The Wider Caribbean has a unique and alarming environmental history.

The decline of Caribbean coral reefs and their associated coastal ecosystems including seagrasses and mangroves has been in progress for at least several hundred years, pacing the explosion of the human population which began in the late 19th and early 20th centuries (Jackson, et al. 2001, Pandolfi et al.2003, Pandolfi et al. 2005).  The recent period of rapid decline first came to notice 4 to 5 decades ago coincident with the start of my career in Panama and St. Croix.  At that time if someone had told me that the relatively luxuriant coral reefs of the region would be as damaged and diminished as they are today in only 40 years, I would have thought that they were completely crazy.  Yet this is exactly what happened and we now recognize this decline is not confined to the Caribbean but is global in extent.  

Arguably the earliest and the best science documenting the decline of reefs and associated ecosystems and seeking its causes has been done in the Caribbean region.  This is perhaps not surprising as the 35 nations and territories of the wider Caribbean region have long supported marine field stations and coastal laboratories housing national academic programs or fisheries management.  These facilities were usually established in relatively undisturbed locations with excellent field access and provided a baseline against which future changes were measured.  The Association of Island Marine Laboratories of the Caribbean (later AMLC), one of the oldest scientific associations of its kind, was established in 1958 to facilitate international communication and exchange of data, technology and people.  

Researchers at these laboratories, aided by colleagues from around the world, began to document and monitor the status and trends of coastal ecosystems (Bone et al. 2001, CARICOMP 2001, Linton and Fisher 2004).  Others investigated the causes of the decline and achieved the earliest understanding of, for example, the coral-algal balance on reefs (Hughes 1994), the importance of herbivores (Hughes et al. 1999, Kuffner et al. 2006, Ogden and Lobel 1978), the impact of fishing (Jackson et al. 2001), top-down predator control (Mumby et al. 2007), the role of nutrients (Szmant 2002), coral diseases (Harvell et al. 2004),  field and physiological studies of coral bleaching (Brown 1997) and most recently ocean acidification (Albright et al. 2008).  

Caribbean scientists have examined the connection with land (Rogers 1990), the inter-connectivity with other coastal ecosystems including seagrass beds and mangroves (Nagelkerken 2009, Ogden 1997) and connectivity by pelagic larvae (Cowen 2000).  These studies and many others have been done in the context of a thorough understanding of the geological history of the Caribbean reefs (Adey 1977), the growth of reefs through the Pleistocene and Holocene (Hubbard et al. 2005) and the origin and evolution of Caribbean corals (Knowlton and Budd 2001).

The bottom line is that the decline of coastal ecosystems in the Caribbean has been a result of multiple stresses the most important of which are anthropogenic in origin and include poor land-use practices, runoff and pollution, over-fishing, and climate change.

Among the earliest Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) were established in the Caribbean.

Supported by long-term observations, monitoring and assessment and the long experience of local people in particular coastal areas, the pioneers of marine conservation, notably Tom van’t Hof, originally of Caribbean Research and Management of Biodiversity (CARMABI) in Curacao, implemented early MPAs and communicated widely their design and political considerations.  Starting from small beginnings, MPAs expanded across the region as the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park became the icon of tropical marine management (Kelleher et al. 1995).  A more recent compendium of MPAs for the Lesser Antilles and Central Caribbean, including Belize and the Turks and Caicos lists 75 functional MPAs (Geoghegan et al. 2001).  However, many of these are still so-called “paper parks” with little or no protection or management other than their boundary lines on the chart.  

Early studies of a class of MPAs called “no-take marine reserves,” prohibiting all extractive use, documented the relatively rapid response of demersal fishes to fishing prohibition.  The Saba Marine Park in the Netherlands Antilles and the Hol Chan Marine Reserve in Belize were among the first and regionally the most influential.  As elsewhere in the world these reserves developed more and bigger fishes in approximately three to five years (Halpern 2003).   However, longer term studies of corals for example, have shown that declines continue through a failure of recruitment under no-take protection, at least at a relatively small geographic scale (S.R. Smith pers. comm.).  Perhaps not surprisingly, fish, corals, and other major groups react differently to no-take protection, related to the ecological processes, particularly recruitment, that drive their dynamics.  

MPAs are necessary but not sufficient.

It is clear that our efforts to date to protect coastal ecosystems from human disturbances have been at best ineffective and that implementation of small marine protected areas, even no-take marine reserves, has not been sufficient (Allison et al. 1998).  Networks of existing MPAs, such as “Islands in the Stream” recently proposed for in the Gulf of Mexico by NOAA Marine Sanctuaries (2009), have been sketched out as one response to the geographic scale problem.  The U.S. through NOAA’s MPA Office (2009) recently announced a national network of MPAs made up of 225 federal, state, and territorial sites, including Caribbean sites, but the work of making this network truly representative of the nation’s marine biodiversity, production and cultural heritage has just begun.  It is not clear if this slow pace will achieve the goal of arresting the decline before it is too late.  We are failing and in danger of being accused of “fiddling while Rome burns.”

The Caribbean provides a compelling rationale for regional ocean governance.

More comprehensive ocean governance is needed that encompasses the geographic scales of marine biodiversity, human impacts and of the ecological processes that sustain coral reefs and associated ecosystems.  There is abundant scientific evidence that the wider Caribbean functions as a large marine ecosystem (LME, Sherman et al. 2005) and plans for regional management inspired by the CARICOMP network of marine laboratories have been developed (Rivera-Monroy et al. 2004).   The ocean currents of the Wider Caribbean connect ecosystems over large areas through the planktonic transport of larvae of many organisms (Cowen et al. 2000, Baums et al. 2006).  While the patterns vary with reproductive strategy and timing, transport of larvae increases the resilience of populations through recruitment following disturbances.  In addition to being linked over long distances by larvae, the key ecosystems of the Caribbean, coral reefs, seagrasses and mangroves are physically, chemically, and biologically connected (Nagelkerken 2009).  There is a strong rationale for planning and management of larger areas of the ocean than the current patchwork of MPAs including adjacent land masses.

