Khuraburi wise practice application

Regional Workshop for the Asia-Pacific University Twinning Network ‘Exploring Wise Practice Agreements’

3. Potential Applications for Wise Practice (Multi-stakeholder) Agreements in the Asia-Pacific Region

During the workshop the major issues and conflicts emerging from each of the field projects were presented and discussed. Subsequently, the participants broke up into small groups to discuss whether a multi-stakeholder agreement could be applied to each field situation. The specific questions that were the focus of the discussion groups were:

These questions promoted dialogue on the scale and complexity of the various projects and illustrated that multi-stakeholder agreements may have many components and stages in their development. Discussions analysed current tools being used to achieve project goals and merging issues in the future.

The papers prepared prior to the workshop discussing conflict situations at each field project site are included in Annex 4. A one-day field visit to the Ko Surin project-site provided participants with the opportunity to gain an in-depth insight of the issues involved, sources of conflict and the potential for a multi-stakeholder agreement at this particular site.

In 1983 ship-breaking activities commenced on the beaches adjacent to the villages of Alang and Sosiya in the state of Gujarat, India. Government policy for comparatively new and novel industries such as ship-breaking had to be developed step by step based on local practice and experience in India. As a result, for many years, activities at the Alang-Sosiya Ship-breaking Yard (ASSBY) were largely unplanned and unregulated. Resulting environmental and social problems, threats of sanctions and increased competition from yards in Bangladesh, China, Pakistan and Taiwan have not prevented ASSBY from becoming one of the largest ship-breaking yards in the world.

A CSI project, focusing on the problems and conflicts at ASSBY, started in 1999 in collaboration with the University of Bhavnagar. The project has conducted surveys of socio-economic conditions and natural resources of the villages lying within a 12 km radius of the ship-breaking yard. University researchers identified the main stakeholder groups and are endeavouring to engage them in constructive dialogue to try and solve some of the major conflicts.

Four main stakeholder groups at the ship-breaking yard have been identified: the villagers within 12 km of the site, the migrant workers, the ship-breakers, and the government departments - in particular the Gujarat Maritime Board which is responsible for the management of the yard. During the workshop one additional potential stakeholder group was identified – the former owners of ships sold for breaking. Two separate discussion groups came up with different sets of recommendations, which varied in terms of scale and the issues to be addressed. However, rather than attempting to encompass the entire, highly complex web of issues and conflicting interests at ASSBY, each group chose to focus on a particular issue for the development of a multi-stakeholder agreement.

The first group proposed addressing environmental issues and the living and working conditions for the workers at the ship-breaking yard. The Indian labour laws – if they were effectively implemented - provide for at least partial resolution of these issues. The participants recognized the need for assistance with the implementation of such legislation and considered international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and their lobbying efforts as potential avenues. There may also be merit in instigating small-scale agreements in the first instance for particular stakeholders and issues, and later expanding these to include other groups and/or concerns.

The second discussion group noted that within the context of the project some initial steps have already been taken in the direction of a multi-stakeholder agreement at ASSBY. The University of Bhavnagar has facilitated meetings with individual stakeholder groups and one joint meeting was held with the four main stakeholder groups to identify and prioritise some of the social and environmental issues. Further work remains to be done, such as bringing together stakeholders to devise an appropriate environmental management system.

Due to the complexity of policy and administrative issues it was proposed by the second discussion group that ideally the government should show leadership in this process. The Gujarat State Government, acting in coordination with the national government, has the power to bring the industrial sector (the ship-breakers) to the discussion table. Due consideration must be given to social and cultural concerns. Some preliminary steps to identify the interests, needs and concerns of all stakeholders have been taken by the University of Bhavnagar, which represents a third party (an outsider) with no vested interest in the issues. Confidence must be built, and dialogue fostered to ensure that all the stakeholders are adequately represented in the communication process. The multi-stakeholder agreement should reach beyond the conventionally defined boundaries of the yard. Key representatives could be appointed to a committee with a procedure and membership trusted by all stakeholders. Regular meetings could be held in order to ensure consistent feedback and interactivity.

