A process framework for coastal zone management in Tanzania

Ocean & Coastal Management 52 (2009) 78–88

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Ocean & Coastal Management journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ocecoaman

A process framework for coastal zone management in Tanzania Kent Gustavson a, *, Zoe¨ Kroeker a,1, Jay Walmsley a, 2, Saada Juma b a b

Jacques Whitford Limited, 3 Spectacle Lake Drive, Dartmouth, Nova Scotia B2T 1N6, Canada AGENDA, Tanzania Bureau of Standards Building Morogoro/ Sam Nujoma Roads, Ubungo Area, P.O. Box 77266, Dar es Salaam, United Republic of Tanzania

a r t i c l e i n f o

a b s t r a c t

Article history: Available online 7 November 2008

A process framework is described to address socio-economic issues related to coastal zone management, specifically as it applies to the mitigation of impacts due to the establishment of marine protected areas (MPAs). Analysis of the existing social environment in Tanzania, including social capital, vulnerable groups and livelihood components, was undertaken to allow for the identification of critical issues and challenges. The developed process framework is a guidance document for decision-makers to incorporate the interests and needs of affected stakeholders. This safeguard commits to a consultative process with clear channels of communication, established grievance procedures, and monitoring and evaluation activities for affected communities. Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Poverty alleviation and environmental issues are recognized as inextricably linked. The Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development (2002) encourages the adoption of environmentally sustainable development and poverty alleviation into international aid development activities [1]. The United Nations’ Millennium Development Goals include both the recognition that there is a need to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger globally, as well as a commitment to environmental sustainability [2]. These international declarations underscore the importance of environmental aspects being taken into consideration during the design and implementation of large-scale projects and programs seeking to alleviate poverty. Only through integrating environmental aspects into poverty alleviation programs will long-term success be possible. However, there are many challenges in making the connection between ecological needs and socio-cultural and economic realities, while developing and implementing management frameworks for projects or programs. Coastal marine protection activities in developing countries provide a particular example of the multi-faceted management challenges in seeking to achieve poverty alleviation and environmental sustainability. Coastal areas are home to more than half of the world’s population and certain regions, such as the East African

* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ1 (902) 468 7777x259; fax: þ1 (902) 468 9009. E-mail address: [email protected] (K. Gustavson). 1 Present address: Ontario Ministry of the Environment, 2 St. Clair Avenue West, 19th Floor, Toronto, Ontario M4V 1P5, Canada. 2 Present address: Earth Tech, 1701 Hollis Street, PO Box 576 CRO, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3J 2R7, Canada. 0964-5691/$ – see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2008.10.008

coast, have both some of the world’s greatest biological resources as well as some of the most impoverished communities. In East Africa, there is impetus to have coastal countries adopt management programs that meet both ecological and social needs. These activities include establishing marine protected areas (MPAs) and adopting new approaches for governmental and regulatory regimes to support the effective management of Territorial Seas and Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZs) to enable investment and strengthen common governance approaches. Driven by local and international biodiversity and conservation needs, these coastal projects remain strongly linked to social equity and poverty-reduction requirements. The United Republic of Tanzania provides a case study of complex coastal management planning. The country has a 2300 km coastline representing both important ecological and economic resources. The coastline currently supports approximately 25% of the country’s population, which is projected to more than double by 2025 [3]. Tanzania is also one of the poorest countries in the world, with low per capita income (57.8% of the population receives less than US$1 per day [4]) and little access to public and social services. Since the early 1990s, Tanzania has developed integrated coastal and marine management through legislation, participated in capacity-building activities, and made commitments to various international agreements related to coastal and marine resource management. More recently, Tanzania has implemented the Marine and Coastal Environment Management Project (MACEMP). The goal of this six-year project is to improve management of coastal and marine resources, enhance the contribution of these resources to economic growth, reduce poverty and further develop a scientific understanding of the marine and coastal resources.

K. Gustavson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 52 (2009) 78–88

The objective of this article is to provide practitioners with an approach and framework to address social and economic planning issues related to coastal zone management, specifically as it applies to the mitigation of impacts due to the establishment of MPAs. By describing the planning activities related to MACEMP in Tanzania, several useful tools for social and economic analysis and program implementation are identified. One of these management tools, a process framework, satisfies World Bank safeguard requirements where there is expected to be project-related restrictions in access to natural resources as a result of MPA designation [5]. The approach and framework is offered as an example to practitioners in support of the effective management of socio-economic issues in a developing country context. 2. Overview of coastal zone management in Tanzania 2.1. Tanzanian coastal communities The coastal zone of Tanzania extends eastwards from the continental margin, and includes the near shore islands off the mainland coast, the islands and islets of the Mafia–Songo Songo archipelago, and the islands of Zanzibar (the largest of which are Unguja and Pemba) (Fig. 1). The coastline extends about 800 km in length with several permanent and seasonal rivers and creeks traversing its plain. The coast is rich in environmental resources including estuaries, mangrove forests, beaches, coral reefs, seagrass beds and deltas. The presence of large and small islands along the coast, the consistent and tropical climate and the existence of diverse marine plant and animal species make Tanzania’s coastal area abundant in resources for communities and a source of their livelihoods. Approximately 25% of the Tanzania’s population lives along the coastline [3,6]. On mainland Tanzania, the coastal population is an estimated 7.0 million living in 30,000 km2 of coastal area, with an annual growth rate of 2–6 % [7] (Table 1). There is extensive migration in coastal areas from rural communities to larger urban centres. The largest urban centres on the coastal mainland include Dar es Salaam, Tanga and Mtwara. Dar es Salaam has the greatest population density, the population having grown by 83% between 1988 and 2002 [6]. In Zanzibar (primarily Unguja Island and Pemba Island), the annual population growth rate is estimated at 3%, with the greatest rise in population growth occurring in coastal regions [6]. In 1993, 45% (745,299) of Zanzibar’s population lived in 63 villages and settlements along the coast [8]. The urban population for Zanzibar has increased from 32% of the total population in 1988 to 40% of the total in 2002 [6]. Households in Tanzania’s coastal communities tend to be of large families with low per capita incomes and high illiteracy rates. Coastal communities have relatively poor access to public infrastructure such as water and sanitation, especially in rural areas, and tend to be faced with poor housing conditions, little to no access to credit and market facilities, and few personal savings [9]. The average size of coastal households is 4.9 persons in mainland Tanzania, and 5.3 per household in Zanzibar [10]. Many coastal villages, especially on the mainland, have high fertility rates, countered by a high population migration to larger urban centres. Education rates among Tanzanians are also low with one quarter of adults with no education and 29% being illiterate. Twice the number of women compared to men having no or little education. Access to credit and savings is also low, although community-based loan programs are emerging, including microcredit revolving funds [11]. Many coastal communities remain relatively isolated due to poor infrastructure such as roads, communications, electrical service, water supply, and ports. The National Bureau of Statistics household budget survey in 2000–2001 indicated that 2% of