The Wider Caribbean is ready for Marine Spatial Planning (MSP).

While the wider Caribbean is a functioning LME, its large size and political complexity suggest that smaller sub-regions may be better suited for a pilot program in MSP.  Unlike terrestrial or freshwater systems, marine ecoregions are not easily compartmentalized and represent a continuum of overlapping, interdependent ecosystems.   However, in several recent schemes, the Caribbean has been sub-divided into a number ecoregions (Spaulding et al. 2007) and these can be used as focal points for discussion and potential selection for MSP.  It is critical that this be an inclusive process integrating the people and political entities in the region.  Thus, practical and political considerations may trump more scientific criteria in site selection.  The key is to select regions where planning and implementation efforts have a reasonable chance of success.

MSP begins with assessment and assembly of existing spatial data and information in GIS formats including, for example, key resources, benthic habitats, biological diversity, oceanography, bathymetry, and sediments.  Human uses are also mapped including shipping lanes, pipelines and cables, minerals leases, protected areas, fishing zones and aquaculture sites to name a few.  The sources of this information include publications, databases and local and traditional knowledge.  The public meetings required to collect the latter play an important part in building a political constituency for this inclusive process.  

The GIS overlays produced show areas where information is abundant and areas where there are significant information gaps.  Continually updated maps from spatially organized databases allow assessments of changes and provide parameters for models to help predict the future under different scenarios of management and environmental change.    The importance of maps in engaging the stakeholders, illuminating complex use problems, and suggesting solutions cannot be over-emphasized (Carollo et al. 2009).   
 
MSP is an idea whose time has come.  It originated during the planning effort that established the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park in 1972.  It has been used in Europe, notably in the extensively exploited North Sea, and in various locations in Asia to balance economic and environmental objectives.  Recently, a step-by step guide to MSP has been published which presents clearly and with many examples its importance and how to do it (Ehler and Douvere 2009).  This exemplary work shows that while the tools and approaches of MSP can be outlined, each location is unique in terms of engagement of the stakeholders and the local and national political apparatus.  
On-going projects in MSP in the Caribbean provide example and opportunity.

There are several governance projects in the Caribbean which serve as examples.  The Meso-American Barrier Reef System (MBRS) project used a spatial planning approach to define biophysical characteristics, human uses and potential conservation management measures within a four-country region of the western Caribbean (Kramer and Kramer 2002).  The planning process was inclusive and thorough, but the political complexity of the region has hampered implementation of  internationally coordinated ecosystem-based management and governance.  

At a larger scale, the Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem (CLME) Project based at the Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission for the Caribbean (IOCARIBE) in Cartagena, Colombia is a developing example of a multilevel governance network linking regional inter-governmental initiatives together with the Caribbean Sea Initiative of the Association of Caribbean States.  While the project to date has concentrated on organization, conceptual designs and political considerations to approach comprehensive governance of the Caribbean LME, it will use MSP to define management concerns and identify use areas to implement governance (Fanning et al. 2007, Mahon et al. in press).

Within the U.S. territories the Puerto Rico-Virgin Islands shelf (including the British Virgin Islands) encompasses one of the most heavily visited touristic regions and forms an attractive region for a pilot project in MSP.  The economic value of the marine ecosystems of this ecoregion is huge and this facilitates buy-in by government and the public. Both Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands have strong, active research teams who could be engaged with sufficient funding (Ogden, in press).    

We must use the Caribbean, but we can’t afford to use it up.  

This paraphrase of a famous quote from author and conservationist Carl Safina captures the ultimate goal of MSP as a first step in EBM in response to the relentless decline of ocean resources and the looming crisis of governance.  Similar to land-use planning, MSP concentrates on places of importance to human societies and provides a mapping and analysis framework for visualizing the finite nature of resources and the need for governance, principally through zoning, of human enterprises on the ocean (Crowder et al. 2006).  Young et al. (2007) outline four key principles to implement governance (EBM):  (1) Create governance arrangements that minimize mismatches between biophysical systems and  socioeconomic activities; (2) Develop procedures that recognize multiple-uses of ocean areas and can mediate conflicts; (3) Insure that all interested parties have a voice in decision-making in MSP and governance from the beginning; and (4) Design governance to monitor results of management policies and to change them as necessary as understanding of the dynamics of the place advances.  

MSP and EBM will bring planning and order to human activities and other concerns, such as conservation, to the ocean.  In most countries the ocean is a commons, governed by sector, if at all, by local and national agencies with overlapping and conflicting legal mandates (Crowder et al. 2006).  Recently, some nations are beginning to seek a way to govern that will accommodate an ecosystem approach.  In the U.S., Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force was charged by Executive Order to develop a framework for marine spatial planning.  The interim report was released in December 2009 for public comment with final recommendations due by the end of 2010 (Executive Office of the President 2009).  In the U.S. there is developing interest in the public trust doctrine, applied currently only in state waters (shoreline to 3 nm) which mandates that ocean resources be managed in the best interests of the citizens.  This doctrine has not yet been implemented in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ, 3nm to 200nm).  Extension of the public trust doctrine to the EEZ will gather ocean assets under the same administration and help to answer a vexing question: “For whom should our country’s oceans be managed, and for what purpose?” (Turnipseed et al. 2009).
    
An opportunity to engage governments through tourism-based economies.

On numerous occasions each year, Caribbean regional scientists gather at  meetings and talk to each other about the dismal state of Caribbean ecosystems.  Similarly, but with a very different tone, ministers of tourism of numerous Caribbean nations gather in a nice hotel on a beach and tell each other how wonderful it is and how new tourism developments in coastal areas are having a positive impact on their respective economies.  With some help from inside the Caribbean tourism establishment, the real story of the Caribbean of the last 50 years could be told including what the science says about what must be done to arrest and reverse the decline.    Pangea World (AAAS 2006) has taken a similar approach, using tourism and its impact on the economy to foster government conservation and sustainability planning in Fiji and Pacific Panama.
 