The workshop participants emphasized that the effective representation of the migrant workers is the single greatest challenge facing the development of a multi-stakeholder agreement at ASSBY. These workers come from many different states, each with their own language and culture, thus they are not a homogenous group. Other challenges include the development of decision-making procedures, rules of compliance, and dispute resolution mechanisms. Documentation and translation of the process, monitoring-evaluation, and raising awareness of both stakeholders and the general public are critical for the success of a multi-stakeholder agreement.

The Surin Islands, also referred to as Ko Surin, are part of the Mergui Archipelago located in the Andaman Sea to the west of Thailand. The archipelago stretches northward into Myanmar. The islands of Ko Surin are a nationally recognized protected area and have National Park status. They are also included in Thailand’s tentative list for World Heritage status. At a meeting of 62 coastal and marine experts in Hanoi, Vietnam, February 2002, Mergui/Surin was listed as a key priority area possessing outstanding universal World Heritage values. The Surin Islands are the home for the Moken hunter-gatherers who make extensive use of plants and animals in their immediate terrestrial and marine environments. There are approximately 160 Moken people in the Surin Islands and several thousand across the archipelago. However, the national government does not formally recognize the right of indigenous people to live within the boundaries of protected areas such as National Parks, and little support has been provided to the community in the past.

GEOATLAS® WORLD VECTOR-GRAPHI-OGRE® - France - 1977

The CSI project here, with the leadership of the Chulalongkorn University, seeks to promote sustainable livelihoods for the Moken and to ensure the continuity of indigenous cultural pride and identity. The workshop participants benefited by having a Moken representative take part in the entire workshop. The field trip to the Surin Islands demonstrated the susceptibility of the Moken people to the impacts of globalisation. It was evident that the national tourism objectives have the potential to impact and marginalize indigenous people, often resulting in negative impacts. The field trip exemplified the fine balance that exists between assisting people in maintaining their rights and impacting their way of life by way of introducing further influences. The Moken people are currently not fully benefiting from the tourism industry and are not included in decision-making processes for park development and commercial fishing.

The key issues for a multi-stakeholder agreement are the development of sustainable livelihoods for the Moken within the National Park, and the conservation and enhancement of their cultural pride and identity.

Lack of citizenship is a concern for the Moken people because it reduces their ability to take an active role in the management of their home land. At present Moken cannot be formally employed at the Park because of their lack of citizenship, nor can they travel freely, marry according to Thai regulations, or have access to Thai health facilities. These issues need to be addressed by the National Government. Special provisions are needed in order to ensure that the Moken can continue their nomadic traditions. These are at risk since rights to fish and gather other resources are currently restricted by the National Park. A degree of self-determination and erosion of traditional knowledge concerning sustainable use of the natural environment are issues of high priority to the Moken. Of greatest concern for the Moken is the continuation of their traditional lifestyle and freedom of movement on the sea.

The stakeholders were identified as the Moken people, The Royal Thai Forestry Department, the Thai Fisheries Department (Marine Parks Division) and the Surin Islands National Park Administration. Workshop participants recommended the involvement of other governmental organizations and NGOs to assist the Moken in being properly represented in discussions of their welfare and future in the Thai society.

The workshop concluded that a multi-stakeholder agreement could be established, founded on the informal agreements that exist between the Moken, the National Park Management Authority, and the Fisheries Department. Chulalongkorn University could act as a facilitator or third party in this process by bringing together the various stakeholders in regular consultations and documenting the process.

These initial steps are critical to establish the basis for dialogue and communication among the stakeholder groups and with the relevant authorities.

In addition, further assessment of the Moken’s use, knowledge and requirements in regard to the local natural resources should be undertaken in order to commence dialogue on cultural and biological diversity and its implications for policy. Health issues need to be discussed locally with authorities; and issues relating to the erosion of Moken culture, language and identity need to be addressed by the education officials. The Thai Government has yet to define its position in terms of the status and future development of the Moken and other indigenous ‘sea people’. Until this situation is resolved it will be difficult for the Moken to have access to higher education and to play a greater role in the day to day management of the Park.