79

households in rural areas have electricity, 6% have bank accounts, 25% have modern walls, and 45% need to travel more than 1 km for drinking water. The most common disease in coastal areas is malaria, affecting 69% of children and 60% of adults [6]. Records for Zanzibar indicate that malaria was responsible for 48% of all outpatient services in 1999 [12]. Households in coastal communities are also faced with other notable diseases including HIV/AIDS, cholera, and schistosomiasis. Coastal communities in mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar are highly dependent on natural resources extraction for their livelihood. Traditional activities undertaken in coastal communities are based around subsistence and small-scale commercial initiatives. These are activities that either provide food or a source of shelter, or which involve income generation within the local market. Key activities include: artisanal fisheries, agriculture and animal husbandry, mariculture, salt and lime production, beekeeping, small-scale trade and crafts, and mangrove and coastal thicketrelated activities. In coastal villages, fishing is the main livelihood activity for male-headed households, while farming is the main activity for female-headed households [13]. A characteristic of households in coastal communities is the necessity to undertake several livelihood activities simultaneously to supplement incomes and ensure a consistent food source for family members. 2.2. Regulatory and management framework The United Republic of Tanzania consists of two regional governments: mainland Tanzania (Union Government) and Zanzibar (Zanzibar Revolutionary Government). Under the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania (1977) the management of issues related to the environment, natural resources (including fisheries) and tourism are considered non-union and are dealt with separately by the two regional governments. As a result, marine and coastal resources are governed by two distinct sets of laws and regulations. However, there is some overlap related to coastal zone management. The Territorial Sea and Exclusive Economic Zone Act (1989) provides for the implementation of the Law of the Sea Convention, and establishes the Territorial Sea and EEZ for activities off the coast of mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar. The Deep Sea Fishing Authority Act (1998) provides for the establishment of the Deep Sea Fishing Authority to regulate uses in the EEZ for both jurisdictions as well. Relevant coastal and marine resource management policies and legislation developed by mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar are listed in Table 2. In both mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar, there is legislation related to general environmental issues, marine resource use, tourism and general land use activities. The legislation demonstrates both the conservation needs and attempts to manage coastal resources (i.e. protect mangrove forest, fisheries) within a complex socio-economic context. In Tanzania, actual management of the coastal environment is decentralized. Policies and regulations developed at the national level are typically implemented through district and local governments [7]. Thus, coastal management activities require acceptance and collaboration at the local level for successful implementation. In addition, implementation of program activities may come under the jurisdiction of a number of different departments. Further, there are several differences between mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar that have ramifications for how frameworks for coastal management are developed. 2.2.1. Mainland Tanzania In mainland Tanzania, the primary central government authority responsible for the management of natural resources is the Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism (MNRT). Within the MNRT, there are five separate departments: Fisheries; Forestry and

80

K. Gustavson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 52 (2009) 78–88

Fig. 1. The coastal zone of Tanzania.

Beekeeping; Wildlife; Tourism; and Antiquities. The Fisheries Division oversees the development and management of fisheries, mariculture, and marine parks. It serves to provide advice to district governments on planning and management issues. The Division of Forestry and Beekeeping oversee the management of all mangroves and coastal forest use activities. The national government has District Commissioner Offices, with Divisional Secretaries, at the district level, which function to provide policy guidance regionally.

In Mainland Tanzania, five administrative regions have Local Government Authorities (13 in total) that fall within the coastal zone [6]. The District Councils and Municipal Councils are responsible for implementation and enforcement of national policies and legislation that address natural resource management (among others). Implementation is operational through the District Natural Resource Offices, which have personnel dedicated to fisheries,

K. Gustavson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 52 (2009) 78–88 Table 1 Population density for coastal regions of the United Republic of Tanzania.a Region

Land area (km2)

Total population

Population density (#/km2)

Coast Dar es Salaam Lindi Mtwara Tanga Unguja Pemba

32,407 1393 66,046 16,707 26,808 1464 868

638,015 1,360,850 646,550 889,494 1,283,636 622,459 362,166

20 977 10 53 48 260–390

a

Adapted from various sources [6,9,12].

forestry and beekeeping, and wildlife. It is at this level that the effective implementation of national policies and programs is dependent on the available technical and management expertise. Within each district or municipality, there are several wards. Within each rural area ward, there is a council (Ward Council) that represents several villages. Village-level government operates through a Village Council, under which there are five committees to address issues at the community level. The committees include: security; environment; community development; health; and finance and planning. The Village Council has the direct local-level responsibility for the planning and implementation of projects, and for making decisions regarding such matters as land allocation and community resource use. In practice, however, their activities tend to be more narrowly focused on revenue collection and enforcement. Of particular relevance are the village environment committees or other similar committees, whose responsibilities include the management and conservation of marine resources. In urban municipalities, individual Mtaa provide representation below the ward level (i.e. there is no Village Council or Village Committees) and have established relationships with the municipal Ward Council. Coastal communities are also associated through the Village Assembly, who must approve decisions made by village governments before being sent to the ward level for subsequent review and approval (which must, in turn, be reviewed and approved at the district level). Specifically with respect to coastal resource management, the business of the Village Assembly includes the development of resolutions respecting desired land allocation, fishing practices, forest resource management (including silviculture and harvesting activities), natural resource use fees, and penalties and fines. 2.2.2. Zanzibar Zanzibar operates in many areas as a distinct state, governed by the Revolutionary Council and House of Representatives. Federally, management of natural resources falls primarily under the

