Marine r Marine regional planning measur egional planning measures to improve the sustainability e the sustainability
of the Seaflower MPA in the Colombian Caribbean Sea/

TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION…………………………………………………………………………………………….ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT………………………………………………………………………………iii
ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………………………………………… v
LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………………………………………. ix
LIST OF FIGURES………………………………………………………………………………………… x
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS…………………………………………………………………………. xi
INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………………….. 1
CHAPTER I: MARINE PROTECTED AREAS GOVERNANCE……………………. 5
1.1 Background ………………………………………………………………………………………… 5
1.1.1 Definitions……………………………………………………………………………………… 6
1.1.2 History of MPAs…………………………………………………………………………….. 7
1.2 WORLDWIDE MARINE GOVERNANCE ……………………………………….. 10
1.2.1 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS 1982)…… 11
1.2.2 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED)
– Agenda 21 (1992)…………………………………………………………………………………. 12
1.2.3 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)………………………………………. 14
1.2.4 Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (FAO)……………………………. 16
1.2.5 UNESCO Man and Biosphere Programme……………………………………….. 17
1.2.6 Special Areas (SP) and PSSAs under MARPOL 73/78………………………. 19
1.2.7 UNEP Regional Seas Programme……………………………………………………. 21
1.2.8 New 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development – SD Goals……………… 23
1.3 REGIONAL MARINE GOVERNANCE IN THE CARIBBEAN SEA … 24
1.3.1 United Nations Environment Programme – Caribbean Environment
Programme – (UNEP-CEP)………………………………………………………………………. 26
vii
1.3.1.1 Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine
Environment in the WCR and its Protocols. ……………………………………………….. 27
1.3.1.2 The Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem (CLME) Project…………….. 30
CHAPTER 2: COLOMBIA’S CARIBBEAN COAST MPAs …………………………. 31
2.1 Background ………………………………………………………………………………………. 31
2.2 National Governance and Framework on MPAs…………………………………. 32
2.3 Coastal and Marine MPAs in the Caribbean Coast of Colombia …………. 37
CHAPTER 3. Case Study: THE SEAFLOWER MPA……………………………………. 39
3.1 Background ………………………………………………………………………………………. 39
3.2 Geographical position………………………………………………………………………… 40
3.3 Oceanographic conditions………………………………………………………………….. 42
3.4 Marine Ecosystems……………………………………………………………………………. 43
3.5 MPA Objectives ………………………………………………………………………………… 46
3.6 MPA Zoning ……………………………………………………………………………………… 47
3.7 Threats to the MPA in the region……………………………………………………….. 48
3.7.1 Increase in Maritime Traffic …………………………………………………………… 49
3.7.1.1 The Panama Canal Expansion …………………………………………………… 49
3.7.1.2 The Nicaragua Canal Construction…………………………………………….. 51
3.7.2 Other Shipping Related Environmental Issues ………………………………….. 53
3.7.2.1 Invasive Species………………………………………………………………………. 53
3.7.2.2 Wave Wake by Ships……………………………………………………………….. 55
3.7.2.3 Underwater Noise by Shipping………………………………………………….. 56
3.7.3 Environmental Impacts from Seabed Activities ………………………………… 58
3.7.4 Maritime Boundary Disputes………………………………………………………….. 60
CHAPTER 4. APPROACHES TO ADDRESS THREATS TO THE
SEAFLOWER MPA …………………………………………………………………………………….. 63
4.1 Governance Initiatives……………………………………………………………………….. 64
viii
4.1.1 Regional agreements……………………………………………………………………… 64
4.1.1.1 Transboundary Marine Protected Areas (TBMPAs) – Conservation
Agreements…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 65
4.1.1.1.1 Case of analysis 1: The Gulf of Maine (Canada – US)……………….. 68
4.1.1.1.2 Case of analysis 2: The Red Sea Marine Peace Park (RSMPP)……. 69
4.1.1.1.3 Case of analysis 3: The Korean Peninsula ………………………………… 69
4.1.1.1.4 Case of analysis 4: Pelagos Sanctuary Marine Mammals (PSMM). 70
4.2 Spatial planning measures …………………………………………………………………. 73
4.2.1 Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS) ……………………………………………………. 75
4.2.2 Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs) ………………………………………… 78
5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ……………………………………… 82
5.1 Recommendations……………………………………………………………………………… 84
5.2 Conclusion ………………………………………………………………………………………… 87
6 REFERENCE LIST ………………………………………………………………………………… 89
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 International and Regional MPA’s mechanisms adopted by Colombia. …….. 33
Table 2. IUCN PA’s Classification and Categories……………………………………………… 33
Table 3. Information of National MPAs – SINAP Categories ………………………………. 35
x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. The World Database on MPAs…………………………………………………………… 10
Figure 2 SPAW Protocol Ratification Status 2012 ……………………………………………… 29
Figure 3. Colombia’s National Protected Areas………………………………………………….. 35
Figure 4. MPAs in the Colombian Caribbean Region………………………………………….. 38
Figure 5 Seaflower Biosphere Reserve location …………………………………………………. 40
Figure 6 The Seaflower MPA Location …………………………………………………………….. 41
Figure 7 General Ocean Circulations in the Wider Caribbean Sea ………………………… 43
Figure 8 Coral reef areas within Seaflower Biosphere Reserve…………………………….. 45
Figure 9 The Seaflower MPA Administrative Division……………………………………….. 48
Figure 10 Major shipping routes and Marine Traffic within the Caribbean Sea ……… 50
Figure 11 Nicaragua Canal………………………………………………………………………………. 51
Figure 12 Caribbean Colombian Oil and Gas exploitation blocks…………………………. 59
Figure 13 Seaflower MPA and Colombia’s maritime boundary (ICJ Decision) ……… 62
Figure 14 Malpelo Island PSSA……………………………………………………………………….. 81
Figure 15 Coral Reefs Buffer Zone as a PSSA within the Seaflower BR……………….. 86
xi
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AFS Antifouling Convention
AIS Automatic Identification System
ANH National Agency of Hydrocarbons
APMs Associated Protected Measures
BR Biosphere Reserve
BWMC Ballast Water Management Convention
CARs Regional Autonomous Corporations
CBD Convention on Biological Diversity
CCO Colombian Ocean Commission
CEP Caribbean Environment Programme
CLME Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem project
CMS Convention on Migratory Species of Wild Animals
CO2 Carbonic Dioxide
CORALINA Regional Corporation for the San Andres Archipelago
DIMAR General Maritime Directorate
EMB Ecosystem-Based Management
EEZ Economic Exclusive Zone
EU European Union
FAO Fisheries and Agriculture Organization
GDP Gross Domestic Product
GEF-LME Global Environment Facility-Large Marine Ecosystems Project
GHG Green House Gas Emmissions
HSC Code High-Speed Craft Code
Hz Hertz (Frequency Unit)
Ibero-MAB Ibero-American MAB Network
ICJ International Court of Justice
xii
ICM Integrated Coastal Management
ICZM Integrated Coastal Zone Management
IMO International Maritime Organization
INVEMAR Marine Research Institute and Coastal “Jose Benito Vives de
Andreis”
IOC Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission
IUCN International Union for Conservation and Nature
IUU Illegal, unreported and unregulated
IWC International Whaling Commission
KMI Korean Maritime Institute
LCVs Large Commercial Vessels
LMEs Large Marine Ecosystems
MAB UNESCO Man & Biosphere Programme
MADS Ministry of environment and Sustainable Development
MARPOL 73/78 International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from
Ships
MDGs Millennium Development Goals
MEAs Multilateral Environmental Agreements
MPAs Marine Protected Areas
MSP Marine Spatial Planning
NGOs Non-Governmental Organizations
NWG National Working Group
PCG Panama-Colombia Gyre
PSMM Pelagos Sanctuary Marine Mammals
PSSA Particularly Sensitive Area
PSU Practical Salinity Units
Rio+20 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development
RUNAP Unique Registry of Protected Areas
xiii
SAMP Subsystem of Marine Protected Areas
SAP Strategic Action Plan
SDGs Sustainable Development Goals
SINA National Environmental System
SP Special Areas
SPAW Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife Protocol
SPNN National Natural Parks System
TBMPAs Transboundary Marine Protected Areas
TBPP Transboundary Protected Peace Park
TSS Traffic Separation Scheme
UAC Environmental Coastal Units
UNCED United Nations Conference on Environment and Development
UNCLOS United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea
UNCTAD United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
UNESCO United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural
UNSD United Nation Sustainable Development Division
VTS Vessel Traffic Services
WCMC World Conservation Monitoring Centre
WCPA World Commission on Protected Areas
WCR Wider Caribbean region
WHC World Heritage Convention
WNBR World Network of Biosphere Reserves
1
INTRODUCTION
In recent times, oceans have become more industrialized, facing several issues that
generate conflict between economic and environmental protection values. For
instance, the increase in shipping activities is causing issues such as increases in
marine invasive species, as well as of CO2 emissions and underwater noise (IMO,
2012), which are causing massive losses of native ecosystems. Furthermore, drilling
activities related to the exploitation of the seabed around the world are becoming
increasingly common (ISA, 2008) as new technologies are developed in the industry.
Furthermore, transnational threats such as illegal fishing, piracy, drug smuggling,
slavery and illegal migration are also contributing as stressors of the marine
environment (Patrick & Storm, 2013). These transnational threats are contributing in
some manner to marine pollution and consequently causing degradation of the marine
environment (Van Tatenhove, 2013). Additionally, climate change effects are now
more evident, degrading ecosystems such as coral reefs, causing migration of fish, and
creating an imbalance in habitats (Harrould-Kolieb & Herr, 2012).
The reason these issues persist is that there is still a lack of compliance by states with
the international framework and awareness from all stakeholders with the sustainable
development of the marine environment; there are also weaknesses in the existing
local framework, and enforcement measures. However, many people from the
scientific community and environmental institutions (EU, 2015) have raised their
voices in concern, to take actions to tackle the issues and manage the oceans
effectively (Jones, 2014; Kelleher G. , 2015).
2
Therefore, the United Nations, through its specialized agencies, is making efforts to
address these problems (UNSD, 2015). They have called for the participation of all
responsible actors, i.e., member states, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), the
shipping industry, communities, and academia, to adopt the strongest measures in a
cooperative manner to ensure the sustainable development of ecosystems for our
future generations. Nevertheless, it must still be a requirement that the protection of
biodiversity has a strong relevance at all levels of society.
As a result, several initiatives in marine governance have been put into play. At the
end of the 20th century, the United Nations upgraded and updated the Convention on
the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) as a necessity to improve governance and protection of
the environment (Jones, 2014). Operational activities in marine spatial planning (MSP)
have emerged as a solution to address those problems through an enormous process of
analysis to manage at both spatial and temporal levels, the distribution of human
activities in the oceans (Vallega, 2001; 2002).
Furthermore, the improvement of cooperation mechanisms in the political process
contributes to reaching environmental, social, and economic goals from coastal state
jurisdictions including the exclusive economic zone (EEZ), especially in regional seas
(Vallega, 2001; Osherenko, 2006; Van Tatenhove, 2013; Ehler, 2014). In addition,
some states have assumed the leadership and started to approach conceptions of
marine governance, focusing on marine and coastal protection, through the concept of
Marine Protected Areas (MPAs).
Today, MPAs have been put into place as a suitable solution for protection of marine
habitats and as an effective measure in marine spatial planning (Jones, 2014). It is
considered an effective solution to counteract transnational threats and environmental
problems caused by multiple marine activities (Kelleher, Bleakley, & Wells, 1995).
3
This is where environmental institutions such as the Non-governmental International
Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and United Nations Environment
Programme (UNEP) are playing an important role developing initiatives for
improvement and guiding countries in the designation of these areas to facilitate and
support the management process (Van Tatenhove, 2013; Jones, 2014; Wright, 2014;
Marine Conservation Institute, 2015). They have also increased the level of protection
to restrict some human activities as a mechanism to ensure the long-term conservation
of ecosystems (Jones & Qiu W, 2011; Van Tatenhove, 2013; Jones, 2014).
Likewise, The International Maritime Organization (IMO) is doing its part in the
protection of the environment from impacts of shipping activities through the
establishment Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs) (IMO, 2006). It has been an
effective solution in foreseeing the conservation of marine habitats through the
establishment of exclusion zones or limiting specific shipping activities. This includes
maritime navigation in high-risk traffic areas to tackling the degradation of marine
habitats from the adverse effects of it. However, MPAs require strong enforcement,
monitoring, and control measures, especially in developing countries, to succeed in the
governance process.
For instance, the Seaflower MPA in the Colombian Caribbean Sea, as one of the
biggest protected areas in the Wider Caribbean Region (WCR), is facing many issues
as a consequence of inadequacy of governance at national level (Taylor, Baine,
Killmer, & Howard, 2013) as well as a lack of regional agreements and cooperation
mechanisms between neighboring countries. Likewise, illegal fishing and overfishing
are issues faced by the MPA. Furthermore, the increase in maritime traffic by the
extension of the Panama Canal, and the possible further increase by the Nicaragua
Canal contribute to the degradation of the ecosystems within the MPA. The
consequences may an increase in invasive species from ballast water exchange, oil
4
pollution, and adverse wave making and underwater noise produced by propellers as
an effect of maritime traffic. Moreover, an increase in seabed explorations might cause
damage and pollution as well.
Therefore, The Seaflower MPA requires improvement of governance strategies at
national and regional levels. Additionally, further special sensitive areas could be
established as a measure against environmental threats around coral reef areas in the
key islands.
This dissertation will address these concerns through the development of four
chapters. Chapter one will show an analytical review of the existing literature on
MPAs, starting with governance at the global level, down to the regional basis to
analyze the current situation in the Caribbean Sea. Chapter two will show the current
framework of Colombian MPAs focusing on the Caribbean area. Chapter three will
discuss the real conditions of the Seaflower MPA, and their existing and future issues
associated, mainly, with shipping activities. In addition, political issues, such as
boundary disputes, that are threatening the integrity and the conservation objectives
within the MPA will be highlighted. Chapter four will approach possible solutions to
address the problems based on the analysis of some specific areas worldwide, taking
into account best practices and spatial planning measures adopted therein. Finally, the
paper concludes by proposing and recommending which of these actions can be taken
to improve governance in the Seaflower MPA.
5
CHAPTER I: MARINE PROTECTED AREAS GOVERNANCE
1.1 Background
Approximately two-thirds of the world’s surface is covered by water. Oceans,
including the seabed and coastal areas, contain rich and diverse environments, fauna
and flora, corresponding to 80% of Earth’s biosphere, some of which are key
ecosystems for life on Earth (Plata, 2009). Nevertheless, these ecosystems are being
threatened by anthropogenic activities causing significant degradation (Jones & Qiu
W, 2011). Therefore, to ensure the heritage for future generations, they should be
protected, preserved and managed appropriately. In that sense, MPAs have become a
suitable solution for the protection of marine/coastal ecosystems (Jones, 2014).
MPAs have undergone a gradual evolution from theory to practice. Thus, today 2.3%
of the total global sea area is enclosed by MPAs (IUCN; UNEP-WCMC, 2013).
However, the number of MPAs is quite low, compared with the 12.7% of land areas
protected, and recent studies have shown a continuous degradation of the ocean biota.
The adoption of measures to protect sensitive ecosystems such as coral reefs,
mangroves, and fish stocks is a real step towards guaranteeing the integrity and
preservation of these areas. It is, therefore, necessary to move towards a stronger MPA
governance system that is also sufficiently attractive to stakeholders in order to
connect the concerns of society and the scientific community to improve, in both
management and governance, the state and balance of the oceans (Jones, 2014).
6
1.1.1 Definitions
When discussing MPA governance, it is important to acknowledge some definitions
surrounding this broad subject. Van Tatenhove (2013, p. 298) makes an extensive
review of the existing literature and defines ocean governance as “… the rules of
collective decision-making where there is a plurality of actors or organizations and
where no formal control system can dictate the terms of the relationship between
them”. Besides this, the concept encompasses a set of official rules involving formal
and informal institutions and a negotiation process between them, which function at
different levels to ensure effective integrated management. This concept leads to a
policy-making process, sharing administration roles through many governing entities
during a temporary period while the stabilization and organization of marine policy
occurs.
To ensure effective ocean governance it is necessary to establish management
strategies based on an ecosystem approach. Ecosystem-Based Management (EBM),
have been defined since mid-1970s as “a conceptual framework incorporating human
activities undertaken at sustainable levels as an accepted element of ecosystem
functioning”. Nevertheless, in 1992 the concept took strong place for international
environmental organizations and was defined as “a strategy for the integrated
management of land, water and living resources that promotes conservation and
sustainable use in an equitable way” (UNEP, 2014a, p. 20).
Conversely, it is important to formally define the concept of protected areas, since it is
considered an umbrella term for protecting marine environments based on EBM. Since
1994, the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) developed the first
definition of protected areas. Then, in 2008 the IUCN World Commission on
Protected Areas (WCPA), created a stronger definition, updating this concept. “A
protected area is a clearly defined geographical space recognized, dedicated and
7
managed, through legal and other effective means, to achieve the long-term
conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values”
(Dudley, 2008 as cited by Lausche (2011, p. 12)).
Both concepts, governance, and protected areas, involve a systematic process of
setting rules within a particular zone, (i.e. marine) to exclude or limit commercial
purposes and tackle degradation of oceanic ecosystems. This is managed by legal
measures (policies) and also by formal agreements with the participation of all the
intervening stakeholders through effective strategies to ensure the long-term
preservation of the environment (Osherenko, 2006; Patrick & Storm, 2013).
As a result, IUCN-WCPA established a formal definition for MPAs: “any area of
intertidal or subtidal terrain, together with its overlying water and associated flora,
fauna, historical and cultural features, which has been reserved by law or other
effective means to protect part or all of the enclosed environment” (Lausche, 2011, p.
14).
1.1.2 History of MPAs
The concept of MPAs dates back thousands of years to the Polynesians. They, through
a traditional management system, protected some coral reef areas considered sacred
and untouchable. Similar traditions were shared by other cultures worldwide by way
of some logical approaches, based on religious and ancestral traditions. They were
effective in preserving and revitalizing fish populations in fishing communities around
coral reefs (Johannes, 1978 as cited by Jones (2014)). From that perspective, MPAs
have had quite a long and slow history, much more spiritual and religious than
managerial.
8
The first country that used the concept of an MPA as a management approach was
Australia when, in 1879, it created the Royal National Park in New South Wales. This
MPA was composed mainly of land, following by estuaries and an open shoreline.
After that, the United States started to lead in the field and in 1903 established the first
MPA on Pelican Island. In 1913, an MPA system at Cabrillo National Monument in
California was established. Subsequently, in 1935, a complete environmental MPA
was put in place in Fort Jefferson, a subtidal area, to protect the Dry Tortugas coral
reef (Jones, 2014; Tripp, 2014).
Nevertheless, in the following years, the development of MPAs was slow. However,
the necessity to improve management methods and protection of marine ecosystems
did take place, which is why, between the mid-1950s and early 1960s, there were
several developments. In 1962, marine and coastal protection was discussed during the
first World Conference on Nationals Parks, representing a significant formal step,
toward adopting and developing the MPA concept globally (Jones & Qiu W, 2011).
During the 1970s concern about environmental protection grew due to increasing
technical capability in the exploitation of marine resources. On that basis, several
conventions such as the Ramsar Convention (1971) and the World Heritage
Convention (1972) were developed in the following years. Simultaneously, the United
Nations Council created the UNEP as the first body in charge of monitoring and
reviewing environmental issues at an international level. After the establishment of
UNEP, there was a considerable advance in the development of MPAs, from 118 in
the 1970s to 718 between the mid-1980s and early 1990s (Kelleher & Kenchington,
1992).
The designation of MPAs worldwide has grown exponentially, and by 2012, the
number had increased to 10,000 representing approximately 2% (Figure 1) of the
oceans’ area (Jones, 2014). According to the Marine Conservation Institute (2015),
9
2.8% of ocean areas are under protection by 13,674 MPAs. This number is still is very
low compared with the 15.4% of protected areas inland.
Nevertheless, MPAs coverage has grown because of awareness of the steady
degradation that is being suffered by marine ecosystems such as coral reefs. This is
especially true in tropical areas due to the increase in sea temperature as a
consequence of climate change (Jackson, Donovan, Cramer, & Lam, 2014). Therefore,
MPAs are considered an effective solution for the protection of those habitats that
have been depleted due to unreasonable exploitation and impacts from anthropogenic
activities (Jones & Qiu W, 2011). Nonetheless, MPAs effectiveness cannot be
measured only by their designation; it is necessary to ensure effective protection
measures.
Thus, MPA categories with different protection levels have been developed as a
management approach, and enforcement solutions for achieving its conservation goals
(Jones, 2014). In addition, marine governance has been strengthened to effectively
address the measures taken in these particular areas, such as reaching the global
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2020 of increasing the number of MPAs to
10% within the oceans (UNSD, 2015).