Ulugan Bay accounts for 15% of the total mangroves in the Philippines and 50% of the mangroves in the province of Palawan, and is located in close proximity to the Puerto Princesa Subterranean River National Park, a World Heritage site. The CSI project on coastal resource management and sustainable tourism in Ulugan Bay, Puerto Princesa City, Palawan, represents a collaborative undertaking between local, national and international institutions, with input from government and non-governmental sectors. The project forms part of a strategy to save one of the most ecologically diverse, yet threatened areas in the Philippines.

Palawan Province, highlighting Ulugan Bay

Ulugan Bay

The Ulugan Bay project has illustrated how partnerships between various institutions can lead to a comprehensive approach to the management of a specific coastal area. Adopting a bottom-up approach in developing an empirical model for community-based coastal resource management, the project has relied on the collective effort of the local government, national scientific institutions, NGOs, the United Nations system and local communities.

The project commenced with four studies focusing on (i) the ecology of the bay, (ii) traditional resource use and culture of the indigenous communities, (iii) a socio-economic profile of the communities residing around the bay, and (iv) the tourism potential of the area. These studies were followed by specific activities, including the implementation of sustainable fish farming, the establishment of a fisheries database, the development of a master plan for community-based sustainable tourism, and non-formal environmental education for youth and adults.

However, many problems persist, such as illegal logging and fishing; potential interest in marble mining and quarrying within the project area; illegal settlement (squatting) still takes place in key watershed areas; and a naval base and related naval reserve covering an extensive part of the bay has been proposed.

Since the early nineties, the Philippine Navy Western Command in Palawan has expressed its intention to establish a larger naval base in Ulugan Bay. In 1997 and 1999, barangay (village) officials of Macarascas, one of the Ulugan Bay communities, passed resolutions vehemently opposing the establishment of the proposed naval base in the bay area. Other organizations, departments and individuals have also vocally opposed the plan for the extended Naval Base throughout this period. In response to the request of the barangay officials and residents, the city government has organized several community consultations with the Navy Western Command.

Multi-stakeholder agreements to resolve two particular issues were discussed, these were the establishment of the naval base, and illegal fish pond activities in one particular barangay.

A multi-stakeholder agreement might also help resolve the illegal fish pond activities in the barangay of Tagabinet. Key issues here are mangrove logging, mangrove conservation, sustainability of aquaculture, and the reduction in community fish catches. The stakeholders include: Multiwatchers Cooperative, barangays, indigenous and fisher communities, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, local government, the Bureau of Fisheries and Aquatic Resources, and environmental NGOs, such as ELAC. Regular consultations with all stakeholders could lead to a meeting of stakeholders convened by the City government authorities, with invitations issued by the barangay. A review of the past demolition order should be undertaken, and an agreement reached on a way forward. In both cases, there are a large number of stakeholders, and the identification of the specific issue or concern to be addressed would determine the structure of the specific consultations.

Subsequent to the Khuraburi workshop the above-mentioned fishponds have been demolished based on a legal decision in regard to their illegal status. The demolition was initiated by the Puerto Princesa Government, led by the Mayor and supported by NGOs, university students and community members. Media representatives interviewed the stakeholders, while dams were opened and mangroves were replanted.

Located on the southern coast of Upolu Island in the Samoa group are the neighbouring villages of Sä’anapu and Sätaoa. A mangrove ecosystem is shared by the two villages. These mangroves have been declared a conservation area by both villages, and are part of the wider Safata Marine Protected Area recognized by the Government of Samoa’s Department of Environment and Conservation

The goal of the CSI project at Sä’anapu and Sätaoa villages in Samoa is to address environment and development problems such as resource depletion, waste disposal and pollution, through innovative coupling of indigenous knowledge and practice with contemporary science and technology. Strong community participation involving school children, youth and the local villagers in project activities is a particular focus. Development of field-based interactive educational materials for incorporation into the national upper primary and secondary school curriculum has been a key activity of the project in this regard.

