sector (milk and cheese production) and
industrial (jewellery and shoemaking) that
were both of great influential in the islands
economy. From the middle 80´s up to the
present date, the growth in tourism and the
service sector and the construction industry
have grown unstoppably, and at this moment,
tourism for the masses, based on sun and
sandy beaches, forms the base of the insular
economy (aprox.1,000,000 tourists in 2002).
In spite of these changes, the agricultural
and industrial sectors remain active, albeit
submersed in a multitude of crises, mostly
caused by entry into the European Union,
competition from Asian nations, and above
a much greater return for real estate invest-
ments (much of which is underground and
covered-up from scrutiny by the Spanish
tax system).
The natural surroundings can still be
found in a well conserved state, above all in
comparison with the neighbouring islands.
The rural landscape, characterised by wide
areas of pastureland for the island cows, is
very harmonious and surprising to find in
Mediterranean setting (Fig 1 and 2). The
greater part of the island coastline has been
spared from the destruction wrought by
tourist developments and conserves important
values in terms of biodiversity and landscape
116 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
(Rita, 2002) (Fig. 3 and 4). The natural
resources have also suffered pressure of
development in the last few years, especially
in terms of water resources. However, the
current situation is still much better that
surrounding islands where seawater must be
desalinised for potable use, although in some
coastal areas seawater incursion due to well
over-pumping has salinised the aquifers.
The archaeological and ethnological herit-
age is so rich that it forms an inseparable
part of the landscape, as there is a density
of more than one site per square kilometre
(Fig. 5).
The insular society has been organized
into a multitude of associations (cultural,
professional, social-politic, etc.), which eases
the task of find representing spokespeople to
establish a via of consultation with society
and to participate in decision-making issues.
The intellectual society, with members that
either live on the island or the many natives
that can be found dispersed through out
the Spanish universities, can be found or
organized through a entity called the Institut
Menorquí d’Estudis (IME, or Minorcan Study
Institution), which has played a crucial role
in the declaration as well as the consolidation
of Minorca as a Biosphere Reserve (Vidal
et al., 1994).
The island is administratively divided into
eight different municipalities, which to this
moment have been able to coordinate actions
such as municipal waste treatment. The
Insular governing body, the Consell Insular
de Menorca (CIMe, The Minorca Insular
Council) with competencies in the areas of land
planning, roadways, tourism, and agriculture.
This administration is also responsible for
management of the reserve. There also
exists a regional government and a Parlia-
mentary government
with ample legisla-
tive powers over
the territory of the
archipelago. The
central government
in Madrid conserves
some important juris-
Fig. 3 Wide coastal areas
of Minorca can be found
in an excellent state of
conservation.
Fig. 2 The mosaic structure of the landscape favours
biodiversity; the natural ecosystems and the cultivated
lands are in closely inter-related.
dictions over the coastline, airports and
the greater part of the judicial system. The
decentralisation of the Spanish administration
has had great relevance for the island govern-
ance; as important decisions like land-use
planning, are made on the island, and in this
manner systems for citizen participation have
real decision-making opportunities. However,
it is still indispensable the coordination
between the different administrative levels,
otherwise it would be very difficult o carryout
an effective, complete, sustainability policy.
The Conceptual Framework
of the Minorca Biosphere
Reserve.
Biosphere reserves are juridical forms that
do not yet exist within our legal ordinances
(2004), and such must be “invented “ for each
circumstance. Only the Statuary Framework
or the World Network of Biosphere Reserves
and the Seville Strategy, both approved
by UNESCO (1995) and the indicators
designed for the follow-up define a minimum
framework for action. In the case of an island
like ours, we had to define some strategic
lines of action and some of our own manage-
ment tools that would respond to what could
be considered as a biosphere reserve in an
insular setting , that in a social-economic
time characterised by enormous tourism and
development pressures (Fig. 6).
These lines and tools are:
A. Reserve Zoning. The Biosphere
includes all of the territory.
When Minorca presented its proposal to
be declared a reserve, there was no doubt
about if the reserve should encompass all its
territory. In an island the size of Minorca,
where the maximum distance between its
two farthest points is somewhat less than
50 kilometres, any type of impact on the
territory or whatever environmental policy
is applied to any part of the island has an
immediate repercussion upon the rest of
the island. For an example, the increase in
tourism related developments (and the same
for an increase in the number of tourists),
even though these would be concentrated
in small areas along the coast, in the end
translates into a greater impact of users
upon the natural area (that would call for
a management of the area), major traffic
density on the roadways (and thus a greater
cry for their amplification), an increase
in waste production, energy and water
consumption, etc..
It is erroneous to think that, and this is
especially true for islands, that is possible to
implant conservation objectives and policies
in one part of the territory, for example in the
protected areas, and forget or ignore what
happens the rest. This type of approximation
to reserve conservation has been very useful
in protecting very valuable places, but in areas
with the dimensions that we are considering,
this is not effective in the mid to long term.