10
Figure 1. The World Database on MPAs
Source: IUCN; UNEP-WCMC (2013)
1.2 WORLDWIDE MARINE GOVERNANCE
The exploitation of oceans through new technologies started taking place in the 1980s
when the oceans became more industrialized, and transnational threats increased (Van
Tatenhove, 2013) at the same time as shipping activities were increasing (Jones,
2014). Therefore, the impacts of pollution on the oceans are high, and marine
ecosystems continue to suffer deterioration due to shortcomings of regulation,
legislation and enforcement (Fanning, et al., 2007) worldwide. Thus, broader
conceptions relating to governance have started to be developed rigorously (Vallega,
2001).
The following sections will describe the international instruments that have been
implemented to support the establishment of MPAs to date.
11
1.2.1 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS 1982)
UNCLOS is the Umbrella convention of all international treaties developed since the
mid-twentieth century (Vallega, 2001) and several changes were made up to the last
update in 1982. As the mother of the international binding regulations, it deals broadly
with all matters related to oceans including closed and semi-closed seas (Vallega,
2002). Furthermore, through these essential principles, it gives provisions to states
regarding the rights and duties in the development of policies under EEZ jurisdiction,
and on the high seas (Umana, 2002; Jones, 2014). Nonetheless, the interest of this
analysis is to discuss the framework related to the conservation and management of
marine resources focusing on MPAs under national jurisdiction.
UNCLOS part XII contains provisions related to the protection and conservation of the
marine environment through sustainable development (UNCLOS, 1982). Furthermore,
in other sections of the Convention, it establishes the duty of states to cooperate in
relation to environmental matters (Van Tatenhove, 2013; Wright, 2014). Cooperation
is the most important principle enforcing the convention because it is the appropriate
mechanism wherein coastal states are accountable to undertake measures to deal with
all transnational threats that are affecting and degrading the marine environment today.
Besides it is necessary to work together with specialized organizations (Umana, 2002;
Jones, 2014) to address the issues efficiently.
Furthermore, UNCLOS gives broader provisions in Articles 194 and 211 regarding
environmental protection and preservation of ecosystems through the establishment of
special areas (UNCLOS, 1982). For instance, it establishes general rules under which
states can act concerning their sovereign rights and perform mechanisms such as the
creation of MPAs (Vallega, 2001; Umana, 2002; Jones & Qiu W, 2011).
12
Moreover, taking into account UNCLOS, several UN specialized organizations started
to develop a mechanism in matters concerning the protection of marine ecosystems.
The main goal is to fill the interpretation gaps that the umbrella convention has,
adapting to the challenges of the 21st century (Vallega, 2001).
In this regard, The IMO is addressing some mechanisms to protect the environment,
through the establishment of special areas such as PSSAs (IMO, 2006) that are being
affected by shipping activities (Van Tatenhove, 2013; Wright, 2014). The aim is to
protect and preserve rare or fragile ecosystems in the long-term (UNEP, 2012; Jones,
2014). In this respect, States have demonstrated their concern to enhance the MPA
approach, since 1992, in the global conference on environment and development.
1.2.2 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) –
Agenda 21 (1992)
Agenda 21 is the result of the first steps that the UN undertook to reach the goals and
priorities regarding sustainable development of the environment for the twenty-first
century. This agenda was adopted during the Earth Summit (UNCED) in Rio de
Janeiro, Brazil in 1992 with the participation of over 170 member states (UNSD,
2015).
The scope of the agenda was based on the provisions made by UNCLOS. Thus, the
agenda is a non-binding action plan formed of four sections, wherein section II
encourages the states to undertake measures to protect fragile environments,
conservation of biodiversity, and control of pollution among others (UNSD, 2015). It
was voluntarily implemented by UN member states and executed at the national level
but also on a global scale. This plan agreed to keep an efficient development through a
permanent follow-up and the establishment of international partnerships (Lausche,
2011; UNSD, 2015).
13
The global alliance was developed with the aim of balancing and integrating
environment and development as one concept to address several issues regarding the
effects of anthropogenic activities such as climate change that can only be solved at
the highest level of cooperation. To strengthen cooperation efforts, Chapter 2 of the
agenda addressed these concerns by way of sub-regional, regional and international
organizations stepping up sustainable development in developing countries to succeed
in the long-term (UNCED, 1992; Lausche, 2011). However, its successful
implementation has to be a responsibility of governments at a national scale through
the execution of strategic action plans and policies within their territories.
Moreover, as was mentioned, section II leads with matters concerning conservation
and management of resources for development. Specifically, Chapter 17 put emphasis
on “protection of the oceans, all kind of seas, including enclosed, semi-enclosed seas,
and coastal areas and the protection of rational use and development of their living
resources” (UNCED, 1992, p. 168; Umana, 2002, p. 34).
As the concern is mainly related to sustainable use and conservation of marine living
resources, it places emphasis on national jurisdictions, and their obligations and rights
regarding preservation and rational use of their resources. Chapter 17 also sets rules
concerning the sustainable development of fisheries and the management of related
activities (UNCED, 1992). Therefore, it obligates coastal states to undertake measures
to enforce preservation and restoration of their threatened ecosystems such as coral
reefs, mangroves, and seagrass beds. Put simply, it encourages states to develop
mechanisms to protect areas minimizing adverse impacts on the marine environment.
This is when MPAs play a major role in doing so (Umana, 2002; Lausche, 2011).
Despite that, UNCED has led different approaches for marine and coastal
development, focusing more on high-level management integration. It has been
14
working on specific environment-based management programs in coastal states and
small islands jurisdictions (including EEZ) and high seas (Umana, 2002). The aim is
to “integrate management and sustainable development; marine environmental
protection; sustainable use, and conservation of marine resources addressing critical
uncertainties within marine ecosystems like climate change, strengthening regional
and international cooperation and coordination” (UNCED, 1992, p. 168).
Thanks to the commitment and contribution of member states supplying information
related to the status of marine habitats and ecosystems, UNCED developed the World
Ocean Assessment. This review provides analysis, evaluating the sustainability of
oceans on how they have been managed at both global and regional levels (UNEP,
2014b). Nevertheless, these efforts for the protection of particular ecosystems are
being supported by a convention related to protecting biodiversity and ecosystems.
1.2.3 Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
The CBD is the result of environmental organizations commitment on biological
sustainable development. In 1988, a UNEP initiative started the development of the
Convention, which was adopted at the UNCED (the Rio Earth Summit), in 1992 and
entered into force in 1993, with the participation of 196 member states (CBD, 2016).
The aim is to provide a globally binding framework based on an EBM, concerning the
sustainable use of the components of biodiversity, based upon the conservation of
biotas and cooperation through the interchange of equal benefits from genetic
resources (Kelleher, Bleakley, & Wells, 1995). Nevertheless, this cannot be done
without enforcement at the national level; likewise, the development of agreeable
measures such as the Strategic Action Plan (SAP) and domestic programs, which
cover the objectives of the Convention (Kelleher, Bleakley, & Wells, 1995; Umana,
2002).
15
In that sense, the Convention imposes some obligations. Article 6 gives tools and
provisions for governments regarding the integration of those strategies under national
jurisdictions. Article 8 refers to in-situ conservation measures and gives provisions
through the establishment of the protected areas system, enforced by domestic
legislation, to preserve ecosystems against threats such as invasive and alien species,
and degradation of those biotas by human activities (CBD, 1992). Finally, the
adoption of these actions shall be taken through the involvement of local stakeholder
communities to ensure the equitable allotment of benefits resulting from them
(Umana, 2002; Lausche, 2011; CBD, 2016).
As compromises of the Convention, parties agreed to develop a regular meeting to
review the SAP to manage and address governance. Therefore, in 1995 the Jakarta
Mandate on Coastal and Marine Biodiversity was issued (Umana, 2002). It identifies
five activities that parties shall implement under the scope of the convention referring
to marine habitats. The activities are, integrated coastal management (ICM);
sustainable use of coasts and marine living resources; implementing feasible
mariculture; preventing invasion of alien species; and creating MPAs (Lausche, 2011).
Likewise, in 2004 at its seventh meeting, a program to work on protected areas was
adopted through decision VII/28 (CBD, 2016). The program is led by an Ad-hoc
working group. The main objective is to look into cooperation options for the
formulation of marine protected areas beyond national jurisdictions using UNCLOS as
a basis. Moreover, it undertakes to identify mechanisms to finance small islands and
developing countries taking into account Article 20 of the CBD (CBD, 1992). On the
other hand, the group has to contribute to the development of instruments to identify,
designate, and implement the management process on national and regional protected
areas in ecological networks involving the local community and stakeholders
(Lausche, 2011).
16
Finally, the Secretariat of the CBD recently updated its SAP for the period from 2011
to 2020, focusing on 16 goals and specific targets (Jones, 2014; CBD, 2016). They are:
to restore approximately 15% of degraded areas by implementing conservation
activities through proper and efficient MPA designations, effectively managed in a
global network, making a special effort in reducing stressors on coral reefs areas
mainly related to fishing activities (Lausche, 2011; Jones, 2014).
1.2.4 Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries (FAO)
The code of conduct was an initiative of the Fisheries and Agriculture Organization
(FAO) as a contribution to reach the objectives of the UNCED Agenda 21. The main
purpose is to Help, especially, developing countries in the conservation, responsible
management and development of all fisheries within its jurisdictions (FAO, 1995).
In addition, the code has one particular objective related to promoting “the protection
of living aquatic resources and their environments in coastal and marine areas”(Art
2) (FAO, 1995, p. 2). Thus, the general principle of the code is to establish that all
marine ecosystems and fishery habitats in a critical situation of depletion, degradation
and pollution due to anthropogenic activities, should be protected and rehabilitated
through a stronger mechanism. In this regard, MPAs are the mechanism that can deal
with these issues through effective MSP implementation.
The above mentioned has a close relationship with the efforts made by other UN
organizations as part of the strategy to create biosphere networks as a measure to cope
with vast areas for conservation of biodiversity and ecosystems through sustainable
development.
17
1.2.5 UNESCO Man and Biosphere Programme
United Nations, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) established the Man
and Biosphere (MAB) Program in the early 1970s. It is an Intergovernmental
Scientific Programme with the objective of improving the affinity of the environment
with people on a systematic basis (Umana, 2002; Lausche, 2011; UNESCO, 2015).
The program encompasses the designation of Biosphere Reserves (UNESCO, 2015)
which by definition are “areas comprising terrestrial, marine and coastal ecosystems
which are internationally recognized for promoting and demonstrating a balanced
relationship between people and nature” (Kelleher, 1999 cited by Umana (2002, p.
35)).
National governments nominate areas that become biosphere reserves, but remain their
sovereign jurisdiction. Nevertheless, the international status is recognized according to
the Statutory Framework of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves (WNBR)
(UNESCO, 2014). The aim is to promote solutions for the conservation of ecosystems
with sustainable use. Therefore, the purpose of these areas, as a scientific basis, is
preventing and monitoring through management, all changes attributable to
interactions between humans and ecological habitats (UNESCO, 2015).
Additionally, three principal aims have to be achieved by biosphere reserves. The first
is to contribute to the conservation of landscapes, ecosystems, species and genetic
variation. The second is to reinforce scientific research, monitoring, training and
education through consistent ecological practices in surrounding areas. The third is to
allow sustainable socio-cultural and environmental development in the part of the
reserve named the “transition area” (UNESCO, 2015).
18
The MAB program has a strong connection with the Convention on World Heritage
(WHC) due to the relevance of conservation for future generations. In some areas, this
is through a cultural awareness such as the Great Barrier Reef in Australia, which has
invaluable importance for humanity (Kelleher, Bleakley, & Wells, 1995). Today, the
program manages a dynamic and interactive WNBR, which is mainly terrestrial but
with an increasing number of maritime reserves. It is achieving a shareholder dialogue
through the harmonious integration of people and environment with the objectives of
reducing poverty, sharing knowledge, and respecting traditional beliefs to improve
national welfare, besides facing the impacts of climate change using interdisciplinary
research and innovate combinations for sustainable development (Umana, 2002;
Lausche, 2011; UNESCO, 2015).
In that way, action plans have been developed to achieve the objectives of the
program. Since 1995, the Seville Strategy suggests some solutions to reach sustainable
development goals for the twenty-first century (UNEP, 2012). Likewise, as a result of
the suggestions proposed in the Seville Strategy, the Madrid Action Plan was adopted
in 2008. This plan joins the MAB and the WNBR in proposing an agenda to achieve
their goals by 2013. Recently, this agenda was updated to continue reaching the goals
for the following decade, until 2015, especially in the increase in MPAs (UNESCO,
2015).
Therefore, the MAB program supports countries in education and capacity building.
This is achieved by strengthening activities through many programs and partnerships
as a platform for cooperation and training in topics related to biosphere reserves
(Kelleher, Bleakley, & Wells, 1995). In consequence, today there are over 600
biosphere reserves in 119 countries. The Caribbean Sea is part of the Ibero-American
MAB Network (IberoMAB), which encompass 120 biosphere reserves under the
jurisdiction of 21 countries (UNESCO, 2015). Colombia is one of these with three
19
biosphere reserves including the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve, the largest MPA in the
Caribbean Sea (Taylor, Baine, Killmer, & Howard, 2013).
Furthermore, as part of the initiatives on environmental protection, the IMO sets
provisions for the establishment of special areas threatened and degraded by the
effects of shipping activities and ship-source pollution.
1.2.6 Special Areas (SP) and PSSAs under MARPOL 73/78
Since 1959, IMO as part of the UN system in charge of matters related to shipping and
maritime safety, has assumed responsibility concerning pollution prevention, and its
associated issues with the aim of mitigating the impacts on the environment as a
consequence of maritime activities. There are over fifty binding agreements adopted
by IMO to regulate shipping worldwide, out of which 21 encompass environmental
concerns (IMO, 2016).
The role of IMO in achieving the protection of the marine environment through the
concept of MPAs is, without any doubt, crucial. That is why, since 1991, IMO has
under the MARPOL 73/78, by the Resolution A 720 (17), adopted and updated
guidelines for Designation of Special Areas and Identification of Particularly Sensitive
Sea Areas (PSSAs) (Blanco-Bazán, 1996; IMO, 2006). The aim is to avoid the
discharge of polluted liquids and waste into the sea (Umana, 2002). In that sense, the
Pollution Convention in Annex I, II, IV, and V defines some sea areas as “Special
Areas” for scientific reasons concerning their natural conditions, which are vulnerable
to stressors of maritime activities such as sea traffic (IMO, 2016). Therefore, a binding
mechanism with a higher level of protection to preserve and to protect those
environments from sea pollution is necessary.
20
Recently, IMO through Resolution MEPC.200 (62) (IMO, 2016) updated and
established new requirements for the designation of Special Areas. The success of
those provisions takes effect by the commitment of the coastal states to notify and to
improve adequate reception facilities (MARPOL Annex IV) on the borders of those
special areas. The resolution entered into force on January 1, 2013.
The criteria for the designation of both PSSAs and special areas are not mutually
exclusive since both points can be identified as parts of one another (Umana, 2002;
IMO, 2016), and are developed taking into consideration provisions made by
UNCLOS. The most up-to-date guidelines for the designation of PSSAs were adopted
by Resolution A.982 (24) on December 1, 2005 (IMO, 2006). The management
practices for enclosed and semi-enclosed seas apply this concept in an accurate
manner (Plata, 2009; IMO, 2016).
The document sets the criteria that coastal states must fulfil to obtain the designation
from IMO. The information required from the area to be designated, at least, should
meet one of the three criteria. These include: ecological criteria (rarity or uniqueness),
the importance of biodiversity in the ecosystem, its vulnerability and degradation by
ocean phenomena and/or anthropogenic activities; socio-economic and cultural value
(tourism), and scientific and educational or historical value (IMO, 2006). There are
additional associated protective measures that states can undertake to manage
maritime activities and guarantee the safety of navigation within the PSSA, such as
traffic separation schemes (routing), and vessel traffic services (VTS).
Moreover, the guidelines enforce the strict application of MARPOL provisions related
to ships discharges (equipment on board) to avoid oil pollution and invasive species.
Likewise, the guidelines determine provisions to supply information regarding the
Automatic Identification System (AIS) from ships. Additionally, states have to provide
21
hydrography and marine weather information (IMO, 2016). The above mentioned is
valuable in the risk assessment plan that coastal states must have to execute a proper
management and governance inside the PSSA (Umana, 2002; IMO, 2003; IMO,
2006).
Although, the effectiveness of PSSAs concept has not been truly proved due to
different interpretation and application of the concept by states (Roberts J. , 2007).
Nonetheless, the IMO aims to continue increasing the number of these particular areas
and, for instance, increase the development of systems (e.g. VTS, AIS) through the enavigation concept to minimize the impact on the environment by shipping activities
(Umana, 2002). Therefore, to date, IMO has designated fourteen PSSAs around the
world. Colombia is one of the states that has one under its jurisdiction with Malpelo
Island (Pacific Ocean) (Plata, 2009; IMO, 2016).
Nevertheless, IMO has aligned its efforts to protect the marine environment according
to the provisions made by the CBD (1992), and its current SAP with the objective to
work together to reach the goal of protection of marine ecosystems (UNEP, 2016).
There, regional environmental bodies start to play an important role in managing all
the anthropogenic activities, including shipping-related ones, within regional sea areas.
1.2.7 UNEP Regional Seas Programme
It is established that UNCLOS provides the scope to cooperate between coastal states
at the regional level by way of multilateral agreements. This is based on relevant proof
of how effective governance in regional seas, both closed and semi-enclosed can be
(Vallega, 2001). For instance, in 1974, UNEP established the first political approach to
deal with those particular sea areas (Lausche, 2011). Therefore, the first concern was
the Mediterranean Sea, creating the Mediterranean Action Plan with the main aim of
conceiving “… the causes of environmental degradation and encompassing a
22
comprehensive approach to combating environmental troubles through the
management of marine and coastal areas” (Vallega, 2002, p. 734).
In 1984, after ten years of the program having been established the lessons learned
were shared, and the UNEP encouraged a generation of policy frameworks by
launching ten more Action Plans enveloping 140 coastal states (UNEP, 2012). The
Caribbean Environment Programme (CEP) was the second having been established in
1981 (UNEP, 2014a). It is considered a postmodern approach for the regionalization
of ocean governance because it provides the essential legal framework for
conservation, including rules for the establishment of MPAs (Vallega, 2002; Lausche,
2011; Jones, 2014).
Today, the UNEP’s Regional Seas Programme leads 18 successful Multilateral
Environmental Agreements (MEAs). The scope is based on cooperation and solidarity
among states, improving Integrated Coastal Zone Management (ICZM) and MSP, and
reducing land-based pollution. Additionally, it protects valuable ecosystems promoting
the creation of MPA networks to tackle the impacts of ocean acidification and climate
change on coral reefs, moving forward a green economy approach (Lausche, 2011;
UNEP, 2014b).
The Regional Seas Programme is not independent of all previous worldwide
governance mechanisms because, being part of UN specialized agencies, it has a
strong link with other conventions, programs, and strategies developed to work in the
protection and sustainable development of the oceans as a whole. For that reason UN
is making significant efforts to determine new goals for the next decade, especially in
the sea, adding their objectives at the sustainable development agenda (Umana, 2002;
UNEP, 2014a).
23
1.2.8 New 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development – SD Goals
The new 2030 Agenda is the update of all previous agendas (e.g. Rio+20) and the
masterpiece of the UN action plans. The global aim for the next fifteen years is to
work for the prosperity of people and planet eradicating poverty through sustainable
development (UNSD, 2015). The Agenda pursues the Millennium Development Goals
that encompass 17 goals and identify 169 associated targets approved by Resolution
A/70/L.1, during the 70th session of UN General Assembly on October 21, 2015, and
put into operation on January 1, 2016 (UNSD, 2015). The goals of sustainable
development are integrated and indivisible, balancing three dimensions; economic,
social, and environmental. These are developed through the cooperation of all
countries and global partnerships through a collective consciousness for the well-being
of current and future generations (Kaurobi, Espey, & Durand-Delacre, 2016). All the
above is framed within international law dissertation writing service provisions; for instance, countries agreed to
enforce them at all levels, regional, sub-regional and national (UNSD, 2015)
This dissertation will focus mainly on the goals related to sustainable management of
oceans and seas preserving and restoring ecosystems and biodiversity that suffer
adverse impacts from climate change and anthropogenic activities.
In that sense, according to UNSD (2015), a specific goal is part of the discussion:
Goal 14. “Conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for
sustainable development”. The targets that should be reached during the next fifteen
years concern:
1. Reducing of all kinds of marine pollution;
2. Increasing sustainable management of existing MPAs;
3. Reducing the impacts of ocean acidification through scientific cooperation;
4. Regulating all kinds of fisheries activities, effectively restoring fish stocks
through science-based management;
24
5. Increasing protection and conservation of coasts and marine areas through science
advice by 10%;
6. Prohibiting irregular fishery subsidies, especially in developing and less
developed countries;
7. Increasing the economic benefits from the sustainable exploitation of marine
resources in Small Island Developing States (SIDS), and least developed
countries.
All of the above will be achieved through enhancing the international binding regime
for the conservation and sustainable use of oceans, increasing scientific knowledge
capacity and, cooperating with scientific organizations for the wellbeing of developing
countries.
The way forward to develop this important strategy is through a global solidarity
partnership where all the stakeholders, governments, and communities are involved.
Regarding sustainable ocean development, the aim is to tackle the degradation of
ecosystems reducing the harmful impacts produced by all kinds of industrial activities.