81

jurisdiction of the Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources, Environment and Co-operatives (MANREC). There are several separate departments within MANREC, including: the Department of Fisheries and Marine Products; the Department of Commercial Crops, Fruits and Forests; the Department of the Environment; the Department of Livestock; the Department of Irrigation; the Department of Co-operatives; and the Commission for Research and Extension. There are five administrative regions, each divided into two districts. Each region is led by a Regional Commissioner, and a Regional Agricultural Development Officer deals with natural resource management issues. The Regional Commissioner is also assisted by a Regional Administrative Officer and Regional Development Committee, the latter to co-ordinate all development activities within their respective areas. This structure is paralleled at the district level. In addition, however, there are subject-matter specialists for forestry, fisheries and the environment at the district level. Both regional and district agencies are involved in planning and the implementation of government policy, as well as the mobilisation of communities. Below the district level, there are Shehias, which are administrative units under the responsibility of a Sheha, who is appointed by the Regional Commissioner. A Sheha often encompasses several villages. The Sheha is the Chief Government Officer and reports directly to the District Commissioner. Each Sheha has an advisory committee of not less than 12 members [6]. In addition, committees at the local level may be established to address specific issues (e.g. for managing the use of natural resources), but the number and specific function of committees varies considerably across Zanzibar. Specific concerns related to national and local government relevant to coastal management include: general lack of staffing and funding capacity to effectively carry-out existing mandates for natural resource management, particularly at the local government level (districts, wards, and village); overlapping jurisdiction of agencies with respect to management of activities in the marine environment and coastal zone; and lack of technical capacity in key program areas, including the need for special knowledge in mariculture, stock assessment, social research, and environmental and natural resource economics (e.g. need for mariculturalists to provide expertise for appropriate siting and design of developments). 2.3. The Marine and Coastal Environment Management Project MACEMP is a partnership between the United Republic of Tanzania, the Global Environment Fund (GEF) and the World Bank. Initiated in 2006, the project has an overall purpose to improve coastal and marine resources, while also contributing to the

Table 2 Coastal and marine resource management related policies and legislation. Type

Mainland Tanzania

Zanzibar

General environmental

Environmental Management Act (2004)

Legislation

National Environmental Policy (1997)

Environmental Management for Sustainable Development Act (1996) National Environmental Policy for Zanzibar (1992) Establishment of Zanzibar Nature Conservation Areas Management Unit Act (1999)

Marine

Marine Parks and Reserves Act (1994) Fisheries Act (2003) National Fisheries Sector Policy and Strategy Statement (1997) National Integrated Coastal Environment Management Strategy (2003)

Fisheries Act (1988) Fisheries Policy (1985)

Tourism

National Tourism Policy (1999)

Zanzibar Tourism Policy (2004)

Land use

Land Act (1999) Forest Act (2002) Village Land Act (1999)

Forest Resources Management and Conservation Act (1996) National Forest Policy for Zanzibar (1995) Land Tenure Act (1992)

82

K. Gustavson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 52 (2009) 78–88

economic growth and poverty alleviation in Tanzania. It is a key part of an initiative to effectively manage the marine environment [14]. MACEMP has three components:  Strengthening marine management institutions in Tanzania by supporting the creation of a common governance regime for the EEZ;  Supporting coastal area planning and the establishing of a network of MPAs, marine management areas (MMAs) and community management areas (CMAs) for conservation of biodiversity and sustainable utilization of coastal and marine resources; and  Creating an enabling environment for investment through the implementation of sub-projects at the village level that contribute to improved livelihoods and sustainable marine management. MACEMP is designed to address the duality of economic and ecological needs in Tanzania’s coastal region. Some of the project’s key outcomes include increasing incomes through improved management of marine resources and increasing productivity and added value from improved post-harvest processing and market access. The project is also expected to reduce vulnerability of communities to external shocks through diversification of local production systems and improve ecosystem services and conservation of globally significant marine and coastal biodiversity. In developing and planning MACEMP, the interplay of other programs that focused on the marine environment, coastal socioeconomic conditions and cultural property issues in Tanzania, was considered. Assessment of potential impacts on existing programs allows for the integration of overlapping interest and/or the enhancement of activities. Several other programs in Tanzania and along the East African Coast provide synergies with the work being undertaken as part of MACEMP. These include:  The Tanzania Social Action Fund (TASAF II) – The objective of TASAF is to empower communities to manage interventions that contribute to improving their livelihoods and supporting income generation for households. The implementation of MACEMP sub-projects will occur through TASAF.  Japan Social Development Fund (JSDP) activities – A JSDF was approved for the Tanzania Community-based Coastal Resources Management and Sustainable Livelihood Project. The objectives of the project are to overcome the problems of poverty and resource degradation in the coastal areas through enhancing the livelihoods of poor and vulnerable groups in the coastal communities.  European Union Programmes – The European Commission Regional Programme for Sustainable Management of Coastal Zones focuses on the countries of the southwest Indian Ocean. Under this programme, the European Commission is currently providing funds for two relevant projects: the Southern African Development Community Monitoring, Control and Surveillance Project, which is working to establish enforcement capabilities for patrolling in the EEZ, and the Sanitary Control Project, which is working to increase the access of fish products from developing countries to the EU, and raise hygiene standards and income opportunities for small-scale fisheries.  Local Government Support Programme – This programme provides grants for small-scale projects at local level. Other focal areas is the unplanned and under-serviced residential areas in Dar es Salaam and support of the President’s Office – Regional Administration and Local Government (PO-RALG) in the implementation, monitoring, evaluation and audits of the Project and the transfer programme supported by local government grants.