The 1995 Sevillian Strategy gave some
messages in this direction when it considered
that greater importance should be given to the
buffer and transition zones, where the greater
economic development takes place.
Despite this holistic vision of the territory,
the declaration of the island as a Biosphere
Reserve requires a definition of the zones
that they are divided into three distinct types
within the reserve. As each area must respond
to the environmental values and must specify
a unique management policy for each zone, a
criteria was adopted that the zoning contain
with its boundaries the areas that are under
protection at this moment. Fro example, the
Fig. 5 The archaeological records and the rural architec-
ture, as can be seen in the photograph, are a part of the
landscape and historical heritage of the island.
Fig. 4. The virgin beaches represent an important
resource for the creation of a new model of tourism
based on sustainability.
Es Grau Coastal Lagoon Natural Park (Parc
Natural de S’Albufera des Grau), which was
the area with the greatest extent of protection
with a management directed basically for a
conservation of the biosphere, was chosen
as a nucleus zone. The resulting buffer zone
which corresponds to a series of areas that
were protected in 1991 by an autonomic law
(Declared Natural Areas of Special Interest,
or Areas Naturals de Especial Interés-ANEIs)
which as a whole include the principal forest
lands, dune systems, coastal cliff-sides
and salt marshes of the island. These deal
with areas with vigorous use restrictions,
urban development for example, with a high
environmental value, yet without a specific
management plan as such, that do not enclose
the nucleus zone as represented in the classic
schemes of reserve zoning. The last zone,
the transition zone, corresponds to the rest
of the island, which in a
greater part are
made up of agricultural areas of great land-
scape and ethnological interest, but also
include urban zones and their infrastructures.
At the time of writing these pages, there are
no declared marine areas included within the
reserve, although in 1999 the northern coast
of north of the island was declared a great
marine reserve and in 2003 the Natural Park
was expanded to include these protected
marine zones.
B. Reserve Management. A light
structure for a complex territory.
Both the existence of an island government
(Insular Council of Minorca, or Consell
Insular de Menorca) that directs the greater
part of the sectorial policies, and the hori-
zontal character of sustainable development,
it would have been unadvisable to create
a parallel reserve management structure to
that of the island government, as it would
have duplicated the existing management
structures. For the case of an island where
the area of the reserve superimposes exactly
the territory of the island government, it
could prove more efficient the management
structure of the reserve have coordinating,
consulting and dynamic functions in addition
to managing concrete policies.
In the case of Minorca the Biosphere
Reserve Office was created with a Reserve
Coordinator, which depends directly on the
Insular Presidential Government. This office
has had as functions the ability to launch
projects (which have been developed by
various insular government departments)
including LIFE, Agenda 21, The Biosphere
Reserve Law, etc., maintain contacts with
UNESCO and the Network of Biosphere
Reserves, disclosure and distribution and
stimulating societies participation in the
management of the reserve.
117

The administrative and management part
is complemented with a Biosphere Reserve
Scientific Commission, a consulting organ
made up of people from the scientific and
academic world whose function is to asses
and analyse the reserve projects as well as
direct the Socio-Environmental Observatory
of Minorca, an institution entrusted with the
follow-up of the state of the reserve and of
which will be made mention later (Fig. 7).
This is a light structure but it is effective
if the territorial governmental organisms
fully assume the philosophy of the biosphere
reserve and promote it with concrete policies.
In any case, if the responsible politicians
do not consider as a priority the sustainable
development of the island, it would be
very unlikely that the reserve will function,
whatever be the structure.
C. The environmental as a horizon-
tal policy. Developmental Planning
and management examples.
In the same manner that the territory cannot
be divided, neither can be its environmental
policies. The insular setting also makes it
much more evident that environmental policy
has a horizontal structure, a well-beloved
idea within the discourse of sustainability.
It is erroneous to consider that conservation
policies are alien to the decisions taken in
socio-economic departments, decisions about
matters of transport (harbour and airport
dimensions as a function of population ceiling
vs. that of an external demand), agriculture
(organic agriculture vs. intensive farming),
tourism (Promotion of a traditional landscape
vs. landscaped golf courses) municipal waste
disposal (compost vs. incineration), hydraulic
resources (rational water consumption vs.
desalinisation plants) etc. all of these issues
have a crucial repercussions on the island’s
118 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
Fig. 6 The conceptual frame-
work of the Minorca Bio-
sphere Reserve (the Bio-
sphere Reserve Law is in the
draft stage).
natural environment and are also fundamental
in the daily lives of the reserve inhabitants.
