Page 14 - Himes_2007

ARTICLE IN PRESS
342 A.H. Himes / Ocean & Coastal Management 50 (2007) 329–351

Tables 4
Priorities for MPA performance indicators by stakeholder group
MPA performance indicator Local residents Fishers Managers Researchers
Context 8.2 8 8.3 0
Politics is not involved 3.8 0 8.3 0
MPA cannot be a success 1.9 8 0 0
MPA managed the same as now 2.4 0 0 0
Planning 54.3 80 66.7 47.8
Management better organized 39.4 66 50 34.8
More strict regulations 19.7 30 33.3 30.4
Less strict regulations 3.8 6 16.7 0
Processes 12 24 41.7 26.1
Community involved or benefits 8.2 22 25 13
Use of sustainable development principles 4.3 2 16.7 17.4
Outputs 55.8 54 66.7 47.8
Increase enforcement and compliance 36.5 48 25 13
More and accurate information 27.4 6 50 30.4
Research and monitoring conducted 2.9 0 8.3 26.1
Better services, signage, port, facilities 4.8 2 8.3 0
Outcomes 66.8 58 66.7 78.3
Environment is protected/increase in biomass 17.8 26 8.3 34.8
Tourism increases or is better organized 18.8 12 16.7 8.7
Community is helped to cope with MPA 19.2 12 8.3 8.7
Begin to value/understand benefits of MPA 15.4 4 16.7 21.7
Economic development 15.4 2 8.3 4.3
Quality tourism 10.1 0 33.3 21.7
Tourism is maintained or decreases 4.3 0 8.3 34.8
Increase in fisher’s catch 2.9 16 0 0
Less pollution 4.8 6 8.3 0
No more conflict 0 0 8.3 4.3
The numbers in the table represent percentages of respondents in each stakeholder group (N ¼ 50 fishers, 208
local citizens, 12 MPA managers and 23 researchers).
stakeholders, including managers, do not consider a lack of staff or funding an important
issue or they take the presence of staff and funding for granted.
The results from the interviews were helpful in establishing several points to consider
about stakeholder preferences for performance indicators in evaluating the EIMR. The
distribution by stakeholder group of coded responses for 20 all-inclusive categories is
summarized in Table 4. For each stakeholder group, the indicators are ordered in terms of
how frequently they were ranked. The ranks were based on the frequency of citation.
Table 4 shows that for half of the indicators, stakeholders group assign relatively similar,
but low importance, while all other indicators were ranked differently by each group. By
far, the most cited indicator of all stakeholder groups is improvement in the organization
of MPA management. This includes performance indicators such as qualified staff, the
consideration of locals and fishers by management authorities, and when the MPA is
managed seriously. Researchers were the only respondents that deviated in ranking this
indicator first, placing it second after protecting the marine environmental and
repopulating local fish stocks.