Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment of the Galápagos ...datagalapagos.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/009... · seamounts, mangroves, and other key areas. b.Protect sea cucumber,

Climate and Oceanography of the Galápagos in the 21st Century │ Chapter 1

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment of the GalápagosIslands

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment of the Galápagos Islands

Climate ChangeVulnerability Assessment

of the Galápagos IslandsTechnical Report based on an

International Expert Workshop

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF


Edited by Irma Larrea Oña (WWF) and Giuseppe Di Carlo (CI)Cover Picture: Galápagos cormorant © Eunice Park / WWF Back Cover Pictures: Galápagos landscape © Eunice Park / WWF; Sally ligthfood © Eunice Park / WWFDesign and Printing: AH/editorial, [email protected]

© Copyright No. 035184 ISBN-978-9942-03-454-0

How to cite this publication:Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment of the Galápagos Islands. 2011. Eds. I.Larrea and G. Di Carlo. WWF and Conservation International, USA.

How to cite a chapter of this publication:Sachs J, Ladd N. 2011. Climate and Oceanography of the Galápagos in the 21st

Century: Expected Changes and Research Needs. In Climate Change VulnerabilityAssessment of the Galápagos Islands. 2011. Eds. I. Larrea and G. Di Carlo. WWFand Conservation International, USA.

Source must be cited in all cases. Parts of this publication can be reproduced without previous written permission if the source is cited. For the total reproduc-tion of this document, CI and WWF must be previously informed. Contents andopinions expressed in this document are exclusive responsibility of the authors.

Published in Quito, Ecuador by Conservation International and WWF © 2011.All rights reserved by CI and WWF.

PREFACE

The Galápagos Islands are among the many places in the world already experiencingthe impacts of climate change. It is predicted that climate change will cause risingsea level, higher ocean temperatures and more acidic waters. As the ocean largelyregulates the climate, changes in ocean temperatures and currents are already al-tering the frequency, intensity, and distribution of storms, floods, heat waves, andthe amount and distribution of rainfall. The unique and endemic biodiversity of theGalápagos is at risk. In addition, the loss of Galápagos biodiversity directly impactsits local human communities as their livelihoods are dependent primarily on nature-based tourism, fisheries, and agriculture, all of which are dependent on these threat-ened natural resources.

In September 2008, Conservation International and World Wildlife Fund (WWF), incooperation with the Ministry of Environment of Ecuador and the Galápagos NationalPark, conducted a vulnerability assessment to gauge the likely impacts of climatechange on marine and terrestrial ecosystems of the Galápagos and the human com-munities that are dependent upon them. The assessment evaluated the vulnerabilityof the Galápagos Islands to climate change and determined the priority actionsneeded to ensure that the Galápagos can adapt to future climate conditions.

This study –including an international workshop– was conducted as part of a year-long commemoration of the 50th anniversary of the Galápagos National Park andbrought together experts on the Galápagos marine and terrestrial environments, cli-mate scientists, social scientists, government officials and local stakeholders, allworking under a common agenda: the need to maintain and increase the resilienceof Galápagos biodiversity. This agenda turned into a real commitment under the Dec-laration of Santa Cruz, signed by the Ecuadorian Ministry of the Environment, theGalápagos National Park Service, Conservation International, WWF, the experts thatcontributed to this study and all the workshop participants.

This report contains the scientific studies that underpin the immediate and substan-tial actions needed to increase the adaptive capacity of Galápagos’ ecosystems andthe people that depend on them. Adapting to climate change is the only solution toensure ecosystems and human societies can survive and maintain their well-beingwhen exposed to climate change impacts. These studies will support the developmentof the Climate Change Adaptation Plan for the Galápagos Islands, an initiative ofthe Ministry of Environment’s Climate Change Undersecretary, integrated into theNational Climate Change Strategy of Ecuador.

Conservation International and WWF are committed to continuing our support tothe Ministry of Environment and the Galápagos National Park in their efforts to-wards ensuring that the biodiversity of the Galápagos is protected and can adapt tofuture conditions for the benefit of the Galápagos society and its future generations.

Luis Suárez Eliécer Cruz B.Executive Director Ecoregional Director

Conservation International Ecuador WWF-Galápagos Program


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This document is the result of a collective effort and would not have been possiblewithout the contributions of many people and organizations.

Conservation International and WWF would like to acknowledge the organizationswhose support made the production of this document possible. In particular, we wouldlike to thank the Charles Darwin Foundation, the University San Francisco de Quito,North Carolina State University and CIIFEN (Centro Internacional para la Investi-gación del Fenómeno de El Niño).

This study would not have been possible without the kind support and contributionof Abga. Marcela Aguiñaga, Ecuador Ministry of the Environment; the Ministry ofAgriculture, Farming, Aquaculture and Fisheries; the Galápagos National Park Serv-ice; the acting Mayor of Puerto Ayora, Ing. Virgilio Santos; David Arana, Director ofAgrocalidad-SICGAL; José Cajas Cadena, Agrocalidad; Commander Patricio Goyes,Director of INOCAR (Instituto Oceanográfico de la Armada); the Coffee ProducersAssociation and Filemón Cueva; SENPLADES (Secretaría Nacional de Planificacióny Desarrollo) and Camilo Martínez; National Institute of Galápagos (INGALA);Chamber of Tourism of Galápagos (CAPTURGAL); Stuart Banks, Charles DarwinFoundation; and Factor Verde.

We also express our gratitude to each of the workshop participants and their homeinstitutions and to the numerous staff at CI and WWF that was involved in severalstages of this project and the final workshop and provided feedback and input to sev-eral stages of the project. Particularly, we would like to thank Noémi d’Ozouville,Fernando Ortiz Quevedo, Free de Koning, Leah Bunce Karrer, Lee Hannah, JeffPrice, Mauricio Castrejón, Emily Pidgeon, Lauren Spurrier, Carolina Carrión andEmili Utreras.

Finally, Conservation International and WWF are grateful to their donors for theirgenerosity which made this study possible.


7

TAbLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction 11Giuseppe Di Carlo, Noémi d’Ozouville, Scott Henderson, Free de Koning, Irma Larrea, Fernando Ortiz, Emily Pidgeon, Lauren Spurrier and Luis Suárez

ChAPTER 1 17Climate and Oceanography of the Galápagos in the 21st Century: Expected Changes and Research NeedsJulian Sachs and S. Nemiah Ladd

ChAPTER 2 29Terrestrial Ecosystems in Galápagos: Potential Responses to Climate ChangeMandy Trueman, Lee Hannah and Noémi d’Ozouville

ChAPTER 3 47A Review of Galápagos Marine habitats and Ecological Processes under Climate Change ScenariosStuart Banks, Graham Edgar, Peter Glynn, Angela Kuhn, Jerson Moreno, Diego Ruiz, Anna Schuhbauer, John Paul Tiernan, Nathalia Tirado and Mariana Vera

ChAPTER 4 69Galápagos Marine Vertebrates: Responses to Environmental Variability and Potential Impacts of Climate ChangeDaniel M. Palacios, Sandie K. Salazar and F. Hernán Vargas

