Sustainable development in Indonesia: the case study of Komodo National Park

How to protect biodiversity in the developing world 3

Indonesia poses a major challenge for environmental conservation. It is an archipelago of over 10,000 islands, the citizenry are relatively poor, the central government is extremely weak and corrupt, and yet it is home to some of the greatest biodiversity in the world, under constant pressure for exploitation. For these reasons, Indonesia has been a focal point for major international conservation groups -- the Nature Conservancy, Conservation International, and the World Wildlife Fund all have major operations in the country.

I recently returned from a nearly month-long trip to Indonesia, where I had the opportunity to meet with many of the people in the conservation community who have been instrumental in the formation of Indonesia's marine protected areas (MPAs). My appreciation for the complexity and difficulty of their work grew enormously. It is one thing as an academic to discuss environmental policy (even with lots of real-world examples), and another to get a sense of the struggles from people who confront them firsthand.

The efforts by the Nature Conservancy to turn Komodo National Park into a model of sustainable development are particularly fascinating, given the complexity of the undertaking. Komodo, as many know, is famous for its Komodo Dragons, but its underwater environments are virtually unrivaled (in fact, Raja Ampat and Komodo have the greatest concentrations of marine biodiversity on the planet). Before the Nature Conservancy began its work, blast fishing was common throughout the region and responsible for decimating the underwater ecosystems. The tourist infrastructure was in disrepair, the local inhabitants had few economic opportunities, and there was very little constructive engagement with the government.

This all changed in 1995 when the Nature Conservancy partnered with the Indonesian government to revamp all aspects of the park. The strategy the Conservancy implemented for expanding economic opportunities for the local inhabitants, while at the same time preserving and restoring the immense biodiversity, was essentially threefold:

  1. No-take zones for fishing
    These are enforced by floating ranger stations, in order to allow the reefs to regenerate and allow for sustainable fish populations. The rangers carry weapons and, unfortunately, there have been violent exchanges with poachers who refuse to honor the protected areas. The efforts have been largely successful, however, and the reefs and fish populations are making a major comeback.
  2. A system of concession fees for tourist operators
    These were established in order to help fund park maintenance and provide local communities with an additional revenue stream. This has been crucial to making the park economically sustainable, but again, it hasn't been easy. Some tour operators are refusing to pay the concession, which threatens the entire arrangement, and efforts are underway to get the government to enforce the law.
  3. Increasing ecotourism and opportunities for alternative livelihoods
    In addition to the construction of additional tourist infrastructure, efforts are underway to provide economic opportunities using aquaculture and fishing outside of the protected areas. Discussions are ongoing concerning the appropriate scale and footprint of these operations.

The Komodo project is still a work in progress, and its ultimate success is not guaranteed. In exchange for severe restrictions on resource use, the local people expect a lot in return, and do not hesitate to express their impatience or frustration. (One thing that struck me throughout my trip was how it is mostly wealthy foreigners like me who have the opportunity to experience the natural wealth of Indonesia, while the locals rarely get the chance to travel, let alone go scuba diving.) As with all attempts at economic development in isolated and poor areas of the world, change is slow and ensuring an equitable distribution of economic benefits is difficult.

So what are some of the lessons from the Komodo experience?

While we in the developed world largely take for granted basic law and order, establishing enforceable rules is a necessary precondition for conservation in many parts of the world. Even if property rights are not ultimately set up for the purpose of promoting private ownership, they still must be established, along with clear rules as to the allowable uses of resources.

In the case of Komodo, the Indonesian government clarified its right to declare certain marine areas off-limits to fishing and backed this up with law enforcement. Just as important, if we want to limit direct access to biological resources for local populations, we need to provide the people with alternative forms of economic development. This is not only fair, but the only strategy that has the potential to permanently align their interests in the direction of long-term conservation.

The local inhabitants may well care about biodiversity, but their first priority is improving their standard of living.

Jason Scorse, PhD
Associate Professor
Chair of the International Environmental Policy Program
Monterey Institute of International Studies

Institute Webpage: http://www.miis.edu/academics/faculty/node/936

Advertisement
Advertisement
  1. caniscandida Posted 7:19 pm
    11 Oct 2006

    anti-Western resistance?The only country that I have traveled to, in which the difference in respective wealth between me and the people who live there is obscenely huge, is Mexico.  In principle, I find the idea of an American traveling to undeveloped countries for recreational purposes morally difficult.  That is not to say that Americans who make such trips are immoral people.  But I cannot help wondering what is going on in the heads of the people there, in those countries that we visit.
    Plainly, the global discrepancy in wealth is a major moral problem.  And Americans should not be complacent about it.
    Jason, you reported, in a summary and suggestive way, on what you observed regarding the people living in (?) or around Komodo National Park, and how they are coping with or resisting certain regulations.  Thank you for that.  Could you perhaps give us a more detailed picture, with theories postponed?
    Also, did you observe that in that predominantly Muslim country, there was a tendency to reject advice from North Americans and Europeans, precisely because the advice was coming from people who happen to be North American or European?

    Chickens are our cousins!

    So are other sensitive animals!

    Enough is enough!

    No more factory farms!
  2. colin Posted 1:47 am
    16 Oct 2006

    komodoPeople on and around Komodo had several regulations inflicted upon them - on Komodo there were limitations on what they could grow, on the livestock they could keep as well as more stringent policing of bomb and poison fishing - which has resulted in villagers being tortured/shot.
    At the same time there is, or was, massive poaching of deer on the island which involved people from the village, the neighbouring islands and park rangers if villagers are to be believed. There has also been a huge increase in population on the island due to migration and corrupt village leaders and this has increased environmental degradation in the area.
    The Nature Conservancy didn't really create any new income streams either from tourism, seaweed farming or grouper farming and they failed to communicate their intentions to the islanders who live in the park - they may have aggressive media relations at international level, but people who have worked for the tnc in the park describe their communications with locals as laughable. At the same time, plans (now abandoned I think) to develop Komodo National Park tourist facilities created resentment - particularly as they would have used a relatively large amount of water - scarce on the island to be begin with.
    Tourist infrastructure in the region has not necessarily improved (more dive schools?) and transport links have got worse in some ways with the local ferry no longer stopping at Komodo Island and isolating villagers there further.
    All this is based on visits from a few years ago - basically the TNC promoted a highly selective version of events that is as disingenuous as the versions of corrupt village leaders, rangers and government officials.
  3. caniscandida Posted 4:40 pm
    17 Oct 2006

    TNC on KomodoThanks, Colin, for this interesting observation.  It supports my suspicion, that eco-tourism (so-called) is a stop-gap.  Regional economic sustainability in countries such as Indonesia cannot be based in the long run on flying in tourists from rich countries.  Morally, that would not be good for either the head-barely-above-the-water people, or for the jet-flying-class people.
    Of course, it is immediately better, practically, for the former than for the latter.
    And as for the (non-human) animals: Are they, as it were, held at stake?  Is it that they will all be murdered by the kidnappers who have them virtually captive, with guns at their heads, unless lots of rich tourists come from the West to Ooh and Aah over them, meanwhile throwing tons of bucks into local coffers during their sojourn?
    This situation is difficult to tolerate.

    Chickens are our cousins!

    So are other sensitive animals!

    Enough is enough!

    No more factory farms!

Add a Comment

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have an account, log in. If you don't have an account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

Hello, Visitor!    Why not register?

Advertisement