Conclusions

The marine resources of the Wider Caribbean are in rapid decline and there is little evidence that the MPA programs that have been developed to halt or reverse the decline are working.  The growth of the human population, doubling since 1965, has driven increasingly environmentally risky and damaging development decisions all over the region. This situation creates an opportunity, if not an obligation, to collaborate with nascent programs in MSP, EBM and governance with appropriate scientific information and public participation.  The actions proposed herein may be in time to reverse the decline of coastal ecosystems but certainly have the benefit of raising the profile of the central economic importance of healthy marine ecosystems.  This will engage the public and increase their understanding of what must be done live sustainably with ocean resources in this first century of the Anthropocene.

References

AAAS (News and Notes). 2006.  Ayalas’ passion for knowledge shines at AAAS event. Science 312: 542.
Adey, W.H. 1977.  Shallow water Holocene bioherms of the Caribbean Sea and West Indies.  Proc. of Third International Coral Reef Symposium 2: 21-24.
Albright, R, B. Mason & C. Langdon C. 2008.  Effect of aragonite saturation state on settlement and post-settlement growth of Porites astreoides larvae.  Coral Reefs 27(3): 485-490.
Allison, G.W., J. Lubchenco & M.H. Carr. 1998. Marine reserves are necessary but not sufficient for marine conservation. Ecological Applications 8 (1): S79-S92.
Baums IB, M.W. Miller, & M.E. Hellberg. 2006. Geographic variation in clonal structure of a reef-building Caribbean coral, Acropora palmata.  Ecological Monographs 76: 503-519.
Bone, D., A Croquer, E. Klein, D. Perez, F. Losada, A. Martin, C. Bastidas, M. Rada, L. Galindo & P. Penchaszadeh. 2001. Programa CARICOMP: Monitoreo a largo plaza de los ecosistemas marinos del Parque Nacional Morrocoy, Venezuela. Intersciencia 26: 457-462.
Brown, B.E.  1997.  Coral bleaching: causes and consequences.  Coral Reefs 16(5): 129-138.
CARICOMP 2001. The Caribbean Coastal Marine Productivity Program (CARICOMP). Bull. Mar. Sci. 69: 819-829.
Carollo, C., D.J, Reed, J.C. Ogden & D. Palandro. 2009. The importance of data discovery and management in advancing ecosystem-based management.  Marine Policy 33: 651-653.
Cowen, R.K., M. Kamazima, M. Lwiza, S. Sponaugle, C.B. Paris, & D.B. Olson. 2000.  Connectivity of Marine Populations: Open or Closed?  Science 287: 857 – 859.

Crowder, L.B., G. Osherenko, O.R. Young, S. Airame, E.A. Norse, N. Baron, J.C. Day, F. Douvere, C.N. Ehler, B.S. Halpern, S.J. Langdon, K.L. McLeod, J.C. Ogden, R.E. Peach,     A.A. Rosenberg, & J.A. Wilson. 2006. Resolving mismatches in U.S. ocean governance. Science 313: 617-618.

Ehler, C. & F. Douvere. 2009. Marine Spatial Planning: a set-by-step approach toward ecosystem-based management. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and Man and the Biosphere Program. IOC Manual and Guides No. 53, ICAM Dossier No.6. Paris, UNESCO, 99pp.

Executive Office of the President of the U.S. 2009. Interim report of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, September 10, 2009.  Council on Environmental Quality38p.

Fanning,L., R. Mahon, P. McConney, J. Angulo, F. Burrows, B. Chakallal, D. Gil, M. Haughton, S. Heileman, S. Martinez, L’ouverture Ostine, A. Oviedo, S. Parsons, T. Phillips, C.S. Arroyo, B. Simmons & C. Toro. 2007. A large marine ecosystem governance framework. Marine Policy 31: 434-443.

Geoghegan, T., A.H. Smith & K. Thatcher. 2001. Characterization of marine protected areas: An analysis of ecological, organizational and socio-economic factors.  CANARI Technical Report #287, 140pp.

