\J._I.tv.3«...§ ,7
I... I . 9

 

m.
. . 4.."

 

200}

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

DEVELOPING INSTITUTIONAL OPTIONS FOR
WATERSHED MANAGEMENT: THE SIXAOLA BINATIONAL
WATERSHED AND LA AMISTAD BIOSPHERE RESERVE

presented by

PAUL GREGORY BABLADELIS

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for the

Doctoral degree in Resource Development

 

 

7% f K 01,641,5th
Major Professor’s Signature

”2% 7/ 2007
/ /

Date

MSU is an affirmative-action. equal-opportunity employer

-.-.-.-.- u .

 

 

LIBRTAfiV"?

Michigan State
University

 

 

"UWI'ELFW -'
ll‘iER 3t -

“if

mar. Mom mm

M

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATEDUE

DATEDUE

DAIEDUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/07 p:/CIRC/DateDue.indd-p.1

 

 

DEVELOPING INSTITUTIONAL OPTIONS FOR WATERSHED MANAGEMENT:
THE SIXAOLA BINATIONAL WATERSHED AND
LA AMISTAD BIOSPHERE RESERVE
By

Paul Gregory Babladelis

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Department of Resource Development

2007

ABSTRACT
DEVELOPING INSTITUTIONAL OPTIONS FOR WATERSHED
MANAGEMENT: THE SIXAOLA BINATIONAL WATERSHED AND
LA AMISTAD BIOSPHERE RESERVE
By

Paul Gregory Babladelis

La Amistad International Park: Costa Rica - Panama was formed in 1982 to conserve and
manage natural resources across borders while Simultaneously providing sustainable
economic opportunities for residents living nearby. It is a single international park but it
is also two separate national parks, Costa Rica and Panama, two separate biosphere
reserves under the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere Program, and a single UN World

Heritage Site.

The Sixaola River Binational Watershed originates in the Talamanca Mountains and core
park areas of La Amistad. While conservation goals have largely been met in the upper
watershed, environmental degradation is a problem in the middle and lower watershed.
Residents of this watershed, including several Indigenousl groups living on reserves in
the middle watershed, are among the poorest in both Costa Rica and Panama. To address
these problems a new management plan for the watershed has been developed by the
governments of Costa Rica and Panama as part of an Inter-American Development Bank

funded project scheduled to begin implementation in 2007.2

 

I The term “Indigenous” is capitalized throughout this dissertation referring to the native peoples of
Talamanca. It is not intended to imply homogeneity of groups, but denotes formal reference.

2 This program was scheduled to begin 2006 but did not pass approval before the Costa Rican National
Assembly before the end of that calendar year.

 

This dissertation presents additional institutional options for management of the Sixaola
Binational Watershed. It examines the watershed as the physical unit of resource
management and looks at contrasting institutional management options. A literature
review informs the development of a model for La Amistad International Park as a
transboundary biosphere reserve sanctioned by the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere
Program. Current watershed management plans are examined with, and without, the

additional institutional structure of a transboundary biosphere reserve.

This dissertation is dedicated to the way of the scholar/practitioner.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to first recognize the educational opportunities provided by Michigan State
University. In addition to the unique and stimulating learning environment provided by
the Department of Resource Development (later CARRS), I was able to draw upon the
resources of the Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies, The Center for
Advanced Studies in International Development, The Institute of Water Research, and
The Julian Samora Research Institute. The rich collaboration among disciplines
encouraged and helped develop a multidisciplinary systems view that is reflected in this

work.

The Government and the people of Costa Rica deserve special mention as a working
example of democracy. Not only did they provide open access to public documents;
public planners provided opportunities for dialogue. Costa Rica deserves Special

recognition for leadership in considering new ways to manage natural resources.

The Nature Conservancy (TNC) deserves special mention for contributions in
conservation worldwide, but more specifically in Costa Rica and Panama. TNC is
largely responsible for facilitating collaboration at the binational level for Parque
Intemacional de La Amistad and simultaneously funding small projects like those for
Bribri3 in the mountains of Talamanca. The large body of scholarly work generated by or

available through TNC Costa Rica was invaluable for this study.

 

3 The Bribri are the most numerous group of Indigenous residents in the Talamanca region.

 

_.4
Jam

 

 

ANAI deserves Special mention as the leading experts on watershed health and
management in Talamanca including the Sixaola Watershed. Through years of field
research they have developed the most comprehensive watershed assessment methods
and data for this region. Their tireless work is recognized, but not nearly enough, and
hopefully planners will seek their advice in preparation of any watershed management

plan.

Dr. A. Allan Schmid has been a patient teacher and mentor. I would like to thank him for
his important contribution to institutional economics; the Situation, Structure,
Performance framework that is used in this dissertation. His personal guidance in early

development of this dissertation is greatly appreciated.

Dr. Raleigh Barlowe provided the threefold framework of land resource economics that is
used in this work. He deserves thanks and recognition for continuing to move the field

forward.

Dr. Richard D. Duke is a leading expert on policy games for strategic management and
deserves special mention here for his help in considering future options for further
research. This project has been framed to provide a foundation to implement policy

simulation exercises in Costa Rica and Panama based upon Dr. Duke’s work.

I would also like to acknowledge and thank my wife, Patricia Anne Babladelis, for her

constant support throughout this project.

vi

 

l

i

' Ii 3 'L- ,1” f a! I
SUV” Iain LI it Inlil

BMW I‘HWIA Chm

IEh

'.\ l

3...... TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

LIST OF TABLES - X
LIST OF FIGURES XI
CHAPTER ONE: THE PROBLEM -1
1.1 STATEMENT OF RESEARCH PURPOSE AND QUESTIONS 3
1.1. 1 Costa Rican Focus, Panamanian Relevance ................................................ 4

1.2 BACKGROUND - - 7
1.2.1 Parque Intemacional de la Amistad: Costa Rica-Panama ........................... 8

1.3 THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS -- -- _ - 10
1.3.1 Land Resource Economics ........................................................................ 11

1 .3 .2 Institutional Economics ............................................................................. 13

1.3.3 Situation, Structure, Performance .............................................................. 14
1.3.4 Foundation for La Amistad ........................................................................ 16
1.3.5 Communication and Cooperation .............................................................. 18
1.3.6 Geopolitical Considerations ....................................................................... 21

1.4 THE PRESENT SITUATION 24
1.5 SUMMARY _ - 28
CHAPTER TWO: METHODS _ _ - 30
2.1 INSTITUTIONAL ECONOMIC CONSIDERATIONS _ , - - v _ _ 31
2.2 SSP; SITUATION, STRUCTURE, PERFORMANCE - 31
2.3 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES: -- _ - -_ -- - .......................... - -33
2.3.1 Pre-dissertation Preparation ....................................................................... 33
2.3.2 Research Design ........................................................................................ 35
2.2.3.1 Define the Situation ............................................................................... 36
2.2.3.2 Develop and Document Institutional Structure One (181) .................... 38
2.2.3.3 Develop and Present Institutional Structure Two (182) ......................... 39
2.2.3.4 Determine Performance Measures ......................................................... 41
2.2.3.5 SSP Analysis and Findings .................................................................... 45
2.2.3.6 Participation and Collaboration ............................................................. 46
2.2.3.7 Future Research and Evaluation ............................................................ 50
CHAPTER THREE: DEVELOPING THE FRAMEWORK __ - <2
3.1 SITUATION: KEY SOURCES OF HUMAN INTERDEPENDENCY -- - <3
3.1.1 Concepts of Land ....................................................................................... 54
3.1.2 Geography of the Watershed ..................................................................... 55
3.1.2.1 Shared Geographic Understanding ........................................................ 58

3.1 .2.2 Biological Diversity ............................................................................... 60

3.1.2.3 Agricultural Considerations: Sunlight, Temperature, Soils, Water. ...... 61
3.1.2.4 Water ...................................................................................................... 65
3.1.2.5 Minerals ................................................................................................. 67

3.1.2.6 Forests .................................................................................................... 70

3.1.2.7 Geocultural Considerations ................................................................... 72
3.1.2.8 Geopolitical Considerations ................................................................... 77

vii

3.1.3 Diversity of Actors and Means of Communication ................................... 79

 

 

 

 

 

3.1.3.1 Indigenous Inhabitants ........................................................................... 82
3.1.4 Current Formal Institutional Arrangements ............................................... 85
3.2 STRUCTURE: INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS 95
3.2.1 Institutional Model One (181): Sixaola Binational Watershed Proposed
Institutional Management Structure .......................................................... 96
3.2.1.1 GEF components of IS] ....................................................................... 103
3.2.1.2 The Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola River Binational
Watershed. ........................................................................................... 108
3.2.1.3 The Multiphase Program for Sustainable Development of Bocas del
Toro ...................................................................................................... 114
3.2.2 Institutional Model Two (182): La Amistad as a Transboundary Biosphere
Reserve. ................................................................................................... 116
3.2.2.1 Legal Framework ................................................................................. 116
3.2.2.2 Adaptive Considerations ...................................................................... 117
3.2.2.3 Formal Institutional Structure; the Vertical Plane ............................... 120
3.2.2.4 The Web of Actors: ISZ Horizontal Plane .......................................... 136
3.3 PERFORMANCE 157
3.3.1 Existence of a GIS product and process for the Sixaola Binational
Watershed ................................................................................................ 160
3.3.2 Interactions among actors regarding planning and resource management
................................................................................................................. 161
3.3.3 The degree of similarity in rules and regulations regarding resource
management throughout the Sixaola Watershed. .................................... 163
CHAPTER FOUR: SSP ANALYSIS AND FINDINGS 165
4.1 SITUATION ONE: PHYSICAL IMMENSITY, BIOLOGICAL AND TOPOGRAPHICAL
DIVERSITY OF THE WATERSHED _ - 165
4.1.1 Bounded Rationality ................................................................................ 166
4.1.2 Geographic Information Systems ............................................................ 168
4.1.2.1 Institutional Structure One, GIS .......................................................... 170
4.1.2.2 Institutional Structure Two, GIS .......................................................... 171
4.1.3 Performance Comparisons: Situation One: IS] and [82 ........................ 173
4.1.3.1 GIS development as part of a transboundary biosphere reserve .......... 173
4.1.3.2 GIS development at the watershed level ............................................. 174
4.1.3.3 Probable Performance Outcomes: Situation One ............................... 178
4.2 SITUATION Two: EXTREME HUMAN DIVERSITY AND LACK OF A COMMON
MEANS OF COMMUNICATION - 182
4.2.1 High and Asymmetric Information Costs ................................................ 183
4.2.2 Standard Operating Procedures and Path Dependency ........................... 184
4.2.2.1 Public Meetings, 131 ............................................................................ 187
4.2.2.2 Public Meetings; 182, Zonation and Communication .......................... 190
4.2.3 Global Actors ........................................................................................... 192
4.2.4 Performance Comparisons: Situation Two: 181 and 182 ........................ 194
4.2.4.1 Diversity of actors involved in planning: ............................................ 195
4.2.4.2 Quantity and quality of interactions regarding natural resource
management. ........................................................................................ l 97

viii

4.2.4.3 Probable Performance Outcomes: Situation Two ............................... 198
4.3 SITUATION THREE: OVERLAPPING AND CONFUSING FORMAL INSTITUTIONAL

 

 

 

MANAGEMENT STRUCTURES. 206
4.3.1 Transboundary Watershed Initiatives ...................................................... 207
4.3.1.1 Danube River Institutional Arrangements ........................................... 208

4.3.1.2 The Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve ................................................. 210

4.3.1.3 The US-Mexico Border Region and Watershed Management ............ 213

4.3.2 Devolution and Decentralization ............................................................. 217
4.3.2.1 Relevant Biosphere Reserve Experience ............................................. 220

4.3.3 Performance Comparisons: Situation Three: 18] and 182: ..................... 225
4.3.3.1 Funding ................................................................................................ 226

4.3.3.2 Approaches to Building Binational Institutions .................................. 228

4.3.3.3 Probable Performance Outcomes: Situation Three .............................. 231

4.4 PERFORMANCE SUMMARY 236
APPENDIX ONE 247
BIBLIOGRAPHY 251

 

ix

LIST OF TABLES

 

 

 

 

Table l: Sixaola Watershed Sub-watersheds 58
Table 2: Sixaola Watershed Land Use 65
Table 3: Indigenous Population by Watershed Zone - - 83
Table 4: Natural Protected Areas and Indigenous Reserves in the Sixaola
Watershed - - 89
Table 5: SSP Analysis Outline - - 246

 

LIST OF FIGURES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1: The Sixaola River Binational Watershed, Zonification 6
Figure 2: Levels of Performance Measures 44
Figure 3: Topographic Map of the Sixaola Watershed 56
Figure 4: Sixaola Watershed, Percent Pop. in Agriculture. 64
Figure 5: Percent of Organic Agriculture 64
Figure 6: Points of Geocultural Interest 73
Figure 7: Limon - Almirante Strategic Axis 78
Figure 8: Sixaola Program Model, Costa Rica 99
Figure 9: Bocas del Toro Program Model, Panama 100
Figure 10: GEF Sixaola River Basin Participative Organizational Scheme. .......... 101
Figure 11: Adaptive Functions of 182 118
Figure 12: [82 Vertical Plane: Formal Institutions 122
Figure 13: 182 Horizontal Plane, the Web of Actors 137

 

 

Figure 14: Levels of Performance Measures (repeated figure) 158

xi

 

CHAPTER ONE: THE PROBLEM

Poverty and the lack of economic opportunities are problems in the Sixaola River
Binational Watershed.4 The canton of Talamanca, which occupies the Costa Rican
section of this watershed, is one of the poorest in Costa Rica and has the lowest social

development index (SDI) in the country.5

Continuing environmental degradation is a problem, especially in the lower watershed
where intensive banana production introduces substantial sediment and chemical
contamination into the watershed (Nessim, Coloane et al. 2004). Deforestation continues
in the middle watershed in and around Indigenous reserves (UNEP 2001) . The upper
watershed is largely intact but development pressure continues including consideration of

hydroelectric projects (Castro, Ramirez et al. 1995).6

Headwaters of The Sixaola Binational Watershed originate completely within the core
area of La Amistad International Park; Costa Rica — Panama, also a UN Biosphere
Reserve and a UN World Heritage Site. This park was formed in 1982 in order to
conserve natural resources, promote and demonstrate friendly relations between
neighboring countries, and to provide opportunities for sustainable development

(Presidencia de la RepI’Iblica de Costa Rica 1982). However, in a 2003 study, 90% of the

 

‘ The terms: Sixaola Watershed, The Sixaola Binational Watershed, the Sixaola River Binational
Watershed, and the Talamanca-Sixaola River Binational Watershed, are all used to represent the same
physical unit in this document. Shortened names will be used for expediency and longer names when exact
citation is required.

5 The SD] is an index created by MIDEPLAN (Costa Rican Ministry of Planning) and is based on six social

indicators.
6 Four hydroelectric projects are currently underway in the Panama region of Bocas del Toro immediately

adjoining the Sixaola Watershed.

Indigenous residents surveyed living in Eastern buffer zones of the park reported that
they do not feel their community has received substantial funding or other help to create
jobs because of the park (Babladelis 2003). While some preservation or conservation
goals have largely been met, partly because of the inaccessibility of the core park area,

development goals have yet to be realized.

The challenge of preserving, or conserving large natural areas while Simultaneously
providing sustainable economic development opportunities for people is not new nor
unique to this case. According to a 2002 UN Man and the Biosphere (MAB) publication,
trying to manage an area for both conservation and sustainable economic development is
much harder than doing so for one purpose only and calls for highly skilled staff who are

not easily found (Hadley 2002).

In the case of La Amistad International Park, one of the most current and exhaustive
studies concludes, “It is true that the institutional management is weak, insufficient, and
deficient” (Borge 2004). A current sustainable development project for the Sixaola
Binational Watershed, designed by the governments of Costa Rica and Panama along
with Inter-American Development Bank planners and consultants, recognizes and
addresses this problem by creating a formal institutional structure to manage natural
resources at the level of the watershed with binational links to the adjoining region in

Panama. This approach, however, does little to recognize or utilize the concepts of a

biosphere reserve.

 

1.1 Statement of Research Purpose and Questions

This dissertation is an institutional economic impact analysis using a modified SSP
(Situation, Structure, Performance) framework (Schmid 2004). It is a participatory
research project with the purpose of helping develop additional institutional options for
watershed and resource management. Primarily designed to inform the current dialogue
in Costa Rica and Panama, this research has relevance for the transboundary biosphere

reserve dialogue as well.

Preliminary research questions were answered before the principal research questions
could be asked. These questions are:
1: “What are the key situational aspects of the Sixaola Watershed that serve as a
source of human interdependence?”
2: “What is the current web of formal institutional arrangements regarding
natural resource management in the Sixaola Binational Watershed and how do
current projects impact this web?”
3: “What would a model of La Amistad Transboundary Biosphere Reserve look
like and how would it function?”
4. “What observable and potentially measurable outcomes can be used to analyze
the interaction of key sources of interdependence inherent in the situation in the

Sixaola Watershed and the institutional structure for addressing those sources

interdependence?”

Once these questions were answered it was possible to identify performance measures

and address three principal research questions:

“What are likely performance outcomes in the Sixaola Binational Watershed under
current plans for management at the level of the watershed, reaching to the binational
level, or with the addition of a second institutional structure, La Amistad as a
transboundary biosphere reserve?” Performance will be analyzed regarding:
1. The existence of a geographic information system (GIS), and a process to use,
evaluate, and continue to develop that system.
2. The diversity of actors involved in planning resource management in the
Sixaola Watershed, the number of exchanges they have regarding resource
management, and the quality of those interactions.
3. The existence of similar or same formal institutions for management of natural

resources in the Sixaola Watershed.

Chapter Three presents data and analysis necessary to answer the preliminary questions.

Chapter Four presents analysis and findings for the three principal research questions.

1.1.1 Costa Rican Focus, Panamanian Relevance

The Sixaola Binational Watershed lies primarily in Costa Rica, 81% of the watershed,

with the remaining 19% in Panama. However, at the level of La Amistad International

 

 

Park the percentages are nearly equal. This dissertation focuses on the Sixaola
Watershed, and correspondingly on Costa Rican considerations, but this in no way
diminishes the importance of Panama. Rather, it is hoped that future research will

continue to develop options with greater emphasis on Panama.

This is especially important in the model for La Amistad as a Transboundary Biosphere
Reserve presented in this dissertation. A corridor is envisioned connecting Puerto LimOn,
Costa Rica, with Bocas del Toro, Panama on the Caribbean side of the biosphere reserve.
Opportunities for ecotourism, sustainable agriculture, and a variety of other interests may
expand when regional development promotes an ecosystem approach and provides new

ways for local actors to work together across borders.

A program administered by the Government of Panama with a loan from the Inter-
American Development Bank, The Multiphase Program for Sustainable Development of
Bocas del Toro, is briefly presented in section 3.2.1.3 of this work. This program
conceptually links to The Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola River

Binational Watershed that serves as a primary focus of this dissertation.

 

 

 

N23990:. am. @330

2.3 05.4”?

M VS. "F
E ”III.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 1: The Sixaola River Binational Watershed, Zonification

Note: This figure is a placeholder, the representation of a map that is presented digitally on CD.

There is no text on this figure that is important for this dissertation.

Source: Government of Costa Rica

1.2 Background

The Sixaola Binational Watershed is the natural resource unit of analysis in this study.
The drainage area of this watershed is 2,848.3 k2, of which 2,316.8 k2 are in the Republic
of Costa Rica and 531.5 k 2 are in the Republic of Panama (81% and 19% of the
watershed respectively). It originates at over 3000m elevation in the Talamanca
Mountains and empties into the Sixaola River which forms the border between Costa
Rica and Panama at the Caribbean Sea. It is possible to divide the watershed into three

distinct zones; upper, middle, and lower, based upon geomorphologic characteristics.

The watershed falls under the formal institutions of two sovereign states; Costa Rica and
Panama, and two sets of rules and regulations impacting management of natural
resources. Within each country there are several governmental agencies charged with
different management functions in the watershed and these management arrangements
are further complicated by the presence of six Indigenous reserves (112,789 ha) in the
middle watershed that have legal status in Costa Rica and special consideration given in

Panama (Nessim, Coloane et al. 2004).

The watershed contains six protected natural areas (155,848 ha) and two national
biological corridors that are part of the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor. Of the
protected areas, Parque Intemacional de la Amistad: Costa Rica — Panama, deserves
special consideration since the core park area contains the entire upper watershed. If

bufl‘er zones and transition zones of the park are included the entire watershed falls

within La Amistad International Park.7 Created in 1972 by presidential decree, Parque
Intemacional de la Amistad: Costa Rica — Panama is designed to be a Single international
park that is an operational example of cooperation and co management between
neighboring nations (Babladelis 2003). Administratively it is also two separate national
parks that continue to function primarily under national, rather than binational,

institutions.

The park has also been designated a UN biosphere reserve, with the Costa Rican portion
of the park inscribed in 1982 and the Panamanian side inscribed in 2000 (UNESCO MAB
Programme 2005). The national parks of La Amistad Costa Rica and La Amistad
Panama were classified as World Heritage Sites in 1983 and were classified as a single
transboundary World Heritage Site in 1990 (UNCESO World Heritage Centre 2006). It
is possible to discuss the watershed without consideration of La Amistad as a biosphere
reserve, but that would ignore history and commitments made at the national, binational,

and global levels.

1.2.1 Parque Internacional de la Amistad: Costa Rica-Panama

The framework for the park was developed in the 1970’s and drew upon the expertise of
five principal organizations credited for their conservation strategies and impact on the

conceptualization of La Amistad International Park. These organizations are: the World
Conservation Union, Switzerland (UICN); The United Nations Environment Programme

(PNUMA); the World Wildlife Fund (WWF); The Food and Agriculture Organization of

 

7 Different buffer zone delineation plans exist among actors, governmental agencies, and NGO’S. By
applying MAB guidelines it is possible to make the claim of relevant zonation throughout the watershed.

the United Nations (F A0); and the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural
Organization, (UNESCO) (Presidencia de la RepI'Iblica de Costa Rica 1982). Many of
the ideas for formation of La Amistad came from the First Central American Meeting on
the Management of Natural and Cultural Resources held in San José, Costa Rica, in 1974
and Sponsored by the agencies listed above and the OAS (Organization of American

States).

After the park was created there were several attempts to assist development. One report
lists contributions totaling US $10,121,000 from seven different international
organizations during the years 1992 through 1997 to develop programs and build capacity
related to sustainable development in La Amistad and its buffer zones (UNEP 2002) . A
more exhaustive study lists approximately US $30,000,000 in aid that flowed to La
Amistad between 1982 and 2004 (Borge 2004). Despite this effort a 2003 survey of
Bribri8 residents living on reserves in buffer zones of the park found that 90% of these
residents did not feel their community had received substantial funding or other help to

create jobs because of the park (Babladelis 2003).

In the original document that created the park, and Signed by Costa Rican President
Rodrigo Carazo and Panamanian President Dr. Aritides Royo in 1982, three principal
objectives for the park were listed: to maintain essential ecological processes and living
systems, preserve genetic diversity, and assure that species and ecosystems will continue
to flourish. In addition to these three principal objectives, ten additional considerations

were offered, the last of which recognizes the park’s extraordinary value for tourism,

 

3 Bribri are the most numerous indigenous people in the Sixaola Watershed.

recreation, teaching, and scientific study. This same consideration notes the importance
of sustainable development while ensuring the permanent well-being of citizens and
future generations. Park founders listed five examples of the type of sustainable
development they envisioned; tourism, recreation, teaching, scientific study, and the

generation of hydroelectric power (Presidencia de la RepI'Iblica de Costa Rica 1982).

These goals and objectives are difficult to realize, especially concurrently and
interdependently. According to a 2002 UN Man and the Biosphere (MAB) publication,
trying to manage an area for both conservation and sustainable economic development is
much harder than doing so for one purpose only and calls for highly skilled staff who are

not easily found (Hadley 2002).

1.3 Theoretical Considerations

“While I have little confidence in our current institutional predictive ability in many areas
and for many behavioral consequences, I am relatively confident that major change in the
environment calls for major changes in institutions. We have fooled people into thinking
that a bit more enforcement or another commission or consolidated agency will make a

difference” (Schmid 1972).
The problems identified earlier in this chapter are all legitimate and have been identified

by careful and credible sources. However, this dissertation identifies problems that must

first be resolved in order to realize the ultimate outcomes of environmental protection,

10

social, and economic development. These are framed as inherent sources on human
interdependence: (1) the lack of a shared geographic understanding, (2) extreme
diversity of watershed actors and the lack of a Shared means of communication, and (3)
overlapping, confusing, and conflicting institutional arrangements for resource
management. Once these three aspects of human interdependence have been addressed

institutionally it is possible for cooperative management to occur.

1.3.1 Land Resource Economics9

Land economics, in the tradition of Barlowe, is a social science that deals with those
problems in which social conduct is strategically affected by the physical, locational, or
property attributes of whole surface units (Slater 1942). It is an applied branch of
economics that is often characterized by its practical, institutional, and problem-solving
approach. Economists working in this tradition recognize the importance of economic
theory but also recognize that real-life conditions frequently do not match the tight

assumptions often assumed in economic analysis.

In the context of land resource economics, land may be thought of as space — as a room
and surface within and upon which life takes place. Land often means different things

depending upon the context in which it is used and the circumstances under which it is

 

9 Land economics was first recognized as a course for collegiate study in 1892 when Richard T. Ely offered
a semester on Landed Property at the University of Wisconsin. Formal recognition as a separate field came
in 1919 when a Division of Land Economics was established in the US. Department of Agriculture.
Foundations were established in the 1920’s for much of the work in urban and rural land economics and in
real estate economics that followed. The first course materials dealing specifically with this field were
published in 1922 Barlowe, R. (1996). Land Resource Economics: The Economics of Real Esta_te_.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, inc.

 

ll

-. K.
_.

1.2-s- A

considered (Barlowe 1996). Given this consideration land includes the rivers, soils,
mountains, skies, and beaches of the Sixaola Watershed. It also includes human artifacts:

cities, roads, and national borders.

Human interdependencies are created by the physical nature of land as well as the life
that arises from the land. The arrangement of living organisms with the land is part of the
physical situation. People, plants, and animals cannot be separated from the land and

must be considered in their relationship to the land and with each other when examining

sources of interdependence.

Barlowe provides a theoretical framework (the threefold framework) to examine land use
and potential development projects simultaneously from different perspectives (Barlowe
1996). It requires that actors consider the impacts of (1) physical and biological factors,
(2) technological and economic considerations, and (3) institutional arrangements and
their impacts on public and private decisions regarding land use. “Highest and best use”
of land resources is attained when land resources are used in a manner that provides an
optimum return to their operators and/or to society. This return may be measured in
monetary terms or as social values and indices (or as a combination of both). Critical to
this discussion is the concept that “highest and best” is conditioned and limited as it

passes through the lens of the threefold framework and possibilities are explored given

the constraints and opportunities of each area.

12

 

From the perspective of land economics a central problem in the Sixaola Binational
Watershed can be framed as the inability to realize “highest and best” use of land
resources. This failure is due partly to a fragmented view of land use that does not apply
the three-fold framework. Analysis is lacking to determine what “highest and best use”
might be given the impacts of physical and biological factors, technological and

economic considerations, and institutional possibilities.

1.3.2 Institutional Economics

While the field of institutional economics can be divided into sub-categories with
differing perspectives, this dissertation builds upon work within the field that attempts to
answer the question, “Can analysis supply tested predictions of the consequences of
alternative institutions with respect to the environment?” (Schmid 1972). Lack of this
sort of analysis is a problem for planners who have desired performance outcomes in

mind but no way to evaluate the impacts of alternative institutions and institutional

interventions.

A first question that must be answered is, “Do alternative institutions make a difference?”
(Schmid 1972). That question has been answered in the affirrnative by many including
winner of the Nobel Prize in Economics, Douglass North, and colleagues who note, “In
recent years scholars and policy makers alike have paid increasing attention to the
complex relationship between social institutions and economic performance. ...Many

scholars now recognize that mainstream economic analysis, neoclassical economics, is of

13

 

 

 

little help in restructuring economies that lack secure markets; the same criticism holds
for other disciplines in the social science. An interdisciplinary research program that
deals explicitly with the link between institutions, institutional change, and economic

performance in now emerging.” (Alston, Eggertsson et al. 1996).

This interdisciplinary approach speaks to the same sort of analysis required in the
threefold framework of land resource economics. A comprehensive View is required to
note institutional constraints as well as opportunities in an applied context; What is
possible institutionally given physical, social, and economic conditions? What are the

likely impacts of alternative institutional arrangements?

1.3.3 Situation, Structure, Performance

Drawing upon considerations noted in the preceding sections of this chapter, current
institutional economic theory has provided a framework for analysis of the performance
impacts of alternative institutions (Schmid 2004). This framework is explored in more
detail in the methods section but is included here as it addresses problems regarding
resource management in the Sixaola River Binational Watershed: (1) a failure to
recognize key aspects of the physical situation that serve as a sources of human
interdependence, and (2) lack of analysis to determine alternative institutional methods of

dealing with those sources of human interdependence.

l4

Current planning for resource management in the watershed mandates institutional
reform but there is limited evidence that proposed interventions will yield desired results.
Program planners draw from literature and past experience yet do not benefit from
current institutional economic theory that first requires researchers to look for sources of

human interdependence inherent in the current situation.

To illustrate; a key finding of this dissertation is that actors in the Sixaola Watershed do
not have a shared geographic understanding. The watershed is so immense, so diverse,
and so physically challenging that most actors know only the small area surrounding their
home and the terrain along roadways, if there are any, that connect them to larger cities.
This physical, inherent, limitation must be overcome in order to make participatory
planning and cooperative behavior possible. People are physically connected by the
watershed and impacted by each other’s actions yet they have limited or no
understanding of those connections. Without recognizing the situation, in this case the
lack of a Shared geographic understanding, institutional arrangements run the risk of
continued failure to attain desired performance objectives. It is possible to frame the
problem as poverty and the lack of social opportunities for residents of the watershed or
as a lack of institutional interventions to address those problems. It is also possible to see
the problem as a failure to recognize key inherent aspects of the situation and the lack of

research to examine how alternative institutional arrangements address those aspects of

interdependence.

15

1.3.4 Foundation for La Amistad

A World Bank publication notes, “Environmental services is a generic term for the
positive extemalities or off-site benefits that are generated by a particular land use. There
are typically no markets for environmental services so land users do not receive
compensation for them, as such they tend not to take them into account when making a
land-use decision” (World Bank 2001). Among potentially thousands of environmental
services the Sixaola watershed provides are: (1) hydrologic services, (2) biodiversity
services, (3) carbon sequestration services, (4) scenic beauty services, and (5) disaster

vulnerability reduction services.

In this context it is possible to say that the Sixaola Watershed is performing substantial,
global scale environmental services while receiving little or no compensation for those
services. This is a problem for those living nearest the resource and who forego personal
uses that would diminish these environmental services. It is a “free ride” for those who

are enjoying these services without making payment.

Payments for environmental services: Some Indigenous lands in the watershed have
been inscribed in a carbon trading program arranged through the Costa Rican Fondo
Nacional de F inanciamiento Forestal (FONAFIFO) (greater detail on this subject is
offered in Chapter Three). A proposed new program, Ecomercados II, funded partially
by the World Bank, will initiate a payment for environmental services tied to watersheds,
but this program is limited to national and watershed regional services and payments. A

component of the Ecomercados II watershed proposal is that a portion of the payments

l6

made to landowners in the Sixaola Watershed, most often Indigenous groups in the
middle watershed, will be given to the Sistema Nacional de Areas de Conservacién
(SINAC), the agency administering La Amistad National Park Costa Rica (Tiffler
Sotomayor 2006). However, this captures only a fraction of the environmental services
performed in the Sixaola Watershed and La Amistad protected areas and does not provide

an adequate mechanism for trading global benefits.

The Foundation for La Amistad: The model for La Amistad as a transboundary
biosphere reserve establishes a foundation (financial institution) with the capacity to
include smaller more focused foundations within it to receive payments for
environmental services provided by the core park area of La Amistad and to influence
behavior in buffer and transition zones. Global residents and organizations will have the
ability to make voluntary payments based upon the environmental services they are
receiving and to influence policy and behavior toward environmentally sound planning
and development. While it can be argued that payments may not be forthcoming once the
foundation is formed it must be noted that without the foundation willing customers

cannot buy the environmental services they deem valuable.

This idea is not new and builds upon the theory and experience of the Foundation for
Eastern Carpathian Biodiversity Conservation. When a trilateral biosphere reserve was
first established among Poland, Slovakia, and Ukraine, a foundation based in Switzerland
was created to “encourage, organize, conduct, and promote activities serving to protect

the overall biodiversity of the Eastern Carpathian Mountains zone.” The initial assets of

17

the Foundation came from the American MacArthur Foundation and the Global
Environment Trust of the Global Environment Facility, under the administration of the
World Bank. It was planned as a mechanism to receive donations, legacies, grants, and
contributions to set up and carry out charitable, scientific, and educational activities as

well as grant donations, subsidies, and fund projects that further the realization of the

objectives of the Foundation.

While the East Carpathians experience has been mixed, and the foundation has not
received expected donations, La Amistad may offer additional advantages. The theory of
using a foundation to perform some functions similar to a market: connecting willing
buyers and sellers of “bundles of environmental services,” and more accurately
establishing the value of globally scarce resources, remains valid and is incorporated into

the model of La Amistad as a Transboundary Biosphere Reserve.

1.3.5 Communication and Cooperation

“For the past thirty years, other economists and other social scientists have been
attempting to modify and refine the issues to see just what has been missing from the
explanation (referring to neoclassical theory). Put simply, what has been missing is an
understanding of the nature of human coordination and cooperation” (North 1990).
North goes on to note the work of Ronald Coase and his observation that institutions
matter when it is costly to transact. In the case of the Sixaola Watershed transactions

among actors are costly. High information costs must first be overcome for actors to

18

 

learn about the existence of each other and the ways in which they are connected.
Extremely diverse cultures, different languages, and different preferred means of

communication all make transactions costly.

North draws from game theory to note, “cooperation is difficult to sustain when the game
is not repeated (or there is an end game), when information on the other players is
lacking, and when there are large numbers of players. These polar extremes in fact
reflect real life contrasts. We usually observe cooperative behavior when individuals
repeatedly interact, when they have a great deal of information about each other, and
when small numbers characterize the group” (North 1990). Current watershed theory
claims that watershed users do not only manage their individual plots, crop, forests, etc.;
collectively, knowingly or not, they manage landscape patterns and bio-physical
processes which transcend their private property. This implies that watershed users
potentially would gain from engaging in collective action to co-ordinate the management

of individual plots (Ravnborg 1998).

Participatory land-use planning may deliver the greatest aggregate benefit with the
highest number of satisfied actors but obstacles to communication and cooperation must
be overcome in order to begin and transaction costs will likely be very high. A study
conducted in a watershed located in the Andean Highlands rejected stakeholder
identification based on a predetermined checklist of possible factors, and instead

employed open—ended constructivist inquiry and exploration.10 In the context of

 

‘° This watershed actually involved two adjoining watersheds and included the presence of an Indigenous
reserve.

l9

 

watershed management, this means a process through which landscape users are invited
to relate their constructions -— their concerns, ideas, values, and issues - related to the
watershed and the management of natural resources taking place within it (Ravnborg
1998). This type of comprehensive stakeholder identification is vital as a first step
toward communication and cooperation. There is wide agreement with Ravnborg who
states, “For a platform to be an effective negotiating body, all stakeholders, relevant to

the problem or resource in issue, must be represented.”

There are high transaction costs to identify all stakeholders in the Sixaola Watershed,
including regional and global actors, and once identified, at least some of these actors
may not be predisposed to communicate with other watershed actors. H Therefore a
second cost is incurred, the costs of letting actors know about the potential benefits of
cooperative behavior. Lastly, the cost of bringing actors together is considerable and
several meetings are necessary for extremely diverse groups to build a degree of trust and
understanding. Most watershed planning programs have not able to recognize, address,
and bear the costs of these transactions yet they are a prerequisite for cooperation and

quality communication.

Additional transaction costs are encountered when a watershed falls between two nations,
and is therefore subject to different formal institutions regarding natural resource
management in the same watershed. These costs are increased when another level of

institutional management is present; a sanctioned UN Biosphere Reserve in the case of

 

” Schmid, 2005, places high information costs as a subset of transaction costs. He offers additional types
of transaction costs but that discussion is beyond the scope of this dissertation.

20

the upper watershed of the Sixaola. A UN MAB Working Paper on the biosphere reserve
experience in Latin America notes, “A fact that has appeared constantly in the survey has
been the frequent lack of interaction or co-ordination between biosphere reserves and
national and regional planning structures” (Daniele, Acerbi et al. 1999). Transaction
costs are further increased in the Sixaola Watershed do to the existence of semi-

autonomous Indigenous reserves in Costa Rica and Indigenous Areas of Panama.

It is possible to say that the lack of communication and cooperation among actors
regarding natural resource management is a problem in the Sixaola Binational Watershed.
One aspect of this problem is the existence of considerable transaction costs that must be

overcome in order to make communication and cooperation possible.

1.3.6 Geopolitical Considerations

“Nature rarely notices political boundaries. Most of the arbitrarily-drawn political
boundaries dividing the Earth into countries were delineated as a result of wars or
political compromises, often by geographers never even having set eyes on the land. As
a result, these political divisions frequently have severed functioning ecosystems.”
(Zbiez 1999). Costa Rica and Panama were the first Central American countries to
recognize and address this reality when they created La Amistad International Park in
1982 with the expressed intent to manage it as a single ecosystem even though it fell

within both nations. AS Central America’s first international park, and with strong

21

linkages to the UN biosphere reserve system, it was intended to be a working model of

cooperation and co-management between neighboring nations.

A persistent problem has been the political reality that it is harder to implement the
concept than it is to theorize it. La Amistad still functions primarily as two separate
national parks despite thirty years of efforts to find mechanism to manage it as a unified
ecosystem. While there have been continued efforts to engage both national governments
in common planning for La Amistad, national plans still receive the greatest attention of
the national governments. Further, La Amistad is split into Pacific and Caribbean

sections in both nations and coordinated planning is difficult even within nations.

The biosphere reserve concept was part of planning efforts that preceded creation of the
park and was seen as a mechanism for binational cooperation and management with
linkages to the global community. By moving the focus from national designations to
biosphere considerations planners hoped to use the biosphere framework as a tool for co-
management. However, the biosphere reserve concept of buffer zones and transition
zones is largely or completely ignored in current government planning at the watershed
level. To date it has not been possible to create functioning institutional systems to
receive loans, confirm projects, and Sign contracts as a single international park or as a
transboundary biosphere reserve. Not only has it proven difficult to build functioning
binational institutions to manage the single ecosystem that is La Amistad, it has also been

difficult to build the lasting global linkages envisioned by the biosphere reserve program.

22

The model for La Amistad as a transboundary biosphere reserve proposes that there are
potential gains to be made from participatory management across national borders and
extending to a global community that is enjoying environmental services the ecosystem is
providing. Global actors may have interests in establishing linkages; scientists,
researchers, educators and students, ecotourists. In at least one case it has been
documented that a majority of residents in the middle watershed would welcome
increased contact with this community'2 If both global and local actors have a desire to
interact, but do not have an effective means, it is possible to say there is currently an
institutional failure to create a means of exchange with the potential to build social capital

as well as economic wealth in the Sixaola Watershed and La Amistad.

One current and comprehensive study recognizes several problems that have been
encountered in transboundary river basin institutions (Milich and Varady 1999). The
authors note that more than 300 river basins accounting for nearly 50% of the earth’s land
surface are shared by two or more countries (Dowdeswell 1998) and that approximately
300 treaties have been negotiated Since 1814 that deal with non-navigational issues of
water management, flood control, hydropower projects, or allocation for consumptive or
non-consumptive uses in international basins (Hamner and Wolf 1998). This literature is
relevant for the Sixaola Watershed and provides an analysis of current and past
transboundary accords. It notes the following general problems that have been associated

with transboundary river basin management; (1) at both the national and sub-national

 

'2 Approximately 65% of Bribri residents living in buffer zones of La Amistad either agreed or agreed very
much with the statement, “Your community would welcome foreign visitors to the park” Babladelis, P.
(2003). La Amistad lntemational Peace Park; What Part Does It Play in the Peace Process? Resource

Development. East Lansing, Michigan, Michigan State University: 1 10.

23

R!

levels, mechanisms rarely exist for public participation in the decision-making process
that results in the creation or implementation of river basin accords, (2) power is largely
retained at the national level even when facing riverbanks have more commerce, more
common culture, and stronger regional ties with each other than with their perspective
nations, (3) implementation of accords is generally left to the discretion of signatory
partiers rather than being unequivocally programmed into an agreement, (4) the power
structure of organizations administering accords often reflects political and economic

imbalances between the participating members.