To achieve these, it is necessary that coastal states work hard on the designation of
MPAs with the strongest governance strategy possible until 10% of the oceans are
protected effectively (Jones, 2014; Wright, 2014). The agenda is very optimistic, but it
is not impossible to accomplish.
Thus, it is necessary to continue working, focusing the regional level, and
strengthening governance to achieve these global goals.
1.3 REGIONAL MARINE GOVERNANCE IN THE CARIBBEAN SEA
As discussed, on a worldwide basis, several regulations have been created in matters
concerning conservation and restoration of the environment through sustainable
development, in particular for the establishment of MPAs under national jurisdictions
25
(Fanning, et al., 2007). To address environmental concerns on a regional basis, in
1974, the UN system created a regional program, as a response to UNCLOS part XII.
The main purpose is to work together for the proper management and development of
closed and semi-enclosed seas encompassing binding and non-binding agreements, i.e.
Regional Seas Conventions and Action Plan (RSCAPs) (Lausche, 2011; UNEP,
2014a; UNEP, 2014b).
Referring to regional governance, it is necessary to define the concept of Regional
Seas. The definition suggested by UNEP through the Regional Seas Programme is
“conceived as a portion of the ocean within which the ecosystem merited protection,
and also within which the development of coastal and islands states would benefit
from the international cooperation” (Vallega, 2002, p. 727). Besides, it is important to
take into consideration that ecosystems do not respect political borders. Therefore, it is
necessary to consider that the nature of ecosystems is transboundary, i.e. across
political boundaries. For instance, today regional governance based on the EBM
Approach is taking place (Vallega, 2002; UNEP, 2014a).
When discussing accomplishment of the EBM Approach through the concept of
sustainable development, it is important to consider the link between both
environments; marine and terrestrial, taking into account natural changes and
ecological variation in the long-term perspective (UNEP, 2014a). In that sense, to
better manage those regional seas, UNEP created the concept of Large Marine
Ecosystems (LMEs). They are defined as “discrete marine areas (typically about
200,000 km2) identified by ecological criteria (bathymetry, hydrography, productivity
and trophic relationship) adjacent to the continents in coastal waters” (Sherman &
Hempel, 2008 as cited by UNEP (2014a, p. 25)). Under this concept, today, there exist
64 LMEs, which are designated and monitored by Global Environment Facility –LME
Project (GEF-LMEs); one of the biggest is the Caribbean Sea (UNEP, 2014a).
26
The UN system recognizes the Caribbean Sea as one of the most unique and complex
areas of the world. Its extension is over 2.5 million km2 (“The Caribbean Sea”, 2015).
It is geographically and politically diverse as it embraces 44 States and territories with
over 100 maritime boundaries (UNEP, 2012; UNEP, 2014a; CEP, 2015). For that
reason, to manage this vast area, several initiatives have been developed.
Kelleher, Bleakley, & Wells (1995), listed several initiatives and institutions that work
in the Wider Caribbean for the protection of marine environment. However, many of
them focusing on fisheries. There are only two biggest environmental protection
programs concerning the whole area that today will be discussed. The first one is the
Caribbean Environment Programme (CEP), and the other is Caribbean Large Marine
Environment project (CLME).
1.3.1 United Nations Environment Programme – Caribbean Environment
Programme – (UNEP-CEP)
The CEP was the second UNEP program established in 1982 with all its institutional
components (Convention, Action Plan, Funds, and Coordination Unit), building one of
the most valuable programs of the UN system. In addition to this, the CEP is
recognized by the countries in the region for its high commitment to the development
of environmental management initiatives (UNEP, 2014b).
The UNEP’s main goal is to reduce and tackle the degradation of environments by
marine pollution (UNEP, 2014b). In that sense, the Caribbean is considered the second
most complex marine route worldwide. This is a consequence of the traffic through the
Panama Canal, and the increase of seaborne trade in many nearby ports in the area due
to its economic attractiveness. These factors are threatening the surrounding
ecosystems by ship-source pollution, including the issue of invasive species (Patrick &
27
Storm, 2013). Likewise, tourism and fisheries are the main activities in the zone and
are sources of marine pollution. Furthermore, the Caribbean faces several political
conflicts and presents diverse economies in terms of development, with significant
influence of developed countries exerting colonial powers, and hosting many different
languages (Patrick & Storm, 2013; Van Tatenhove, 2013; UNEP, 2014b).
To address all the above issues and challenges, in 1982, countries unanimously
decided to work for the adoption of a cooperative and integrated approach through a
convention for the protection and sustainable development of the Caribbean region
(UNEP, 2012).
1.3.1.1 Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine
Environment in the WCR and its Protocols.
The Wider Caribbean Action Plan was the first step taken by CEP and countries to
start to develop a binding agreement. As a result and through the commitment of the
countries involved, it was possible to move forward to the adoption of the Convention
for the Wider Caribbean, which was agreed in Cartagena de Indias, Colombia in 1983
(hereafter, the Cartagena Convention). This regional treaty entered into force in 1986.
To date, 25 States have ratified it (Lausche, 2011; UNEP, 2012).
The Cartagena Convention is the current binding regional environmental agreement
serving as an essential reference for both managers and policy-makers when protection
measures and management development of coastal and marine resources are in place,
either individually or jointly. Nevertheless, due to developing economies surrounding
the area, many issues are facing the Caribbean region. For that reason, one of the main
targets is the establishment of MPAs as a mechanism to ensure the conservation of
biodiversity, reduction of pollution, education, and capacity building. For instance, it
28
is necessary to apply regional ocean governance based on the effective EBM approach
to ensure sustainability in the WCR (UNEP, 2012).
Following the adoption of the convention in 1983, two legal instruments were
subsequently adopted. The first one was the Protocol concerning Cooperation in
Combating Oil Spills in the Wider Caribbean Region (Oil Spills Protocol). This
protocol and the convention itself were convened simultaneously. The second is the
Protocol Concerning Specially Protected Areas and Wildlife (SPAW Protocol), which
was adopted in the early 1990s and entered into force in 2000. The latter was the third
program driven by UNEP with the aim of preserving and improving the marine
ecosystem in the region (Lausche, 2011; UNEP, 2012; CEP, 2015).
Today, the SPAW Protocol has been ratified by only 16 states (UNEP, 2014a) (Figure
2), including Colombia. The aim is “to take necessary measures to protect, preserve
and manage, in a sustainable way, zones that require protection to safeguard their
particular value and that threaten or endanger species of flora and fauna” (Art. 3)
(UNEP, 2012, p. 40).
To date, nine coastal states in the wider Caribbean encompass over 31 MPAs under
the SPAW protocol and the CEP. The marine area covered is approximately 100,000
km2 corresponding to only 4% of the all-regional sea (CEP, 2015).
29
Figure 2 SPAW Protocol Ratification Status 2012
Source: CEP (2015)
Although the number of MPAs is relatively small, in 2014, the Caribbean Regional
Programme (CRP), under the umbrella of the SPAW Protocol, established the
Caribbean Challenge Project (CEP, 2015). The objective is to enlarge regional MPAs
up to 20% by 2020 through a sustainable governance mechanism based on cooperation
between countries for the protection of the ecosystem in the larger Caribbean (UNEP,
2014a).
Colombia is the depository country for the Convention and one of the first to ratify it.
Therefore, it is making efforts to fulfil the agreement. Currently, around nine percent
of its maritime jurisdiction is protected through MPAs (PNNC-RUNAP, 2016); one of
30
the largest in the region is the Seaflower MPA (Howard, 2006; CEP, 2015).
1.3.1.2 The Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem (CLME) Project
The CLME is a strategy developed by the UNEP in cooperation with the Global
Environment Fund (GEF) for the protection of ecosystems in closed and semienclosed seas and in particular areas around the world which, according to their
oceanographic patterns and biodiversity, create special habitats. The Wider Caribbean
Region is one of the LMEs (Fanning, et al., 2007; UNEP, 2014a; Vousden, 2016). The
CLME is a comprehensive regional governance approach that addresses the objective
of the RSP for the protection of the environment through the creation of MPAs
underpinning management initiatives such as the EBM approach (Fanning, et al.,
2007; Vousden, 2016).
31
CHAPTER 2: COLOMBIA’S CARIBBEAN COAST MPAs
2.1 Background
Colombia is the fifth-largest and most biologically diverse State in Latin America
(Toro, Requena, & Zamorano, 2009; “US Commerce Office”, 2011; OECD, 2014;
Alonso, et al., 2015). Due to its strategic position, it shares waters in both the
Caribbean and the Pacific oceans, corresponding to approximately 45% of the national
territory (Minambiente, 2012). The Caribbean coast is the largest area, with
approximately six thousand square kilometers and 1,300 kilometers of coastline (CCO,
2014; “Cancilleria Colombia”, 2016). Its waters and coastal areas embody rich coral
reefs, seagrass beds, mangroves, estuaries and coastal lagoons (The World Bank,
2006; “US Commerce Office”, 2011; Minambiente, 2016).
Thus, the economy is based on ecosystem services, which have grown considerably in
recent years, especially coastal and marine (Nolet, Vosmer, De Brujin, & BralyCartillier, 2014). Therefore, it represents 40% of the national GDP (OHI, 2015), of
which commercial fishing, and small-scale artisanal fishing represent only 0.36%
(Ramirez, 2016). Nevertheless, fishing is the core livelihood for coastal and islander
communities. For instance, efficient management mechanisms and frameworks are
necessary to protect its marine richness from anthropogenic activities. On this basis,
Colombia has established coastal and marine conservation priorities (Alonso, F., Diaz,
Segura, Castillo, & Anthony, 2007), through the establishment of MPAs to overcome
the threats that are causing marine degradation (Ramirez, 2016).
32
2.2 National Governance and Framework on MPAs
Colombia’s environmental framework is considered one of the most comprehensive
and the oldest in Latin America (Cajiao, et al., 2006; “US Commerce Office”, 2011).
All the principles and provisions for the protection and management of the natural
resources and biodiversity are in the National Constitution of 1991 (Art 8, 63, 80, 102)
(Minambiente, 2011; OECD, 2014). Colombia has also adopted and implemented
international conventions and programs (Minambiente, 2011).
To guarantee the protection of the nation’s natural patrimony, the government, has
created several institutions since 1968. The Ministry of Environment (MADS) is in
charge of managing and developing policies in matters concerning the protection of
areas where natural resources are threatened and require special care (Cajiao, et al.,
2006). To do so, more specifically, the National System of Natural Parks (SPNN), was
created in 1974, and several pieces of legislation were adopted, taking into account the
model used by the United States (Minambiente, 2012).
Likewise, extensive changes have occurred with the preparation and ratification of the
CBD (Minambiente, 2011). Thus, in MPA governance, in 1993, it created the National
system of Protected Areas (SINA), and the subsystem of Marine Protected Areas
(SAMP). Furthermore, the government decentralized some management functions
creating the Regional Autonomous Corporations (CARs) in charge of the
administration and management of natural resources at regional level (OECD, 2014).
On the other hand, the governance structure implemented in the legislation for the
conservation and protection of MPAs is based on the adoption of international
instruments (Table 1). In addition, it considers the IUCN categories and classification
(Table 2) (Lausche, 2011; Al-Abdulrazzak & Trombulak, 2011), including the
restricted protection and multiple-use categories. In general, the country manages
33
eleven national categories that correspond to four IUCN categories (Minambiente,
2012, pp. 9-10).
Table 1 International and Regional MPA’s mechanisms adopted by Colombia.
Instrument Signed Related (National Law)
UNCLOS, 1982 December 10, 1982 Not Ratified yet
AGENDA 21, 1997 New York, 1997 CONPES 3164, 2002
CBD, 1992 Rio de Janeiro, 1992 Law 165 of 1994
FAO Code of Conduct, 1995 —— Resolution 121. March 21,
1995
UNESCO MAB Convention
Concerning the Protection of the World
Cultural and Natural Heritage
Paris, 1972 Law 45 of 1983
MARPOL 73/78 Law 12, January 9, 1981
UNEP 1976
SDGs Agenda, 2015 New York, 2015 Decree 280, February 2015
Cartagena Convention, 1983 Cartagena, 1983 Law 56, December 23, 1987
SPAW Protocol, 1990 Kingston, 1990 Law 356, January 21, 1997
Source: Minambiente (2011)
Table 2. IUCN PA’s Classification and Categories
IUCN
Category Scope of Application Main MPA Objective
I
(Strict Nature/Wilderness area) PA
managed for science or wilderness
protection
Restore Ecosystems; enhance MPA
Network/MSP; Cultural value of set-aside
areas; Management tourism/recreation its
impacts; cultural symbolic value
II (National Park) PA managed for ecosystem
protection and recreation
Restore ecosystems; enhance MPA
Network/MSP; control the impacts of
tourism/recreation
III (National Monument) PA managed for
conservation of specific natural features Promote research and education
IV
(Habitat/Species Management Area) PA for
conservation based on management
intervention
Protect rare and vulnerable habitats and
species
V (Protected Landscape/Seascape) PA
managed for conservation and recreation
Maintain traditional uses; cultural values of
set-aside areas
VI (Managed Resource PA) PA managed for
the sustainable use of natural ecosystems Restore fish stocks; maintain traditional uses
Source: Lausche (2011); Jones (2014)
34
Nevertheless, reviews of the earlier legislation identified a few deficiencies. For
instance, in 2010, the government clarified definitions of protected areas and their
categories. It also established coordination mechanisms and defined the criteria,
procedures and responsible actors for designation, administration, and management of
the MPAs (Minambiente, 2011). As a result, it created the Unique Registry of
Protected Areas (RUNAP) to consolidate the inventory of PAs based on the type of
governance, classified in public and private law, at the national and local level, based
on the IUCN categories and objectives. Furthermore, the legislature is working on
developing a law to include communitarian and stakeholder governance in the
protected area system (Minambiente, 2012).
This governance approach has been implemented in Colombia since 2001, and it is
being developed in the national bio-cultural regions, including the Caribbean (De
Pourcq, Thomas, Arts, Vranckx, Leon-Sicard, & Van Damme, 2015). There was an
innovative mechanism executed by the MADS to ensure management and
conservation of biodiversity within PAs in the territory.
The relevance of this approach is the involvement of ethnic communities near the PAs,
which have the awareness to conserve the environment due to the benefits of the
sustainable development of these areas. Thus, it recognizes that the state is not the
only actor in the governance process (Ramirez, 2016). Nevertheless, the system does
not have enough information about the effectiveness of the management objectives on
MPAs, and the information available is related mainly to fisheries (Minambiente,
2012).
35
According to RUNAP, Colombia has protected approximately nine percent of its total
marine area (7,854,381.83 ha) (Figure 3) (PNNC-RUNAP, 2016). Likewise, national
MPAs are classified into six categories (Table 3).
Table 3. Information of National MPAs – SINAP Categories
Source: PNNC-RUNAP (2016)
On the other hand, geographically the marine jurisdiction of Colombia is divided into
the following regions: Tropical Atlantic and East Tropical Pacific, within which three
provinces are found, two in the Caribbean and one in the Pacific. The Caribbean
provinces are the Caribbean Sea province and the province of the Archipelago of San
Andres, Providencia and Santa Catalina (Figure 3) (CORALINA-INVEMAR; GómezLópez, D. I.; Segura-Quintero, C.; Sierra-Correa, P. C.; Garay-Tinoco, J., 2012;
INVEMAR, 2016).
SINAP Category IUCN
Category
Admin
Entity Total area (ha)
Total
terrestrial area
(ha)
Total
maritime area
(ha)
National District of
integrated management
Seaflower Biosphere
Reserve
I
IV
VI
MADSPNN 6,501,800.00 6,000.00 6,495,800.00
Park Via III PNN 56,200.00 27,315.47 28,884.53
Regional Natural Park II PNN –
CARs 405,195.30 405,156.40 38.90
Regional District of
Integrated Management VI MADS –
CARs 4,129,038.10 4,124,013.10 5,025.00
National Natural Park II PNN –
CARs 11,049,941.71 10,699,432.31 350,509.40
Sanctuary of Fauna and
Flora III PNN 1,048,629.26 74,505.26 974,124.00
TOTAL 23,190,804.37 15,336,422.54 7,854,381.83
36
Figure 3. Colombia’s National Protected Areas
Source: The Author – Software QGIS
37
2.3 Coastal and Marine MPAs in the Caribbean Coast of Colombia
The Colombian Caribbean Sea is located in the northern part of South America. The
Caribbean coast extends 1,932 km, with a marine jurisdiction of 532,154 km2 (CCO,
2014); the portion of submerged coastal zone is 7,673 km2 (INVEMAR, 2016). This
includes the extension of the continental margin in the insular area of San Andres and
Providencia (Figure 4).
The governors of eight continental departments, one insular department, twelve
environmental authorities and nine harbor masters, in charge of environmental
management, complicate the governance in the region. This system deals with 84% of
the total coastal population of the country (INVEMAR, 2016). Likewise, these
authorities manage six Environmental Coastal Units (UAC), and the Caribbean
Oceanic Environmental Unit defined by the MADS through Decree Law 1120 in 2013
(Minambiente, 2015; Alonso, et al., 2015; INVEMAR, 2016).
As the country has embraced its extensive biodiversity, the Caribbean coast underpins
vast ecosystems of coral reefs, seagrass beds, mangrove forests, coastal lagoons and
estuaries, which cover a total of 561,235 ha (Alonso, et al., 2015). The coral reefs are
the biggest area (over 52% of total) followed by coastal lagoons and estuaries. Over
six thousand marine species in the Caribbean have been recorded. However, only 16%
of these marine ecosystems are included under 23 MPAs (Figure 3) (INVEMAR,
2016; PNNC-RUNAP, 2016).
The biggest Colombian Caribbean MPA is the Seaflower MPA located in the insular
area of San Andres and Providencia. It encompasses the largest ecosystem of coral
reefs (INVEMAR, 2016) in addition to seagrass beds, and mangroves. All of the above
are the habitats of several vertebrate marine species, molluscs, and migratory species
38
(CORALINA-INVEMAR; Gómez- López, D. I.; Segura-Quintero, C.; Sierra-Correa,
P. C.; Garay-Tinoco, J., 2012)
Figure 4. MPAs in the Colombian Caribbean Region
Source: The Author – Software QGIS
39
CHAPTER 3. Case Study: THE SEAFLOWER MPA
3.1 Background
Colombia’s constitutional mandate considers the preservation and conservation of its
unique ecosystems and areas of ecological importance, and is respectful of the
obligations prescribed in the international environmental treaties to which it is party
(Minambiente, 2011). The government, in 1998, proposed the designation of the
archipelago of San Andres, Providencia, and Santa Catalina, and the surrounded
marine area, as a biosphere reserve (Figure 5) to be known as the Seaflower Biosphere
Reserve (Minambiente, 2005). Later in 2000, UNESCO included it within the MAB
World Biosphere Network (Howard, 2006).
Moreover, in January 2005, the MADS through Resolution 107, declared an MPA,
within the biosphere reserve (Minambiente, 2005), the largest in the Caribbean Sea,
and the first of its category in Colombia (Howard, 2006; UNEP, 2010; CORALINAINVEMAR; Gómez- López, D. I.; Segura-Quintero, C.; Sierra-Correa, P. C.; GarayTinoco, J., 2012; Taylor, Baine, Killmer, & Howard, 2013).
The Archipelago’s Regional Environmental Corporation – CORALINA is the
administrative and environmental management authority, which determined the
internal management division and zoning of the MPA through accords 021 and 025,
respectively (Coralina, 2005). Furthermore, in 2014, through Resolution 0977, the
MADS gave the Category of Integrated Management District “Seaflower MPA”
(MADS, 2014) to including within the RUNAP.
40
Figure 5 Seaflower Biosphere Reserve location
Source: The Author – Software QGIS
Despite the legal designations made by Colombia’s environmental institutions and
those accorded by international bodies to protect the ecosystems and to manage the
activities within the area, it is still threatened and jeopardized by several issues, mainly
shipping-related. Further, boundary disputes, with the neighbouring country
Nicaragua, due to the judgment of the International Court of Justice (ICJ) might be
damaging the integrity of the entire ecosystem within the biosphere reserve as well as
the MPA (Gorricho, 2012; De Rivaz, 2013; CORALINA, 2014).
3.2 Geographical position
The Seaflower MPA is located in the south-western Caribbean region, surrounding the
San Andres Archipelago (i.e. three small inhabited oceanic islands and eight unsettled
41
cays and atolls) (Figure 6). The origin of the formation of islands, cays, and atolls was
caused by volcanic formations as a result of fracture zones associated with the
Nicaragua Rise (Diaz, Diaz-Pulido, Garzon-Ferreira, Geister, Sanchez, & Zea, 1996).
The largest island, San Andres is 800 km (480 NM) north-west of the Colombian
continental territory (UNEP, 2010; Murillo & Ortiz, 2013). The MPA Area covers a
maritime area of 65,000 sq.km, with only 1% of the terrestrial surface (650 sq.km.)
(UNEP, 2010). The population of over 100,000 base their livelihood on artisanal
fisheries and tourism (Howard, 2006). The MPA is part of the Caribbean coral reef
hotspot, which is among the richest areas in marine species diversity, but also one of
the most threatened (Howard, 2006). For instance, the area is considered to be of
regional and national ecological significance.