Halpern, B.S. 2003. The impact of marine reserves: Do reserves work and does reserve size matter? Ecological Applications 13 (Supplement): 117-137.
Harvell, D. R. Aronson, N. Baron, J. Connell, A. Dobson, S. Ellner, L. Gerber, K. Kim, A. Kuris, H. McCallum, K. Lafferty, B. McKay, J. Porter, M. Pascual, G. Smith, K. Sutherland & J. Ward. 2004. The rising tide of ocean diseases: unsolved problems and research priorities. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2: 375-382.
Hubbard, D.K., H. Zankl,  I.Van Heerden & I. P. Gill. 2005. Holocene Reef Development Along the Northeastern St. Croix Shelf, Buck Island, U.S. Virgin Islands. J. Sedimentary Research 75: 97-11.
Hughes, T.P.  1994.  Catastrophes, phase shifts, and large-scale degradation of a Caribbean coral reef.  Science 265(5178): 1547-1551.
Hughes, T., A.M. Szmant, R. Steneck, R. Carpenter, & S. Miller.  1999.  Algal Blooms on Coral Reefs: What Are the Causes?  Limnology & Oceanography, 44: 1583-1586.
Jackson, J.B.C., M.X. Kirby, W.H. Berger, K.A. Bjorndal, L.W. Botsford, B.J. Bourque, R.H. Bradbury, R. Cooke, J. Erlandson, J.A. Estes, T.P. Hughes, S. Kidwell, C.B. Lange, H.S. Lenihan, J.M. Pandolfi, C.H. Peterson, R.S. Steneck, M.J. Tegner, & R.R. Warner.  2001.  Historical overfishing and the recent collapse of coastal ecosystems.  Science 293(5530): 629-638.
Kelleher, G., C. Bleakley & S. Wells. 1995. A global representative system of marine protected areas. Volume II: Wider Caribbean, West Africa and South Atlantic. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, the World Bank, and The World Conservation Union (IUCN). 93pp.
Knowlton, N. & A.F. Budd.  2001. Recognizing coral species past and present, p97-119.  In J.B.C. Jackson, S. Lidgard, & F.K. McKinney (eds.) Evolutionary patterns: growth, form and tempo in the fossil record.  Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.
Kramer, P.A. & P. R. Kramer (M. Mcfield ed.), 2002. Ecoregional conservation planning for the Mesoamerican Caribbean Reef (MACR). World Wildlife Fund, Washington, D.C., 140 p.
Kuffner, I.B., L.J. Walters, M.A. Becerro, V.J. Paul, R. Ritson-Williams & K.S.  Beach.  2006.  Inhibition of coral recruitment by macroalgae and cyanobacteria.  Marine Ecology Progress Series 323: 107-117.
Linton, D. & T. Fisher (eds). 2004. CARICOMP: Caribbean Coastal Marine Productivity Program, 1993-2003. CARICOMP ISBN 976 610 624 X, 91p.
Mahon, R. L. Fanning, P. McConney, & C. Toro. In press. Governance for Caribbean living marine resources: seeking a path. Proc. Gulf & Carib. Fish. Inst. 60.
Mumby, P.J., A.R. Harborne, J. Williams, C.V. Kappel, D.R. Brumbaugh, F. Micheli, K.E. Holmes, C.P. Dahlgren, C.B. Paris & P.G. Blackwell.  2007.  Trophic cascade facilitates coral recruitment in a marine reserve.  Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 104: 8362-8367.
Nagelkerken, I. (ed.) 2009. Ecological Connectivity among Tropical Coastal Ecosystems.
Springer, 620pp.

Ogden, J.C. 1997. Ecosystem interactions in the tropical coastal seascape, p288-297.
In: C. Birkeland (ed.) Life and Death of Coral Reefs, Chapman and Hall, NY, 536p.

Ogden, J.C. & P.S. Lobel. 1978. The role of herbivorous fishes and urchins in coral reef communities. Environmental Biology of Fishes 3: 4963.

Ogden, J.C. (in press) Marine spatial planning (MSP): A first step to ecosystem-based management (EBM) in the Wider Caribbean. Revista de Biologia Tropical.
Pandolfi, J.M., R.H. Bradbury, E. Sala, T.P. Hughes, K.A. Bjorndal, R. G. Cooke, D.H. McArdle, L. McClenachan, M.J.H. Newman, G. Paredes, R.R. Warner, & J.B.C. Jackson. 2003. Global trajectories of the long-term decline of coral reefs ecosystems. Science 301: 955-958.

Pandolfi, J.M., J.B.C. Jackson, N. Baron, R.H. Bradbury, H.M. Guzman, T.P. Hughes, C.V. Kappel, F. Micheli, J.C. Ogden, H.P. Possingham, & E. Sala. 2005.  Are US coral reefs on the slippery slope to slime? Science 307: 1725-1726.

Rivera-Montoy, V.H., R.R. Twilley, D. Bone, D.L. Childers, C. Coronado-Molina, I.C. Feller, J. Herrera-Silveira, R. Jaffe, E. Mancera, E. Rejmankova, J.E. Salisbury & E. Weil. 2004. A conceptual framework to develop long-term ecological research and management objectives in the Wider Caribbean region. Bioscience 54: 843-856.

Rogers, C. 1990. Responses of coral reefs and reef organisms to sedimentation. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 62: 185-202.

Sherman K, M. Sissenwine, V. Christensen, A. Duda, G. Hempel, C. Ibe, S. Levin, D. Lluch-Belda, G. Matishov, J. McGlade, M. O’Toole, S. Seitzinger, R. Serra, H.R. Skjoldal, Q. Tang, J. Thulin, V. Vandeweerd & K. Zwanenburg.  2005.  A global movement toward an ecosystem approach to management of marine resources. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 300:275-279.
Spaulding, M.D., H.E. Fox, G.R. Allen, N. Davidson, Z.A. Ferdana, M. Finlayson, B.S. Halpern, M.A. Jorge, A. Lombana, S.A. Lourie, K.D. Martin, E. McManus, J. Molnar, C.A. Recchia & J. Robertson. Marine ecoregions of the world: A bioregionalization of coastal and shelf areas. Bioscience 57: 573-583.
Szmant, A.M.  2002.  Nutrient enrichment on coral reefs: is it a major cause of coral reef decline?  Estuaries 25(4): 743-766.
Turnipseed, M., L.B. Crowder, R.D. Sagarin, & S.E. Roady. 2009. Legal bedrock for rebuilding America’s ocean ecosystems. Science 234: 183-184.
Young, O.R., G. Osherenko, J.Ekstrom, L.B. Crowder, J. Ogden, J.A. Wilson,
J.C. Day, F. Douvere, C.N. Ehler, K. McLeod, & R. Peach. 2007. Solving the Crisis in Ocean Governance: Place-Based Management of Marine Ecosystems. Environment 49(4): 20-32.

Internet References

Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem Project: http://www.cavehill.uwi.edu/cermes/clmeInfo.html
NOAA Marine Protected Area Center. 2009. http://mpa.gov/  
NOAA Marine Sanctuaries. 2009. http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/about/pdfs/se_gom.pdf
Pangea World: http://www.pangeaworld.com/home.htm
Marine Spatial Planning (UNESCO) 2009: http://www.unesco-ioc-marinesp.be/

John C. Ogden, USF Emeritus Professor, Department of Integrative Biology, c/o Florida Institute of Oceanography, University of South Florida, 830 First Street South, St. Petersburg, Florida 33701 USA; JOgden@marine.usf.edu

 

The Wider Caribbean has a unique and alarming environmental history.