ChAPTER 5 81Dealing with Climate Change in the Galápagos: Adaptability of the Tourism and Fishing SectorsDiego Quiroga, Carlos Mena, Leah Bunce Karrer, Haruna Suzuki, Alexandra Guevara and Juan Carlos Murillo

ANNExES 109

Annex I: List of participants - International Workshop of Experts for the Analysis of the Vulnerability of Biodiversity and Human Wellbeing Associated to Climate Change in the Galápagos Islands

Annex II: Declaration of Santa Cruz


9

AcronymsCAPTURGAL Chamber of Tourism of Galápagos, acronym in SpanishCDF Charles Darwin FoundationCI Conservation InternationalCIIFEN International Center for the Research of El Niño Phenomenon,

acronym in SpanishCIMEI Inter-institutional Committee for the Control and Management of

Introduced Species, acronym in Spanish. CPUE Catch per unit effortEN El NiñoENSO El Niño-Southern OscillationEUC Equatorial UndercurrentFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate ChangeGAIAS Galápagos Institute for the Arts and Science, University San Fran-

cisco de QuitoGMR Galápagos Marine ReserveGNP Galápagos National ParkINGALA National Institute of Galápagos, acronym in SpanishINOCAR Naval Oceanographic Institute, acronym in SpanishIPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate ChangeITCZ Inter-tropical Convergence ZoneIUCN International Union for Conservation of NatureLN La NiñaMMA Marine Managed AreaMPA Marine Protected AreaNGO Non-governmental organizationNOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationOAGCM Ocean-atmosphere general circulation modelPDO Pacific Decadal Oscillation SENPLADES Ecuadorian Secretary for Planning and Development, acronym in

SpanishSICGAL Galápagos Inspection and Quarantine System, acronym in SpanishSLP Sea level pressureSSH Sea surface heightSST Sea surface temperatureUN United NationsUSFQ University San Francisco de QuitoWWF World Wildlife Fund

CHAPTER 5

Dealing with Climate Change in the Galápagos:Adaptability of the Tourism and Fishing Sectors

Diego Quiroga1, Carlos Mena

1, Leah Karrer

2, Haruna Suzuki

1,

Alexandra Guevara1and Juan Carlos Murillo

1

1. Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Galápagos Institute for the Arts and Sciences (GAIAS),Ecuador.

2. Conservation International, USA.

WW

F-U

S / S

TEV

E M

ORE

LLO

1. ExECUTIVE SUMMARY

Currently, an estimated 25,000 people live in the Galápagos Is-lands. They depend directly or indirectly on the ecosystem, whichprovides resources and supports the cultural services that in-creasingly form the basis of the local economy. By affecting keyecosystem processes and emblematic species, climate changecould influence the wellbeing of all people who live in the islands.

In this study, we analyzed the potential impacts of climate changeon tourism and fisheries:

a. While tourism in Galápagos has shifted from specialized naturetourists to generic nature tourists, nature remains the primaryreason that tourists travel to the islands. Because tourists aredrawn by a number of emblematic species, significant adverse ef-fects on the tourism industry are expected if many emblematicspecies go extinct because of climate change. Tourism is criticalto the Galápagos economy, employing a large and increasing pro-portion of residents. Loss of nature tourists would mean loss ofthe majority of international tourists, who spend more money, onaverage, than national tourists. A further negative effect of de-clining tourism is that tourism provides funds for conservationefforts, and loss of that funding may contribute to further de-clines in ecosystem health. However, people in the tourism sectorappear to have a relatively strong capacity to adapt to climatechange because of their transferable skills, including strong lan-guage and communication skills; high education levels; strong in-stitutional and social networks to support them during hardship;generally solid financial resources; access to credit; and relativelyhigh economic capital.

b. Fisheries are a small percentage of the Galápagos economy, ac-counting for less than 4% of gross product (Watkins and Cruz2007) and 3.55% of employment, according to the Galápagos Cen-sus 2006. Therefore, any adverse effects on fisheries will havelimited implications for the larger economy. However, peoplewithin the industry—especially those who fish for sea cucumber,spiny lobster, and coastal demersal fish—will be adversely af-fected. The fisheries sector has a moderately strong ability toadapt, with the advantages that fishermen have strong social andinstitutional support, access to some credit, and 90% of fishermenhave alternative livelihoods. Vulnerabilities include relativelylow levels of education, language skills, communication capacity,and existing financial resources.

We recommend the following steps tosupport tourism and fisheries in theface of climate change:

A. Enhance resiliency of species andhabitats.

For tourism:

a. Protect the species that attract in-ternational tourists to the Galápa-gos (tortoises, sea turtles, marineiguanas, penguins, blue-footedboobies, sea lions, and land igua-nas) and the ecosystems that sup-port them.

b. Develop tourism business strate-gies to address the uncertaintysurrounding climate change.

For fisheries:

a. Establish sustainable manage-ment measures for demersal fish.Improve conservation efforts forseamounts, mangroves, and otherkey areas.

b. Protect sea cucumber, spiny lob-ster, and demersal species fromoverfishing, as these species arethe most vulnerable to climatechange.

c. Establish sustainable manage-ment regulations for pelagicspecies that may not be heavily

fished at present, but could becomemore important due to climatechange.

B. Enhance people’s adaptive capacity.

a. Promote diversification of liveli-hood activities, particularly withinthe tourism sector where diversifi-cation is currently low.

b. Strengthen education, particularlyamong fishermen.

2. INTRODUCTION

Around the world, people seek to under-stand the socioeconomic implications ofclimate change, including likely effectson the economy, strategies to minimizenegative consequences, and ways toadapt to inevitable impacts. The Galápa-gos Islands provide an excellent casestudy for understanding climate changeeffects on biodiversity and human well-being because of the importance of na-ture to fisheries and tourism, therelative isolation of the islands, and thewell studied local impacts of the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO) climaticphenomenon. ENSO events could be aproxy to understand the possible effectsof climate extremes that might result

Adaptability of the Tourism and Fishing Sectors │ ChAPTER 5

83

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

from climate change, and ENSO eventscould themselves increase and becomemore intense with climate change.

Other chapters in this publication dis-cuss the effects of climate change onecosystems. In this chapter, we analyzethe potential socioeconomic effects ofthese ecosystem changes. Given the closelinkage between nature and society,these effects could be significant. Under-standing the sensitivity of the tourismand fisheries sectors to climate changeand the adaptive capacity of each to ad-dress these changes is essential for thedevelopment of present and future man-agement strategies. More broadly, thisassessment will be critical in gaining po-litical and public attention to the actionsneeded to address climate change.

The focus of this chapter is to examinehow tourism and fisheries —two of themost nature-based activities in theGalápagos Islands— will be affected byclimate change and to what extent wecan expect these industries to be able toadapt to these impacts. The chapterconcludes with recommendations forhelping these sectors, as well as thelarger Galápagos society, adapt to cli-mate change.