Managing a river system, or other ecosystems, across political boundaries has historically
been problematic. After conducting an analysis of transboundary river basin accords,
Milich and Varady concluded, “The world’s transboundary environmental institutions
typically are driven from the top, fimction behind closed doors, disregard sustainability,

and rely on technical fixes or regulatory mechanisms (Milich and Varady 1999).

1.4 The Present Situation

A sustainable development program for the Sixaola River Binational Watershed has been
proposed by the Government of Costa Rica through a loan from the Inter-American
Development Bank with the main objective: “to improve the living conditions of the
population of the Sixaola River watershed in Costa Rica (canton of Talamanca), through
interventions in the economic, social, environmental, and local management areas that

help implement a sustainable development model for the watershed.” (N essim, Coloane

24

et al. 2004). This approach views the problem as poverty, lack of social development,
and degradation of natural systems in the Sixaola Binational Watershed. “Interventions,”
are listed as the means to solve this aggregated problem and Specific sub problems yet
there is little empirical evidence to indicate that these interventions will work where

others have failed.

Limitations were recognized by planners as they developed the program; specifically, the
lack of funds and efforts to further binational efforts and build new formal institutions. It
became apparent to planners that additional funds and activities were needed to attain a
higher degree of binational cooperation in managing the watershed and adjoining areas.
To address this problem, non-reimbursable funds were solicited and approved from the
Global Environment Facility (GEF) to concentrate on building new binational institutions
for natural resource management. This GEF program, Integrated Ecosystem
Management in the Sixaola Binational River Basin, seeks to coordinate the Costa Rica
sustainable development program for the Sixaola Watershed and a Similar program, also
made possible with a loan from the Inter-American Development Bank, in the adjoining
area of Bocas del Toro Panama. The GEF program is complementary and consistent with
the national programs and was requested (and received) because of the recognized effort
needed to facilitate binational institutional reform and the inability of either national

program to provide that effort alone (GEF 2004).

A new formal institutional structure for resource management at the level of the

watershed was developed in project planning. This institutional structure must be

25

operationalized in Specific areas for loan funds to be released, thereby restricting some
options for adaptation and institutional change. This project theoretically reaches to the
binational level and seeks to build new formal institutions to coordinate watershed
management within the Sixaola Watershed and between the Sixaola Watershed and the
adjoining Bocas del Toro Region of Panama. '3 It does not conceptually reach to the

global level.

The way in which the problem is framed greatly impacts institutional considerations.
This dissertation identifies three preliminary problems that must be resolved before
cooperative and participatory planning can be achieved. If formal institutions are created
without first examining ways in which they will address these three problems, expected

performance outcomes may be not be realized.

North points out, “The institutional constraints that define the opportunity set of
individuals are a complex of formal and informal constraints. They make up an
interconnected web that in various combinations Shapes choice sets in various contexts”
(North 1990). The problem in the Sixaola Binational Watershed is multidimensional and
will require a multidisciplinary View to examine individual aspects of the problem and
how these aspects interrelate with each other. The linkage noted by North between
formal and informal institutions is especially important to note in the case of the Sixaola

Watershed where residents have seen programs come and go without having a significant

 

'3 The lnterAmerican Development Bank is funding adjoining projects in the Sixaola Watershed and the
Bocas del Toro Region of Panama that utilize Global Environment Facility (GEF) funds to further regional
cooperation in resource management.

26

positive impact on their lives. Informal institutions largely rule the day and changes in

formal institutions may have little or no impact on day to day behavior in the watershed.

Barlowe tells us, “Institutional factors exert a continuing influence on economic
behavior. They help to make it more stable and predictable but at the same time
adjustable and dynamic. Their significance is often overlooked or taken for granted in
economic discussions. Yet their overall impact is such that they can never be assumed
away once economic theory is taken out of its academic vacuum and applied in the arena
of real life” (Barlowe 1996). A key component of the current sustainable development
program for the Sixaola Watershed is the creation of a self-sustaining cash flow for the
geographic region. Despite past attempts to stimulate the economy of the region
sustainable economic opportunities have not been forthcoming. The web of formal and

informal institutions has not been able to develop the synergy to produce a vibrant

economy.

Schmid describes this web in the following manner: “Institutions are sets (networks) of
ordered relationships (connections) among people that define their rights, their exposure
to the rights of others, their privileges, and their responsibilities. A set at one level is
embedded in a set at a higher level to make up a complex system. To say that one system
is embedded in another is not to say that higher levels determine lower levels. Different
levels are interdependent and mutually defined” (Schmid 2004). The system described
by Schmid is complex and difficult to examine in its entirety. None-the-less, an attempt

must be made to examine institutional arrangements on multiple levels in order to better

27

understand the impacts of these arrangements on performance. Great attention must be
given to alternative institutional structures and their impacts on performance before

interventions are designed and mandated by law.

1.5 Summary

The problem regarding natural resource management in the Sixaola Binational Watershed
is multidimensional and requires a broad and inclusive approach to examine the roots as
well as the impacts of the problem. Land Resource Economics, in the tradition of
Barlowe, provides a framework and methodology from which to view the problem as a
failure to attain, “highest and best use of the resource.” Defining “highest and best use”
is a process that requires the engagement of actors and provides answers that change over
time. It requires that actors view the situation through multiple lenses at once; (1)
physical and biological factors, (2) technological and economic considerations, and (3)
institutional realities and possibilities. Planning from this perspective is lacking at

present and this dissertation addresses that problem.

As North and others have proven; institutions matter (North 1990; Alston, Eggertsson et
al. 1996). A current program in the Sixaola Binational Watershed mandates formal
institutional change regarding resource management. This program identifies poverty,
that lack of social development, and environmental degradation as primary problems.
However, it is also possible to frame the problem as the lack of institutional mechanisms

to address inherent sources of human interdependence and thereby allows actors to

28

engage collaboratively in management of natural resources. In the first case it is assumed
that the proposed institutions will function as planned; that they are the right institutions
to realize the program goals. In the second case it is assumed that the institutional
structure to manage the resource for maximum overall benefit, and for the greatest benefit

for the greatest number of users, is not known.

Actors must first be identified and made aware that they are connected with each other
due to the physical nature of the watershed. A means of communication must be
established and the actors must see value in communication. After these obstacles are
overcome it is then possible for actors to begin the process of creating an institutional

framework that best meets their management needs and goals.

29

CHAPTER TWO: METHODS

This dissertation is an institutional economic impact analysis; a case study that examines
The Sixaola River Binational Watershed as the natural resource unit of analysis and
contrasts two institutional arrangements for management of this resource. It contrasts
likely performance outcomes under two different institutional arrangement by using a
modified SSP (situation, structure, performance) framework (Schmid 2004). The
methodology applied rests upon the belief that: (1) There are inherent characteristics of a
good, in this case the Sixaola Watershed, that are a source of human interdependence, (2)
institutional structures address these sources of interdependence in different ways (3) it is
possible to examine performance as impacted by the interaction of the inherent

characteristics of the good and the institutional arrangement by which it is managed.

This dissertation is also a participatory research project that involves collaboration with
actors on multiple levels engaged in a sustainable development project operating
independently of this dissertation. The dissertation design, inquiry, and findings have all
had some impact on the project, even if slight, and the project has provided much of the
data that is presented here (Nessim, Coloane et al. 2004). By involving actors, and
seeking feedback from them, the dissertation project has stimulated additional ideas and
introduced new options for management of the Sixaola Binational Watershed. These
options are now being discussed in public spaces independently of the dissertation

project.

30

2.1 Institutional Economic Considerations

This dissertation builds upon the broad concepts of political economy and one tradition in
the applied branch of land economies. In addition to theoretical considerations, this
approach demands that analysis take a very practical position regarding applications of
economic concepts under real-life conditions. Land economics, as presented by Barlowe,
is often characterized by its practical, institutional, and problem-solving approach

(Barlowe 1996).

An impact analysis using current institutional economic theory, a modified situation,
structure, performance (SSP) approach, is then applied against this backdrop. The SSP
approach developed and presented by Dr. A. Allan Schmid is not restricted to use with
land economics issues but can be used effectively in this case. While this approach (the
SSP framework) can be applied for both impact and change analysis (Schmid 2004), this
dissertation focuses solely on impact analysis of two contrasting institutional
arrangements. The terms; situation, structure, and performance are all defined and used

here based upon this approach.

2.2 SSP; Situation, Structure, Performance

Situation: Key Traits of the Physical Unit of Analysis. Situation refers to the
existence of inherent characteristics of a good, in this case the Sixaola Watershed, that
serve as a source of human interdependence. These characteristics create the Situation; a

web that links human beings. It is possible to examine these characteristics individually

31

 

and create independent variables that correspond to them; however, these characteristics
interact with one another and collectively create the situation as defined in this
dissertation. These inherent characteristics are a given even though over time technology

may change them (Schmid 2004).

Structure: The rules of the game. Structure is the collective rules of the game, both
formal and informal institutions, which dictate the way in which the inherent traits of the
Situation are managed among people. For this study institutions are sets (networks) of
ordered relationships (connections) among people that define their rights, their exposure to
the rights of others, their privileges and their responsibilities” (Schmid 2004). Just as there
are several key situational traits operational at one time, there are layers of institutional
arrangements among actors throughout the watershed. However, key institutional
characteristics can be separated, identified, and used to create independent variables that

impact performance.

Performance: Observable outcomes. Performance can be evaluated in ahvariety of
ways but must be measurable or observable as specified in the research design.
Determining key performance measures is part of the research methodology. Levels of
performance were identified as part of this research project and are presented in section

2.2.3.4 that follows.

No attempt is made to offer a mechanistic formula that can be completely replicated nor

used to predict performance in other places and contexts. Rather, performance outcomes

32

are viewed in a broad sense and presented as the result of multiple forces, often unique to
the case of the Sixaola, working together. Projected performance outcomes are presented
given the specific situation of this case and two contrasting institutional arrangements

that address the situation differently.

2.3 Research Objectives:

The research objectives in this study are designed to explore a multifaceted problem in a
multidisciplinary way. There are several research questions that must be answered before
this type of broad and integrated analysis is possible. These questions are identified in
this chapter and methodology provided to answer them. Performance outcomes are
discussed and presented as the result of a Specific aspect of the situation that creates
human interdependence and the institutional mechanism for addressing that
interdependence. Producing these projected outcomes is not the research goal of this
dissertation. The goal of this research project is to provide new information, additional

institutional options, for planners to consider in development of the Sixaola Watershed.

2.3.1 Pre—dissertation Preparation

A thesis for the degree of Master of Science in Resource Development titled, “La
Amistad Peace Park; What Part Does It Play in the Peace Process?” provides the
foundation for this research (Babladelis 2003). This work documented the development

of a conceptual framework for La Amistad as an international park, a UN biosphere

33

reserve, and a UN World Heritage Site, and measured performance as assessed by
residents of three Indigenous communities in the middle watershed of the Sixaola River

Basin.

As project documents for the current Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola
River Binational Watershed became available the author acquired them and used them as
part of the data in a case analysis for a graduate level watershed management course (The
Sixaola Watershed was also used as the unit of analysis for a second graduate level
watershed class taken during dissertation field work). The Sixaola Program Manager
located in the Costa Rican Ministry of Planning was notified that a dissertation proposal
was being prepared that related to this program. The Program Manager invited the
researcher to meet with planning officials in San Jose’ upon arrival in Costa Rica to

discuss the research project and the Sixaola Program in more detail.

Prior to leaving the US and beginning pre-dissertation field work, preliminary approval
was requested and received from the Michigan State University Council for Research
Involving Human Subjects (UCRIHS). From January 2006 until June 2006 pre-

dissertation field work in Costa Rica and Panama prepared for the research project.

In February 2006 the researcher met with Costa Rican government planners in the
Ministry of Planning (MIDEPLAN) to discuss the dissertation and its links to the Sixaola
Program. Later that month the researcher was invited by MIDEPLAN and participated in

a binational planning meeting for the project held in Bocas del Toro, Panama. This group

34

135 3

‘5“.‘A

at":
LLLV

\f‘.‘ T '
All.

it'll.

Err-.-

i 1

.fi‘

2...
I

I
f)”

was a representative sample of actors with interests in the watershed project; government
officials from both Costa Rica and Panama, residents of Indigenous reserves, NGO’S,
citizen and community groups, Inter—American Development Bank Personnel, and
consultants hired by the governments to write the program and coordinate planning

activities.

In March of 2006 the researcher met once again with MIDEPLAN planners and
presented the dissertation project in greater detail. At that time MIDEPLAN provided the
most current copy of all official documents related to the program. The GIS that was
developed as part of the program was also provided and the researcher was given

permission to use this data to produce findings.

Approval to begin research was given June 8, 2006 by UCRIHS; Dissertation ID#:

i023416, Final approval: IRB #: 05-871.

2.3.2 Research Design

This research design presents a theoretical framework to determine findings from data. A
series of questions is asked and methodology provided to answer them. The collected
answers to these questions provide a context from which to formulate likely performance
outcomes as a result of the interaction between (1) situation, a source of human
interdependence present in the watershed, and (2) the specific institutional mechanism to

address that source of interdependence. The goal of this research is to provide new

35

 

information and additional options for watershed management in the specific context of

the Sixaola Binational Watershed and La Amistad Biosphere Reserve.

The research design of this dissertation does not strictly adhere to the three-fold
framework of land resource economics. Findings are presented with consideration to
physical and biological factors, social factors, and technological as well as economic
considerations. However, institutional arrangements and possibilities are examined

separately and in greater detail to address specific questions regarding structure.

2.2.3.1 Define the Situation

Conduct an assessment to determine key sources of human interdependence created by
the physical nature of the Sixaola Binational Watershed.

This assessment is framed to answer the preliminary research question, “What are the key

situational aspects of the Sixaola Watershed that serve as a source of human

interdependence?”

To answer this question a physical analysis was performed regarding the land of the
watershed. For the purposes of this dissertation land includes the rivers, soils, mountains,
skies, and beaches of the Sixaola Watershed. It also includes human artifacts: cities,
roads, and national borders. Several identified sources of human interdependence are

presented in the findings, and from these, a single key physical source is identified and

chosen to use for analysis:

36

Data needed for this analysis was provided by several sources: The Government of Costa
Rica with the Inter-American Development Bank (Nessim, Coloane et a1. 2004), the
Global Environment Facility (GEF 2006) various academic publications (Borge and
Villalobos 1994), world conservation monitoring organizations (UNESCO 2002), and

assorted complementary data.

A second analysis was necessary to determine important social and political dimensions,
including geocultural and geopolitical considerations which create human
interdependencies. Questions include, (1) who are the primary actors in the watershed?
(2) how do they differ culturally, socially, linguistically? (3) what are preferred means of
communication? As noted in the theoretical considerations of Chapter One of this
dissertation, humans cannot be separated from the landscape they inhabit in a physical

analysis of the watershed.

Data for this analysis was provided by the Costa Rican government (as reported by the
Inter-American Development Bank and the Global Environment Facility) and is similar
or the same data used for analysis to develop the Sixaola Program. This data was
supplemented and checked against data developed independently through the
participatory process of writing a national and international management plan for La
Amistad-(Borge 2004; Carazo, Herrera et al. 2005). These management plans were

largely facilitated by The Nature Conservancy in Costa Rica and Panama.

37

 

2.2.3.2 Develop and Document Institutional Structure One (181)

Document the existing formal institutional structure for natural resource management in
the Sixaola Binational Watershed. Note proposed institutional changes that are mandated
for implementation.

Documentation is provided by answering the preliminary research question: “What is the

current web of formal institutional arrangements regarding natural resource management

in the Sixaola Binational Watershed and how do current projects impact this web?”

To answer this question a model was developed, Institutional Structure One (181), to
represent the current institutional structure for binational management of the Sixaola
Watershed. This model builds from existing institutions and incorporates changes that
are either mandated or desired as part of the Sustainable Development Program for the
Sixaola River Binational Watershed and/or the GEF Program for Integrated Ecosystem
Management in the Sixaola Binational River Basin. Implementation of this model is tied
to project loans from the Inter-American Development Bank and payments may be

withheld if new institutions are not created or fimctioning.

The data sources used to develop this model are official project documents and

government records that have been noted earlier in this section.

While current and proposed formal institutions can be well documented in this
dissertation, the informal institutions, Standard operating procedures of actors living in
the watershed, can only be addressed in the most general sense and would require

multiple other dissertations to adequately document and analyze them. None-the-less,

38

these informal institutions largely rule the day despite current laws, rules, and regulations

that often go unenforced in the Sixaola Watershed.

2.2.3.3 Develop and Present Institutional Structure Two (152)

Construct a theoretical model for La Amistad as a transboundary biosphere reserve.

This theoretical model is developed in answer to the preliminary research question,

“What would a model of La Amistad as a transboundary biosphere reserve look like and

how would it function?”

Development of a model for La Amistad to function as a transboundary biosphere
reserve, called Institutional Model Two (182) in this dissertation, requires a theoretical
leap on two levels. First, La Amistad is not functioning as a transfrontier biosphere
reserve at present and past attempts at binational management have largely failed. It is
not possible to empirically study an existing institutional arrangement and document it;

rather, it is necessary to create a theoretical model of something that does not exist.

Secondly, there are no transfrontier biosphere reserves globally that have been able to
fully operationalize the ideals of the biosphere reserve program. Case studies have
Shown successes in some areas yet failure in others. Current transfrontier biosphere
reserves are in the process of creating themselves and seek to complete pieces of the
model that are lacking at present (UNESCO 2003). The model of La Amistad as a

transboundary biosphere reserve, developed in this dissertation to address this research

39

 

question, is an ideal; no similar model is fully operational globally. However, pieces exit

that can be observed and analyzed.

The 182 model is based upon MAB guidelines for formation and operation of a
transboundary biosphere reserve and applies these guidelines in the specific context of La
Amistad and the Sixaola Watershed. It begins from the current Situation; the existing
legal institutions that enable, prohibit, or shape its formation. It also recognizes that La
Amistad exists at present as two national biosphere reserves and builds upon past efforts
to manage across borders utilizing the biosphere reserve framework. A literature review
was then conducted that surveyed the biosphere reserve program and concentrated on the
Latin American experience and the experiences of transboundary biosphere reserves.
Case studies of five of the current seven functioning transboundary biosphere reserves

provided data to help build the 182 model.

The model for La Amistad to function as a transboundary biosphere reserve is one on the
most Significant contributions of this dissertation. The model is presented as an adaptive
model; engineered to change. Its evolution is driven by dialogue among actors. As part
of the participatory process utilized in this dissertation the model has been presented to

government planners as a possible next step for La Amistad.

Data used to answer the research question was obtained from the current binational

agreement for cooperation; Costa Rica — Panama (Marco Legal CR-Panama 1995), UN

40

Biosphere Reserve publications (UNESCO 2000; Hadley 2002; UNESCO 2003), Specific
biosphere literature regarding Latin America (Daniele, Acerbi et al. 1999), and case

studies, technical evaluations, provided by the UN (UNESCO 2003).

There is a long history of planning to manage La Amistad as a single biosphere reserve
and it is likely that this function was intended from the park’s inception in 1982.
Development of the 182 model drew from this process and a variety of documents that

continue to inform planning and dialogue.

2.2.3.4 Determine Performance Measures

Identify key performance measures for use in analysis.

Performance measures are determined by answering the preliminary research question,
“What observable and potentially measurable outcomes can be used to analyze the
interaction of key sources of interdependence inherent in the Situation in the Sixaola

Watershed and the institutional structure for addressing that interdependence?”

There is and has been widespread agreement on desired performance outcomes for the
Sixaola Watershed, especially if one considers its integral relationship with La Amistad
lntemational Park. Preservation of biodiversity is an identified performance outcome
noted in creation documents for La Amistad lntemational Park, in both the UN Biosphere

Reserve resolutions, and the UN World Heritage Site agreements. It is noted in current

41

watershed planning documents and is a focus of a Global Environment Facility project

that scheduled for implementation in 2007.

It is possible to establish performance measures to determine if this goal is being met;
number of Species, increase or reduction of land cover, aquatic life present in streams to
name just a few. However, when the question of, “Who gets what?” is introduced a
different sort of analysis is required: Who is enjoying the benefits of preservation of
biodiversity? Who is paying by foregoing other uses? This analysis can become

extremely complex if one considers global benefits as identified earlier in this work.

The question, “Who gets to decide?” is another way of exploring the distribution of
benefits inherent in making the rules for resource management. An institutional
economic analysis, this dissertation primarily addresses shifts in the rules for making the
rules in performance outcomes. As additional actors participate in planning benefits will
shift; however, this dissertation does not provide analysis regarding the economic or
social impacts of those shifts. It rather seeks to docmnent observable institutional
arrangements, the actors likely to be engaged, in what ways, and with what probable

OUICOIIICS.

Performance measures were developed after key sources of human interdependence in
the Sixaola Watershed had been identified, the current institutional management
framework documented, and a literature review conducted regarding the global biosphere

reserve experience. Case studies had been reviewed regarding the transboundary

42

 

biosphere reserve experience, and a literature review had been conducted regarding
watershed management in general, with emphasis on transboundary watersheds, prior to

development of performance measures.

Once key sources of interdependence had been established, and data reviewed to see how
this was addressed in other cases and with what outcomes, the performance measure was
identified. For example, once it had been established that a key source of human
interdependence in the Sixaola Watershed is the lack of a shared geographic
understanding, the performance outcome: existence of a participatory GIS to assist the
planning process was selected. By using existing data it was possible to see how a GIS
was used to address the lack of a shared geographic understanding in other cases, at the
watershed level, and at the transboundary biosphere reserve level. Analyses of projected
performance outcomes for the Sixaola Watershed consider the likelihood a GIS product
or process will exist, and given the institutional framework, who will participate in this
process and in what ways. The figure that follows was developed. to represent

performance measures:

43

 

Levels of Performance Measures —l

 

 

 

they are talking about, in order to
effectively.

 

Actors must have a shared geographic information system, and a
understanding, a similar vision of what process to use, evaluate, and

The existence of a geographic

Plan continue to develop that system
is an observable performance

 

 

outcome addressing this need.

 

 

 

The diversity of actors

 

 

A shared and equitable means of
communication is needed when
actors are extremely diverse and
do not speak the same language.

 

involved in resource
management, the number
and type of exchanges they
have, can be observed and
evaluated in relationship to
communication.

 
  
  
  
  

 

 

 

An institutional
arrangement is needed
that enables participatory
planning across borders
and a means to execute
those plans.

 

 

 

  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 

 

 

Formal intuitional
arrangements are
observable; written
into code or law.
These arrangements
can be evaluated
regarding similarity of
institutions throughout
the watershed.

  

 

 

measure performance at

 

Poverty reduction, social development, conservation and preservation
outcomes are framed as the result of effective participatory planning and
management. The social development index and many economic scales

this level.

 

Figure 2: Levels of Performance Measures

44

 

2.2.3.5 SSP Analysis and Findings
Once preliminary research questions were answered it was possible to address the three

principal research questions:

“What are likely performance outcomes in the Sixaola Binational Watershed under
current plans for management at the level of the watershed, reaching to the binational
level, or with the addition of a second institutional structure, La Amistad as a
transboundary biosphere reserve?” Performance will be analyzed regarding:
1. The existence of a geographic information system (GIS), and a process to use,
evaluate, and continue to develop that system.
2. The diversity of actors involved in planning resource management in the
Sixaola Watershed, the number of exchanges they have regarding resource
management, and the quality of those interactions.

3. The existence of similar or same formal institutions for management of natural

resources in the Sixaola Watershed.

This analysis frames three aspects of the current situation as independent variables; (1)
physical immensity, biological and topographical diversity of the watershed, (2) extreme
human diversity and lack of a common means of communication, and (3) Overlapping
and confusing formal institutional management structures . These three aspects of the
situation respond to the way institutional arrangements address them and the interaction

of these two variables impacts performance. These performance outcomes are presented

and discussed in Chapter Four.

45

2.2.3.6 Participation and Collaboration

At the heart of this dissertation is an ecosystem, part of which is the Sixaola Binational
Watershed. Humans inhabit this ecosystem and have done so for millennia.'4 Current
planning and program implementation will affect land use and associated biological
impacts as well as social opportunities for people. The horizontal plane of the 182 model
presented in Chapter Three places the ecosystem at the center of concentric circles.
People surround the ecosystem, protecting it or destroying it, knowingly or unknowingly,
enjoying benefits of use in combinations that defy simple answers. This dissertation uses
a broadly defined systems perspective (Patton 2002) and views humans and natural

systems as inseparable; woven together in the fabric of life.

Gunderson and Holling developed and tested theories that explain transformational
change in human and natural systems, theories that are inherently integrative. These
theories link sustainability with cycles, smaller and larger, and the ability for systems to
adapt with change (Gunderson and Holling 2002). Adaptation in the 132 model presented
in this dissertation draws upon these concepts and is driven by human interaction;

communication and co-operation, or the lack thereof.

Participation and collaboration with actors in the Sixaola Watershed, with national

government planners, with NGOS, with the UN MAB Programme, and with other

 

‘4 Pre-cerarnic human settlements discovered in buffer zones of La Amistad south of the Sixaola Watershed
are among the oldest in Central America.

46

 

researchers is part of the research design of this dissertation. By looking at the problem
though multiple lenses, as found in the viewpoints of other actors, the researcher was able
to develop a better understanding of how the Sixaola Watershed functions as a system

and how it might change in given circumstances.

These interactions are not included in research data but are identified here as part of the
research process. By meeting with government planners it was possible to better
understand official documents and program data that are used for analysis in this
dissertation. Through contact with other researchers it was possible to learn of historical
documents that inform this study. By appearing before the National Commission for
Parque Intemacional de la Amistad, or a group of Costa Rican lawmakers, the researcher
was able to receive feedback on project design and actor’s perceptions of preliminary

findings.

Early in pre-dissertation planning contact was made with the project director in the Costa
Rican Ministry of Planning and Political Economy (MIDEPLAN), the federal agency
implementing the Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola River Binational
Watershed (the Sixaola Program). From this initial contact an ongoing dialogue
developed; government planners were briefed as to the dissertation process and
preliminary findings; the researcher was provided with up to date program documents
and information. The researcher accompanied MIDEPLAN presenters to the Costa Rican

National Legislative Assembly for a meeting at which national lawmakers and invited

47

citizens groups were briefed about the Sixaola Program. MIDEPLAN has requested final

dissertation finings to consider for binational planning.

The researcher attended a binational planning workshop for the Sixaola Program in 2006
with government officials of Costa Rica and Panama, local actors from the watershed,
Inter-American Bank representatives, and a consulting firm hired by the governments to
coordinate project planning. The purpose of this collaboration was twofold; to gain a
better understanding of the Sixaola Program and to inform actors about the dissertation
project. In addition, attendance at the workshop provided some degree of understanding

for the researcher regarding the process that was implemented to develop the Sixaola

Program.

Contact with the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere program was also made during pre-
dissertation research regarding transfrontier biosphere reserves. The program
representative at MAB headquarters in Paris and the Latin American MAB regional
representative were sent information describing the dissertation project. The model for
182, La Amistad as a transfrontier biosphere reserve, was sent to these representatives in
early draft and revised form. Feedback was solicited to check accuracy and also to guide

ftnther refinement of the model.
A working relationship was established with The Nature Conservancy Parks in Peril

Program for La Amistad and an information exchange was ongoing throughout the

dissertation project. Projects through The Nature Conservancy (TNC) have had

48

considerable impact on changing institutional arrangements in the Sixaola Watershed by
funding numerous small projects as well as developing national and international
management plans for La Amistad. The Nature Conservancy has also facilitated

meetings for The Binational Commission for Parque Intemacional de La Amistad.

A presentation of preliminary findings was made in October 2006 for the Costa Rica
National Commission for Parque Intemacional de La Amistad. In addition, a
presentation was made in November 2006 at the Costa Rican National Assembly for a
group of Costa Rican Diputados, elected officials in an office Similar to the US Senate.

In Panama 3 Similar presentation was made for the senior official in charge of transborder
affairs. Each of these presentations was intended to inform actors about the dissertation

research project and to solicit feedback from them.

The researcher attended the Panama National Forum in Oct. 2006; “Proyectos
Hidroeléctricos en Bocas Del Toro” at the Salén Horacio Alfaro, Camara de Comercio,
Industrias y Agricultura de Panama. This forum was sponsored by the Nature
Conservancy and participants included economists, biologists, representatives from
industry, and government representatives. Several Indigenous residents of Panama
attended the forum since their territory is most affected by the four dams proposed for the
Bocas del Toro region. The researcher met with presenters prior to the forum and

informally with representatives of these Indigenous groups following the forum.

49

In February 2007 the researcher met with representatives of ANAI, a prominent NGO
that performs stream and river monitoring activities in the Sixaola Watershed and
elsewhere in the region. The researcher participated as a volunteer in a stream
monitoring activity to gain a more detailed watershed View by accompanying

experienced watershed biologists into the field.

2.2.3.7 Future Research and Evaluation

This dissertation stands as an institutional economic analysis; an impact analysis using
the Situation, Structure, Performance framework; a case study based upon secondary
data. However, as part of its methodological design it sets the stage for further research;
a qualitative research project to be conducted with actors to explore institutional
management options. The current work provides a starting point from which to launch a
“process use” participatory qualitative inquiry (Patton 2002) that engages actors in

project design, research, and evaluation and helps them learn skills and develop them

through use.

The approach can be utilized in policy game simulation exercises for strategic
management (Duke and Geurts 2004). The Sixaola Watershed and the Panama Region of
Bocas del Toro are facing sudden and profound change as development projects become
operational and private investment increases dramatically. In order to protect and
simultaneously derive benefits from La Amistad Park or La Amistad Biosphere Reserve

actors must first establish a functioning communication network and then use it to

50

collaboratively build management options together. By building this network and using
it to conduct Simulation exercises actors learn the practice of management for mutual

benefit.

This dissertation sets the stage for that project. It examines the physical unit, the Sixaola
Watershed, and to some degree, the physical unit designated as La Amistad Biosphere
Reserve; Costa Rica-Panama. It presents a model of current and planned institutional
arrangements for management of these natural resources. Based upon a literature review,
as well as current recommendations and guidelines, it presents a model of La Amistad as
a sanctioned UNESCO MAB transboundary biosphere reserve. It then presents probable
performance outcomes in specific areas under each model. Based upon the findings of

this dissertation actors can decide if they would like to participate in further research.

51

CHAPTER THREE: Developing the Framework

This chapter seeks to answer four preliminary research questions:
1: “What are the key situational aspects of the Sixaola Watershed that serve as a
source of human interdependence?”
2: “What is the current web of formal institutional arrangements regarding
natural resource management in the Sixaola Binational Watershed and how do
current projects impact this web?”
3: “What would a model of La Amistad Transboundary Biosphere Reserve look
like and how would it function?”
4. “What observable and potentially measurable outcomes can be used to analyze
the interaction of key sources of interdependence inherent in the Situation in the
Sixaola Watershed and the institutional structure for addressing that

interdependence?”

A survey of the physical watershed is presented that includes information about
biodiversity, topography, agricultural patterns and possibilities, water, minerals, forests,
climate, and unique situational or physical aspects of the watershed. Information is also
provided about the human actors who inhabit the watershed with attention given to the
geographic distribution of actors, their relationships with the watershed, and key cultural
and socioeconomic considerations. The current institutional management framework for

the watershed is documented, along with proposed changes, and presented as a theoretical

52

model. A second theoretical model is presented; a model for La Amistad to function as a

UN MAB sanctioned transboundary biosphere reserve.

Chapter Three is the foundation for the Situation, Structure, Performance analysis that is

conducted in Chapter Four.

3.1 Situation: Key Sources of Human Interdependency

A physical and social analysis of the watershed was conducted using secondary data. A
primary source of that data was the Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola
Binational Watershed (Nessim, Coloane et al. 2004). Another primary data source was
project documents from the Integrated Ecosystem Management in the Sixaola Binational
River Basin project (Franklin, Linares et al. 2006). These projects are tied to a third
project, The Multiphase Sustainable Development Program for Bocas del Toro in Panama
(Nessim, Lemay et al. 2004; Franklin, Linares et al. 2006). All three projects are

formally linked, sharing funds and data, but each with Specific information not found

elsewhere.

All three projects examined physical, social, and institutional aspects of the watershed.
They cite current problems, threats, and opportunities for better management of the
watershed. They propose interventions based upon this data and Specifically cite

institutional change as a desired and mandated outcome.

53

A GIS product was created as part of this process and was used to create maps
representing physical and social characteristics of the watershed. These maps and the
data used to produce them are based upon the best official information available within
the respective governments. While the social data is current (2000 and more recent), a

recognized limitation of the GIS is that much of the physical data is fifty years old.'5

The various Sixaola Program data presented from these government sponsored programs
were supplemented from a variety of sources that are cited throughout this chapter.
Institutional Structure One (181), the proposed binational institutional arrangement, was
built upon this data and a degree of control is offered by building Institutional Structure
Two upon this same data. However, several additions have been made as needed to

capture dimensions that were not present in the aforementioned documents.

3.1.1 Concepts of Land

Land may be thought of as space — as a room and surface within and upon which life
takes place. Land often means different things depending upon the context in which it is
used and the circumstances under which it is considered (Barlowe 1996). Given this
consideration land includes the rivers, soils, mountains, Skies, and beaches of the Sixaola

Watershed. It also includes human artifacts: cities, roads, and national borders.

 

'5 Several GIS generated project maps note that they are based upon physical data from 1927.

54

Human interdependencies are created by the physical nature of land as well as the life
that arises from the land. The arrangement of living organisms with the land is part of the
physical situation. People, plants, and animals cannot be separated from the land and
must be considered in their relationship to the land and with each other when examining

sources of interdependence.

The threefold framework of land economics put forth by Barlowe involves the impacts
that (1) physical and biological factors, (2) technological and economic considerations,
and (3) institutional arrangements have on private and public decisions relative to land
use. These dimensions are different lenses by which to simultaneously examine
development initiatives and together they set the limits concerning what individuals,
groups, and governments can accomplish in their development, utilization, and
conservation of land resources (Barlowe 1996). Key findings are presented below

recognizing the multiple aspects of physical, social, and economic interests.

3.1.2 Geography of the Watershed

The Sixaola River Binational watershed originates in the Talamanca Mountains and
empties into the Caribbean Sea at the mouth of the Sixaola River where it forms the
border between Costa Rica and Panama. It occupies a surface area of approximately

2,848 square kilometers; 2,317 (81%) square kilometers within Costa Rica, and 531

55

square kilometers (19%) within Panama.'6 The highest point in the watershed, the
summit of Chirripo Grande, is 3,820 meters above sea level and the lowest point is the
mouth of the Sixaola River at the Caribbean Sea (Nessim, Coloane et al. 2004). A
topographic map shows the extreme differences in elevation as the water flows from

Costa Rica’s continental divide to the ocean. '7

 

 

 

 

 

0' --.2.
d i

 

L

Figure 3: Topographic Map of the Sixaola Watershed

Note: This figure is a placeholder, the representation of a map that is presented digitally on CD.
There is no text on this figure that is important for this dissertation.

Source: Government of Costa Rica

 

'6 Slight differences in the physical dimensions of the watershed are common among different sources. As
cited in the current Costa Rica National Management Plan for La Amistad Park, the exact dimensions of

the area are not precisely known.
17 Maps in this printed dissertation are placeholders only and represent digital maps included as part of this

dissertation in electronic format.

56

Based on its geomorphologic characteristics (and for purposes of the Sixaola Sustainable
le Development Program), the watershed is divided into three zones: a larger (2,038.0
km2) sparsely populated (0.42 inhabitants/km2) upper watershed; a middle basin (512.4
km2, 16.36 inhabitants/km2) and a smaller but more developed and populated lower

basin (336.8 km2, 72.49 inhabitants/km2) (GEF 2006).

Another classification system divides the watershed in the Canton of Talamanca into two
sub-regions. '8 The sub-region of High Talamanca is 2,248 square kilometers (80% of
the canton) of which 2,044 square kilometers is protected mountains with slopes and
inclines of greater than 60% and 204 square kilometers in mountainous steps. Low
Talamanca has an extension of 562 square kilometers (the remaining 20% of the canton),
composed of 225 square kilometers of hills (8% of the canton), 281 square kilometers of

valleys (10%), and 56 square kilometers of coast (2% surface of the canton).

The Sixaola Binational Watershed is also divided into six sub-watersheds. These
watersheds are: (l) the Yorkin, (2) Uren, (3) Lari, (4) Coen, (5) Teire, and (6) Sixaola.
Water quality in the upper watershed is good due largely to an intact forest cover.
Degradation begins in the middle watershed and becomes substantial in the lower
watershed with the introduction of agrochemicals and increased sedimentation resulting
from intensive banana production. The quantity of water produced in the Sixaola
Watershed, and its potential to produce hydroelectric power are mentioned in documents

that created La Amistad lntemational Park. Further information about condition of the

 

”The CATlE-IUCN classification is based upon the Canton of Talamanca (2810 square kilometers), not
the watershed which totals of 2,3 1 7 square kilometers (82%) within the canton.

57

watershed and hydroelectric potential is included in the section on water that follows later

in this chapter.

Table 1: Sixaola Watershed Sub-watersheds

 

Principal Sub-Watersheds of the Sixaola Watershed

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Area (Square Kilometers)
Sub-watershed
Costa Rica Panama Total
Yorkin 41.0 252.0 293.0
Uren 252.5 75.5 328.0
Lari 347.7 0 347.7
Coen 407.6 0 407.6
Teire 1037.0 0 1037.0
Sixaola 231.0 204.0 435.0

 

 

 

 

 

Source: Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola Binational Watershed

 

3.1.2.1 Shared Geographic Understanding

The sheer size of the watershed, coupled with the rugged topography, makes it difficult
for actors to share a common understanding of the geography of the watershed. In
watersheds that have more uniform geographic characteristics actors do not face the
challenge of understanding physical conditions so vastly different from the ones in which
they live. This understanding is further limited by the lack of roads, especially in the
upper watershed, which makes access nearly impossible. For the most part, actors have a

limited view of the watershed that centers on the immediate area in which they live.

58

 

According to Carlos Borge, consultant and facilitator for the project that produced the
current Costa Rican National Management Plan for La Amistad lntemational Park, “La
Amistad lntemational Park Talamanca has been immeasurable up to the present, of
unknown magnitude. Its size on paper at a scale of 1:50,000 is based upon aerial
photographs that are fifty years old. A field measurement has never been performed,
remaining beyond economic reach. A measurement Should be done some day, perhaps
by remote sensing that can provide detailed relief. When it is done we may possibly
discover that the park measures much more than currently believed, and that we have a

protected area disproportionately measured until that time.

“Because of that we don’t have a shared “geographic imagination”. No map or satellite
image or aerial photograph can reveal the magnitude of the protected forested area. The
relief with slopes greater than 60%, and in many cases 80%, are not captured nor
insinuated. Even when we fly over in a helicopter it is not possible for us to capture the
dimensions of the immense green steppe, we only realize that we have not been able to
imagine the majesty and Size of the park. Those who have traveled though the park on
foot carry a lasting impression but no one can say that they know La Amistad Park,

Talamanca” (Borge 2004) (Author’s translation from Spanish).

A question from this same national management plan asks, “How can we articulate and

harmonize visions that correspond to vastly different perceptions? This question speaks

59

to a key source of human interdependence; the need for a shared geographic

understanding in order to plan collaboratively.

3.1.2.2 Biological Diversity

The Sixaola Watershed is also one of the most biologically diverse areas in Central
America with multiple Holdridge Life Zonesl9 including Tropical Moist Forest, Tropical
Wet Forest, Premontane Rain Forest, and Lower Mountain Rain Forest (Jordan,
Sagastizabal et al. 1999). At the level of the biosphere reserve La Amistad has ten of the
thirteen Holdridge life zones present in Panama and nine of the twelve Holdridge life

zones present in Costa Rica.

The Talamanca-Central mountain range contains at least 10% of the main habitat types
found on Planet Earth, and the region has been classified as one of the 200 global priority
ecoregions defined by the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF). In the upper sub-basin,
La Amistad Park contains an estimated 4% of the planet’s terrestrial species, including
some 10,000 species of superior plants and more than 40,000 inferior and non-vascular
plants. Approximately 80% of the mosses and the majority of the 900 species of lichen
known in Costa Rica can be found here, as well as 1,000 ferns and 1,000 orchid species.
In terms of fauna, the Talamanca mountain range harbors more than 400 bird species, 263

species of amphibians and reptiles, as well as 215 mammal Species. The coastal

 

‘9 Holdridge Life Zones are ecological classifications devised using three indicators: biotemperature (based
on the growing season length and temperature); mean annual precipitation; and a potential
evapotranspiration ratio, linking biotemperature with annual precipitation to define humidity provinces.
The data set has a total of 38 life-zone classes.

60

ecosystems, including wetlands, mangroves, coral reefs and sea grass beds, are home to a

variety of threatened and endangered Species (Franklin, Linares et al. 2006).