In short, the philosophy of the Biosphere
Reserve or that is, of its sustainability, should
be introduced in all policies instead of having
them be the exclusive of a certain department
within the insular government. However, these
horizontal policies need powerful co-ordinating
mechanisms as well as a clear definition about
what signifies sustainability for each one of
the sectorial policies. It was for this reason
that in 1997, that with LIFE funds a Plan for
the Sustainable Development of Minorca was
drawn up, where a diagnosis was made for
each one of the socio-environmental sectors
and presented proposals for each one of them.
And has served as an action guideline for the
design of concrete actions since then (Insular
Council of Minorca, 1998).
Some of these concrete actions where
the importance of coordination between
administrative agencies are the following:
Fig. 7 Organisational diagram of the Minorcan Biosphere Reserve. The Insular Council of Minorca (Consell Insular
Menorca) handles the reserve. The Local agendas 21 are developed by the island municipalities. The NGO projects
are financed by the island governments and carried out by the local associations.
Municipal Solid Waste. The policy for
municipal solid wastes for the island was
designed in the late 1980’s with some
extremely important decisions.
• Formation of Solid Waste Consortium, in
which all of the island municipalities and the
Insular Council of Minorca participate.
• The unification into a single site or munici-
pal solid waste treatment for the entire
island.
• Transformation of those wastes into
compost and concentrate into one area for
waste deposition
• A definite dedication to separate wastes at
the source point.
The excellent co-ordination between
administrations and their decision for the
most environmentally friendly system, has
resolved one of the principal environmental
problems of the island in a satisfactory
manner and has placed the island at the van-
guard of our country in selective recovery.
Management of the littoral. In a tourist island
like Minorca the management of the littoral
has an extraordinary economic importance, as
the greater majority of the tourists that visit the
island come precisely for the sun and the sandy
beaches (Fig. 8). In the summer, thousands
of visitors frequent the coast o a daily basis
to enjoy the nearly one hundred beaches on
the island. The Spanish legislation entrusts
 • Communication cam- The Council of Minorca and municipal govern-
paigns for beach-goers ments) in 2002 the elaboration of Local
(over 150,000 pamphlets Agenda 21´s began simultaneously in the
edited each year in six eight island municipalities, in the manner that
languages, posters, web covers the entire island territory. These Local
page, etc.) to promote the Agendas are allowed to endow a concrete
environmental values of programme for sustainability approved through
these areas. a citizen participation process that should be
• Evaluation of the beach complete by the year 2004.
carrying capacity and
access and parking design Biodiversity. Although the Insular Council
Fig. 8 The management of the littoral is carried out with a holistic focus to make its
in function of their capac- of Minorca does not dispose competencies
conservation compatible with the public use that it sees during the summer.
ity for the more problem- over the biodiversity, they did apply for a
the beach maintenance to the corresponding atic beaches (of 10 projects 5 have been LIFE program from the European Union
municipality, and until the 90´s, each city implemented, with two of these cases (2000-2004) for the protection of threatened
government on the island did so in an independ- in collaboration with the Environmental plant species. Some of the actions of this
ent manner, normally without regards to Ministry). project are:
environmental concerns. During this period • The elaboration of plans to recuperate
heavy machinery such as tractors and excava- Local Agendas 21. The participation of the these species.
tors have entered into fragile areas such as municipal administration in the management • Eradication of a species evasive to the
beaches and dune systems causing a very seri- of the Biosphere Reserve is fundamental, as littoral (Carpobrotus spp.).
ous environmental impact. As a consequence, these municipalities are disposed with a great • Regulation of the littoral access.
many of our beaches have eroded and have autonomy and capacity for the management • Education campaigns.
been reduced in surface area. From the year of their territory. Also, citizen participation is This project has generated synergetic
1999, all governments decided to unify their easily stimulated when you address questions interests with the littoral management proc-
maintenance habits, introduce environmentally that affect their daily lives. ess, as is now complemented from the point of
protective methods, and allow that the Insular With funds proceeding form three distinct view of biodiversity. However, these actions
Government direct the process. At the present administrations, (The Balearic Government, should be coordinated with the Ministry
time, these beach cleaning methods of the Environment which is saddled
have converted into an environmental with the eradication chores along the
service instead of a matter of environ- coastline and of which it is composed
mental degradation. The new criteria of the pertinent competencies and in
are: conjunction with the Balearic Govern-
• Classification of the beaches as a ment should authorise and supervise
function of their use (urban, non- the works related with the protected
urban, but with easy access, and species.
non-urban but with access by foot
traffic), and designing each clean- The Coastal Marshland Natural
ing program according to the beach Park. The Coastal Marshland Natural
category. Park nucleus zone of the Biosphere
• The cleaning program includes all Reserve. This park has since its crea-
island beaches, not just the touristic tion, a management body (Management
ones, and throughout the year (not Authority) formed by three different
just during the summertime). administrations (the local, insular and
• Manual cleaning methods, except autonomic governments), although
in the urban beaches. the management responsibilities fall
• Use of cleaning machines specifi- especially upon the autonomic govern-
cally designed for cleaning sandy ment. However, budget approvals and
surfaces. annual management plans should be
• Quantification of the residues made by common accord between three
extracted during the cleaning proc- administrations. The smooth operation
Fig. 9 More than 7 % of the species on the island of Minorca are endemic.
ess for evaluation of system effec- In the photograph is Femeniasia balearica, a genus and species exclusive of the Park within the last few years
tiveness. to the island. has made possible the amplification

119
 of its boundaries, in 2003 in both marine
and land area.