3. METhODS

Analyzing the potential effects of cli-mate change on economies is a rela-tively new field. In developing themethodology for this study, we focusedon two critical issues: (1) the likely ef-fects of climate-related ecosystemchanges on tourism and fisheries, and(2) the ability of these sectors to adaptto these effects. This approach comple-ments global analyses examining sensi-tivity based on (1) employment andeconomic dependence and (2) adaptive

capacity based on health, education,governance, and size of the economy(Allison et al. 2009).

Likely effects of climate-relatedecosystem changes on tourism andfisheries: For the first component of thestudy, we analyzed the level of economicand social importance of fisheries andnature-based tourism. In particular, weexamined the role of species and habi-tats in each sector to determine how thepredicted climate change effects on thesespecies and habitats, as discussed inother chapters, might affect fisheriesand tourism. To do so, we investigatedwhich species and habitats are most im-portant to (a) fisheries, based on fish-eries data and the biology of key species,and (b) tourism, based on tourists’ rea-


84

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

sons for visiting the Galápagos. We thenexamined the levels of employment andeconomic dependence associated withthese two sectors, as measured by em-ployment statistics and the percentageof the Galápagos economy attributed toeach sector. These data served as an in-dicator of the sectors’ sensitivity tochange. As part of this analysis, we alsoconsidered (a) differences between thecontributions of national versus interna-tional tourists to the economy, and (b)the contribution of fisheries and tourismto other economic sectors.

Ability of tourism and fisheries sec-tors to adapt to climate-related ef-fects: For the second component of thestudy, we examined variables indicativeof people’s ability to adapt to new eco-nomic situations. These variables in-clude: level of education, languageskills, social and institutional supportnetworks, access to alternative liveli-hoods, investment in the current sector,and Internet communication skills.

We used multiple methods to examinethese variables, which ensured triangu-lation of information, and obtainedquantitative data for statistical analy-ses and qualitative data for an in-depthunderstanding of the issues.

Literature review: To minimize dupli-cation of previous research and to max-imize our understanding of the issues,we conducted a literature review thatincluded materials from governmentagencies, private businesses, non-gov-ernmental organizations, and peer-re-viewed journals (see References andAdditional Literature).

Tourist surveys1: We interviewed 400Galápagos-bound tourists in the Quitoairport over a 5-day period using astructured interview guide. This samplewas statistically representative of

tourists visiting Galápagos during themonth of August.

2The purpose of the

interviews was to determine what at-tracted tourists to the islands. To obtaina general sense of the type of tourismpresently occurring in the Galápagos,we asked visitors what types of activi-ties (e.g. observation of wildlife, adven-ture sports, and nightlife) were centralto their visit, and also asked them toauto-identify the types of tourists theyare (e.g. tourist with general interest inand knowledge of Galápagos wildlife,tourist with specialized knowledge ofGalápagos species and habitats, andvisitor interested in adventure sports).Tourists also ranked the importance ofspecific species to their decision to visit,which allowed us to identify the speciesmost critical for tourism, and thus theimplications for Galápagos tourism asclimate change affect these species.

Key-informant interviews: We useda “snowball” sampling scheme to select35 key informants, defined as peopleknown and respected for their knowl-edge on the issue and often representa-tive of the community. Snowballsampling uses references from key in-formants to identify individuals withparticular characteristics to be inter-viewed. This method identifies a set ofinformants that form a social network.The purpose of these interviews was todetermine the adaptive capacities of thetourism and fisheries sectors based ontheir social, economic, and cultural cap-ital. We interviewed each key informantfor approximately one hour using semi-structured questionnaires.


85

1. Survey questionnaire and other information availableupon request to author.

2. The sample size is based on a total population of11,389 tourists who entered Galápagos during August2008. The results were obtained with a 95% confidencelevel.

In addition, guides, conservationists,and tourism experts attending the Cli-mate Change Vulnerability AssessmentExpert Workshop in April 2009 were in-terviewed about the types of touristspresently seen in the Galápagos andpossible effects of climate change ontourist visitation.

household survey: We conducted ahousehold survey on the three mainpopulated islands: Santa Cruz, SanCristobal, and Isabela. The purpose ofthe survey was to determine key socioe-conomic and demographic characteris-tics—at a very low level of socialorganization (i.e., household)—that de-termine adaptive capacity and vulnera-bility. The survey included 365households, which is statistically repre-sentative of the population,

3and col-

lected information on 1,397 people. Weselected street blocks randomly andthen determined, based on block size,the number of houses to be sampled.Less than 1% of the respondents re-jected the survey. This percentage waslower than expected, considering thehigh occurrence of surveys in the is-

lands as well as the 2006 GalápagosCensus,

4which might have caused re-

spondent fatigue.

4. CLIMATE ChANGEEFFECTS ONTOURISM

Other chapters in this publication ex-amine the possible effects of climatechange on different ecosystems andtheir functional biodiversity. We nowconsider how these changes may subse-quently affect tourism. First, we exam-ine the likely impacts on touristvisitation given the importance of na-ture to tourism. Then we consider theeffects of climate change on the Galápa-gos economy and the people engaged inthe tourism industry.

4.1. Sensitivity: Importanceof Nature to Tourism

The opportunity to see emblematicspecies is one of the central reasons thattourists visit the Galápagos Islands,making it critical to understand poten-tial impacts of climate change onecosystem health. In tourist surveys,81.3% of respondents ranked wildlife as“very important/may not have comeotherwise” to their decision to visit theGalápagos, and an additional 6.75%ranked wildlife as “important, althoughnot critical” to their decision (table 1).Furthermore, 17 of the 18 species in-cluded in the questionnaire wereranked as “very important/may nothave come otherwise” by at least 33% ofrespondents (table 2).


86

3. The sample was established based on a confidence in-terval of 95%, which measures the probability of cover-age for the parameters to be estimated with an errorestablished. The error was a maximum of 5%, whichmeasures the level of uncertainty in relation to the pa-rameter. A rate of “no response” of 10% was also de-fined. If we assume that the proportion of householdsto be surveyed is p and the sample achieves an estima-tion p, then: P(│p - p│<0.05)=0.95We used the following formula for the calculation ofthe sample size for a proportion:

Where: p =0.5, the value with generated maximumvariability; N is the population size, the number ofhouseholds in the province; d is the sampling error(0.05); and Z value is 95% (z=1.96). The final sample in-cludes 190 household surveys in Santa Cruz, 110 in SanCristobal and 69 in Isabela, for a total of 360. This is arepresentative sample of Galápagos households, withan over-sampling of Isabela and San Cristobal Islands,and with adjustments to Santa Cruz.

4. 2006 Galápagos Census is a de jure census that collecteddata only on permanent residents of Galápagos, regard-less of their place of residence at the time the censuswas taken. Data was therefore not collected on visitors,temporary workers, and undocumented workers.

)-(1)1(d

)-(1

2

2

2

2

2

ππ

ππ

α

α

ZN

ZNn

+−=


87

Table 1. Importance of activities to Galápagos tourists.

