Comparing images of all six stakeholders

effective. Surprisingly, despite the perceived negative opinion about STINAPA on the island only five of the Bonairean respondents think STINAPA is not doing a good job, compared to the same number of Dutch respondents. Twelve respondents of Bonaire origin think STINAPA manages the park in a correct manner which is a higher amount than the eight Dutch respondents.

Lastly, it is clear that most respondents feel that everybody should benefit equally from marine protection (73.6%), but that currently benefits are not equally spread. Half of the respondents think some people benefit more than others. Respondents found it hard to assess whether they benefit less from the protection of marine environment than others. These results indicate that there is a perception of inequality, which is in line with the fact that not all stakeholders feel the marine environment contributes to their economic welfare, well-being and happiness.

While this problem with comparing the interview and survey results applies to all elements, general remarks on the similarities and differences can be made.

Based on the comparison on the first element of ecosystem health above, it can be said that all six stakeholders are reasonably positive about the health of the coral reefs. With regard to the second element, well-being, coral reefs attract economic activity and for a majority of the public this contributes to their economic welfare. In this respect all stakeholders agree that livelihoods related to the marine environment are largely beneficial for the local community. As the research question related to this element was “what do stakeholders think about livelihoods?”, happiness was not discussed with the directly involved stakeholders, thus no comparison can be made in this regard.

What is interesting on views about power relations is that all interviewees, except Mr.

Visser, say the OLB is responsible for rules, regulations and policies, as does the majority of the respondents. When asked who has the most influence on marine park policies, most respondents answered that the NGOs do. This is in line with Mr. Visser who says STINAPA determines which activities can and cannot take place in the marine park. This contradicts the results of the power images resulting from the interviews (figure 11) which indicate that the OLB has more influence than STINAPA. Thus it seems that there is a distinction between the images of stakeholders in the governing system (STCB, STINAPA, OLB and DG) and the system-to-be-governed (Mr. Visser and the public).

It is further interesting to note that all five directly involved stakeholders have indicated that they believe the inhabitants are the biggest stakeholders of the marine park, while the majority of the public has said that they feel the inhabitants have the least influence on marine park policies.

Comparing the value images for the five directly involved stakeholders and the public shows differences as well. In the interviews, most stakeholders have said that a balance between economic development and nature conservation still needs to be found, while the majority of the public, although not overwhelming, believes the two are already sufficiently balanced. This contradicts the view of the DG, who says while the two are already balanced, an imbalance is perceived by the public. Nonetheless, almost 80% of the public has said that having regulations are needed to protect the coral reefs from human impacts, while

approximately 40% feels regulations are in the way of economic development, which reflects the need for finding a balance as indicated by the other stakeholders.

Regarding the views related to the norms element, both the directly involved stakeholders and the public are not satisfied with the rules, regulations and policies.

Furthermore, there is a difference between the perception of the directly involved stakeholders and the public about the marine park goals, which relates to the principles element. The interviewees have expressed that, while the marine park may have started with the underlying motivation of marine protection, nowadays it concerns the protection of both nature and the economy. Contrarily, the majority of the public believes that the goal of the marine park is purely for the protection of the marine environment. As the respondents were asked what the goal of the marine park is, rather than was, a comparison can only be made between their ideas of the current principles. Why it was chosen to do so will be discussed in the next chapter.

In addition, all directly involved stakeholders and the majority of the public see the relevance of having regulations in place for the protection against human influences.

Although the OLB and DG and a majority of the public believe that an economic-touristic zone is a possible option, none of the directly involved stakeholders want to dissolve the park or part of the park and most of the public disagreed with lifting a section of the marine park.

Another similarity can be found between the images of the directly involved stakeholders and the public related to the effectiveness element. The majority agrees that Bonaire’s marine environment is being conserved successfully. A slight difference can be noted about the perceptions of effectiveness of STINAPA. The interviewees have mentioned a fair few points of improvement for STINAPA, while the majority of the public (approx.

60%) believes STINAPA manages the park in a correct manner.

Lastly, all stakeholders believe not everybody benefits equally from having the marine park. Half of the public says some people benefit more than others. Interviewees have indicated that the public does not believe everybody benefits, whether directly or indirectly, or in the short- or long term. Thus according to the directly involved stakeholders, public awareness on this point is low. In addition, they believe that some people enjoy more privileges than others, culture and nature conservation sometimes collide, and payment for

nature fees is unequal. All four views on equality may explain why not all of the public thinks the marine environment contributes to their economic welfare or well-being.