Figure 6 The Seaflower MPA Location
Source: The Author – Software QGIS
42
3.3 Oceanographic conditions
Due to its location within the Wider Caribbean Region, the archipelago has a continual
east-to-west flow of currents from the Atlantic Ocean (Figure 7) which, considering
the marked changes in bathymetry, divide the Caribbean current between the islands,
forcing the stream to deviate to the south. The flow, which collides with the continent,
recirculates in the area, forming the Colombia-Panama Gyre with an average velocity
of 1m/s, which by the effect of winds, creates a long wave fetch (Andrade C. , 2000;
CORALINA-INVEMAR; Gómez- López, D. I.; Segura-Quintero, C.; Sierra-Correa,
P. C.; Garay-Tinoco, J., 2012).
The temperature in the water column fluctuates between 26 and 29.5ºC, and the
horizontal distribution is influenced by wind stress, maintaining an average of 28ºC
and reaching a value of 27ºC at 100 m depth (Andrade C. , 2000). Additionally, the
patterns of salinity oscillate between 35.5 PSU (Practical Salinity Units) at the surface,
reaching values close to 37 PSU at 150m depth. At the surface, the horizontal
distribution of salinity is influenced by a zonal gradient from the south-west due to the
intense seasonal rainfalls in the area. This stratifies the water column markedly. These
factors produce optimal values of oxygen and turbidity, vital for coral life
(CORALINA-INVEMAR; Gómez- López, D. I.; Segura-Quintero, C.; Sierra-Correa,
P. C.; Garay-Tinoco, J., 2012). These particularly complex oceanographic conditions
have contributed to the formation and evolution of a unique coral reef that serves as a
habitat for diverse species of marine fauna and flora.
43
Figure 7 General Ocean Circulations in the Wider Caribbean Sea
Adaptation from: Taylor, Baine, Killmer, & Howard (2013); Ruiz-Ochoa (2011)
3.4 Marine Ecosystems
The Seaflower MPA is recognized as possessing one of the highest levels of marine
biodiversity in the Caribbean region (Murillo & Ortiz, 2013). It representatively
defines Colombia’s six tropical marine ecosystems: coral reefs, seagrass beds,
mangroves, rocky littorals, sandy beaches, and soft bottoms, which influence the high
productivity of the area (Howard, 2006).
44
The coral reef is the key ecosystem for conservation in the MPA because as one of the
largest in the Caribbean, it represents about 14% of the world’s coral reefs (UNEP,
2005), the second in the western hemisphere, and most productive in the region
(UNEP, 2010). The reef extension covers approximately 2,000 km2 (Taylor, Baine,
Killmer, & Howard, 2013), and is composed of two barrier reefs, five atolls, reef
lagoons, and coral banks (Howard, 2006), which is 78% of the national total (Figure 8)
(CORALINA-INVEMAR; Gómez- López, D. I.; Segura-Quintero, C.; Sierra-Correa,
P. C.; Garay-Tinoco, J., 2012).
Seagrass beds extend 2,000 ha, covering over five percent of the archipelago
extension, and they are found mainly in reef lagoons, providing habitat for fish, sea
turtles, and invertebrates (Murillo & Ortiz, 2013). Mangroves, covering about 250 ha,
are catalogued as one of the most productive ecosystems in the zone (UNEP, 2010),
They provide refuge for a number of marine species, especially in the first larval
stages, and also migratory species of birds (CORALINA-INVEMAR; Gómez- López,
D. I.; Segura-Quintero, C.; Sierra-Correa, P. C.; Garay-Tinoco, J., 2012). The sections
of the coastline comprised of sandy beaches are characterized by calcareous
formations (Diaz, Diaz-Pulido, Garzon-Ferreira, Geister, Sanchez, & Zea, 1996).
Together, they contribute to the control of erosion, stabilization of the sea bottom, and
provide food, and oxygen for marine life. In addition, the beaches provide human and
cultural values for islanders who base their economy on ecosystem services, mainly
fisheries, for the provision of livelihood and recreational benefits.
45
Figure 8 Coral reef areas within Seaflower Biosphere Reserve
Source: CORALINA-INVEMAR; Gómez- López, D. I.; Segura-Quintero, C.; SierraCorrea, P. C.; Garay-Tinoco, J. (2012)
46
3.5 MPA Objectives
Colombia set, through the National Law 99/93 (Alonso, et al., 2015), overall targets
for the MPAs in the territory, based on the global IUCN objectives (Lausche, 2011;
Speed & Levine, 2014; Jones, 2014). Moreover, the Seaflower MPA has defined its
objectives with the participation of islander communities, and stakeholders based on
the concept of community-based management (Howard, 2006; De Pourcq, Thomas,
Arts, Vranckx, Leon-Sicard, & Van Damme, 2015) to ensure effective governance and
protection of the ecosystems in the zone. Moreover, to succeed in achieving the
activities within the MPA, five core objectives were defined (Coralina, 2005):
1. Preservation, recovery, and long-term maintenance of species, biodiversity,
ecosystems, and other natural values including special habitats;
2. Promotion of sound management practices to ensure long-term sustainable use of
coastal and marine resources.
3. Equitable distribution of economic and social benefits to enhance local
development.
4. Protection of rights concerning historical use.
5. Education to promote stewardship and community involvement in planning, and
management.
Based on these, and using the EBM approach (Fanning, et al., 2007; UNEP, 2014a),
both the community and authorities designed the zones within the MPA to ensure the
protection of ecologically relevant areas. The zoning criteria took into consideration
the ecological criteria (Roberts, et al., 2003), seeking an easy demarcation based on
representativeness and connectivity of key habitats, (i.e. coral reefs, seagrass beds,
algal beds, and mangroves). Moreover, it seeks social-ecological resilience (Jones,
2014), absorbing and adapting to the changes to foster compliance to meet the MPA
objectives (UNEP, 2010) effectively.
47
3.6 MPA Zoning
The MPA is divided into three administrative sections, established through Accords
021, and 025 (Coralina, 2005), seeking a better implementation of the biosphere
reserve. Therefore, the areas are: Northern (37,522 km2
), Central (12,716 km2
), and
Southern (14,780 km2
) (Figure 9). Moreover, within the administrative divisions, there
are five zone types for in-situ conservation and sustainable use (Howard, 2006; Taylor,
Baine, Killmer, & Howard, 2013):
1. No-entry (116 km2
), preservation zones restricted only for research and
monitoring activities;
2. No-take (2,214 km2
), conservation zones that incorporate and allowing nonextractive uses;
3. Recovering and sustainable use of marine resources (2,015 km2
), allows
traditional artisanal fishing activities, and artisanal sport fishing and all the
activities allowed in the special use, no-entry and no-take zones;
4. Special use (68 km2
), shipping related, leisure, and waters sports;
5. General use (60,587 km2
), minimal restrictions apply, seeking and maintaining the
MPA objectives to promote marine conservation.
48
Figure 9 The Seaflower MPA Administrative Division
Source: The Author – Software QGIS
3.7 Threats to the MPA in the region
Vallega (2002), UNEP (2005), Lopez & Krauss (2006), Fanning, et al. (2007), Biggs
(2009), Morris (2012), and UNEP (2014a) have described the threats and issues
concerning the marine ecosystems in the Caribbean region, and thus, they are not
different for this MPA.
Likewise, Howard (2006), and Taylor, Baine, Killmer, & Howard (2013), described
the drivers and conflicts within the MPA. Furthermore, since the establishment of
Seaflower, the national government, by the hand of the archipelago’s local authority,
determined those and are stated in the legal documents (Minambiente, 2005; Coralina,
49
2005). Moreover, today, new challenges concerning shipping activities have emerged
as a consequence of on-going and short-term developments in the region. In addition
to IUU fisheries and boundary disputes that are affecting and threatening the link of
the unique ecosystems within the Seaflower MPA, the following developments are of
concern.
3.7.1 Increase in Maritime Traffic
About 90% of global trade is moved by seagoing vessels (IMO, 2012), and keeping
pace with global economic development, shipping has grown by 30% over a period of
four to five years (AGCS, 2014), increasing routes and connectivity. For instance,
according to UNCTAD (2015), Latin America and the Caribbean have the highest
liner shipping connectivity with Panama. To date, 21 vessel operators connect with the
US directly through the Panama Canal, which is the crossroad between east-west and
north-south routes, followed by Mexico, Jamaica, and Colombia. Thus, the Panama
Canal expansion will allow regional expansion of ports, and therefore, larger vessels
transiting through the Caribbean. Likewise, the proposed Nicaragua Canal will be
another development in the region that will bring more pressures and, thus, impacts on
the Seaflower MPA ecosystems.
3.7.1.1 The Panama Canal Expansion
The opening, on June 26, 2016, of the expanded new Panama Canal (The World Bank,
2016) will enable the transit of approximately 4,750 additional ships per year,
handling over five percent of global goods, and about eight percent of all
transshipments worldwide (Rodrigue & Ashar, 2015). Furthermore, over 72% of all
regional Central and South American transshipments move through the south-western
Caribbean area – wherein the Seaflower is located, a high amount of cargo, being
containers and petroleum products the principal commodities moved through the area
(AGCS, 2014).
50
Approximately 60 voyages per week (14,000 annually), to over 100 maritime routes
(Figure 10), pass through the Caribbean Sea (US Department of Transportation, 2013;
Webster, 2015). Thus, the risk of an incident occurring during transit through the
routes in the Caribbean is much greater. Further, it will cause an increase of shipsource pollution such as CO2, and GHG emissions (UNCTAD, 2015), which
contribute to ocean acidification (Harrould-Kolieb & Herr, 2012; Hassellöv, Turner,
Lauer, & Corbett, 2013), affecting the coral reefs in the Wider Caribbean area, and
those within the Seaflower MPA.
Figure 10 Major shipping routes and Marine Traffic within the Caribbean Sea
Source: The Author – Software QGIS
51
3.7.1.2 The Nicaragua Canal Construction
After several debates, the Nicaragua Canal (NC) seems set to become a reality. In
2013, the Nicaraguan government gave a concession to a Hong Kong Corporation
(HKND) for the construction of the interoceanic canal including an oil pipeline, and
two deep-water ports among other inland projects. This concession, since the
beginning, has not taken account of the environmental impact assessment as part of the
approval requirement; nevertheless, the government is continuing the development of
this project despite the recommendations made by the scientific community (HuetePérez, et al., 2015; Yip & Wong, 2015). The development of this alternative route in
the Caribbean will allow the transit of about 17% of the global fleet (AGCS, 2014).
This means an increase in maritime traffic near the Seaflower MPA (Figure 11) due to
its proximity to the Nicaraguan coast, over 100 km away (Howard, 2006).
Figure 11 Nicaragua Canal
Source: The Author – Software QGIS
52
The construction of the canal represents a significant and long-term negative
implication for this hotspot of global biodiversity (Huete-Pérez, et al., 2015), changing
oceanographic patterns especially in the following areas:
3.7.1.2.1 Physical properties of water
The opening of channels from continental zones may cause the exchange of fresh
water, altering the equilibrium of sea temperature and salinity, and influencing
changes in the water mass composition. These alterations can be markedly noted in
specific regions, especially in semi-enclosed seas like the Caribbean Sea (Stewart,
2003; Osborne, Haley, Hathorne, Flögel, & Frank, 2014).
For instance, the behaviour of the water mass circulating the Seaflower MPA will
depend on the climatology of the region (dry and rainy seasons), defining the longterm physical conditions, which determine the development of living organisms
(Andrade C. , 2000). Therefore, changes in patterns of physical properties, and the
water mass circulation will affect some of the marine organisms regarding their
physiological processes, presence, and distribution.
Moreover, the opening process and further maintenance activities on the canal will
impact the surrounding marine environment. The disposal of dredged materials along
the coasts and estuaries on both sides the Caribbean and Pacific will contribute
increasing sediments, affecting the turbidity, and quality of water due to dispersion
caused by currents. The consequences for the area are, among others, damage to the
coral reef and seagrass bed ecosystems (Huete-Pérez, et al., 2015) including those
within the Seaflower MPA.
53
3.7.1.2.2 Water Mass Circulation
The opening of the NC might alter the hydrodynamics in the area, changing the
patterns of adjacent water flows, especially on the surface taking into account the
analysis of the currents by Molares et al., (2004). For instance, the south-western
Caribbean has three predominant surface currents well described by Andrade (2000),
Andrade, Barton, & Mooers (2003).
Moreover, the stream, which may change, is the Panama-Colombia Gyre (PCG), due
to its cyclonic circulation in a southwesterly direction (Figure 7), might move the
sediments produced from the NC, displacing all the suspended particles in the
surrounding areas. It could alter the oceanographic regime, as well as cause
degradation of the biota in the area, especially in the coral reef.
There are other shipping-related aspects associated with the Panama Canal expansion
and Nicaragua Canal construction that could impact considerably, in the long-term, the
ecosystems within the Seaflower MPA, and thus the whole biosphere reserve.
3.7.2 Other Shipping Related Environmental Issues
Today, it is well known that 12% of marine pollution is produced by ships (Romero,
2016), including sewage, waste, and invasive species, among others. Furthermore,
there are other shipping-related concerns that may also affect the marine environment
such as the impact of wave wakes, and underwater noise produced by the transit of
vessels into the Caribbean Sea.
3.7.2.1 Invasive Species
The issue of invasive species is a hot topic for the international community,
particularly the IMO. The IMO has developed binding and non-binding instruments,
such as the 2001 Anti-fouling Convention (AFS), and guidelines to prevent invasive
54
species from ballast water (Tamelander, Riddering, Haag, & Matheickal, 2010).
Furthermore, the Ballast Water Management Convention (BWMC) will soon enter
into force, addressing the issue widely, seeking the reduction and control of invasive
species from shipping. In addition, many other institutions are contributing to this
issue (WWF, 2009) more broadly, advising and increasing awareness within
communities due to the importance of conservation of biodiversity.
Therefore, due to the multiple negative impacts on the environment as described by
Tamelander, Riddering, Haag, & Matheickal (2010), one of the major concerns is
associated with the reduction of native biodiversity by predation or competition with
indigenous species. Furthermore, impacts to the ecosystems mainly pertain to the
changes of ecological cycles, owing to the diminution of oxygen, causing
decomposition of nutrients, and also affecting water quality and impacting the health
of coastal populations (WWF, 2009).
Consequently, According to Mooney (2005), the combined impact on these biota, in
the short-term might be unappreciated. However, in the long-term, it will threaten the
environment altering and changing the stability of ecosystems services, and then, the
primary production will be affected, having repercussions on the economy of the
region. This economic repercussion is concerning, mainly, with the reduction of fish
stocks due to introduction of pest and pathogens.
Studies regarding invasive species in the Colombian Caribbean Sea have been
conducted by Lopez & Krauss (2006). Moreover, the major issue concerning invasive
species is the Lionfish (Mooney, 2005; Green & Côté, 2008; Morris, 2012), which due
to its fast spread from the East Coast of US is causing severe damage to the
environment of the coral reef areas in the Caribbean region. Therefore, ecosystems
within the Seaflower MPA are not immune to these issues.
55
The permanent traffic passing, through the Panama Canal, and in the short-term,
through the Nicaragua Canal, will increase the risk of invasive species by ballast water
exchange and fouling during voyages into the zone.
3.7.2.2 Wave Wake by Ships
The increase in maritime traffic as a result of the Panama Canal expansion, and the
Nicaragua Canal construction might cause more impacts to the marine environment
within the zone as a consequence of ship wave generation.
To discuss wave wake impacts, it is necessary to define the concept of the high-speed
vessel. According to MarCom (2003), The IMO developed the High-Speed Craft Code
(HSC Code), establishing, and, therein, its definition. Thus, a High-speed vessel is one
which can reach maximum speed, equal or superior to 3,7 ∇!,!””# � � , wherein
∇ �! is the displacement of the ship measured above the waterline.
Merchant vessels are embodied in the category of high-speed craft according to the
interpretation of British Law (UK Legislation, 2004). Therefore, considering this,
there are adverse effects of ships adding wake wave energy to coastal systems where
they occur. For instance, the morphology and ecology in an area can be affected
significantly by the transit of merchant vessels at slow steaming (Moon & Woo,
2014), and small, fast boats through or near to MPAs especially when the natural wave
energy is very low (Bauer, Lorang, & Sherman, 2002).
Two dominant processes related to wave making have been identified as having
negative impacts on the environment, associated with vessel traffic. Firstly, changes in
the wave period due to the ship’s speed; and secondly, wave transformation caused by
the effect of bathymetry (MarCom, 2003). Thus, these two processes are relevant for
56
the MPA, due to the bathymetry and seasonal oceanographic patterns within, which
are more sensitive to the effects of a vessel’s wave wake, causing changes of wave
height, celerity, and direction, affecting the normal physical and biological conditions
of the ecosystems.
3.7.2.3 Underwater Noise by Shipping
International concern is rising regarding the impacts of noise pollution on the marine
environment from anthropogenic activities, especially shipping. Furthermore, the
safeguarding of MPAs from ship noise is an important topic due to the ecological
richness, and the protection of threatened marine species of mammals and fish. That is
why the International Whaling Commission (IWC), and IUCN has addressed and
called for the adoption of measures to protect marine species and environments from
ship noise pollution, especially in MPAs (Haren, 2007; Abdulla & Linden, 2008).
Additionally, the IMO developed through MEPC.1/Circ.833 on April 2014 (IMO,
2014) “Guidelines for the reduction of underwater noise from commercial shipping to
address adverse impacts on marine life”. These guidelines are establishing some
measures that the maritime industry can adopt. These measures are related to
technology, good maintenance practices, and selection of ship speed. The reduction of
ship speed is a major factor that contributes to reducing cavitation of propellers
reducing underwater noise. Furthermore, these guidelines advice countries to adopt
measures such as rerouting as a mean to reduce adverse impacts on marine life
especially in sensitive areas.
Commercial shipping is categorized as lower-level and chronic, which means that the
constant perturbation also poses a threat for the long-term cumulative effect (Haren,
2007; McKenna, Ross, Wiggins, & Hildebrand, 2011). For instance, the increase in
maritime traffic will increase noise levels interfering with species’ ability to
57
communicate, but it also may affect natural reproductive and developmental functions
due to generalized stress (Hildebrand J. , 2005).
According to Poleika, S., (2004) as cited by Haren, (2007), in 2004, a study conducted
in the Santa Barbara Channel National Marine Sanctuary on the Pacific Coast of US,
showed that noise generated by propellers from commercial shipping had the most
significant impact on the sanctuary due to the proximity of the routes passing by.
Additionally, other studies related to underwater noise from ships, such as
supertankers and container ships, show that these vessels emit the highest broad bands
of low-frequency tones (long wave distance) between 5 and 500 Hz, due to the wave
characteristics produced by their propeller cavitation (McKenna, Ross, Wiggins, &
Hildebrand, 2011).
Furthermore, as a consequence of high displacement, and considering the physical
property of water to absorb sound, it may stay resilient in the water for extended
periods if maintaining constant low-frequency emissions. These are the primary
sources of background noise in areas heavily transited by merchant ships. Thus,
shipping is the principal source of background noise in oceans worldwide, doubling
this value every decade, proportionally to the increasing of the size of vessels
(Mazzuca, L., 2001, as cited by Haren, (2007)).
Specifically for the Caribbean, the increase in maritime traffic due to recent
developments will result in denser shipping route areas that will threaten the
surrounding marine environments by ship-source noise, causing degradation of the
ecosystems in the area as well as in the Seaflower MPA.
58
3.7.3 Environmental Impacts from Seabed Activities
The seabed is a reservoir of natural resources such as oil, and gas, and while these
resources remain in the seabed within the EEZ of a state, it has the rights to explore
and exploit these resources in a sustainable way (Zeeniya, 2013). Moreover, these
activities represent only the one percent of total marine pollution (Romero, 2016).
Nevertheless, the impacts of this particular activity might be devastating in the longterm (Markussen, 1994; Morgan, Odunton, & Jones, 1999; Eastwood, Mills, Aldridge,
Houghton, & Rogers, 2007).
Therefore, at global level, UNCLOS (Part XII) gives provisions concerning protection
and prevention of pollution from seabed activities (UNCLOS, 1982). Likewise,
international institutions such as the Seabed Authority (ISA, 2008), and many others
such as the IMO, are committed to addressing offshore activities regarding oil and gas
exploration and exploitation (Lyons, 2011; EMSA, 2013) encouraging the states to
take the effective measures.
In this regard, Colombia has stated in its national constitution, and enforced through
several national laws, the protection of the marine environment, including regulations
for the development of seabed activities (Minambiente, 2011; Minambiente, 2015).
The National Agency of Hydrocarbons (ANH) is the entity in charge of managing the
development of these activities. For instance, they have conducted studies in the
Caribbean Sea, and determined areas for exploration in the Nicaraguan platform
(ANH, 2010), and the Cayos basin (Castillo L. & Vargas C., 2013). Thus, around
thirteen prospective areas has been identified (Figure 12), with an extension of over
130,000 sq.km within these sectors. There is evidence of hydrocarbons reservoirs
(ANH, 2010) due to the structural geology formed by calcareous and shell rocks from
the coral reef from geological ages.