Not important at all/ Important but Very important/may not No answer no influence not critical have come otherwise

Viewing wildlife 2.34 6.75 81.3 9.61

Photography 3.90 23.12 60.52 12.47

Snorkeling 11.43 36.36 35.84 16.36

Beaches 18.96 38.96 28.31 13.77

Diving 42.60 21.56 16.88 18.96

Kayaking 53.51 20.52 4.42 21.56

Surfing 66.23 9.87 2.34 21.56

Nightlife 62.08 15.32 2.34 20.26

Fishing 67.53 8.31 2.08 22.08

Other 0.52 1.04 4.42 94.03

Table 2. Importance of species to Galápagos tourists.

Not important at all/ Important but Very important/may not No answer no influence not critical have come otherwise

Tortoise 4.2 16.4 65.7 13.8

Sea turtles 2.3 19.0 64.9 13.8

Marine iguana 4.4 24.4 57.1 14.0

Blue-footed booby 5.5 23.4 57.1 14.0

Penguin 4.2 26.5 55.6 13.8

Sea lion 5.7 29.9 52.7 11.7

Land iguanas 6.5 27.8 52.5 13.2

Red-footed booby 6.5 30.9 47.8 14.8

Lava lizard 10.1 30.9 43.4 15.6

Masked booby 8.1 34.8 39.5 17.7

Albatross 9.6 34.8 39.0 16.6

Galápagos hawk 10.4 34.8 38.4 16.4

Flamingo 12.7 36.4 36.4 14.5

Frigate bird 13.5 35.1 35.8 15.6

Sharks 13.2 35.6 33.8 17.4

Reef fish 10.4 38.7 33.8 17.1

Flightless cormorant 13.2 36.9 32.5 17.4

Finches 12.2 42.1 28.3 17.4

Other 0.3 0.5 1.6 97.7


88

Table 3. Importance of species to tourism; effects of El Niño events on these species; anticipated effects of climate change and overall

expected change in species population from climate change.

Species Previous El Niño effects (indicative of climate changeeffects)

Tortoise 65.7 During the 1997–98 El Niño, tor-toises drowned in floods, andsome died from falling downravines. Reproduction declineddue to increased vegetation andwet soils, which lowered soil tem-peratures and made nests unvi-able, and also due to introducedmammals (e.g. rats) and insects(e.g. fire ants) that attacked andkilled hatchlings (Snell and Rea1999).

Sea turtles 64.9 The 1982–83 El Niño led to a con-siderable drop in green turtle nest-ing at various beaches from400–800 individuals per beach tofewer than 50 individuals perbeach (CDF 2009).

Marine iguana 57.1 The 1982–83 El Niño resulted inpopulation crashes of up to 90% insome populations (Steinfartz et al.2007 in CDF 2009). Hatchling mor-tality was reportedly as high as90%, with an overall 45–70% mor-tality; populations subsequentlyrecovered with an increase in fer-tility. Llerena et al. 2004 reportednegative impacts after the 1997–98 El Niño, with recovery over fouryears (CDF 2009).

Importance totourism indicatedby % tourists whonoted species as“very important/may not havecome otherwise”

Anticipated effect of climate change (see other biodiversity chapters)

Expectedchanges

High air temperatureinduces migrations tolower elevations. Tem-perature and rainfallvariation affects thesoil rendering nestsunviable. Increase ininvasive species (e.g.fire ants) reduceshatchling survivalthrough predation.

Uncertain

Warmer temperatures(above 30°C) will affectnesting eggs, favoringthe birth of more fe-males and consequentlyadversely affecting pop-ulations. In addition, de-clines in macroalgae willlimit diets, and beacherosion from sea-levelrise will adversely affectnesting sites.

Decline

Marine iguana num-bers are expected tosuffer significantly,principally due to de-creases in macroalgae,marine iguana’s majorfood source, and de-creases in the strengthof ocean upwelling.

Decline

Source: Juan Carlos Murillo, pers. comm.


89

Species Previous El Niño effects (indicative of climate changeeffects)

Penguin 55.6 This species experienced populationcrashes of 77% and 65% after the1982–83 and 1997–98 El Niñoevents (Vargas et al. 2006 in CDF2009). By the 1987 El Niño, the pop-ulation was only approximately halfas large as it had been in the early1970s (Boersma 1998 in CDF 2009).Increased temperatures and rainfallfavor pathogens such as Plasmod-ium, which have been detected al-ready in penguins. It has beenestimated that the Galápagos pen-guin has a 30% probability of ex-tinction within the next century(Vargas et al. 2006 in CDF 2009).

Blue-footed ooby 57.1 During the 1982–83 and 1986–87 El Niños, breeding colonies wereabandoned and attempts at repro-duction were unsuccessful (Valle etal. 1987; Anderson 1989 in CDF2009).

Sea lion 52.7 While different colonies respondeddifferently to El Niño events, allcolonies experienced significantdrops in population numbers. Dur-ing the 1982–83 El Niño, high pupmortality was observed (Trillmichand Limberger 1985). Pup produc-tion in 1983 was less than 30% ofnormal on the majority of islands, although wide variation betweencolonies was also noted (Trillmichand Limberger 1985). During the1997–98 El Niño, a 50% decline inthe sea lion population was ob-served, owing to 35% mortality and 15% relocation to other sites(Salazar and Bustamante 2003 inCDF 2009).

Land iguanas 52.5 Land iguanas are adapted to sea-sonal rain variation and rely on an-nual rainfall for nesting and survivalof young (Snell and Tracy 1985).Therefore, they may be adversely affected by reductions in rainfall.Also, increases in the spatial distri-bution of tropical fire ants during El Niño events have posed a threatto land iguanas’ nesting sites.

The weakening of theEcuadorian Undercur-rent will adversely af-fect penguins andother cold-water-adapted species. Thisweakening will cause areduction of nutrientsand food for many ma-rine species.

Decline;extinctionlikely

High average air tempera-tures induce blue-footedboobies’ migrations, increase adult mortality,and reduce reproductivesuccess.

The weakening of the Ecuadorian Under-current will adversely affect cold-water-adapted species. The lowering of thethermocline couldmean that sea lions willnot be able to accesstheir sources of food.

Uncertain

Increase in rainfall hasa negative effect on re-production (i.e., fewer,smaller eggs) andgrowth of egg-layingfemales.

Decline

Uncertain

Importance to tourism indicated by %tourists whonoted species as“very important/may not havecome otherwise”

Anticipated effect of climate change (see other biodiversity chapters)

Expectedchanges

4.2. Sensitivity: AnticipatedEffects on Tourism ofChanges in EmblematicSpecies

The seven most critical species fortourism (i.e., more than 50% of touristsindicated the species are “very impor-tant/may not have come otherwise”)were tortoises, sea turtles, marineiguana, penguin, blue-footed booby, sealion, and land iguanas. All seven are ex-pected to decline due to climate change(table 3). Despite these declines, we ex-pect tourism to endure in the Galápagosbecause of tourists’ broader interest innature.

