• Logged in as Unregistered User
  • Sign in

Social-Ecological Systems Meta-Analysis Database: Component

SummaryAct that establishes the Seaflower MPA in 2005
SubtypeFormal Governance System
SectorMarine protected areas
Begin Date2005
ExplanationAfter 5 years of multi-stakeholder involvement, led by CORALINA, the Minister of Environment, Housing, and Territorial Development declared the Seaflower MPA.
End Datecurrent
ExplanationStill ongoing
Governance ScaleSub-national (State, Province, District)
ExplanationIt is entirely contained within Colombian territory although a recent International Court of Justice decision awarded a part of the MPA territory to Nicaragua.
Governance System DescriptionLocal governance system
ExplanationEven though the MPA Act was declared by the Ministry, its implementation and management is conducted by the regional body (CORALINA).
Governance TriggerSudden disturbance
ExplanationIn this case it might not have been environmental but social trigger: declaration of the Seaflower as a Biosphere Reserve by UNESCO.
Type Of Formal GovernanceSystem of laws
ExplanationIt is the creation act. I could not have found the actual management plan for this MPA.
Mpa Internal Natural BoundariesMedium (2)
ExplanationI would imagine give that it is considerably large. At least this is the case for different habitat types.
Mpa Migratory Life HistoryMissing
ExplanationNO DATA
Mpa Threats To Migratory Sp["Resource competition", "Habitat destruction", "Other"]
ExplanationThese threats impact not only migratory species but also local resources. They also represent the reasons MPA was establish in the first place.
Mpa ThreatsMissing
ExplanationNO DATA
Governance Knowledge Use["Scientific knowledge", "Local/traditional knowledge"]
ExplanationMapping of key areas/habitats was completed through participatory exercises with all stakeholders including artisanal fishers.
Pa Car PrinciplesPartially (2)
ExplanationI am not sure if the creation of this MPA followed these principles or not. They were not mentioned in the literature as such. However, based on the variables Mpa Comprehensiviness and Mpa Representativeness I would imagine that it was pretty close to this principle. That is why I selected Partially as my answer.
CentralizationHighly decentralized (1)
ExplanationThe passage of the congressional law in 1993 established the National Environment System (SINA) that decentralized environmental management in Colombia through the creation of 34 regional autonomous agencies (CARs). Each of them is responsible for managing the environment and natural resources within its jurisdiction.
Distance To MarketsBetween 100km-1000km (3)
ExplanationMajor market is located on the San Andres Island.
Horizontal CoordinationBoth formal and informal
Mpa Iucn Somewhat Strict Zones %
Mpa Iucn Sustainable Zones %
Mpa Budget6000000 $US
Explanationfor a period from 2009-2014. Regional office is responsible for obtaining funds on its own. It does not receive funding from the national government. This particular funding was received from IDT/GEF grant. At this point, based on our interview with Graham Edgar CORALINA does not have any major funding stream.
Mpa ConnectivityMissing
ExplanationNO DATA
Mpa Migratory Threats And ReduxMissing
ExplanationNO DATA
Mpa Motivation["Ecological value", "Feasibility"]
ExplanationIts biodiversity, declared as a Biosphere Reserve by UNESCO, high social capital of major (if not all) stakeholders (i.e. feasibility).
Mpa Primary Goal (In Practice)["Biodiversity conservation", "Fisheries improvement", "Social goals"]
ExplanationMPA objectives include: 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 the rights pertaining to historical use; and 5) Education to promote stewardship and community involvement in planning and management (Howard et al. 2005).
Mpa Protection["Reducing threats", "Encompassing entire habitat"]
ExplanationExclusion of all or only extractive activities from specific areas of the MPA. NEEDS TO BE CHECKED.
Metric DiversityMissing
ExplanationNO DATA
Pa Iucn Strict Zones3.6 %
ExplanationThe percentage area breakdown by zone is as following: no-entry, 0.2%; no-take, 3.4%; artisanal fishing, 3.1%, special use, 0.1%; and general use, 93.2%. Only no-entry and no-take count in this case.
Social Ecological FitMedium (2)
ExplanationIn terms of the governance process yes (multi-stakeholder participation), but in terms of management activities no. These are stymied by the lack of stable funding, environmental monitoring, and enforcement.
Mpa Migratory BenefitMissing
ExplanationNO DATA
Governance System Spatial Extent65000