The decline of Caribbean coral reefs and their associated coastal ecosystems including seagrasses and mangroves has been in progress for at least several hundred years, pacing the explosion of the human population which began in the late 19th and early 20th centuries (Jackson, et al. 2001, Pandolfi et al.2003, Pandolfi et al. 2005).  The recent period of rapid decline first came to notice 4 to 5 decades ago coincident with the start of my career in Panama and St. Croix.  At that time if someone had told me that the relatively luxuriant coral reefs of the region would be as damaged and diminished as they are today in only 40 years, I would have thought that they were completely crazy.  Yet this is exactly what happened and we now recognize this decline is not confined to the Caribbean but is global in extent.  

Arguably the earliest and the best science documenting the decline of reefs and associated ecosystems and seeking its causes has been done in the Caribbean region.  This is perhaps not surprising as the 35 nations and territories of the wider Caribbean region have long supported marine field stations and coastal laboratories housing national academic programs or fisheries management.  These facilities were usually established in relatively undisturbed locations with excellent field access and provided a baseline against which future changes were measured.  The Association of Island Marine Laboratories of the Caribbean (later AMLC), one of the oldest scientific associations of its kind, was established in 1958 to facilitate international communication and exchange of data, technology and people.  

Researchers at these laboratories, aided by colleagues from around the world, began to document and monitor the status and trends of coastal ecosystems (Bone et al. 2001, CARICOMP 2001, Linton and Fisher 2004).  Others investigated the causes of the decline and achieved the earliest understanding of, for example, the coral-algal balance on reefs (Hughes 1994), the importance of herbivores (Hughes et al. 1999, Kuffner et al. 2006, Ogden and Lobel 1978), the impact of fishing (Jackson et al. 2001), top-down predator control (Mumby et al. 2007), the role of nutrients (Szmant 2002), coral diseases (Harvell et al. 2004),  field and physiological studies of coral bleaching (Brown 1997) and most recently ocean acidification (Albright et al. 2008).  

Caribbean scientists have examined the connection with land (Rogers 1990), the inter-connectivity with other coastal ecosystems including seagrass beds and mangroves (Nagelkerken 2009, Ogden 1997) and connectivity by pelagic larvae (Cowen 2000).  These studies and many others have been done in the context of a thorough understanding of the geological history of the Caribbean reefs (Adey 1977), the growth of reefs through the Pleistocene and Holocene (Hubbard et al. 2005) and the origin and evolution of Caribbean corals (Knowlton and Budd 2001).

The bottom line is that the decline of coastal ecosystems in the Caribbean has been a result of multiple stresses the most important of which are anthropogenic in origin and include poor land-use practices, runoff and pollution, over-fishing, and climate change.

Among the earliest Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) were established in the Caribbean.

Supported by long-term observations, monitoring and assessment and the long experience of local people in particular coastal areas, the pioneers of marine conservation, notably Tom van’t Hof, originally of Caribbean Research and Management of Biodiversity (CARMABI) in Curacao, implemented early MPAs and communicated widely their design and political considerations.  Starting from small beginnings, MPAs expanded across the region as the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park became the icon of tropical marine management (Kelleher et al. 1995).  A more recent compendium of MPAs for the Lesser Antilles and Central Caribbean, including Belize and the Turks and Caicos lists 75 functional MPAs (Geoghegan et al. 2001).  However, many of these are still so-called “paper parks” with little or no protection or management other than their boundary lines on the chart.  

Early studies of a class of MPAs called “no-take marine reserves,” prohibiting all extractive use, documented the relatively rapid response of demersal fishes to fishing prohibition.  The Saba Marine Park in the Netherlands Antilles and the Hol Chan Marine Reserve in Belize were among the first and regionally the most influential.  As elsewhere in the world these reserves developed more and bigger fishes in approximately three to five years (Halpern 2003).   However, longer term studies of corals for example, have shown that declines continue through a failure of recruitment under no-take protection, at least at a relatively small geographic scale (S.R. Smith pers. comm.).  Perhaps not surprisingly, fish, corals, and other major groups react differently to no-take protection, related to the ecological processes, particularly recruitment, that drive their dynamics.  

MPAs are necessary but not sufficient.

It is clear that our efforts to date to protect coastal ecosystems from human disturbances have been at best ineffective and that implementation of small marine protected areas, even no-take marine reserves, has not been sufficient (Allison et al. 1998).  Networks of existing MPAs, such as “Islands in the Stream” recently proposed for in the Gulf of Mexico by NOAA Marine Sanctuaries (2009), have been sketched out as one response to the geographic scale problem.  The U.S. through NOAA’s MPA Office (2009) recently announced a national network of MPAs made up of 225 federal, state, and territorial sites, including Caribbean sites, but the work of making this network truly representative of the nation’s marine biodiversity, production and cultural heritage has just begun.  It is not clear if this slow pace will achieve the goal of arresting the decline before it is too late.  We are failing and in danger of being accused of “fiddling while Rome burns.”

The Caribbean provides a compelling rationale for regional ocean governance.

More comprehensive ocean governance is needed that encompasses the geographic scales of marine biodiversity, human impacts and of the ecological processes that sustain coral reefs and associated ecosystems.  There is abundant scientific evidence that the wider Caribbean functions as a large marine ecosystem (LME, Sherman et al. 2005) and plans for regional management inspired by the CARICOMP network of marine laboratories have been developed (Rivera-Monroy et al. 2004).   The ocean currents of the Wider Caribbean connect ecosystems over large areas through the planktonic transport of larvae of many organisms (Cowen et al. 2000, Baums et al. 2006).  While the patterns vary with reproductive strategy and timing, transport of larvae increases the resilience of populations through recruitment following disturbances.  In addition to being linked over long distances by larvae, the key ecosystems of the Caribbean, coral reefs, seagrasses and mangroves are physically, chemically, and biologically connected (Nagelkerken 2009).  There is a strong rationale for planning and management of larger areas of the ocean than the current patchwork of MPAs including adjacent land masses.