Biological diversity of world importance is institutionally recognized in the current
designation of La Amistad lntemational Park (including the entire upper Sixaola
Watershed) as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. While local benefits are evident, global
actors can benefit in a variety of ways from the preservation of the genetic diversity and
unique species found in the watershed. Medicines as well as food crops may be derived
from plants present in protected areas of the Sixaola Watershed. Global citizens may
value the existence of threatened species in La Amistad even though these citizens reside
far from the watershed. While there currently is no global market for maintenance of
genetic diversity a payment system to compensate especially important areas is not

inconceivable in the future.

3.1.2.3 Agricultural Considerations: Sunlight, Temperature, Soils,
Water.

Daylight ranges from 11 hours 34 minutes to 12 hours 42 minutes over the course of a
year but sunlight intensity and cloud cover can vary considerably within Short periods as
well as annually. Shade producing canopies are necessary to grow plants that are not
tolerant of extreme sunlight and this has been done successfiilly for production of
botanicals. The normal average high temperature for the lowlands of the Canton of
Talamanca is 30.5 degrees Celsius. Average annual low temperature is 20.4 degrees

Celsius. These temperatures are typical of the Talamanca Valley as well as the other

61

lowland areas suitable for agricultural production in the watershed. Annual rainfall is
3,000 to 4,000 mm (118-157 inches) but this can vary widely and flooding has been a
chronic problem. This characteristic is discussed in greater detail in the geocultural

considerations section of this dissertation.

Soils in the upper watershed are not appropriate for agriculture due to their limited depth
and high vulnerability to soil erosion if the forest cover is removed. Steep slopes, often
60 degrees to 80 degrees, and the continuous rainfall throughout the year exacerbate
erosion problems and make sustainable agriculture nearly impossible in this part of the

watershed.

The lands appropriate for agriculture are located mainly in the fertile flood plain of the
lower basin and the Talamanca Valley (middle sub-basin) which is inhabited by Bribri
and Cabe’car Indigenous people. Extensive commercial banana plantations ( 12,400 ha)
dominate production in the lower watershed while Indigenous producers in the middle
watershed cultivate organic bananas (2,450 ha.), produce a combination of organic cacao

and banana in agro-forestry systems (3,600 ha.) and widely practice subsistence farming.

There is an existing link between agriculture and changes in Indigenous culture in the
middle watershed. In 1909 the United Fruit Company (UFCO) established banana
plantations in the Sixaola lower watershed, but after fungal diseases affected production
in the Chiriqui Lagoon and the Changuinola River UFCO settled new lands in the

Talamanca Basin. Prior to this time the Bribri and Cabecar had been practicing

62

subsistence agriculture with limited commodity exchange. The UFCO presence
transformed the economy of the region by introducing contact with the international
capitalist system. In 1930 the UFCO abandoned banana cultivation in the Talamanca
Basin after floods, shifting watercourses, and fungal diseases had negatively affected the
production. When the Company pulled out the Bribri and Cabecar resettled lands they
had previously occupied, and with the region already linked to the international economy,
began growing cacao for exchange and eventual export. Cacao remained the most
important cash crop in the Talamanca Basin until the late 1970’s when the fungal disease,

Monilia, swept across the region (Borge and Villalobos 1994).

The process of land degradation related to current agriculture is localized mainly in the
following areas; (1) in the margins of the Indigenous territories of Bribri y Cabecar
(middle sub-basin); (2) in the Yorkin sub-watershed associated with cattle grazing
promoted by Ladinos and non-native Indigenous inhabitants (N gObe-Buglé); (3) in the
Panamanian side of PILA; and (4) on the hillsides and flood plain in the lower sub-basin.
At least 3,340 ha. in these areas are subject to conflicting land use as Slash-and-burn
practices to prepare for cattle grazing contributes to soil erosion during the heavy rains

and affects the area throughout the year (Franklin, Linares et al. 2006).

63

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 4: Sixaola Watershed, Percent Pop. in Agriculture.

Note: This figure is a placeholder, the representation of a map that is presented digitally on CD.
There is no text on this figure that is important for this dissertation.

Source: Government of Costa Rica

 

S CON PRESENCIA

W
DECULTWOS Demos (SEGLN APPTA)

 

 

 

 

' “'"w‘ ' ..._. "“ ..I: ..I ' ' ..I
Figure 5: Percent of Organic Agriculture
Note: This figure is a placeholder, the representation of a map that is presented digitally on CD.
There is no text on this figure that is important for this dissertation.

Source: Government of Costa Rica

64

Table 2: Sixaola Watershed Land Use

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Land Use in the Sixaola Watershed
(Hectares)
Land Use Total %

Banana (intensive) 12,417 4.3
Banana (organic) 2,451 0-3
Banana with cacao (organic) 3,607 1.2
Forest 255,741 88.6
Mixed Cultivation 2,476 0.9
Mixed Cultivation, Pastures and Farms not in cultivation 4,494 1.6
Plantain 2,965 1 .0
Plantain cultivation mixed with forest 1,060 0.4
Pasture 1,066 0.4
River 2,449 0.8
TOTAL 288,726 100.0
Source: ERDS; 2003 in Sixaola Program documents

 

 

 

 

 

3.1.2.4 Water

Average rainfall in Talamanca ranges between 59 and 79 inches a year. The forests in
the Sixaola Watershed capture an estimated 2,685 mm of precipitation on an annual
basis, resulting in an average multi-annual flow of 172 m3/s, representing a volume of
5,456,000 m3/year (Franklin, Linares et al. 2006). While the water quality in the upper
sub-basin is generally good, the waters in the middle and lower sub-basins suffer from
pollution mainly from agriculture and human settlements. In the Yorkin and Lari
watersheds (in the middle sub-basin), for example, the Biotic Integrity Index, which
reflects the health of the aquatic ecosystem, is classified level three on a scale of one to
five indicating that water pollution and sedimentation are affecting the aquatic

enviromnent.20

 

2° It is possible that the Biotic Index referred to in official documents is based upon the Biotic Index used
by ANAI, an NGO that monitors water quality in the Sixaola Basin. The ANAI Biotic Index is a

65

The large quantities of clean water that originate in the headwaters of the Sixaola (and La
Amistad Park) are of importance to a variety of actors. In addition to agricultural uses in
the middle and lower watershed, these water sources sustain life by providing drinking
water for human communities. The principal cities of Limon in Costa Rica and David in
Panama both get their freshwater supplies from water that originates in headwaters that
are part of La Amistad Park (but not the Sixaola Watershed). As proposed development
occurs there will be a greater demand for drinking water and other watershed uses in the

Sixaola Basin.

Costal communities, the current center of tourism activities, are highly impacted by water
quality, and if proposed ecotourism programs are to develop, clean water throughout the
watershed is needed to facilitate this economic activity. Links, although as yet unclear,
have been established between intensive banana production and negative impacts on
fragile marine shoreline ecosystems including coral reefs (Rainforest Alliance Network
2003). The tourism trade of the region iS heavily dependent upon the health and quality

of these marine ecosystems.

The hydroelectric potential for the Sixaola Watershed can be somewhat approximated by
examining the adjoining area in Panama and hydroelectric projects that are in
implementation there. Four current projects, all located in the Changuinola-Teribe

Watershed of Panama, are also located within the limits of the Palo Seco Protected

 

multifaceted evaluation of watershed health and uses ratings of 1.1, 3.3, or 5.5, with 5.5 being the highest
rating indicating health of the stream or river.

66

Forest. Three of these projects are to be built on the Changuinola River and the fourth on

the Bonyic River. Both of these rivers have their headwaters in La Amistad Park (PILA).

The dams’ combined installed capacity would be 446 megawatts, equivalent to 30
percent of Panama’s total capacity at the end of 2004. A cost-benefit analysis of the
aggregate hydroelectric program concludes, “Our analysis suggests that the projects
would most likely be both economically and financially feasible. Nonetheless, they
would cause environmental damage in an area of global conservation interest and impose
serious hardship on Indigenous communities living along these rivers. The company that
builds and operates the project would earn approximately $87 million in present value
terms. This “net present value” (N PV) figure is the sum of yearly profits, discounted
with an interest that is a weighted average of returns on alternative investments and the

lending rate for similar projects” (Cordero, Montenegro et al. 2006).

Up to ten hydroelectric projects have been proposed for the Sixaola Watershed (Jordan,
Sagastizabal et al. 1999) but these projects have been stopped due to objections from
Indigenous residents who have legal rights regarding land use on Indigenous reserves.
These projects were proposed not only as a way to generate electricity (and revenue) but
also to mitigate flooding in the middle and lower watershed and allow expanded
agricultural production options. Flooding is addressed in the section on geocultural

considerations that follows later in this dissertation.

3.1.2.5 Minerals

67

The production of minerals in Costa Rica has been limited in recent years partly due to
pressure from domestic and international environmental advocates. As one of his first
acts in office, Costa Rican President Abel Pacheco (administration 2002-2006) decreed a
nation-wide moratorium against oil exploration and open pit mining. In the case of the
Sixaola Watershed extraction of minerals is prohibited in protected natural areas (50% of

the watershed) and strongly opposed on Indigenous reserves (30% of the watershed).

All mineral production in Costa Rica accounts for less than 1% of the gross domestic
product (GDP). Government control of mining is tied to law 6797 of 1982 at which time
mining was placed under the same ministry charged with management (and conservation)

of natural resources, the Ministerio de Recursos Naturales, Energia, y Minas.

Industrial mineral production includes cement, clays, diatomite, lime, pumice, salt, sand
and gravel. Precious metal production is primarily gold with Silver as a by product (Doan
1998). All production has been limited in the Sixaola Watershed due to the sheer
inaccessibility of the terrain, and later, to the designation of protected areas and strong
public opposition to mineral extraction in this zone. However, pressure for oil

exploration has been strong in the watershed and the entire southern Caribbean region of

the country.

The first exploratory oil well was drilled in the region of Limon (home of the Sixaola

Watershed) in 1915 and since that time 12 more exploratory wells have been drilled,

most of them on or near Indigenous reserves in Talamanca. Drilling stopped

68

approximately 20 years ago but many Indigenous residents have personal memories of
these projects and have organized to oppose further drilling (Diaz 2006). Although
drilling stopped, oil exploration continued and is currently a topic of local and national

debate.

In June 1998 a concession was granted by the Costa Rican national government to MKJ
Xploration Inc., a subsidy of Harken Energy Corporation, for hydrocarbon exploration in
a region that extends from the central Caribbean port of Moin (Limon) to the Panamanian
border.21 In 1999 Harken Energy performed a marine exploration on an area of 108
square kilometers from Port Limon to Cahuita.22 The exploration consisted of seismic
detonations in the sea bed to determine geologic formations that may contain oil deposits.
The detonations had unknown impacts and raised objections from residents who were not

informed prior to setting them off (Fuentes Belgrave 2001 ).

Shortly thereafter opposition to oil exploration coalesced and a group, ADELA (AcciOn
de Lucha Antipetrolera), was formed by brining together approximately 95 organizations
in Talamanca and Limon. With assistance from regional and global actors this group
legally opposed oil exploration activities in the Caribbean region of Costa Rica and
organized widespread public support. Actions regarding oil exploration are still in Costa
Rican court in 2006 and private companies that received concessions are suing for
damages unless exploration is allowed to resume once again. Opponents cite the

following institutional arrangements (and others) to legally prevent further exploration:

 

2' Resolution R-702-98 is the legal document granting this concession.
22 Cahuita is a village located near the north border of the Sixaola Watershed and is part of a district

watershed committee structure.

69

the Convenio 169 of the OIT recognizing Indigenous autonomy, the Rio de J aneiro
Summit Agreements, the Social Summit of Copenhagen, the Convenio de Cites Sobre
ConservaciOn y Zonas Protegida, the RAMSAR Conventions, and the Costa Rican

National Constitution (Fuentes Belgrave 2001).

It is worthy to note that the first geologic explorations of the region began in the mid
1800’s, fueled partly by legends of gold in Talamanca. This was a time of large national
development projects and mineral exploration was linked to other efforts including the
construction of a railway to connect Costa Rica’s Central Valley with the Caribbean port
of Limén. Prominent among the geologic explorers was William Gabb who produced a
geologic map of Talamanca in 1873 but which was never formally published (Denyer Ch.
and Soto Bonilla 1999). Given the secrecy of mineral explorations, the extremely
challenging terrain, and the protected status of much of Talamanca, it is reasonable to say

that a definitive mineral analysis of the Sixaola Watershed is not known to exist.

3.1.2.6 Forests

Forest cover in the upper watershed is largely intact, due in part to designation of the
entire upper watershed as a national protected area, and due in part to the lack of roads
and sheer inaccessibility of the trees. The link between forests and the hydrologic
services they provide has been developed in detail and applied as part of a proposed
program; Scaling Up and Mainstreaming Payments for Environmental Services in Costa
Rica: PROYECTO ECOMERCADOS 11. Four of the primary services listed are: (1) the

forests protect against flooding and help regulate rainfall, (2) they stabilize the soil and

70

reduce erosion, (3) protect biodiversity, and (4) reduce soil compaction, promote
infiltration, and capture of surface water. These considerations are especially important

in the Sixaola Watershed since 255,741hectares (88.6 % of the surface of the watershed)

are currently forested.

The forests of the Sixaola Watershed, in combination with the Indigenous agro-forestry
systems, capture an estimated volume of 647,444 tons of carbon (representing 2,374,000
tons of C02 per year) and contribute to climate change mitigation. While protected lands
are not able to participate in the global carbon trading program administered by the
Fondo Nacional de Financiamiento F orestal (FONAFIFO), Indigenous reserves have
been included and began participating in carbon sequestration programs in 1997.
Participation is through contracts with the Asociaciones de Desarrollo Indigena (ADIRI)
with nine projects approved in 2005. Payments for forest services on all Indigenous
lands in Costa Rica through this program totaled $4.3 million US from 1997 through
2005. It is worthy of note that the overall percentage of Indigenous lands participating in
FONAF IF 0 programs declined from 3.1% of all contracts in 2001 to 1.5% of all
contracts in 2005. While the total number of hectares on Indigenous lands participating
in the project increased slightly from 4199 hectares in 2001 to 5400 hectares in 2005, this
represented a drop in the percentage of hectares in the national program from 13.7% in

2001 to 10.3% in 2005 (Tiftler Sotomayor 2006).23

 

23 At the time this data was reported for 2005 three additional projects on Indigenous lands were pending
and not included in these numbers.

71

 

 

Carbon sequestration and mitigation of global climate change are planetary services
provided by the forests of the Sixaola Watershed. Along with the protection of biological
diversity, these services are a source of human interdependence that extend from the local

to the global.

3.1.2.7 Geocultural Considerations

The Sixaola Sustainable Development Program produced a map that noted four particular
geocultural points of interest. These include: 1) coral formations along the coastline at
Punta Uva, Manzanillo, Punta Mona, and lsla Mona; 2) an area of seismic activity; 3) an
area of frequent flooding and changing riverbed path; and 4) an area of historic glacial
activity. Additionally it is important to note that Mesoamerican Biological Corridors
interconnect at the mouth of the Sixaola River in the Caribbean Sea, thus providing a
vital link between two of the natural protected areas of global importance: the Gandoca-
Manzanillo Wildlife Refuge and the San San Pond Sak Wetland. These two sites are
included in the Convention on Wetlands of lntemational Importance especially as

Waterfowl Habitat (RAMSAR).

72

 

\
PJN‘OS DE iNTERES SECCUL’JRL \

\

 

 

 

 

Figure 6: Points of Geocultural Interest

Note: This figure is a placeholder, the representation of a map that is presented digitally on CD.
There is no text on this figure that is important for this dissertation.

Source: Government of Costa Rica

Coral Formations, Coastal Ecosystems and Upstream Impacts. Water quality is good
in the upper watershed but begins to degrade in the middle watershed (Biotic Integrity
Index 3 on a scale of 1-5 as reported in program documents), largely due to deforestation
including slash and burn practices that are followed by pastures or small to mid-Sized
agricultural production. Water quality deteriorates further in the lower watershed largely
due to intensive banana and plantain production. The water quality of the Sixaola River
as it reaches the ocean impacts coral formations as well as costal ecosystems, the health
of sensitive protected areas, and opportunities for human actors to enjoy chemical and

sediment free water.

73

Banana and plantain, the main crops in the watershed, are damaged by pests and diseases
and are dependent upon agrochemicals to produce bananas that meet current export
standards. The negative impacts of the use of agrochemicals in this application are
documented as affecting the health of the human population and terrestrial, freshwater,
and costal wetland ecosystems (Nessim, Coloane et al. 2004). Scientists commonly
believe that sedimentation, agrochemicals, and other contaminants that streams and rivers
carry from the banana plantations to the mouth of the river are detrimental to the reefs,
but much more research (and better coordinated research) is needed to firlly describe the

cause-and-effect relationships (Rainforest Alliance Network 2003).

Current intensive agricultural practices in the lower watershed may have negative
impacts for the RAMSAR Sites of Gandoca-Manzanillo Wildlife Refuge and the San San
Pond Sak Wetland respectively located north and south of the river mouth. These sites
are institutionally recognized for their global importance and the quality of water
impacting them serves as a source of human interdependencies reaching from the local to
the global and involving multinational companies, NGO’S, scientists, goverrunent

officials, environmental activists from around the world, as well as local residents.

Seismic Activity. A second area of special interest is a band of seismic activity that
follows the coastline from the southern edge of the watershed and extends north. The
most significant recent earthquake to occur in this region (Limon Province) was April 22,
1991 (M=7.5). Fifty-three people were killed, 198 injured, and widespread damage

occurred to constructed works. Proceedings of a 1993 US. — Costa Rica workshop to

74

examine the causes, process, and possible further consequences of seismic activity in the
area concluded, “Ground failures generated by liquefaction caused floodplains to press
into river channels, compressing bridge structures, and caused soils to weaken under
highway and railway grades, causing embankment fills to settle and spread laterally.

. . .Most liquefaction occurred in alluvial and fluvial deposits that underlie river
floodplains or in deltaic, lagoonal or estuarine deposits that underlie lowlands along the

coast (Lesslie Youd 1993).

An important note regarding seismic considerations is that while most destructive activity
occurred, and is likely to occur, along the coastal areas of the watershed, the Talamanca
Mountains are Central America’s highest non-volcanic mountain range and have a long
history of seismic activity. The north flank of the Talamanca range is included in current
seismic monitoring to detect hazards relating to the Central Valley (Fernandez M. and
Rojas W. 2006). While Sixaola Project planners noted a coastal band of seismic activity,
care must be taken to recognize that seismic considerations extend throughout the

watershed.

Flooding and Riverbed Changes. A third geocultural point of interest is the flooding
and changing course of the Sixaola River downstream of the Talamanca Valley. The
river naturally meanders, changing course in the mid and lower watershed where

topographic relief stabilizes near sea level. This same area is prone to severe flooding.

75

Significant flooding in 2002 was followed by an even more severe occurrence in early
2005. A newspaper article from January 19, 2005 notes that losses in the southern region
of Limon had exceeded 15,000 million colones (>$US 30 million) from the rain events
earlier that month (Alvarado 2005). The devastation caused by flooding is an important
geocultural consideration, especially when placed in the context of a 2006 newspaper
article that laments the un-repaired damage to the principal Sixaola—Bribri road 18

months after the 2005 flooding (Oviedo 2006).

In a recent publication that examines extreme events in Costa Rica, flooding, especially
in the Caribbean Region, was noted as a primary problem. This report calls for creation
of a database with hydro-meteorological information that is lacking at present. It also
calls for technical education about hydrology and overflow protection in infrastructure
design for municipalities in the Caribbean Region (Salas Pinel 2005). Through a
binational process, the coordinated Sixaola and Bocas del Toro Sustainable Development
Programs will examine moving two cities, Sixaola in Costa Rica, and Guavito in Panama

partly due to repeated floods (Franklin, Linares et al. 2006).

Glacial Deposits. The final item noted of Special geocultural importance is the presence
of glacial deposits in the Costa Rican Paramos, an area that includes the highest peaks of
the Cordillera de Talamanca; Cerros Chiripo, de la Muerte, and Kamuk. It is a unique
ecosystem in the country with the highest elevations and coldest climate (Lachniet, Selzer
et al. 1998). This fragile ecosystem is vulnerable to human intrusions with areas of easily

disturbed soils and vegetation (Kappelle and Horn 2005).

76

The Sixaola Watershed begins at the continental divide of these peaks and in an
ecosystem that is vastly different from the lowlands at the mouth of the Sixaola River.
This is perhaps where management at the level of the watershed is weakest, the
continental divide, and a single fragile high altitude ecosystem that might be better

managed as a unit rather than in pieces (by watershed).

3.1.2.8 Geopolitical Considerations

The Sixaola River Watershed is binational, residing partly in Costa Rica (81%) and
Panama (19%). This characteristic deserves special consideration as literature has
evolved to address issues unique to binational or multinational watershed management.
There is ample evidence to indicate that the binational or multinational aspect of a
watershed is a source of human interdependencies that can and should be addressed

institutionally (Milich and Varady 1999).

The Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola River Binational Watershed
(Nessim, Coloane et al. 2004) and the Integrated Ecosystem Management in the Sixaola
Binational River Basin (Franklin, Linares et al. 2006) highlight the binational
composition of the watershed as a key component to be addressed in planning and
management of natural resources. The Sixaola Programs are pilot programs that address
this binational source of interdependence, and successful experiences may be replicated

elsewhere (GEF 2004).

77

The Sixaola Watershed also is strategically located as part of the Limon-Almirante Axis,
a proposed infrastructure corridor that links the ports of Limon, Costa Rica; Almirante,
Panama; and the Panama Canal. This situational aspect takes on additional impact in
light of the Panama Canal expansion approved by voters in October 22, 2006. The
amplification of the canal will allow more and larger Ships to pass through the canal as
international trade flows continue to increase. The Sixaola Program is formally tied to
the Puebla-Panama Plan, a larger Inter-American Development Project that seeks to
promote a network of highways linking eight countries from Mexico to Panama. The
geographic location of the Sixaola Watershed and its situational relationship to this plan

will also be considered in Chapter Four of this dissertation.

 

 

l cum 0E1. Ric SIXAOLA EN Etc. rexrc DEL as Esmréoico LIMON — ALMWE
“*‘ .
~-
P" I
Q— l— ‘-
.....
.
been an -—-

 

 

 

 

Figure 7: Limon — Almirante Strategic Axis

Note: This figure is a placeholder, the representation of a map that is presented digitally on CD.
There is no text on this figure that is important for this dissertation.

Source: Government of Costa Rica

78

3.1.3 Diversity of Actors and Means of Communication

There is extreme diversity among actors living in the Sixaola Watershed. While it is
common to find different socioeconomic groups and some racial and ethnic differences in
any watershed, the differences in the Sixaola Watershed are extreme with the exception
of a single largely shared circumstance: limited social development opportunities

coupled with endemic poverty.24

The human population in the Basin is pluricultural, with 58% being Indigenous,

38% Ladinos and 4% Afro-Caribbean descendants. The Afro-descendant population is
concentrated along the coast, while the indigenous populations of Bri Bri and Cabecar are
concentrated in the middle sub-basins on legally declared Indigenous Reserves in Costa
Rica and Indigenous Regions in Panama which do not have “comarca”, or legal status
(although more than 90% of the residents classify themselves as Indigenous). The

Ladino population is mainly represented in the lower sub-basin (Franklin, Linares et al.

2006).

These official numbers do not recognize other groups present in the watershed but not
recorded. Indigenous reserves in the middle watershed have seen the increasing presence

of Ladino settlers many of whom are illegal Nicaraguan immigrants. According to

 

24 Talamanca has a Social Development Index (SDI) value of 0. SDI is an integrated indicator developed by
MIDEPLAN to measure social gaps between different geographical areas. It considers: educational infrastructure,
access to educational programs, infant mortality, deaths among the population under five years, average monthly
consumption of residential electricity, and births of children of single mother. The highest (100) value corresponds to
the canton in the best socio-demographic situation and the lowest (0) to the one that is most behind in its level of
development; (Franklin, H., A. M. Linares, et al. (2006). Integrated Ecosystem Management in the Sixaola Binational
River Basin. Proiect Document. San Jose, Costa Rica, lnterAmerican Development Bank: 35.

79

estimates of the National Development Program of Indigenous People, approximately
15% of the Cabecar territory and 35% of the Bribri territory is in the hands of non-
Indigenous groups (GEF 2006). These non-Indigenous actors are a social force
impacting traditional Indigenous communities and further increase diversity as new
norms and value systems are constructed through the interactions of these diverse

cultures.

European and North Americans began to arrive as tourists and then settle in numbers
during the 1970’s. Recent years have seen a wave of affluent foreign interest in
Talamanca, primarily along the coast, with an accompanying construction boom. Most
of these settlers do not appear on census records (they do not appear at all in the official
census summary cited above) Since they often retain residency in their home country
despite the fact that they spend much or most of their time in Costa Rica or Panama.
They break further into sub-groups by ethnicity or culture and collectively bring extreme
diversity to the watershed with representation from a variety of European nations as well
as North and South America. While the number of these residents is unknown, this group
has a visible presence, especially in the area of Puerto Viejo. These actors bring the
cultural values of the North; education, activism, and a degree of wealth that is much

higher than most of the watershed.

Afro-Caribbean settlers, primarily of Jamaican descent, began arriving in the early 1800’s

and developed a multifaceted culture in Talamanca that ranged from wealthy chocolate

farmers to gatherers and subsistence farmers who successfully blended with Indigenous

80

 

groups.25 While census data places the percentage of Afro-Caribbean residents of the
watershed at 4%, this group has considerable political power and impacts customs of the
region, largely serving as the cultural base for Limon, the nation’s principal seaport and
seat of regional power, and the beach town of Cahuita which forms the northernmost

village represented in proposed Sixaola District Watershed Committees.

The village of Sixaola and the area surrounding it have received Central American
migrants (principally Nicaraguans and Honduran) as well as Costa Ricans from the
Central Valley, Guanacaste, and other parts of the country to work in banana production.
This has created a heterogeneous population with less cohesiveness than Indigenous
reserves that are divided by tribe and cultural group. This points out the extremes in
diversity among actors since it is worthy to note that even on a single Indigenous reserve
there are competing factions with different visions of the future and disputes have led to

social fractures that inhibit co-management (Palmer 1989).

A related source of human interdependence is the diversity of preferred means of
communication among actors. Government planners routinely communicate in Spanish
and use digital forms of communication as well as the printed page. Indigenous residents
of the watershed most often speak Spanish as a second language and their first language
was not originally a written language. Most Afro-Caribbean residents speak some
English, and for others it is their primary language. These cultural and linguistic
differences are further accentuated by vast divisions in wealth among actors in the

watershed and differences in access to technology. In order for these actors to understand

 

2’ The collapse of chocolate production in the 1970’s had a profound impact upon this culture.

81

each other, and communicate effectively, a communication system must be developed
that allows a large degree of equal access for all. This mean more than speaking the same

language, it requires similar fluency.

Each of these groups has different as well as Shared interests in the watershed, its
management, and development options. The Sixaola Program documents note, “It is a
region of diverse social actors with distinct and common interests, with alliances and
contradictions, with all types of agendas, external and internal, that in one way or another
are expressed politically in power games to ensure survival and to advance their agendas.
Institutional and individual actors interrelate and are generally concerned with specific
themes depending upon their situational position” (Inter-American Development Bank

2006).

3.1.3.1 Indigenous Inhabitants

Indigenous territories (called Indigenous Reserves in Costa Rica and Indigenous Regions
in Panama), and the autonomy of Indigenous peoples, are recognized in specific laws and
in Treaty No. 169 of the lntemational Labor Organization (ILO) ratified in both Costa
Rica and Panama. In Costa Rica, National Law 6172 establishes that the Indigenous
governments are made up by the Associations of Integrated Development (ADI), and in
Panama it is established that each territory must define their form of government. Within

these territories, the Indigenous Governments act with relative autonomy although the

82

respective national governments institutionally retain final authority (Franklin, Linares et

al. 2006).

The Sixaola Watershed contains six Indigenous territories, four in Costa Rica; (the
Indigenous reserves Bri Bri of KekOldi, Bri-Bri of Talamanca, Cabe’car of Talamanca and
Cabecar of Telire), and two in Panama; (the Bri Bri and Naso), even though these two

lack legal status as “comarca” or formal Indigenous Region.

In the case of the Sixaola Watershed the presence of Indigenous residents serves as a
source of human interdependence. Table Three below shows that in both countries over
90% of the inhabitants living in the middle watershed are Indigenous people. Watershed-
wide the Indigenous population is 58% of all inhabitants. This fact alone would make the
Indigenous population a special consideration in development planning, but cultural and
ethical issues must also be addressed regarding this group with ties to the land that extend

historically for millennia.

Table 3: Indigenous Population by Watershed Zone

Watershed , Population (Percent Indigenous population) Surface Density
Zone Costa Rica Panama Overall Total (km) per 10112
Upper 848 (100%) 7 0 848 (100%) 2,038.0 0.42
Middle 7,256-(94%) 1,1 19 (97%) 8,375 (95%) 512.4 16.36
Lower . 11,550 (27%) 12,808 (60%) 24,3 58 (44%) 336.8 72.49
Total 19,654 (55%) 13,927 (63%) 33,581 (58%) 2,887.2 11.63

Source: Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola River Binational Watershed

It is unknown when the first human settlers came to the Talamanca region but the Bribri

and Cabecar had settled in Talamanca, displacing other tribes, prior to Columbus and the

83

arrival of Europeans. These Indigenous groups successfully resisted intrusions by the
Miskito Indians, the conquistadores and Spanish settlers, the displacement promoted by
the expansion of banana plantations (United Fruit Company) in the early 1900’s, and are
currently struggling to find their own level of acceptance regarding the integration

policies of the centralist government (APPTA 2006).

A Bribri-Cabecar myth speaks of an immense space between the mountains of ChirripO
and Kamuk, a huge conical house in which the three principal mythological animals
(totem animals; the danta, jaguar, and eagle) live protected by spirits of the mountains.
This is where the Sixaola Watershed originates forming the Telire, Coe’n, Lari, and Uren.
It is also where the winds live with clouds and light, held there by soft absorbing sponges
placed by SibO (God) (Borge 2004). It is extremely difficult for non-Indigenous actors to
understand this way of being, of knowing, and the accompanying importance it places

upon the land.

Protecting cultural heritage is part of La Amistad’s designation .as a UNESCO World
Heritage Site. Pre-ceramic sites just south of the Sixaola Watershed have been dated at
approximately 12,000 years old. Further exploration is needed to learn more about some
of Central America’s earliest inhabitants. Protecting Indigenous cultural heritage and
preserving its past are more than interests; they are institutional agreements linking the

local to the global (UNEP and WCMC 1997).

84

3.1.4 Current Formal Institutional Arrangements

The current web of formal institutions for management of the Sixaola Watershed is
presented here as part of the situation. There is substantial agreement that this
institutional structure is not working well at present, and the Government of Costa Rica
as well as the Government of Panama, have recognized this problem, applied for
financial help to restructure institutional arrangements, and have begun the process
seeking to improve binational management of the Sixaola Watershed. Independent
sources have also documented deficiencies in the institutional management of La
Amistad lntemational Park which has a direct relationship to management of the Sixaola

Watershed (Borge 2004).

A documentation of the crurent institutional structure is offered from collected data. This
is the given situation, the formal structure actors currently must use to participate in

resource management. Both models that follow build upon this current situation.

Institutional Stakeholders: A list of institutionally linked stakeholders (formal
governmental entities) prepared as part of the GEF Plan of Operations for the Integrated
Ecosystem Management of the Binational Sixaola River Basin (Franklin, Linares et al.

2006) includes the following:

Costa Rica: the Ministry of Planning (MIDEPLAN), Ministry of Agriculture and Cattle

(MAG), Ministry of Environment and Energy (MINAE), Ministry of Foreign Affairs

85

(COMEX), Ministry of Transport and Public Works (MOPT), Ministry of Health
(MIN SA), National Emergency Commission (CNE), the Municipality of Talamanca,
Water and Sewerage Institute (AyA), Costa Rican Electricin Institute (ICE), and the

Costa Rican Institute of Tourism (ICT), among others.

Panama: Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF), Ministry of Agricultural
Development (MIDA), Environmental National Authority (ANAM), Panamanian
Institute of Tourism (IPAT), National Civil Protection System (SINAPROC), Ministry of

Public Works (MOP) and the Ministry of Health (MINSA), among others.

National and Binational Institutions. In Costa Rica, the National Water Policy, the
National Health Policy 2002-2006, the National Environmental Strategy 2005-2020 and
the proposed Water Bill, stipulate that water resources should be managed in an
integrated, decentralized and participatory manner, where the watershed should be the
preferred unit of planning and management. The Biodiversity Law defines the Ministry
of Environment and Energy (MINAE) as the institution responsible for watershed
management; however, this requires close collaboration with other stakeholders, such as
the Ministry of Agriculture (MAG), which is responsible for applying the Soil Use,
Management and Conservation Law. This law requires MAG to develop soil resources
management and conservation plans and associated instruments including certifications
of sustainable land use which in turn need to be coordinated with the municipalities in
order to apply a property tax-discount. Facets of watershed management are canied out

by different national and municipal agencies in an overlapping way that seeks integration

86

but without complete information. A flow chart delineating the integrated system by

which watershed resources are managed is not known to exit.

In Panama, the National Environmental Law gives the National Environmental Authority
(Autoridad Nacional del Ambiente — ANAM)) the main responsibility for watershed
management, including development of corresponding environmental land use plans,
however, the multiple agencies and ministries noted above all have some institutional

stake in management.

With regards to binational basins, the Costa Rica — Panama Border Development
Cooperation Agreement gives the Costa Rican Ministry of Planning and Political
Economy (MIDEPLAN) and the Panamanian Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF) a
Special mandate to coordinate interventions. During the formulation of the Regional
Sustainable Development Strategy, an Indicative Functional Land Use Plan was
developed in a participatory manner with stakeholder input. It was conceived as a
general guiding instrument for land-use planning but its effective implementation

requires the development and approval of the other plans mentioned above.

There are specific institutional arrangements for protected areas and Indigenous reserves

in Costa Rica. In the Sixaola Watershed alone there are six different Indigenous reserves
located in buffer zones of La Amistad, four in Costa Rica and two in Panama. The Bribri
and Cabecar are legally represented in Costa Rica by Asociaciones de Desarrollo Integral

(Development Associations) which serve as local governments. In Costa Rica there are

87

11 ADI’S for the Bribri-Cabecar, of which eight (combined into four reserves in 1984)
have boundaries with La Amistad lntemational Park (approx. 300 linear kilometers):
Talamanca Bribri, Talamanca Cabe'car, Tayni, Telire, Alto Chirripo, Ujarras, Salitre and

Cabagra (Borge 2004).

In Costa Rica, the laws governing protected areas are much more restrictive than Similar
laws in Panama, and more ambiguous with regard to the issue of co-management. In
Costa Rica the Sistema Nacional de Areas Protegidas de Costa Rica (SINAC) operates as
part of the Ministry of Planning (MIDEPLAN). In Panama protected areas fall under the
regulation of the National Environmental Authority (Autoridad Nacional Ambiental —
ANAM). There are some experiences of co-management, and while the Costa Rica
Controller’s Office currently does not have an approved process for co-management it is
not prohibited and both nations recognize the need to develop procedures and policies for
its formalization. Panama’s legislation, on the other hand, provides for co-management

of protected areas through concessions and the application procedures are relatively clear.

Table Four which follows shows the various natural protected areas and Indigenous

Reserves in the Sixaola Binational Watershed.

88

Table 4: Natural Protected Areas and Indigenous Reserves in the Sixaola Watershed

 

Extension Within the Sixaola River Watershed of
Natural Protected Areas and Indigenous Territories

 

Natural Protected Areas Extension (ha)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chirripo National Park 12,448.37
La Amistad lntemational Park 138,481.26
Hitoy Cerere Biological Reserve 1,267,71
Palo Seco Protected Forest 762.84
Gandoca-Manzanillo Wildlife Refuge 2,387.68
San San Pond Sak Wetland 500.53
Total 155,848.39
Indigenous Territories Extension (ha)

Bri Bri of Kekbldi Indigenous Reserve 1,157.57
Bri Bri of Talamanca Indigenous Reserve 45,355.72
Bri Bri Indigenous Reserve (Panamanian Side) 25,755.30
Cébecar de Talamanca Indigenous Reserve 22,947.61
Cébecar de Telire Indigenous Reserve 17,237.73
Naso Indigenous Reserve (Panamanian Side) 33 5. 12
TOTAL 1 12,789.55
Source: EPYPSA-INCLAM, IDB Technical Cooperation ATN/Sl
8060-RS.

 

Parque Intemacional de La Amistad (PILA), which makes up the entire upper watershed
and accounts for 89% of natural protected areas of the Sixaola Basin, has two regulatory
agencies in each country: Area de Conservacién La Amistad Pacifico y Area de
Conservacién La Amistad Atlantico as part of MIN AE/SIN AC in Costa Rica, and the

Regional de Bocas del Tom and the Regional de Chiriqui as part of ANAM in Panama.

The administration of PILA has been cited as deficient by the Controller’s Offices of both

Costa Rica and Panama, and the environmental authorities of both countries were called

89

upon to improve the coordination and binational management of PILA. In response,
MINAE and ANAM established the PILA Binational Commission which is currently
developing an action plan. One of the principal aims is to harmonize the two existing
management plans of PILA, especially with regards to zoning and management criteria in
the border areas. Among the priority topics considered is the need to develop co-
management arrangements, in particular involving Indigenous communities, in an effort
to improve protected area management effectiveness. The environmental authorities, as
well as the involved civil society organizations, also acknowledge the need to enhance
integration of the coastal transboundary protected areas (San San Pond Sak and Gandoca
Manzanillo), including harmonized management plans and joint management activities

(Franklin, Linares et al. 2006).

Territorial Divisions. Costa Rica is divided into seven (7) provinces, eighty one (81)
cantones, and four hundred sixty three districts. The Republic of Panama is divided into
nine (9) provinces, five (5) comarcas, seventy six (76) districts, and six hundred twenty
(620) corregimientos. Each of these territorial divisions constitutes a level of government
that coordinates with central government ministries or agencies. Local government is
autonomous or semi-autonomous but these terms are worked out in practice through
coordination with the central government. Institutional structure recognizes participation
of citizens, coordination among local authorities, regional and central government

ministries and agencies.

90

Local Government.

In Costa Rica the Sixaola Watershed falls under the jurisdiction of the Canton of
Talamanca (19,390 total inhabitants) with four sub-districts: Telire, upper watershed;
Bratsi, middle watershed; and Sixaola and Cahuita, lower watershed. In Panama it falls
under the jurisdiction of the district of Changuinola (13,927 inhabitants), and a single

corregimiento (sub district), Guabito.

Under the Costa Rican Constitution the municipalities have political, administrative, and
financial responsibilities as well as autonomy.26 They provide for basic services; roads,
garbage collection, sewage systems, register land, collect taxes, and several other local
services. However, according the Sixaola Program documents prepared in conjunction
with the Ministry of Planning, the local governments, including Indigenous governments,
are not capable of delivering basic services to the population and lack the respective
regulatory and policy instruments. The reasons include a lack of management capacity in
the generation of revenue (no collection of taxes, subsidized or outdated fees for services,
lack of an up-to-date cadastre) and in their administration. The three districts that
comprise the canton of Talamanca (Telire, upper watershed; Bratsi, middle watershed;
and Sixaola-Cahuita, lower watershed) are technically, administratively, and financially
weak and, although they have legal means to generate revenues, collection levels are low
(close to 60% of the revenues come from central government transfers, including

resources from the tax on bananas) (Nessim, Coloane et al. 2004).

 

26 Article 170 of the Costa Rican Constitution reformed by Law number 8106 the 3 of June, 2001.

91

In Panama activities and responsibilities of the national ministries are carried out at the
provincial level in the Provincial Directorates. The public sector is organized under a
centralist model, where plans and programs are decided at the central level. The
provincial directors of national institutions are based primarily in Changuinola and Isla
Colon, where they provide an institutional presence but have little autonomy and few
operational resources. The provincial Governor, appointed by the President of the
Republic of Panama, plays an auxiliary role of collaboration and coordination with the
national offices, which are coordinated through a Provincial Technical Board, and
oversee the consistency of their plans and activities with national policies. There is a
provincial council where the legislators and mayors are represented, but not community

organizations or producers.

The municipal (local) government in both countries is made up of elected officials who
make up the Municipal Council (Consejo Municipal). The municipal structure of both
countries also includes appointed officials who participate with legal voice in the
deliberations and task forces of the Municipal Council and contribute to planning and
management to assist in local development. The Controller General of the Republic of
Costa Rica is responsible to supervise the planning process and operative administration
of the municipalities. In Panama this function is provided by the Ministry of Economy

and Finance (MEF).

In Panama district municipal councils are made up of at least five representatives elected

in the sub-districts (corrigimientos). The council’s job includes formation, in

92

collaboration with the Ministry of Economy and Finance, of a plan for development of
the district and the sub-districts. The council and professional staff prepare, evaluate, and

execute development programs and projects for the districts in conjunction with MEF.