 The South West Indian Ocean Fisheries Project (SWIOFP) – SWIOFP is supported by the World Bank and the UNDP in response to Indian Ocean country requests for assistance in better managing the living resources and habitat of their shared marine ecosystems. It focuses on international fisheries management. There is an agreement between SWIOFP and MACEMP that all monitoring and stock assessment activities within Tanzanian marine waters over the continental shelf and shelf-break areas, to a depth of 500 m, will be the responsibility of MACEMP. All activities beyond this distance will be the responsibility of SWIOFP.  Aghulas-Somali Current Large Marine Ecosystems (ASCLME) Project – This project is centered on ecological research associated with the two large marine ecosystems of the East Coast of Africa associated with the Somali and Aghulas currents. The project is funded by the GEF and will be implemented by UNDP. There are nine member countries including Comoros, Kenya, Mauritius, Mozambique, Seychelles, Somalia, South Africa and Tanzania. This project will assist in providing ecological information that is useful in implementing MACEMP.  The Tanzania Coastal Management Partnership (TCMP) – The TCMP was established in 1997 within the Vice President’s Office, with support from USAID, to improve national coastal planning, policy and management, and to co-ordinate local and national coastal resource management. The main implementing partners are the University of Rhode Island and the National Environment Management Council of Tanzania. In addition, government undertakes a number of research activities, some of which are done in partnership with universities and foreign agencies, related to coastal management, including supporting development and capacity building for MPAs [3]. Organizations active in funding and/or conducting related research include the Tanzania Fisheries Research Institute (TAFIRI), the Tanzania National Scientific Research Council (TNSRC), the Tanzania Industrial Research and Development Organisation (TIRDO), the Tanzania Fisheries Corporation (TAFICO), and the Institute of Marine Sciences at the University of Dar es Salaam. 3. Analysis of the existing social environment In order to integrate social issues, particularly poverty alleviation and equity concerns, into the design of MACEMP, an analysis of the existing social environment was undertaken. This type of analysis allows for the identification of critical issues and specific management challenges that need to be addressed in the project design. Three primary components were identified for analysis: social capital, vulnerable groups and livelihoods. For each component, the current status was assessed and interactions with the project identified. 3.1. Social capital Social capital can be defined as the attitudes and values that govern interactions among individuals, and the norms and traditions through which community-level decisions are made and individuals have access to power. It is defined by a social group’s characteristics, intra-group and inter-group relationships, and the relationships of those groups at the village level with public and private institutions. Rural coastal communities are composed both of individuals closely related by birth or marriage and, in contrast, of unrelated individuals who have migrated from other regions in search of better livelihood opportunities [6]. The strength and extent of the familial relationships within and between villages, and the degree to which the presence of transient individuals has influenced social

K. Gustavson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 52 (2009) 78–88

interactions, varies by community. Extended family structures and kinship groups remain an important determinant of the strength of relationships between individuals within the community. There are several social capital structures (i.e. those that enhance local decision-making capabilities and performance of institutions) apparent in coastal communities in Mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar, although the level of organization and participation in decision-making varies greatly between locations. In general, coastal villages are organized internally into social groups based on participation in common livelihood activities (e.g. fishing groups and co-operatives); on gender or age (e.g. women’s groups, youth groups); to fulfill a common need (e.g. savings and credit associations); or to facilitate the provision of emotional and spiritual support (e.g. religious institutions through local mosques). These groups function to bring individuals together around common problems or issues that they face, and assist them in coping with difficult situations (e.g. income or food insecurity). Decision-making in villages is based on consensus, and involves several levels of communication. This includes decision-making at the household level, at an activity/social group level and then at the community or village level. Households tend to be controlled by men, although women are decision-makers in female-headed households. It is largely within the household that important natural resource management decisions are made. Relationships between individuals within communities are based on expectations of mutual obligation, honesty, reciprocity, and mutual respect [6]. Within villages, however, certain stakeholder groups tend to be dominant, better represented and more influential on the decisions made by village government. For example, in many villages, women do not have an influence or voice concerning the decisions that are made, while in some villages, their involvement appears more established [15]. In addition, unofficial leaders within communities, including, for example, wealthy individuals, religious leaders and fortune-tellers, may have a substantial influence in decisions behind the scenes [6]. Many coastal villages are active politically. A study conducted in coastal communities in Tanga, Lindi, Mafia Island, Pemba Island and Unguja Island found that the general level of political participation was high, with 91% of heads of households voting in recent local elections [11]. Villagers in coastal communities also have access to government decision-making and activities through local government structures such as the Village Council and village committees. Different communities have a different level of awareness and experience with development assistance and aid programs. In essence, two types of communities can be distinguished:  Enhanced communities are typified by their strong knowledge of conservation issues, experience with development aid initiatives and engagement processes (e.g. participatory rural appraisal, or PRA). There is often a previous presence of nongovernment organizations (NGOs) or community-based organizations (CBOs) in the community, and well-defined roles and responsibilities (e.g. communities located in areas where there are existing MPAs).  Greenfield communities are those that have little to no experience with externally-initiated consultation. For these communities, the internal social capital may be well developed, but experience in being involved with development projects is lacking, and effectively linking project activities within community-level processes will require greater effort. 3.2. Vulnerable groups Vulnerable persons are those characterized by higher risk and reduced ability to cope with change or negative impacts. This may be based on socio-economic condition, gender, age, disability, ethnicity, or criteria that influence people’s ability to access

83

resources and development opportunities. Vulnerable persons in relation to coastal zone management in Tanzania may include the elderly, orphans, people with disabilities, HIV/AIDS-affected or infected persons, widows, widowers, people suffering form serious illness, and women and children at risk of being dispossessed of their productive assets. Coastal communities are susceptible to increasing numbers of vulnerable individuals, and have characteristic risk factors that can lead to vulnerability, such as a lack of social services and health infrastructure. Current challenges faced in Tanzania include: high mortality of children, increasing HIV/AIDs infection among adults and children, rural–urban migration, lack of education for women, and a lack of programs or plans for youth development (both education and economic) [12]. Within the United Republic of Tanzania, there are approximately 3.5 million persons living with disabilities [16], of which 40,000 of these persons live in Zanzibar [12]. In addition, over 1.5 million or 41.75 per 1000 people were living with HIV in 2001. While potential for infection is unevenly distributed based on gender, age and social groups, the population most likely to be affected are economically capable adults between the ages of 15–45 in rural areas [17]. In 1999, there were 44,250 confirmed cases of AIDS reported, with a cumulative analysis of 600,000 AIDS cases between 1983 and 1999. Poverty continues to be recognized as a major factor in HIV infection. Youth on mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar (those between the ages of 15 and 35 years of age) represent over 30% of the total population and provide an important segment of the work population. Women represent over half of the population and are highly active in agricultural production, trading and some fishing activities [11]. Traditionally, women in coastal communities are involved in household activities, including the collection of fuel wood and water, production of food and subsistence fisheries, while men are mainly involved in cultivation of food and cash crops, fishing and small-scale business and trade. While women have equal legal rights, they are often hindered by education disparities based on gender (e.g. higher rate of illiteracy than men), less involvement in the formal commercial sector, and less access to productive assets such as land. In some cases, gender-based discrimination influences control and ownership [18]. For example, a UNICEF report in 2001, reported that 24% of women farmed on their husband’s land and 46% farmed on borrowed land [12]. 3.3. Livelihoods A livelihood is comprised of the capabilities, assets (including both material and social resources) and activities required for a means of living. A livelihood is sustainable when it can cope with and recover from stresses and shocks and maintain its capabilities and assets both now and in the future, while not undermining the natural resource base. Key livelihood activities include fisheries (commercial and traditional), tourism, coastal forest resource use, mariculture, agriculture and animal husbandry, salt production, and small-scale trade handicrafts. In Tanzania in 2006, the total marine fisheries catch was approximately 49,000 tonnes, which represents about 20% of the country’s total catch, the remainder 80% being from freshwater fisheries [19,20]. Fishery activities in coastal Tanzania include artisanal fishing activities (i.e. fishing households with low capital, small vessels for subsistence or director sale) and commercial fishing operations (i.e. offshore and nearshore commercial operators, on-shore processing). Artisanal fisheries account for about 90% of the total marine fish landings in the country, while only 10% is derived from commercial fisheries in the Indian Ocean [20]. Fishing activities are an integral part of the culture and social fabric of coastal communities with an estimated 43,000 marine fishermen, of which 42,500 are small-scale artisanal operators [18]. Primarily,

