A guided marine spatial planning exercise leads to the development of a multi-use zoning design for the area. This increases the capacity to protect, manage and sustainably use the marine resources. Potential mismatches between the area’s existing jurisdictional (legal-institutional) and geographical (social-ecological) scales requires consideration.

Collaborative data and information gathering was used to: identify and acquire secondary information; document local knowledge of resources and space-use; develop an appropriate habitat classification scheme; conduct marine habitat mapping field surveys; validate information produced; and ascertain the technological capacity and information preferences of stakeholders. Furthermore, participatory research demonstrates the relevance of information provided by stakeholders, strengthens capacity and provides ownership of the information produced.

Supporting women from fishing communities to create, market and sell jewelry made from previously discarded lionfish parts adds value to fishers’ lionfish catch. It also meets several needs simultaneously: poverty alleviation in fishing communities, gender equality as women learn skills and are supported to earn independently, and further awareness raising about invasive lionfish, thus contributing to the conservation of Belize’s marine ecosystem.

Other potential lionfish value-added product markets include lionfish burgers, frozen fillets for sale through supermarkets and animal feed. Further benefit to fishing communities could be achieved through establishing lionfish processing plants within the communities themselves, increasing the availability of skilled employment opportunities and providing new skills for local community members.

Three future scenarios are developed with input from stakeholders providing local information on human uses and preferences for future location and intensity. Stakeholders also suggest specific changes to the scenarios, based on known alternative development plans or future natural resource uses. Simple tools (e.g. NatCap’s online mapping tool InSEAM) and exercises help stakeholders understand what scenarios are and how alternative spatial development decisions can affect natural capital and benefits delivered to people.

Most management plans focus on ensuring the maintenance of healthy, functional ecosystems, through direct management of the marine environment, surveillance and enforcement and direct biodiversity management interventions. In order to achieve this, surveillance and enforcement programs have been supported and strengthened in the four protected areas of the initiative. Basically, the support has been focused on the economic provision so that patrols can be developed continuously. By providing funds to a regular number of patrols, the Protected Areas can secure matching funds with other organizations and develop inter agency patrols. Also, while increasing presence in their areas, the Protected Areas have managed to acquire greater credibility and trust among local actors/fishers, resulting in collaboration from them assuming the role of community rangers and providing information regarding overfishing, illegal fishing and illegal fishing methods.

Monitoring programs provide ongoing information on the state of the marine resources that can be used for adaptive management, to assist in prioritizing monitoring and research activities, and to inform management decisions. Populations of key conservation species were monitored to assess the success of MPAs, e.g. coral reef fish larvae have been monitored to determine the connectivity among protected areas of the MAR. Also, the baseline for mangrove and sea grass cover was established in the four protected areas. The resulting datasets and subsequent analyses provide essential information to inform adaptive management strategies and assess the management effectiveness of the marine protected area. The monitoring programs also included capacity building activities for staff, rangers and community members to conduct research and monitoring as well as to improve support for conservation activities.

When coastal communities are collaborating towards the conservation of fisheries resources that surround them, it is necessary to provide them an alternative which they can live on. Somehow they need to be recognized for the effort they are doing by not extracting the resources and respecting it for a common property. Such economic alternatives depend on the dynamic of the area, the skills of the communities and the needs of the people that visits these communities. Several types of alternatives have been supported with the project. Some of these are:

• Protect our Pride. This initiative has trained and certified local youth of Roatan to become diving service providers in the island, which is the number one activity for tourists.
• Local stores. In Guatemala, three communities that supported and participated during the establishment of three fisheries recovery sites requested support to build local stores, one in each community, to create a local income.
• Cultural kitchen. In Belize, the group of women of the Punta Negra village was supported with the construction and equipment of a community restaurant that provides meals to every tourist that visits this beautiful site.

The strengthening of the protected area managers of the four project areas is fundamental to this approach. There has been a special focus on capacity building in order to better prepare them for upcoming challenges. Capacity building activities addressed not only specific technical topics, but also how to approach and work with strategic partners. This was done through several meetings between authorities and stakeholders and resulted in the promotion of local partners in each of the protected areas that cooperate with the administrator providing their expertise and supporting the management and sustainable use of natural resources. Among these actors are municipalities, NGOs, fishing communities and other authorities.

The Coral Triangle Center developed an entrance fee system formalized by District Regulation based on a ‘willingness to pay’ survey. The survey indicated that tourists visiting Nusa Penida would pay between USD5 – USD10 per entry. However, the District Government only approved to collect USD1 per visit to avoid decreasing numbers of tourists. In the first year, the collected fee sums up to USD140.000. The 20-year business plan for the MPA, however, indicates the need USD600.000 per year (minimum scenario) and USD800.000 per year (maximum scenario). Thus, currently the entrance fee is covering about 25% of the cost of the MPA management (minimum scenario). The District Government will increase the free gradually to USD5 in 10 years. Assuming 200.000 visitors per year, the entrance fee will reach USD1 million per year, even higher than the maximum scenario costs. Another source of income to cover 20% of the management cost comes from Government budget, souvenirs and merchandise, education trips and collaboration with NGOs and other donors. In addition to rising management costs, the current challenge includes the transfer of authority and tasks such as collecting the entrance fees from the District Government to the Bali Provincial Government due to changed national law.

Accompanying fishermen on the initial ecotourism trips provides further training and allows for regular feedback from tourists. In case manta rays are observed, snorkelling and free diving is conducted. Location and time of encounter is registered, and, if possible, a photograph of the ventral surface is collected for photo-identification. Manta sightings are recorded in a database. Ecotourists are thus able to support research during their boat trips, serving as citizen scientists providing ongoing information about the local species population. Fees paid by ecotourists provide an additional income to fishermen, while encouraging manta ray conservation.