D. Territorial Planning
as a management tool.
In an island with a strong tourist and housing
growth sector, territorial planning is an impor-
tant tool for the future direction of the island,
and imposes regulations about how the territory
should be used, and permits the situation of
infrastructures upon the terrain from a holistic
point of view of the islands reality. From
the conservation point of view, a territorial
plan would give an idea of what would be
the environmental scenario over the medium
range, and would for example, have an idea of
what should be the population ceilings as well
as evaluate the guaranties of conservation of
the natural and cultural heritage.
In our case, two types of documents have
been drafted:
• A Land Plan at the insular level (Plan
Territorial Insular, PTI).
• Six management plans for the protected
areas that make up the Biosphere Reserve
buffer zone.
In 2003 the Insular Territorial Plan was
approved, this urban planning document is
extremely important for the island economy
and obviously for its natural environment, as
it outlays the islands future for the next years
and supposes a guarantee for the conservation
of the values that were given when Minorca
was declared a Biosphere Reserve. This plan
is the tool that would regulate not only what
should be a limit to the islands population,
but as where this population should be felt,
what infrastructures must accompany them,
and which parts of the territory that must be
protected. This plan offers an opportunity to
control the urban growth, which if in step
with past rates, would have doubled. The
main contributions of this plan are (Insular
Council of Minorca, 2003):
• Increase the protected area of the island to
60% of the surface area.
• Prohibit building on rural lands (to avoid
that rural areas are transformed into urban
areas), save for beltways surrounding the
cities.
• Reduce the quantity of developable land
in tourist zones by an equivalent of 55,000
tourist places.
120 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
• Prohibit the construction of apartment
buildings in tourist areas, the only new
tourist lodgings permissible must be the
form of hotels and single family dwell-
ings.
• Establish urban growth quotas between
municipalities.
On their behalf, the six approved plans
for the protected areas define the possible
uses for the different zones and the carrying
capacities of the natural areas, providing as
well an agenda of actions with the object of
conserving the rural values.
E. Participation. Society
as a whole is responsible
for the reserve.
The statutory framework of the Biosphere
Reserve of 1995 requires that certain spe-
cific channels for citizen participation in
decision making tasks for the biosphere be
habilitated.
The Minorca Biosphere Reserve benefits
from a series of circumstances that facilitates
citizen participation. One factor is the
decentralization of the Spanish governmental
administration, which in turn has created an
insular government capable of a wide range
of competencies that allows a proximity
between the citizens and the administration
that makes the decisions. Another factor
is that the society is very well structured,
with many civic associations of multiple
forms that can easy provide a spokesperson to
represents a multitude of social players.
In the Biosphere Reserve, empowers
several diverse mechanisms for citizen
participation (Rita et. al., 2002) that can be
classified as:
• Formal systems of participation.
• ”ad hoc” consulting.
• Actions in management projects.
The formal participation in the Biosphere
Reserve is channel through a consulting
commission (Commissió Consultiva sobre
el Territori i la Reserva de Biosfera) a body
in the various representatives of the various
island social players can participate: politi-
cal parties, trade unions, associations, busi-
ness associations, neighbourhood associa-
tions, ecological groups, etc., and reunites
approximately every three months. This com-
mission informs and consults with society
the principal decisions that should be taken
on the island, and can have an importance
incidence over the territory. This commis-
sion had a relevant role, for example, in
the discussion of the draft for the Insular
Territorial Plan.
A second level of formal participation are
the citizens forums that are made up from
the eight island municipalities that should
participate in the debate of Agenda 21.
These agenda are being (2004) elaborated
simultaneously in all of the island municipali-
ties and will define the developmental paths
of each. The municipal level permits that
greatest approximation between the citizen
and the matters that they will participate
and decide upon. From the administrative
bodies of the Biosphere Reserve, stimulates
the elaboration of these eight local agendas
is precisely to generate ways of participation
and create agendas containing consensual
actions that are directed at the sustainability
of these municipalities. These participatory
practices where created by special consulting
firms.
Additionally there are many bodies of
formal consultation for sectorial themes (for
example; the Economic and Social, or the
Natural Park Governing Assembly) on an
insular and municipal scale which guarantees
citizen participation in the decision making
process.