84

K. Gustavson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 52 (2009) 78–88

fishing activities are undertaken by men, although women in coastal communities are also involved in the artisanal fisheries activities (shellfish harvesting, shell collection, collection of octopi). Many fishermen in Tanzania live below the poverty line and fishing remains both an important source of income and an essential food source with up to 90% dependence on fishery for animal protein consumption among households in coastal communities. Artisanal fisheries along Tanzania’s coastline are nearshore and primarily dependent on coral reef environments, with some fishing activities being undertaken in mangrove creeks and over seagrass beds. The gear used for artisanal fishing is typically non-mechanized (e.g. gill nets, hand lines, and traps). The use of destructive fishing practices such as the use of drag nets, beach seines, poison, spearguns and dynamite does occur, presenting a challenge for conservation efforts. Artisanal fishermen face a number of ongoing challenges including poor fishing gear, lack of support services for their fisheries such as infrastructure (roads, plants, markets, market information), lack of capital and access to loans and absence of organized associations, lack of alternative sources of livelihoods and declining catches [10]. Resource use conflicts are evident between the inshore commercial prawn trawlers and the artisanal fishermen, as well as between artisanal and migratory fishermen. Commercial fisheries activities along the coastline of Tanzania and around Zanzibar include deep-sea fishing (predominately long line and purse seine), coastal trawling and on-shore fish processing. The industrial foreign offshore fishery in Tanzania is focused on migratory fish such as tuna, sailfish, sardines, marlin and swordfish. Commercial fisheries operate with relatively large mechanized vessels and focus primarily on serving the export market. Export products from marine fisheries include a number of products but there is a large focus on the coastal prawn fisheries. The overall contribution of the fisheries sector to the Tanzania GDP was 2.9% in 1999 [10]. The issues facing the commercial fishery industry in Tanzania include lack of infrastructure, such as road systems to access coastal landing areas, limitations in cold storage and processing facilities, inadequate fish market facilities, and lack of diverse market channels for fish products. There is also a nearcomplete lack of harvest and stock assessment information, greatly hindering effective management. Coastal-based tourism activities in Tanzania include sportfishing, diving, snorkelling, swimming, and other recreation and eco-tourism-related activities, with some coastal areas beginning to develop hotels, resorts and small-scale guest houses [9]. Tourism in Tanzania is a major source of foreign exchange, accounting for 16% of national GDP and nearly 25% of total export earnings [18]. The economic values of tourism include revenues from tourism infrastructure and activities (hotels, restaurants, retail business), increased jobs for local communities, and investments in diving and eco-tourism activities (boat tours, marine life viewing). Tanzania is still developing as a tourist destination and is ranked behind other African nations such as South Africa, Kenya and Zambia [21]. Visitors to Tanzania primarily visit inland (e.g. to see animals on safari) but the country has large expanses of coastal habitats, which tourists are increasingly visiting [21]. Tourism has a potential important role to play in Tanzania’s coastal economy and the development of MPAs. Tanzania’s existing marine parks (Mafia Island Marine Park, Maziwi Marine Park) are developing tourism management plans and visitors are charged a visitation fee, which is used to support the management of MPAs [21]. Coastal tourism has been identified for development in certain key areas, although the scope for large-scale tourism is limited in many coastal areas as a result of remoteness and lack of infrastructure. As part of the slow development of tourism-based activities, a number of conflicts have arisen. This includes conflicts between tourism development and communities, primarily associated with access and use of the foreshore and beach areas (e.g. tourism

