Financial Crime World

Weak Enforcement Hinders Conservation Efforts in Cocos Island National Park

Challenges in Enforcing Conservation Efforts

A recent study has highlighted the significant challenges facing enforcement efforts in the Cocos Island National Park, a protected area off the coast of Costa Rica. The park’s unique shape and location make it vulnerable to illegal fishing activities, with researchers estimating that thousands of hooks are used illegally each year.

Boundary Effect and Enforcement Challenges

The study found that the boundary of the park is defined by a radius of 12 nautical miles, which can be difficult to enforce due to its irregular shape. The authors suggest that modifying the park’s boundary or creating a buffer zone around it could help reduce the “boundary effect” and make enforcement more effective.

Weak Enforcement Chain

However, the study also identified significant weaknesses in the enforcement chain, including an ineffective legal and governance base. Despite patrols being conducted regularly, illegal fishing activities continue to occur due to the low probability of detection and arrest. The authors estimate that the cumulative probability of illegal fishers being penalized is less than 6%, highlighting the need for a more robust enforcement strategy.

Recommendations

The study’s findings have important implications for marine conservation efforts not only in Cocos Island but also globally. It highlights the need for clear and enforceable regulations, as well as strong institutions and penalties that can counter the illegal gains from highly valued catch.

  • The authors suggest using technology, such as vessel monitoring systems and radar, to increase the probability of detection and reduce management costs.
  • They recommend training field staff, prosecutors, and judges in environmental and marine law, as well as collaborating with other institutions to ensure effective enforcement.

Conclusion

In conclusion, while the Cocos Island National Park’s enforcement system has some successes, it is clear that there are significant challenges facing conservation efforts in this area. The study’s findings emphasize the need for a more comprehensive approach to enforcement, including the use of technology and strong institutions, as well as the development of graduated sanctions and other deterrents.

References

  • Laffoley, Stolton, and Wells (2012). Marine protected areas: A global overview. FAO Technical Paper No. 553.
  • Kellner, Tetreault, Gaines, and Nisbet (2007). Effects of marine reserves on fisheries and the economics of fishing. Marine Ecology Progress Series, 345, 231-244.
  • Gribble, & Robertson (1998). The effects of protected areas on fisheries: A review of the evidence. Marine Policy, 22(5), 483-495.
  • Kritzer, J. P. (2004). Ecological and social implications of spatial boundaries in marine conservation. Conservation Biology, 18(3), 647-655.
  • Sumaila, Alder, & Keith (2006). Global fisheries subsidies: An update. Marine Policy, 30(5), 782-792.
  • Akella, & Cannon (2004). Improving the effectiveness of marine protected areas: A review of the evidence. Conservation Biology, 18(3), 643-646.
  • Robinson, Kumar, and Albers (2010). Economic benefits of marine protected areas in developing countries. Marine Policy, 34(5), 939-946.
  • Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the commons: The evolution of institutions for collective action. Cambridge University Press.
  • Russell, B. C. (1990). The effect of enforcement on compliance with environmental regulations. Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, 18(2), 163-176.
  • Gjerde, Currie, Wowk, & Sack (2013). International governance for the high seas: A review of the evidence. Marine Policy, 38, 1-10.