Another component seeks to strengthen indigenous knowledge, practice, cultural identity and self-esteem by emphasizing the value of mangroves and swamps as sources of food, medicine and other traditional products, as well as places of social and spiritual significance.

The present absence of major conflicts in this project situation is partly due to the all-encompassing indigenous system of local governance and organization in Samoa - Fa’a Samoa - which tends to either resolve or hide away any conflict issue within the system One conflict resolving mechanism is the way in which monetary gains are distributed. Tourists canoeing in the mangroves have generated a cash income for the village. This is distributed among the villagers according to customary systems of distribution, so that the benefits from this activity are spread throughout the community. Another reason for the absence of conflict in the project has been its focus on education, awareness, and research, rather than on conflict resolution. In dealing with important issues, all voices within the village are heard through organizations representing the Wives of Chiefs, Untitled Men, and Women and Girls. A final important note concerns the fact that the conservation area was named after both of the local villages to ensure that the objective of the project was shared by all local residents.

Two major issues were identified with regard to the development of a possible multi-stakeholder agreement at Sä’anapu-Sätaoa: how to ensure equality, and how to maintain transparency in the decision-making process. The workshop participants felt that a form of agreement was already in place, although it was questioned whether some families and other social groupings such as youth might be disadvantaged by the concentration of power with the chiefs. However, it was concluded that the system does offer mechanisms through which voices other than those of the Chiefs can be heard. Often, by the time a decision is taken at the top by the Council of Chiefs it is a mere formality, based on months of discussion at lower levels.

Given that a working model of an efficient and stable multi-stakeholder agreement is already in place, the question of transferability of this system to other contexts was raised. The project could serve as a model for using traditional structures as a means of resolving conflict situations in other contexts. The issue of governments and donor agencies themselves becoming threats to the stability of the traditional system was also raised. This may occur when these agencies try to impose external ideas on the communities. The risk is particularly high in cases where projects do not give communities the appropriate time to consider the nature and extent of their involvement.

The discussion identified the increasing interaction with the country’s monetary economy as another threat to the stability of the Samoan traditional village system. As the need for cash among villagers grows, the traditional long-term basis for decision making is eroded and replaced with new short-term strategies.

The Motu Koita, numbering around 30,000 of the 250,000 total population of the city of Port Moresby, the National Capital of Papua New Guinea, are the traditional landowners of the area. Sixty per cent of the land around the city is government land, while 40% is customary owned. There are ten Motu Koita villages within the area (three within the mega-village of Hanuabada). The goal of this project, which is spearheaded by the Institute of Public Administration and the University of Papua New Guinea, is to address the social, economic and environmental problems affecting the livelihood of the Motu Koita people in Port Moresby by generating awareness.

According to tradition, the Koita people moved from the upland areas into the coastal areas, while the Motu people are a drifting, seafaring people. Through intermarriages and other connections, the Koita allowed the Motu to settle in the Koita coastal areas, to build their houses over the sea (on stilts), and to collect resources for their use. With colonization and administration by the British and Australians in the 20^th century the land was proclaimed Crown Land, purchased at very low prices and transformed into freehold. Shortly thereafter, there were waves of migration from other coastal areas and the highlands in particular.

After independence from Australia many people from outside of Port Moresby moved into the city, and increasingly, all aspects of the lives of the Motu Koita – political, economic, social and cultural – became marginalized. No longer did the Motu Koita determine their own destiny. Particular problems faced by the local people are related to rapid urbanization and limited space. The unemployment rate of the Motu Koita population is now about 70% and there are substantial problems facing the youth. The key issues are land tenure and the marginalization of the Motu Koita through changes to the system of land tenure in the capital.