The Municipal Councils en Costa Rica are made up of Council Members (Regidores) and
provide legal voice through the Municipal Council, to groups, and to people who are able
to participate in council sessions. The Municipal Council provides planning, initiates and

approves projects, and coordinates land use and records.

Each municipal corporation is led by an elected official, the Mayor (Alcalde), who is
elected by popular vote in the municipality. The Mayor performs administrative
functions and carries out policies and agreements made by the council. In both Costa

Rica and Panama the Mayor is the highest local elected official.

The Local and Community J untas in Panama, and the District Councils in Costa Rica
constitute the first level of government for local residents of the Sixaola Watershed.
These community juntas in Panama are public organizations that represent the inhabitants
of the corregimiento and have the primary mission to drive community development and
resolve problems among stakeholders. There is a direct link between the community
junta and the municipality. The municipalities provide services and execute works for
each corregimiento through the community juntas. As such these juntas have

considerable say in what programs will gain favor and priority in their area.

93

In Costa Rica, article 54 of Law 7794 dictates the municipal code and establishes district
councils, organizations charged with representing the interests of the citizens of the
district, monitoring municipal activities, and collaborating with other districts of the
municipality. District councils provide a means for local people to enter the planning
process and to bring issues before the municipality. Members of the district council are

elected by popular vote each Six years.

Summary: The complex web of institutional arrangements, in each country, and
amplified when taken together, constitute a source of human interdependence in the
Sixaola Watershed. These laws, rules, and regulations are a given, an inherent part of life
for watershed residents. Government planners have recognized the obstacles for
binational watershed management given this current institutional arrangement and have
proposed changes to improve this situation (N essim, Coloane et al. 2004) (GEF 2004).
The 182 model of La Amistad as a transboundary biosphere also addresses this source of
interdependence and is used for analysis and comparison to 181, the model representing

proposed governmental changes.

94

3.2 Structure: InstitutionalArrangements

Two models are presented for analysis and comparison in this dissertation. The
institutional arrangements represented by the models serve as independent variables for
impact analysis. These models are necessary to examine the means by which
management efforts of a natural resource, The Sixaola Binational Watershed, address

inherent characteristics of the land and the people who live on it.

While institutions are not factors of production, there is no production function
independent of institutions (Schmid 2004). Institutional arrangements determine
potential benefit for A and liability for B as well as encourage cooperative behavior or
provide incentives to act as individuals seeking immediate personal gain. Both models
presented in this dissertation recognize the importance of institutional arrangements for
sustainable development and propose the creation of arrangements that do not currently
exist. Economic and social performance are impacted by these institutional arrangements

(North 1990).

The models presented here represent selected dimensions of two webs of institutional
arrangements. The first was developed by a team that included the Governments of
Costa Rica and Panama, The Inter-American Development Bank, the Global
Environment Facility, professional consultants hired to assist in program development,
and selected actors with interests in the Sixaola Binational Watershed. The second model

was developed as part of this dissertation based upon a literature review of the UNESCO

95

MAB Biosphere Reserve Programme, existing legal arrangements between Costa Rica
and Panama, UN MAB recommendations for creation and operation of a transfrontier

biosphere reserve, and the current management plans for La Amistad lntemational Park.

3.2.1 Institutional Model One (ISl): Sixaola Binational Watershed Proposed
Institutional Management Structure

The legal framework for Institutional Structure One begins with the Convenio de
Cooperacién Transfronterizo, Signed by the governments of Costa Rica and Panama in
1995 (Marco Legal CR-Panama 1995). This agreement provides a means to create
formal binational institutions and organizations. Because of this legal agreement it has
been possible to envision new ways to manage the Sixaola Binational Watershed, ways

that were not previously possible.

Under this agreement, approved by the legislative bodies in both countries, a permanent
Binational Commission was created and agreement was made to formulate a Binational
Basin Sustainable Management Program. This effort, supported by Central American
Commission for Environment and Development (CCAD), materialized in the Regional
Strategy for the Sustainable Development of the Bi-National Sixaola River Basin (RSDS)
in 2004. The RSDS is conceived as a long-term integrated strategy which envisions
interventions along four strategic lines: (1) environmental management, sustainable
management of natural resources and reduction of vulnerabilities, (2) productive

activities and diversification, (3) public services and basic infrastructure, and (4)

96

institutional strengthening. This strategy is to be implemented in a decentralized manner

and with strong participation by civil society (GEF 2006).

An Indicative Plan for Functional Land-use Management (Plan Indicativo de
Ordenarniento Territorial Funcional) (PIOTF) was developed by both nations as part of
an Inter-American Development Bank non-reimbursable project to provide more Specific
guidelines regarding land use consistent with the RSDS. This plan serves as a starting
point to develop more detailed land use plans as part of the Sixaola and Bocas del Toro

programs.

The Sixaola Binational Watershed program is also an integral element of the
Mesoamerican Sustainable Development Initiative (IMDS) of the Plan Puebla Panama
(PPP), of which both countries are parties. The IMDS strives to promote sustainable
development interventions in transboundary areas as a means to promote regional

integration (GEF 2006).

There are currently three principal projects that are related conceptually, institutionally,
and with planned further integration. Two of the projects are made possible by loans
from the Inter-American Development Bank: The Sustainable Development Program for
the Sixaola River Binational Watershed CR-0150 (Nessim, Coloane et al. 2004) and the
Multiphase Program for Sustainable Development of Bocas del Toro, Panama PN-Ol49
(Nessim, Lemay et al. 2004). A third project, Integrated Ecosystem Management of the

Binational Sixaola River Basin , made possible with Global Environment Facility funds

97

(GEF 2006), seeks to link these projects and facilitate integration of resource
management in the Sixaola Basin and with the region of Bocas del Toro to the south.
The model for IS] recognizes the integrated nature of these three projects and places the
Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola River Binational Watershed in this

CODICXI.

The first two of three figures that follow represent institutional structures that were
developed by program planners and taken from national loan proposal documents. The
first, Costa Rica’s national Project Execution Structure for the Sixaola Binational
Watershed Program, was developed as part of the loan application for IDB CR—0150.
The second model, Participatory Program Execution Framework for Multiphase Program
for Sustainable Development of Bocas del Toro, was developed as part of the loan
application for IDB PN-0149. The third institutional structure, the GEF Sixaola River
Basin Participative Organizational Scheme, was conceived during development of the
two national program proposals and seeks Global Environment Facility funds to integrate
the first two national structures. Collectively these three models represent an interrelated
web of institutional arrangements that are either in the process of implementation or
waiting for final legislative approval. This planned web of institutional arrangements is

called Institutional Structure One (ISI) for this dissertation.

98

 

 

 

fir“

 

 

 

 

Program Advisory Ministry of Planning
Council (CAP) M IDEPLAN
MH, MIDEPLAN,
MINAE, MAG, MP
1
Decentralized agency of
[ MIDEPLAN ]

 

 

 

 

 
     
   
 

  

Program
Executing Unit
(PCU)

Sixaola River
Watershed
Committee

(CCRS)

 

 

F

 

 

K

Huétar Vertiente
Atlantica Regional
Development Council
(CRDHV)
Regional Secretariat

 

(Upper Watershed)

(Middle Watershed)

[ Telire District Committee ] [ Bratsi District Committee ]

 

 

 

 

Sixaola-Cahuita
District Committee
(Lower Watershed)

 

 

1

 

CIVIC, COMMUNITY, ENVIRONMENTAL, AND
PRODUCTION-ORIENTED ORGANIZATIONS (OCCAP’S)

 

Figure 8: Sixaola Program Model, Costa Rica
Source: Inter-American Development Bank

99

 

J

     
         
     

 

\ /

 

   
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ZEHHQ om wages. Ba 2&8». $835 93358 m2
2:38-35. :5 eamaa“
230:». Swans
3553.8 mama—EH Ems—Him 35> >22: 25. no.5.
980888 SAVES—29»
h 3623
r. .\
e
woman“: 9808823 HoEms... 0822330: ea 33333 021838" 93328

mxoocmam Ca:

2:.
82.5 A v

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dina 003338 935 93538 939 93558
89 93%.?on 39 9:35. 89 £8 woe—m

H H H

OOZZCZd—Hm

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

100

Figure 9: Bocas del Toro Program Model, Panama

Source: Inter-American Development Bank

 

COSTA RICA

PANAMA

 

 

Agreement: Permanent Bi-national Commission
Convenio de CooperaciOn Transfronterizo CR-PAN Marco Legal (I995)

 

 

 

 

 

Executive Secretariat and
National Coordinator

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Executive Secretariat and
National Coordinator

 

 

 

 

 

TECHNICAL Bl-NATIONAL COMMISSION
(To be strengthened by GEF Program)

 

 

 

 

 

IDB Program
Costa Rica
(MIDEPLAN and
Advisory Committee)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bi-national GEF
Program
(ANAM, MINAE)

 

 

IDB Bocas del Toro

Program
(MEF and Advisory

Committee)

 

 

 

Program Coordination
Unit
UCP

 

 

 

 

 

Regional Development
Council
CRD
Sixaola River Basin
Committee CCRS

 

 

 

A

 

 

District Committees
CD

 

 

 

 

 

 

Program Coordination
and Execution Unit
UCEP

 

 

 

 

 

Provincial Program
Development Council
CDP

 

 

 

 

 

District Committees
CD

 

 

 

'5, .

= z

 

 

 

 

(OCCAPS)

CIVIC, COMMUNITY, ENVIRONMENTAL AND PRODUCTIVE ASSOCIATIONS

 

—l

 

 

Figure 10: GEF Sixaola River Basin Participative Organizational Scheme.

Source: GEF

101

Management as an Ecosystem. Management as a Single ecosystem has been a goal of
Parque Intemacional de La Amistad: Costa Rica-Panama since it was created in 1982.
This goal has been persistently difficult to obtain and the park currently functions
primarily as two national parks. Management plans have been developed and refined
since the park was created, and in 1987, the Centro AgronOmico Tropical de
InvestigaciOn y Ensei’ianza (CATIE) produced a detailed management plan that built
upon past efforts and new knowledge. Later, in 2004, a cooperative effort sponsored by

The Nature Conservancy produced the most current binational management strategy.

Partly because of the difficulty encountered in realizing binational management at the
level of La Amistad lntemational Park, a project was proposed and approved for the
Sixaola Binational Watershed. Due to the inherent binational character of the watershed
it requires new institutional arrangements to enable functional management at the
watershed level. A goal of the Costa Rican project is to first reinforce the permanent
binational commission then seek to create binational institutions to manage funds and
harmonize resource management efforts in both countries. Building from the Sixaola
Binational Watershed project, and the institutions created there, linkage is envisioned
with a Similar project in the adjoining region of Bocas del Toro, Panama. Global
Environment Facility non-reimbursable funds have been awarded to further binational
cooperation of natural resource management and to help link these two projects in a long

range strategy.

102

By design, the Sixaola and related programs provide an opportunity to learn and develop
institutions that may have wider application at a later time. It seeks a regional approach
but is starting fi'om national programs with binational possibilities and moving outward

(GEF 2006).

3.2.1.1 GEF components of IS].

The GEF Program, Integrated Ecosystem Management of the Binational Sixaola River
Basin, is used to present the highest level goals and objectives for IS]. These goals and
objectives represent integration at the binational level and at the regional level reaching a
level of cooperation unattainable through the national programs alone. This integration is
consistent with the two national loans that are both linked to the Mesoamerican
Sustainable Development Initiative (IMDS), part of Plan Puebla Panama (PPP), an Inter-
American Development Bank regional program linking the city of Puebla, Mexico to the
Panama Canal. There is some connection to the global with payment for environmental
services; however, Institutional Model One is primarily binational, and secondarily,
regional. While global environmental services are noted in program documents, global
payment for these services is primarily limited to carbon sequestration. Global actors do

not have an identified role in 181.
The overarching goal of the Integrated Ecosystem Management of the Binational Sixaola

River Basin program is, “to contribute to the improvement of the health and integrity of

the ecosystems as well as the well-being of the people in the Binational Sixaola River

103

Basin” (MINAE, ANAM et al. 2006). While the national sustainable development
programs are administered through the ministries of planning and finance, the GEF
binational project is administered by the Costa Rican and Panamanian ministries of
environment (MINAE, ANAM). It is placed under the GEF focal area of biodiversity but
targets stability or improvement in the human development indices along with ecological

performance measures.

To realize this goal the Integrated Ecosystem Management of the Binational Sixaola
River Basin program seeks, “to contribute to the sustainable use and conservation of
biodiversity, water and soil resources, through the creation of an enabling environment
for the integrated and cross-cutting management of the Binational Sixaola River Basin.”
It has three primary objectives: (1) To strengthen the bi-national institutional framework
for an integrated management and enhancement of technical and operational capacities of
the institutions involved, indigenous organizations, and civil society organizations, (2) To
promote the adoption of productive models that are comparable with the conservation and
sustainable use of the water and soil resources, (3) To promote the conservation and
sustainable use of globally important biodiversity. Each of these objectives is addressed
by activities with verifiable output indicators and a means of verification. The degree to

which they are attained will determine the final shape of IS 1.

Specific activities conducted to address objective one (To strengthen the bi-national

institutional framework for an integrated management and enhancement of technical and

104

operational capacities of the institutions involved, indigenous organizations, and civil
society organizations) include:

o A Bi-national Basin Commission will be formed and begin meeting at least twice
a year.

0 Joint training sessions are held for bi-national governmental staff groups in
environmental and protected area management, environmental-territorial
planning, and health.

0 Community leaders, local governments, and Indigenous governments receive
training on protection of natural resources

a A Geographic Information System (GIS) is created and a protocol for updating
the system established.

Community based training is provided for environmental monitoring.
A database of projects operating in the basin is established and a web page
developed.

0 Coordinate action plans of Parque de La Amistad and the Watershed Bi-national
Commission; explore viability of integration into a Single management area.
Conduct viability analysis and financing strategy for a watershed trust fund.
Sponsor a variety of educational experiences targeting primary and secondary
schools as well as specific Indigenous areas of interest.

0 Develop a newsletter, web page, and other means for dissemination of research
findings or lessons learned.

0 Train producers in techniques and successful experiences in organic agro-
ecological production.

Specific activities conducted to address objective two (To promote the adoption of
productive models that are comparable with the conservation and sustainable use of the

water and soil resources) include:

0 Establish a code of good practices and certifications achieved by associations of
independent producers and banana companies.
Establish public recognition mechanism for adoption of good practices.
Create a dialogue table with credit-financial institutions and/or credit programs
for the consideration of environmental criteria in the allocation of resources.

0 Facilitate exchange-visits for small farmers to visit model farms using sustainable
and integrated models.

0 Establish a seed fund to promote the adoption of sustainable agricultural practices.

0 Pilot projects in the lower watershed to explore ways to convert areas of intensive
banana production.

0 Elaborate water and soil quality baselines.

105

Conduct annual monitoring activities with community participants.
Establish a Bi-national Agrochemical Registration System.
Enhance functional land use planning by developing a management plan for the
basin and facilitating management plans for Indigenous areas.

0 Improve micro-watershed management with community participation, sponsor
participative projects including citizen monitoring.

0 Facilitate inventory, diagnosis, and set criteria for intervention at micro-watershed
level.

0 Support restoration projects in riverbeds, critical areas, and biological conidors.

Specific activities conducted to address objective three (To promote the conservation and
sustainable use of globally important biodiversity) include:

0 Establish a legal and political framework for the co-management of transboundary
protected areas.

0 Elaborate agreements for some sectors of PILA and put these into action with
Indigenous authorities.

0 Critical elements of the management plans, including zoning and management
criteria, of the transboundary protected areas are harmonized between both
countries.

0 A baseline consolidated monitoring system is put in place jointly by both
countries with stakeholder involvement.

0 Action plans are prepared for the recovery of biological corridors and carried out
in a participative manner in both countries.

0 Promote alternative livelihoods based upon sustainable use of biodiversity;
conduct feasibility studies of initiatives, disseminate information, conduct
workshops, and provide systemized experiences in sustainable use of biodiversity.

The overarching goal stated earlier in this section, the specific objectives, and the
representative activities were taken from the logical framework and evaluation criteria for
the Integrated Ecosystem Management of the Binational Sixaola River Basin Program.
They are restated in similar ways in other program documents and are designed to mesh
with goals, objectives, and activities listed in the national programs. This goal and these

objectives were chosen because they appear in the evaluation criteria of the program that

serves as the bridge and umbrella for the two national programs.

106

A specific objective listed in the GEF Plan of Operations is creation of an enabling
environment for biodiversity conservation through economic valuation of the functions
and services of the major bi-national ecosystems of the basin and harmonization of Costa
Rica-Panama environmental management plans of La Amistad Reserve (PILA) and in the
adjacent lower basin neighboring areas of the Gandoca-Manzanillo and San San Pond
Sak Wildlife Reserve and Wetland. This objective is worth mentioning since Costa Rica
has pioneered payment for environmental carbon sequestration services and this program
will likely expand, perhaps binationally. A second payment for environmental services
program in Costa Rica, Ecomercados II, will initiate a system of payments for watershed

services. It is unclear what level of integration is desired by planners regarding these

programs.

Five verifiable outcome indicators are listed as means to determine if goals of the project

have been met after three years of having finalized the project. These are:

0 The area of natural forest cover in the basin is the same or has expanded
compared to the level at the end of the first year of the project.

0 The Social Development Index (Costa Rica) and the Human Development Index
(Panama) in the basin are the same with respect to the baseline at the beginning of
the project.

0 Annual public investment for the binational integrated ecosystem management in
the basin has increased compared to marginal contributions at the beginning of the
project.

0 the water quality in the Sixaola Binational River Basin is stabilized as shown by a
maintenance of the Biotic Integrity Index in the Yorkin watershed at regular level
(three on a scale of one to five with one poorest and five best) which is the level at
the beginning of the project.

107

o The populations of key species in the representative ecosystems in the basin
maintain stability compared to their levels at the end of the first year of the
project.

The GEF Integrated Ecosystem Management in the Sixaola Binational River Basin
project was conceived during preparation of the loan documents for the Panama and
Costa Rica Inter-American Bank sustainable development programs. According to GEF
documents it will not be possible to achieve a development that is consistent with the

sustainable use and conservation of the basin’s biodiversity, land and water resources

with only implementation of the baseline activities of the national programs (GEF 2004).

3.2.1.2 The Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola
River Binational Watershed.

The Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola River Binational Watershed is
implemented through a loan from the Inter-American Development Bank to the Republic
of Costa Rica with the Ministry of Planning and Political Economy as the executing
agency through a program coordinating unit (PCU), a decentralized entity with legal
status to act on behalf of MIDEPLAN with support from the Sixaola River Watershed
Committee (CCRS) and the Regional Development Council of the Hue’tar Vertiente
Atlantica Region (CRDHVA). The program’s main objective is to improve the living
conditions of the population of the Sixaola river watershed in Costa Rica (canton of

Talamanca), through interventions in the economic, social, environmental, and local

108

management areas that help implement a sustainable development model for the

watershed (Nessim, Coloane et al. 2004).27

A program execution structure is tied to the loan and five new entities must be created
before the first disbursement of the loan: (1) the program coordinating unit, (2) three
district committees (Telire in the upper watershed, Bratsi in the middle watershed,
Sixaola-Cahuita in the lower watershed), and (3) The Sixaola River Watershed
Committee (CCRS). The following descriptions of each entity are proposed in program
documents and it has not been possible to determine the actual shape of them as
implementation had yet to occur as of December 2006. The Costa Rica Sustainable
Development Program for the Sixaola River Binational Watershed is expected to pass the
National Legislative Assembly in the first quarter of 2007 and the following entities will

be formed at that time.

Program Advisory Council (CAP). A council will be established, chaired by the
Minister of Planning (MIDEPLAN) and made up of high-level representatives from the
following governmental institutions at the national level: Ministry of Finance, MINAE,

MAG, Ministry of the Presidency, and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Worship.

The CAP will advise on program execution, ensuring that the govemment’s policy
guidelines are being followed. Its functions will include: (1) coordinating the efforts of
the government and other donors in the watershed; (2) channeling and guiding the

participation of national authorities; and (3) reviewing the program’s progress reports, the

 

27 The program description that follows is based upon this document.

109

annual work plan (AWP) for the watershed, and program budget execution. The CAP
may be convened by the Minister of Planning or at the request of any of its members and

will meet at least once a year.

The Regional Development Council of the Huétar Vertiente Atlantica Region
(CRDHVA) is charged with strengthening the capacity of institutions in the entire
Atlantic Region as well as the Sixaola the watershed. The Multiphase Program for
Sustainable Development of the Atlantic Huetar Region (A project made possible by an
Inter-American Development Bank loan - CR-157) ties to this regional council and links
with institutions created in the Sixaola Project. When documents were prepared for the
Sixaola Program a system of Regional Development Councils (CRDS), including the
Regional Development Council of the Hue’tar Vertiente Atlantica Region were in place
under MIDEPLAN but this regional structure was abolished during the early Arias
administration in 2006 and formal adjustments have not been announced at the time of

this writing.

Sixaola River Watershed Committee (Comité de la Cuenca del Rio Sixaola) (CCRS).
A Watershed Committee for the Sixaola River will be set up and chaired by MIDEPLAN,
through the regional secretariat of the CRDHVA, and will be comprised of 14 members
as follows: the Regional Directors of MAG, MINAE, MOPT, MINSA, National
Commission on Emergencies, the Mayor of Talamanca, and two representatives from
civil society organizations (CSOS) for each of the district committees of Telire and

Sixaola-Cahuita and three representatives from the district committee of Bratsi.

llO

The CCRS will have the following responsibilities:

Review the technical aspects of the district Annual Work Plans (AWPS).
Consolidate, coordinate, and approve the AWPS of the Sixaola River Watershed
based on the district AWPS, and inform MIDEPLAN through the PCU.

0 Ensure fulfillment of the Regional Sustainable Development Strategy (Estrategia
Regional de Desarrollo Sostenible) (ERDS) and the watershed Indicative Plan for
Functional Land-use Management (Plan Indicativo de Ordenarniento Territorial)
(PIOTF) agreed upon by the two countries;

Monitor execution based on approved AWPs;
Meet goals, objectives, and priorities in the context of the Regional Sustainable
Development Strategy (ERDS).

0 Provide the opportunity and forum for resolving disputes by providing the support
needed to encourage consensus among the various actors.

0 Review the annual reports and financial statements prepared by the PCU and
report to the CRDHVA on the presentation and execution of the AWP. The
Committee will be convened by the Regional Secretary at his or her own initiative
or at the request of two of its members and will meet at least bimonthly. The PCU
coordinator will act as the committee’s secretary.

Program Coordinating Unit (PCU). The Program Coordinating Unit (PCU), a
decentralized entity with legal status, will be attached to MIDEPLAN and located in the
watershed. It will be comprised of a coordinator who will head it, will act as liaison
between the stakeholders and the CCRS, and will be responsible for program execution.
It will have a support team comprised of three technical experts to support each of the
district committees, an administrative officer and two administrative assistants. It will
also receive support from consultants for the process of hiring and preparing the technical
components of the program. This unit is central to program execution and performance

outcomes will be impacted Significantly by key personnel.

The PCU is a focal point for relations with the Bank and in principle will have the

following functions:

11]

 

0 Sign agreements with the various organizations (producer, civic, environmental,
etc.), local governments and central government institutions with regard to
technical assistance, the execution of salaries, advisory support and projects, and
supervision thereof.

Proceed with the respective contracting.
Prepare technical assistance projects, studies, specific projects, and production-
oriented pilot projects and commission their preparation through to feasibility

0 Support organization and local governments in preparing projects profiles or
feasibility studies and hire the necessary advisory support, ensuring that it meets
the eligibility and feasibility criteria se out in the Program Operating Regulations
(POR’S).

- Support the district committees in the formation of district AWPS and coordinate
the program execution process.

Administer and supervise the activities related to program execution.
Prepare disbursement requests and present them to the Bank on time and with
proper justification.

0 Prepare reports required by the Bank for accounts for resources of the financing
and of the local counterpart
Maintain resources.

Provide technical and administrative support to the CCRS at its working
meetings.

0 Make payments for goods and services.

District Committees (Telire in the upper watershed, Bratsi in the middle watershed, and
Sixaola-Cahuita in the lower watershed). To facilitate participatory management and
ensure a decentralized execution scheme, a structure will be developed for the purposes
of setting investment priorities from the bottom up (community-govemment). To this
end, three committees will be created, one per district (Telire, Bratsi, and Sixaola-
Cahuita), to ensure speedy and orderly execution of the AWPS and representation of the
various communities and ethnic groups in the watershed. The district committees will
receive support from the PCU and its specialists. Each one will be comprised of six
representatives, three of whom will be members of the district councils and the other

three selected from lists presented by the community of each district. Initially, members

will be selected by the CRDHVA based on lists presented by the OCCAPS of the

112

respective district and subsequently by the district committees themselves, based on their

respective by-laws.

District committee functions will include:

0 Receiving the projects presented by the civic, community, environmental, and
productive organizations (OCCAPS) and local governments.

o Ranking the projects according to the strategies devised, the PORS, the PIOTF,
and the availability of resources according to the indicative budget prepared by
the PCU.

Presenting the district AWPS for coordination with the CCRS.
Monitoring and following-up on the program activities in their respective district

and making pertinent recommendations to the PCU.
0 Keeping community organizations informed on their initiatives and consulting

with them.
The district committees will meet at least every two months and will be convened by the
chairman of each committee at his or her own initiative or at the request of a majority of

the members.

Civic, community, environmental, and productive organizations (OCCAPS). There
are different types of local organizations in the watershed, many of which are recognized
institutionally by the government; groups that provide an effective forum for collective
decision-making, bringing actors together autonomously to act for the collective good.
The program will promote OCCAP participation as a basic tool for communication and

representation of the communities.

In full program documents a list of identified actors is presented. Bringing these actors

together for meaningful discourse has been problematic in the past. The extreme

113

diversity of these actors makes it difficult to find a Single means of communication that

leads to shared understanding and power sharing.

3.2.1.3 The Multiphase Program for Sustainable Development of
Bocas del Tom.

The Region of Bocas del Toro is the second largest in Panama. Located in the east and
adjoining Costa Rica on the north, it has a total surface area of 8,745 square kilometers
and a population of 90,000 people, of which approximately 63% are Indigenous. It is
also home of the increasingly popular resort area of Bocas del Toro, an archipelago of
Islands that are rapidly developing and face environmental degradation and associated
loss of tourism revenue if sustainable development practices are not implemented

quickly.

The Multiphase Program for Sustainable Development of Bocas del Toro is made
possible by a loan from the Inter-American Development Bank (PN-0149) to the
Republic of Panama, with the executing agency of the Ministry of Economy and Finance
(MEF) through its Regional Planning Directorate. This unit with legal representative
powers from MEF is similar to the Program Planning Unit identified in the Sixaola
Program description. The goal of the program is to, “Help lay the basis for sustainable
development of the region by supporting activities yielding economic, social and
environmental benefits to produce a sustainable improvement in living conditions”

(Nessim, Lemay et al. 2004).

114

The program is structured in three components; (1) strengthening management capacity,
(2) sustainable management of natural resources and productive development, and (3)
improvements in basic services and transportation infrastructure. The National Steering
Committee for the Program (CDNP) is comprised of high level government officials from
a variety of ministries similar to the Sixaola Project arrangement. A Provincial
Development Committee will be created and bring together representatives of civil
society with government. District Committees are created consisting of actors who
represent specific interest areas (agriculture, fishery, forestry, unions), NGO’S, ethnic
groups, and other district representatives. The District Committee members are selected

from lists that are submitted from these groups.

The Multiphase Program for Sustainable Development of Bocas del Toro is mentioned in
this section of dissertation findings to note its relationship to the Sixaola Program through
the formal institutional structure put forward as part of the GEF Program, Integrated
Ecosystem Management of the Binational Sixaola River Basin. The two national
programs, Costa Rica and Panama, are institutionally tied to the GEF program, both in
terms of goals and objectives, and with an agreement to contribute funds for the full GEF
Program. The GEF program recognizes differences in the institutional structures
regarding management of natural resources in Costa Rica and Panama and promotes
ways to harmonize management strategies with an ultimate goal of attaining Similar
management frameworks on both Sides of the border. The Multiphase Program for
Sustainable Development of Bocas del Toro links to the Sixaola program in this context,

and as such, is part of Institutional Structure One presented here.

115

 

3.2.2 Institutional Model Two (IS2): La Amistad as a Transboundary
Biosphere Reserve.

Institutional Model Two (182) is built upon guidelines provided by the UNESCO Man
and the Biosphere Programme (UNESCO 2005).28 It is a model for creation and
operation of La Amistad as a Single transboundary biosphere reserve sanctioned through
this program. The starting point for the model is the present situation and the feasibility
for implementation given the current formal institutional arrangement (Marco Legal CR-

Panama 1995). It is an adaptive model with both a horizontal and a vertical plane.

A literature review was necessary to study the history of the UN Biosphere Reserve
Program and to explore two areas in detail: (1) The Latin American experience, and (2)
transfrontier biosphere reserves (Jaeger 2005) (Daniele, Acerbi et al. 1999) (UNESCO
2003). Based upon the given institutional structure for transborder cooperation Costa
Rica/Panama, current UN guidelines for formation and operation of transfrontier
biosphere reserves, and with the benefit of a literature review that included case studies
of five of the seven existing transfrontier biosphere reserves, a theoretical model was

developed for La Amistad to function as a single transfrontier biosphere reserve.

3.2.2.1 Legal Framework

The Convenio de CooperaciOn Transfronterizo, signed by the governments of Costa Rica

and Panama in 1995 provides a means to create formal binational institutions and

 

28 The formal titular spelling of programme is Shortened to the common US spelling, program, in this
dissertation.

116

organizations. This institutional arrangement made Costa Rica and Panama excellent
candidates for sustainable development projects on both sides of the border and helped
them secure Inter-American Development Bank loans and GEF funding for coordinated
ecosystem management. An anticipated outcome of these adjoining watershed projects is
the creation of new binational mechanisms for managing funds as well as coordinating

projects (Franklin, Linares et al. 2006).

The same legal agreements that enable the development of these institutions for the
Sixaola Binational Watershed Project and the Integrated Ecosystem Management in the
Sixaola Binational River Basin Program also can be used to develop the institutions

needed to create and Operate a transfrontier biosphere reserve.

3.2.2.2 Adaptive Considerations

Gunderson and Holling developed and tested theories that explain transformational
change in human and natural systems, theories that are inherently integrative. These
theories link sustainability with cycles, smaller and larger, and the ability for systems to
adapt with change (Gunderson and Holling 2002). The model of 182 is designed to
change with new information, new social arrangements, changes in natural systems, or a

host of other unforeseen circumstances that change the status quo.29

 

29 A crnrent guideline for biosphere reserves states that, “Management should be open, evolving and
adaptive. Such an approach will help ensure that biosphere reserves - and their local communities - are
better placed to respond to external political, economic and social pressures.”

117

An Adaptive Model

This model has a horizontal
and a vertical plane

Theoretical possibilities

ll

 

Loca' Global

The web of actors expands across the horizontal plane.

 

The beginning;

Institutional options are realized on the vertical plane.

A commitment to
create a TBR

Figure 11: Adaptive Functions of 182

The model begins at a starting point; the ability (legal structure) and readiness for Costa
Rica and Panama to submit a request with application materials to the UNESCO MAB
Programme for La Amistad to become a transfrontier biosphere reserve. With this
request both nations must show the main components of a plan for co-operation in the
future. The plan must be consistent with the goals of the Seville Strategy and Show intent
to implement the basic guidelines for creation and functioning of a transfrontier biosphere

1'6881'VC.30

 

3° The Seville Strategy refers to guidelines arising Item the lntemational Conference on Biosphere
Reserves held in Seville (Spain) from March 20 to 25, 1995.

118

From this starting point the model expands as formal institutions are formed and begin to
function. The model is not created all at once but rather bit by bit, and as it comes into
being, will likely change from the blueprint presented here. The model of 1S2 developed
for this dissertation is a theoretical structure that meets MAB guidelines (UNESCO 2005)
and is largely consistent with the most current binational management plan for Parque
Intemacional de la Amistad (Carazo, Herrera et al. 2005) . It is designed to serve as a
tool for discussion and help actors consider options. Should Costa Rica and Panama
decide to create a transboundary biosphere reserve it will grow and change from the

starting point; it will adapt as it is constructed by actors.

Adaptation on the horizontal plane occurs within the center circle of the model, the
biosphere, and all levels radiating outward. Natural systems are in constant flux with
varying cycles of exploitation, conservation, release, and reorganization (Gunderson and
Holling 2002). Concentric circles radiate outward from the biosphere which is
immediately surrounded by actors closest to the land. These actors are the primary
recipients of the benefits of the biosphere and they also serve as primary protectors. The
formation of partnerships and overlapping areas of interest will provide an adaptive
function at this inner level, and these partnerships will shift over time, changing political

emphasis placed on individual areas of interest.
From the inner circle of local interests a web expands globally connecting local

organizations and individuals with remote actors who have an interest in and connection

to the protected natural systems. Divisions by area of interest mark the model; science,

119

education and youth, Indigenous interests, NGOS, sustainable agriculture, commerce,
tourism, and watersheds. Despite these divisions the presence of each group is felt in the
other. For example, Indigenous interests will clearly be found in science, ecotourism,
watersheds, and all other areas. The adaptive function of the model recognizes that these
arbitrary divisions do not slice up a pie; they blend and flow in a dynamic process. The
formation of partnerships within and among groups impacts this process and the balance

of power for management of the biosphere reserve.

It is important to note that none of the current global transboundary biosphere reserves
have developed to the point that they are fully functioning in the detail presented in the
1S2 model. The fully functioning model represents the top of the vertical plane of 1S2.
While there are successes in all “real world” cases there are correspondingly deficits. 1S2
was constructed as an ideal given current circumstances. Considerations and

comparisons of case studies are presented in Chapter Four of this dissertation.

3.2.2.3 Formal Institutional Structure; the Vertical Plane

A binational committee for La Amistad lntemational Park exists and is functioning at
present under the Convenio de Cooperacién Transfronteriza de 1995. Although this
committee includes formal representation from governmental agencies of both Costa Rica
and Panama it lacks the final steps necessary to legally exist.31 However, given the

current binational projects between Costa Rica and Panama, it is likely that this

 

3 ' The binational committee is made up of twelve people: two representatives of ANAM Central, two
representatives of ANAM Chiriqui, two representatives of ANAM Bocas del Toro, two representatives of
SINAC Central, two representatives of ACLA-Pacifico, and two representatives of ACLA-Caribe.

120

committee can be legally formed, either as is, a binational committee for La Amistad
lntemational Park, or in some other form to oversee creation and operation of La Amistad
Peace Park, A Transboundary Biosphere Reserve.32 The legal framework exists to create

the committee, and the political will, as manifested in meetings and projects, is growing.

Under the Convenio de Cooperacién Transfronteriza de 1995 five technical commissions
were created to deal with issues targeting Specific sectors; tourism, health, municipal
issues, natural resources, and social/production areas. At present, the binational
committee for La Amistad lntemational Park is located under the commission for Natural
Resources. However, placing the committee for La Amistad under natural resources does
not capture current biosphere reserve thinking in which conservation is viewed as an
integral part of a broader and participatory process that could equally be placed under the
social/production commission and will have Significant interests under yet another
commission; tourism. For this reason 182 begins with a binational commission (or a
binational committee) Specifically for La Amistad and does not place it under any of the
five existing commissions currently in place under the Convenio de Cooperacién. It is

created at a level equal to or separate from the other commissions.

 

32 Current Costa Rican president, Dr. Oscar Arias, referred to La Amistad lntemational Park as La Amistad
Peace Park in a book chapter he co-authored in 1992. That name is used as a formal title for La Amistad
Transfrontier Biosphere Reserve in this dissertation.

121

_i> >_<=m._.>U _um>om _u>_£n

> 43543354 20333 .3223 h

 

 

53.38320: *2 .5 25.32.

352.02 m<m_cm..o:. 08353.3.
523632.03

23 3.30.“! 88.8. 25 .33 So: 8:32
Human 2.38363

53:35.6 233.5

.20..o:m_ H .aosmaoao. 29.x ...omam
.033.:m..o: 2 mania .22: 2»:
63853.0: a 333% >308 .588

 

 

 

03.3.8.0: 3.. ..- >3.08n ...mw
nuance..." 233.8. 0.83.3.

.. i i .v ”33833.0: 3 game .3933” A. - u .

manage. mega. 90:03.0

 

 

 

.

 

 

4 .fi

3.03 :6 020333.». 232.26. 003358
3. ..m 23.38 58333». cm}

 

330.36: .2 ..9 >352.

 

>89 0." 5833 2:23.». 25 room.
0033.33 >223

 

 

 

r

 

.3». ~35.

1:39.02 382.333. .7
8333. 33:8. 9.8%.

manages" mauve:

 

 

 

 

 

 

e

 

mucosao: anazoam mnosom
m2. <05:

mama”

H H H H H

40:33 200w 33.8.88 003328 .366305
53.88

02.8230: - 8 8:333 8 :5 83822.03 0.. 533839
anom<m839 $8.8 m2. mono...” Summon.

023.332: - 8 8&2 6833.0 m2. scam: 35.838.
53.0: .m 80.0.3285 m3 m8_oc.8__< "358.3%.

roam..." mauve... - 8 20st 263: .2 4888:. 33.818. 8:83:
man 58353: 98.588 85.8 8 58.. 32.8». m3 goon. 538. o.

83823.8 m3 85.0233.

 

 

9m magmas 3032.0: 3553.0:
Bagging

«53.8“
mafia—.356 33.8

<2...an 22.9

335: _:m...c..o:m

Figure 12: 182 Vertical Plane: Formal Institutions

122

Coordinating Structure: the Commission for La Amistad Peace Park (A
Transboundary Biosphere Reserve)."’3 A baseline recommendation for creation and
operation of transfrontier biosphere reserves is that the coordinating structure for the
biosphere reserve be representative of various administrations and scientific boards,
authorities in charge of the protected areas, the local communities, interested and affected
groups including youth, and the private sector as well as NGO’s. As the current
binational committee is made up exclusively of governmental representatives (with
assistance from NGO’s), the coordinating structure for La Amistad as a transboundary
biosphere reserve (TBR) is created separately under this committee. The governmental
binational committee would have broad oversight powers but seek to devolute power to
the Commission for La Amistad TBR. Devolution in this sense indicates the transfer of
responsibility and authority over natural resources from the state to nongovernmental

bodies, particularly user groups (Knox and Meinzen-Dick 2001).

Representatives of central government ministries and agencies will work within various
divisions of the TBR. This is especially true of park administration. However,
coordinated management takes place under the Commission for La Amistad as a

transboundary biosphere reserve.

As the principal coordinating structure for the transfrontier biosphere reserve, the
Commission for La Amistad TBR, is charged with planning and direction for the

biosphere reserve. It is made up of representatives from diverse interest groups:

 

33 La Amistad Peace Park: A Transboundary Biosphere Reserve will be used sparingly as a formal title. La
Amistad TBR is used to designate the transboundary biosphere reserve without imposing the formal title.

123

 

Education and Youth, Watersheds, Science, Tourism, Non-Profit Organizations,
Commerce, Indigenous Interests, and Sustainable Agriculture. This commission is
originally comprised of a representative fiom each of the area of interest committees as
well as two government representatives, one from each nation, appointed by the
governmental binational committee. The total number of members on the commission is
flexible, likely ranging between twelve and twenty members. The composition of this
commission will be determined internally (with oversight from the governmental
binational commission) once it is functioning and will grow to include representatives
from both principal arms of the commission; Administration for La Amistad and the

Association for La Amistad.

The Commission for La Amistad TBR must have real power and be allowed to plan and
set the direction for the biosphere reserve. The government commission above it is for
oversight only and micromanagement would violate the intent of the model. The
Commission for La Amistad TBR is a source of power for the area of interest committees
and in turn it receives its legitimacy from them. It provides a space in which interest
groups interact and work together seeking solutions that provide the most positive options
for actors as defined by actors. It is not assumed that all interest groups will have equal
voice at all times, rather to the contrary, that adaptation will occur with shifting power
relationships and alliances formed to steer the direction of the biosphere reserve in a way
that accurately reflects public sentiments. Greater detail of the relationships among
actors and the area of interest groups that make up the Commission for La Amistad TBR

can be found in the section on the horizontal plane of 182.

124

 

Establishing zonation of core park areas, buffer zones, and transition zones is a critical
role of the Commission for La Amistad TBR. The process of establishing zones is
ongoing with input from all areas of interest as well as park administration. A GIS is
crucial to this process, a GIS that is widely used in public meetings as well as in official
planning sessions. The development of GIS layers with alternative zonation enables
diverse actors to share a sense of virtual geography and helps drive dialogue. However, it
is the Commission for La Amistad TBR that has the responsibility to certify the current

official GIS and zonation plan.