The Wider Caribbean is ready for Marine Spatial Planning (MSP).

While the wider Caribbean is a functioning LME, its large size and political complexity suggest that smaller sub-regions may be better suited for a pilot program in MSP.  Unlike terrestrial or freshwater systems, marine ecoregions are not easily compartmentalized and represent a continuum of overlapping, interdependent ecosystems.   However, in several recent schemes, the Caribbean has been sub-divided into a number ecoregions (Spaulding et al. 2007) and these can be used as focal points for discussion and potential selection for MSP.  It is critical that this be an inclusive process integrating the people and political entities in the region.  Thus, practical and political considerations may trump more scientific criteria in site selection.  The key is to select regions where planning and implementation efforts have a reasonable chance of success.

MSP begins with assessment and assembly of existing spatial data and information in GIS formats including, for example, key resources, benthic habitats, biological diversity, oceanography, bathymetry, and sediments.  Human uses are also mapped including shipping lanes, pipelines and cables, minerals leases, protected areas, fishing zones and aquaculture sites to name a few.  The sources of this information include publications, databases and local and traditional knowledge.  The public meetings required to collect the latter play an important part in building a political constituency for this inclusive process.  

The GIS overlays produced show areas where information is abundant and areas where there are significant information gaps.  Continually updated maps from spatially organized databases allow assessments of changes and provide parameters for models to help predict the future under different scenarios of management and environmental change.    The importance of maps in engaging the stakeholders, illuminating complex use problems, and suggesting solutions cannot be over-emphasized (Carollo et al. 2009).   
 
MSP is an idea whose time has come.  It originated during the planning effort that established the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park in 1972.  It has been used in Europe, notably in the extensively exploited North Sea, and in various locations in Asia to balance economic and environmental objectives.  Recently, a step-by step guide to MSP has been published which presents clearly and with many examples its importance and how to do it (Ehler and Douvere 2009).  This exemplary work shows that while the tools and approaches of MSP can be outlined, each location is unique in terms of engagement of the stakeholders and the local and national political apparatus.  
On-going projects in MSP in the Caribbean provide example and opportunity.

There are several governance projects in the Caribbean which serve as examples.  The Meso-American Barrier Reef System (MBRS) project used a spatial planning approach to define biophysical characteristics, human uses and potential conservation management measures within a four-country region of the western Caribbean (Kramer and Kramer 2002).  The planning process was inclusive and thorough, but the political complexity of the region has hampered implementation of  internationally coordinated ecosystem-based management and governance.  

At a larger scale, the Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem (CLME) Project based at the Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission for the Caribbean (IOCARIBE) in Cartagena, Colombia is a developing example of a multilevel governance network linking regional inter-governmental initiatives together with the Caribbean Sea Initiative of the Association of Caribbean States.  While the project to date has concentrated on organization, conceptual designs and political considerations to approach comprehensive governance of the Caribbean LME, it will use MSP to define management concerns and identify use areas to implement governance (Fanning et al. 2007, Mahon et al. in press).

Within the U.S. territories the Puerto Rico-Virgin Islands shelf (including the British Virgin Islands) encompasses one of the most heavily visited touristic regions and forms an attractive region for a pilot project in MSP.  The economic value of the marine ecosystems of this ecoregion is huge and this facilitates buy-in by government and the public. Both Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands have strong, active research teams who could be engaged with sufficient funding (Ogden, in press).    

We must use the Caribbean, but we can’t afford to use it up.  

This paraphrase of a famous quote from author and conservationist Carl Safina captures the ultimate goal of MSP as a first step in EBM in response to the relentless decline of ocean resources and the looming crisis of governance.  Similar to land-use planning, MSP concentrates on places of importance to human societies and provides a mapping and analysis framework for visualizing the finite nature of resources and the need for governance, principally through zoning, of human enterprises on the ocean (Crowder et al. 2006).  Young et al. (2007) outline four key principles to implement governance (EBM):  (1) Create governance arrangements that minimize mismatches between biophysical systems and  socioeconomic activities; (2) Develop procedures that recognize multiple-uses of ocean areas and can mediate conflicts; (3) Insure that all interested parties have a voice in decision-making in MSP and governance from the beginning; and (4) Design governance to monitor results of management policies and to change them as necessary as understanding of the dynamics of the place advances.  

MSP and EBM will bring planning and order to human activities and other concerns, such as conservation, to the ocean.  In most countries the ocean is a commons, governed by sector, if at all, by local and national agencies with overlapping and conflicting legal mandates (Crowder et al. 2006).  Recently, some nations are beginning to seek a way to govern that will accommodate an ecosystem approach.  In the U.S., Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force was charged by Executive Order to develop a framework for marine spatial planning.  The interim report was released in December 2009 for public comment with final recommendations due by the end of 2010 (Executive Office of the President 2009).  In the U.S. there is developing interest in the public trust doctrine, applied currently only in state waters (shoreline to 3 nm) which mandates that ocean resources be managed in the best interests of the citizens.  This doctrine has not yet been implemented in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ, 3nm to 200nm).  Extension of the public trust doctrine to the EEZ will gather ocean assets under the same administration and help to answer a vexing question: “For whom should our country’s oceans be managed, and for what purpose?” (Turnipseed et al. 2009).
    
An opportunity to engage governments through tourism-based economies.

On numerous occasions each year, Caribbean regional scientists gather at  meetings and talk to each other about the dismal state of Caribbean ecosystems.  Similarly, but with a very different tone, ministers of tourism of numerous Caribbean nations gather in a nice hotel on a beach and tell each other how wonderful it is and how new tourism developments in coastal areas are having a positive impact on their respective economies.  With some help from inside the Caribbean tourism establishment, the real story of the Caribbean of the last 50 years could be told including what the science says about what must be done to arrest and reverse the decline.    Pangea World (AAAS 2006) has taken a similar approach, using tourism and its impact on the economy to foster government conservation and sustainability planning in Fiji and Pacific Panama.
 