operators being unhappy with fishing vessel landing sites or seaweed farming areas being near beach resorts, or simply the presence of local residents on beaches used by tourists). There has also been conflict between fishermen and dive operators over preferred coral reef sites. Coastal forest resource use includes all activities that utilise mangroves and other coastal forests. This includes harvesting for construction, fuel wood, and charcoal production, as well as beekeeping. Many households in coastal communities rely on mangrove trees to meet a variety of residential and commercial needs. Residential and production energy needs range from cooking and heating needs in the home to use as fuel for salt and lime production, and drying and frying fish. Mangrove trees are also a valuable source of timber used for construction poles for local housing needs and for beekeeping activities (honey production). Activities in mangrove forests along Mainland Tanzania’s coastline are regulated nationally but often managed locally by nearby villages adjacent to mangrove forests. Harvesting of wood for commercial sale requires a license and fees to be paid; however, harvesting of poles for domestic construction is generally overlooked [6]. Currently mangrove forests are being cleared at an estimated rate of 500 ha per year and the sustainability of harvesting remains an issue, especially in areas such as the Zanzibar islands. Mariculture activities in Tanzania include seaweed farming, fish farming (fish ponds), and oyster culture. Small-scale operations have emerged in a number of coastal communities. Undertaken primarily by women, these have been initiated by the communities, often encouraged by the government or through conservation activities and as a source of alternative livelihood. Experimental seaweed farming was introduced in Tanzania in the 1980s and has been successful in some coastal areas such as Zanzibar where the seaweed industry now accounts for approximately 25% of Zanzibar’s export income [18]. Other mariculture activities in coastal communities include culturing finfish (e.g. Chanos chanos, Mullet cephalus) in brackish water (often in mangrove areas) and some prawn farming. The further development of mariculture initiatives along Tanzania’s coastline is challenged by the management costs and technology required for certain mariculture activities (e.g. hatcheries, grow-out ponds) [22]. The majority of the coastal population is engaged in some type of agriculture, either subsistence production of small food crops (i.e. rice, cassava, sweet potatoes, peas, traditional vegetables) or some production of cash crops (i.e. coconuts, cashew nuts, fruit, spices, oil seeds) [6]. Agriculture activities in coastal communities comprises primarily of small holders in areas with poor infrastructure who practice deep soil farming and coral rag farming. A number of constraints exist for these agricultural developments including threats of vermin, use of poor and inadequate tools, unreliable rainfall/water sources, lack of education on agricultural technology and developments, low market prices for products and unfertile and insufficient land. Many households in coastal communities also undertake animal husbandry activities, raising indigenous species of cattle, chickens, goats and sheep. These activities are mainly for subsistence needs. Coastal communities are involved in salt making either full time or as a seasonal occupation. Most salt production is undertaken in mangrove forest reserves and consists of solar evaporation processing and in some smaller cases, boiling seawater, the latter requiring substantial wood use. In 1991, it was estimated that solar salt pans occupied 3100 ha of cleared coastal forest [23]. Production in coastal communities contributes over 75% of the total salt produced in Tanzania. Household members in some coastal communities are undertaking small-scale trade and handicraft activities seasonally to supplement their incomes. This includes women selling products such as coconuts, vegetables, fried fish and palm wine and

K. Gustavson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 52 (2009) 78–88

producing crafts such as mats, rags, pottery, batiks, and some weaving. Coastal forests are an important source of raw materials for carpentry, carving, and weaving. Men may be involved in smallscale trades such as drying fish in the sun, tailoring, and carpentry. Increasing the amount of small-scale trade and handicrafts in coastal communities is impeded by lack of markets and problems with availability of materials. 4. The management of social impacts The social analysis undertaken as part of the preparation for MACEMP identified several potentially positive impacts on the social environment as a result of the project. However, it also identified a number of specific management challenges (Table 3). In order to address these challenges, specific design and management measures were applied. A process framework was developed as a tool to address the potential displacement of livelihood activities due to the establishment of MPAs under MACEMP.

85

implementation. The process framework is also multi-faceted in its use, serving as a broad communication tool to inform stakeholders of the risks of the project (i.e. impacts on livelihoods due to establishing MPAs) and establishing how these types of risks can be considered and overcome. It also serves as a type of agreement between parties (implementing parties, funding partners, other agencies) developing a system for dealing with mitigation activities. The development of a process framework is consultative. In this case, sessions were held with persons in coastal communities potentially affected by MACEMP. To ensure success of the framework, there must be consideration of potential collaborative opportunities, including integration into other existing development and poverty-reduction programs. Another important element in developing a process framework is the clear identification of all stakeholders, or key target users of the process. This may vary depending on the location, but will likely include mangers and implementers at the administrative and operational level within the local governments and communities.

4.1. Process framework Under MACEMP, several potential negative impacts were identified related to the project, including the potential effect the establishment of MPAs may have on the livelihoods of coastal communities. Coastal communities are dependent on artisanal activities and any limitation to access of marine resources is a perceived threat to ongoing sustainability. In an effort to plan for and mitigate this impact, a process framework was designed to guide activities and procedures related to the establishment of MPAs. A process framework can be considered as a guidance document for decision-makers to incorporate the interests and needs of affected stakeholders who may be directly impacted by the decisions of a project. The concept of the process framework is derived from resettlement policy frameworks required by the World Bank under the Safeguard for Involuntary Settlement (OP 4.12) [5]. This safeguard commits that no one should be worse off due to a project, and requires the development of a guidance document to ensure that there are clear communication, grievance processes and monitoring and evaluation activities for affected communities. The process framework created for MACEMP had three key process elements: 1. Process for Identifying Specific Target Groups. This process is to ensure that target groups are identified both at the individual and household level. These are groups that can be impacted by the project and may have difficulties participating in feedback and decision-making around the project, requiring special mechanisms for participation. 2. Process for Communications and Participation. This process is to ensure that there is a system for communication and participation by communities in any activities related to the development of MPAs. 3. Monitoring and Evaluation System. This requirement ensures that a monitoring and evaluation system is established for the project and procedures for inclusion of all target and vulnerable groups are met throughout the life of the project. The benefit of a process framework is that it provides a tailored socio-economic guidance document that can be used in conjunction with other environmental management plans. Typically, assessments of projects look broadly at impacts and mitigation, but do not address the ‘‘how’’ of implementation, particularly with respect to socio-economic mitigation activities. The process framework provides a methodology for providing a value-added approach to community consultations and involvement with

4.1.1. The process framework applied to MACEMP The process framework developed for MACEMP was an early pilot application of this type of approach in addressing community and vulnerable group interests. The design is based on several considerations, which jointly drive how the guidance procedures are established. The establishment of MPAs will result in the reduced access to resources by already impoverished populations, as a direct result of a change in the resource management regime from an open access system to one which is regulated and has limited access. Therefore, communities need to understand the potential impacts and the degree to which the changes will influence their activities. Other considerations include the potential for weakening of community institutions, social networks and traditional authority as a result of the project, and potentially diminishing or removing mutual help systems that exist within communities. In order to address these considerations, several processes are established as part of the framework:  Process for identifying specific target groups. One of the primary objectives of the process framework is to ensure that any individuals, households and communities with the potential to be impacted by activities related to the establishment of MPAs are identified for consultation and other communication activities. To identify target groups, the framework provides guidance on how to establish the types of current assets and livelihoods in communities potentially impacted, how to identify general impacts due to project activities, and provide a clear definition and criteria to identify affected individuals and households.  Communication and participation process. A number of communication and participation processes are included in the framework to ensure the overarching goals of the framework were addressed. This included the development of mitigation measures to consult on alternative livelihood opportunities and guidance on the development of Community Mitigation Action Plans, to be prepared by each affected village. Guidelines are also provided for consultations on the design and assessment of MPAs and the types of considerations to be taken during any consultation and communication activities. An integral part of the communications and participation process is the establishment of grievance, dispute and redress mechanisms. Grievances and disputes can arise at several stages of project planning and implementation. Under the process framework, there is information on sources of grievances and conflicts, and redress mechanism are established, both formal