The Commission for La Amistad TBR has two principal arms, Administration for La
Amistad and the Association for La Amistad. It also directs and oversees a permanent

office of financial and legal affairs.

Administration for La Amistad TBR. The principal functions of the Administration
for La Amistad are evaluation, coordination, and implementation. There are two chief
administrators, one from each nation, and national as well as international work teams.
Scientific as well as conservation and preservation activities are biologically focused and
need not be restricted by national boundaries. While there are national dimensions to the
administrative body for La Amistad, it represents an undivided biosphere that is of global

importance.

125

 

Evaluation is an ongoing function of the Administration for La Amistad TBR and takes
many forms, explicitly recognizing the profoundly different world views and interests of
actors. Evaluation activities may be requested by an area of interest committee, pass
discussion at the level of the commission, and be assigned to administrative personnel
who work on evaluation methodology with the area of interest group requesting the
activity. Correspondingly, employees working in park administration can request an
evaluation on areas where they perceive knowledge to be lacking. An international
scientist can request a study that will inform a global issue and collaborate with biosphere
reserve administrators to implement it in a way that is consistent with other studies

currently under way or planned for the future.

Evaluation is an ongoing and an integral role of the Administration for La Amistad TBR.
It provides data that informs planning for the biosphere reserve and incorporates actors
from the local to the global. Evaluation skills are honed through practice and continual

improvement in the evaluation process is a designed component of 182 (Patton 2002).

Continuing planning is also a function of The Administration for La Amistad TBR and
draws upon results of ongoing evaluation. Plans are developed at this level, not only in
response to planning edicts from the Commission for La Amistad TBR, but to generate
and offer plans to them as well. The planning process involves diverse actors and is not
controlled, but rather facilitated, by the Administration for La Amistad TBR and its

professional staff.

126

A current management plan for La Amistad as an international site has been prepared by
The Nature Conservancy through a participatory process that included more than fifty
meetings, involving over 25 organizations and 150 people (Carazo, Herrera et al. 2005).
A detailed national management plan for Parque Intemacional de La Amistad Costa Rica
also exists at present (Borge 2004) and reflects widespread participation and
representation of diverse actors. Panama similarly has a national plan for La Amistad.
These plans could easily serve as a starting point to develop a management plan for La
Amistad as a transfrontier biosphere reserve. Detailed evaluation and management
planning is carried out under the administrative arm of La Amistad TBR, and leads to its

third principal function: coordination of activities.

The administrative arm of La Amistad TBR is responsible for knowing what activities are
taking place in the biosphere reserve and for coordination of those activities. A website
is maintained with the help of the Association for La Amistad to provide public
information about activities; social, scientific, or economic relating to the biosphere
reserve. This website also provides links for actors to communicate with park

administration or other partners.

Coordination of activities is a participatory process with efforts made to invite
partnerships and share responsibilities. Theoretically if good information is available
easily for actors they will be able to largely coordinate activities themselves and help
minimize the role of Administration for La Amistad TBR. Administration is ultimately

responsible for enforcement and adherence to biosphere rules but minimizes this role by

127

proactively coordinating activities that include monitoring impacts of human actors as

well as other ecosystem changes.

The Administration for La Amistad TBR shares many similarities with park management
practices now in place; however, as the biosphere reserve evolves it seeks to harmonize
rules and regulations (formal institutions) throughout the entire biosphere reserve
including buffer zones. If both nations are willing to legally devolute regulatory power in

some areas of natural resource management to the biosphere reserve it is possible to

 

create a single set of rules and regulations that apply binationally. Short of this total
integration, the Administration for La Amistad TBR works with local, national, and
regional planners to move toward standardization. Progress toward standardization has
the potential to greatly reduce transaction costs and fundamental uncertainty among
actors (Schmid 2004). Ideally, a common set of formal rules and regulations will be
developed through widespread collaboration among actors, approved by the Commission
for La Amistad TBR, the Governmental Binational Committee for La Amistad, and

adapted to guide legal management of the biosphere reserve as a single entity.

The 182 model is designed to cultivate informal institutions that encourage positive
attitudes and behaviors toward the natural environment. Another arm of the biosphere
reserve, The Association for La Amistad TBR is charged with this function, but it is
mentioned in this section on the Administration for La Amistad because biosphere
administration is charged with enforcement of rules and regulations. Enforcement is

expensive if not impossible in an area as expansive and diverse as La Amistad. The

128

stress on biosphere reserve administration, especially the enforcement branch, is reduced

by effectively marketing and encouraging positive behavior.

The Association for La Amistad TBR provides support and help for all other branches
of the biosphere reserve. In addition it provides education and marketing to create
informal institutions that guide day to day behavior of residents living in buffer and
transition zones of the biosphere reserve. 1t reaches out to global citizens, making them
aware of the planetary services provided by La Amistad TBR, and providing social and

economic mechanisms for them to pay for these services.

GIS. One of the four main committees under the Association for La Amistad TBR is
Geographic Information Systems. A high quality GIS must be created from a variety of
sources and the economic cost of creating one is prohibitive without substantial
resources. GIS tools are sometimes built using the best available data even if that data is
known to be lacking. Providing the financial resources to “do it right” and create a
Geographic Information System that international scientists and Indigenous residents can

agree is accurate is a role of this committee.

A Geographic Information System is critical for use in evaluation and planning, not only
for biosphere reserve administration, but for public participation at all levels. It provides
at least some degree of shared geographic understanding for actors who can discuss and
plan using this visual tool. This is especially important for an area with extremely

diverse actors who have different languages, dialects, and worldviews. By projecting

129

visual images using a GIS actors are given a new space in which to interact. “Hands on”
educational programs empower residents and planners to learn how to use the GIS and
develop those skills as the GIS is used in public meetings. Additionally, a GIS, and maps
created from this system, can be sent and shared digitally at low or no cost via the

Internet.

While there will be an official GIS version for the biosphere reserve at any given time,
this GIS is constantly evolving by design. In addition to the official version, which is
available to the public, non—official GIS layers are developed by citizens or organizations
and may be incorporated into the official GIS. Development of the GIS is the
responsibility of the GIS Committee but the Commission for La Amistad TBR must

approve the official version.

Education. The Education Committee located under the Association for La Amistad
TBR processes and coordinates information that is then distributed widely to the public.
In this model education does not flow in any single given direction; it is mutually
reinforcing. The Education Committee not only seeks to educate others but is a learning

organization charged with educating itself as well.

Education includes scientific and cultural ways of seeing and knowing. It embraces
multiple paradigms as valid and has members fiom varied area of interest groups on the
committee. The Education Committee gathers information from studies that take place

within La Amistad as well scientific and cultural information that is generated elsewhere

130

but relates to the biosphere reserve. In addition to disciplinary approaches the committee

looks for connections and overlapping areas of understanding.

Educational outreach is conducted under this committee but is not to be confused with
promotion and marketing. The outreach efforts of the Education Committee target school
children as well as adults, both locally and globally, and the committee sponsors
environmental education and community research programs that help people learn about
the research process in a “hands-on” way. Internationally it provides information about
one of the world’s most biologically diverse areas and a UN World Heritage Site of
recognized global importance. Locally it helps residents not only learn about the
biosphere reserve but also about economic opportunities connected to the reserve. Areas
of interest committees draw upon the resources of the education committee to help them

with specific programs.

Promotion and Marketing. Marketing includes advertising and the creation of logos,
tag lines, and promotion of a biosphere reserve identity that includes standard operating
procedures for resource management. It seeks to promote a common baseline ecological
identity (Thomashow 1995) among actors that provides them with an understanding of

human interdependencies and connections.

Global marketing of the biosphere reserve will assist marketing efforts in ecotourism,

specialized agricultural products, art or other manufactured items that are sustainably

produced in buffer zones of La Amistad. An overall marketing campaign for the

131

 

biosphere reserve creates a climate that empowers and assists individual actors,
companies, or organizations in their individual and collective marketing efforts.
Promotion and marketing also are tied to raising global awareness about La Amistad

TBR and helping generate contributions to the Foundation for La Amistad.

A second important function is marketing behavioral norms. While one function of
educational outreach is to educate people about laws and standards regarding resource
management, marketing promotes general ideas, ways of seeing, and ways of interacting
with nature. It teaches informal rules of behavior that are based upon understanding and

ethics rather than fear of enforcement.

An example of this type of marketing campaign would be a series of posters that are
different yet all have the same tag-line, “La Amistad. . .We’re Connected”. Different
drawings show different ways in which this tag-line is true; people are connected to
people through the natural environment, people are connected to plants and animals, and
specific actions, either good and bad, are connected to specific outcomes. Marketing is a
key way by which the biosphere reserve creates its own image and impacts the way

people think about it and about each other in their relationships to nature.

The Foundation for La Amistad TBR. The primary function of the Foundation for La
Amistad TBR is to generate a sustainable funding flow. It receives voluntary payments
from individuals and organizations, invests those funds, and generates revenue from the

interest. There are mechanisms that allow disbursements of a percentage of funds, but

132

the goal of the foundation is to provide a stable source of funding for biosphere reserve

support functions.

The Foundation for La Amistad performs some of the functions of a market; however, in
contrast to a market, these environmental services do have to be precisely defined. It
links global citizens who are willing to pay for environmental services (as they define
them) with local sellers who ensure those environmental services continue to be
provided. The Marketing and Promotions Committee makes people aware of each other
and promotes voluntary payments. The Foundation for La Amistad TBR offers
individuals, organizations, and governments a way to pay directly and maintain or

strengthen conservation or preservation efforts they believe to be valuable.

The Foundation for La Amistad TRB has several sub-foundations within it. These sub-
foundations are not named in the model for ISZ but would evolve naturally as the
biosphere reserve begins to function. These foundations are established under the larger
foundation to support causes deemed important by organizers and donors. A foundation
could be started to support jaguar research, fund watershed activities, or help launch a
series of Indigenous publications. By nesting these sub—foundations within a larger
foundation administrative costs are greatly reduced while performance possibilities for

investments are increased by economies of scale.

The Foundation for La Amistad TBR has considerable freedom in banking practices and

answers first to the Association for La Amistad TBR, and secondly, to the Commission

133

for La Amistad TBR. The commission does not interact directly with the foundation nor
manage its funds. The Association for La Amistad sets the operating procedures, budget,
and overall direction for the foundation. Sub-foundations operate almost autonomously

within broad foundation guidelines.

The Foundation is a support mechanism separate from the legal financial arm of La
Amistad TBR which manages salaries, buys equipment, confers contracts and develops
the budget for La Amistad. The Foundation may purchase equipment or fund projects
through the biosphere reserve financial mechanism or on its own. It is designed to be
open and flexible, to create options and opportunities, and to facilitate payments from
global actors who value a service or multiple services performed by the biosphere

reserve.

Financial and Legal Affairs for La Amistad TBR. A binational body is legally created
to confer contracts, receive and disburse payments, engage in negotiations and manage
the budget for the biosphere reserve. This body will have mechanisms to handle firnds by
nation or as a single biosphere reserve. The biosphere reserve can serve as a learning
laboratory for both nations to experiment with co-management of funds and collaboration
on legal financial arrangements. The skills learned in this process would expand

possibilities for both nations to pursue larger regional development projects.

The Financial and Legal Affairs Division of La Amistad TBR serves as a permanent

secretariat that handles the legal affairs as well as financial matters of the biosphere

134

reserve. It is placed directly under the Commission for La Amistad TBR, carries out
actions on behalf of the commission, and serves as a source of stability as the commission
changes over time. This division will have a top post for each nation and follow
guidelines similar to the Administration for La Amistad which also answers to the

Commission for La Amistad TBR.

Area of Interest Committees. Eight area of interest committees serve as the heart of the
Commission for La Amistad TBR. This is presented theoretically on the horizontal plane
of 182. These committees are conduits connecting local actors with national, binational,
regional, and global interests. The divisions by area of interest presented in the 182
model are based upon MAB guidelines as well as unique considerations of La Amistad.
A mechanism is present at the level of the Commission for La Amistad TBR to allow the

number of these committees and the interests they represent to change over time.

135

3.2.2.4 The Web of Actors: ISZ Horizontal Plane

In addition to the vertical plane of formal institutions, the model for La Amistad as a
transboundary biosphere reserve has a horizontal plane. Actors spread out across this
plane connecting with each other and linking the local to the global. The biosphere is
represented by a center circle and is surrounded by rings of human interest. The primary
beneficiaries of biosphere services are local actors who form the irmnediate ring around
it; however, environmental services radiate outward in recognition of their global
contribution.34 Correspondingly, the inner ring provides primary protection for the
biosphere with help from actors found in the outer circle. A recognized symbiotic
relationship with the biosphere guides human actors as they interact to collaboratively
manage natural resources. This is not a new idea; a similar relationship has been

presented previously in Costa Rica and elsewhere (Quesada Mateo 1992).

 

3‘ The term “environmental services” is used in a liberal context in this dissertation and allows for
environmental services to be defined as, “a service or bundle of services provided by ecosystems that
humans perceive to be of value to them”.

136

 

..0 >358: 10000 .002: > 48:08:80.... 9000.003 £00020

7/
...8 0.000. ...8 <<0:0 20:20}

00.02....0 9 3:60:80 08:00
00335....

          
                

            

  

30.0088

 

   
  

 

 

      
      

 

03.30:. .0. 00.0:00 3.0.00.0 <05... 0. 30 308..
m:<_8:.30:.0. 40008.0 E01958
002000
50.003000 2:820:
...:0 0:0 <05:
/. ‘ 0.00088 ‘
2302.3 3303
0:08.820 ...8 20.2.0} 0..
.0503 0:08.80. 3.03088. 200.0
00330“ 00 3:05.50

 

100.0030.
1.030” 0:08.820 . .
4:0 503 Ow 80.08. 0:: 0.000. >0. 0008.0:
>033 0033030 L E08300

Figure 13: 182 Horizontal Plane, the Web of Actors

137

The circles on IS2’s horizontal plane divide actors by area of interest yet do so on the
fabric of a single circle representing a unified whole. Divisions are made based upon
Man and the Biosphere Guidelines as well as unique characteristics of La Amistad.

There is a mechanism at the level of the Commission for La Amistad TBR (located on the
vertical plane of 182) to allow these divisions to change and adapt over time. The

outermost ring of the circle is broken, indicating outward expansion as well as points of

entry.

The following characterization of the horizontal plane for La Amistad as a transboundary
biosphere reserve is presented as a theoretical ideal. The adaptive nature of this model
moves from the current situation to the theoretical ideal presented here. Actual
implementation of this model would not reach theoretical possibilities; however, these

and other evolving ideals would help drive evolution of the biosphere reserve.

Center Circle of the Horizontal Plane; The Biosphere. The Costa Rican portion of the
Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserve was designated a UN World Heritage Site in 1983
and a single transboundary World Heritage Site with Panama in 1990.35 This designation
is a formal recognition of an ecosystem that supersedes national boundaries and is of
recognized importance for the planet. This ecosystem is at the heart of [$2 and is

represented by the innermost circle of the model’s horizontal plane.

 

3’ When the Panamanian portion of La Amistad was inscribed on the World Heritage List in 1990 the entire
area with Costa Rica was formally called the Talamanca Range-La Amistad/La Amistad National Park.

138

The natural protected area of La Amistad World Heritage Site comprises the single
largest natural forest unit in Central America, containing several hundred endemic plant
species and one of the last major refuges for threatened fauna. No other protected area in
Central America contains as many viable populations, species, life zones, or as much
altitudinal variation. The Talamanca range is estimated to contain almost four percent of

the varieties of all terrestrial species on earth (UNEP and WCMC 1997).

The World Heritage Site designation also includes cultural dimensions. Archaeological
sites are reported along many major waterways yet an almost total lack of archaeological
investigation within the area makes objective analysis of the human history difficult. Pre-
cerarnic sites at least 12,000 years old have been discovered in buffer zones of La
Amistad Panama near Baru Volcano in Chiriqui Province (UNEP and WCMC 1997) with
evidence of continuous and evolving human occupation for the past 4,000 years (Linares,
Shccts et al. 1975). Such sites are extremely rare in Central America and this discovery

indicates the possibility of more finds of Central America's earliest human inhabitants.

There are existing institutional links (independent of the World Heritage Site designation)
that recognize the connection between environmental services provided by the biosphere
and global actors. Costa Rica is the world leader in a carbon trading program that
compensates private land owners (or Indigenous reserves) for maintaining or regenerating
forests for carbon sequestration services.36 An expansion of programs to pay for

environmental services through FONAFIFO, “Ecomercados II; Scaling Up and

 

3‘ The FONDO NACIONAL DE FINANCIAMIENTO FORESTAL (FONAFIFO), the Costa Rican agency
administering the national arm of the global carbon trading program, has increasingly registered Indigenous
lands in buffer zones of La Amistad to receive payments for carbon sequestration services.

139

Mainstreaming Payments for Environmental Services”, seeks regional payments for
watershed services and will compensate Indigenous residents living in buffer zones of La
Amistad (among others) and allocate a percentage of those payments to La Amistad

National Park Costa Rica.

Concentric circles around the biosphere on the horizontal plane of 182 represent layers of
services provided by the biosphere that extend from the land to local and global actors.
These circles indicate divisions in the scope of environmental services and segments of
actors who enjoy those services; however, the relationship is actually a continuum.
Global services, while further removed from the center, impact billions of human actors.
Local or regional environmental services are provided to fewer people but their health,
production capability, and economic opportunities are directly connected to the land upon

which they live.

Specific detail about the physical nature of La Amistad lntemational Park (the same
physical unit as the Talamanca Range-La Amistad/La Amistad National Park World

Heritage Site) is available in the situation section (3.1) of this dissertation.

Area of Human Interest Groups. The official guidelines for the establishment and
functioning of transboundary biosphere reserves recommends that the following groups
are represented in the biosphere reserve coordinating structure: governmental
administrators, scientists and scientific boards, local communities, interested and affected

groups (including youth), the private sector, and NGOs. Using these recommendations,

140

groups were developed by area of interest for the unique case of La Amistad.
Governmental interests are captured on the vertical plane of 182 and therefore are not
represented on the horizontal plane. The area of interest groups are: Indigenous
interests, education and youth, NGOS, sustainable agriculture, commerce, tourism,

watersheds, and science.

The divisions among interest groups ensure that voice exists for each of these focal areas.
It does not restrain interests and confine them to a single category. In one example,
Indigenous interests, it is possible to envision substantial interests in all other groups.
Indigenous ecotourism involves both the tourism area of interest and the Indigenous
interest area where examination of the cultural impact of tourism activities takes place.
Sustainable agriculture feeds those tourists as well as Indigenous communities that may
or may not choose to participate in tourism. Commercial artwork is produced on reserves
and marketed locally as well as globally with help from the commerce area of interest.
Indigenous school children take part in ongoing scientific experiments to monitor the
biosphere, and as such, fit into the categories of science, education, and Indigenous
interests equally and simultaneously for this activity. The watershed interest group helps
Indigenous residents link with global markets for environmental services and realize a
sustainable cash flow. Many Indigenous activities are assisted financially and with

human expertise by local and international NGOs.

A similar case could be made for each of the area of interest groups. This inability to

constrain interests to a single category is not a detriment; rather, it is used as a force to

141

 

drive adaptation on the horizontal plane of 182. By design, actors flow among categories
and bring emphasis to critical nexus points. These points change over time as learning
takes place, partnerships change, or new deveIOpments occur in technology or natural
systems. A recognized danger is the evolution of power imbalances that lead to
dominance by a limited number of actors. For that reason the 182 model has divisions for
areas of human interest, and while these areas can change, there must be an effort to

maintain voice for all.

Area of Interest by Group:

Indigenous Interests. These are the people who have lived closest to the land of La
Amistad for generations, millennia. The core park area was and still is home for some of
them but the majority of Indigenous residents live on reserves in buffer zones of La

Amistad. More than any other group they have historic ties to the land.

It is important to recognize the diversity in this category. In the Sixaola Watershed alone
there are six different Indigenous reserves located in buffer zones of La Amistad, four in
Costa Rica and two in Panama. The Bribri and Cabécar are legally represented in Costa
Rica byiAsociaciones de Desarrollo Integral (Development Associations) which serve as
local governments, but this formal structure does not capture the diversity among
Indigenous actors. Even within a single reserve factionalism is common and institutions
are adapting in communities, ofien without clear formal agreement as to who speaks for
whom (Palmer 1989). Formation of a transboundary biosphere reserve will not directly

impact this local governmental structure but will rather allow an additional forum for the

142

voice of Indigenous residents. A charge of the Indigenous Interest Committee is to seek
out Indigenous actors who are not represented in the current resource management
dialogue and provide opportunities for them to participate in ways other than the existing
legal-political system. The new planning process created by the biosphere reserve
impacts local government as citizens use new knowledge and possibilities to work

through the existing systems of local government.

This area of interest committee extends outward toward the global network of Indigenous
organizations. An example of this type of activity is the 2001 Indigenous Peoples
Summit of the Americas held in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. This summit brought together
Indigenous people from North, Central, and South America and created lasting
relationships that led to the Second Indigenous Peoples Summit of the Americas held in
Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2005 (Assembly of First Nations in Canada 2005). Through
these summits partnerships have been formed that foster collaboration on projects as well

as increase understanding of common needs, goals, and methods.

By linking with other Indigenous groups globally, residents living in buffer zones of La
Amistad can benefit from knowledge and resources these groups can provide.
Collaboration among Indigenous groups brings a cultural component to these exchanges
and actors benefit form considering the experience of other groups and the positive and
negative impacts of those experiences on Indigenous culture. A concrete example of
international Indigenous cooperation is work that builds upon Brazil’s existing telehealth

network (Hira, Tognoli et al. 2005) and links Canadian and Brazilian Indigenous

143

communities through shared experiences and resources. A similar program could be
implemented in Talamanca through a partnership with Northern Indigenous groups who
have technical knowledge, financial resources, and the cultural experience of working

with a similar program in the Amazon.

Education and Youth. Area schools, including adult education and other specialized

programs, are primary participants in the Education and Youth Committee. Interests in

 

this committee include local and distance learning programs which have been established
in both Costa Rica and Panama. Young people and general education are given voice in
this committee, and while there are ties to higher education, advanced scientific research

and dissemination of those findings is the function of the science committee.

Environmental education programs are particularly well suited for La Amistad TBR and
these programs are of special importance for the Education and Youth Committee. The
natural world provides a classroom for “hands-on” learning that is only possible through
direct experience. Students participate in ongoing experiments, not only to learn about
the natural environment, but to learn research methods as well. Educational exchange
programs bring students from all over the world to La Amistad and open doors for local

students to travel and learn abroad.

Education was cited as one of the original goals listed in creation documents of La

Amistad lntemational Park (Presidencia de la Republica de Costa Rica 1982) and

educational programs have been part of several initiatives between Costa Rica and

* 144

Panama, laying the groundwork for further work in this area (The Nature Conservancy

with FUNDESPA 2002).

NGOs. Since 1982 international organizations for cooperation have invested up to 30
million US dollars in projects or programs for La Amistad Biosphere Reserves (Borge
2004). Most recently The Nature Conservancy, along with USAID, has funded and
facilitated cooperation through the Parks in Peril Program for La Amistad to produce a
binational management plan as well as assist in development of the Costa Rican national
management plan for the park. It has also funded activities to strengthen the binational
committee for La Amistad lntemational Park and also sponsored several projects at the

local level to target inner circle actors nearest the land.

NGOS were instrumental in developing the early framework for La Amistad lntemational
Park and include the following who made a significant contribution in the 1970’s: The
World Conservation Union, Switzerland (UICN); The United Nations Environment
Programme (PNUMA); the World Wildlife Fund (WWF); The Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (F AO); the United Nations Educational, Scientific,
and Cultural Organization, (UNESCO), and the Organization of American States.
Conservation lntemational has had a significant and continuing presence for La Amistad
and The Nature Conservancy has been a vital force in recent years driving collaboration

among governmental planners as well as local actors.

145

A Global Environment Facility report notes the following financing for associated
activities tied to one current project, “Integrated Ecosystem Management in the
Binational Sixaola River Basin” (the same project presented in IS 1 ): The Nature
Conservancy $420,000, Conservation lntemational $360,000, the European Commission
$200,000 (GEF 2006). As this example illustrates, the economic impact of NGOs and
government aid programs is considerable for La Amistad. It is also possible to say that
contributions of human knowledge and talent are equally important resources provided
by NGOs. The design of 182 encourages NGOs to empower those living closest to the

biosphere; to help, facilitate, and know when to get out of the way.

Sustainable Agriculture. The second of three central goals for creation and operation of
a transfrontier biosphere reserves is: “Utilize biosphere reserves as models of land
management and of approaches to sustainable development” (UNESCO 2005). Buffer
zones and transition zones of La Amistad provide an excellent opportunity to model
sustainable agriculture as an integrated part of land management and biosphere reserve
operation. The climate and soils are ideal for targeted agricultural production that could
easily feed the local population, tourists to the region, and export specialty items
worldwide. Agricultural activities provide baseline security for the local population by
ensuring a constant and continuing food supply while simultaneously providing a viable

income flow that is suited to existing and preferred job opportunities.

Costa Rica has a long history of collaboration in agricultural extension and is home for

EARTH University and CATIE, organizations that promote agricultural research and

146

extension throughout the humid tropics. Agricultural producers, large, small, and
medium, are all cited as principal actors to consider for management of La Amistad as a
binational site (Carazo, Herrera et al. 2005). Several agricultural cooperatives are also
present and functioning in the area. A readiness exists to expand sustainable agricultural

production based upon past experience.

Data from 2003 puts organic banana production of the Sixaola Watershed at 2,451
hectares and intensive banana production (heavily chemically dependent) at 12,417
hectares. Eighty-nine percent of the Sixaola Watershed is forested, and sustainable
agriculture can be significantly expanded without reducing this forest cover. A planned
land use change frees acreage for sustainable agricultural activities as intensive banana
production is reduced in the lower watershed. In the middle watershed production can be
significantly increased by promoting more intensive, yet sustainable, production methods
and with more options for crop selection. Proposed and scheduled infrastructure
improvements, roads, bridges, and possibly rail, connect this area with both the Port of
Limon in Costa Rica, and A1 Mirante in Panama thereby facilitating regional and global

exports.

The Sustainable Agriculture Committee for La Amistad TBR has close ties with the
education and youth committee as well as the science committee to help coordinate study
experiences, research, and outreach with them. It works with ecotourism and develops
local production to meet tourism food demands as well as provide a cultural link to the

food supply. Indigenous groups have interests in agriculture as individuals and through

147

the collectives already in existence. Agricultural use is a primary consideration of
watershed plans and strong links are developed with that committee. Food products find

markets in collaboration with the committee for commerce.

Commerce. The Commerce Committee works closely with the Promotion and
Marketing Committee found on the vertical plane of 182. Products and services
associated with La Amistad are enhanced through the creation of a logo, tag lines,
branding, and promotion of awareness that the product has a tie to the conservation of
natural areas. The focus for the Commerce Committee on the inner ring nearest the
biosphere is providing technical support, access, and knowledge about markets.
Diversity in products is encouraged, artwork to agriculture to light production, provided

that the products meet the sustainability standards adopted for biosphere marketing.

There is a need for technological access to global ecommerce in nearly all groups
represented in the 182 model. The Commerce Committee establishes a central platform
that can provide access to Internet marketing for the members of any of the other
committees. It works with government and private industry to ensure that technological
infrastructure exists for potential users and it encourages implementation by providing

technical options and by coordinating loans to implement those options.

One of the most important functions performed by the Commerce Committee is learning;

identifying markets, trends, and options that are consistent with the goals of the biosphere

reserve, and passing that knowledge on to local actors. With ecommerce the distance

148

between local and global shortens, middle level brokers are eliminated, and product value
is captured as close to the biosphere as possible. Likewise, as more visitors come for a
tourism experience they stay in housing built by local builders with local materials, serve
food that is grown and prepared locally, and purchase souvenirs made by local residents
with sustainably harvested local materials. Recommendations for greater “rent capture”
have been made as a result of economic analysis of Costa Rica’s tourism trade (Inman
1998). It is a charge of the Commerce Committee to help other actors understand this

concept and implement its basic operating guidelines.

I“ ~_.. w—fi
.d
L

Tourism. As a transboundary biosphere reserve, La Amistad is well positioned to
present a variety of tourism experiences and succeed in protecting the natural
environment at the same time. A key to this process is zonation and designation of the

biosphere reserve core area(s), buffer zones, and transition zones.

The biosphere reserve approach to tourism provides a new space for actors to address
current problems. The debate about nature tourism, ecotourism, and conventional
tourism continues in Costa Rica as well as globally. This discourse can be greatly
informed by including the concept of zonation. Rather than debate the viability of a
given tourism activity, the biosphere reserve concept adds the dimensions of place and
time. A dialogue is facilitated at the level of the Tourism Committee for La Amistad
TBR to discuss the appropriateness of activities as they relate to specific sites and
specific times of the year. Local actors know the area and the impacts, and through

dialogue, plan tourism opportunities that protect or even enhance natural areas.

149

Zonation is formally approved at the level of the Commission for La Amistad TBR and
draws upon suggestions from park administration as well as other area of interest groups
including tourism. The Tourism Committee has a voice in zonation but does not set
policy; it does however promote a dialogue to determine tourism opportunities and place

them within the zonation scheme.

Tourism links closely with Indigenous interests in the case of La Amistad. Buffer zones
of the TBR in Talamanca are almost exclusively made up of Indigenous reserves that
have legal status in both Costa Rica and Panama. The majority of ecotourism activities
take place here, not in the core park area, and the economic benefits of tourism activities
in this zone are captured primarily by Indigenous operators. The presence of these
Indigenous reserves offers a tourism experience that blends culture and nature
appreciation. As ecotourism brings people from around the globe to experience the land
and people of these Indigenous zones, lasting partnerships are created and nurtured,

generating social capital as well as a sustainable revenue stream.

The zonation process also allows for costal or marine areas of limited or no access,
restricted access or activities, and other areas of intensive use that none-the-less follow
basic practices for good ecological health. These costal areas are presently the primary
tourist destination in the region of La Amistad and actors face the possibility of degraded
resources as growth continues without an overall development plan. Without zonation

actors often compete with each other to maximize their individual benefits and as a result

150

competing interests and activities often collide. By providing a zonation process, actors
can address areas of contention and work together to seek solutions that provide for the
greatest good of the majority of actors and simultaneously protect natural resources that

provide the basis for tourism activities.

Links to the Tourism Committee for La Amistad TBR include watersheds, where
upstream activities directly impact costal and marine areas, and commerce, where the
suitability of commercial activities is determined partly by its relationship to tourism.
Perhaps the most important benefit for tourism resulting from operation of La Amistad as
a transboundary biosphere reserve is the tie to Promotion and Marketing found on the
vertical plane of 182. By creating a brand name, an identity for La Amistad, and
marketing the entire biosphere reserve along with the conservation ethics it promotes,
tourism operators will enjoy an enhanced position from which to launch their individual

marketing efforts.

Watersheds. A committee for watersheds builds upon current government projects and
facilitates natural resource management at the level of the watershed. Buffer zones of the
biosphere reserve are managed locally, through existing formal institutions, and
simultaneously at the level of the watershed with new institutions that are in the process
of formation and implementation. These management activities enjoy the additional
benefit of management at the level of the biosphere which provides overall guidelines,

information, and material help for projects.

151

Watershed management utilizes widespread citizen involvement and public dialogue.
Meetings enjoy the benefits of an up to date GIS and the increased understanding it
enables among actors. Diverse actors physically see the same images and relationships of
human activities to the watershed. Drawing upon the GIS Committee that is part of the
Association for La Amistad TBR, watershed committees and managers have access to the
help they need to build additional layers; proposed housing or tourism developments,
agricultural use, or the impact of roads. Not only do watersheds receive technical GIS
help from the larger biosphere reserve network, they enjoy the benefits of widespread

GIS use in other aspects of biosphere reserve planning which increases the capacity

among actors to work with this technology.

Management at the level of the watershed also offers a tie to regional, national, and
international programs to pay for enviromnental services. In Costa Rica there is an
institutional link between forested areas, carbon sequestration, watershed services, and
the environmental services they perform. Programs to pay for environmental services are
administered under the same governmental unit, the Fondo Nacional de F inanciarniento
F orestal (FONAFIFO), and target providers of environmental services in the middle and
lower watershed. La Amistad National Park is scheduled to begin receiving a percentage
of watershed service fees but there are no direct payments to the park at this time. La
Amistad TBR does not seek payment for environmental service in the model for 182, but

through the watershed committee, helps actors connect with opportunities.

152

The Watershed Committee of La Amistad TBR facilitates the sharing of knowledge
among watersheds, and many successful strategies, tools, and materials prepared for one
watershed can be adapted for use in another. The transboundary biosphere reserve
provides a learning laboratory for international watershed management and fulfills goal
two of La Amistad TBR: Utilize biosphere reserves as models of land management and
approaches to sustainable development. Existing sustainable development projects in the
Sixaola Binational Watershed and the adjoining Teribe-Changinola Watershed use the
legal fi'amework created on the vertical plane of 182 and efforts at the watershed level are

strengthened by education and marketing efforts of the Association for La Amistad.

 

Science. Fulfilling the first goal of La Amistad TBR, to conserve natural and cultural
diversity, is highly dependent upon science and scientific monitoring. One international
monitoring group suggests that it is possible no other park is the world possesses as many
species and such a wealth of fauna (UN EP and WCMC 1997). La Amistad is home for
many threatened and endangered species and may be one of the last and best places to

protect and learn about them. Science is critical to this function.

Costa Rica has already made significant advances in coordinating scientific research
nationally and making that information available to the public through printed
publications as well as a website that links agencies, organizations, and individuals with

scientific interests in biodiversity. The Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad (INBio) is a

 

Costa Rican nonprofit, non-govemmental organization that works with educational

 

institutions, individuals, for profit companies as well as governmental agencies. Its

153

mission is to promote a better understanding of the value of biodiversity, to conserve it,
and to better the quality of human life. INBio has much in common with the goals of La
Amistad TBR and is an important actor representing the scientific community on this

area of interest committee.

Numerous international groups and organizations have a scientific interest in La Amistad;
universities, botanical gardens, NGOs, and private industry. It is at the level of the
Science Committee for La Amistad TBR that these interests are examined in light of the
biosphere reserve’s goals and guidelines. The Science Committee brings an informed
and authoritative voice to the Commission for La Amistad which is charged with
planning and direction for the biosphere reserve. Additionally, the Science Committee
works closely with Park Administration to coordinate activities and get feedback from the

ground up.

The Science Committee recognizes Indigenous knowledge as well as narrow academic
paradigms and strict disciplinary ways of knowing. While the term “Indigenous
knowledge” does not capture the diversity within this category, it is possible to say that
knowledge systems based upon thousands of years of direct experience are alive and
operational in the region of La Amistad. Men and women of knowledge often occupy
positions that blend science, medicine, and religion with political functions in the
community. This inclusive way of seeing is incorporated into the dialogue at the table of
the Science Committee and exchanges among diverse actors lead to new knowledge and

understanding.

154

Summary. The 182 model is offered as an ideal. It does not ignore the pitfalls that have
been documented in ecotourism, sustainable agriculture, watershed management, or
really any other area of interest group. The model is presented as an ideal, what might be

theoretically possible, if people work together to attain it.

It is based upon a readiness within both Costa Rica and Panama to begin the process of I
constructing a transboundary biosphere reserve. Part of that process is bringing actors

together to examine the model and use it as a starting point for dialogue. The experience

of most transfrontier biosphere reserves has been mixed, realizing some of the

components presented here, but lacking others (UNESCO 2003). However, building

upon that experience and existing legal agreements, Costa Rica and Panama are poised to

lead the way for other transfrontier biosphere reserves in Latin America.37

A vertical and a horizontal plane are presented for La Amistad as a transboundary
biosphere reserve. Formal institutions are presented on the vertical plane and a web of
actors is presented on the horizontal plane. Both planes have an adaptive function and
change is anticipated and intended. The web of actors will not be formed all at once but
will rather evolve. Institutional structures will also take time to build, and while 182
provides a vision of what is possible, actors will build their own structure and modify it

over time.

 

37 As of March, 2007 there were no Latin American transfrontier biosphere reserves.

155

b-

The 1S2 model meets the recommendations of the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere
Reserve Programme for establishment and functioning of transboundary biosphere
reserves. It considers specific characteristics of La Amistad and offers a rationale for
inclusion of additional voices. The model for La Amistad as a transboundary biosphere
reserve builds upon existing legal agreements, viable institutional options, past planning,

and current management plans for La Amistad lntemational Park.

Additionally, the 182 model draws upon analysis of global biosphere reserve concepts
and guidelines (Hadley 2002) (UNESCO 2000), the Latin American Experience (Jaeger
2005) (Daniele, Acerbi et al. 1999) , and the experience of seven functioning transfrontier

biosphere reserves (UNESCO 2003).

The model presented here for La Amistad Peace Park, A Transboundary Biosphere
Reserve, is a framework that has yet to be filled in. It lacks specific detail in many areas
yet does so with the expressed intent that these details will be provided collaboratively by

actors through dialogue and exchange.

156

3.3 Performance

The framework of this dissertation places performance as a dependent variable
responding to an interaction of (1) the situation, and (2) the institutional mechanism for
addressing that situation. To make analysis possible two models were developed, (1) a
model for management of the Sixaola Binational Watershed at the binational level, and
(2) as part of a UN Transboundary Biosphere Reserve. From these models specific
institutional arrangements were selected and compared as to the way in which they
address a specific characteristic of the situation in the Sixaola Watershed that is a source
of human interdependence. However, it is important to note that performance outcomes
must not be viewed as mechanistic or immediately transferable from one situation in time
or place to another. Indeed, it is worthy to note that over thirty years of plans and
schemes to deliver expected performance outcomes in the region of Talamanca have

largely failed.

In this dissertation intermediate performance goals are identified as leading to ultimate
outcomes: poverty reduction, biological conservation and preservation, and social
advancement. These ultimate outcomes are framed as dependent upon the intermediate
performance goals: a planning process that engages the diverse actors in the watershed,
helps them attain a similar geographic understanding, provides them with a common
means of communication, and an institutional arrangement to effectively plan and carry
out those plans. The figure that follows, Levels of Performance Measures, presents this

concept graphically (figure repeated from Chapter Two).

157

 

 

Levels of Performance Measures

 

 

 

The existence of a geographic
Actors must have a shared geographic information system, and a
understanding, a similar vision of what process to use, evaluate, and
they are talking about, in Order to plan continue to develop that system
effectively. is an observable performance

 

 

 

outcome addressing this need.

 

 

 

The diversity of actors
involved in resource
management, the number
and type of exchanges they
have, can be observed and
evaluated in relationship to
communication.

  
   
   
  
 

 

A shared and equitable means of
communication is needed when
actors are extremely diverse and
do not speak the same language.

 

 

 

  
  

 

 

 

An institutional
arrangement is needed
that enables participatory
planning across borders
and a means to execute
those plans.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Formal intuitional
arrangements are
observable; written
into code or law.
These arrangements
can be evaluated
regarding similarity of
institutions throughout
the watershed.

 

 

 

  

 

 

Poverty reduction, social development, conservation and preservation
outcomes are framed as the result of effective participatory planning and
management. The social development index and many economic scales
measure performance at this level.

 

 

 

Figure 14: Levels of Performance Measures (repeated figure)

Performance must be substantive, potentially observable and measurable, to test a

hypothesis regarding the impacts of alternative institutions. It must also deal with the

158

 

question of, “who gets what?” since different people have different interests that often
conflict with one another (Schmid 2004). Outcomes that one stakeholder perceives as
good may be disastrous for another. Natural resource management can be especially
complex in this regard since environmental and economic benefits are distributed

globally as well as locally.

Creation documents of Parque Intemacional de La Amistad, the UN MAB publication
“Recommendations for the Establishment and Functioning of Transboundary Biosphere
Reserves”, and current government programs for binational resource management in the
Sixaola Watershed all share a broad central goal: preservation or conservation of natural
resources while simultaneously providing economic and sustainable development
opportunities for humans living closest to the resource. From this broad goal several
more specific goals and performance objectives are specified in various programs or

plans.

Performance outcomes and measures for this dissertation were developed by answering
the question, “What outcomes can be used to observe the interaction of situation and
structure in addressing this broad goal? The way in which this question is answered
depends greatly upon framing and the paradigm of the responder. The Sixaola Watershed
governmental development programs identify problems and mandate interventions to
address those problems. Activities are detailed and performance outcomes specified in
measurable terms. For the most part these performance outcomes are found at the base

level of the figure above, as ultimate outcomes, however performance measures above

159

this level on the figure are not specifically addressed. The 182 model looks at institution
building as best solved by the actors involved and this process is examined relating to
intermediate performance outcomes. From this perspective the desired outcome may be a

process rather than an end.

The performance outcomes used for analysis in the next chapter were chosen with the
following criteria: (1) They are desired outcomes for both models; 131 and 182, (2) they
are substantive outcomes that can be observed and measured, and (3) they are of key
importance in addressing the broad overarching goal of preservation/conservation and

sustainable development.