Conclusions

The marine resources of the Wider Caribbean are in rapid decline and there is little evidence that the MPA programs that have been developed to halt or reverse the decline are working.  The growth of the human population, doubling since 1965, has driven increasingly environmentally risky and damaging development decisions all over the region. This situation creates an opportunity, if not an obligation, to collaborate with nascent programs in MSP, EBM and governance with appropriate scientific information and public participation.  The actions proposed herein may be in time to reverse the decline of coastal ecosystems but certainly have the benefit of raising the profile of the central economic importance of healthy marine ecosystems.  This will engage the public and increase their understanding of what must be done live sustainably with ocean resources in this first century of the Anthropocene.

References

AAAS (News and Notes). 2006.  Ayalas’ passion for knowledge shines at AAAS event. Science 312: 542.
Adey, W.H. 1977.  Shallow water Holocene bioherms of the Caribbean Sea and West Indies.  Proc. of Third International Coral Reef Symposium 2: 21-24.
Albright, R, B. Mason & C. Langdon C. 2008.  Effect of aragonite saturation state on settlement and post-settlement growth of Porites astreoides larvae.  Coral Reefs 27(3): 485-490.
Allison, G.W., J. Lubchenco & M.H. Carr. 1998. Marine reserves are necessary but not sufficient for marine conservation. Ecological Applications 8 (1): S79-S92.
Baums IB, M.W. Miller, & M.E. Hellberg. 2006. Geographic variation in clonal structure of a reef-building Caribbean coral, Acropora palmata.  Ecological Monographs 76: 503-519.
Bone, D., A Croquer, E. Klein, D. Perez, F. Losada, A. Martin, C. Bastidas, M. Rada, L. Galindo & P. Penchaszadeh. 2001. Programa CARICOMP: Monitoreo a largo plaza de los ecosistemas marinos del Parque Nacional Morrocoy, Venezuela. Intersciencia 26: 457-462.
Brown, B.E.  1997.  Coral bleaching: causes and consequences.  Coral Reefs 16(5): 129-138.
CARICOMP 2001. The Caribbean Coastal Marine Productivity Program (CARICOMP). Bull. Mar. Sci. 69: 819-829.
Carollo, C., D.J, Reed, J.C. Ogden & D. Palandro. 2009. The importance of data discovery and management in advancing ecosystem-based management.  Marine Policy 33: 651-653.
Cowen, R.K., M. Kamazima, M. Lwiza, S. Sponaugle, C.B. Paris, & D.B. Olson. 2000.  Connectivity of Marine Populations: Open or Closed?  Science 287: 857 – 859.

Crowder, L.B., G. Osherenko, O.R. Young, S. Airame, E.A. Norse, N. Baron, J.C. Day, F. Douvere, C.N. Ehler, B.S. Halpern, S.J. Langdon, K.L. McLeod, J.C. Ogden, R.E. Peach,     A.A. Rosenberg, & J.A. Wilson. 2006. Resolving mismatches in U.S. ocean governance. Science 313: 617-618.

Ehler, C. & F. Douvere. 2009. Marine Spatial Planning: a set-by-step approach toward ecosystem-based management. Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission and Man and the Biosphere Program. IOC Manual and Guides No. 53, ICAM Dossier No.6. Paris, UNESCO, 99pp.

Executive Office of the President of the U.S. 2009. Interim report of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, September 10, 2009.  Council on Environmental Quality38p.

Fanning,L., R. Mahon, P. McConney, J. Angulo, F. Burrows, B. Chakallal, D. Gil, M. Haughton, S. Heileman, S. Martinez, L’ouverture Ostine, A. Oviedo, S. Parsons, T. Phillips, C.S. Arroyo, B. Simmons & C. Toro. 2007. A large marine ecosystem governance framework. Marine Policy 31: 434-443.

Geoghegan, T., A.H. Smith & K. Thatcher. 2001. Characterization of marine protected areas: An analysis of ecological, organizational and socio-economic factors.  CANARI Technical Report #287, 140pp.