The “ad hoc” participation of is another
extremely important via of participation and
consultation. These are meetings or mono-
thematic seminars in which the affected
social groups are summoned. Through these
informal reunions, we can learn and discuss
the opinions of the main citizens collectives
about concrete issues. In the last few years,
there have been conducted a great number of
these types of reunions, treating a very broad
range of themes (The Insular Territorial
Plan, Regulation of wind-generator parks,
main projects that can be financed with an
“EcoTax”, planning for the port of Ciutadella,
etc.) or simply analyse the future of the
Biosphere reserve (Socio-Environmental
Observatory of Minorca, Observatorio Socio-
Ambiental de Menorca -OBSAM, 2000).
The participation in the management of
the Reserve on behalf of the citizens has
been stimulated through project calls for
ideas to be developed by the various non-
governmental agencies (NGO´s). It is an
attempt to take advantage of the many good
ideas that the assorted island NGO´s have in
mind to carry-out. For this purpose there has
been created financial incentives to guarantee
that no good idea will be left out without
further development. In the last four years,
approximately 60,000 € has been awarded
annually for the execution of these projects.
In this manner the following exemplary
projects have been created, for example:
• Restoration of the ethnologic heritage.
• Create botanical walks.
• Restore old rip-wrap trails.
• Clean–up marine beds.
• Design sustainable school buildings where
this subject can also be taught.
• Conduct education campaigns.
F. Independent Monitoring
programs: The Socio-Environmen-
tal Observatory of Minorca.
Monitoring of the state of the Biosphere
Reserve and the advances towards sustain-
ability is also a requisite which is reflected
in the Statutory Framework (Article 7.d) and
the Seville strategy, and thus exist a group of
indicators that evaluate the compliance of the
objectives proposed in the Strategy.
In our case, for the monitoring of the
Reserve, a Socio-Environmental Observatory
of Minorca was created (Observatorio Socio-
Ambiental de Menorca, OBSAM) within
the cultural organization Minorcan Study
Institute (Institut Menorquí d´Estudis, IME)
and which is under the supervision of the
Scientific Committee for the Biosphere
Reserve (Comissió Cièntifica de la Reserva
de Biosfera). This is a committee of scientific
nature, which assesses and advises the
Reserve management.
Although the OBSAM does receive funds
from the insular government, is of an inde-
pendent character in the sense that it has the
liberty to study and express its opinion about
Reserve matters.
The OBSAM has worked these last years
in statistical data recollection, some of which
have been already obtained by the observatory
itself of a ample battery of social, economic
and environmental indicators, classified by
their the classical scheme of pressure, state
and reaction. However the principal function
of the Observatory is the design of synthetic
indicators of sustainability, that integrate
the information in some few statistically
significant values. The OBSAM has utilized
participatory techniques for the selection
of these sustainable indicators in the form
that the citizens opinions were collected
to determine which indicators where under-
stood by society. These results can be con-
sulted on the internet ant the web page:
http://www.obsam.org./
G. The Biosphere Reserve Law
The strategic line of the last point is that there
should be in tune with the objectives between
the various afore-mentioned administrations
within the concept of the Biosphere Reserve.
However, throughout the history of the
reserve, there have been many changes of
the political composition of the various
administrations so it is to expect that at any
given moment, this syntony may not exist,
in fact, I the case of Minorca this political
syntony has never been produced between all
of the complex levels of the island’s public
administration. For this reason it is essential
to have a framework document supported
by a wide consensus between the political
forces, above all about what the biosphere
reserve should be. This document should be
of obligatory compliance which lay out the
rules of the game between all of the islands
social players and with sufficient strength to
stabilize them for the long term run. In our
case, we consider that a Biosphere Reserve
Law could fulfil this “constitutional” role that
would define the Biosphere objectives, the
manner of participation of the administration
in the management of the reserve. This law
would also cover the judicial void that that
exists for biosphere reserves in our country.
In the case of Minorca and at the moment
of writing these lines (the beginning of
2004), there is a draft of a law with these
characteristics.
Conclusions
Protected areas have served as a fundamental
instrument for the protection of the biodiver-
sity. But in the last World Park Congress held
in Durban (2003) it was made clear that the
spectacular increase in protected areas has
not been sufficient to brake the deterioration
of the biodiversity. Also in this congress,
and in meetings held in the previous years
they have made manifest the necessity to
integrate the local communities and establish
a network that would allow these areas allow
connection amongst them.
The biosphere reserves approach the
problem of conservation through from a
much wider and holistic than those that
includes the protected areas as yet another
instrument for their conservation and that
they give a great importance to non-protected
spaces. These peripheral zones may posses
an enormous ecological value, as a matrix
that would interconnect the territories as well
as providing a great landscape and cultural
heritage. These biosphere reserves open
the possibility to change the scale in which
the natural habitat is protected by applying
different management strategies to each
one of their areas. For this reason it is very
difficult to classify them with the categories
of the UICN, at least for those that could be
considered as “Meta-protected areas”. This
approximation implies a major complexity in
management, which in addition to the well
known techniques for biodiversity conserva-
tion, must be added territorial planning,
environmental policies and rural development
(Mata, 2002).