59
Despite its potential, these zones have not been drilled, especially since the majority of
the areas are within the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve. Therefore, in 2011, Colombia’s
Government decided not to explore it (Garcia, 2012), as an example of the awareness
of and commitment to the protection of the marine environment from the central level.
However, again, the ecosystems within the MPA and the biosphere reserve are
jeopardized by maritime disputes with the neighbouring country, Nicaragua. The
reason is because it seems that one of Nicaragua’s pretensions is to exploit oil
resources in the seabed within the area (Gorricho, 2012).
Figure 12 Caribbean Colombian Oil and Gas exploitation blocks
Source: The Author – Software QGIS
60
3.7.4 Maritime Boundary Disputes
According to Sanín, and Ceballos (2013), Gorricho (2012), and Bekker (2013),
Colombia and Nicaragua have been in maritime disputes since the 19th century, when
they obtained sovereignty over their respective territories after being ruled by Spain
since the colonial period. Moreover, in 1928, both states agreed to solve sovereignty
rights differences over the San Andres Archipelago and the Nicaraguan Mosquito
Coast with a bilateral treaty. It is agreed in the treaty that Nicaragua keep the Mosquito
Coast, and Colombia the archipelago area. However, in 1972, Colombia and the US
signed a treaty in which the US renounced its sovereignty claims over the northwestern cays and atolls Quitasueño, Roncador, and Serrana. Nevertheless, at that time,
Colombia was protesting against Nicaragua because, in 1969, it granted concessions
for oil exploration in the Quitasueño area. Therefore, Nicaragua denounced the 1928
treaty, in 1980, and declared it null.
Consequently, in late 2001, Nicaragua instituted proceedings against Colombia at the
International Court of Justice (ICJ), claiming rights to the islands and maritime waters
(Bekker, 2013). Additionally, Nicaragua requested to the Seabed Authority an
extension of their continental shelf with the pretension of granted in concession the
area claimed for exploration and exploitation of oil and gas, jeopardizing the marine
biodiversity, in particular, the coral reef areas. However, the ICJ refused the request
due to insufficient data and information to do so (ICJ, 2012).
After eleven years, the ICJ ruled, based on customary law, that Colombia has the
sovereignty over the islands in question. However, due to Colombia not being party to
UNCLOS, Nicaragua was given rights to over 75,000 km2 of sea (ICJ, 2012; Bekker,
2013) (Figure 13), surrounding the islands, which tremendously affected the historical
values of native islanders from the archipelago, whose legal livelihoods depend mainly
on fishing activities as the basis of their subsistence, followed by tourism. Besides,
61
drug trafficking is an emerging activity for the young population due to the proximity
to Central America (Gorricho, 2012; Taylor, Baine, Killmer, & Howard, 2013; Otero,
2014-2015), which are affecting the economy of islanders because of the reduction of
labour in fishing and tourism activities. Moreover, an increase in IUU fishing activities
is also an issue as consequence of the judgment (CORALINA, 2014).
Furthermore, the ICJ decision is a disaster for the pristine marine ecosystems, dividing
the integrity of the Seaflower MPA and the biosphere reserve declared by UNESCO in
early 2000 (Howard, 2006), and backed by many international environmental
organizations such as UNEP, and GEF (Gorricho, 2012). For instance, during the
International Coordinating Council of the MAB program in 2014 (UNESCO, 2014),
UNESCO appealed to both authorities, Colombia and Nicaragua, to continue
respecting the protected areas of the Seaflower BR, encouraging them to establish a
transboundary biosphere reserve.
After the 2012 judgment, Colombia presented objections to the ICJ, who in early 2016
reaffirmed its first judgment, giving rights to Nicaragua over the waters of the
archipelago (ICJ, 2016). Colombia refused the judgment and said that it would seek
bilateral agreements with Nicaragua, calling for diplomacy between the states to deal
with the dispute (El Tiempo, 2016). In consequence, political constraints and
economic interest are affecting and jeopardizing the protection of the marine
ecosystems within the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve, and thus the MPA.
62
Figure 13 Seaflower MPA and Colombia’s maritime boundary (ICJ Decision)
Source: The Author- Software QGIS
63
CHAPTER 4. APPROACHES TO ADDRESS THREATS TO THE
SEAFLOWER MPA
As shown in Chapter 3, threats to the Seaflower MPA and the biosphere reserve are
inherently transnational and are exacerbated by weak enforcement and ineffective
implementation of regulations, and management instruments by authorities and
administrators. Meanwhile, the effects of climate change continuing impacting
negatively, plus the regional common environmental threats of overexploitation of fish
stocks, and land-based pollution continuing causing degradation of the ecosystems.
In addition to this, while shipping remains on the surface, ship-source pollution will
continue contributing to the degradation of marine and coastal biodiversity.
Furthermore, as new technologies for seabed activities are being improved, marine
pollution, of all kinds, is the top priority and the main challenge for the protection and
conservation of marine biodiversity.
Nevertheless, political issues represent a significant threat to the protection of
ecosystems and habitats within the Seaflower MPA that cannot be protected and
sustainably managed if the integrity of Seaflower Biosphere Reserve is fragmented.
Thus, recognizing the importance of marine biodiversity and its ecosystems, it is
paramount to understand that oceans and their living species do not recognize political
boundaries.
64
For instance, to address political constraints and shipping-related issues, some
effective measures have to be taken at all levels. Although it is understood that solving
political problems is a highly time-consuming process, whereas the shipping-related
issues are possible to address by immediately taking the necessary actions to achieve
the goals of protecting the marine environment.
4.1 Governance Initiatives
From the ocean governance, some measures at the regional level can be taken. Despite
this, the governance framework in regional seas is not effective enough, in general, as
was shown by the EU in the public consultation on international ocean governance
conducted in 2015 (EU, 2015), and many other authors (Vallega, 2002; Wright, 2014)
who agreed with it. For instance, there is the opportunity to enhance governance of
MPAs, closing the existing gaps on national and regional framework, and management
mechanism based on the combination of different theoretical governance perspectives
expressed by Van-Tatenhove (2013) and Jones (2014), in which the states, market, and
civil society are involved. There is an imperative to understand that the governance
processes have to be developed in two ways, top-down and bottom-up. The
involvement of all governments, and stakeholders surrounding the Seaflower is
paramount, besides the integration of communities that receive benefits from
ecosystem services through a participatory process (Van Tatenhove, 2013).
4.1.1 Regional agreements
At the governance level, it is paramount to enhance the existing links with UNEP-CEP
through the WCR agreement (Cartagena Convention) especially in relation to the
SPAW Protocol (UNEP, 2012) seeking international support to keep the unity of the
MPA. To do so, Colombia as the depository country to the convention has to assume
leadership among the neighboring countries to motivate them to ratify it, seeking the
65
commitment and awareness for the protection of the rich ecosystems that encompass
the Seaflower BR. The aim for those countries who have not ratified the protocol yet,
once they agree to comply with it, is to bind the actions of these states concerning the
protection of the ecosystems surrounding the MPA.
It is vital to consider the ongoing regional process for the implementation of the
SDGs, specifically on Goal 14.5 regarding conservation of at least ten percent of
national MPAs (UNSD, 2015). The role of the regional environmental agreements is
also fundamental (UNEP, 2016). To do so, it is paramount that the application of EBM
approach (Fanning, et al., 2007; Van Tatenhove, 2013; Olsen, et al., 2013) be
employed as a mechanism to strengthen governance in the Caribbean region (Mahon,
et al., 2010).
Moreover, it is crucial that Colombia builds stronger partnerships between
international environmental organizations such as the Intergovernmental
Oceanographic Commission (IOC) and UNEP that have been working in the region
for a long time. It might be a useful strategy to raise a voice to the international
community, calling for the protection of the Seaflower BR, seeking support to create
transboundary agreements, despite the boundary disputes that the country is facing.
4.1.1.1 Transboundary Marine Protected Areas (TBMPAs) – Conservation
Agreements
As the regionalization of governance has received high acceptance in the last few
years (Vallega, 2002), many organizations and states that share particular ecosystems
are focusing on strengthening transboundary agreements.
66
Furthermore, since 1997 IUCN has taken leadership in developing the initiative to
create the Global Transboundary Conservation Network defining different types of
transboundary protected areas (IUCN-WCPA, 2011), with the mission of encouraging
cross-border cooperation and peace-building among countries (MPA News, 2008).
The main goal of this initiative is the protection of ecosystems and biodiversity,
enhancing knowledge and capacity-building, and promoting cultural heritage and
social values.
Additionally, there are some international treaties such as the Convention on
Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS) that supports TBMPAs (Vasilijević,
Zunckel, McKinney, Erg, Schoon, & Rosen-Michel, 2015). According to the latest
inventory in 2007, there are 227 TBPAs in different categories around the world,
where Colombia has four TBPAs, both inland, and marine, with the neighboring
countries of Panama, Peru, Ecuador, Brazil and Venezuela (IUCN-WCPA, 2011).
Moreover, the international community firmly believes that LMEs and transboundary
water systems are a good approach to achieving regional protection of marine
ecosystems (Fanning, et al., 2007). Thus, GEF and the IOC, over a six year period
(i.e. 2009 to 2015), developed the Transboundary Waters Assessment Programme
(TWAP) (IOC-UNESCO; UNEP, 2016).
The report points out how anthropogenic activities are highly degrading the
ecosystems within these LMEs including the CLME, in addition to the impacts of
climate change. Furthermore, it is recognized that the option to address the issues and
pressures on these ecosystems requires an integrative and multi-sectoral approach
through the improvement of transboundary governance, seeking country-level
engagement, and closing gaps in biodiversity arrangements.
67
To do so, the first step is to foster a scientific data revolution (CEPEI, 2015)
developing a follow-up indicator framework, and monitoring associated systems
through an innovative methodology. It is fundamental to consider an open governance
process, based on co-management, which contributes to production, and collection of
data as a mean of filling the gaps of information for a suitable decision-making
process.
Taking the above into account, and based on the findings of the TWAP to improve
governance, MPAs are an adequate mechanism to achieve ocean governance,
particularly on the CLME, enhancing ecosystem resilience regarding an improvement
on policy response (IOC-UNESCO; UNEP, 2016).
Moreover, one single country cannot protect all the ecosystems by itself. It is
necessary to engage other nations and seek the establishment of transboundary
agreements focusing on fisheries, biodiversity protection, and exchange of data and
information (IOC-UNESCO; UNEP, 2016). The Seaflower RB might be the adequate
scenario, seeking cross-cutting integration between the institutions in charge to
manage the activities within the EEZ of each neighboring country to the Seaflower.
The Seaflower MPA is an ideal area to create a Transboundary Protected Peace Park
(TBPP) (Gorricho, 2012) to promote peace and cooperation among countries (MPA
News, 2008; IUCN-WCPA, 2011; Vasilijević, Zunckel, McKinney, Erg, Schoon, &
Rosen-Michel, 2015). Some maritime disputes among countries have been solved
through this effort. For example, in 1932, Canada and the US declared the Waterton
Lakes an international peace park (Vasilijević, Zunckel, McKinney, Erg, Schoon, &
Rosen-Michel, 2015), and other countries such as Ecuador and Peru have adopted the
experiences learned (Gorricho, 2012). Nevertheless, it is vital for the intervention of
68
international environmental organizations to act as a neutral moderator for the wellbeing of the ecosystems within the CLME.
Furthermore, experiences learned from the effectiveness of transboundary agreements
around the world are essential to support the initiatives that Colombia can undertake to
address protection of the marine ecosystems and its habitats within the Seaflower BR,
and therefore, for the MPA.
4.1.1.1.1 Case of analysis 1: The Gulf of Maine (Canada – US)
The Gulf of Maine has quite a similar history to the San Andres Archipelago.
According to Vanderzaag (2010), in the 1960s and 1970s, the Gulf of Maine was an
object of disputes between Canada and the US. The claim was for continental shelf
rights in a fishing zone between borders (Georges Banks). After the ICJ judgment,
both countries codified the adopted the decision through a bilateral treaty in 1981.
Several lessons were learned from this case; the most relevant being that countries
demonstrate flexibility, showing an interest to agree on the disputes despite the
economic interest (fishing) in the zone, but also recognizing the social and cultural
values for the communities in the area. Another lesson is that, although the dispute
was solved, both countries understood that while maritime boundary delimitation was
the endpoint of political concerns, it was also the starting point for effective
transboundary ocean governance, and long-term management cooperation of the
marine environment.
Thus, from 1989 the bordering Canadian provinces and US states decided to adopt an
informal agreement for the conservation of the marine environment, enhancing
transboundary cooperation based on shared ecosystem goals and targets. To date, what
started as an informal agreement has become a stronger binding instrument. This is
69
because, from the beginning, the main goal and the desire of local governors was to
cooperate for the well-being of their communities and the long-term nature
conservation of ecosystems (Hildebrand & Chircop, 2010; Hildebrand L. , 2016).
4.1.1.1.2 Case of analysis 2:The Red Sea Marine Peace Park (RSMPP)
After many years of political and religious conflicts between Israel and Jordan
including maritime disputes in the Gulf of Aqaba, in 1994 both countries normalized
political relations, and in 1999 agreed to solve their differences through the creation of
the RSMPP. The importance of this case is to show how cooperation and good foreign
relations can be built based on the conservation of the marine environment (Ormel,
2011). The Gulf of Aqaba is a semi-enclosed sea encompassing one of the largest
coral reef ecosystems within the Red Sea; therefore, both countries have MPAs within
the area, the Jordan’s Aqaba Marine Park, and Israel’s Coral Reef Reserve (MPA
News, 2008). Each state funds this TBPP according to the targets in each particular
MPA, and both promote tourism for the benefit of the communities surrounding the
area, contributing to the growth of the regional economy. Moreover, the outcome of
these actions resulted in protection and long-term sustainable development (MPA
News, 2008), plus the improved management of the shared common natural resources
that are being affected by the same stressors and anthropogenic activities.
4.1.1.1.3 Case of analysis 3: The Korean Peninsula
The both Korean countries, North and South, have faced political and military issues
and boundary disputes in the Korean Peninsula. This resulted in two naval conflicts in
a period of three years (1999-2002), which, thanks to the recognition of culture and
economic values, were solved peacefully (KMI, 2007). Consequently, in 2005, initial
actions to propose the creation of an MPP in the disputed areas between the South and
North Korean governments started. With no response from the North, South Korea
lead the actions, based on the goals for the MDGs to ensure sustainable and peaceful
70
development while taking into account the EBM, peace, and economic prosperity in
the western Korean sea region. Moreover, political will, in this case, was the main
problem (MPA News, 2008).
According to the report by the Korean Maritime Institute (KMI) (2007), as both
governments could not agree through political channels to the creation of the MPP, the
KMI proposed a set of recommendations to address the challenges in development,
and to succeed in its creation. Firstly, countries have to give the leadership to the local
communities, scientific organizations, and other stakeholders from both nations
because between them it is possible to achieve a positive dialogue. Secondly, it points
out that enhancing the partnerships with international and regional environmental
organizations such as IUCN, UNESCO, UNEP and the GEF are paramount as
moderators in the process and guarantors of the agreed.
Finally, the report encourages the countries to be patient in the schedule. Due to the
construction of these processes, it is necessary to include social awareness, which is
neither easy nor quick to achieve. To date, this initiative has not been fully
implemented despite the significant efforts made by South Korea. Due to the
unwillingness of North Korea (Mackelworth, 2016) to work for the efficient
management and sustainable development of the area in question, it is still under
discussion. Nevertheless, this initiative is an excellent example of how positive action
can be undertaken in achieving transboundary marine environmental issues and peace
building from one country that has the desire to cooperate.
4.1.1.1.4 Case of analysis 4: Pelagos Sanctuary Marine Mammals (PSMM)
The PSMM, the largest TBMPA in the Mediterranean Sea (3.5% of total Area)
(Gabrié, et al., 2012), is a trilateral agreement between France, Italy, and Monaco for
the protection of marine mammals, especially cetaceans (Grilo, 2010). This initiative
71
began in 1999 and entered into force in 2002 (Mackelworth, 2012), and is part of the
Barcelona Convention, qualified as a Specially Protected Area of Mediterranean
Importance (SPAMI) (Olsen, et al., 2013). It is a good example of how cross-border
management is an efficient mechanism. The PSMM member states agreed that all
management activities beyond the territorial sea must be co-managed. It is because all
the coastal states in the Mediterranean Sea have not declared sovereignty over their
EEZ. They only consider high seas to be beyond their territorial sea (Guerreiro da
Silva, Fernandes e Castro-Ribeiro, Mocinho-Viras, & Grilo, 2012). Then, all the
activities beyond its maritime jurisdiction (territorial sea) have to be managed by
applying the agreement based on the EBM approach. However, the designation of a
unique management body is threatening the effectiveness of the governance process
(UNEP-MAP, 2012; Olsen, et al., 2013).
Nevertheless, this transboundary MPA has succeeded in effective management since
its creation due to the willingness and commitment of the three states to protect the
marine environment.
Finally, there are several other TBMPA regimes around the world such as the Coral
Triangle TBMPA between six countries (White, et al., 2014). There are other
TBMPAs in coastal and marine areas in East Africa (Guerreiro, Chircop, Grilo, Viras,
Ribeiro, & Van der Elst, 2010; Grilo, Chircop, & Guerreiro, 2012). All of the above
have succeeded in achieving cross-jurisdictional conservation.
The success of these TBMPAs has been based on the exercise of national sovereignty,
and transnational coordination, thanks to the efficient management initiatives and
mechanism implemented for the states that agreed to do so. They have been motivated
by ecological concerns (Grilo, 2010) implementing EBM, but they have also given
72
significant value to the transboundary human and environmental interconnection
(Jones, 2014).
Likewise, experiences learned from experts in MPAs (Jones, 2014; Kelleher G. , 2015)
point out the importance of national and regional MPA networks, particularly in
developing countries. Examples of these are well explained by UNEP-WCMC (2008)
in the Report of the National and Regional MPA Network. The significance of
creating such networks is that a single MPA is unlikely to succeed due to the
transmission of the adverse effects of external anthropogenic activities into the MPA.
This is because of the fast expansion of the economy in recent years, which is causing
coastal and marine degradation. Moreover, managers frequently fail to reach the final
goal of the MPA due to their, sometimes, preferring immediate recognition rather than
long-term benefits (Kelleher G. , 2015).
Colombia, in the exercise of its sovereign rights and thinking about long-term
management, carried out an analysis of the existing metadata in the Seaflower BR
through the Colombian Ocean Commission (CCO) in 2013 (Murillo & Ortiz, 2013).
The main goal, based on a science-based management approach, is to improve data
and information in the area. Therefore, the government supported the initiative to
create the Seaflower National Working Group (Seaflower NWG). This NWG is
integrated by the MADS, CCO, DIMAR, Coralina, the academia (i.e. universities),
and the INVEMAR. The objective is to incorporate marine research programs in their
awareness to define the real state of marine knowledge within the biosphere reserve
taking into account specific areas for research based on data gaps.
Furthermore, the report (Murillo & Ortiz, 2013, pp. 13-25) mentions that nineteen
research areas were defined with a total of 187 projects developed to date by different
sectors of the Seaflower NWG. The results of the data received point out a low
73
percentage of projects related to MPA management (5%), governance (4%), among
others, while bathymetry is the highest value (21%) followed by biodiversity, and
ecosystems. In addition, the majority of these have been developed mainly close to the
main island San Andres (37%), followed by broader projects within the biosphere
reserve and the archipelago, 18%, and 17% respectively. This means that the
peripheral areas such as the north and south cays and atolls require more attention in
monitoring and follow-up for data and information especially related to the state of the
ecosystems. Therefore, it is paramount to reach a high percentage of developments
regarding management and governance through the improvement of transboundary
agreements and the implementation of MSP measures.
4.2 Spatial planning measures
As the governance process is the most meaningful solution to address the issues in the
Seaflower MPA, simultaneously, other tools have to be considered to obtain effective
management and conservation measures within the biosphere reserve. Moreover,
transboundary agreements cannot be applied easily, and anthropogenic maritime
activities, i.e. shipping, continues increasing rapidly; therefore other immediate actions
are necessary.
Thus, spatial planning measures may contribute to management and conservation
strategies (Olsen, et al., 2013). This tool is especially useful for the implementation of
the EB management approach in the resolution of cross-border conflicts and intersectoral conflicts (Olsen, et al., 2013; Ehler, 2014), through the application of marine
spatial management (MSM). Moreover, from the management point of view, EBMSM is not independent of MPAs. These concepts are intrinsically linked,
crosscutting and interrelating especially in multi-use MPAs wherein diverse purposes,
ecological, social, cultural, and economic, apply (Olsen, et al., 2013).
74
The significance of this concept is well appreciated and widely understood across
Europe (Jay, et al., 2016), but particularly in the Baltic Sea due to the narrow area that
encompasses this regional sea, and the multiple activities, busy shipping routes among
others, developed within. Therefore, in their awareness to manage this area effectively,
a document was released called Vision and Strategies around the Baltic Sea (VASAB),
in which the general principles for MSP are established, cross-cutting with the
environmental agreements. It is relevant to mention that this agreement is the first
worldwide where the MSP concept was developed for a large transboundary cooperation area (EU, 2013). It also served as the basis for the 2014 EU Maritime Spatial
Planning Directive (Jay, et al., 2016). Simultaneously, there are countries outside EU
that also have developed MSP effectively such as Australia, Canada, and the US.