86

K. Gustavson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 52 (2009) 78–88

Table 3 Expected impacts on the social environment. Social component 1. Social capital

2. Vulnerable groups

3. Livelihoods (a)Fisheries

(b) Tourism

(c) Coastal forest resource use

(d) Mariculture

(e) Other livelihood activities

Expected impacts

 Ongoing, long-term positive impacts associated with local government capacity building, development of community partnerships in ICM, outreach activities, and community capacity building.  Ongoing, long-term negative impacts associated with support for MPAs, management of mangrove ecosystems, rehabilitation of cultural heritage sites, and development of existing and alternative livelihoods if inappropriate engagement and consultation processes used during implementation.  Ongoing, long-term positive impacts associated with outreach activities and community capacity building.  Ongoing, long-term negative impacts associated with support for MPAs, management of mangrove ecosystems, and development of existing and alternative livelihoods if inappropriate engagement and consultation processes used during implementation  Short-term, low-level negative impacts on fishing operators impacted by enhancement of rent capture mechanisms, improved enforcement (i.e. prevention of current illegal practices), and increased costs to comply with MCS. Impacts not expected to persist in the long-term as individual fishing operators adjust practices.  Long-term, positive impacts with investment in Dar es Salaam and Zanzibar fish landing ports.  Short-term, negative impacts associated with support for MPAs, becoming ongoing, positive impacts in the long-term.  Ongoing, long-term positive impacts associated with investment in fishing, with short-term, negative impacts on fisheries if other investments reduce overall access to resources or the quality of the resource.  Ongoing, long-term positive impacts associated with the rehabilitation of cultural heritage sites.  Short-term, negative, relatively low-magnitude and spatially restricted impacts on tour operators associated with subprojects, where such sub-projects compete with coastal and marine resource use.  Short-term, negative impacts associated with support for CMAs, MMAs and MPAs, becoming ongoing, positive impacts in the long-term.  Ongoing, long-term positive impacts associated with investments in coastal forest livelihood activities, with short-term, negative impacts on coastal forest resource use if other investments reduce overall access to resources or the quality of the resource.  Short-term, negative impacts associated with support for CMAs, MMAs and MPAs, becoming ongoing, positive impacts in the long-term.  Ongoing, long-term positive impacts associated with investments in mariculture livelihood activities, with short-term, negative impacts on mariculture if other investments reduce overall access to resources or the quality of the resource.  Short-term, negative impacts associated with support for CMAs, MMAs and MPAs, becoming ongoing, positive impacts in the long-term.  Ongoing, long-term positive impacts associated with investments in agriculture and animal husbandry, salt production, and small-scale trade and handicraft livelihood activities, with short-term, negative impacts on if other investments reduce overall access to resources or the quality of the resource.

and informal. Clear procedures related to consultation steps are established and responsibilities and legal procedures are also enumerated.  Monitoring and evaluation system. Monitoring and evaluation is a fundamental component of projects involving affected individuals, households and communities. As the implementation of MACEMP will lead to a change in access to natural resources in specific areas as a result of conservation practices, building capacity for improved monitoring activities is essential. Types of indicators identified for monitoring include both those related to the process framework (e.g. number of participants in consultation process, number of grievances recorded) and community livelihood indicators (e.g. changes in activities by household, change in location of resource use).

4.1.2. Case example: Misali Island Marine Conservation Area In order to demonstrate how the process framework can be applied to supporting existing and emerging MPAs, a case study example of the Misali Island Marine Conservation Area (MIMCA) is provided. Misali Island is located off the southwest coast of Pemba Island, in the Pemba Channel between Zanzibar and Mainland Tanzania. The area is characterized by unique marine and terrestrial ecosystems. It is an important location for fishing as it supports the direct livelihood of over 11,400 people who fish in and around Misali annually. An estimated 36 of 50 communities on Pemba fish the waters of Misali and up to 7,000 people can be considered dependent on its resources. Misali Island has no permanent

population, although some seasonal camps are set up on the east side of the island for short periods. The area is characterized as a migratory fishing area. In 1998, Misali Island and its surrounding reefs were protected as a conservation area through the establishment of the MIMCA. The conservation area covers 21.58 km2 in total, of which 20.68 km2 is a marine area and 0.90 km2 is a terrestrial area. MIMCA has two main zones, an extractive use zone where legal fishing is permitted and a non-extractive zone (approximately 1.4 km2) where no uses except snorkelling, swimming, boating and research are permitted. Community and stakeholder involvement in MIMCA is quite high. Formalized participation of the local community through the Misali Island Conservation Association, a local NGO developed by local fisherman, ensures one ongoing source of consultations with the community. Several environmental NGOs and government agencies have also been involved in the area, providing ongoing support for programs related to savings and credit programs and promoting eco-tourism. Fig. 2 provides an overview of how the process framework may be applied to MIMCA. The given scenario proposes that under MACEMP an expansion of the current non-extractive use zone in MIMCA will be realized from its current size of 1.4 km2 (approximately 8.5% of the total conservation area) to protect additional valuable habitat. The example outlines how the process framework would be triggered, how key existing stakeholders and new stakeholders would be involved in the process, and at what point meetings with groups would take place. The key tool developed for mitigation is

K. Gustavson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 52 (2009) 78–88

87

Fig. 2. Application of the process framework to the Misali Island Marine Conservation Area (MIMCA).

a Community Mitigation Action Plan (CMAP). Throughout the process, the grievances and redress options remain available to participants. The expected outcome of this application is that MIMCA-affected communities would have a greater understanding of the potential impacts and be able to enhance their participation in the decision-making process, especially among vulnerable groups.

becoming increasingly important to help ensure that these initiatives are well designed and implemented. The challenge of coastal zone management in these countries, while working towards the goal of poverty alleviation, requires the design and delivery of consultative and inclusive management processes. The process framework represents a relatively simple tool that can be used to inform project design and mitigate social impacts.