The case is that we consider in this article
is a good example of this situation, we have
taken heed to find or implant solutions for a
minimum of requisites that a reserve should
have, and yet this model does not have to
be the only possible solution. Some of the
main characteristics of Minorca Biosphere
Reserve are:
• A natural park is another piece of the
territory, it occupies a place a specific
management needs to be made to conserve
the biodiversity; but it is only one of
the pieces that is integrated into a much
broader territory were all of its parts have
value and his value is due to the whole
of these parts, not due to their individual
richness.
• The inlands’ political environment affects
all insular administrative departments,
that are supported by the criteria of the
121
 Plan for Sustainable Development and the
regulations that govern the territory as are
stipulated in the Insular Territorial Plan. In
addition, local policies must be based on
the elaboration of Local Agendas 21.
• The management structure is flexible and
has an office of coordination and action,
with an scientific assessment committee.
• In the mechanisms for participation there
are formal ones as well as “ad hoc” in a
form that lets us consult the citizens their
opinion over the decisions to be made
about the territory. Financial tools have
also been implemented so these same
social organizations may participate in the
management of the reserve.
122 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
• A monitoring organism ha been created
that possesses sufficient autonomy to
develop the indicators needed to evaluate
the state of the reserve.
• Legal support for the figure of the Bio-
sphere reserve has been should be created
to obtain a stable framework for the
reserve in a context of the political changes
that occur with the passing of time.
Bibliography
CONSELL INSULAR DE MENORCA. 1998. Plan de
Desarrollo Sostenible. Estudio de Viabilidad. Ed.
Consell Insular de Menorca.
CONSELL INSULAR DE MENORCA. 2003. Menorca,
un projecte territorial sostenible. Memoria del Plan
Territorial Insular. Ed. Consell Insular de Menorca.
MATA, R. 2002. Una revisión histórica de la investigación
de los espacios naturales protegidos de España.
Del interés por las bellezas naturales, a las redes
territoriales de espacios merecedores de protección.
In La investigación y el seguimiento en kis espacios
naturales protegidos del siglo XXI, Ed. Diputació de
Barcelona, Monografies 34, p.15-26.
OBSAM. 2000. Els futurs possibles de la reserva de
biosfera de Menorca. Taller EASW Menorca. Ed.
OBSAM. Maó.
RITA, J. 2002. Minorca. A Mediterranean island declared
a Biosphere Reserve. Plant Talk, vol. 29, p. 19-23.
RITA, J.; BORRINI-FEYERABEND, G.; SYNGE, H.
2002. Island of the Biosphere. Policy Matters, vol.
10, p. 83-88.
UNESCO. 1996. Reservas de Biosfera. La Estrategia
de Sevilla & El Marco Estatutario de la Red Mundial.
UNESCO, París.
VIDAL, J.M.; RITA, J.; MARÍN, C. 1994. Menorca Reserva
de la Biosfera. Ed. Consell Insular de Menorca. Sa
Nostra. Institut Menorquí d’Estudis.
123
 A new approach to conservation
by Juan Carlos Moreno Moreno
The importance of nature in
the Canary Islands
The Canary Island archipelago is exception-
ally well endowed with natural wealth, with
one of the greatest biodiversities of all the
temperate region of the world in comparison
with its tiny surface area. The large number
of endemic species makes the Canary Islands
a centre of biodiversity of the first order.
Our geographic location and rugged vol-
canic relief have given rise to a wide variety
of landscapes and ecological habitats, and
the fact that they are islands has propitiated
processes of evolution that have originated
animal and plant species that are exclusive to
these islands and has conserved relict samples
of species that had a far more extensive range
in ancient times. But this natural heritage is
highly vulnerable as, apart from the implicit
ecological vulnerability of an island per se,
the islands themselves are very small and very
densely populated. Isolation, fragmentation
of the land mass, population density and the
currently predominant economic model based
on tourism, involving an intensive use of
natural resources, represent a clear threat to the
biodiversity of the Canary Islands, which is
presently a strategic asset for our society.
This situation makes it essential to seek
an alternative model of development capable
of striking a sustainable balance between
the tourist industry and an improvement in
the living standards and quality of life of the
people, on the one hand, and the conservation
of natural resource on the other.
But a lack of suitable knowledge about some
of the elements of Canary Island biodiversity
could lead to the implementation of conserva-
tion policies that are, at best, ineffective. For
these reasons, the Canary Island Government,
through its Ministry of Regional Planning and
the Environment, has embarked on a project
aimed at studying and evaluating the status
of Canary Island biodiversity. This initiative
has translated into the creation of the Canary
Island Biodiversity Data Base, pursuant to the
Order of the 1st of June 1999.