Workshop participants recognized that a multi-stakeholder agreement can be developed in this case. A foundation has been laid with the reports of the Parliamentary Commission headed by Lady Caroline Kidu (previously a parliamentarian and now a Minister of Government and a champion of the Motu Koita cause), which addressed many of the concerns facing the Motu Koita as well as other issues. However there is a need to breathe new life into the process.

Stakeholders include the following: the Motu Koita people themselves (possibly represented by a Motu Koita council or another representational body), the National Capital District Commission, National Government Departments (Education, Lands, Justice, Planning, and others), developers, donor agencies, the University of Papua New Guinea, Institute of Public Administration, and Lady Kidu.

An initial step might be a series of stakeholder meetings, perhaps initiated by Lady Kidu, to focus on one or several of the most important issues. However, this will need to be supported by an intensive awareness and media campaign, possibly including an international workshop or conference in Papua New Guinea to discuss the plight of indigenous peoples with a particular focus on the Motu Koita. Such activities might apply indirect pressure upon the decision makers. It was also suggested that micro awareness campaigns through youth-organized activities at the village/hamlet level may be more effective than macro approaches. Of immediate concern is how to best initiate a process to foster leadership in order to tackle the issues of concern for the Mota Koita both now and in the future.

Map of Jakarta and Kepulauan Seribu Archipelago

GEOATLAS WORLD VECTOR -GRAPHI-OGRE France 1997

	Community development (in collaboration with self-help groups)
	Community based recycling centre (paper recycling and composting)
	Schools directly involved in the programme
	Community learning centre (EDU)
	Traditional markets (model for waste management)
	Mangrove rehabilitation site for environmental centre (proposal)
	Fish farming (Participatory Programme 1999)
	Study sites (coral reefs)
	Study sites (rivers)

Jakarta is a huge coastal megacity producing more than 25,000 cubic metres of waste per day. Much of this is dumped in the rivers draining Jakarta and does not end up at the Bekasi dumpsite, which is operating at its capacity limit and was scheduled to be closed a year ago. At least 1,000 cubic metres of solid waste end up in Jakarta Bay each day as well as large amounts of chemicals and heavy metals. The Pulau Seribu archipelago, a group of 108 islands, is located north of Jakarta and includes a marine national park in the northern section of the archipelago. The CSI project has focused since 1996 on community-based waste management, patterns and causes of coral reef deterioration, fish farming, and environmental education.

The land-based pollution from industries, mining and agriculture, as well as from the densely settled areas of the city impacts the islands. In addition, unsustainable watershed management practices result in sedimentation from illegal logging and farming of steep hillsides. Additional problems are caused by destructive fishing practices, over-fishing, sand mining, coral extraction, ship-based pollution, marine oil pollution, as well as the trade in live coral and fish.

Critical social issues in the Seribu Islands include overpopulation, poverty, sanitation problems, lack of transport and education, limited access to information, marginalization in relation to land ownership, and unsustainable tourism. Policy issues include changes in the islands’ administrative structure, the enactment of the recent local autonomy (decentralization) law; consideration of a gambling concession and a weak participatory mechanism in local planning.

Stakeholders are many and indirectly include everyone in the city and its environs. Offshore stakeholders are also numerous, including islanders, fishermen (residents and non-residents), oil companies, tourism operators, sand and coral miners, national park authorities, the Indonesian Institute of Sciences, private island owners, business men, aquarium traders, and owners of cargo ships. Land-based stakeholders include: agro-producers, households, small industry, private enterprises, scavengers, local government, NGOs, community groups, schools, religious leaders, boy scouts, universities, media and international agencies.