Halpern, B.S. 2003. The impact of marine reserves: Do reserves work and does reserve size matter? Ecological Applications 13 (Supplement): 117-137.
Harvell, D. R. Aronson, N. Baron, J. Connell, A. Dobson, S. Ellner, L. Gerber, K. Kim, A. Kuris, H. McCallum, K. Lafferty, B. McKay, J. Porter, M. Pascual, G. Smith, K. Sutherland & J. Ward. 2004. The rising tide of ocean diseases: unsolved problems and research priorities. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2: 375-382.
Hubbard, D.K., H. Zankl,  I.Van Heerden & I. P. Gill. 2005. Holocene Reef Development Along the Northeastern St. Croix Shelf, Buck Island, U.S. Virgin Islands. J. Sedimentary Research 75: 97-11.
Hughes, T.P.  1994.  Catastrophes, phase shifts, and large-scale degradation of a Caribbean coral reef.  Science 265(5178): 1547-1551.
Hughes, T., A.M. Szmant, R. Steneck, R. Carpenter, & S. Miller.  1999.  Algal Blooms on Coral Reefs: What Are the Causes?  Limnology & Oceanography, 44: 1583-1586.
Jackson, J.B.C., M.X. Kirby, W.H. Berger, K.A. Bjorndal, L.W. Botsford, B.J. Bourque, R.H. Bradbury, R. Cooke, J. Erlandson, J.A. Estes, T.P. Hughes, S. Kidwell, C.B. Lange, H.S. Lenihan, J.M. Pandolfi, C.H. Peterson, R.S. Steneck, M.J. Tegner, & R.R. Warner.  2001.  Historical overfishing and the recent collapse of coastal ecosystems.  Science 293(5530): 629-638.
Kelleher, G., C. Bleakley & S. Wells. 1995. A global representative system of marine protected areas. Volume II: Wider Caribbean, West Africa and South Atlantic. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, the World Bank, and The World Conservation Union (IUCN). 93pp.
Knowlton, N. & A.F. Budd.  2001. Recognizing coral species past and present, p97-119.  In J.B.C. Jackson, S. Lidgard, & F.K. McKinney (eds.) Evolutionary patterns: growth, form and tempo in the fossil record.  Univ. of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.
Kramer, P.A. & P. R. Kramer (M. Mcfield ed.), 2002. Ecoregional conservation planning for the Mesoamerican Caribbean Reef (MACR). World Wildlife Fund, Washington, D.C., 140 p.
Kuffner, I.B., L.J. Walters, M.A. Becerro, V.J. Paul, R. Ritson-Williams & K.S.  Beach.  2006.  Inhibition of coral recruitment by macroalgae and cyanobacteria.  Marine Ecology Progress Series 323: 107-117.
Linton, D. & T. Fisher (eds). 2004. CARICOMP: Caribbean Coastal Marine Productivity Program, 1993-2003. CARICOMP ISBN 976 610 624 X, 91p.
Mahon, R. L. Fanning, P. McConney, & C. Toro. In press. Governance for Caribbean living marine resources: seeking a path. Proc. Gulf & Carib. Fish. Inst. 60.
Mumby, P.J., A.R. Harborne, J. Williams, C.V. Kappel, D.R. Brumbaugh, F. Micheli, K.E. Holmes, C.P. Dahlgren, C.B. Paris & P.G. Blackwell.  2007.  Trophic cascade facilitates coral recruitment in a marine reserve.  Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences (USA) 104: 8362-8367.
Nagelkerken, I. (ed.) 2009. Ecological Connectivity among Tropical Coastal Ecosystems.
Springer, 620pp.

Ogden, J.C. 1997. Ecosystem interactions in the tropical coastal seascape, p288-297.
In: C. Birkeland (ed.) Life and Death of Coral Reefs, Chapman and Hall, NY, 536p.

Ogden, J.C. & P.S. Lobel. 1978. The role of herbivorous fishes and urchins in coral reef communities. Environmental Biology of Fishes 3: 4963.

Ogden, J.C. (in press) Marine spatial planning (MSP): A first step to ecosystem-based management (EBM) in the Wider Caribbean. Revista de Biologia Tropical.
Pandolfi, J.M., R.H. Bradbury, E. Sala, T.P. Hughes, K.A. Bjorndal, R. G. Cooke, D.H. McArdle, L. McClenachan, M.J.H. Newman, G. Paredes, R.R. Warner, & J.B.C. Jackson. 2003. Global trajectories of the long-term decline of coral reefs ecosystems. Science 301: 955-958.

Pandolfi, J.M., J.B.C. Jackson, N. Baron, R.H. Bradbury, H.M. Guzman, T.P. Hughes, C.V. Kappel, F. Micheli, J.C. Ogden, H.P. Possingham, & E. Sala. 2005.  Are US coral reefs on the slippery slope to slime? Science 307: 1725-1726.

Rivera-Montoy, V.H., R.R. Twilley, D. Bone, D.L. Childers, C. Coronado-Molina, I.C. Feller, J. Herrera-Silveira, R. Jaffe, E. Mancera, E. Rejmankova, J.E. Salisbury & E. Weil. 2004. A conceptual framework to develop long-term ecological research and management objectives in the Wider Caribbean region. Bioscience 54: 843-856.

Rogers, C. 1990. Responses of coral reefs and reef organisms to sedimentation. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 62: 185-202.

Sherman K, M. Sissenwine, V. Christensen, A. Duda, G. Hempel, C. Ibe, S. Levin, D. Lluch-Belda, G. Matishov, J. McGlade, M. O’Toole, S. Seitzinger, R. Serra, H.R. Skjoldal, Q. Tang, J. Thulin, V. Vandeweerd & K. Zwanenburg.  2005.  A global movement toward an ecosystem approach to management of marine resources. Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 300:275-279.
Spaulding, M.D., H.E. Fox, G.R. Allen, N. Davidson, Z.A. Ferdana, M. Finlayson, B.S. Halpern, M.A. Jorge, A. Lombana, S.A. Lourie, K.D. Martin, E. McManus, J. Molnar, C.A. Recchia & J. Robertson. Marine ecoregions of the world: A bioregionalization of coastal and shelf areas. Bioscience 57: 573-583.
Szmant, A.M.  2002.  Nutrient enrichment on coral reefs: is it a major cause of coral reef decline?  Estuaries 25(4): 743-766.
Turnipseed, M., L.B. Crowder, R.D. Sagarin, & S.E. Roady. 2009. Legal bedrock for rebuilding America’s ocean ecosystems. Science 234: 183-184.
Young, O.R., G. Osherenko, J.Ekstrom, L.B. Crowder, J. Ogden, J.A. Wilson,
J.C. Day, F. Douvere, C.N. Ehler, K. McLeod, & R. Peach. 2007. Solving the Crisis in Ocean Governance: Place-Based Management of Marine Ecosystems. Environment 49(4): 20-32.

Internet References

Caribbean Large Marine Ecosystem Project: http://www.cavehill.uwi.edu/cermes/clmeInfo.html
NOAA Marine Protected Area Center. 2009. http://mpa.gov/  
NOAA Marine Sanctuaries. 2009. http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/about/pdfs/se_gom.pdf
Pangea World: http://www.pangeaworld.com/home.htm
Marine Spatial Planning (UNESCO) 2009: http://www.unesco-ioc-marinesp.be/

John C. Ogden, USF Emeritus Professor, Department of Integrative Biology, c/o Florida Institute of Oceanography, University of South Florida, 830 First Street South, St. Petersburg, Florida 33701 USA; JOgden@marine.usf.edu