The Importance
of the Data Base
We can now assess the results and applications
obtained from the beginning very positively.
By implementing the “Biota-Especies”
project, all the existing information on the
biota of the islands has been selected and
stored. To date, this amounts to 14,352
records of terrestrial species and sub-species
belonging to the kingdoms of the Fungi,
Plants and Metazoans, and a total of 5,232
marine species and 63 sub-species of Algae,
Fungi, Plants and Animals. Each reference
contains geographic information on two
scales of accuracy: grid squares of 500 m x
500 m and grid squares of 5,000 m x 5,000
m. This information has been recorded with
a very stringent and uniform process with the
intervention of over one hundred experts in
the different taxonomic groups.
Each of the registers entered in this Data
Base is endorsed by a reference document
that has been selected and validated by a
supervising expert and compiled by a specialist
in the relevant taxonomic group. So far, a total
of 4,419 documents have been registered and
their contents have been organised into the
Data Base Documentary Archive. These are
publications, reports, documents on plant and
animal collections, catalogues of the species
of very specific environments and notes and
references made by experts.
Juan Carlos Moreno Moreno
Director General of the Environment
Department of the Environment
Canary Island Government
123

Data Base Applications
This initiative has enhanced our knowledge of
some taxonomic groups and the geographic
distribution of species, sub-species and
populations. Previously, this information was
highly biased and scattered. There is a very
wide range of applications that can be used
with the Data Base.
Drafting official lists of taxa
The Data Base has been established as an
official register of Canary Island species.
All of the species and sub-species known
in the Canary Islands have been recorded
in the data base, indicating their taxonomic
position, their island location and whether
they are endemic or introduced.
All this information has been published
in two books: the Canary Island list of Wild
Species and the Canary Island List of Marine
Species. These works include a chapter with
all the biodiversity facts and figures by islands
and by taxonomic groups. Furthermore,
the List of Marine Species also includes a
statistics chapter that analyses the distribution
of species by depth, the historic evolution of
taxonomic discoveries and the current status
of knowledge on each group.
124 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
Reports on selected zones
• Sectorial Plans and Territorial Plans.
The inventories of flora and fauna included
in sectorial and territorial plans are com-
pared with the information on the area in
question stored in the Biodiversity Data Base.
Common examples of this are the natural
spaces plans, which before they are finally
approved, are sent to the Biodiversity Service
where the accuracy of the information on the
biota is checked.
• Environmental impact study
In the case of environmental impact studies,
the same consultation process as the one used
in the sectorial and territorial plans is used.
Selection of SPAs from the Natura
2000 network
Using the BIOTA analysis module, the
wealth of bird life present in the area proposed
for extending the Canary Island network of
SPAs has been studied, with a view to having
it included in the Natura 2000 network.
Evaluation of the
catalogued species
A review is currently being done of the state
of conservation of the species that appear in
the Canary Island Catalogue of Endangered
Species, applying the new cataloguing criteria
published in the ORDER of the 25th of
September 2003.
During the evaluation process, the Data
Base analysis module has been used. This
provides information on changes in the
distribution of species over a period of time.
Analysing Biodiversity as a whole
Biodiversity analysis can evaluate threats
and the causes of biodiversity loss, help to
enhance our knowledge of biological diversity
as a whole and assess its conservation as
a strategic resource. In this sense, applied
studies have been carried out, the results
of which have been circulated to the Island
Cabildos (Island Councils) involved in the
management of the affected areas. One of
these studies addresses a strategy to make
areas of land on the island of Tenerife part of
the island heritage. The Terrestrial Data Base
analysis module has been used to determine
the zones of greatest biological wealth on
the island that are not currently protected as
Protected Natural Areas and which contain an
important number of endangered species.
This study provides a list of important
sites from the point of view of conservation,
and recommends where the Tenerife Island
Cabildo should establish priorities for their
conservation and management measures to
safeguard biodiversity. This way, preferences
are set for private lands that could be acquired
by the Cabildo, in order to protect a wide
range of representative biodiversity.

Biota Application in the
Region of Macaronesia
Based on the Canary Island Biodiversity
Strategy, consideration has been given to the
creation of a biodiversity study and
analysis centre devoted to the study of
the archipelagos of Azores, Madeira, the
Salvagem Islands, Canary Islands and
Cape Verde. On the other hand, in the context
of specific European policies for the so-called
“ultra-peripheral” or remote regions of the
European Union, the European Commission
has created an initiative called Interreg III-B
Azores – Madeira – Canary Islands for the
period 2000-2006, with a view to fostering
trans-national co-operation between the
authorities of these islands to promote a
greater degree of regional integration. Two
projects have recently been approved for these
archipelagos, one is called “The Develop-
ment of a Macaronesian Biodiversity Data
Base”, known as “ATLANTICO”, and the
other is entitled “Monitoring and Planning
Endangered Species of Macaronesia”, or
“CENTINELA”.
scheduled actions are related to the Catalogue
of Endangered Species of this geographic
region.