More than half of the tourists surveyedindicated that emblematic species werecritical to their decision to visit and thatthey may not have traveled to the Galá-pagos otherwise. However, the experi-ence of naturalist guides, conserva-tionists, and other experts who werepresent at the climate change workshoporganized by Conservation Interna-

tional and WWF, some of whom wereinterviewed by our research team, indi-cates that most tourists will not stopcoming if some of the emblematicspecies disappear. They noted that, un-like in the past, and although nature re-mains a priority reason for visiting,most tourists are not knowledgeableabout specific species and habitats. Thisopinion is supported by the shift towardgeneric nature tourists and tourismthat includes the Galápagos as part ofa broader package. Our tourist surveysreported three times as many genericnature tourists (34% of tourists identi-fied themselves as visitors enjoying na-ture in general) compared to expertnature tourists (13% of tourists de-scribed themselves as having more spe-cialized knowledge of certain speciesand places) (figure 1). The remaining53% comprised people traveling to theGalápagos as part of a longer trip in theregion (38%), visitors interested in ad-venture sports (3%), people visitingfriends or family (2%), visitors withouta personal interest in the Galápagos but


90

Visitor that comes tovisit friends or family

2%

Visitor that istraveling around

Ecuador or SouthAmerica and

Galapagos is a partof a larger tour

39%

Visitor enjoying naturein general, no specific

objective andknowledgeable about

certain species orplaces34%

Visitor that thas specificknowledge aboutcertain species or

places13%

Other9%

Visitor that comes foradventure sports

3%

Figure 1. Types of Galápagos tourists.

traveling with friends or family (1%),and others who either did not answer ordid not fit into any of the given cate-gories (9%).

Given the shift toward generic naturetourism, we believe that declines insome emblematic species will not resultin significant drops in tourist visitation.Rather, the Galápagos will experiencerelatively stable tourism numbers oreven an increase in visitation, as longas generic nature tourists and visitorsseeking adventure and water sportscontinue traveling to the Galápagos.During El Niño years, when speciessuch as penguins and marine iguanassuffered population crashes, guidesnoted that tourism continued largelyunaffected. Only in the event of athreshold effect in which severe climatechange leads to the extinction of many

emblematic species will there be signif-icant decreases in tourist visitation,owing mainly to a loss of generic naturetourism (i.e. not knowledgeable aboutspecies or ecosystems).

While our surveys indicate that nature-based tourism remains a large, criticalcomponent of the Galápagos tourismeconomy, non-nature tourism (tourismbased on beaches and relaxation) andadventure and sports tourism (tourismbased on activities such as kayaking orsport fishing) also draw people to the is-lands. These types of tourism may notbe as sensitive to climate change as na-ture-based tourism, and they providesome income for the local population.However, they constitute only a smallpercentage of Galápagos tourism atpresent (see table 1 and figure 1), and ifthey were to grow, the long-term impli-cations for economic viability would beadverse. As Watkins and Cruz (2007)indicate, adventure and sport tourismwill attract clients only in the short

term. Eventually, the Galápagos willneed to compete with other destinationsthat can offer the same activities atmore economical costs. While someprices could be reduced, the isolated lo-cation of the Galápagos would make itdifficult to offer truly competitive rates.Furthermore, although some nationaltourists visit the archipelago for relax-ation and the enjoyment of its beachesrather than the viewing of local wildlife,their numbers are minimal in compari-son to generic nature tourists, and someof them may begin to consider less ex-pensive beach options on the mainlandor in neighboring countries.

4.3. Sensitivity: Importanceof Tourism Sector toEconomy andEmployment

As previously discussed, sensitivity ofthe tourism sector and the larger Galá-pagos society to climate change will de-pend on the severity of impacts onemblematic species. While climatechange events that result in the de-cline or extinction of some emblematicspecies may only affect the tourismsector and the larger Galápagos econ-omy marginally, climate events result-ing in the extinction of manyemblematic species would have sweep-ing negative effects. Generic naturetourism would collapse, leading togreat losses of revenue and sources ofemployment. Currently, tourism rev-enues make up 77% of the Galápagoseconomy (Epler 2007) and total an es-timated US$65 million annually (Epler2007; Taylor et al. 2006). The tourismsector employs approximately 40% ofGalápagos residents (Kerr et al. 2004).Survey results revealed that 55.7% ofpeople involved in the tourism sectorfeel that the activity has improved


91

their income, which suggests potentialreductions in living standards iftourism were to decline.

Residents of Santa Cruz would be mostaffected by changes in visitation andspending. The tourism sector is concen-trated on this island, with 50% of SantaCruz residents employed in tourism(figure 2). Most of the live-aboard boattours, from which the greatest revenuesare generated, are based on this island,and 40% of these operations are run bylocal businesspeople (Taylor et al. 2006in Watkins and Cruz 2007). In contrastto Santa Cruz, San Cristobal is home tothe provincial government seat, and itseconomy has depended mainly on thepublic sector since the 1970s (Wilen etal. 2000). On Isabela, fishing is still animportant economic activity, althoughin recent years both San Cristobal andIsabela have opened up more to tourismwith the development of new hotels andactivities. On Isabela, according to the2006 Census, 8.6% of the populationworked in hotels and restaurants(7.91% in fishing).

According to our tourist surveys, cur-rently foreign tourists are mostly genericnature tourists, whereas Ecuadoriantourists are both generic nature and non-nature visitors. The disappearance ofmany emblematic species will mean aloss of the majority of internationaltourists, which in turn will result in sub-stantial economic losses for Galápagostourism and the local economy. Nationaltourists spend a far higher percentage oftheir budget locally with a variety of ven-dors, leading to a multiplier effect (Taylorand Yúnez-Naude 1999). On the otherhand, international tourists—who spendan average of US$4,180 in the islands(Taylor et al. 2006)—have a greater im-pact on the economy, as they tend tospend more money than the average na-tional tourist (Taylor et al. 2006). Touristinterviews revealed that 37% of foreigntourists spend between US$2,000 andUS$4,000, and 35% spend more thanUS$4,000. In contrast, 78% of nationaltourists spend less than US$2,000, andsome spend as little as US$500 in totalfor airfare, transportation, food, accom-modations and activities.


92

Santa Cruz

San Cristobal

Isabela

Other

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

Loca

tion

Number

Figure 2. Location of tourism companies in the Galápagos.

Source: Hardner and Gómez 2004.

The tourism sector would experience aloss of revenue not only in the Galápa-gos but also on the mainland. Hotelsand tours on the continent, domesticairfare between the islands and themainland, and local travel agenciesgross approximately US$100 millionannually (Epler 2007).

What is more, the effects of climatechange on the tourism economy couldextend beyond the tour operators.Tourism provides money for conserva-tion efforts, generating revenues for theGalápagos National Park, other localgovernment institutions, and local en-vironmental organizations. Since theenactment in 1988 of the Law of theSpecial Regime for the Conservationand Sustainable Development of theProvince of Galápagos (LOREG), moremoney from tourism has remained inthe archipelago as a whole, but most no-tably in political, administrative, andconservation institutions (Grenier2008). In 2006, an estimated US$36.5million was spent on the maintenanceof government institutions at variouslevels (Diaz Guevara 2006 in Watkinsand Cruz 2007). Approximately 40% ofthis budget derives from the tourismsector and the remaining 60% from thecentral government (Diaz Guevara2006 in Watkins and Cruz 2007).