5. Conclusions

Acknowledgements

The process framework provides practitioners with an example of an approach to address community impacts of coastal zone management initiatives, specifically as it applies to the mitigation of effects due to the establishment of MPAs. There is an increase in the number of African coastal countries adopting integrated coastal management (i.e. from a total of five to 13 between 1993 and 2000) [24]. Therefore, the need for the management of social impacts is

This paper evolved from the results of an Environmental and Social Assessment (ESA) of the Marine and Coastal Environment Management Project (MACEMP) of the United Republic of Tanzania. Dr. Dan Walmsley of Walmsley Environmental Consultants (Canada) served as an advisor on the project. The project co-ordinators for the United Republic of Tanzania were Mr. Baraka Mngulwi (Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Tanzania), Mr. Magese Bulayi

88

K. Gustavson et al. / Ocean & Coastal Management 52 (2009) 78–88

(Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Tanzania), Mr. Sheha Hamdan (Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources, Environment and Co-operatives, Zanzibar), and Mr. AM Othman (Ministry of Agriculture, Natural Resources, Environment and Co-operatives, Zanzibar). The authors would also like to acknowledge the cooperation and assistance provided by the many personnel within the Government of Tanzania and the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar. Dr. Jack Ruitenbeek (H.J. Ruitenbeek Resource Consulting Limited, France), Ms. Indu Hewawasam (World Bank, Tanzania Office), and Dr. Roxanne Hakim (Social Development Department, World Bank, Washington) provided important guidance as part of the World Bank Task Team. Any opinions or conclusions expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of Jacques Whitford Limited, Agenda, the Government of Tanzania, the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar, the World Bank or their affiliated agencies. References [1] United Nations Environment Program. Johannesburg Declaration on Sustainable Development. Adopted at the 17th plenary meeting of the World Summit on Sustainable Development; September 4, 2002. [2] United Nations. The millennium development goals report. New York: The United Nations; 2006. 32 pp. [3] Torell EC, Amoral M, Bayrer TG, Daffa J, Luhikula G, Hale LZ. Building enabling conditions for integrated coastal management at the national scale in Tanzania. Ocean and Coastal Management 2004;47:339–59. [4] World Bank. World development indicators. Washington, DC: The World Bank; 2006. [5] World Bank. Involuntary resettlement instruments. operational policy (OP) 4.12, Annex A, 2001 (December). Available from: . [6] Juma SK, Tanzania Marine and Coastal Environment Management Project (MACEMP). Environmental and social situation analysis. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, United Republic of Tanzania; 2004. 199 pp. [7] Tanzania Coastal Management Programme (TCMP). Tanzania coastal tourism situation analysis. Report prepared by the National Environmental Management Council, the University of Rhode Island Coastal Resources Centre and the United States Agency for International Development. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: TCMP; 2001. 62 pp. [8] Department of Environment, Institute of Marine Sciences, Sub-commission for Forestry, Sub-commission for Fisheries and Integrated Planning Unit. Towards integrated management and sustainable development of Zanzibar’s coast. Findings and recommendations for an action strategy in the Chwaka Bay-Paje area. Dar es Salaam, Tanazania: Department of Environment; 1997. 64 pp. [9] Tanzania Coastal Management Programme (TCMP). Tanzania state of the coast 2001: people and the environment. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: TCMP; 2001. 54 pp.

[10] Lema R. Capacity building in planning and co-management of the Tanzania prawn fishery. Community participation in the Tanzania Prawn Fishery Management Plan – a draft report for the second workshop. Prepared for Food and Agriculture (FAO) of the United Nations; 2003. [11] Leo´n Y, Tobey J, Torell E, Mwaipopo R, Mkenda A, Ngazy Z, et al. MPAs and poverty alleviation: an empirical study of 24 coastal villages on mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: The World Bank; 2004. [12] Zanzibar Revolutionary Government (ZRG). Zanzibar Poverty Reduction Plan. Cross cutting issues (gender, HIV/AIDS, environment, population and vulnerable groups and land). Zanzibar: ZRG. Available from: ; 2002. [13] Wells S, Juma S, Mohando C, Makota V, Argady T. Study on the ecological basis for establishing a system for MPAs and marine management areas in the United Republic of Tanzania. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: The World Bank; 2004. [14] Ruitenbeek J, Hewawasam I, Ngoile M. Blueprint 2050: sustaining the marine environment in Mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar. Washington, DC: The World Bank; 2005. 125pp. [15] Chando C. Gender roles in fisheries planning and projects: a case study of coastal region in Tanzania, masters thesis. Norway: University of Trondheim; 2002. [16] USAID. Helping the disabled impacted with HIV/AIDS. Telling Our Story Series. USAID Information for Tanzania; 2003. 2 pp. [17] Government of Tanzania. HIV/AIDS in Tanzania. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: TACAIDS (Tanzania Commission for Aid); 2003. 20 pp. [18] Tanzania Coastal Management Programme (TCMP). Tanzania state of the coast 2003: the national ICM strategy and prospects for poverty reduction. Joint initiative between the National Environment Management Council, the University of Rhode Island Coastal Resource Center, and the United States Agency for International Development. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: TCMP; 2003. 36 pp. [19] Food and Agriculture Organization. Fisheries and aquaculture information and statistics service – capture: quantity (United Republic of Tanzania). 2008. Available from: . [20] Bulayi ME. Community Based Cooperative Fisheries Management for Lake Victoria Fisheries in Tanzania. Reykjavik, Iceland: United Nations University Fisheries Training Program. Available from: ; 2001. Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism, Fisheries Division, Tanzania. [21] Tanzania Coastal Management Partnership (TCMP). Tanzania Coastal Tourism Situational Analysis, Prepared by Tanzania Coastal Management Partnership Support Unit and Coastal Tourism Working Group. Dar es Saleem, Tanzania: TCMP; November 2001. 51 pp. [22] Ngwale J, Kamukala G, Bashagi W, Lima R. Kilwa District consultations: design of Rufiji-Mafia-Kilwa Seascape Marine Coastal Resources Management Programme. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: World Wildlife Fund; 2004. [23] Semesi AK, Mzava EM. Management plans for mangrove ecosystems of Mainland Tanzania, vols. 1–10. Dar es Salaam, Tanzania: Ministry of Tourism Natural Resources and Environment, Forestry and Beekeeping Division, Mangrove Management Project; 1991. [24] Cicin-Sain B, Belifore S. Linking marine protected areas to integrate coastal and ocean management: a review of theory and practice. Ocean and Coastal Management 2005;48:847–68.