Thus, new routes for vessel traffic present challenges for managers, despite the strict
governance in the shipping industry. Some conflicts and issues require proper zoning
and delimitation so as not to interfere with each other, and in cases in which some of
these overlap it does not cause any threats to the marine environment nor for safe
navigation.
The regional developments in the Caribbean Sea such as the Panama Canal extension
and the proposed Nicaragua Canal, will increase liner connectivity causing an increase
of maritime traffic through the zone that, to a certain extent, crosses the Seaflower
MPA.
Therefore, it is urgent to establish measures through the use of the MSP mechanism to
protect the ecosystems, especially from shipping in the peripheral areas of the
Seaflower BR. As it was mentioned in Chapter 3, within the MPA and the biosphere
reserve there are unique ecosystems especially coral reefs that are suffering
degradation, as a consequence of changes to the oceanographic conditions.
75
Additionally, the increase in maritime traffic in the area will create constant wave
wake, as an effect of the marked variations in bathymetry, plus noise generated by
propellers, contributing to the degradation of the ecosystems.
In consequence, to mitigate to some degree these impacts the most efficient solution is
to make use of the IMO instruments to regulate maritime traffic and protect the
ecosystems creating a TSS, and the establishment of a PSSA.
4.2.1 Traffic Separation Scheme (TSS)
Vessel traffic zones (VTZ) are defined as an approach to managing the traffic of large
vessels within a particular area in order to boost protection of marine resources,
physical and biological, and simultaneously allowing safe navigation and efficient
vessel operation (Brown, 2001; Pietrzykowski & Magaj, 2016). This practice was
implemented especially in passenger ships in the North Atlantic in 1898 and later on
was adopted internationally for the importance of vessel safety in 1964, included
within the 1960 SOLAS Convention (IMO, 2016). To begin with, the mechanism was
adopted by coastal states in particularly busy areas of on-going vessels. In addition,
due to the increase in collisions and maritime casualties, the states have been obliged
to adopt regulatory measures. Thus, the IMO, as the international body responsible for
regulation, has approved this mechanism, making it a mandatory observance for all
ships. Therefore, in 1972, with the adoption of the collision regulations (COLREGs)
TSS were included as the mandatory compliance (IMO, 2016).
Furthermore, the 1974 SOLAS Convention, in regulation V10, and V11 (IMO, 2003),
defines the concept of ship’s routing widely, encompassing protection of the marine
environment as is stated in UNCLOS (Pietrzykowski & Magaj, 2016). Likewise, VTZ
applies in principle to the following ship types: tankers, bulk carriers, and large
76
commercial vessels (LCVs) (Brown, 2001). In addition, any TSS scheme cannot
function without a strong Vessel Traffic Service that controls and monitors the area
where the TSS is demarked (IMO, 2003).
Based on international regulations, the measures in TSS are applicable to MPAs in
every case, and coastal states have the right and duty to take effective preventive
measures to protect their natural resources within their EEZ, including the exclusion,
partially or wholly, of ships through MPAs (Spadi, 2000). The effectiveness of this
tool has been measured and proved around the world. For example, the Baltic Sea as
one of busiest shipping routes (EU, 2013; Pietrzykowski & Magaj, 2016), has shown
the benefits of using routing schemes to safeguard the ships against collisions in busy
areas and also protects the marine environment (Silber, et al., 2012). These
assessments have also been conducted in MPAs, such as the Monterey Bay National
Marine Sanctuary (Brown, 2001), and the Pelagos Sanctuary (Coomber, D’Incà,
Rosso, Tepsich, Notarbartolo di Sciara, & Moulins, 2016).
The Caribbean Sea is also a busy area for shipping, which divides the maritime traffic
into two broad categories, bulk, and containers (Briceño-Garmendia, Bofinger, Cubas,
& Millan-Placci, 2015; UNCTAD, 2015). Nevertheless, according to BriceñoGarmendia, Bofinger, Cubas, & Millan-Placci (2015), the movement of containerized
freight in the area is compounded by intercontinental and inter-island traffic that
defines two types of routes: local routes and main roads. These, constitute a system of
three different route networks within the Caribbean system, as follows:
• The actual island-to-island routes that bring all needed imports into the zone.
• The supply routes between main hubs for the Caribbean, and;
• The mainline routes passing through the region used for larger transshipment
operations crossing the Panama Canal.
77
The routes above exclude passenger ships, which are increasing at the same rate as
tourism grows. Moreover, three main gateway countries supply the Small Island States
in the Caribbean: the US, Jamaica, and Trinidad (Briceño-Garmendia, Bofinger,
Cubas, & Millan-Placci, 2015). Furthermore, almost all ports are connected through
freight with Panama, where ten recognized carriers operates in the region (UNCTAD,
2015) Nevertheless, these carriers are different from those that connect with the US
(US Department of Transportation, 2013; Rodrigue & Ashar, 2015) directly.
Therefore, traffic becomes more dense, particularly, in the south-western Caribbean
where the Seaflower MPA is located.
All the challenges mentioned above are causing negative impacts to the marine
environment, including the MPA, as a consequence of the wave wake and underwater
noise created by the transit of high-speed LCVs. Nevertheless, the most affected zone
is in the northern part, where the cays and atolls Serrana, Quitasueño, and Roncador
are located. The largest coral reefs in the entire Seaflower MPA are located there
(CORALINA-INVEMAR; Gómez- López, D. I.; Segura-Quintero, C.; Sierra-Correa,
P. C.; Garay-Tinoco, J., 2012) (Figure 8), and it is in these areas where vessels are
observed navigating in proximity to the reefs. Additionally, other kinds of ship-source
pollution like oil discharges, ballast water exchange, and CO2 emissions are also
impacting the MPA. Likewise, as was shown previously in the CCO report (Murillo &
Ortiz, 2013), these areas are the least developed and least managed within the MPA.
Additionally, the new Nicaragua Canal will force the transit of LCVs between the
main islands of the archipelago (San Andres, and Providencia), creating new issues for
the islanders, and managers in the management, and conservation of the ecosystems.
Therefore, the MPA is the proper scenario to develop the first TSS in Colombia, and
the first in the southwestern Caribbean. As IMO routing guidelines mention
78
cooperation between states (IMO, 2003), it is an excellent opportunity to strengthen
transboundary agreements regarding shipping with the neighboring countries that
surround the Seaflower MPA and the biosphere reserve.
Furthermore, it has been proven that the restriction, in transit, of particular types of
ships through protected areas is highly effective in the restoration and conservation of
endangered species that have been extremely impacted by all kinds of ship-source
pollution. Therefore, IMO established, as a preventive measure, an extensive list of
adverse effects of navigation on the marine environment, and set up the concept of
PSSAs (Spadi, 2000).
4.2.2 Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas (PSSAs)
The concept of PSSAs is defined by IMO in Resolution A.982 (24) as: “an area that
needs special protection through action by IMO because of its significance for
recognized ecological, socio-economic or scientific reasons and because it may be
vulnerable to damage by international shipping activities” (IMO, 2006).
The criteria for an area to be selected by IMO as a PSSA must fulfill at least the
following three elements (Roberts, Tsamenyi, Workman, & Johnson, 2005):
• The area proposed must embody one of the three criteria that mention the basic
concept (i.e. ecological; social, cultural and economic; and scientific-educational);
• It must need special protection, i.e. be vulnerable enough to impacts by
international shipping activities; and
• The area must allow IMO to take proper actions from their scope framework to
provide protection from the vulnerability already identified.
The legal basis to do so is in UNCLOS chapter XII (UNCLOS, 1982) that gives the
general scope to IMO, and to the states to take such actions, especially in rare and
79
fragile ecosystems. However, the designation of PSSAs by IMO is not legally binding
at all because the concept was developed through a resolution, despite the legally
binding convention, MARPOL 73/78, mentioning the designation of Special Areas.
Therefore, PSSAs approach is covered under the legal concept of protective measures
stated in MARPOL (Blanco-Bazán, 1996; Roberts, Tsamenyi, Workman, & Johnson,
2005). Nevertheless, for IMO to accede to declare a PSSA there have to be certain
actions between international environmental organizations, coastal states and the IMO
through co-operation mechanisms in the interest of being protected, and that the
interrelated restrictive measures beyond IMO’s competence do not affect further
shipping activities (Blanco-Bazán, 1996).
Furthermore, according to Gjerde (2001), there are remarkable benefits with the
designation of a PSSA. First, the area designated acquires international recognition of
particular importance, which means that any further action to protect the marine
environment has significant value. Second, safeguarding safe navigation, obliging
sailors to take extra measures when navigating in proximity to the marked area; third,
it lets coastal states take protective action to address different threats and risks
associated with international shipping in the area. Additionally, the designated area
must provide historical evidence of the risks and impacts (damage) caused by
shipping, besides, vessel traffic characteristics, and relevant natural factors.
Moreover, to guarantee the effectiveness of the protective measures, coastal states may
undertake enforcement measures through the adoption of Associated Protective
Measures (APMs) within the PSSAs (Guan, 2010). The passage of these APMs will
make PSSAs efficient in practice. Thus, dissertation writing Helpance UK IMO has approved certain measures regarding
compulsory or recommended pilotage, mandatory ship reporting, avoidance areas,
TSS, forbidding discharges, mandatory no-anchoring areas, deep water routes, and
emission control areas (ECAs) (IMO, 2006). However, to ensure the efficiency of the
80
APMs from the lack of compliance by ship’s masters, there enters into play a major
role for countries, maritime administrations through coastal state and port state
control. It is also possible to enhance these APMs in combination with the interaction
of MPAs, and MSP (Guan, 2010).
To date, the IMO has designated fourteen PSSAs around the world (IMO, 2013), with
Colombia having one, since 2005, in the tropical Pacific Ocean with the Malpelo
Island, through Resolution 1589, October 26, 2005 (Cajiao, et al., 2006) (Figure 14).
This area was designated with the aim of protecting the uniqueness of the marine
fauna in the area (mainly sharks), and migratory species (whales and birds). In
addition, in 2006, UNESCO declared this area as a fauna and flora sanctuary, and part
of the culture heritage sites (UNESCO, 2016).
In accordance with all the above, the Seaflower MPA is again, the proper area to
implement such measures for the protection of the marine environment, especially
coral reef areas. The area meets the criteria established by the IMO guidelines for the
designation of a PSSA (IMO, 2006).
For instance, analyzing ship tracks from international shipping through the major
transited areas in the Caribbean, and that pass through Seaflower, and based on the
information of the US Department of Transportation, the majority of international
traffic consists of large containers and bulk (petroleum) ships (US Department of
Transportation, 2013). The regional transshipment is also for containers and cruise
ships (Webster, 2015). Thus, considering safe navigation, the northern part of the
MPA, Serranilla, Quitasueño, Roncador, and Serrana, represents a high risk for ships
due to the marked changes in bathymetry (Murillo & Ortiz, 2013).
Furthermore, the Seaflower MPA, as part of the biosphere reserve, counts on the
recognition of international and regional environmental organizations, which provide
81
support and easy acceptance for the protection of the ecosystems in the areas
mentioned above. Finally, considering that these are coral reef areas, it might be
proper to adopt the APMs of a zone to be avoided, mandatory no anchoring, and TSS.
Figure 14 Malpelo Island PSSA
Source: The Author – Software QGIS
82
5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Today, the world is facing the great challenge of developing and implementing the
2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and its associated SDGs, which contain the
path for the protection, conservation and sustainable use of oceans and coastal areas.
In this regard, the international environmental organizations such as UNEP and the
IMO, as the regulator of shipping activities, are performing well in the development of
a comprehensive scope to establish protected areas to protect and conserve ecosystems
and fragile habitats around the world. Nevertheless, it is the responsibility of states to
establishing these, through a structured SAP and the development of proper policy
mechanisms to enforce the correct management. The main goal has to be to conserve
the ecosystems and habitats in the long-term, making the use of these in a sustainable
way for the well-being of future generations.
Moreover, boundary disputes and political differences between states are of daily
discussion due the desire of states to get more space to exploit natural marine
resources. However, this is sometimes done without due care, with duties to the
marine environment ignored. Therefore, actions have to be taken now seeking the
commitment and the awareness of all stakeholders, national and regional, to ensure
that biodiversity within a regional area maintains sustainable in the long-term. The use
of marine areas in regional seas is increasing due to a rise in shipping activities, and
these developments are occurring now mainly in developing countries. Thus, they
need to adapt to these changes and be prepared to address the issues that emerge
because of them.
83
For instance, in the Caribbean Sea, due to the expansion of the Panama Canal and the
possible Nicaragua Canal, the surrounding countries have to take proactive and
protective measures to preserve the marine environment within their EEZs as is stated
in the umbrella convention, UNCLOS, and in the regional agreement, the Cartagena
Convention. Furthermore, other binding applicable agreements such as the CBD and
MARPOL also oblige the countries to undertake protective measures for the marine
environment.
The subject of this dissertation, Colombia, has recently experienced an increase in its
economy due to its strategic position and proximity to the Panama Canal. It has been
obliged to move forward to develop more coastal and marine services, especially
shipping facilities. Therefore, it is paramount to enhance and to improve the associated
protective measures for the conservation of the ecosystems within its marine
jurisdiction.
Furthermore, a maritime boundary dispute with the Republic of Nicaragua is
threatening the integrity of the marine territory in the Caribbean Sea, specifically in
the San Andres Archipelago affecting islander communities whose livelihoods are
based on sea-usage. In addition, the archipelago as a unique ecosystem in the southwestern Caribbean houses several species of fauna and flora in the WCR that
Colombia has decided to protect through the establishment of the Seaflower Biosphere
Reserve. It has established the adequate management mechanism to make the use of
this natural wealth sustainable through the creation of the MPA within the vast area
designated.
Thus, focusing on the improvement of the Seaflower MPA management, the following
actions are proposed to address the issues and challenges that this important MPA is
now facing.
84
5.1 Recommendations
Firstly, Colombia has to enhance political relationships with the neighbouring
Republic of Nicaragua to solve the long-running maritime boundary dispute. The
strategy that Colombia has to adopt is the social and EBM approach. It has to put
environmental concerns first in order to agree that the Seaflower BR is the milestone
for the protection of fish habitats and based on this maintains its integrity. To do so, it
is recommended that dialogues putting in place the cultural values of islanders be
supported, through a co-management strategy for the management of the MPA.
Nevertheless, it is necessary to establish in the national legislation this mechanism to
provide funds and support for the governance process.
Likewise, it is paramount to enforce this through a regional agreement. It is necessary
for the neighbouring countries of Costa Rica, Nicaragua, and Honduras to ratify the
SPAW Protocol as a mechanism to ensure the legal obligations for the protection of
the Special Protected Areas with regional relevance such as the Seaflower Biosphere
Reserve.
One approach for these countries for ratification could be the establishment of a
transboundary agreement using the Seaflower BR to seek regional commitment for the
protection of the ecosystems in the region. It is proper to use the IUCN marine
transboundary protected area categories (Vasilijević, Zunckel, McKinney, Erg,
Schoon, & Rosen-Michel, 2015).
To succeed in the establishment of the transboundary agreement, paramount is the
participation of CCO as an advisory body in the negotiation process. Moreover, it is
85
important to consider the support of the Seaflower NWG as a mean of expressing the
awareness and the importance of the EBM for the adoption of the agreement
Parallel to this, some other actions must be taken by Colombia within its territorial sea
in the archipelago MPA. As the expanded Panama Canal is increasing the maritime
traffic in the zone, there are threats to the ecosystems, especially affecting coral reefs,
marine mammals, and fish species. Thus, in the northern part of the MPA in the island
cays and atolls of Serranilla, Serrana, Roncador, and Quitasueño (See figure 10),
wherein the unspoiled coral reefs are located, the presence of higher density of
maritime traffic for international shipping is a threat.
Therefore, the recommendation is, through DIMAR, to propose to the IMO, the
creation of PSSAs in the islands cays mentioned above, establishing a buffer zone of 7
Nm (Figure 15), taking into consideration the experience and success in the
conservation of the ecosystems from the PSSA in Malpelo Island. If the buffer created
is close to the forefront reef, it will help to protect the coral from the wave wake and
underwater noise from LCVs transiting the area.
Additionally, it is important to establish associated protective measures such as TSS,
areas to be avoided, and no anchoring inside the buffer. The above is possible to do
due to the MPA zoning in these small reef island cays being categorized mostly for
general use. Thus, to allow sustainable fishing in the proximity of the reefs, it is
necessary to allocate buoys to each island to facilitate small vessels belaying there
during fishing trips.
86
Figure 15 Coral Reefs Buffer Zone as a PSSA within the Seaflower BR
Source: The Author- Software QGIS
Furthermore, on the enforcement side, and follow-up, it is important that in order to
reach the efficiency of the recommended measures, it is necessary to enhance the
archipelago’s VTS station. To do so, as Serrana, Serranilla and Roncador islands cays
are inhabited by marines from the Colombian Navy, as a mean to exert sovereignty in
the area, it is recommended to install AIS repeaters there to increase monitoring
coverage.
On the other hand, it is vital that the navy continue developing enforcement measures
to tackle issues of IUU in the areas, as well as drug trafficking. Parallel to this, within
the main archipelago islands, San Andres and Providencia, it is necessary to
87
implement social programs to involve the local young people in the management of
the MPA based on co-management, to dissuade the population from involvement in
illegal activities.
Finally, the integration of environmental education is paramount, although the highlevel measures are still poorly structured. Nevertheless, a methodological path based
on integrated environmental education in MPAs has been developed by ZorrillaPujana & Rossi (2014), and it will be useful to improve marine protected areas
management including the Seaflower MPA.
5.2 Conclusion
The Caribbean Sea offers the proper scenario to establish the appropiate mechanisms
to protect the Seaflower MPA. The new developments and challenges oblige
Colombia and its neighbouring states to undertake immediate regional action.
It has been shown that Colombia’s government has the commitment to improve the
Seaflower MPA’s management mechanisms through a science-based approach and
institutional support; this is a significant step in the improvement of the MPA.
However, the involvement of the entire stakeholder and islander community is
paramount, applying co-management practices from the others inland continental
MPAs.
Likewise, political will and effort from national governmental bodies are crucial for to
succeed in the protection of the Seaflower’s ecosystems. The creation of strong
regional partnerships is also vital. By using the biosphere reserve as the milestone for
transboundary conservation agreements based on EBM approach, sharing duties and
88
responsibilities between regional partners to ensure effectiveness, regional protection
objectives can be achieved.
Finally, it is the proper time to request the IMO to create the PSSAs to ensure that
shipping activities continue moving the highest freight in the region with safety
navigation and in an environmentally sustainable way.
89
6 REFERENCE LIST
“Cancilleria Colombia”. (2016). Cancilleria. Retrieved March 23, 2016 from
Freshwaters and Oceans:
http://www.cancilleria.gov.co/internacional/politica/ambiental/aguas-dulcesoceanos
“The Caribbean Sea”. (2015). The Columbia Encyclopedia, 6th edition. Retrieved
February 11, 2016 from Encyclopedia.com:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-Caribbea.html
“US Commerce Office”. (2011). Final Environmental Review. United States –
Colombia Trade Promotion Agreement. Retrieved April 19, 2016 from Office
of the U.S. Trade Representative:
https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/uploads/Countries%20Regions/africa/agreem
ents/pdfs/FTAs/columbia/COLOMBIA%20Final%20Environmental%20Revie
w.pdf
Abdulla, A. P., & Linden, O. P. (2008). Maritime traffic effects on biodiversity in the
Mediterranean Sea: Review of impacts, priority areas and mitigation
measures. Retrieved August 07, 2016 from IUCN Centre for Mediterranean
Cooperation: https://portals.iucn.org/library/efiles/edocs/2008-042-1.pdf
AGCS. (2014). Panama Canal 100 Shipping safety and future risk. Retrieved January
17, 2016 from Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty:
http://www.agcs.allianz.com/assets/PDFs/risk%20bulletins/Panama-Canal100_low-res.pdf
Al-Abdulrazzak, D., & Trombulak, S. (2011). Classifying levels of protection in
Marine Protected Areas. Marine Policy Journal (36), 576-582.
Alonso, D. A., F., R. L., Diaz, J. M., Segura, C., Castillo, P., & Anthony, C. (2007).
Chapter4: Coastal and Marine Conservation Priorities in Colombia. In A.
Chatwin, Priorities for Coastal and Marine Conservation in South America
(pp. 31-40). Arlington, Virginia, USA: The Nature Conservancy.
Alonso, D., Barbosa, H., Duque, M., Gil, I., Morales, M., Navarrete, S., et al. (2015).
Conceptualización del Subsistema de Áreas Marinas Protegidas en Colombia.
Documento de Trabajo (Versión 1.0). Proyecto COL75241 Diseño e
implementación de un Subsistema Nacional de Áreas Marinas Protegidas
(SAMP) en Colombia. Retrieved June 06, 2016 from INVEMAR:
90
http://www.invemar.org.co/documents/10182/14479/cartillaconceptualizacion-final-web.pdf
Andrade, C. (2000). Circulation and Variability of the Colombian Basin in the
Caribbean Sea. PhD Thesis. Menai Bridge, U.K.: University of Wales.