Internet Applications (www.gobierno
decanarias/medioambiente)
Atlantis is a computer programme with
two main modules that can be run; on the
one hand the functions of loading and up-
dating data and, on the other, to deal with
consultations and information analysis.
In order to provide access to the informa-
tion to a wide range of users, an Internet
application has been designed to provide
access to the contents of the Data Base.
This contains a range of digital mapping
consultation tools (reference co-ordinates,
orthophotography, grid squares, zoon and
image transfer). There are two forms of
search for consulting the information:
The objectives of “ATLANTICO” are:
a) Generating information about different
aspects of the species
• To identify the genetic structure of the b) Lists of species located in a specific site
populations of Canary Island species. This
knowledge will provide greater effective-
in the islands
ness for biodiversity diagnoses and
decision making in the field of conserva-
tion. This is especially important for the
recovery of Canary Island species. That
is why the project will give priority to
the species listed in the Canary Island
Catalogue of Endangered Species.
• To create a Biodiversity Data Base in
Cape Verde. Following the model used in
the Canary Islands, the project will create
a system to store all existing information
on references to species in Cape Verde.
The aim, therefore, is to work exclusively
with the taxonomic part of the biodiversity
of Cape Verde.
• To disseminate the Biodiversity Data The Atlantis Contribution
Base, which will include the publication
to the “Mapa” Software
of the taxa lists of the Canary Island and
Cape Verde Data Bases and to host and “Mapa” is a geographic viewer that enables
maintain web sites where Biodiversity users to consult regional information about
Data Base information will be available.
any point in the Canary Islands. This com-
puter application has several tools and func-
“CENTINELA” tions, including, for example, consultation
includes four main lines of work:
of alpha-numeric data, place name search,
• Monitoring of endangered species
• Planning the necessary actions for
keeping threats under control
• Maintaining habitats and their popula-
tions in a favourable state of conserva-
tion
• The dissemination of issues related to
the implementation of the project.
For the area of the Canary Islands, all the
125
 geo-referencing of information, etc. The
data, which is sourced from different public
administrations, is organised in “views”. The
catalogue of “Views” is an ample one, but,
as far as Biodiversity is concerned, one can
consult information on Sites of Community
Interest (SCIs), Special Protection Areas for
Birds (SPAs) and several different analyses
of Atlantis.
Building for the future
The creation of the Biodiversity Data Base
has represented a quantitative and qualitative
leap forwards in the study of Canary Island
Biodiversity. Taking the present moment
in time as a reference, we can predict that
advances in this field will continue to grow
exponentially. This initiative has provided a
solid scientific foundation for Environmental
Conservation Policy in the Canary Islands.
The Data Base is a high precision tool whose
functions are to provide information on the
applicable regimen and conservation status of
any component of our biodiversity, facilitate
regional planning and decision making for
planning and for ecological impact assess-
ments and to provide the necessary informa-
tion for decision making in the management
and monitoring of biodiversity status.
126 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ISLAND AFFAIRS
On the other hand, it has also been a starting
point in international co-operation for
the conservation of the Biodiversity
of the Macaronesia region. Thus,
it provides greater cohesion for
strategies aimed at guaran-
teeing the future of one
of Mankind’s greatest
assets.
International
Projection
The Data Base is a state-of-the-art tool in
its field. Its applications have started to be
used internationally, becoming a benchmark
that several European and ultra-peripheral
countries have placed their trust in. This
can be seen from the interest shown by all
the countries that make up the region of
Macaronesia; all these archipelagos have
joined the project first embarked upon by
the Canary Island Government, resulting in
a range of different projects encompassed
in the Community Initiative Programme
Interreg III B (Cape Verde, Azores, Madeira
and the Canary Islands), some of which have
already been dealt with in this chapter.
On the other hand, the European Commis-
sion’s European Fauna data base has also
shown an interest in applying
the operative dynamics of the Canary Island
data base.
This fact per se is a tribute to the Canary
Island Government’s new line of action. The
success reaped by the Biodiversity Data Base
is due to the stringent scientific standards
applied and the enormous effectiveness in
the registering, consultation and analysis of
the existing information on Canary Island
biodiversity.
I believe that this initiative has placed the
first cog in a system that will enhance our
knowledge of biodiversity at the service of
mankind, and I think other data bases will be
incorporated in the near future to generate
a complex framework that will push out the
frontiers of our knowledge of the biodiversity
of the planet.