The provincial level government and local investors have great interest in Bunaken. Unlike most 

national parks, Bunaken is located in the provincial capital's backyard and is perceived as a key 

element of provincial economic development.  Bunaken is perceived as a magnet for money. 

That is, if Bunaken is kept intact, tourists will come in larger and larger numbers, spending 

increasing amounts of money on diving trips.  The perimeters of the park, including mainland 

and island coastlines, are considered ripe for tourism development. From provincial government 

and private investor perspectives, people using Bunaken's resources for non tourism purposes 

pose a threat to the park's ability to sustain tourism and its potential income stream.  A more 

base argument would be that these people, especially those living near the main dive areas, are 

an eye sore on valuable land.  From this limited perspective, the best management option would 

imply their elimination from the park.   

As stated previously, each stakeholder group is its own diverse community, representing its own 

wide range of people with various backgrounds, interests and aspirations.  Many of these 

groups have had little or no interaction, share little in common with other groups, and are in 

active competition with one another for resources rights.  For example, government officials and 

investors interested in expanding the tourism sector are in clear competition with fishing 

communities.  Given this diversity and competition, developing participation in an equitable and 

constructive manner posed a formidable challenge for park management. 

The conflict over local residents in and adjacent to the park derives partly from insufficient 

knowledge of the relative value sets of alternative uses of park resources.  The relative value 

sets for Bunaken indicate that local fisheries still provide the highest contribution to the 

provincial economy (US $6 million) compared to tourism (US $4.3 million) and preservation (US 

$4.1 million).  Inadequate data on fishing from the park meant that the official data recorded 

perhaps only 10 15 percent of the actual fish catch.  As a consequence, provincial decision 

makers undervalued the importance of the fishery.  This situation is perhaps aggravated by the 

manner in which benefits are distributed between the fishery and tourism sectors.  Tourism 

contributes to wider regional and national goals and benefits urban communities, while fishing 

supports rural communities. Co management of these park uses is required, and 

implementation must be made in a manner that sustains healthy coral reefs.  This will require all 

users to modify their behavior in certain circumstances. 

Very few local residents reap the benefits of tourism, and they perceive a number of problems 

associated with tourism.  Dive sites are often located in favored fishing spots.  Tourism 

development, especially along the park's northern coast, is leading to environmental 

degradation that is negatively impacting local livelihoods.  Specifically, clearing mangroves is 

leading to beach erosion, increased flooding, coral reef damage, and loss of breeding habitat for 

economically important marine species.  The national park's conservation objective to preserve 

ecological functions is being lost to economic development opportunities. 

The main goal of NRMP field work in Bunaken was to facilitate participatory and flexible 

management of the park, based on a participatory planning process for the development of the 

national park management plan.  Throughout the NRMP experience, project staff and field 

workers attempted to generate and nurture community participation.  NRMP's work in Bunaken 

became a good example of community participation in national park planning.  However, the 

success of Bunaken's participatory planning process must be measured in terms of the level of 

planning participation, management flexibility, and the subsequent participation in national park 

management implementation. 

63