Andrade, C., Barton, E., & Mooers, C. (2003). Evidence for an Eastward Flow along
the Central and South American Caribbean Coast. Journal of Geophysical
Research , 108 (C6-3185), 11.
ANH. (2010). Los Cayos. Retrieved July 14, 2016 from Open Round Colombia 2010:
http://ronda2010.anh.gov.co/region.php?id=43&lang=
Bauer, B., Lorang, M., & Sherman, D. (2002). Estimating boat wake induced levee
erosion using sediment suspension measurements. Journal of Waterway Port
Coastal and Ocean Engineering (ASCE.128), 152-162.
Bekker, P. (2013, January 15). The World Court Awards Sovereignty Over Several
Islands in the Caribbean Sea to Colombia and Fixes a Single Maritime
Boundary between Colombia and Nicaragua. From The American Society of
International Law:
http://www.peacepalacelibrary.nl/ebooks/files/354062581.pdf
Biggs, C. (2009). Indo-Pacific Red Lionfish: Pterois Volitans, Invasion of the Western
Atlantic and Caribbean Oceans. Retrieved August 23, 2015 from
http://www.washington.edu:
http://depts.washington.edu/oldenlab/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2013/03/Pterois-Volitans_Biggs.pdf
Blanco-Bazán, A. (1996). The IMO guidelines on Particular Sensitive Sea Areas
(PSSAs). Their possible application to the protection of underwater cultural
heritage. Retrieved July 26, 2016 from Marine Policy : http://ac.elscdn.com/0308597X9600019X/1-s2.0-0308597X9600019Xmain.pdf?_tid=55d00398-5308-11e6-b136-
00000aab0f6b&acdnat=1469520774_518c4fef85e319b6dce8d1757ed97bc0
Briceño-Garmendia, C., Bofinger, H. C., Cubas, D., & Millan-Placci, M. F. (2015,
January). Connectivity for Caribbean Countries: An Initial Assessment. Policy
Research Working Paper. Retrieved July 26, 2016 from World Bank Group:
https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/handle/10986/21397
91
Brown, J. A. (2001). A Review of Marine Zones in the Monterey Bay National Marine
Sanctuary. Marine Sanctuaries Conservation Series MSD-01-2. . Retrieved
January 17, 2016 from U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration, Marine Sanctuaries Division:
http://aquaticcommons.org/2352/1/Zones.pdf
Cajiao, M. V., Florez, M., Gonzalez, A., Hernandez, P., Martans, C., Porras, N., et al.
(2006). Manual de Legislacion Ambiental para los Paises del Corredor
Marino de Conservacion del Pacifico Este Tropical. San Jose, Costa Rica:
Fundacion Mar Viva.
Castillo L., L. A., & Vargas C., G. (2013, December 2). SEISMOSTRATIGRAPHY OF
LOS CAYOS BASIN. Retrieved July 14, 2016 from Boletin de Geologia [S.L]:
http://revistas.uis.edu.co/index.php/revistaboletindegeologia/article/view/3738/
4165
CBD. (1992). Convention on Biological Diversity. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: UNEP.
CBD. (2016, January 1). Convention on Biological Diversity. Retrieved March 10,
2016 from CBD website: https://www.cbd.int
CCO. (2014, November). Nationa Policy of the Oceans and Coastal Areas. Retrieved
March 29, 2016 from Comision Colombiana del Oceano:
http://www.cco.gov.co/documentos/pdf/pnoec.pdf
CEP. (2015). The Caribbean Environment Programme- about Cartagena Convention.
Retrieved February 11, 2016 from The Caribbean Environment Programme:
http://www.cep.unep.org/
CEPEI. (2015, September). Un zettabyte de motivos para hablar de datos y desarrollo.
Retrieved June 17, 2016 from Centro de Pensamiento Independiente-CEPEI:
http://cepei.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/insumoevento17sept__1_.pdf
Coomber, F. G., D’Incà, M., Rosso, M., Tepsich, P., Notarbartolo di Sciara, G., &
Moulins, A. (2016, April 16). Description of the vessel traffic within the north
Pelagos Sanctuary: Inputs for Marine Spatial Planning and management
implications within an existing international Marine Protected Area .
Retrieved July 26, 2016 from Marine Policy Journal: http://ac.elscdn.com/S0308597X16301853/1-s2.0-S0308597X16301853-
main.pdf?_tid=25168920-5308-11e6-aad2-
00000aab0f02&acdnat=1469520692_e90a59ba75f9ed8772d7f95729e47aec
92
Coralina. (2005). Acuerdos 021 y 025 de 2005 Por medio del cual se delimita
internamente el Área Marina Protegida de la Reserva de la Biosfera Seaflower
y se dictan otras disposiciones. Retrieved February 18, 2016 from Registro
Unico Nacional de Areas Protegidas:
http://runap.parquesnacionales.gov.co/reportes/generardocadminzip/aid/838
CORALINA. (2014, November 26). Effects of the ruling of the International Court of
Justice- ICJ of Hague in the Archipelago. Retrieved July 7, 2016 from
http://www.coralina.gov.co/coralina/categoria-noticia/1358-effects-of-theruling-of-the-international-court-of-justice-icj-of-hague-in-the-archipelago
CORALINA-INVEMAR; Gómez- López, D. I.; Segura-Quintero, C.; Sierra-Correa,
P. C.; Garay-Tinoco, J. (2012). Atlas de la Reserva de Biósfera Seaflower.
Archipiélago de San Andrés, Providencia y Santa Catalina. (Vol. 28). Santa
Marta, Colombia: Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras “José Benito
Vives De Andréis” -INVEMAR- y Corporación para el Desarrollo Sostenible
del Archipiélago de San Andrés, Providencia y Santa Catalina -CORALINA.
De Pourcq, K., Thomas, E., Arts, B., Vranckx, A., Leon-Sicard, T., & Van Damme, P.
(2015). Conflict in Protected Areas: Who Says Co-Management Does Not
Work? PLoS ONE , 10 (12).
De Rivaz, C. (2013, September 5). Colombia government lays out measures to protect
Caribbean islands from Nicaraguan expansion. Retrieved July 7, 2016 from
Colombia reports.com: http://colombiareports.com/colombia-govt-laysmeasures-protect-islands-nicaraguan-expansion/
Diaz, J., Diaz-Pulido, G., Garzon-Ferreira, J., Geister, B., Sanchez, J., & Zea, S.
(1996). I. Complejos arrecifales oceánicos. In Atlas de los arrecifes coralinos
del Caribe Colombiano. (Atlas of Caribbean Colombian Coral Reef)Atlas de
los arrecifes coralinos del Caribe Colombiano. (Atlas of Caribbean Colombian
Coral Reef) (Vol. Special Publication Series No 2, p. 83). Santa Marta,
Colombia: Instituto de Investigaciones Marinas y Costeras “José Benito Vives
de Andreis”- INVEMAR.
Eastwood, P. D., Mills, C. M., Aldridge, J. N., Houghton, C. A., & Rogers, S. I.
(2007). Human activities in UK offshore waters: an assessment of direct,
physical pressure on the seabed. ICES Journal of Marine Science (64), 453-
463.
93
Ehler, C. (2014). A Guide to Evaluating Marine Spatial Plans (Vol. 70). Paris, France:
UNESCO.
El Tiempo. (2016, March 17). Colombia respeta el derecho, pero exige también
respeto al derecho. Retrieved July 15, 2016 from El tiempo.com:
http://www.eltiempo.com/politica/justicia/reaccion-de-santos-tras-decision-decorte-de-la-haya/16539485
EMSA. (2013, Nov 14). Action Plan for response to Marine Pollution from Oil and
Gas Installations. Retrieved June 01, 2016 from European Maritime Safety
Agency: http://www.emsa.europa.eu/news-a-press-centre/externalnews/download/2585/1961/23.html
EU. (2013, January 5). European Seas and Territorial Development, Opportunities
and Risks ( ESaTDOR). ANNEX 10 to the Scientific Report Governance Case
Studies: Baltic Sea . Retrieved January 16, 2016 from European Observation
Network Territorial Development and Cohesion:
http://www.espon.eu/export/sites/default/Documents/Projects/AppliedResearch
/ESaTDOR/FR_160413/20130417_annexes/ESaTDOR_FR_Annex_10_Baltic
_CS.pdf
EU. (2015). International Ocean Governance Public consultation . Retrieved February
8, 2016 from European Commission_ Maritime Affairs and Fisheries:
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/maritimeaffairs_fisheries/consultations/oceangovernance/index_en.htm
Fanning, L., Mahon, R., McConney, P., Angulo, J., Burrows, F., Chakalall, B., et al.
(2007). A Large Marine Ecosystem Governance Framework. Marine Policy ,
31 (Issue 34), 434-443.
FAO. (1995). FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries. Retrieved June 04,
2016 from FAO- Fisheries and Aquaculture Department:
http://www.fao.org/docrep/005/v9878e/v9878e00.htm#PRE
Gabrié, C., Lagabrielle, E., Bissery, C., Crochelet, E., Meola, B., Webster, C., et al.
(2012). The Status of Marine Protected Areas in the Mediterranean Sea.
Retrieved November 18, 2015 from MedPAN & RAC/SPA:
http://www.medpan.org/documents/10180/0/The+Status+of+Marine+Protected
+Areas+in+the+Mediterranean+Sea+2012/069bb5c4-ce3f-4046-82cff72dbae29328
94
Garcia, P. (2012, May 2). How Change Happens: Defeating Oil Exploration in the
San Andres Archipelago. Retrieved July 14, 2016 from From Poverty to Power.
How active citizens and effective States can change the World:
https://oxfamblogs.org/fp2p/how-change-happens-defeating-oil-exploration-inthe-san-andres-archipelago/
Gjerde, K. M. (2001). Protecting Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas From Shipping: A
Review of IMO’s New PSSA Guidelines. In H. Thiel, & J. A. Koslow,
Managing Risks to Biodiversity and the Environment on the High Sea,
Including Tools Such as Marine Protected Areas – Scientific Requirements and
Legal Aspects – (pp. 123-131). Boon, Germany.
Gorricho, J. (2012, November 28). Global Pacebuilding II: High time for
environmental diplomacy in the Caribbean. Retrieved July 7, 2016 from
Governance and Development:
http://www.governanceanddevelopment.com/2012/11/global-peacebuilding-iihigh-time-for.html
Green, S. J., & Côté, I. M. (2008). Abundance of Invasive Lionfish (Pterois volitans)
on Bahamian Coral Reef. Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries Institute, Department
of Biological Sciences, Simon Fraser University. Guadaloupe: Gulf and
Caribbean Fisheries Institute.
Grilo, C. (2010, April). The Impact of Maritime Boundaries on Cooperation in the
Creation of Transboundary Marine Protected Areas: Insights from Three
Cases. Retrieved January 16, 2016 from researchgate.net/ Ocean Yearbook:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/52005839
Grilo, C., Chircop, A., & Guerreiro, J. (2012, August 12). Prospects for
Transboundary Marine Protected Areas in East Africa. Retrieved April 08,
2016 from Ocean Development & International Law:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00908320.2012.672297
Guan, S. (2010, June 16). Enforcement of Associated Protected Measures in
Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas. Retrieved January 17, 2016 from aquatic
commons/ School of Marine Science and Policy. :
http://aquaticcommons.org/3907/1/Guan_papers.pdf
Guerreiro da Silva, J. Â., Fernandes e Castro-Ribeiro, R. C., Mocinho-Viras, A. d., &
Grilo, C. B. (2012). Transboundary MPAs: a challenge for the twenty-first
century. Retrieved April 08, 2016 from Management of Environmental
95
Quality: An International Journal:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14777831211232191
Guerreiro, J., Chircop, A., Grilo, C., Viras, A., Ribeiro, R., & Van der Elst, R. (2010,
January 14). Establishing a transboundary network of marine protected areas:
Diplomatic and management options for the east African context . Retrieved
January 16, 2016 from Marine Policy Journal: http://ac.elscdn.com/S0308597X10000151/1-s2.0-S0308597X10000151-
main.pdf?_tid=fa71a232-bc57-11e5-be90-
00000aacb35e&acdnat=1452952355_6d46e6fd6b4fdab069390164125974d0
Haren, A. M. (2007). Reducing Noise Pollution from Commercial Shipping in the
Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary: A Case Study in Marine
Protected Area Management of Underwater Noise. Retrieved September 29,
2015 from Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy:
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13880290701347432
Harrould-Kolieb, E. R., & Herr, D. (2012, January). Ocean acidification and climate
change: synergies and challenges of addressing both under the UNFCCC.
Retrieved October 22, 2015 from Climate Policy Journal:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14693062.2012.620788
Hassellöv, I.-M., Turner, D. R., Lauer, A., & Corbett, J. J. (2013, June 6). Shipping
contributes to ocean acidification. Retrieved November 22, 2015 from
Geophysical research letters:
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/grl.50521/epdf
Hildebrand, J. (2005). Impacts of Anthropogenic Sound. (T. J. Press, Ed.) Marine
Mammal Research: Conservation beyond Crisis , 101-124.
Hildebrand, L. (2016, March). Non-traditional Coastal and Ocean Partnerships. WMU
201 Marine and Coastal Environmental Issues , 50. Malmo, Skane, Sweden:
WMU.
Hildebrand, L., & Chircop, A. (2010). A GULF UNITED: CANADA-U.S.
TRANSBOUNDARY MARINE ECOSYSTEM-BASED GOVERNANCE IN THE
GULF OF MAINE. Retrieved July 22, 2016 from Ocean and Coastal Law
Journal :
http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/occoa15&collection=jou
rnals&index=&id=343
96
Howard, M. W. (2006, June). Assessment Report Seaflower Biosphere Reserve
Implementation: The First Five Years 2000 – 2005. Retrieved November 2,
2015 from UNESCO:
http://www.unesco.org/csi/smis/siv/Caribbean/San_actEnvEd_Seaflower2000-
2005%20.pdf
Huete-Pérez, J. A., Alvarez, P. J., Schnoor, J. L., Rittmann, B. E., Clayton, A., Acosta,
M. L., et al. (2015, March 2). Scientists Raise Alarms about Fast Tracking of
Transoceanic Canal through Nicaragua. Retrieved January 17, 2016 from
Environmental Science & Technology:
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.est.5b00215
ICJ. (2012). Territorial and Maritime Dispute (Nicaragua v. Colombia), Judgment,
I.C.J. Reports. Retrieved July 14, 2016 from International Court of Justice:
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/124/17164.pdf
ICJ. (2016). Cases, Judgments, Advisory opinions and Orders by chronological order/
(Nicaragua v. Colombia). Retrieved July 15, 2016 from International Court of
Justice: http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/index.php?p1=3&p2=5
IMO. (2014, April 14). Guidelines for the reduction of underwater noise from
commercial shipping to address adverse impacts on marine life. Circular Letter
66 session MEPC committee . London, UK: IMO.
IMO. (2012, March 5). International Shipping Facts and Figures – Information
Resources on Trade, Safety, Security, Environment. Retrieved July 10, 2016
from IMO-Knowledge Centre section: Ships and Shipping- Facts and Figures:
http://www.imo.org/en/KnowledgeCentre/ShipsAndShippingFactsAndFigures/
TheRoleandImportanceofInternationalShipping/Documents/International%20S
hipping%20-%20Facts%20and%20Figures.pdf
IMO. (2003, January 6). MSC/Circ. 1060. GUIDANCE NOTE ON THE
PREPARATION OF PROPOSALS ON SHIPS. ROUTEING SYSTEMS AND
SHIP REPORTING SYSTEMS FOR SUBMISSION TO THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SAFETY OF NAVIGATION. Retrieved July 26, 2016 from
imo.org:
http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Navigation/Pages/ShipsRouteing.aspx
IMO. (2016, January). Our work- Marine Environment. Retrieved March 11, 2016
from International Maritime Organization:
http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/Pages/Default.aspx
97
IMO. (2013). Particular Sensitive Areas Website. Retrieved July 27, 2016 from
imo.org/pssa: http://pssa.imo.org/#/pssas
IMO. (2006, February 6). Resolution A.982(24). REVISED GUIDELINES FOR THE
IDENTIFICATION AND DESIGNATION OF PARTICULARLY SENSITIVE
SEA AREAS. Retrieved March 16, 2016 from imo.org/environment/PSSAs:
http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Environment/PSSAs/Documents/A24-
Res.982.pdf
IMO. (2016). Ships’ routeing. Retrieved July 26, 2016 from imo.org:
http://www.imo.org/en/OurWork/Safety/Navigation/Pages/ShipsRouteing.aspx
INVEMAR. (2016). Informe del estado de los ambientes y recursos marinos y
costeros en Colombia: Año 2015. Retrieved June 06, 2016 from INVEMAR/
Publicaciones:
http://www.invemar.org.co/documents/10182/14479/ier_2015_baja.pdf/f225fd
a1-eb06-44ad-9d60-535909e85cc6
IOC-UNESCO; UNEP. (2016, July 13). Large Marine Ecosystems: Status and Trends,
Summary for Policy Makers. Retrieved July 20, 2016 from United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP): http://www.geftwap.org/publications/lmesspm
ISA. (2008, March). Protection of the Seabed Environment. Retrieved July 13, 2016
from International Seabed Authority:
https://www.isa.org.jm/files/documents/EN/Brochures/ENG4.pdf
IUCN; UNEP-WCMC. (2013). The World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA).
(UNEP-WCMC, Producer) Retrieved February 23, 2016 from Protect Planet
Ocean: http://www.protectplanetocean.org
IUCN-WCPA. (2011). UNEP-WCMC Transboundary Protected Areas Inventory2007. Retrieved July 22, 2016 from Global Transboundary Conservation
Network: http://www.tbpa.net/page.php?ndx=78
Jackson, J., Donovan, M., Cramer, K., & Lam, V. (2014). Status and Trends of
Caribbean Coral Reefs: 1970-2012. Gland, Switzerland.
Jay, S., Alves, F. L., O’Mahony, C., Gomez, M., Rooney, A., Almodovar, M., et al.
(2016). Transboundary dimensions of marine spatial planning: Fostering
98
inter-jurisdictional relations and governance . Retrieved January 16, 2016
from Marine Policy Journal: http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0308597X15003954/1-
s2.0-S0308597X15003954-main.pdf?_tid=e07fc708-bc59-11e5-b2d0-
00000aab0f6b&acdnat=1452953171_4d76cf6dc70ebd5a12836c31a4c1a827
Jones, P. J. (2014). Governing Marine Protected Areas: Resilience through Diversity.
New York: Taylor and Francis.
Jones, P. J., & Qiu W, D. S. (2011). Governing Marine Protected Areas – Getting the
Balance Right. United Nations Environment Programme. Nairobi – Kenya:
UNON.
Kaurobi, E. d., Espey, J., & Durand-Delacre, D. (2016, February 15). Indicators and a
Monitoring Framework for FfD: Proposals for Follow-up and Review of the
Addis Ababa Action Agenda of the Third International Conference on
Financing for Development . Retrieved June 17, 2016 from United Nations
Sustainable Development Solutions Network: http://unsdsn.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/03/Final-FfD-Follow-up-and-review-paper.pdf
Kelleher, G. (2015). The importance of regional networks of Marine Protected Areas
(MPAs) and how to achieve them. Retrieved May 5, 2016 from IUCN:
http://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/gkelleher_the_importance_of_regional_net
works_of_marine_protected_areas__mpas__finala.pdf
Kelleher, G., & Kenchington, R. (1992). Guidelines for Establishing Marine Protected
Areas. A Marine Conservation and Development Report (Vol. VII). Gland,
Switzerland: IUCN.
Kelleher, G., Bleakley, C., & Wells, S. (1995). A global Representative System of
Marine Protected Areas (Vol. II). Canberra, ACT, Australia: Great Barrier
Reef Marine Park Authority.
KMI. (2007). Towards Establishing the Marine Peace Park in the Western
Transboundary Coastal Area of the Korean Peninsula. Retrieved July 24, 2016
from The University of Washington:
http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/mppkorea.pdf
Lausche, B. (2011). Guidelines for Protected Areas Legislation (Vol. XXVI). Gland,
Switzerland: IUCN.
99
Lopez, V., & Krauss, U. (2006). National and Regional Capacities and Experiences
on Marine Invasive Species, Including Ballast Waters, Management
Programmes in the Wider Caribbean Region – a Compilation of Current
Information. United Nations Environment Programme. Trinidad & Tobago:
CAB International Caribbean and Latin America Regional Centre (CLARC).
Lyons, Y. (2011). Offshore oil and gas in the SCS and the protection of the marine
environment. Retrieved June 01, 2016 from Centre of International Law:
http://cil.nus.edu.sg/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/OG_SCS_CILPart206oct2011-1.pdf
Mackelworth, P. (2016). Marine Transboundary Conservation and Protected Areas
(Vol. 1). New York: Taylor and Francis Group.