Performance measures were developed after key sources of interdependence were
identified in the situation humans encounter in the Sixaola Binational Watershed. While
there are many additional sources, three key elements were identified: (1) physical
immensity, biological and topographical diversity of the watershed, (2) extreme human
diversity and lack of a common means of communication, and (3) overlapping and

confusing formal institutional management structures.

3.3.1 Existence of a GIS product and process for the Sixaola Binational
Watershed

The existence of a geographic information system, and a process to use, evaluate, and
continue to develop that system, is a performance measure for analysis in this

dissertation. It addresses a key physical aspect of the situation; immensity, biological and

160

 

topographical diversity of the watershed. Additionally, it addresses a second source of
human interdependence; extreme human diversity and lack of a common means of

communication.

The physical existence of a functioning GIS is observable. The quality of that GIS can be
evaluated by examining the data that it is built from and the scope of analysis possible
using the system. Additionally, it is possible to evaluate the GIS as to the process by
which it was created, who made design decisions, and who had input regarding data

selection. Critical to this analysis is the dimension of a GIS process as contrasted with a

GIS product.

3.3.2 Interactions among actors regarding planning and resource
management

This measure has dimensions of breadth, the scope of actors, and depth, the quality of

interactions.

The diversity of actors involved in planning resource management in the Sixaola
Watershed, the number of exchanges they have regarding resource management, and the
quality of interactions, collectively make up this performance measure. It is presented as
responding to the situation in the watershed; extreme human diversity and lack of a

common means of communication, and the way in which it is addressed institutionally.

161

It is not possible to observe all interactions among actors regarding resource management
in the Sixaola Watershed. Many of these interactions are informal and may be part of
daily conversation among neighbors. However, it is possible to observe formal
institutional interactions as captured by meetings, planning sessions, and dialogue
conducted in other public spaces.38 It is possible to examine the diversity of actors
participating is these exchanges by using a variety of measures that includes cultural
group, gender, race, socioeconomic considerations, or preferred means of
communication. The effectiveness of the dialogue may be somewhat approximated by
the willingness of actors to remain engaged and the expansion of the overall dialogue.
Precision in measuring the number or depth of interactions is not required or desired for
the broad analysis of this performance outcome in the chapter that follows. Differences

should be significantly great and observable that agreement for analysis is possible.

It is recognized here that this performance measure is useful only in this case and context.
Indeed, in some instances fewer interactions among actors would be desirable. This is
especially true in a case where overlapping institutions heighten transaction costs and
increase the number of transactions needed to effect a change. Legal institutions are dealt

with separately in the performance variable that follows in section 3.3.3.

The performance measure presented here is time and context specific. It captures
elements of informal institutions as well as formal institutions. There is a deficiency in
communication among actors in the Sixaola Watershed who frequently do not even know

about the existence of each other, a prerequisite to communication. It is a common

 

3" This would include digital or virtual meeting places.

162

concept in watershed planning that actors must realize they are connected via the
watershed, learn about the existence of each other, and open a means of communication
before participatory management of the watershed is possible. The quality of the

dialogue drives other outcomes.

This performance measure used for analysis captures the readiness of the actors, the
availability of a means of communication, and a functioning communication process. It
addresses the questions, “Are all actors at the table? Is there an equitable means of
communication? What is the approximate quantity and quality of communication?

3.3.3 The degree of similarity in rules and regulations regarding resource
management throughout the Sixaola Watershed.

The existence of similar or same formal institutions for management of natural resources
in the Sixaola Watershed is and has been a widely agreed upon goal since inception of La
Amistad in 1982 and subsequent biosphere reserve development programs. It is a focal
goal of the Global Environment Facility project designed to facilitate binational planning
and the standardization of legal institutions between Costa Rica and Panama. A
hypothesis underlying this goal is that a single ecosystem can be best managed with a
single set of rules and regulations. Short of total integration, current programs seek to
blend and harmonize formal institutions as much as possible and create new institutions

to facilitate binational management.

Current government programs mandate institutional change in watershed management.

Implementation of I82, the model of La Amistad as a transfrontier biosphere reserve, also

163

requires institutional change. The performance variable identified here: the existence of
similar or same institutional rules for management of natural resources in the Sixaola
Watershed, is analyzed as a result of the way in which these two contrasting institutional
arrangements address the source of human interdependence found in the current situation;
overlapping and confusing formal institutional management structures. Relevant
questions include, “What is the likely formal institutional structure for resource
management in the Sixaola Binational Watershed following the implementation of IS 1 ?

How would this structure likely differ with the addition of 182?

164

CHAPTER FOUR: SSP Analysis and Findings

The framework for this Situation, Structure, and Performance (SSP) analysis was defined
in Chapter Two and a theoretical background was provided for choosing this method of
analysis. In Chapter Three the “situation” was established, sources of human
interdependence identified regarding watershed management, and two alternative
institutional models were presented to address interdependencies inherent in this
situation. This chapter provides analysis to examine likely performance outcomes that
are impacted by the interaction of the situation and the way it is addressed by the

institutional structure for management.

4.1 Situation One: Physical immensity, biological and topographical
diversity of the watershed

The Sixaola Watershed is among the most diverse places on Planet Earth. It occupies a
surface area of approximately 2,848 square kilometers, but this in no way captures the
immensity of the watershed which begins at an elevation of 3,820 meters above sea level
(the highest point in the country) and empties into the Caribbean Sea. Multiple
Holdridge life zones are found along the way including Tropical Moist Forest, Tropical
Wet Forest, Premontane Rain Forest, and Lower Mountain Rain Forest (Jordan,
Sagastizabal et al. 1999). Inclines of 60 degrees are common with occasional inclines of

80 degrees or more. There are no roads in the upper watershed, only paths.

165

A finding of Chapter Three is that this physical immensity, biological, and topographical
diversity collectively create a source of human interdependence. Human beings are
physically connected via the watershed and their individual and collective use of the
watershed impacts other users. Actors often do not know about each other nor
understand the connections created by the watershed. A barrier to increasing this
understanding is the immensity of the watershed and the extremely challenging terrain
that makes travel difficult. Actors frequently know only a small area around the place

they call home with the possible exception of nearby or major cities.

4.1.1 Bounded Rationality

“Institutional economics is built on a foundation of behavioral science. A working model
of variables and processes describing the way the brain works is essential to underpin

institutional impact and change analysis” (Schmid 2004).

There are limits to what human beings can understand, limits to how much information
they can process. Several dimensions of this characteristic are documented by Schmid
and grouped under the term “bounded rationality” (Schmid 2004). The following

summary is backed up by research citations in that work that are not recited here.

Of particular interest for this case is the issue of lexicographic choice. Products, in this

case the Sixaola Watershed, have many features, and for consumers (watershed users), it

is impossible to weigh each of these features and compare alternative uses. Because of

166

wlAmh-n ‘ ..“n-.. - '

this limitation consumers establish features that are most important to them and base
choices on a few characteristics they deem most important. Humans place these
characteristics in some sort of hierarchy and compare products (watershed uses) in that
context. Price is but one example; if a resident of an Indigenous reserve has no money,
and wants to begin subsistence farming, their watershed uses will largely be impacted by

a single characteristic; it doesn’t require a capital investment.”

The physical immensity of the Sixaola Watershed poses a significant challenge for the
limits of human comprehension. In the words of one of the greatest authorities on the
Talamanca Region, a prominent author on the subject, and consultant for the Costa Rican
National Management Plan for Parque Intemacional de la Amistad, “N0 map or satellite
image or aerial photograph can reveal the magnitude of the protected forested area. The
relief with slopes greater than 60%, and in many cases 80%, are not captured nor
insinuated. Even when we fly over in a helicopter it is not possible for us to capture the
dimensions of the immense green steppe, we only realize that we have not been able to
imagine the majesty and size of the park. Those who have traveled though the park on
foot carry a lasting impression but no one can say that they know La Amistad Park,

Talamanca” (Borge 2004) (Author’s translation from Spanish).

The other end of the Sixaola Watershed is diverse, precious, and protected as well.
Cahuita National Park with its large coral reef is located just north of the watershed and

forms the northern border for the lower watershed management committee of the Sixaola

 

39 Residents of Indigenous reserves are not able to obtain loans against their land since it has a special
status.

167

 

 

 

 

Watershed. Other coral reefs are found moving south from Cahuita along the coast at
Punta Uva, Manzanillo, Punta Mona, and Isla Mona. A protected wetland, the Gandoca-
Manzanillo Wildlife Refuge is located just north of the river mouth. The San San Pond

Sak Wetland, a RAMSAR protected area, lies just south of the river mouth.

How can actors in the middle and lower watershed understand their impacts on these
coastal ecosystems? How can actors understand the environmental services currently
performed in the upper watershed especially when one considers the dimension of global
environmental services? How can actors collectively look at the “big picture” from a
variety of angles and begin to understand their connections via the watershed? New

technology has provided some promising results.

4.1.2 Geographic Information Systems

Technology has evolved to present complex data in new ways that promote greater
shared understanding. Geographic Information Systems are now being used in social
sciences as well as natural sciences, business and government, by over two million
people around the world on any given day.40 These systems are well suited to present
physical data of the Sixaola Watershed in a visual way that cuts across language barriers
and is comprehensible for most actors. Social data can also be integrated with physical
data to examine relationships, explore options, and engage in dialogue leading to

coordinated management.

 

4° Estimate provided by ESRI, a GIS software manufacturer.

168

 

 

It is not necessary to validate the use of a GIS as a preferred tool for planning in the
Sixaola Watershed; there is agreement in both 181 and 182 that the existence of this tool
is a desired performance outcome. The visual images produced by a GIS can present
complex data in a way that is comprehensible for most people regardless of educational
level or social background. However, there are obstacles that must be overcome for a
GIS to be effective; this is not a fix-all technology, a silver bullet solution. Building and

managing the GIS as a product or a process is vital to the discussion.

Several GIS tools exist at present in Costa Rica and Panama that cover the Sixaola
Watershed. One of the most recent is a GIS produced as part of the Sustainable
Development Program for the Sixaola River Binational Watershed. Other government
agencies have their own specific GIS tools, as do NGO’s and educational organizations.
As part of this research project an effort was made to identify a mechanism for bringing
these diverse GIS tools together for possible individual and net benefits. No such
mechanism could be found and there seems to be limited data or file sharing among

actors to build a larger, more public, GIS.

The following sections examine how 181 and ISZ address the situation: physical
immensity, biological and topographical diversity of the watershed. Analysis will be
provided to examine the ways in which 181 and 182 utilize a new technology, GIS, to
overcome these barriers to a shared geographic understanding. Performance will be

examined based upon case studies as well as theory.

169

4.1.2.1 Institutional Structure One, GIS

A GIS tool was produced as part of the Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola
River Binational Watershed. Architects of the GIS were consultants hired by the
Governments of Costa Rica and Panama with the approval of the Inter-American
Development Bank. The best official data was used from both governments and
approximately 46 maps were produced as part of the project using this tool.
Considerations included the topographic relief of the watershed, location of Indigenous
Territories, sub-watersheds, population with a potable water supply, population using
firewood for cooking, rates of illiteracy, and thirty nine other considerations. By
combining these views planners hope to see a more integrated picture that captures

multiple interconnected dimensions.

This GIS was produced as a product to assist in planning. There was a budget allocated
to produce the product and an end identified when the product was complete. In an effort
to make the product useable for a wide range of users it was packaged to open and nm
with software that can be distributed with the system and without cost to the user. A
similar GIS was produced for the Bocas del Toro area of Panama that immediately
adjoins the Sixaola Watershed. This second GIS was produced by the same team that
produced the Sixaola GIS and care was taken to enable integration of the two GIS tools
for the type of regional planning envisioned by the Global Environment Facility program,

Integrated Ecosystem Management of the Binational Sixaola River Basin.

170

 

 

The GIS was packaged in a way to link project text with graphics. Maps were grouped
by focal area and text displayed with maps to help interpret their significance. The
resulting GIS product is a new technology addressing the immensity of the watershed and
presenting a multifaceted way to view it. It introduces a capacity that did not previously

exist for planners or other watershed actors with computer access and knowledge.

4.1.2.2 Institutional Structure Two, GIS

One of the four main committees under the Association for La Amistad TBR is
Geographic Information Systems.41 The biosphere reserve promotes a GIS process and
actively seeks public participation and inputs from a variety of sources. While there is an
official GIS, one that has been agreed upon by the GIS Committee and approved by the
Commission for La Amistad TBR, there are numerous versions in development at any

one time, and the official GIS is designed to change over time.

Technical capacity is developed as actors learn through doing. GIS use is integrated into
a public planning process that is ongoing in buffer and transition zones of La Amistad.
This is a fundamental difference when compared to the existing GIS prepared in IS].

The biosphere reserve model nurtures an ongoing public planning process that utilizes the
concepts of core park area, buffer zone, and transition zone. These zones can be fluid

and changed to recognize new knowledge, technology, or threats. The GIS of 182 is part

 

4' The Association for La Amistad TBR provides support and help for all other branches of the biosphere
reserve.

171

of this designed adaptive process that requires public participation. Use of the GIS as an
integrated part of this process is presumed to increase actors’ knowledge and ability to

use the system.

The question of funding is critical to the GIS process. Findings in Chapter Three
indicated that much of the physical data used to build the GIS for 181 is more than fifty
years old even though recent aerial photos and remote sensing data are available. Cost of
making this current data useable for a GIS was prohibitive for that project, especially if a
goal of program planners is to use limited funds to immediately help generate economic

income for actors.

The GIS process identified as part of the 182 model is substantially funded by the
Association for La Amistad which has a fund-raising arm, the Foundation for La
Amistad. It is possible that a sub-foundation specifically dedicated to helping the GIS
process could be formed under the larger foundation and thereby provide a sustainable
cash flow for this activity. As institutional and public GIS capacity increase fund-raising

and grant possibilities also increase.

Development of the GIS for La Amistad TBR (including all of the Sixaola Watershed) is
the responsibility of the GIS Committee located under the Association for La Amistad.
The Commission for La Amistad TBR must approve and designate the official GIS
version, however, GIS development is a process, and even though there is an official

version at any given time, this version is designed to change over time. Public discussion

172

_-__.n_____x - ._~_

 

 

drives change and the GIS is intended to be used widely, in a variety of settings, and for a

variety of applications.

4.1.3 Performance Comparisons: Situation One: 181 and 182

There is not an inherent performance outcome associated with GIS development, as a
product or a process, at the watershed or transboundary biosphere reserve (TBR) level.
There are successful cases of effective public participation in an ongoing GIS process
centered at the level of the watershed and also developed as part of a transboundary
biosphere reserve. While there are many successful cases of GIS development at the
watershed level, there are only seven UN MAB recognized transboundary biosphere
reserves at present. Of these seven one serves as a basis for comparison regarding what

is possible with a GIS.

4.1.3.1 GIS development as part of a transboundary biosphere
reserve

The Vosges du Nord/Pf’cilzerwald Biosphere Reserve, a transboundary biosphere reserve
between France and Germany, has a GIS that is open to anyone with Internet access. By
going to the biosphere reserve’s home page, which serves as a portal for a wide variety of
activities, users can enter the Transfrontier Biosphere Reserve Observatory. From this
page it is possible to begin a virtual visit to the transfrontier biosphere reserve. This
Observatory uses a GIS called SIGIS whose databases cover the reserve as a whole and

are accurate to a scale of 1:25,000.

173

 

According to the Transboundary Biosphere Reserve42 literature, SIGIS is designed to
serve decision-makers and all those active in the area. Its objective is to maintain and
supply global and multi-subject information, to assist project-finders in the area, and
monitor changes over the long term (The Vosges du Nord/Pfalzerwald Biosphere Reserve
2007). By making the GIS available in a public space and via the Internet actors are
encouraged to participate locally, regionally, and globally. Barriers to access are greatly
reduced and economies of scale are realized in distribution of biosphere reserve

information.

Both national park structures, France and Germany, have a designated GIS staff member
and GIS development is ongoing and collaborative. Layers that are currently available
include aerial views, changes between 1960 and 1995, water, natural areas, historic
monuments, municipal boundaries, and the current land-use plan. These layers are
continuously revised and new layers are in development at any point in time. The GIS
developed as part of The Vosges du Nord/Pfalzerwald Biosphere Reserve is a
multifaceted tool that is widely accessible via the Internet, useable for public meetings,

and capable of detailed geospatial analysis.

4.1.3.2 GIS development at the watershed level

 

‘2 The Vosges du Nord/Pfalzerwald Biosphere Reserve often uses The Transfrontier Biosphere Reserve as a
title for itself in English language publications.

174

There are numerous successful examples of GIS development at the watershed level. The
examples cited here represent a variety of efforts but there are others that are innovative
and effective to help watershed actors develop a shared geographic understanding. By
focusing at the level of the watershed it is possible to receive funding and support for GIS

activities from a variety of sources.

The Institute of Water Research at Michigan State University provides comprehensive
watershed management tools in one location (Institute of Water Resources 2007). These
tools include an interactive GIS that makes it possible for Michigan residents (or anyone
else) to use the lntemet and access a web-based mapping program that builds upon a GIS.
By using this system it is possible to display various features of a selected watershed.
Several projects within the Institute of Water Resources utilize GIS capability and a
designated site was created to assist framers, citizens, and planners in developing digital
maps that can be used in a variety of ways. By typing in an address, city, and zip code, or
using a locator map, users can retrieve a map containing aerial photos, streets, streams,
and soils information. GIS data is also available through the Institute of Water Research
for watershed or subwatershed group developing their own GIS to meet specific needs.
Other tools are provided via the Institute’s website that are complementary to the GIS and

include soils mapping and links to other resources for watershed users and managers.

The Department of Geography at San Diego State University has assembled and

maintains the Tijuana River Watershed Data Clearinghouse. This binational watershed,

located in the US and Mexico, is classified as a Category I (impaired) watershed by the

175

 

 

 

 

California State Water Resources Control Board and faces several pollution challenges.
Rather than provide a public, intemet based GIS, the Department of Geography at San
Diego State University has provided a data clearinghouse that gathers GIS data in a single
place and makes it available to the public (San Diego State University Department of
Geography 2007). Data sets are wide ranging and include digitized streams, roads, land
use, lakes, coastline, communities, soils, and several other data sets. Updating this data
clearinghouse is an ongoing project and facilitates the evolution of watershed GIS tools.
Rather than providing a complete GIS, data is provided to encourage a wider public GIS

process and development of individualized systems.

GIS tools are often developed at the level of the watershed or sub-watershed in order to
address a specific watershed management consideration or objective. In the process of
addressing a specific management objective other GIS uses can be realized beyond the
original focus. The Russian River Watershed GIS Project is one such example (Russian
River Watershed GIS Group 2007). The goal of this project is to crate a comprehensive
spatial data resource for addressing salmonid recovery in the Russian River Watershed.
The project faced a situation somewhat similar to that of the Sixaola Watershed in which
several data layers covering the watershed are housed in different locations and produced
by a variety of efforts. Partnerships were formed recognizing the common need for a

centralized source of GIS data and the project was launched.

Partnerships expanded and grew to include federal, state, and local agencies as well as

groups and individuals. This serves as an example of a GIS that is driven by expanding

176

Rik-,5... nun.-. -7

interest and cooperation. The GIS is both a product and a process that seeks to improve
over time and builds upon a long history of assessment and conservation efforts by
governmental agencies, private citizens, and watershed groups. The resulting GIS is well
suited to assist in salmonid conservation and restoration, but is also useful in a wider

context for planners, citizens, and resource managers.

The Niger River Basin presents an interesting case for developing a GIS in a large
multinational watershed (Merem and Twumasi 2006). A term used in this project,
hydropolitics, describes the relationships of nations and peoples due to the inherent
physical relationship of the watershed. Remotely sensed data was used to construct a
GIS that examines temporal-spatial evolution of ecological change induced by human
activities along the Niger River watershed. Overall land cover change was modeled for
the duration of 14 years between 1966 and 2000. The purpose of the project was to
supply data by using a GIS to inform the multinational management of the shared waters

of the River Niger Basin.

A GIS that represents the multinational watershed was developed using remotely sensed
data thereby providing a common a seamless data source. This data enabled planners to
evaluate changes over time and indicated trends and alternatives. Like the Sixaola GIS
developed in IS 1 , the project was largely completed by professionals with limited citizen
engagement. While the project offers a promising method for multinational watershed
management using a GIS, it was a project with a beginning and an end that produced a

GIS product. While this product was found to be useful, a valuable tool for enhancing

I77

 

 

 

 

‘MF '- . ..op-m—w‘uh—L.“ , . — a.

decision support systems, further projects will be needed to move this GIS process

forward. It was not originally conceived of or designed to be an ongoing process.

In summary, it is possible to note several successful uses of GIS to create a shared
geographic understanding for resource management. The cases presented here show
different approaches that involve public and/or private fimding, academic support, GIS as
a product or a process, and available on the intemet or primarily in offices of professional

planners and academics.

4.1.3.3 Probable Performance Outcomes: Situation One

Funding: Building a GIS is expensive and maintaining the process requires a continuous
source of funding. A GIS has already been produced as part of 181 but there is no
identified source of significant further funding. Uniting the Sixaola GIS with the Bocas
del Toro GIS is in the process and some funding will be available from the GEF project
to pay for this sort of activity. However, there is no designated stream of funding in [S]
to maintain a GIS process over time. Further, at present there is no significant single

infusion of money identified to update the physical data upon which the GIS is built.

The fact that this GIS is built upon old data is a problem, especially considering that high
quality data exists from comprehensive remote sensing. It is likely that without a
significant infusion of money the existing Sixaola GIS will remain built upon the same

physical platform and will not benefit from technological opportunity.

178

 

 

The 182 model has an integrated GIS component that is immediately useable at the
watershed level or at the TBR level. The Transfrontier Biosphere Reserve, The Vosges
du Nord/Pfcilzerwald Biosphere Reserve, provides an example of what is currently

possible using this approach. The GIS is an evolving process with full time staff funded

 

through the national arms of the biosphere reserve. The 182 model for La Amistad as a [J
TBR funds the GIS process through a foundation established to receive funds from global
interests. The foundation invests assets and crates a sustainable funding flow to support a

variety of inter-related activities including GIS.

The Watershed Committee is one of the core committees under the Commission for La
Amistad TBR, and as such, has immediate access to information and technology
available to the TBR as a whole. As a support function, GIS help is available to
committees, not only data, but hardware and software as well as training. There are
financial transactions within the biosphere reserve groups and committees, but cost

savings are significant, and high quality GIS data is generated and provided free for

 

public access. 1S2 has a mechanism to create a sub-foundation with the expressed intent

of funding GIS development should interest evolve.

Product and Process: The existing GIS for the Sixaola Watershed is a product that has
proven usefirl for planning. It is not clear how this product will be used in the firture and
an adaptive process, the process aspect of GIS development, is not found. As is the case

in many GIS applications, the process of creating this product also created opportunities

179

 

. 0.. s 5.; A -"“"e

for future uses. While this GIS represents a major step forward the steps yet to be taken

are unclear.

There are many adaptive features of La Amistad TBR, and the official GIS is one of
them. It is designed to be open and evolving, driven by need, and primarily from the
ground up. The GIS ties closely to the zonation process that is featured in the following
section. As watershed users and planners work on an ongoing zonation process that is
heavily dependent upon a current GIS they create new needs that often correspond to new

capacities.

La Amistad TBR (IS2) maintains a website that gathers information pertaining to the
biosphere reserve; research, coastal projects, Indigenous ecotourism, and a variety of
other linked sites. This website also serves as the portal to access the official GIS
sanctioned by the Commission for La Amistad TBR. In addition, a clearinghouse gathers
public data in one place and greatly promotes data sharing and evaluation. This function
was identified in the section above on GIS implementation at the level of the watershed
as well as the transfrontier biosphere reserve. By providing data easily and for free
public participation in the GIS process is increased considerably. Development of data
and visual layers by public or private efforts is encouraged and new layers can be

submitted for evaluation by a committee and slated for inclusion into the official GIS.

Partnerships: The process of creating a GIS often involves the creation of new

partnerships. Individuals and agencies submit data for examination and build trust over

180

time and through repeated interactions. The Russian River Program cited above involved
an extremely high number of actors who found the GIS process positive and formed
relationships with actors with whom they had limited or no relationships with in the past.
It involved substantial involvement from the federal to the local including actors at
intermediate levels. The GIS process envisioned for 182, La Amistad as a TBR, uses this
same philosophy but also includes the dimension of expanded global actors and

partnerships.

It would be possible to build this same relationship at the level of the watershed;
however, given the lack of significant public involvement in GIS development, and
limited funding for a continuing GIS process, it is not likely to be realized under 181

without the addition of 182.

181

4.2 Situation Two: Extreme human diversity and lack of a common
means of communication

The findings in Chapter Three indicate that the Sixaola Watershed is inhabited by people
of extremely diverse social, cultural, and economic backgrounds. There is no shared
means of communication to enable these actors to learn about each other and begin a
dialogue regarding resource management. An associated problem is that the
communication systems that do exist for resource management favor those who are fluent
in using those systems, often digital, and most often written in Spanish. Bribri and
Cabécar Indigenous reserves occupy most of the middle watershed and residents of this
zone often prefer verbal communication in their native language. They traditionally did
not have a written language, and as a culture, are skilled in dialogue for problem-solving

and are more comfortable in face to face interactions.

It was shown that a variety of diverse Hispanic migrants have been drawn to work in
intensive banana production in the lower watershed and that these actors have one of the
lowest social development indices in Costa Rica and Panama. In contrast, Afro-
Caribbean residents are influential watershed actors and many speak English as well as
Spanish and have attained a high level of education. Costal areas have become an
international blend of European, North American, and some South American immigrants

(part time and full time residents) in addition to Costa Rican nationals and local residents

representing Indigenous and Afro-Caribbean cultures. There is a documented presence of

illegal Nicaraguans who have migrated into the Sixaola Watershed and these actors are

182

__L.~.__. _.~ . . o

 

unlikely to engage in public watershed management at present although their actions

impact other users.

Current watershed literature, as well as biosphere reserve guidelines, recognizes the need
for all actors to be involved in watershed planning and management. Both models used
for analysis in this dissertation, IS] and 182, agree that widespread public participation in
watershed planning and management is a goal. However; in order to attain this goal a

communication platform must be established to allow equal access for diverse actors.

4.2.1 High and Asymmetric Information Costs

Information asymmetry between transacting parties creates interdependence (Schmid
2004). If one transacting party has more knowledge about the product (the watershed in
this case) there is an asymmetry of knowledge that can create unequal opportunity sets.
If collaborative planning is desired, with the input of all actors, there must be some

attention given to equitable access to information and the costs of obtaining information.

These considerations are especially relevant for the case of the Sixaola Watershed where
world views are diverse among actors, many of whom don’t even speak the same
language, live across the digital divide, and have unequal access to planning information.
While there are formal institutional measures to regulate the sharing of information,
addressing informal institutions may be a more effective option in this case. Watershed

literature cited throughout this work cites a belief that through repeated interactions trust

183

-.u...'__. A. ..

 

 

 

if built among actors thereby encouraging the sharing of information. Symmetry of

information is addressed as actors realize the possible benefits of cooperation.

A common language serves as a starting point for planning, but questions of fluency must
also be addressed. An actor is much more able to work effectively within a planning
process if business is conducted in their native language. Additionally, an asymmetry
exists when groups of actors do not understand the process of doing business. In the

Sixaola Watershed large groups of actors do not speak Spanish as a first language, and

 

while many of them are fluent in that language, they may still face a disadvantage when
dealing with native Spanish speakers, especially when considering bureaucratic or

academic jargon and the conventions of the public planning process.

A finding of this work is that a geographic information system can serve as a means to
address the problem of high and asymmetric information costs. This visual means of
communication can be utilized by a wide variety of actors and fluency in the technology
cultivated. The distinction between a widespread public GIS process and a GIS product
used primarily in offices is critical here. The GIS is a tool that enables richer
communication and understanding; however, the will to share information must also be

present.

4.2.2 Standard Operating Procedures and Path Dependency

 

184

MA“- a...

Residents of the Sixaola Watershed have seen ideas, initiatives, and promises for
development come and go in the region. They also experience the reality of continuing
social conditions that are rated as the worst in the country. Financial contributions
totaling US $10,121,000 from seven different international organizations during the years
1992 through 1997 have been documented toward development efforts and programs to
build capacity related to sustainable development in La Amistad and its buffer zones; an
area that includes the Sixaola Watershed (UNEP 2002). Why should residents believe
that the current development efforts of 181 will succeed where others have failed? Social
science indicates that it is more likely special attention and effort must be given to
overcome a belief among watershed actors, conditioned by experience, that despite

efforts and proclamations nothing much will change.

Skinner’s theory of stimulus, behavior, and reinforcement suggests that current behavior
is a product of past experience (Skinner 1971). Based upon this theory it is possible to
say that Watershed actors will likely meet announcements of the current Sixaola Program
for sustainable development with a bias based upon their experience with other past
announcements for programs they perceive to be similar. Those who have been involved
in past public programs will likely be predisposed to participate; however, it is unlikely
that large numbers of actors who do not currently take part in a public dialogue will
quickly or easily become engaged. It is acknowledged here that the SBR paradigm has

been challenged and is but one way of looking at a multifaceted situation.

185

 

Standard Operating Procedures: In the face of complexity consumers simplify and use
some standard operating procedure (SOP) or rule of thumb cued by certain characteristics
of the environment (Schmid 2004). Confronted with the complexity of understanding all
laws, rules, and regulations, coupled with the possibility that these formal institutions
may or may not be enforced, watershed actors have largely adopted a set of standard
operating procedures (SOPs) that they prefer. Enforcement of many current laws is
prohibitively expensive and it may not be possible to change behavior of humans in this
case by enacting new regulations. Actors are predisposed to maintain their SOPs until a

readiness is present and a perceived new path is opened.

While 181 does not specifically recognize SOP’s operative among actors at present, the
182 model addresses the presence of these standard operating procedures, often different
by watershed user group, and uses a mechanism to impact them. The marketing branch
of 182 is charged with marketing norms and values (in addition to other functions) that
are consistent with La Amistad as a biosphere reserve. The relationship between
informal and formal institutions is noted in the description of 132, specifically in creation
of shared norms regarding natural resource management and the resulting impact on the

need for enforcement of formal institutions.

Institutional Path Dependency: A comprehensive and innovative work on institutional
path dependency states, “The ‘first best’ public policy rule in these matters, therefore, is
not necessarily the making of positive choices, but instead the improvement of the

informational state in which choices can be made by private parties and governmental

186

 

' 'r

 

 

agencies. In the context of the recent literature on sunk cost hysterics and options theory,
one may see that the more history matters —- because complementaries create
irreversibilities in resource commitments - the more worthwhile it is to invest in being

better informed prior to leaping (David 2000).

This work suggests that once government programs are in progress, such as the Sixaola
Program, it is difficult to adapt and restructure, especially once resources have been
allocated and approved. A central idea that follows is the warning that it may be
necessary to create a readiness, to take the time to clear away the standard way of doing
business, and to think deeply about institutional options before leaping into creation of

the next structure.

4.2.2.1 Public Meetings, 181

The space in which a meeting takes place and the manner in which it is conducted color
the balance of power. Public meetings take place in the Sixaola Watershed at present and
more are proposed as part of programs designed to increase public participation in
watershed management. It is not possible to present a list of meetings here and catalog
characteristics as to how they are conducted. However; a summary of findings from

Chapter Three allows a degree of analysis.

The Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola River Binational Watershed (and

therefore the 181 model) states, “To ensure a decentralized and participatory management

187

 

 

and execution scheme, a participatory structure will be developed for purposes of setting
investment priorities, from the bottom up (community-govemment). To this end, three
committees will be created, one per district (Telire, Bratsi, and Sixaola-Cahuita), to
ensure speedy and orderly execution of the Annual Work Plans and representation of the
various communities and ethnic groups in the watershed. The district committees will
receive support from the Program Coordinating Unit and its specialists. Each one will be
comprised of six representatives, three of whom will be members of the district councils
and the other three selected from lists presented by the community of each district.
Initially, members will be selected by the Regional Development Council of the Huetar
Vertiente Atlantica region based on lists presented by the civil, communal, environmental
and production-oriented organizations of the respective district and subsequently by the

district committees themselves, based on their respective by-laws.”

This approach builds upon the existing situation and current communications systems; it
does not significantly develop new meeting spaces or ways of communication. Initial
watershed committee members will be selected by an existing Regional Development
Council based on lists presented by civil, communal, environmental, and production-
oriented organizations that choose to participate. But what about groups of actors who do
not choose to interact via meetings, who do not submit lists of names for consideration?
What about actors who have no idea these committees are being formed and who may not
even speak or read Spanish? While there are outreach efforts throughout the program it
is unclear how these efforts will prepare a readiness to enable new meeting spaces and

new ways of interacting that address the extreme diversity of humans in the watershed.

188

 

 

 

The Sixaola River Watershed Committee will be created as part of the current program
in ISI . This committee will be chaired by a representative of a government agency,
MIDEPLAN, and be comprised of 14 members, seven of whom are governmental
representatives of some type, and seven of whom are representatives from civil society
organizations. The creation of this watershed committee, as well as the district
committees cited above, are tied to the disbursement of the first bank loan funds to launch
this project. A third organizational entity, a Program Coordinating Unit, integral to
program development, is also mandated for implementation as a requirement for the
disbursement of funds. The Program Coordinating Unit is a new decentralized entity
with a legal attachment to MIDEPLAN (the organization also chairing the watershed
committee). It is unclear what specific criteria will be used to hire or fire the Coordinator
for the Program Coordinating Unit, a key management position, and what measures have
been taken to ensure the coordinator is able to represent the interests of diverse actors

should they differ from those of the government agency to which the PCU is attached.

Structurally there may be a perverse incentive to widespread identification and
engagement of actors as new institutional arrangements are formed. Program planners
must move quickly once legislation is approved and create five key entities to open the
flow of loan funds. Reaching actors who are not already engaged in the process requires
considerable time and effort, and while it is possible to solicit change and greater
inclusion of more actors later, research has shown that once the organizational entities are

formed path dependency presents an obstacle to change (David 2000). From the

189

.‘l‘u

 

 

description in this section regarding the process for formation of program organizational
entities it is not possible to see an engineered entrance for many of the actors absent from

the current management process.

4.2.2.2 Public Meetings; ISZ, Zonation and Communication

The public process of ongoing zonation presented in 182 opens new meeting spaces for
actors and provides ways of communicating that are not present at this time. This
zonation process is critical to biosphere reserve management theory and was presented in
Chapter Three. To briefly summarize; the 182 model utilizes the concepts of a core park
area, buffer zones, and transition zones. The zonation process is ongoing and driven by
public dialogue. For example, discovery of a new species may encourage actors to
review and possibly change the zoning of that area. By design, watershed actors engage
in an ongoing dialogue to determine what development options are desirable, for whom,
and at what cost. A formal zonation map results from this process and this map is

updated on a regular basis.

The zonation process of 182 contrasts significantly with current zonation schemes for
protected areas. The GEF Program, Integrated Ecosystem Management of the Binational
Sixaola River Basin does include a zonation plan but this was developed by government
planners and without widespread involvement of watershed actors. Further, the structure

of the plan does not include a public process to continually evaluate zoning designations

190

 

 

 

through public dialogue and in the light of technological change, new information, or

new land resource uses.

Zonation meetings in the 182 model are open and designed to engage large numbers of
actors in face to face dialogue. A GIS is used widely at zonation meetings and actors
become proficient with the system and its capabilities through use. Routinely, a large
computer-generated image is projected onto a screen at the front of a large. meeting room
and a variable number of people, up to more than a hundred, can view the exact same
image and realize some degree of a shared geographic understanding. This digital and
visual technology opens a new way of communication that greatly cuts across language

and culture barriers.

The Bribri and Cabécar43 have a long tradition of public dialogue and consensus making.
The shared visual medium of the GIS lowers barriers faced by those who do not speak
Spanish and have limited experience with the printed page. The face to face format of
inclusive public meetings favors their traditional problem-solving practices. By using
interpreters at public meetings clarification of the issue in discussion can be widely

shared and common understanding enhanced among different language groups.

The GIS provides the technological capability to open new ways of communication but
using a GIS product is no guarantee that all actors will be represented or that there will be
significant increases in communication. Managed poorly, the GIS process can create

power imbalances and alienate actors. It is possible for a GIS process to thrive on the

 

‘3 The Bribri and Cabecar are the two most numerous Indigenous groups in the Sixaola Watershed.

191

 

Fun

 

involvement of actors as they challenge data, refine the GIS tool, and apply new uses. It
is also true that a GIS product can be threatened by public examination, dialogue, and
challenges if there are no firnds available for modification. This situation somewhat
represents the difference between the GIS in 182, a process used in zonation for the
transboundary biosphere reserve, and IS] with the GIS product that currently exists.
Findings of this dissertation indicate that a GIS process can be an effective tool to address
a source of human interdependence in the Sixaola Watershed; extreme human diversity

and the lack of a common means of communication.

4.2.3 Global Actors

A firndamental difference between the IS] and 182 models is the expressed inclusion of
global actors. The horizontal plane of the 182 model begins with the biosphere at the
center and moves outward to local, regional, and global actors. This consideration
becomes important in a discussion of diversity of actors and a common means of

communication.

Both national parks, La Amistad Costa Rica and Panama, are also UN sanctioned

biosphere reserves. Together, they are also a single UN World Heritage Site indicating
global biological and cultural importance. These are formal institutional arrangements
that recognize the global importance of La Amistad (including the Sixaola Watershed),

and as such, the presence of global actors with interests in watershed use.

192

 

 

181 does not diminish these arrangements but rather ignores them for the most part. The
Sixaola Program is binational and the GEF Program for Integrated Ecosystem
Management reaches to a larger, but still binational, regional area. A formal
programmatic relationship was identified with Plan Puebla-Panama, a larger Inter-
American Development Project that seeks to promote a network of highways, power
lines, and infrastructure linking eight countries from Mexico to Panama. The Sixaola
Watershed has a strategic positional relationship with this plan and in this context joins
with both American continents; however, there is no substantial inclusion of global actors

as having an interest in watershed use or management.

In contrast, IS2 recognizes existing UN designations and seeks to reinforce and
strengthen these commitments by applying for inclusion of La Amistad as a UN MAB
sanctioned transboundary biosphere reserve. The model representing this transboundary
biosphere reserve is an adaptive model that expands across two planes; a horizontal plane
that links a web of actors and a vertical plane that maps formal institutional structure and
relationships. Global actors are found in the outer ring of the horizontal plane of 182 and,
as a UN MAB sanctioned transboundary biosphere reserve, are also recognized on the
vertical plane of the model (formal institutions). This recognition is critical for operation

of the model in other areas.

At present it is not possible for global actors to contribute financially to support La

Amistad Biosphere Reserve efforts; even if they want to pay for benefits from the

biosphere reserve (or Sixaola Watershed), they do not have a mechanism to make

193

 

 

 

 

payments. By including global actors, and establishing a mechanism (The Foundation for
La Amistad) for them to pay for environmental services (as defined by the individual), a
free rider situation is addressed. The payment mechanism mentioned here is substantially
different from current carbon sequestration programs (one specific environmental
service) and links consumers directly with the biosphere reserve via a foundation set up

to receive voluntary donations.

One recent Costa Rican case suggests that global interests are willing to pay for
preservation or conservation uses (The Nature Conservancy 2007). In November 2004
the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation awarded The Nature Conservancy $8 million to
help protected forested areas in Costa Rica’s Osa Peninsula Piedras Blancas and
Corcovado national parks and the biological corridor connecting them. The $8 million
gift is part of the $32.5 million Osa Campaign dedicated to conservation efforts in that
region of Costa Rica. Global actors are recognized on the 1S2 model and their
contributions; financial, social, and academic, significantly impact performance of the

biosphere reserve and life in the Sixaola Watershed.

4.2.4 Performance Comparisons: Situation Two: 151 and 152

This performance measure has three components; diversity of actors involved in planning
and resource management in the Sixaola Watershed, the number of exchanges they have
regarding resource management, and the quality of those interactions. A degree of

subjectivity is recognized in any evaluation of quality in interactions and is measured

194

 

here by a willingness of participants to voluntarily remain engaged or expand their web

of engagement regarding resource management.

Addressing the situation in the Sixaola Watershed; extreme human diversity and lack of a
common means of communication, depends partially upon utilization of a new
technology, GIS. As stated earlier, production and use of a GIS is no silver bullet, and it
must be part of an engineered effort to provide a new meeting space with a new visual

language if it is to effectively address the situation as defined here.