Another important complication oftourism sensitivity relates to the shiftin the tourism industry from nature tonon-nature tourism. This shift is al-ready occurring and may accelerate asnature opportunities decline. Thischange might make the Galápagos lesscompetitive and could lead to an unde-sirable cycle of cost-cutting and exces-sive growth (Watkins and Cruz 2007).Climate change also can cause changesin visitation patterns. It is predictedthat as temperatures in tropical areas

such as the Galápagos increase, touristswill begin to choose destinations withhigher altitudes and latitudes wherethe climate is more attractive (Simpsonet al. 2008). Severe weather, diseases,and carbon quotas also may make trop-ical destinations less desirable.

4.4. Adaptive Capacityof the Tourism Sector

In studying the adaptive capacity ofpeople in the tourism sector, includingboat tour operators, hotel and restau-rant owners, land transportationproviders, and guides, we found thatthis sector possesses various types ofcapital that will help them adapt tochanges in tourist visitation and spend-ing. In terms of cultural capital, peoplein the tourism sector have relativelyhigh education levels in comparison tothe rest of Ecuador. Nearly 40% oftourism respondents in the householdsurvey completed high school, and aquarter have university or graduate de-grees, compared to 22% and 18% re-spectively at the national level in 2001.People with higher education levelsgenerally have more transferable skillsand can earn more in the workplace. Inaddition, they have access to better op-portunities both within and outsidetheir home countries. Surveys also re-vealed that nearly 32% of respondentsspeak at least one language in additionto Spanish. Knowing multiple lan-guages can give a person a competitiveadvantage, as it allows access to differ-ent opportunities locally and abroad.All respondents indicated that they areknowledgeable about and regularly usethe Internet.

With regard to economic capital, ourqualitative study revealed that peoplein the tourism sector have relatively


93

solid financial standing. In addition toowning a house in the islands, somealso have a house on the mainland.Banking and access to credit throughformal institutions also are highly im-portant in terms of their adaptive ca-pacity. In the qualitative study, allinformants reported having a checkingaccount and access to credit in theBanco del Pacífico (Pacific Bank).Some people in the tourism sector haveeven made alliances with individualsoutside of the islands to access fundsfor implementing their tourism proj-ects.

Many tourism workers have large so-cial networks that include family andfriends in the islands and on the conti-nent. Some have international ties andfriends in different countries. Ourstudy also showed that many people inthe tourism sector belong to a formal

tourism association that certifies themto perform activities as tour guides,hotel owners, or tourism agents; all ofthese extended networks provide emo-tional and economic support. However,the tourism sector has few stronggrassroots organizations that couldprovide assistance, information, andstrategies to help people to deal withclimate change. There are some excep-tions, such as grassroots networks oftour guides.

Many people involved in tourism in theGalápagos have alternative livelihoods(figure 3), indicating a general adaptivecapacity. However, the picture is differ-ent when one looks at specific islands.Thus, one serious disadvantage for theadaptive capacity of tourism is thatmore than 56% of people in tourism onSanta Cruz—where tourism is concen-trated—do not have alternative sources


94

Has at least one other economic activity 35 %65 %

Only employed in tourism

Table 4. Percentage of tourism workers engaged in alternative economic activities.

Alternative Economic Activities San Cristobal Isabela Santa Cruz

Do not have other economic activity 11.1 N/A 56.0

Owner of business 11.1 N/A 4.0

Manual labor N/A 11.1 N/A

Professional labor N/A N/A 8.0

Service or construction N/A 11.1 N/A

Taxi driver or marine transportation 11.1 33.3 N/A

Commerce N/A N/A 16.0

Other 66.7 44.4 20.0

Figure 3. Livelihood dependency of people employed in tourism industry.

of income. The lack of alternative liveli-hoods makes them heavily dependenton the tourism industry and limits theiradaptive capacity. Among those onSanta Cruz with another source of in-come were hotel owners who also owneda small boat, store, or business. In con-trast, people in the tourism sector onSan Cristobal and Isabela are better offin this respect, as 89% on San Cristobaland 100% on Isabela have a secondsource of income. Still, some of theseSan Cristobal and Isabela residentswith alternative livelihoods will be af-fected to some extent because secondaryjobs in transportation and local busi-nesses have tourists as part of theirclientele.

5. CLIMATE ChANGEEFFECTS ONFIShERIES

In this section, we consider the poten-tial impacts on fisheries of biodiversitychanges resulting from climate change.First, we analyze the importance offisheries to the economy and employ-ment in the Galápagos. Next, we exam-ine the likely impacts of climate changeon fish stocks, discussing species inorder of importance to employment andthe local economy. Finally, we considerthe adaptive capacity of the fishermenand the industry.

5.1. Sensitivity: Importanceof Fishing Industry tothe Economy andEmployment

Fisheries by nature are highly depend-ent on marine ecosystem health. Con-sequently, it is expected that climatechange effects (positive or negative) on

ecosystem health will directly affect

this industry. Fishing intensity and

the number of fishermen in the Galá-

pagos increased from the late 1990s to

the early 2000s, driven by demand

from a growing population, a growing

tourism industry, and international

markets. Sea cucumbers are still

highly prized by Asian markets as food

and aphrodisiacs, and though illegal,

shark finning is practiced to satisfy

Asian markets. Lobsters are mainly

exported to the United States, but they

also are consumed within the islands

and on the mainland. The establish-

ment and growth of locally based

tourism over the last three decades

also has created a high demand for fish

and other marine species such as slip-

pery lobster, octopus, and conch.

Between 1999 and 2006, the number of

registered fishermen increased from

795 to 1,006 (figure 1), and the fishing

fleet doubled. It is estimated that cur-

rently there are between 436 and 466

active fishermen (Moreno 2007 in Cas-

trejón 2008). Fisheries in the Galápa-

gos account for an annual income of

approximately five to six million dol-

lars (Taylor et al. 2006). Isabela is

most dependent on fishing for employ-

ment, but even there fishing consti-

tutes only 7.91% of employment (INEC

2006).

Presently, the economic significance of

this sector compared to others, includ-

ing tourism, is small (table 5). Fishing

constitutes less than 4% of the Galá-

pagos economy (Watkins and Cruz

2007), and employs 4.92% of people in

San Cristobal, 7.91% in Isabela and

2.29% in Santa Cruz. In all three is-

lands, fishing is one of the least com-

mon sources of employment (INEC

2006).


95


96

1971

Num

ber

of

Fish

erm

en

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

156

156

392

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0

Year

Fishermenregistered inthe GalapagosNational Park

SeaCucumberfishermen

Lobsterfishermen

455 457

613682

978 997 1001 1006

1115

919

795 834

Table 5. Economic activities in San Cristobal, Isabela, and Santa Cruz Islands.