Mackelworth, P. (2012, March 2). Peace parks and transboundary initiatives:
implications for marine conservation and spatial planning. Retrieved January
16, 2016 from Wiley Online Library – Conservation Letters :
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00223.x/epdf
MADS. (2014, June 24). Resolucion 0977 (Junio 24 de 2014) Por medio del cual se
adiciona la resolucion 107 del 27 de enero de 2005, con el fin de asignar una
categoria de area protegida al “Area Marina Protegida de la Reserva de
Biosfera Seaflower”. Retrieved February 18, 2016 from RUNAP – UAESPNN
– Ministerio de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible:
http://runap.parquesnacionales.gov.co/reportes/generardocadminzip/aid/838
Mahon, R., McConney, P., Parsram, K., Simmons, B., Didier, M., Fanning, L., et al.
(2010). Ocean governance in the Wider Caribbean Region: Communication
and coordination mechanisms by which states interact with regional
organisations and projects. Retrieved March 18, 2016 from Academic Council
on the United Nations System- ACUNS: http://acuns.org/wpcontent/uploads/2012/05/Mahon_2010_Ocean_governance_in_the_Wider_Cari
bbean_CTR_40.pdf
MarCom. (2003). Guidelines for Managing Wake Wash from High-speed Vessels.
Retrieved July 11, 2016 from PIANC- International Navigation Association:
http://www.pianc.us/workinggroups/docs_wg/marcom-wg41.pdf
Marine Conservation Institute. (2015, December 1). MPAtlas. Retrieved February 22,
2016 from MPAtlas. Seattle, WA: http://www.mpatlas.org
100
Markussen, J. M. (1994). Deep Seabed Mining and the Environment: Consequences,
Perceptions, and Regulations. (H. O. (eds.), Ed.) Green Globe Yearbook of
International Co-operation on Environment and Development , 31-39.
McKenna, M. F., Ross, D., Wiggins, S. M., & Hildebrand, J. A. (2011, November 4).
Underwater radiated noise from modern commercial ships. Retrieved July 12,
2016 from Acoustical Society of America:
http://cetus.ucsd.edu/Publications/Publications/PAPERS/McKennaJASA2012.
pdf
Minambiente. (2012, March 30). Action Plan for the Implementation of the work
program on Protected Areas under the Convention on Biological Diversity.
Retrieved April 6, 2016 from cbd.int: https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/co/conbsap-powpa-es.pdf
Minambiente. (2016). Asuntos Marinos y Costeros y Recursos Acuaticos. Retrieved
March 29, 2016 from Ministerio de Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible:
https://www.minambiente.gov.co/index.php/ambientes-y-desarrollossostenibles/asuntos-marinos-y-costeros-y-recursos-acuaticos
Minambiente. (2015, May 26). Decree number 1075 of May 26 to 2015. Retrieved
March 17, 2016 from Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y Desarrollo Sostenible:
https://www.minambiente.gov.co/images/normativa/app/decretos/4eDECRETO%201076%20DE%202015%20MINAMBIENTE%20EXPIDE%20
DECRETO%20%C3%9ANICO%20REGLAM.%20SECTOR%20AMBIENT
E%20Y%20DESARROLLO%20SOSTENIBLE.pdf
Minambiente. (2011). National Policy for the Integral Management of Biodiversity
and its Ecosystemic services (NPIMBES). Retrieved April 10, 2016 from
cbd.int: https://www.cbd.int/doc/world/co/co-nbsap-v2-en.pdf
Minambiente. (2005, January 27). Resolución número 107 (27 de Enero de 2005) Por
el cual se declara un área marina protegida y se dictan otras disposiciones.
Retrieved November 22, 2015 from Ministerio de Medio Ambiente y
Desarrollo Sostenible:
http://www.coralina.gov.co/coralina/rendiciondecuentas/monitoreo-planaccion/normatividad-1/normatividad-por-temas/areas-protegidas/238-
resolucion-107-de-2005-por-la-cual-se-declara-un-area-marina-protegida
101
Molares, R. B., Vanegas, T. J., Bustamante, J. V., & Andrade, C. A. (2004). Aspectos
ocenograficos de las aguas sobre la depresion Providencia. Scientific bulletinCIOH (22), 11-25.
Moon, D. S.-H., & Woo, J. K. (2014, August 1). The impact of port operations on
efficient ship operation from both economic and environmental perspectives.
Retrieved October 22, 2015 from Journal of Maritime Policy & Management:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2014.931607
Mooney, H. A. (2005). Invasive Alien Species: The Nature of the Problem. In H. A.
Mooney, R. N. Mack, J. A. McNeely, L. E. Neville, P. J. Schei, & J. K. Waage,
Invasive Alien Species: A New Synthesis (Vol. Scope 63, p. 357). Washington,
USA: Island Press.
Morgan, C. L., Odunton, N. A., & Jones, A. T. (1999). Synthesis of Environmental
Impact of Deep Seabed Mining . Retrieved July 14, 2016 from MArine
Georesources & Geotechnology: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/106411999273666
Morris, J. J. (2012). Invasive Lionfish: A Guide to Control and Management. Gulf and
Caribbean Fisheries Institute Special Publication (Vol. 1). Marathon, Florida,
USA.
MPA News. (2008, April). Marine Peace Parks: Establishing Transboundary MPAs
to Improve International Relations and Conservation. Retrieved July 22, 2016
from Unversity of Washington:
http://depts.washington.edu/mpanews/MPA95.pdf
Murillo, I., & Ortiz, R. (2013). Analisis de los metadatos sobre proyectos de
investigación científica marina desarrollada en el area de la reserva de
biosfera Seaflower. Secretaria Ejecutiva de la Comision Colombiana del
Océano- Area Asuntos Marinos y Costeros, Bogotá D.C.
Nolet, G., Vosmer, W., De Brujin, M., & Braly-Cartillier, I. (2014). Managing
environmental and social risk: a roadmap for national development banks in
Latin America and the Caribbean. Retrieved April 24, 2016 from InterAmerican Development Bank:
https://publications.iadb.org/bitstream/handle/11319/6437/CMF%20MON%20
Managing%20Environmental%20and%20Social%20Risks.pdf?sequence=1
102
OECD. (2014). OECD Environmental Performance Review: Colombia. Retrieved
April 21, 2016 from oecd.org: https://www.oecd.org/env/countryreviews/ColombiaEPR_AssessmentRecommendations.pdf
OHI. (2015, October 15). Colombia Makes Strides on Developing its First Ocean
Health Index Independent Assessment. Retrieved March 20, 2016 from NewsOcean Health Index: http://www.oceanhealthindex.org/news/colombia-makesstrides-developing-independent-assessment
Olsen, E., Johnson, D., Weaver, P., Go.i, R., Ribeiro, M., Rabaut, M., et al. (2013).
Achieving Ecologically Coherent MPA Networks in Europe: Science Needs
and Priorities. Marine Board Position Paper 18. (K. Larkin, & N.
McDonough, Eds.) Retrieved November 18, 2015 from European Marine
Board: http://www.marineboard.eu/file/23/download?token=hUK5AcVY
Ormel, E. (2011, June 28). Marine Peace Parks effective peace-building instruments?
A Marine Peace Park contribution to paving the road towards comprehensive
neighbourly relations between Jordan and Israel . Retrieved July 24, 2016
from Academia. edu:
https://www.academia.edu/4360681/Marine_Peace_Parks_effective_peacebuilding_instruments
Osborne, A. H., Haley, B. A., Hathorne, E. C., Flögel, S., & Frank, M. (2014).
Neodymium isotopes and concentrations in Caribbean seawater: Tracing water
mass mixing and continental input in a semi-enclosed ocean basin. Earth and
Planetary Science Letters , 406, 174-186.
Osherenko, G. (2006). New discourses on ocean governance: Understanding property
rights and the public trust. Journal of Environmental Law and Litigation , 21
(2), 317-381.
Otero, M. (2014-2015). Problems in the Caribbean: The Absence of Finality to the
Territorial Dispute in Nicaragua v. Colombia Will Have Negative Impacts in
the Region. University of Toledo Law Review , 46 (3), 617-680.
Patrick, S., & Storm, B. (2013, January 02). Council on Foreign Relations. (K. Brown,
F. F. Thaler, Producers, & Media Strom) Retrieved January 23, 2016 from
Global Governance Monitor/oceans: http://www.cfr.org/globalgovernance/global-governancemonitor/p18985#!/oceans?gclid=CN_QxJjLwMoCFSTecgodjDoHAw#IssueBrief
103
Pietrzykowski, Z., & Magaj, J. (2016, March 25). Ship domains in Traffic Separation
Schemes. Retrieved July 25, 2016 from Scientific Journals of the Maritime
University of Szczecin: http://repository.scientificjournals.eu/bitstream/handle/123456789/1196/20-zn-am-45-117-
pietrzykowski-p.pdf?sequence=1
Plata, J. (2009). Protecting Marine Biodiversity in the South Eastern Pacific Ocean
(Vol. 1). Malmo, Sweden: WMU.
PNNC-RUNAP. (2016). Unique National Registry of Protected Areas – RUNAP.
Retrieved June 05, 2016 from National Natural Parks of Colombia:
http://www.parquesnacionales.gov.co/portal/es/sistema-nacional-de-areasprotegidas-sinap/registro-unico-nacional-de-areas-protegias/
Ramirez, L. (2016, March 31). Marine protected areas in Colombia: Advances in
conservation and barriers for effective governance. Retrieved July 8, 2015
from Ocean & Coastal Management:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0964569116300308
Roberts, C. M., Andelman, S., Branch, G., Bustamante, R. H., Castilla, J. C., Dugan,
J., et al. (2003). Ecological Criteria for Assessment Candidates Sites for Marine
Reserves. Ecological Applications , 13 (1), S199- S215.
Roberts, J. (2007). Marine Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation:
The application and future development of the IMO’s Particularly Sensitive Sea
Area Concept. Berlin, German: Springer.
Roberts, J., Tsamenyi, M., Workman, T., & Johnson, L. (2005). The Western
European PSSA proposal: a ‘‘politically sensitive sea area’’. Retrieved July
26, 2016 from Marine Policy Journal: http://ac.elscdn.com/S0308597X04000624/1-s2.0-S0308597X04000624-
main.pdf?_tid=171aaa08-5304-11e6-a6da00000aab0f27&acdnat=1469518951_2d66a39fab5cef71272f8d5d681671c3
Rodrigue, J.-P., & Ashar, A. (2015, October 2). Transshipment hubs in the New
Panamax Era: The role of the Caribbean. Journal of Transport Geography , 10.
Romero, C. (2016, April 13). Law and Policy related to the marine environment.
University Lectures subject WMU 253 , 27. Malmo, Sweden: WMU.
104
Ruiz-Ochoa, M. (2011). Variabilidad de la cuenca Colombia (mar Caribe) asociada
con el niño-Oscilación del sur, vientos Alisios y procesos locales. Doctoral
Thesis . Medellin, Colombia.
Sanín Posada, N., & Ceballos Arevalo, M. (2013). La llegada del Dragon ¿Falló la
Haya? / The arrival of the Dragon ¿Do the Hague fail? Bogota D.C.,
Colombia: Panamericana Editorial.
Silber, G. K., Vanderlaan, A. S., Arceredillo, A. T., Johnson, L., Taggart, C. T.,
Brown, M. W., et al. (2012, May 15). The role of the International Maritime
Organization in reducing vessel threat to whales: Process, options, action and
effectiveness . Retrieved July 26, 2016 from Marine Policy Journal:
http://ac.els-cdn.com/S0308597X12000528/1-s2.0-S0308597X12000528-
main.pdf?_tid=3fe6125c-5308-11e6-a84f00000aab0f6c&acdnat=1469520737_dad3a0e6e4a1251719a48a34d394f2d8
Spadi, F. (2000). Navigation in Marine Protected Areas: National and International
Law. Retrieved September 29, 2015 from Ocean Development & International
Law: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/009083200413172
Speed, J. R., & Levine, A. (2014). What makes a “successful” marine Protected Area?
The unique context of Hawaii’s fish replenishment areas. (Elsevier, Ed.)
Marine Policy , 44, 196-203.
Stewart, R. H. (2003). Chapter 3 the physical setting. In R. H. Stewart, Introduction to
physical oceanography (pp. 21-37). Texas: Department of Oceanography,
Texas A&M University.
Tamelander, J., Riddering, L., Haag, F., & Matheickal, J. (2010). Guidelines for
Development of a National Ballast Water Management Strategy. Retrieved
August 30, 2015 from Globallast – IMO: http://globallast.imo.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/11/Mono18_English.pdf.
Taylor, E., Baine, M., Killmer, A., & Howard, M. (2013). Seaflower marine protected
area: Governance for sustainable development . Marine Policy , 41, 57-64.
The World Bank. (2016, May 07). Panama Canal expansion: A smart route for
boosting infrastructure in Latin America. Retrieved July 30, 2016 from The
World Bank: http://blogs.worldbank.org/voices/panama-canal-expansionsmart-route-boosting-infrastructure-latin-america
105
The World Bank. (2006, February 25). Republic of Colombia: Mitigating
Environmental Degradation to Foster Growth and Reduce Inequality.
Retrieved April 21, 2016 from Earthmind.org:
http://earthmind.org/files/coed/04-COED-Colombia.pdf
Toro, J., Requena, I., & Zamorano, M. (2009, October 24). Environmental impact
assessment in Colombia: Critical analysis and proposals for improvement.
Retrieved April 20, 2016 from Science Direct:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019592550900122X
Tripp, E. (2014, January 14). Marine Protected Areas: A Timeline of MPAs in the U.S.
. Retrieved February 22, 2016 from marine science today:
http://marinesciencetoday.com/2014/01/14/marine-protected-areas-a-timelineof-mpas-in-the-u-s/#ixzz40ua695zE
UK Legislation. (2004). The Merchant Shipping (High Speed Craft) Regulations 2004.
Retrieved July 11, 2016 from Legislation.gov.uk:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2004/302/pdfs/uksi_20040302_en.pdf
Umana, U. A. (2002). Marine Ecosystems and the Role of Marine Protected Areas as
Sustainable Development Strategies. Dissertation of MSc in Maritime Affairs.
Malmo, Sweden: World Maritime University.
UNCED. (1992). Agenda 21- United Nations Conference on Environment and
Development (Vol. 1). Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
UNCLOS. (1982). United Nation Convention on the Law of the Sea. New York:
United Nations.
UNCTAD. (2015). Review of Maritime Transport 2015. Retrieved July 10, 2016 from
UNCTAD/RMT: http://unctad.org/en/PublicationsLibrary/rmt2015_en.pdf
UNEP. (2012). Convention for the Protection and Development of the Marine
Environment of the Wider Caribbean Region and its Protocols (Second edition
ed.). Kingston, Jamaica: UNEP.
UNEP. (2016, April). Enhancing Cooperation among the seven biodiversity related
agreement and convention at the national level using national biodiversity
strategies and actions plans. Retrieved June 17, 2016 from United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP):
106
http://www.unep.org/environmentalgovernance/Portals/8/publications/rolemea-synergies-sdgs.pdf
UNEP. (2014a). Measuring Success: Indicators for the Regional Seas Convention and
Action Plans. Retrieved March 13, 2016 from UNEP:
http://apps.unep.org/publications/index.php?option=com_pub&task=download
&file=011400_en
UNEP. (2010, October 5). Seaflower Marine Protected Area- Colombia. Proposed
areas for inclusion in the SPAW list. Retrieved February 11, 2016 from Unite
Nations Environment Program – Caribbean Environment Program:
http://www.spaw-palisting.org/uploads/reports/Report_31.pdf
UNEP. (2014b). Setting a Course for Regional Seas. Retrieved March 12, 2016 from
UNEP- Regional Seas Programme:
http://apps.unep.org/publications/index.php?option=com_pub&task=download
&file=011736_en
UNEP. (2012). UNEP The first 40 years. Retrieved March 12, 2016 from UNEP:
http://www.unep.org/pdf/40thbook.pdf
UNEP. (2005). Wider Caribbean Region Profile. Retrieved February 11, 2016 from
UNEP:
http://www.unep.org/regionalseas/programmes/unpro/caribbean/instruments/r_
profile_car.pdf
UNEP-MAP. (2012, April). Support to the Barcelona Convention for the
Implementation of the Ecosystem Approach, including the establishment of
MPAs in open sea areas, including deep sea. Final Report. Retrieved
November 18, 2015 from european council-environment:
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/marine/international-cooperation/regional-seaconventions/barcelona-convention/pdf/SBCI_ECAP_FinalReport.pdf
UNEP-WCMC. (2008). National and Regional Networks of Marine Protected Areas:
A Review of Progress. Retrieved July 30, 2016 from unep.org:
http://www.unep.org/regionalseas/publications/otherpubs/pdfs/MPA_Network_
report.pdf
UNESCO. (2015). MAB Programme / United Nations Educational, Scientific and
Cultural Organization. Retrieved February 29, 2016 from MAB Programme:
107
http://www.unesco.org/new/en/natural-sciences/environment/ecologicalsciences/man-and-biosphere-programme/
UNESCO. (2016). Malpelo Fauna and Flora Sanctuary. Retrieved July 27, 2016 from
UNESCO/ World heritage centre: http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1216
UNESCO. (2014, April 17). SC-14/CONF.226/14. Retrieved July 7, 2016 from
Twenty-sixth session of the International Coordinating Council of the Man and
the Biosphere Programme:
http://www.unesco.org/new/fileadmin/MULTIMEDIA/HQ/SC/pdf/SC-14-
CONF-226-14-Information_on_Seaflower-eng-rev.pdf
UNSD. (2015, September 27). Transforming our World: The 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development. Retrieved Februray 14, 2016 from Sustainable
Development Knowledge Platform:
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld/publicat
ion
UNSD. (2015). United Nations Sustainable Development. Retrieved march 07, 2016
from Sustainable Development Knowledge Platform, Agenda 21:
https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/milestones/unced/agenda21
US Department of Transportation. (2013, November 20). Panama Canal Expansion
Study_Phase I Report. Retrieved January 17, 2015 from U.S. DEPARTMENT
OF TRANSPORTATION MARITIME ADMINISTRATION:
http://www.marad.dot.gov/wpcontent/uploads/pdf/Panama_Canal_Phase_I_Report_-_20Nov2013.pdf
Vallega, A. (2001). Ocean governance in post-modern society—a geographical
perspective.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X01000240, Ed.)
Marine Policy , 25 (6), 399-414.
Vallega, A. (2002). The regional approach to the ocean, the ocean regions, and ocean
regionalisation—a post-modern dilemma. Ocean & Coastal Management , 45,
721-760.
Van Tatenhove, J. P. (2013). How to turn the tide: Developing legitimate marine
governance arrangements at the level of the regional seas. Ocean and Coastal
Management Journal , 71, 296-304.
108
Vanderzaag, D. L. (2010). THE GULF OF MAINE BOUNDARY DISPUTE AND
TRANSBOUNDARY MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES: LESSONS TO BE
LEARNED. Retrieved July 22, 2016 from Ocean and Coastal Law Journal :
http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/occoa15&collection=jou
rnals&index=&id=245
Vasilijević, M., Zunckel, K., McKinney, M., Erg, B., Schoon, M., & Rosen-Michel, T.
(2015). Transboundary Conservation: A systematic and integrated approach.
Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series. Retrieved July 22, 2016 from
Global Transboundary Conservation Network :
https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/files/documents/PAG-023.pdf
Vousden, D. (2016, March 8). The Ocean Governance Course. WMU Presentations .
Malmo, Skane, Sweden.
Webster, M. (2015, December). Redrawing Global Shipping Routes: The Panama
Canal Gets an Upgrade. Retrieved January 17, 2016 from Brown Brothers
Harriman:
https://www.bbh.com/blob/10958/f7d1d1c2fd63c146c469fb0d384b1c75/redra
wing-global-shipping-routes–the-panama-canal-gets-an-upgrade-pdf-data.pdf
White, A. T., Aliño, P. M., Cros, A., Fatan, N. A., Green, A. L., Teoh, S. J., et al.
(2014, February 12). Marine Protected Areas in the Coral Triangle: Progress,
Issues, and Options. Retrieved October 22, 2015 from Coastal Management
Journal: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2014.878177
Wright, G. (2014). Marine Governance in an industrialised ocean: A case study of the
emerging marine renewable energy industry. Marine Policy , 52, 77-84.
WWF. (2009). Silent Invasion- The spread of marine invasive species via ships’
ballast waters. World Wildlife Fund International. WWF International.
Yip, T. L., & Wong, M. C. (2015, February). The Nicaragua Canal: scenarios of its
future roles. Retrieved January 17, 2016 from Journal of Transport Geography:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692315000046
Zeeniya, A. (2013, June 6). Legal Analysis of International Conventions for the
Prevention of Vessel-source Marine Pollution: A Maldivan Perspective.
Retrieved June 10, 2016 from UNEP:
http://www.rempec.org/admin/store/wyswigImg/file/News/Forthcoming%20M
eetings/Offshore%20Protocol%20WG%20(Malta,%2013-
109
14%20June%202013/WG%20384-%20INF.7%20-%20IMLI%20Doc%20-
%20Ms%20Sandra%20Betancourt%20-%20E.pdf
Zorrilla-Pujana, J., & Sergio, R. (2014, April 1). Integrating environmental education
in marine protected areas management in Colombia. Retrieved March 23,
2016 from Ocean & Coastal Management Journal:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0964569114000660

Published by

Medical

View all posts