4.2.4.1 Diversity of actors involved in planning:

Current watershed theory widely agrees that successful watershed management programs
depend upon the identification and involvement of all watershed actors. A case in the
Andean hillsides shares many similarities with the Sixaola watershed and provides
insights regarding ways to identity diverse actors and foster communication among them.
The physical situation is somewhat similar to the Sixaola Watershed with many poor and
diverse actors living in relatively remote situations including an Indigenous Reserve
(Ravnborg 1998). Watershed users in this South American region have limited
technology, travel most often on foot or by bicycle, and rely primarily on face to face
communications for information. Similar conditions are encountered throughout much of

the middle and upper regions of the Sixaola Watershed.44

 

‘4 Literature has shown that watershed management is extremely complex and it is not assumed that the
cases cited here can be replicated completely in the case of the Sixaola or will respond well when “scaling
up”. They are cited as valid lessons learned in watershed planning.

195

 

 

A key finding from the Andean hillsides study is that participatory watershed
development programs should target small groups of users, perhaps 30 or 40, before
attempting to scale up. This case draws upon research that shows initial efforts at
building mutual trust among watershed actors should be limited to a small group and
microwatersheds, typically less than 200 hectares. Conclusions of that work state,
“Efforts to stimulate collective watershed management and thus promote local platforms
therefore have to start from below to create ‘stakeholder identity’ and build up new ways
of communication. Only when this has been achieved, can steps be taken to establish
larger scale platforms with indirect representation to enable the effective negotiation of

problems that require larger scale actions” (Ravnborg 1998).

This work is corroborated by others including a study from India that states, “The first
step is to work in “miniwatersheds” of no more than a few hundred hectares and a
hundred farmers. Second, MYRADA (a NGO operating in southern India) helps form
small subgroups of farmers based on homogeneity of location, socioeconomic conditions
or interests. The miniwatersheds group serves as an informal apex body for the various

subgroups within the miniwatersheds” (Kerr 1997).

Another commonality in both studies cited above is the desirability for a third party to
help facilitate this process of actor awareness and communication. Watershed actors and
groups often have a distrust of each other, especially when cultural or socioeconomic
differences are great, and existing power relationships create an obstacle for meaningful

and equitable dialogue. The Andean study concludes, “In this way, third party facilitators

196

 

 

 

can help fostering public negotiation about watershed use where before such issues had
been either suppressed or had found a violent ending” (Ravnborg 1998). One of the
activities of MYRADA cited in the India experience is organizing people around specific
small group objectives to work toward one common purpose. Without this third party
assistance it is unclear where the impetus to organize and engage in a new behavior,
communication regarding watershed use, will come from. It is possible to find a degree
of contradiction in using third party agents to foster development from the ground up;

however, current research has shown that this does work in similar cases.

4.2.4.2 Quantity and quality of interactions regarding natural
resource management.

It is relatively easy to estimate the number of people involved in a specific planning
activity and to document the number of activities regarding a particular focus. It is much
harder to judge the quality of interactions as defined by the actors themselves without a
vigorous qualitative study that may or may not also develop quantitative data. A
qualitative study exploring relationships and interactions among watershed actors is
proposed in a follow-up study to this dissertation. For this work; however, a general
approximation regarding the quality of interactions is captured by a willingness of
participants to voluntarily remain engaged or expand their web of engagement regarding

resource management.

The quality and quantity of interactions regarding watershed management in this case are

perceived to be mutually reinforcing. A first obstacle identified earlier in this chapter is

197

 

 

the identification of all actors and a second obstacle is bringing them together for
interactions regarding watershed use and management. If actors find these interactions
productive at some level and of sufficient quality they are likely to remain engaged.
Other cases have demonstrated that positive watershed planning experiences generate
partnerships and can significantly expanded participation in watershed planning (Russian

River Watershed GIS Group 2007).

It must be noted that there are few or almost no formal interactions regarding watershed
management in the Sixaola Watershed outside of governmental levels at present. The
performance measures presented here must be viewed in that context and may not be
appropriate at another time or in another stage of development. Further, it is reasonable
to challenge the necessity and ability to approximate quality of these interactions. Given
the current situation, the distrust and disengagement of many watershed actors, it is not

possible to ignore this dimension simply because it is complex and difficult to measure.

4.2.4.3 Probable Performance Outcomes: Situation Two

This dissertation examines institutional options for watershed management, at the level of
181 only, or with 182 also operational. These two models are not presented in opposition
to each other; rather, ISl stands alone or blends with IS2. While ISl may change
somewhat with the creation of IS2 it is not lost. The vertical and horizontal planes of IS2
feature a watershed committee as one of the principal committees forming and operating

the transboundary biosphere reserve. The Sixaola Watershed would be represented on

198

 

this committee and join with other areas of interest committees that collectively form La
Amistad TBR. The performance measures examined in this section are especially useful
in consideration of how IS2 can potentially help 1S1 attain its stated performance

objectives.

Research cited earlier in this chapter indicates that it is imperative in watershed
management plans to first identify all actors. Secondly, in cases with similarity to the
Sixaola, it was shown that actor engagement should begin with microwatersheds, perhaps
only 200 hectares in size. As part of the development process for IS] a list of watershed
actors was compiled. While this list is one of the most comprehensive to date it does not
reach to the level recommended by the cited studies to begin a watershed management
program. One verifiable output indicator of the GEF Project linking to the Sixaola
Program is three participative micro-watershed management projects in implementation
at the end of year four of the project. This indicates recognition in 181 of the micro-
watershed approach; however, IS2 benefits from literature that indicates watershed
projects should begin at the microwatershed level and build to larger levels. ISl begins
by creating a watershed council and district committees before working at the
microwatershed level, thereby creating an institutional path dependency that must be

overcome should other institutional options emerge.

Of the total Sixaola Program loan package, US $12,220,000, slightly more than one tenth,

US $1,400,000, is allocated to environmental management, natural resource management,

and vulnerability reduction. Significant funding for further identification and recruitment

199

 

 

 

of watershed actors is not identified in the Sixaola Program, and should this priority
emerge, funding would compete with a variety of other program components including
the drafting of new regulations and programs to mitigate the effect of flooding. Funds
from the Global Environment Facility to foster binational c00peration in the watershed
are largely targeted at government professionals and only propose to implement three
projects at the microwatershed level by the end of project year four. While some
increased participation by watershed actors will likely occur through initiatives currently

in place under IS 1 , this participation can be greatly increased with the addition of IS2.

A second problem encountered with implementation of ISI alone is creation of a path
dependency that may restrict future options even though those options present new
opportunities. A goal of 181 is formation of new watershed institutions and new
binational institutions. At the present time it is possible to examine existing and
additional options in the light of new information presented by this dissertation and
consider the creation of watershed and binational institutions in the context of a
transfrontier biosphere reserve. Integration of I81 and IS2 is possible at any time but

path dependency costs can be reduced by acting in a timely manner.

GIS technology was identified as an effective means to directly address the lack of a
common means of communication. The GIS performance of 181 was discussed earlier in
this chapter and reasons cited as to why it is not likely to find widespread use and build
new ways of communication for diverse actors in the watershed. With the addition of

IS2, a GIS process is launched that involves watershed actors in an integrated

200

 

 

consideration of resource management that begins at the microwatershed. ISl gains a
considerable advantage in actor identification and engagement with the addition of the
GIS process provided by 182. IS] also gains a powerful tool for use in public meetings
regarding watershed planning. Without the addition of IS2, or a similar significant
program change, it is unlikely that 181 will develop the technology and process to create

a now means of communication accessible to diverse watershed actors.

There will likely be many more interactions among watershed actors regarding natural
resource management and planning with the addition of 182. A prominent reason is the
existence of a zonation process for La Amistad TBR designed to generate widespread
public participation and feature large public meetings. This process is largely informal
and represents a type of public forum not currently available. Actors living in buffer
zones of the park, roughly the middle and lower watershed including costal areas,
participate in zonation meetings to determine appropriate land use. ISl does not utilize
the biosphere reserve zonation system and this public discourse would not be present
without IS2. The zonation process brings diverse actors together to use a GIS tool and
discuss land use regarding preservation, conservation, limited use, or greater use with
ecological guidelines. Watershed relationships are taught and used in the zonation

dialogue.

Nearly all current transboundary biosphere reserves have multiple core protected areas,

and in the case of The Vosges du Nord/Pf‘alzerwald Biosphere Reserve there are now

more than forty of these designated core areas. The first zonation scheme for this

201

 

 

 

transboundary biosphere reserve had only one core park area surrounded by a buffer zone
and a transition zone. This is roughly analogous to the situation faced by La Amistad at
present. Over time, and through dialogue, thirty core sites were designated on the French
side and fifteen on the German side of the TBR. However, joint zonation has yet to be
realized and separate legal processes continue to establish zonation in both nations. In an
effort to implement the type of widespread zonation planning envisioned in ISZ, an ad
hoc transboundary working group was formed but has thus far been unable to realize the

institutional arrangements needed for unified zonation.

Zonation as a practice is evolving in all transboundary biosphere reserves and currently
still takes place at governmental levels with limited ground-level citizen participation. It
will be difficult for IS2 to realize the ambitious zoning process that does not exist at
present. However, without the benefit of IS2, it is nearly certain that a widespread

zonation process will be absent from Sixaola Watershed planning.

By including global actors the number of exchanges regarding resource planning and
management in the Sixaola watershed is increased dramatically. The website maintained
as part of IS2 potentially generates hundreds or thousands of information exchanges
weekly; users seeking to learn about the biosphere reserve, utilize the GIS, and find
current research or to link with other users regarding natural resource or cultural interests.
Recognition of these global actors was discussed earlier in this chapter and the
significance of their potential impact. 181 does not specifically recognize these actors

and their contributions will be largely lacking without the addition of IS2.

202

 

 

 

Quality of interactions; as measured by a willingness of participants to voluntarily remain
engaged or expand their web of engagement regarding resource management, is
addressed by the Watershed Committee of I82. One of the eight principal committees of
La Amistad TBR, the watershed committee brings together watershed groups throughout
the biosphere reserve and facilitates knowledge, methodologies, and skills exchanges.
These watershed committees begin at the level of the microwatershed and build from the
ground up. The ISl model does not utilize the microwatershed concept and will not

benefit from this process without the addition of IS2.

The Watershed Committee of IS2 links to other global watershed organizations, large
and small, and is able to provide financial help for projects through partnerships and the
foundation for La Amistad TBR. Financial considerations are significant to fund the type
of activities identified earlier in this chapter as necessary to lay the groundwork for initial
watershed actor engagement that encourages the rural actors of the Sixaola Watershed to
remain engaged and expand their level of engagement form the microwatershed level to

participate in larger district or watershed level management activities.

IS2 also provides the technical tools that encourage watershed actors to remain engaged. .
In the United States the US. Department of the Interior through the US. Geological
Survey maintains a website to promote “Science in Your Watershed” with the use of GIS.
This website links citizens with software, data, and a functional GIS. The relevance here

is the voluntary engagement of users in getting information, preparing GIS tools, and

203

 

 

then using these systems in planning. Other examples of successful GIS use and grth
in watershed applications have been cited in this work. These efforts are growing
because they work; people find the experience of planning with a GIS useful, and if used

well, participants remain engaged and recruit others to participate.

The GIS committee of IS2 is not only charged with development of the GIS but also with
helping actors get access to hardware and software. This produces a secondary positive
reason for continuing actor engagement; access to information technology. In one
example fi'om the city that marks the northern edge of Sixaola Lower Watershed District
Committee, Cahuita, citizens have demonstrated significant interest in gaining
technology skills. A non-profit group, Opportunity Access Inc., opened the Cahuita
Computer Center in 2000. During the first year of operation participants at this location
logged in 800 times for intemet service and 920 times for educational games. By 2005
this number had increased to 1128 participant sign-ins for intemet services and 1406
sign-ins for educational games with the number of machines and hours of operation
serving as constraining factors. From its initial location Opportunity Access has
expanded to 35 public schools throughout the Province of Limon (Moore 2006). The
secondary benefit of employing digital technology in watershed planning will encourage
more actors to remain engaged and voluntarily expand their level of engagement with the

addition of IS2.

It may be useful to restate that IS2 is an adaptive model; it is not designed to be

implemented all at one. It begins with a formally declared interest on the part of Costa

204

 

 

Rica and Panama, and an application made to the UN MAB program, to unite La
Amistad and create a single transboundary biosphere reserve. Specific activities, and the
GIS itself, would be developed slowly over time and piece by piece. Microwatershed
programs would also begin in targeted areas and expand. Current transfrontier biosphere
reserve theory and practice (UNESCO 2003; UNESCO 2005) promotes an adaptive
model; a process by which transboundary biosphere reserves continue to create
themselves over time. The IS2 model is designed to adapt as it is constructed and will

likely change from the model presented in this dissertation.

205

 

 

 

 

4.3 Situation Three: Overlapping and confusing formal institutional
management structures.

It is possible to empirically demonstrate the ways in which institutional arrangements
overlap and sometimes counter each other regarding resource management in the Sixaola
Watershed. A primary example presented in Chapter Three is the binational nature of the
watershed with different formal institutional arrangements at the local, regional, and
national levels in both countries. The biosphere reserve designations require specific
management activities, zonation for example, which are largely ignored in current
planning at the watershed level. Protected areas make up the headwaters of the Sixaola
Watershed and two RAMSAR sites, representing additional institutional arrangements,
lie on either side of the mouth of the river. Indigenous reserves in Costa Rica have a
degree of autonomy but are still subject to ultimate national authority. Indigenous lands
in Panama face a greater degree of ambiguity since they enjoy an informal degree of

autonomy but lack formal national designation.

To say this system is confusing for watershed actors brings in a subjective element.
However; the reader is asked to consider the findings of Chapter Three regarding
institutional arrangements, and then add the additional consideration that these
arrangements may or may not be enforced. Additional study is required to empirically
demonstrate the degree of confusion watershed actors face regarding formal institutional
arrangements. For the purpose of this dissertation documentation has been provided that

formal institutions overlap and contradict each other at times. It is reasonable to say that

206

 

this arrangement is confusing; especially given the poverty, lack of education, and limited

engagement of most watershed actors with formal administrative entities.

There is widespread agreement that institutional reform is desirable in the Sixaola
Watershed as indicated by government applications from Costa Rica and Panama to
implement programs to effect institutional change regarding natural resource
management. Approximately US$ 4,000,000 has been allocated through the Global

Environment Facility to assist in the process of harmonizing current national institutions

 

and strengthen or build new binational institutions for the watershed. A rationale offered
to acquire this GEF award is that without institutional reform other efforts to initiate

sustainable development projects may not be sufficient.

4.3.1 Transboundary Watershed Initiatives

More than 300 river basins are shared by two or more countries and account for nearly
50% of the earth’s land surface. Most of the environmental management institutions
regulating these transboundary watersheds have been characterized as driven from the
top, functioning behind closed doors, with disregard for sustainability, and relying on

technical fixes or regulatory mechanisms (Milich and Varady 1999). This same study

 

presents four conceptual paradigms that have historically characterized international
environmental accords: (a) technical/scientific, (b) regulatory/standard-driven, (c)
closed, and (d) top-down. The authors then offer a model for each paradigm and cite
specific cases as examples. While it is possible to challenge the often harsh critique of

this study, it stands as one of the most comprehensive transboundary river basin studies

207

 

to date and serves to document the difficulty in establishing equitable and participatory

institutional management arrangements for transboundary river basins.

4.3.1.1 Danube River Institutional Arrangements

Arrangements regarding the Danube River are presented in the Milich and Varady study
mentioned above and cited as an example of the “closed” paradigm. However, the delta

region of the Danube offered a unique opportunity for a new type of cooperation and

 

management, and in 1999 The Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve, a UN sanctioned
transboundary biosphere reserve, was officially created jointly in Romania and Ukraine.
While there are many differences in the cases of the Danube and the Sixaola Rivers, there

are similarities and considerations for comparison.

The Danube River Basin lies partly in 17 counties and flows 2,850 km as it travels to the
sea. The geographic diversity of the basin is equaled by the cultural, political, and
economic diversity of the nations it travels through. Efforts at any sort of unified
development or environmental regulation have been hampered by a spectrum of local,
regional, and national laws as well as varying and sometimes competing national
priorities and widely disparate resources to address problems and present solutions
(Linnerooth 1990). The Danube Convention was signed in Belgrade in 1948 and formed
a commission with one representative from each signatory state. While this commission
has served as the primary agency to maintain safe navigation, address flood control

problems and advise hydroelectric plans, it also considers questions of sanitation and

208

 

 

river inspection. However, signatory states do not always interpret the convention in the

same way and disagreements have been common and at times intense.

In 1986 representatives from the eight countries (at that time) through which the Danube
flowed declared their willingness to cooperate in management of the river and a
nonbinding Danube Declaration was signed as a first step toward an ecosystem-based
approach to Danube watershed management. Despite this common recognition of a need
to co-manage and realize a degree of standardized institutional arrangements throughout
the watershed progress has been slow or stalled and several nations still place
responsibility for watershed management among multiple governmental ministries or
agencies. As of 1999 there was still no authoritative scientific body with jurisdiction
over the entire basin let alone a unified watershed institutional planning and management

structure (Milich and Varady 1999).

Increased contact and cooperation among nations sharing the Danube Watershed resulted
in the 1990’s following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the idea to form a
transboundary biosphere reserve in the delta region of the Danube gained strength. In
1991 a newly formed Romanian Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Authority organized a
meeting in the delta with the help of the World Conservation Union and the World
Heritage Convention Secretariat from UNESCO. While management of the delta region
was discussed it did not reach to the level of transboundary co-management. In 1995 this
effort intensified and a framework for transboundary cooperation was developed as part

of two World Bank projects managed through the Global Environment Facility (GEF)

209

 

 

and titled the Danube Delta Biodiversity Project. These two projects ran from 1994 to
1998 (Ukraine) and 2000 (Romania). Primary objectives included assisting in the
formation and functioning of institutional arrangements to manage the delta’s

biodiversity jointly and these efforts were coordinated with two other World Bank
projects operating in the Danube and Black Sea region at the same time. A key finding of
the UN technical evaluation of this effort notes that, “The impetus to cooperate thus did
not come from the people working in the field, but rather from the MAB National

Committees and the World Bank” (UNESCO 2003).

4.3.1.2 The Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve

In 1999 the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve was created based upon two biosphere
reserves, one in Romania and one in Ukraine, and an expressed desire on the part of these
two nations to cooperate and move toward management of these reserves as a single
entity. Formation of this transboundary biosphere reserve offered an opportunity to
manage natural resources in new ways and on a smaller scale than on the level of the
Danube watershed. This new institutional arrangement, a transfrontier biosphere reserve,
also promised a degree of flexibility not possible with existing formal arrangements.
Global Environment Facility and World Bank programs provided funding for activities to

foster the transboundary cooperation necessary to define a common management plan.

With funds from the World Bank and GEF, transboundary contact and cooperation

increased to levels that were previously unattainable and have not been met since. The

210

 

 

intent of these programs was to initiate a process and build the necessary level of
understanding and cooperation for the process to be sustainable. Both Ukraine and
Romania recognized the need for a unified governing structure for the biosphere reserve
but it was not possible to create this joint coordinating structure when external frmding
was present for transboundary cooperation and planning. It is even more difficult now

that GEF and World Bank programs have ended and external funding is gone.

A Joint Commission on Transfrontier Cooperation on Natural Protected Areas was
formed in 2003 and funded by the Environment and Sustainable Development Division
of the Council of Europe. This joint commission is comprised of nine member from three
nations in the lower Danube watershed; Romania, Ukraine, and Moldova. Partly because
a certain number of meetings are funded each year, and partly because many of the
biosphere reserve interests and actors are present within this group, it may eventually take
over management of the biosphere reserve.

NGO’s and international entities have had considerable impact in the formation of the
biosphere reserve. In addition to the Global Environment Facility and the World Bank,
the UNESCO World Heritage and Man and the Biosphere programs, the World Wildlife
Fund (WWF), and the World Conservation Union (IUCN), a myriad of other partnerships
have been created through the Danube Delta National Institute. This last organization,
operating on the Romanian side of the biosphere reserve deserves special recognition as a

unique institutional arrangement that has been able to generating funding for research.

211

 

 

 

The Danube Delta National Institute (Institutul National de Cercetare Dezvoltare Delta
Danarii — Tulcea) is an independent research institute that performs all scientific studies
for the Romanian portion of the biosphere reserve. This institute operates under the
Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve Authority (DDBRA) established by Romania in 1990
and formalized through legislation passed in 1993. The “Law Regarding the
Establishment of the Danube Delta Biosphere Reserve,” passed at that time by the
government of Romania, laid out guidelines for operation and handed power and
responsibility for execution of these guidelines to the Biosphere Reserve Authority. The
independent institute was created under this flexible structure and the President of the
Danube Delta National Institute is the President of the DDBR Authority; indicating a
strong formal (as well as informal) linkage between the two bodies. The institute has
been highly successful in collaboration with numerous organizations (N GO’s,
universities, research institutes, governmental agencies) and attracting contracts for
research. Through successful collaboration and execution of projects the Danube Delta
Institute has created a favorable international reputation and was awarded a three-year
contract as a “Centre of Excellence in Delta and Wetland Management” as part of the
Fifty Framework Programme of the European Union. The Institute employs 112 people,
manages approximately 20-30 projects each year with an average of two scientists
working on each project, and generates 40% of its annual budget from international

sources (UNESCO 2003).

Legal management of the biosphere reserve in the Ukraine has yet to be settled. The

presidential decree that established the biosphere reserve (1998) specifies that local

212

 

authorities will prepare a document transferring ownership of the territory to the Danube
Biosphere reserve; however, this had not yet been done five years after the decree was
issued and the process reached a standstill thereby creating confusion and uncertainty for
the Biosphere Reserve Administration. This stands in contrast to the Romanian
experience and speaks to the difficulty in forming national biosphere reserve legal

arrangements let alone transboundary arrangements.

Discussion of the Danube River Watershed and the Danube Delta Biosphere reserve is
presented here as a case study that will be used in performance analysis later in this

section.

4.3.1.3 The US-Mexico Border Region and Watershed
Management

The US-Mexico border is currently and has been an area of contention where these two
nations have a special interest in water as well as a variety of other issues. After the
border was defined in 1848 by the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, and later by the
Gadsden Purchase in 1853, official relationships regarding border issues were primarily
conducted by national leaders in capitals located far from the border region. Partly in
response to this top-down management system, NGO’s have increasingly operated in the
border region to foster cooperation at a local level and across borders. In one example
relevant to this work, Rotary lntemational has worked since the 1930’s to facilitate an
effort to create a transboundary park (called a peace park) at the Big Bend of the Rio

Grande (Rio Bravo in Mexico) (LoBello 2004). Several NGO’s including the

213

 

 

Environmental Defense Fund, National Wildlife Foundation, National Resources Defense
Council, and the Sierra Club have played important roles in environmental issues at the

local and regional levels (Milich and Varady 1999).

The North American Free Trade Agreement, signed in 1993 by Canada, Mexico, and the

United States, created additional institutional options for transfrontier cooperation and j
management of natural resources. Two important sets of agreements addressing

environmental concerns were reached as part of the NAFTA process and marked a

historical first in which auxiliary instruments to a negotiated trade agreement linked

environmental sustainability to economic development. By joining environmental and

economic agendas policy makers were able to formally recognize that development of the

border economy depended at least partially on a healthy natural environment.

As part of the NAFTA negotiations two binational organizations were created to function

 

within the border region, at that time a 200 km wide strip with 100 km on either side of
the border. The first of these organizations is the North American Development Bank
(NADB) which helps arrange public-private loan programs to fund environmental
infrastructure. These loans are institutionally tied to the second organization, the Border
Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC), which must certify projects before they
are eligible for these loans. The BECC examines projects to ensure that they comply
with all applicable environmental laws and satisfy guidelines for community

participation, public health, sustainability, technological feasibility, and economic self-

214

 

sufficiency. Environmental infrastructure projects must gain approval from the BECC in

order to move from the design phase and secure funding from the NADB.

The BECC is of interest for this dissertation because it offers alternatives to prevalent
institutional arrangements for transboundary natural resource management. Water
allocation is still controlled by two national entities, the International Boundary and
Water Commission (IBWC) in the US and the Comisién Intemacional de Limites y Agua
(CILA) in Mexico. BECC performs a different regulatory function evaluating
environmental projects in the border area, providing a forum for public discussion
regarding these projects, and offering a carrot (access to funding) rather than a stick
(enforcement) to drive sustainable development. The BECC is governed by a binational
10 member board of directors, two of whom are commissioners, one from the IBWC and
one fiom CILA. This dual membership fosters understanding and promotes knowledge-
sharing between entities. While the national agencies most often have a scientific-
technical-engineering viewpoint, The BECC seeks to give voice to more human
dimensions. It offers a new forum that is easily accessible to the public and allows

residents to address common problems that may be only of regional or local relevance.

Milich and Varady detail ways in which the BECC has employed new approaches for
binational watershed management with considerable success in engaging diverse actors in
a widespread public dialogue. Recognizing that economically and socially disadvantaged
communities lack experience in grant seeking and proposal writing, the BECC offers

financial and technical help for proposal writing. Through participation in this process

215

 

 

 

 

people and communities have built capacity in articulating needs and seeking help.
Another program, the BECC’s Technical Assistance Program, provides help for
engineering and design studies that are otherwise beyond the reach of poor boarder

communities.

Through the BECC a degree of devolution has been achieved thereby allowing actors
closest to the resource to make decisions. Prior to creation of the BECC, communities
had to approach national entities and effectively engage in lobbying to secure funding
and approval for projects. Now communities approach the BECC directly and thereby
avoid unnecessary transaction costs that are encountered in a national solicitation process
that is escalated when corruption is present. Funding for the BECC comes from annual
congressional appropriations and as such is somewhat isolated from direct political and
economic pressures. The BECC offers a binational forum and perspective that is at the
same time local or regional. It has expanded beyond national borders but pulled back
from national capitals and transferred management of projects to actors closest to the

I'CSOUI'CC.

In addition to a board, the BECC’s charter also calls for it to maintain an advisory
committee made up of representatives from the 10 Mexican and US border states to
advise the board on implementation and policy matters. This committee reviews
proposed projects sent to them by the commission and in this way projects are examined
in the broad and diverse perspective of regional representation. These institutional

arrangements are designed to keep the decision-making process open, public, and

216

 

 

accessible. Other arrangements included the requirement that from the design phase on
all projects are required to have public advisory committees. The membership and self-
defined missions of these committees have differed considerably with different projects
and allow a degree of flexibility and adaptability in composition. In another response to
the BECC’s charter and explicit mandate for public participation it has provided public
access to documents for all proposed projects requiring certification and created
BECCnet, an Internet tool linking government officials, academics, NGO’s, private

sector stakeholders, citizen groups, and individuals (Milich and Varady 1999).

The Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) certified 118 infrastructure
projects in its first 11 years of operation with a total investment of almost US$2.75 billion
with expected benefits targeting more than 11 million people. Of the 118 projects
certified by the BECC, the North American Development Bank (discussed earlier in this
section) is participating in 101 of them with a total of US$886 million in financing;

US$596.4 million in grants and US$269.6 million in loans (Water World Online 2007).

4.3.2 Devolution and Decentralization

“Tenure defines property and what a person or group can do with it—their property
rights. However, tenure is not only a legal concept but a complex social institution, often
involving traditional practices and customary authorities as much as formal laws. It
governs ownership and access to natural resources, which is the gateway to use and

benefit from these resources. As such, tenure is at the heart of the poor’s ability to derive

217

 

 

 

income and subsistence from ecosystems—to make them part of a sufficient and

sustainable livelihood” (World Resources Institute 2005).

Devolution and Decentralization. Devolution is used to indicate the transfer of
responsibility and authority over natural resources from the state to nongovernmental
bodies, particularly user groups. Decentralization describes the reallocation of
administrative duties from ministry or department headquarters to branch offices of
central government (Knox and Meinzen-Dick 2001). Another current researcher
provides a different description of decentralization, “Decentralization is any act in which
a central government formally cedes powers to actors and institutions at lower levels in a

political-administrative and territorial hierarchy (Ribot 2002).

Given these definitions it is possible to say that the Sixaola and GEF projects primarily
seek to decentralize, both in the sense that central governments are seeking to transfer
some administrative duties fi'om the national capitals to the watershed, and in the sense
that the central governments are ceding certain powers to institutions at lower levels in a
political-administrative and territorial hierarchy. These efforts are similar to those
identified in the US-Mexico arrangement and exemplified in the Border Environment
Cooperation Commission (BECC). In that case the BECC occupies a higher position in
the political-administrative and territorial hierarchy; it is binational rather than national.
However, in another sense it is decentralized, both in distance from the capitals and with

the increased empowerment of local and regional actors to manage their own resources.

218

 

 

 

The model of La Amistad as a transboundary biosphere reserve (IS2) primarily seeks
devolution in the sense that both central governments transfer primary responsibility and
authority over natural resources from the state to nongovernmental bodies. This is not an
either/or process in which the state must completely surrender or keep control of national
territory. The model of ISZ has a binational governmental committee overseeing
operation of La Amistad TBR, but this committee seeks to devolute power to a non-
governmental entity, the Commission for La Amistad TBR, over time and as trust is built.
Governmental agencies and personnel are present and operating within many areas of La
Amistad TBR, but the design of the model is that both governments agree to allow a
commission made up of diverse actors, to have primary management responsibilities for

the biosphere reserve.

While it is important to affix precise definitions to the concepts of decentralization and
devolution it is equally important to consider theses terms in the context of the Sixaola
Watershed’s current institutional situation. Efforts of the GEF and Sixaola programs
clearly seek to give more control over management decisions, project planning, and
implementation to people at local levels. However, if one considers the extreme social,
political, and educational differences among actors in the watershed, it is unclear how
power will be widely distributed without substantially new ways of engaging diverse

actors.

Likely there is no such thing as absolute devolution in this case; rather, it is a question of

what real power will be transferred from central governments to actors with a stake in

219

 

 

management of natural resources. In the context of La Amistad TBR actors are identified
on the horizontal plane of IS2 beginning with the biosphere itself in the center and
spreading out through local and regional actors to link with the global community. In
consideration of both decentralization and devolution individuals will likely differentiate

between what is seen as desirable, but idealistic, and what is realistically obtainable.

4.3.2.1 Relevant Biosphere Reserve Experience

When an agreement was signed in 1991 between the Ministers of Environment Protection
in Poland, Slovakia, and Ukraine, the East Carpathians Biosphere Reserve was created as
the only trilateral biosphere reserve in Europe. With the signing of this document a
process was set in motion to preserve ecosystems across borders and to work toward
management of the biosphere reserve as a single system. Institutional diversity was great
regarding resource management, not only among, countries, but within them. In the
Polish part of the reserve the park is made up of three adjacent areas of varying protected
status. In Slovakia practical management is carried out by the State Forestry Department
and the national park primarily acts as a consultative body. In the Ukraine the biosphere
reserve is made up of a national park and a regional landscape. A difficulty in setting up
the biosphere reserve has been resolving differences by nation in the legal status of
protected areas and there is no set of common terms or concepts needed to harmonize

management.

220

 

 

In an effort to aid transboundary cooperation, not only for the biosphere reserve but for a
variety of efforts, the Carpathian Euroregion was set up copying the model of other
Euroregions especially the trilateral initiative between Switzerland, France, and
Germany. The Carpathian Euroregion initially raised hopes and expectations to attain
similar successes and benefits that had been demonstrated in other Euroregions.
However, actual results were disappointing and the organization lost momentum. An
identified obstacle to progress has been the concerns, specifically on the part of Slovakia
and Ukraine, over loss of national power and the significance of a Euroregion. One
author writes that, “In many ways this is also one of the growing pains of the biosphere
reserve, and capacity-building in the field of civil society, with increased participation in
the planning process for non-govemmental organizations, would be a very important
point to further increased cooperation, both within countries, and between countries”

(UNESCO 2003).

In the case of the East Carpathians Biosphere Reserve it has not been possible to develop
and implement an official biosphere reserve coordinating council or unified governing
structure. Although the 1991 agreement provides a legal basis to operate the biosphere
reserve, the final intergovernmental agreement to officially establish the trilateral
biosphere reserve was still not signed by all parties seven years after it was prepared.
However; one component of the biosphere reserve is a relative success considering
significant difficulties in other areas; The Foundation for Eastern Carpathian Biodiversity

Conservation.

221

 

When the project to create the transfrontier biosphere reserve was first established, a
foundation was set up in Switzerland, The Foundation for Eastern Carpathian
Biodiversity Conservation, to “encourage, organize, conduct, and promote activities
serving to protect the overall biodiversity of the Eastern Carpathian Mountains zone.”
The initial assets of the Foundation came from the American McArthur Foundation and
the Global Environment Trust of the Global Environment Facility and administered by
the World Bank. Despite expectations that the foundation would attract funding from a
variety of sources it has yet to succeed in this effort and assets are little more than the

original start-up firnding of US$600,000. None-the-less, the revenue from the

 

Foundation’s funds have sponsored small-scale local projects in each country, and it has
endured as an institutional arrangement that is in the process of seeking new ways to

fulfill original goals.

The Foundation is the only legally established body for trilateral consultations and
cooperation for the biosphere reserve, and as such, has somewhat assumed a de facto
position as the coordinating unit for the biosphere reserve. It provides the only consistent
opportunity for face to face contact for representatives of the three sides of the biosphere
reserve in both formal and informal settings by hosting a fully funded annual meeting.
Recent years has seen a shift from early idealism to a more pragmatic approach tempered
by experience, and the Foundation is adapting, relaxing some formal rules, and
concentrating on fostering cooperation and dialogue as well as attracting additional funds

for biosphere reserve projects (UNESCO 2003).

222

 

Other transboundary biosphere reserves have been much more successful in creating and
agreeing to common economic and environmental policies. In the case of the
Krkonose/Karkonosze Biosphere Reserve located in the Czech Republic and Poland, it
was possible to create an independent body to support participation of various
stakeholders in sustainable development activities and planning within the biosphere
reserve. An agreement was reached in 1996 that seeks to develop common economic and
environmental policies and establishes the Czech-Polish Board as a biosphere reserve
governing body The signatories not only included central state planners but
representatives of six main sectors identified in planning: the two National Park
administrations, representatives of the local Polish and Czech communities,
representatives of the respective local/regional authorities, representatives of the private
sector from both nations, representatives of local Czech and Polish NGO’s and other
working groups. This board does not have the authority to create legal institutions but
rather seeks to coordinate activities and facilitate communication among actors. A
representative success of these efforts can be seen in the drafting of the current Polish

park management plan that included participation and input from Czech actors.

The Vosges du Nord/Pfalzerwald Biosphere Reserve, located in France and Germany, is
perhaps the best example of integration, cooperation, and standardization of
transboundary biosphere reserve management to date. Both countries are part of the
European Union (EU), and as such, share a large number of common regulations and a
common currency. Several specific transboundary entities have been created to allow

and facilitate the creation of transfrontier local administrative units. Formation of the

223

 

 

biosphere reserve utilized an adaptive firnction by limiting the first formal agreement to a
ten year period and predetermined expiration date. The second agreement was very
precise and clear, benefiting from ten year’s experience under the first agreement. It
defines the goals of the TBR, provides a framework for a work program over several
years, defines the technical and financial means to sustain the biosphere reserve in the
future, and satisfies legal requirements to operate. It also provides for a joint Scientific
Board and creates several working groups as well as a biosphere reserve Coordinating

Committee.

A consistent problem in nearly all transborder planning efforts is funding, and the
biosphere reserve experience is no exception. When funding is present collaboration is
much higher than in cases where national entities need to come up with the funding
themselves. In the case of The Vosges du Nord/Pfalzerwald Biosphere Reserve the
European Union has strongly supported transboundary collaboration and multiple sources
of funding have been solicited and received for this purpose partly due to the ability of

planners to express needs and pursue funding for transboundary projects.

A key activity in the history of this biosphere reserve is especially relevant for this
dissertation. In 1998 the two national parks organized an activity to maximize efficiency
and resolve problems confronting the biosphere reserve. The session was partly
sponsored by UNESCO and devoted to an “objective-oriented project planning”.
Through interactions among actors involved in biosphere reserve planning difficulties

and perceived reasons for those difficulties were presented and clarified through

224

 

 

 

dialogue. The participants were than able to develop a work plan for the following three-
year period that included the following: (I) draw up a common charter or management
plan, (2) launch pilot projects to enhance acceptance of the TBR by the local population,
(3) enlarge the network of partners of the stakeholders of the TBR and raise awareness
among them, (4) establish transboundary management procedures, and (5) guarantee
technical and financial resources for cooperation. As stated in the methods section of this
dissertation, a policy simulation exercise, somewhat similar to the one described above, is

proposed to facilitate creation of La Amistad as a transboundary biosphere reserve.

4.3.3 Performance Comparisons: Situation Three: [81 and [82:

It is likely that current formal institutions for transboundary watershed management will
be harmonized to some degree either with [8] alone or with the addition of 182. The fact
that both countries have recognized the possible benefits of institutional harmonization or
standardization shows a readiness that is often a key ingredient for successful
implementation of projects that target institutional capacity building. A second important
consideration is funding. Findings from the literature indicate transboundary
communication and cooperation are more likely with the presence of external funding.
The GEF project specifically recognizes this need and funds activities for Costa Rica and
Panama to standardize institutions for resource management; however, these firnds are for
a limited duration. The 182 model also recognizes the need for funding to foster a
continuing process of cooperative planning among binational and global actors, but

places an emphasis on the aspects of consistency and sustainability in funding.

225

 

 

4.3.3.1 Funding

Literature is prevalent to show that in most cases when funding from external sources
stops transboundary activities drop as well (UNESCO 2003). This consideration has
been addressed both at the watershed level and at the level of the biosphere reserve and
mechanisms established to provide for a continuous flow of frmding for transboundary
planning. The Border Environment Cooperation Commission between the US and
Mexico is sustainably funded by national governments, and while it is not specifically a
watershed entity, it often functions in that capacity since a river forms the national border
as in the case of the Sixaola in the lower watershed. A problem with this approach has

been changes in the levels of funding linked to the political process.

In another case The Vosges du Nord/Pftilzerwald Biosphere Reserve has successfully
developed sustainable funding and initiated multi-year programs and plans that
continually refine institutional arrangements and have provided a much higher degree of
harmonization and integration of institutional arrangements than would be possible
without the biosphere reserve. Other biosphere reserve arrangements have shown
methods of obtaining funds ranging from a financial foundation to active grant seeking

by researchers.

The Global Environment Facility Project, Integrated Ecosystem Management of the

Binational Sixaola River Basin, estimates a total project cost of US$12,460,000

226

 

corresponding to activities related to natural resource management, development of
sustainable livelihoods and strengthening of local capacities (GEF 2004). While some of
these funds are non-reimbursable, or represent in-kind contributions, more than half
comes from loan funds that will be paid back by both countries to the Inter-American
Development Bank. Given the situation it is reasonable to ask, “Will this funding be
adequate realize the goals of the program? Where will funding for transboundary
activities come from when the program is over? Annex One of the GEF Project: Logical
Framework lists a verifiable outcome indicator for the end of the project as, “altemative
sustainable financing sources leveraged at the national or local level are covering at least
10% of the recurrent cost related to the integrated binational management of the Basin

compared to marginal domestic allocations at the beginning of the Project”

In the ISI model there is no specific mechanism for significant future funding of
transborder activities to harmonize institutions for watershed management. This may not
be a problem if sufficient progress can be made during the project period for actors to
envision new ways to secure funding and continue the process. One of the last well-
funded attempts to foster transboundary cooperation in the Sixaola Watershed took place
at the level of the biosphere reserve. An institutional analysis of La Amistad
lntemational Park notes that in the late 1980’s and early 1990’s there were abundant
economic resources and activities promoting cooperative thinking and planning.
However, since that time, and without external funding, binational cooperation regarding
the international park and biosphere reserve have diminished to the point that the park is

currently managed in independent sections in both countries (Borge 2004).

227

The IS2 model has a designed mechanism to provide sustainable funding for
transboundary collaboration and cooperation. The Foundation for La Amistad provides
actors living anywhere on the planet with a mechanism to support conservation and
preservation efforts in the Sixaola Watershed as well as help local actors find sustainable
economic and social development opportunities. As literature has shown, the process of
harmonizing institutions for ecosystem management across borders can be extremely
difficult and take much longer than initially expected. All transboundary biosphere
reserves are currently engaged in this process and none have reached a state of total
integration. The mechanism of a foundation for sustainable funding presented here draws
upon the experience of The Foundation for Eastern Carpathian Biodiversity
Conservation. This foundation is currently the only legal multinational institutional
arrangement for that biosphere reserve, and while it has not realized initial ambitious
goals to raise significant funds, it has endured and interest from the initial investment
continues to fund the only regularly scheduled meetings for cooperation and dialogue

regarding the biosphere reserve.

4.3.3.2 Approaches to Building Binational Institutions

The performance measure identified in Chapter Three, the degree of similarity in rules
and regulations regarding resource management throughout the Sixaola Watershed,
concentrates primarily on formal institutions since they are observable and verifiable.