Economic activity % of population employed in sectorSan Cristobal Isabela Santa Cruz

Fishing 4.92 7.91 2.29

Agriculture 6.38 11.74 8.26

Hotels and restaurants 5.03 8.28 7.41

Construction 7.24 8.16 7.35

Commerce 10.09 10.63 11.67

Transportation and logistics 12.13 7.66 19.55

Public administration and defense 25.43 16.69 8.49

Teaching 7.99 5.56 4.98

Manufacturing 3.92 3.34 5.12

Others 16.87 20.03 24.88

Source: 2006 Galápagos Census.

Figure 4. Numbers of registered fishermen in Galápagos National Park and active fishermen in the sea cucumber and lobster fisheries.

5.2. Sensitivity: Species thatWill be Most Affected

In this study, we considered the extent

to which commercially important fish

species in the Galápagos may be af-

fected by climate change. In order of

economic importance based on total

landing value, the main marine re-

sources in the Galápagos are sea cu-

cumber (Isostichopus fuscus), spiny red

and green lobsters (Panulirus penicilla-

tus and P. gracilis), and a variety of de-

mersal white fish of the Serranidae

family (mero, bacalao, camotillo). Large

pelagic fish such as wahoo and tuna are

important for local consumption, and

small pelagic fish such as mullets, sar-

dines, and mackerel are important for

bait. Local people also consume other

marine species, such as slippery lobster

and octopus.

All of these commercially importantspecies are either overfished or theirstatus is unknown (table 6). Overfish-ing already has had an adverse effect onecosystem health, and any negative ef-fects of climate change, such as thewarming of ocean waters, could worsenthe decline of stocks. The extent towhich any positive effects of climatechange, such as expansion of tropicalspecies’ ranges, may compensate for thedeclines is unclear. One of the processescritical for the maintenance of manyfisheries and one that may be threat-ened by climate change is the couplingof El Niño and La Niña. Many marinespecies reproduce and hatch their larvaeduring El Niño and need the cold, nutri-ent-rich currents of La Niña for larvaeto survive. A decoupling of these twoevents caused by climate change mayhave adverse effects on various speciesof commercial importance.


97

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF


98

Tab

le 6

. Ec

onom

ic im

por

tanc

e, m

arke

t dem

and

s, c

urre

nt s

tatu

s,

and

exp

ecte

d c

limat

e ch

ang

e ef

fect

s on

com

mer

cial

ly im

por

tant

fish

erie

s in

the

Gal

ápag

os.

Spec

ies

(in o

rder

of

econ

omic

impo

rtan

ce)

Impo

rtan

ce to

em

ploy

men

tin

fish

erie

s (an

d/or

to

econ

omy)

Mar

ket d

eman

dsCu

rren

t sta

tus

Expe

cted

clim

ate

chan

geeff

ects

Ove

rall

effec

t

Sea

cucu

mbe

rD

eclin

ing

num

ber o

f fish

er-

men

, but

still

em

ploy

s 25%

of fi

sher

men

. Bet

wee

n Ju

ly20

08 a

nd Ja

nuar

y 20

09,

only

368

fish

erm

en o

ut o

f apo

ssib

le 1

,200

regi

ster

edfis

herm

en p

artic

ipat

ed in

the

sea

cucu

mbe

r fish

erie

s,w

hich

is th

e lo

wes

t num

ber

of fi

sher

men

sinc

e th

e 19

99se

ason

.

Hig

hly

priz

ed b

y A

sian

mar

-ke

ts.

Ove

rfish

ed, a

nd c

atch

is d

e-cl

inin

g. In

200

9, th

e fis

hery

was

clo

sed

due

to lo

w p

op-

ulat

ion

dens

ities

.

War

mer

wat

ers a

ndst

rong

er fl

ow fr

om th

eIn

do-P

acifi

c m

ay fa

vor r

e-cr

uitm

ent o

f sea

cuc

umbe

ran

d lo

bste

r pop

ulat

ions

fol-

low

ing

stro

ng E

l Niñ

oev

ents

. How

ever

, ove

rfish

-in

g m

ay o

ccur

bec

ause

ac-

cess

will

be

easi

er a

s oth

ersp

ecie

s die

out

.

Incr

ease

s aft

er E

l Niñ

oev

ents

, but

pos

sibl

e su

bse-

quen

t dec

lines

.

Spin

y re

d an

d gr

een

lobs

ters

Dec

linin

g nu

mbe

r of fi

sher

-m

en, b

ut st

ill e

mpl

oys 2

5%of

regi

ster

ed fi

sher

men

(384

indi

vidu

als)

.

Mai

nly

expo

rted

to th

e U

.S.

Als

o co

nsum

ed in

the

Gal

á-pa

gos a

nd m

ainl

and

Ecua

dor.

Ove

rfish

ed, b

ut b

ette

rm

anag

ed th

an se

a cu

cum

-be

r. In

200

9, lo

wer

pric

esfo

r spi

ny lo

bste

r mea

nt th

atth

ese

fishe

ries w

ere

not a

sim

port

ant.

The

stoc

ks se

emto

be

in a

pro

cess

of r

ecov

-er

y.

War

mer

wat

ers a

ndst

rong

er fl

ow fr

om th

eIn

do-P

acifi

c m

ay fa

vor r

e-cr

uitm

ent o

f sea

cuc

umbe

ran

d lo

bste

r pop

ulat

ions

fol-

low

ing

stro

ng E

l Niñ

oev

ents

. How

ever

, ove

rfish

-in

g m

ay o

ccur

bec

ause

ac-

cess

will

be

easi

er a

s oth

ersp

ecie

s die

out

.

Incr

ease

s aft

er E

l Niñ

oev

ents

, but

pos

sibl

e su

bse-

quen

t dec

lines

.

Slip

pery

lobs

ter

Unk

now

n.In

cide

ntal

cat

ch o

f spi

nylo

bste

r.U

nkno

wn.

War

mer

wat

ers a

ndst

rong

er fl

ow fr

om th

eIn

do-P

acifi

c m

ay fa

vor r

e-cr

uitm

ent o

f sea

cuc

umbe

ran

d lo

bste

r pop

ulat

ions

fol-

low

ing

stro

ng E

l Niñ

oev

ents

. How

ever

, ove

rfish

-in

g m

ay o

ccur

bec

ause

ac-

cess

will

be

easi

er a

s oth

ersp

ecie

s die

out

.

Incr

ease

s aft

er E

l Niñ

oev

ents

, but

pos

sibl

e su

bse-

quen

t dec

lines

.


99

Nea

r-co

asta

l dem

ersa

lfis

h (e

.g. w

hite

fish

, G

aláp

agos

gro

uper

[b

acal

ao],

[mer

o], c

od a

ndse

abas

s [ca

mot

illo]

, and

som

e co

asta

l pel

agic

s)

In 2

009,

the

fishe

ry w

asve

ry im

port

ant f

or lo

cal

fishe

rmen

’s in

com

e. F

ishi

ngis

par

ticul

arly

impo

rtan

tbe

twee

n Se

ptem

ber a

ndM

arch

bec

ause

of d

eman

dfo

r the

se fi

sh in

mai

nlan

dEc

uado

r.