The challenges for a multi-stakeholder agreement in the Seribu Islands include the high number of stakeholders and their physical separation, a consistent and strong facilitator, the lack of long-term commitments and the non-existence of traditional voluntary compliance systems, recent changes in administrators and administrative structures at the local level, and the weak national legal framework. Furthermore, developing such an agreement needs to seek balances in approaches and values accepted and applied by stakeholders, and to encourage the stakeholders to maintain their commitments. The participants concluded that a multi-stakeholder agreement can be applied in the context of Jakarta Bay, as exemplified by the successful waste management project in the Jakarta village community Banjarsari. However, there is a need to expand the scale from just the single village case. This needs to be approached at the local and national levels. There is a need for more active involvement of the institutions and organizations contributing to the Jakarta Bay situation, and extensive monitoring arrangements are also required. The newly formed Indonesian Waste Forum, a multi-stakeholder organization, which seeks to draw national attention to waste issues, could perhaps assist in this process.

Other model projects could be developed in Jakarta Bay and in the Seribu Islands using the experiences of Banjasari. Workshop participants suggested, that the model could be further developed by including economic incentives for behavioural change utilizing the ‘polluter pays’ principle.

3.7 Commonalities and key differences among the proposals for multi-stakeholder agreements

The workshop discussions focused on regular stakeholder meetings as the foundation of enduring agreements in all of the projects. The first step is to identify the stakeholders as well as the key problems and conflicts. For fairly simple, small scale issues, such stakeholder meetings may be the critical action needed upon which the necessary follow-up is formulated. For projects of a much larger scale and social and environmental complexity, such stakeholder meetings may require more in-depth research and the use of additional tools to ensure effective communication and facilitation among the stakeholders. Scale is dependent upon the number of stakeholders, the geographic size of the area, and the number of ecosystem types involved. Cultural influences, language barriers and the social and political situation at both the local, national and regional levels also play a role in determining the scope of the project.

Common to both the ASSBY and Jakarta Bay projects is the fact that the implementation of laws, and co-ordination between relevant agencies and administrative structures, is vital to address the core concerns for each site. Ongoing activities at ASSBY indicate that this project has made some preliminary progress towards establishing a multi-stakeholder agreement by holding individual and joint stakeholder meetings.

Analysis of the project at Ko Surin indicates that before a multi-stakeholder agreement can come into effect, the status of the Moken needs to be officially recognized, and they need to develop adequate representation in the formal and informal decision-making processes. This is in stark contrast to the Samoan project where a traditional governance system for conflict resolution exists. This provides for involvement and awareness on the part of all stakeholders and has resulted in a secure mechanism rooted in traditional culture. However, these processes, which emphasize the power of verbal agreements, are not isolated from outside influences and do face challenges as they interact with the official Samoan governance structure.

In Ulugan Bay the continuing concern over the construction of the naval base is one of the issues that could be addressed through a multi-stakeholder agreement. The need for the involvement of a third party is essential in order to ensure that the process is transparent. The success of such an agreement will be dependent on whether effective dialogue and communication can be maintained.

The situation with the Motu Koita in Papua New Guinea revealed that while research into the social and environmental problems and stakeholder identification has been undertaken, further action is needed to assist the stakeholders in engaging in a regular process of communication of dialogue. Such actions might include further awareness work at local, national and international levels.

Analysis of the Jakarta Bay situation showed success at the local village level, but a need to find ways to enhance the scale of the positive impact. This will involve the local, national and international levels. The scale of the issue determines the type of tools required to find solutions for social and environmental concerns. There is a need for clarity and prioritisation of action to address interactions between the public, government, industries and all the other stakeholder organizations involved.

The differences between each project exemplify the wide range in scale and complexity between projects and underline the fact that individual approaches are required. Discussions at the workshop continually returned to the premise that multi-stakeholder agreements must be part of a dynamic process. It is clear that equity in stakeholder representation is also important. This was most clearly exemplified in the cases presented from ASSBY and the Motu Koita where complex structural, political, cultural and linguistic impediments must be overcome in order to ensure that appropriate communication and dialogue processes can be put in place and maintained.

	Introduction	Activities	Publications	search
	Wise practices	Regions	Themes

Papua New Guinea mainland showing places of origin of main migrant groups to Port Moresby	Port Moresby and the National Capital District