Performance objectives for the GEF Project, the objectives used for IS] , frequently use

228

 

 

 

documents and reports to verify institutional arrangements. Meetings, training sessions,
and seminars are also verifiable, but informal institutions, rules regarding interactions
among actors outside of the legal system, are much harder to document and validate.
None-the-less, these institutions often provide day to day rules for actors even though
they may conflict with formal institutions. The model for 182 places a significant
emphasis on creation of informal institutions throughout the watershed and

harmonization of these institutions with formal rules and regulations.

The Border Environment Cooperation Commission (BECC) established by the US and
Mexico as part of NAFTA serves as an example of rules and regulations standardization
by offering incentives. Rather than move from two national to a single set of binational
rules and regulations that are enforced by law and through penalties, the BECC initiated a
new process. Funding for borderland projects was made available through the North
American Development Bank but all projects from either side of the border have to be
approved by the BECC before they can qualify for that funding. In this way a public-
driven process was created in which standards are not only written but refined through
public dialogue and decisions as to which projects are approved and which ones are not.
Actors on both sides of the border have learned from this process and have demonstrated
increased capacity in identifying and articulating needs as well as securing external

funding in addition to loans (Milich and Varady 1999).

The ultimate aim of a transfrontier biosphere reserve is to operate as one functional

biosphere reserve. This implies a common set of operating procedures, rules and

229

 

regulations, evaluation techniques, and shared work plan throughout the biosphere
reserve. It is possible to realize this goal through dialogue and agreed standardization of
rules and regulations in both nations. It is also possible to realize this goal through
devolution; a case in which both Costa Rica and Panama give La Amistad TBR the
authority to develop rules and regulations for resource management. The model of 182,
La Amistad TBR, has a governmental oversight committee, thereby reducing concerns

about loss of national sovereignty.

A common lesson in both biosphere reserve and watershed literature is that the process of
harmonization or standardization of transboundary rules and regulations for resource
management is usually lengthy and difficult. Most successful efforts require sustained
firnding and there have been several cases in which the process slowed or collapsed when
funding for these efforts ceased. The approach of ISI initiates a process that builds
capacity to a target level in four years. It creates working groups and sets planning
processes in motion. The project notes the need to secure external funding but does not
identify where potential funding will come from. It is probable that the GEF project is
intended to create the institutions necessary for the Sixaola and Bocas del Toro Programs
to utilize when the GEF project ends; however, competition for limited financial
resources in those programs may present a challenge if work still needs to be done

regarding institutional arrangements when the GEF project ends.

230

 

4.3.3.3 Probable Performance Outcomes: Situation Three

The performance variable identified here: the existence of similar or the same
institutional rules for management of natural resources in the Sixaola Watershed, is
analyzed as a result of the way in which the two contrasting institutional arrangements
address the source of human interdependence found in the current situation; overlapping
and confusing formal institutional management structures. Harmonization or
standardization of rules for management of natural resources in the Sixaola Watershed is
a goal of both 181 and IS2. There is not an inherent advantage in addressing this goal at

the watershed level or at the level of the biosphere reserve.

A perceived advantage in scale is present in two cases presented in this dissertation; (1)a
biosphere reserve created in the Danube Delta presented the possibility of standardizing
management institutions more easily than at the scale of the Danube River Watershed,
and (2) the Sixaola Watershed Program presented the possibility of standardizing
management institutions more easily than at the level of La Amistad as an international
park or a biosphere reserve. This approach, creating transboundary institutions at a
smaller geographic scale, recognizes the difficulty in working with large areas and
numerous diverse actors and creating new institutions. However, this dissertation
examines the possibility of working simultaneously on multiple scales, at the
microwatershed, sub-watershed, watershed level, and at the level of the biosphere
reserve. It considers how a process can be initiated, rather than an end, which utilizes

advantages of working at multiple levels in an integrated process.

231

 

 

The Sixaola Program and the GEF Project (ISl) will create new binational entities
including a permanent Binational Commission for the Sixaola River Basin and a
Binational Technical Committee. Other new management entities are formed similarly in
both countries; new program coordinating units, new development councils, and new
district committees. These units have a planned integration function and are designed to
be similar in both countries. With their creation similar formal watershed institutions are
put in place throughout the Sixaola Watershed and in the larger region with Panama.
Implementation of these new units and the institutions they provide may or may not
impact broader institutional arrangements currently existing at the national and local
levels, as and such, it is uncertain how much impact they will have in addressing the
situation of existing confusing and overlapping institutional arrangements for resource
management. It is possible that with the introduction of these new units the situation may

become even more complicated for many actors in the watershed.

Binational activities will be sponsored through [S] to increase contact and understanding
between government personnel from different ministries, municipalities, community
groups, and school children among others. A positive benefit from these exchanges is a
projected increase in understanding and a shared view of desirable regulations and
methods for monitoring natural resources. These activities will help drive progress
toward harmonization or standardization of formal institutions for natural resource
management. ISI, standing alone, will likely have a significant impact in helping actors
move toward creation and implementation of similar formal institutions throughout the

watershed.

232

It is not clear that this progress can be sustained, however, and it is important to note that
past attempts at harmonization in this region, carried out at the level of the two biosphere
reserves, have done well when external funding was present but dropped off and
remained low when fimding for transboundary collaboration stopped. This tendency has
been observed in other cases at both the watershed level and the biosphere reserve level.
Verifiable outcome indicators from the GEF project target a wide variety of activities for
diverse stakeholders. A danger is that collaboration and expectations will be raised
among stakeholder groups, but when project funding runs out, they are left with no means

to continue.

La Amistad as a transboundary biosphere reserve presents an opportunity to standardize
rules and regulations over natural resource management of the core park area by signing
an agreement transferring power to draft formal institutions for natural resource
management from the national level to the level of the transboundary biosphere reserve.
This action is much more likely at the level of the biosphere reserve than at the level of
the watershed since the reserve/park is already an entity with special institutional
arrangements in both nations. While devolution in this case would allow the most
complete standardization of institutions for resource management in the core park area
(upper watershed) it does not address areas outside the core park area (middle and lower
watershed). This level of devolution has not been achieved in any existing transfrontier
biosphere reserve and past efforts at creating institutional arrangements to manage La

Amistad as a single international park or as a biosphere reserve have failed. New efforts

233

will have to overcome skepticism and provide concrete reasons to believe integration of

resource management at the level of the biosphere reserve is possible.

The biosphere reserve framework also provides for standardization of management in

areas outside the core park area, buffer and transition zones, but does so through local

 

units and institutions. The zonation process in the buffer and transitions zones utilizes

'0‘

local government and existing institutional arrangements to implement broad concepts
and guidelines marketed by the biosphere reserve. Rules and regulations in middle and
lower Sixaola Watershed (buffer and transitions zones of the biosphere reserve) will be
standardized to the degree attained by 181 (1S1 is running within IS2), but the continuing
zonation process and biosphere reserve activities will drive this process forward

sustainably over time.

The Promotion and Marketing Committee found under the Association for La Amistad
targets informal institutions and seeks to create a baseline ecological identity throughout
the biosphere. Biosphere reserve concepts and guidelines are actively promoted to the
general public and impact the public planning process. The area of interest committees
of La Amistad TBR, including the watershed committee, mesh with existing formal
institutions, and over time, help attain harmonization of those institutions throughout the
watershed and the biosphere reserve. The administrative arm of La Amistad TBR brings
the experience of national resource managers from Costa Rica and Panama together with
scientists and academics to gather with representatives from the area of interest

committees at the level of the biosphere reserve coordinating body. Consensus reached at

 

234

this level is transmitted back through the same network and impacts planning from the
local through the regional and ultimately impact global planning. Secondly, consensus
reached at the level of the coordinating body, The Commission for La Amistad TBR, is
transferred laterally through The Association for La Amistad to the Promotion and
Marketing committee. This committee sponsors projects to target citizens, schools, and
community organizations and communicate the baseline norms and values of the

biosphere reserve which find their way into the formal planning process.

235

 

 

4.4 Performance Summary

Three specific measures of performance were developed that relate directly to identified
sources of human interdependence in the current situation in the Sixaola Binational
Watershed. The way in which institutional arrangements address these sources of
interdependence impacts performance. Analysis was conducted to examine possible
performance outcomes for two institutional arrangements; Institutional Structure One,
current government programs and projects now scheduled for implementation in 2007,
and Institutional Structure Two, a model of La Amistad as a transboundary biosphere
reserve. These institutional structures do not stand in opposition to one another; rather,

181 is considered without and with the addition of 132.

Findings of this research project document the lack of a shared geographic understanding
among actors in the watershed. Due to physical immensity and extreme topographical
and biological diversity it has not been possible for actors to develop a unified view of
the watershed that can be communicated to achieve a shared geographic understanding.

A technological innovation, development of geographic information systems (GIS),
offers a promising way to address this situation. Successful examples of GIS applications
were provided and both institutional models used in analysis recognize the desirability of
a functioning GIS for the watershed and region. Examples were provided for a variety of
GIS arrangements and there was no inherent advantage found at the watershed or the

biosphere reserve level.

 

A GIS has already been developed for 181 and a similar GIS has been developed for the
adjoining Bocas del Toro region of Panama. This system is functioning and in use for
planning at the present time. Further development of the GIS is planned as part of the
Global Environment Facility Project, Integrated Ecosystem Management of the
Binational Sixaola River Basin. However, funding for this activity is limited and
development takes place largely without the input of local actors. Further, the physical
data used to produce the GIS is often more than fifty years old and does not benefit from
current technological possibilities. This is not likely to change in IS] without a

significant infusion of external capital.

Performance findings consider the GIS as a product or as a process. Evidence was
presented for approaches that provide data freely and easily to the public in an effort to
grow a GIS from the ground up; producing an evolving product through this process.
This does not stand in opposition to GIS planning in government offices or academic
settings; rather, it contributes to a mutually reinforcing process. Data used to construct a
GIS can be continuously refined through field observations by local actors as well as
remote sensing. If these actors are given access to the process in a way that they find
engaging, data collection and evaluation of the GIS can be sustainable. The process of
citizen engagement in use of a GIS under lSl is extremely limited compared to the
widespread use of GIS in planning and zonation in the model of La Amistad as a

transboundary biosphere reserve.

237

A second situation identified in findings is extreme human diversity of watershed actors

and the lack of a shared means of communication. If the first situation can be addressed,
the lack of a shared geographic understanding, actors still need a means to communicate
effectively and equally to engage in management of resources. Both ISI and 182 seek

widespread citizen participation but differ in approaches.

182 utilizes a GIS process to explore new meeting spaces and a common visual language.
While nearly all actors in the watershed speak Spanish, it is a second language for most
Indigenous watershed actors whose first languages are primarily spoken languages with
few actors proficient in a written form. Performance findings indicate that a GIS product
alone is not adequate to provide a common means of communication for actors in the
Sixaola Watershed; it must be implemented as a process that actors find engaging.
However, findings also indicate that a GIS can potentially be used as a new means of

communication that is acceptable for the great majority of actors.

Findings were also presented to suggest watershed management efforts in rural cases with
extremely diverse actors should begin at the microwatershed level. By working in small
groups actors can build trust and working relationships that enable them to scale up and
participate in management efforts at the sub-watershed level leading eventually to
management at the level of the watershed. ISl implements institutional arrangements at
the level of the watershed and then implements a limited number of microwatershed
initiatives over the next four years. In this arrangement a path dependency is created

institutionally and actors entering the process through the microwatershed initiatives have

238

 

 

to overcome associated path dependency costs should they desire a different institutional
arrangement. These costs can be somewhat minimized by careful implementation of the

new units mandated into existence with loan programs.

The model for La Amistad as a transboundary biosphere reserve creates a new activity,
zonation, specifically designed to engage the diverse actors in the watershed. Biosphere
reserves utilize the concept of core park area, buffer zones, and transition zones.
Protected areas under state control would be primary candidates to form core areas of the
biosphere reserve; however, the zonation process would expand significantly to engage
public participation in buffer zones and transition zones of the reserve. A possible range
for the reserve on the Caribbean side of La Amistad, including buffer and transition

zones, could extend from Puerto Limon, Costa Rica through Bocas del Toro, Panama.

The zonation process helps local actors define land use and work through local
governments to impact formal institutions. It is funded through the biosphere reserve and
actively seeks to involve all actors in the watershed. The watershed committee sponsors
activities beginning at the microwatershed. Science and education committees integrate
with the public dialogue to ensure sound science goes into planning with ecotourism,
recreational tourism, and business interests among others. Not only does the biosphere
reserve fund zonation activities, it actively seeks to educate actors, develop new norms
regarding resource management, and impact informal institutions; daily operating

procedures for biosphere reserve (and watershed) actors. These efforts at education and

239

activism are manifested through the existing public process and citizens use existing

channels to impact formal institutions.

Findings have shown that development of a GIS process and product can effectively help
create a shared geographic understanding among actors in the watershed. Used as a tool
for communication, the GIS can provide a new visual language that is much more
equitable for Indigenous actors for whom Spanish is a second language. A zonation
process in IS2 seeks out all actors in the watershed and engages them in dialogue that
promotes shared norms and informal institutions. In these ways implementation of 132

has considerable potential to help ISl attain its target objectives.

A web of existing formal institutions was presented in Chapter Three of this dissertation,
areas of overlap noted, and the potential for confusion discussed. IS] and IS2 both
recognize this problem and seek harmonization or standardization of rules and
regulations for resource management in the watershed. The fact that both governments
recognized this problem in loan applications, and are seeking to address it, indicates a
high degree of readiness among actors and a framework for formal and informal
communications. ISI will likely make significant progress in this area without the
existence of IS2. However, a concern exists as to the sustainability of these efforts once
external funding ends. An impact analysis must consider that failed or partially fulfilled

actor expectations may discourage them from participation in future planning efforts.

240

The model for La Amistad as a transfrontier biosphere reserve seeks a devolution
mechanism whereby both central governments cede the authority to create formal
institutions regarding resource management to the commission regulating the biosphere
reserve. The process of creating those institutions would take place over time and
through interactions among multiple actors including resource managers from both
countries. Theoretically this process has the highest potential to create as single set of

formal institutions for protected areas in the watershed.

Case studies have shown that the process of harmonizing or standardizing institutions for
resource management across borders can take much longer than originally expected.
Sustainable firnding for these activities is critical to enhance chances of success and allow
the process to unfold over time. Actors in Costa Rica and Panama are sophisticated and
competent. It is reasonable to believe they will make significant accomplishments during
the four years of the GEF project; however, sustained funding beyond that provided in
the Sixaola and Bocas del Toro programs is not identified should the process take longer

than expected.

Sustainable funding for La Amistad as a biosphere reserve is partly provided through the
Foundation for La Amistad. This foundation receives voluntary payments from citizens
or groups who wish to support firnctions provided by La Amistad; environmental
preservation, conservation, social development, or other activities they deem important.
One case in Costa Rica was cited, that of the Osa Peninsula, and a single donation in

2004 of US$8 million to The Nature Conservancy to help protected forested areas in

241

 

Costa Rica’s Osa Peninsula Piedras Blancas and Corcovado national parks and the
biological corridor connecting them. The $8 million gift is part of the $32.5 million Osa
Campaign dedicated to sponsoring conservation efforts in that region of Costa Rica.
Global actors have demonstrated a willingness to support preservation and conservation
activities coupled with sustainable development and the Foundation for La Amistad
provides a mechanism to receive payments and transfer benefits to local and regional

actors who forego alternative land uses.

With the addition of La Amistad as a transboundary biosphere reserve, the efforts of ISI
to harmonize or standardize formal institutions for watershed management gain support
for continued collaboration once current and proposed projects end. Further, by targeting
informal institutions, 182 seeks to impact formal institutions over time as an informed

public participates in the planning process.

Clearly, ISI and 182 both seek to provide actors living in the Sixaola Watershed with
greater involvement in natural resource planning and management. Both models seek to
provide enhanced protection for natural areas while simultaneously providing additional
economic and social opportunities for actors living closest to the land. With increased
public planning comes a corresponding loss of control for those who currently develop

plans, rules and regulations.

This can become a complex issue as is illustrated in the case of Costa Rica and Panama

with proposed hydroelectric power plants in the Sixaola Watershed and in the adjoining

242

areas of Panama. Projects were not launched in Costa Rica largely because of resistance
from Indigenous communities with specific legal rights. Indigenous settlements in
Panama do not enjoy this same status and the government approved four projects without
approval of these watershed actors. The new power plants in Panama are expected to
generate approximately 30% of the country’s need for electricity and fuel development
along the Caribbean coast including the rapidly growing region of Bocas del Toro. While
Indigenous groups affected by the projects will lose their present homes, global actors
will also lose a degree of biodiversity and the opportunity to view or study these natural
systems unaffected by human intervention. Economic gains from electricity supplied by
the plants will be shared among private companies, the central government, and by actors
engaged in development activities in the region. Indigenous residents have been
promised economic benefits as well including new homes, schools, and a road; however
they do not have the right to reject the proposed benefits and stop the hydroelectric
projects. From one perspective hydroelectric power is a benefit for the environment since
it represents clean energy that doesn’t add carbon to the atmosphere or contribute to
planetary warming. From another perspective the dams will block migration of several
species of fish, permanently alter natural systems, and cause significant and possibly

irreversible environmental harm.

In the case of the Sixaola watershed, and for this dissertation, an important question
regarding resource management is, “who gets to decide?” Both models seek widespread
involvement of diverse actors in the watershed; however, one current study notes that in

the case of the Sixaola there may be, “insufficient human and financial resources to

243

transfer the public participation to the bottom” (Yamaguchi 2004). Watershed
management programs implemented at the level of the microwatershed are more likely to
involve all actors than programs implemented at larger geographic levels. Lessons
learned and cited in this work document the necessity to involve all actors in watershed
planning since only a few disenfranchised actors can negatively impact a program or

project.

The model for La Amistad as a transboundary biosphere reserve promotes power sharing
through collaboration and dialogue regarding resource management. The governing body
for the biosphere reserve, The Commission for La Amistad TBR, is made up of
representatives from diverse area of interest groups as well as governmental and
administrative personnel. These area of interest groups link local with global actors who
bring information, expertise, and resources; thereby having a secondary impact on
planning and decision making. This global participation is largely absent from the ISI

model.

The goal of this dissertation has been to provide additional institutional options for
watershed management in the Sixaola Binational Watershed. To address this goal two
models were developed and used to examine the ways in which institutional
arrangements impact key aspects of human interdependence that are present in the current
situation. Likely performance outcomes were presented based upon theory and case
studies relevant to the Sixaola Watershed and La Amistad as a transboundary biosphere

I'CSCI'VC.

244

It is hoped that this work will prove relevant for planners as well as academics and
inform the public dialogue in the general area of natural resource management and
specifically cases of transboundary management and UN biosphere reserves. The Sixaola
Binational Watershed is unique globally yet shares traits with many other watersheds that
face similar challenges. This dissertation seeks to provide additional options for planners
seeking public participation and an adaptive process for co-management of natural

resources.

As stated in earlier in this dissertation, the model for La Amistad as a transboundary
biosphere reserve serves as a starting point for dialogue and can be used to craft policy
simulation exercises that draw upon game theory. While the primary goal of this
dissertation is to provide additional institutional options for watershed management a
secondary goal has been to provide the tools needed to form a base from which to launch

these simulation exercises.

The title of a definitive book on the region of the Sixaola Watershed, Talamanca en La
Encrucijada (Talamanca at the Crossroads), captures the significance of this moment in
time for people who continue to struggle with poverty and few social opportunities
(Borge and Villalobos 1994). Current and planned development efforts will certainly
impact the lives of these people. A question yet to be answered is, “How much will they

be able to participate in planning their own future?”

245

 

Table 5: SSP Analysis Outline

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Situation Structure Performance
Physical immensity, ISI Produce finished GIS based upon old physical
biological and data.
topographical Limited citizen involvement and use.
diversity of the Some chance of new GIS.
watershed IS2 Begin and continue GIS process.
GIS product produced with multiple layers.
Wide community participation in development and
use.
Extreme human ISI Status quo with some increased communication.
diversity and lack of ISZ New spaces for interaction.
a common means of New means of communication.
communication Higher percentage of communication among
watershed actors.
Global actors recognized
Overlapping and IS] Some rules standardization successful.
confusing formal New binational institutions created and
institutional functioning.
management Few changes on the ground.
structures. IS2 Governments devolute power to the TBR. One set

 

 

of institutional regulations in core area.

Efforts to market informal institutions impacts
formal institutions.

Buffer zone planning impacts local governments.

 

246

 

 

APPENDIX ONE

Recommendations for the Establishment and Functioning of Transboundary
Biosphere Reserves

Provided by the UNESCO Man and the Biosphere Programme.

As borders between states are political and not ecological, ecosystems often occur across
national boundaries, and may be subject to different, or even conflicting, management
and land use practices. Transboundary Biosphere Reserves (TBR) provide a tool for
common management. A TBR is an official recognition at an international level and by a
UN institution of a political will to co-operate in the conservation and sustainable use
through common management of a shared ecosystem. It also represents a commitment of
two or more countries to apply together the Seville Strategy for biosphere reserves and its
objectives. It corresponds to the increasing recognition of the appropriateness of the
ecosystem approach for conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity.

The recommendations presented below deal with the establishment of a TBR, the
measures which can be taken to respond to the MAB principles and in particular the goals
of the Seville Strategy and the way of ensuring that a TBR is truly operational. However,
it should be kept in mind that, although the biosphere reserve provides a general
framework for action in a transboundary location, the real-world situations will vary very
much from a place to another, and flexibility is needed even more than in a national
context.

The process leading towards the official designation of a TBR can include many forms of
cooperation and co-ordination among the existing areas on either side of a border. These
serve as a basis for forrnalizing the TBR proposal and should be encouraged.

Procedure for the establishment of a TBR

Up until now, all existing TBR were established as separate biosphere reserves in
individual countries before being designated as TBR. However, it could be envisaged in
the future that a TBR be established jointly by the countries concerned in one step. In
both cases, the ultimate aim should be to have one functional biosphere reserve.

In these two different scenarios, the following respective procedures are recommended:

Establishment of a biosphere reserve on each side of the border;
or, when the TBR is established in one step, definition of the zoning of the area
according to the general criteria for designation of biosphere reserves.

0 Identification of local and national partners and establishment of a working group
to define the basis and identify key issues for co-operation.

- Signing of an official agreement between governmental authorities regarding the
TBR.

o Nomination of the various parts by the respective State authorities;

247

or, when the TBR is established in one step, joint nomination for the whole area
by the concerned State authorities.

In both scenarios, indication of the main components of a plan for co-operation in
the firture.

Official designation by ICC MAB of UNESCO.

FUNCTIONING OF THE TBR

Among the measures recommended to make the TBR function effectively, priority should
be given to:

Preparation and adoption of a zonation plan for the whole area and
implementation of the zonation by strict protection of core areas, delimitation of
the buffer zones and coordinated objectives for the transition areas; this implies
that the countries concerned have a common understanding of the characteristics
of each of the zones, and that similar management measures are in place for each
zone.

When the zonation plan is defined, publication on a joint map of the zonation.
Definition of common objectives and measures, work plan, time table, and
required budget; this should be a demand driven process, based on perceived
needs or management requirements. This work plan should take into account the
elements listed under the goals of the Seville Strategy as suggested below.
Identification of potential funding sources for the work plan and joint or
simultaneous application for these funds.

Establishment of a means of communication between the coordinators/managers
of the different parts of the TBR, including electronic mail when feasible.
Efforts towards harmonized management structures on each side.

INSTITUTIONAL MECHANISMS

The TBR will not function without a joint structure devoted to its co-ordination.
Although this structure can vary greatly from one TBR to another, the following points
can be recommended:

The coordinating structure is representative of various administrations and the
scientific boards, as well as the authorities in charge of the protected areas, the
representatives of local communities, interested and affected groups, including
youth, and of the private sector.

The NGO sector in the area is also represented in the structure.

This structure has a permanent secretariat, and a budget is devoted to its
functioning.

A person is designated on each side to act as a focal point for co-operation.
General and regular meetings of the coordinating structure are complemented by
thematic groups, on an ad hoc basis, in order to create a platform for discussion
among stakeholders from the countries concerned, with a view to promote all
opportunities for exchanging views and knowledge.

248

 

0 Joint staff teams are operational for specific tasks.
0 An association is set up with the specific aim of promoting the TBR.

RESPONDING TO THE GOALS OF THE SEVILLE STRATEGY
Goal I : Use Biosphere Reserves to Conserve Natural and Cultural Diversity

In order to develop a concerted strategy for conservation, the following measures can be
recommended:

0 Co-ordination of regulatory measures on protection and, in case of
incompatibility, their harmonization.

0 Common or coordinated policies for threatened and protected species and
ecosystems, migratory species, as well as control of invasive alien species.

0 Common or coordinated policies for rehabilitation and restoration of degraded
areas.

0 Coordinated action against illegal activities such as wildlife poaching and
unauthorized logging.

Goal II : Utilize Biosphere Reserves as Models of Land Management and of
Approaches to Sustainable Development

The human component of biosphere reserves and their role in promoting approaches to
sustainable development can lead to a variety of forms of co-operation, ranging fi'om the
use of natural resources to the protection of cultural heritage. Among the measures that
can be recommended in TBR are the following:

- Co-ordination of management practices, for example in forestry, logging, forest
regeneration, or in the field of pollution control.

0 Identification of possible perverse incentive and promotion of viable sustainable
alternatives.
Elaboration and supporting of the implementation of a joint tourism policy.
Promotion of partnership among various groups of stakeholders having the same
interests in order to make the TBR a common project.

0 Promotion of participation of local communities in the TBR, including local
NGOs.

0 Promotion of joint cultural events and fostering of co-operation on cultural and
historical heritage preservation.

0 Developing of common strategies for planning based on research and monitoring.

Goal III : Use Biosphere Reserves for Research, Monitoring, Education and
Training

Joint activities on research and monitoring should be led by scientific boards and planned
in joint sessions; these activities could be carried out along the following lines:

249

Define and implement joint research programs.

Develop common data collection formats, indicators, monitoring and evaluation
methods.

Exchange existing data, including maps and geographical information, and
facilitate access to results of research.

Share scientific information, including through the organization of workshops,
conferences, etc.

Share equipment when feasible.

Jointly publish results of common research.

Develop joint mapping and GIS.

Many joint activities in the field of education and training can be recommended, such as:

Organization of joint training courses and technical meetings for managers and
field staff.

Promotion of staff exchanges.

Promotion of understanding of neighboring country’s culture.

Organization of linguistic training when needed.

Exchanges of scientists between universities and academic and research
institutions of each country.

School exchanges.

Launching of participatory training programs for various groups of stakeholders.

Information and public awareness are crucially important to develop a common
understanding and build support for and appropriation of the objectives of the TBR by the
different stakeholders. Therefore, the rationale and objectives of the TBR should be
explained by varied means to different targets groups (decision makers, local populations,
visitors, schools, scientists, managers, etc). Among other activities, the following can be
recommended:

Develop a common public relations’ strategy with the aim of raising awareness
and promoting the TBR.

Produce information material, brochures, books, etc.

Organize exhibits and events around the TBR.

Develop a common logo for the TBR, as well as a common design for published
material.

Implement joint demonstration projects.

Set up a common intemet site.

250

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alston, L. J ., T. Eggertsson, et al. (1996). Empirical Studies in Institutional Change.
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

Alvarado, E. E. (2005). Perdidas Ya Superan Los (colones) 15,000 Million. La Nacion'
January 19, 2005. San Jose, Costa Rica.

 

APPTA (2006). Historical Evolution of Socio—Environmental and Cutural Scene. Bribri,
Costa Rica, Asociacion de Pequef‘los Productores de Talamanca. 2006.

Assembly of First Nations in Canada (2005). The Second Indigenous Peoples Summit of
the Americas, Assembly of First Nations in Canada. 2006.

Babladelis, P. (2003). La Amistad lntemational Peace Park; What Part Does It Play in the
Peace Process? Resource Development. East Lansing, Michigan, Michigan State
University: 110.

Barlowe, R. (1996). Land Resource Economics: The Economics of Real Estate.
Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Borge, C. (2004). Reflexiones del Consultor; Plan de Manejo: Parque Intemacional de la
Amistad. San Jose, Seder, TNC, MINAE, USAID,.

Borge, C., (Consultor) (2004). Plan de Manejo: Parque Intemacional La Amistad
Talamanca. San Jose, Costa Rica, SEDER, The Nature Conservancy, MINAE, USAID.

Borge, C. and V. Villalobos (1994). Talamanca en La Encrucijada. San Jose, Costa Rica,
Universidad Estatal a Distancia.

Carazo, F., B. Herrera, et al. (2005). Plan de Conservacion: Sitio Binacional La Amistad
Costa Rica — Panama. Guia de acciones 2002-2004 (Working Copy). T. N. Conservancy.
Costa Rica-Panama, San Jose, The Nature Conservancy: 50.

Castro, J. J ., M. Ramirez, et al. (1995). The la Amistad biosphere reserve. Conservation
of Biodiversity and the New Regional Planning, IUCN.

Cordero, S., R. Montenegro, et al. (2006). Analisis de Costo Beneficio de Cuatro
Proyectos Hidroele'ctricos en la Cuenca Changuinola-Teribe. T. N. Conservancy, C.
International, C. E. P. Fundet al. Panama, Panama.

Daniele, C., M. Acerbi, et al. (1999). Biosphere Reserve Implementation: The Latin

American Experience. South-South Co-operation Programme on Environmentally Sound
Socioeconomic Development in the Humid Tropics, UN MAB Programme.

251

David, P. A. (2000). Path Dependence, Its Critics and the Quest for 'Historical
Economics'. Oxford: 25.

Denyer Ch., P. and G. J. Soto Bonilla (1999). "Contribucion Pionera de William M. Gabb
a la Geolgia y Cartografia de Costa Rica." Annuario de Estudios Centroamericanos 25(2):
103-138.

Diaz, M. G. (2006). Anti-Oil Groups Request Ban. The Tico Times. San Jose, Costa
Rica: 1-5.

Doan, D. B. (1998). "The Mineral Industry of Costa Rica." Latin American Mining
Institute; Mexico and Central America Investment and MiningGuide (annual).

Dowdeswell, E. (1998). "Where Peaceful Waters Flow." Water lntemational 23(1): 13-
16.

Duke, R. D. and J. L. A. Geurts (2004). Policy games for strategic manggement;
Pathways into the unknown. Amsterdam, Dutch University Press.

Fernandez M. and Rojas W. (2006). "Faulting, Shallow Seismicity and Seismic Hazard
Analysis for the Costa Rican Central Valley." Soil Dynamics and Earthquake
Engineering.

Franklin, H., A. M. Linares, et al. (2006). Integrated Ecosystem Management in the
Sixaola Binational River Basin. Project Document. San Jose, Costa Rica, lnterAmerican
Development Bank: 35.

Fuentes Belgrave, L. (2001). "Lucha Antipetrolera en el Atlantico Sur; Nos Defendemos
a Capa y Espada." SeMueve(May 2001).

GEF (2004). Request for Pipeline Entry and PDF-B Approval. Agencflroject ID: RS-
X1006, GEF.

GEF (2006). Project Executive Summary: Integrated Ecosystem Management in the
Binational Sixaola River Basin, GEF.

Gunderson, L. H. and C. S. Holling (2002). Pinarchy: Understanding Transformations in
Hurn_an and Natural Systems. Washington, Covelo, London, Island Press.

Hadley, M. (2002). Biosphere reserves, SpecialJplaces for people and nature. Paris,
France, UNESCO.

Hamner, J. H. and A. T. Wolf (1998). "Patterns in lntemational Water Resource Treaties:

The Transboundary Freshwater Dispute Database." Colorado Journal of lntemational
Environmental Law and Polig(Suppl.): 157-177.

252

Hira, A. Y., T. Tognoli, et al. (2005). "Establishment of the Brazilian Telehealth Network
for Paediatric Oncology." Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare 11(Supplement 2): 51-
52.

Imnan, C. (1998). Impacts on Developing Countries of Changing Production and
Consumption Patterns in Developed Countries: The Case of Ecotourism in Costa Rica,
Prepared by INCAE, The Central American Institute of Business Administration, for the
United Nations Environment Programme: 55.

Institute of Water Resources (2007). Home Page. East Lansing, MI, Institute of Water
Resources
Michigan State University.

Inter-American Development Bank (2006). Analysis de Actores Sociales e Institucionales
en la Cuenca del Rio Sixaola. F ortalecimeinto Institutional y de las Cgpacidades Técnicas
y Operativas Para un Mango Integral.

Jaeger, T. (2005). New Prospects for the MAB Programme and Biosphere Reserves;
Lessons Learned from Latin America and the Caribbean. Working Papers. Number 35.
S.-S. C. Programme. Motevideo, UNESCO Regional Office for Science for Latin
America and the Caribbean: 140.

Jordan, 0., D. Sagastizabal, et al. (1999). The Talamanca-Sixaola Watershed: Tightening
the Ties of Cooperation; A Contribution to the Interarnerican Water Management Dialog.
Gainesville, FL, Center for Governmental Responsibility, University of Florida Levin
College of Law: 16.

Kappelle, M. and S. P. Horn (2005). Paramos de Costa Rica. San Jose, Editorial IN Bio.

Kerr, J. (1997). The Economics of Soil Degradation: From National Policy to F arrner's
Fields. Workshop on Assessing the Causes and Impacts of Soil Erosion at Multiple
Scales. Bogor, Indonesia.

Knox, A. and R. Meinzen-Dick (2001). Collective Action, Property Rights, and
Devolution of Natural Resource Management: Exchange of Knowledge and Implications
for Policy. CAPRi Working Paper No. 11. Washington D.C., Secretariat: lntemational
Food Policy Research Institue.

Lachniet, M. S., G. O. Selzer, et al. (1998). Geologia, Geomorfologia, y Depositos
Glaciares en los Paramos de Costa Rica. Balboa, Panama, Smithsonian Tropical Research
Institute: 17.

Lesslie Youd, T. L. (1993). "Liquefaction, Ground Failure and Consequent Damage

During the 22 April 1991 Costa Rica Earthquake (Abridged from EERI Proceedings:
U.S. Costa Rica Workship 1993." 9.

253

Linares, O. F., P. D. Shccts, et al. (1975). "Prehistoric Agriculture in Tropical
Highlands." Science 187(4172): 137-145.

 

Linnerooth, J. (1990). "The Danube River Basin: Negotiating Settlements to
Transboundary Environmental Issues." Natural Resources Journal 30: 629-660.

LoBello, R. (2004). Rotarians Rekindle the Dream, Rotary lntemational. 2004.
Marco Legal CR-Panama (1995). Convenio de Cooperacion Transfronterizo CR-PAN.

Merem, E. C. and Y. A. Twumasi (2006). Hydropolitics: A Case of the Niger River
Basin, GIS Development.

Milich, L. and R. G. Varady (1999). "Openness, Sustainability, and Public Participation:
New Designs for Transboundary River Basin Institutions." Journal of Environment &
Develgrment 8(3): 258-306.

MINAE, ANAM, et al. (2006). Sistema de Monitoreo y Evaluacion del Proyecto: Marco
Logico.

Moore, C. (2006). Opportunity Access, Inc., Annual Report for The year 2005. East
Stroudsburg, PA, USA and Cahuita, Limon, Costa Rica.

Nessim, H., R. Coloane, et al. (2004). Sustainable Development Program for the Sixaola
River Binational Watershed. CR-0150, lnterAmerican Development Bank.

Nessim, H., M. Lemay, et al. (2004). Multiphase Program for Sustainable Development
of Bocas del Toro. PN-0149, Inter-American Development Bank.

North, D. C. (1990). Institutions. Institutional Change and Economic Performance.
Cambridge, UK, New York, NY, USA, Cambridge University Press.

Oviedo, E. (2006). Via Sixaola Curnple 18 Meses Sin Reparar. La Nacion; June 23. 2006.
San Jose, Costa Rica.

Palmer, P. (1989). Environment, Development, and Indigenous Knowledge Systems: A
Participatory Action Research Approach Toward Natural Resources Management in
Costa Rica's Cocles/Kekoldi Indian Reserve. Sociology. East Lansing, MI, Michigan
State University: 98.

Patton, M. Q. (2002). malitative Research & Evaluation Methods. 3 Edition. Thousand
Oaks, London, New Delhi, Sage Publications.

Presidencia de la Republica de Costa Rica (1982). Decreto de Creacion del Parque
Intemacional de La Amistad (NO. l3324-A): D 110-115.

254

Quesada Mateo, C. A. (1992). Marco Conceptual Para la Defininicion del Desarrollo
Sustenible. Desarrollo Sostenible y Politicas Economicas en la America Latina San Jose',
Costa Rica, EDITORIAL DEI.

Rainforest Alliance Network (2003). Final Report: Project: Water Quality Coalition for
Reef Protection (2001-0336-007), National Fish and Wildlife Foundation: 13.

Ravnborg, M. H. (1998). Collective Action in Watershed Management: Expereiences
from the Andean Hillsides. Multiple-Use CPRs, Collective Action and Platforms for
Resource Use Negotiation, Crossing Boundaries, Vancouver 10-14 June 1998.

Ribot, J. C. (2002). Democratic Decentralization of Natural Resources: Institutionalizing
Popular Participation. Washington, DC, World Resources Institute.

Russian River Watershed GIS Group (2007). The Russian River Watershed GIS. 2007.

Salas Pinel, M. F. (2005). An Institutional Environment Analysis for Extreme Events in
Costa Rica. EPIC Force Proiect. San Jose.

San Diego State University Department of Geography (2007). Tijuana River Watershed
Data Clearinghouse. San Diego, Department of Geography. 2007.

Schmid, A. A. (1972). "Analytical Institutional Economics: Challenging Problems in the
Economics of Resources for a New Environment." American Journal of Environmenta_l
Economics: 893-901 .

Schmid, A. A. (2004). Conflict and Cogreration: Institutional and Behavioral Economics.
Blackwell Publishers.

Skinner, B. F. (1971). Beyond Freedom and Dignity. Alfred A. Knopf.

Slater, L. A., Jr. (1942). "The Content of Land Economics and Research Methods
Adapted to Its Needs." Journal of Farm Economics(24): 235.

The Nature Conservancy (2007). Osa Peninsula Costa Rica. TNC.

The Nature Conservancy with FUNDESPA (2002). Sistematizacion de Acuerdo
Institucionales y Acciones de Cooperacion Binacional entre Costa Rica y Panama en el
Marco de los Recursos Naturales. Panama City, Panama, The Fundacion para el
Desarrollo Sostenible de Panama.

The Vosges du Nord/Pf‘alzerwald Biosphere Reserve (2007). The Transfrontier Biosphere
Biosphere Reserve Observatory.

Thomashow, M. (1995). Ecological Identity: Becoming a Relflexive Environmentalist.
Cambridge, Massachusetts, the MIT Press.

255

Tiffler Sotomayor, R. (2006). Analisis de los Beneficios Ambientales y Sociales
derivados de la Proteccion de Cuencas usando el Mecanismo del PSA. San José, Costa
Rica.

UNCESO World Heritage Centre (2006). World Heritage List. 2006.

UNEP (2001). Parks for Peace, Protected Areas Programme. 2003.

UNEP and WCMC (1997). World Heritage List Talamanca Range-La Amistad Reserves
/ La Amistad National Park. World Heritage Sites, Protected Areas Proggamme. U. W. C.
M. Centre, UNEP-WCMC. 2006.

UNEP, W. C. M. C. (2002). World Heritage Sites, Country, Costa Rica, UNEP World
Conservation Monitoring Centre. 2002: 6.

UNESCO (2000). Solvingt_he Puzzle: The Ecosystem Approach and Biosphere
Reserves. Paris, UNESCO.

UNESCO (2002). UNESCO - MAB Reserves Directory, UNESCO - MAB. 2003.
UNESCO (2003). Biosphere Reserves in a Nutshell, UNESCO - MAB. 2003.

UNESCO (2003). Five Transboundary Biosphere Reserves in Europe. Biosphere Reserve
Technical Notes, Paris, UNESCO.

UNESCO (2005). Recommendations For the Establishment and Functioning of
Transboundary Biosphere Reserves. The MAB Programme, UNESCO.

UNESCO MAB Programme (2005). Complete List of Biosphere Reserves. UNCESO.

Water World Online (2007). BECC-NADB Board Approves Water Projects on US.-
Mexico Border. San Antonio, TX, Water World Online. 2007.

World Bank (2001). Watershed Management Program Agriculture Technical Note. W.
M. Program.

World Resources Institute (2005). World Resources 2005: The Wealth of the Poor-

Managing Ecosystems to Fight Poverty. Washington DC, World Resources Institute
(WRI) in collaboration with United Nations Development Programme, United
Nations Environment Programme, The World Bank: 268.

Yamaguchi, H. (2004). Public Participation as an Operational Strategy In The
lntemational River Basin Projects: Case Study of Costa Rica. F urou-cho, Chikusa,
Nagoya, Aichi, Japan, Graduate School of lntemational Development, Nagoya
University: 9.

256

H—

Zbiez, D. C. (1999). Transfrontier Ecosystems and Internationally Adjoining Protected
Areas. Durham, MC, Duke University: 13.

257