Manta ray bycatch
Manta ray tourism has the potential to be multi-million dollar industry in Indonesia, but is it competing head to head with the fisheries industry?
Conservation is about people and economics, as much as it is about wildlife. Indonesia’s Ministry of Maritime Affairs and Fisheries predicts that fishery exports will top US$ 3.2 billion in 2011. This is good news for the country’s developing economy, but what does it mean for the environment?
The story is an all too familiar one worldwide. Decision-makers, driven by the need to secure votes, favour short-term economic goals over long-term environmental investments.
Conservationists often tout tourism as a solution. They argue that environmental and economic goals can go hand-in-hand; the costs of regulating industry and protecting wildlife offset by the benefits that nature-based tourism can bring.
In 2010 Indonesian fisheries contributed US$ 16.4 billion to the gross domestic product. Tourism generated less than half this figure, at US$ 7.6 billion.
Of course this simple comparison only tells part of the story. In marine conservation it is possible to have your cake and eat it too. Well-managed marine areas can support sustainable fisheries growth, while simultaneously protecting habitats and generating tourism revenue.
But in the government halls of Jakarta, where buzz words, sound bites and attention grabbing headlines rule, decision-makers are likely to focus on the short-term prize.
So is marine tourism the road to manta ray protection? There is no doubt that tourism has a vital role to play in protecting manta rays, but by itself it may not be the complete panacea.
To make up this US$ 7 billion deficit and compete with fisheries on a level playing field in terms of jobs and livelihoods will require more than just a vibrant tourism sector.
It will require an understanding of and appreciation for the intrinsic and non-market values of manta rays, and a dramatic shift in our economic compass. The magic of encountering a manta in its natural habitat, or the deep spiritual and cultural links between indigenous communities and the natural world, certainly add immense value to society.
The loss of these values affects us all, yet they are not considered in current measures of profit or loss—in economists’ jargon they are externalities. These are the true cost of biodiversity loss, and the value of these ecosystem services deserve greater prominence in government and business planning.
But perhaps most critically, we need revolutionary new ideas. Ideas that are competitive in terms of profit, and their positive social and environmental impacts.
Entrepreneurs with the vision to create innovative new markets and pro-biodiversity businesses. Leaders able to demonstrate that a living manta ray contributes more to GDP and social quality than a sack of dried gill rakers. And innovators able to reverse the market incentives driving manta ray decline. Much like the failing whaling industry, the future of manta ray fisheries depends on their profitability.
But what are your opinions? Does business and profit have a role in manta ray conservation? How much is a manta ray worth? At what stage does manta ray conservation become too expensive to try? And who should foot the bill? Share you opinions below.
I really liked what the small, traditionally fishing village, Limasawa, does in S. Leyte, Phillipines. Just outside of their village resident whale sharks make the shallow bay their home for a good part of the year. If you want to visit these creatures you just need to hire a boat and go. When you get there the village ranger will come out with a small boat and sell you marine park tickets for a modest price. This money goes directly to the village. This village elected to create this reserve in their local waters. They patrol and protect it, and they collect the profits. Everyone is happy! What happens to the money from Bunaken and Komodo National Parks? My pure speculation is that it goes to Jakarta and maybe if we are lucky 10% trickles back to provide support for park monitoring, local public education and alternative livelihood programs. Please correct me if Iam wrong. I hope I am way off the mark.
Hi Alice, I fear you may be right. People too often think that conservation means restricting people’s livelihoods and activities. The people of S. Leyte have shown that this is not the case. They noticed that living whale sharks have a value, they took action, and they now have an incentive to protect and conserve that income. A great success story for community-based conservation! Unfortunately only some of the benefits of National Parks trickle down to the local people whose lives are affected by conservation decisions. As a result, people feel less of an incentive to follow the rules. Our challenge as conservationists is to find the incentives or ideas that promote conservation while at the same time generating social and economic benefits for local people. What can we learn from the success in S Leyte that could be applied to other locations?