Unk

now

n.Po

ssib

ly o

vere

xplo

ited.

De-

mer

sals

hav

e de

clin

ed in

shal

low

coa

stal

regi

ons,

re-

sulti

ng in

fish

ing

atse

amou

nts a

nd in

dee

per

wat

ers.

Hig

her t

empe

ratu

res a

reex

pect

ed to

cau

se ra

nge

redu

ctio

ns in

col

d-ad

apte

dsp

ecie

s.

Dec

lines

.

Larg

e pe

lagi

c fis

h (e

.g.

wah

oo, y

ello

wfin

tuna

,bi

g-ey

ed tu

na, s

wor

dfish

,sh

arks

, and

rays

)

Impo

rtan

t for

fish

erm

en’s

inco

me

year

roun

d.

Con-

sum

ed b

y th

e lo

cal p

opul

a-tio

n an

d by

tour

ists

inre

stau

rant

s and

tour

boa

ts.

Unk

now

n.In

crea

sing

pre

ssur

e as

fish

-er

men

shift

from

dem

ersa

lsp

ecie

s to

pela

gics

. Big

-ey

ed tu

na o

vere

xplo

ited.

Yello

wfin

and

wah

oo c

lose

to c

apac

ity.

Thes

e sp

ecie

s hav

e affi

nity

for w

arm

er te

mpe

ratu

res,

so th

eir p

opul

atio

ns m

aysh

ift. P

rote

ctio

n fro

m in

-du

stria

l fish

ing

fleet

als

ow

ill e

nsur

e st

abili

ty.

Incr

ease

s.

Min

or b

enth

ic re

sour

ces

(e.g

. oct

opus

, chu

ro, a

ndca

ncha

lagu

a)

Impo

rtan

t for

loca

l con

-su

mpt

ion.

Exa

ct n

umbe

rsun

know

n.

Incr

easi

ng d

eman

d fro

mto

uris

ts a

nd lo

cals

.U

nkno

wn.

In

tert

idal

hab

itats

are

ex-

pect

ed to

be

affec

ted

byw

arm

ing

wat

ers a

nd la

ck o

fpr

oduc

tive

envi

ronm

ent.

Dec

lines

.

Shar

ks

Diffi

cult

to e

stim

ate,

as fi

sh-

ing

shar

ks is

ille

gal. T

here

are

repo

rts f

rom

inte

rvie

ws

with

fish

erm

en, p

artic

ular

lyin

Isab

ela,

that

shar

ks a

rean

impo

rtan

t sou

rce

of in

-co

me

for s

ome

fam

ilies

of

fishe

rmen

invo

lved

in th

eca

ptur

e an

d tr

ade

of sh

ark

fins.

Freq

uenc

y un

know

n bu

tre

late

d to

the

dem

and

inEa

st A

sian

mar

kets

.

Spec

ific

data

una

vaila

ble

beca

use

capt

ure

is il

lega

l.U

nkno

wn.

Unk

now

n.

Spec

ies

(in o

rder

of

econ

omic

impo

rtan

ce)

Impo

rtan

ce to

em

ploy

men

tin

fish

erie

s (an

d/or

to

econ

omy)

Mar

ket d

eman

dsCu

rren

t sta

tus

Expe

cted

clim

ate

chan

geeff

ects

Ove

rall

effec

t

Sea Cucumber

This species already is heavily exploited(figure 5) due to overfishing, and it isexpected to decline further with climatechange, although brief post-El Niño in-creases may occur. While historicallysea cucumber has been the most prof-itable fishery in the Galápagos, thenumber of people fishing for sea cucum-ber has declined substantially, mainlybecause of declining catch per unit ef-fort (CPUE). Between July 2008 andJanuary 2009, only 368 fishermen par-ticipated in the sea cucumber fishery,which was the lowest since the 1999season (Murillo 2009). In 2008, fisher-men in this fishery obtained revenuesof approximately US$1,500 per month(Murillo 2009). Household surveys re-veal that when the fishery was open,21% of San Cristobal fishermen, 19% ofIsabela fishermen, and 23% of SantaCruz fishermen participated in the fish-ery, although not exclusively. The sur-vey data indicate that fishermen wouldbe affected equitably from all three is-lands if climate change were to drasti-cally reduce this fishery.

Spiny Lobster

Like the sea cucumber, spiny lobster de-clined in the early 2000s due to over-fishing (figure 6). However, spinylobster populations have shown signs ofrecovery in the past two years due inpart to effective management by theGalápagos National Park (Murillo2009). Nonetheless, future climatechange events could threaten thisspecies, although brief post-El Niño in-creases may occur. While this is the sec-ond-most profitable fishery in theGalápagos, there are currently only 384fishermen and 151 fishing boats in thisfishery (Murillo 2009). The surveyshowed that 16% of San Cristobal fish-ermen, 19% of Isabela fishermen, and23% of Santa Cruz fishermen partici-pate in this fishery when it is open, andobtain revenues of approximatelyUS$1,800 per month during the fishingseason (Murillo 2009). All of the fisher-men who participate in the spiny lob-ster fishery also participate in the seacucumber fishery.


100

Year

OpenAccess

Ban

Ban

Co-Management

1993

1992

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Cat

ch (

10

ind

ivid

ual

s)6

10

8

6

4

2

0

Figure 5. Annual catch of sea cucumber in the Galápagos Marine Reserve from 1992 to 2007.

Source: Castrejón 2008.

Slippery Lobster

The slippery lobster is an incidentalcatch of the spiny lobster fishery. Thus,the largest level of exploitation of theslippery lobster takes place during thespiny lobster fishing season from Sep-tember through December. During therest of the year, only a small number offishermen fish for slippery lobster. Thepresent state of the slippery lobsterfishery is uncertain; no data exist onthe density of the population. Neverthe-less, fishermen may take a greater in-terest in the capture and marketing ofthe slippery lobster due to overexploita-tion of the spiny lobster fishery. Likethe sea cucumber and spiny lobster,this species is expected to experiencepost-El Niño increases. However, as inall of these fisheries, climate changemay transform some of the key ecologi-cal conditions, such as the coupling ofEl Niño and La Niña.

Coastal Demersal Fish (Primarily

Grouper)

Coastal demersal fish populations havebeen overexploited, and fishing effortsare shifting to deep-sea demersal species

(e.g. mero, brujo, and camotillo). Thesespecies are expected to decline furtherdue to climate change-induced warmingof waters. Fishermen in these fisherieshave reported monthly revenues of ap-proximately US$700 year-round, com-pared with US$1,500 per month for seacucumber and lobster. There are approx-imately 200 fishermen in demersal fish-eries, and a small portion of thesefishermen also are involved in the seacucumber and lobster fisheries (Murillo2009). In 2009, 11% of San Cristobalfishermen, 23% of Isabela fishermen,and 14% of Santa Cruz fishermen werefishing for grouper, indicating that amodest portion of fishermen would be af-fected if demersals declined further.

Large Pelagic Fish (e.g. Wahoo,

Yellowfin Tuna, Big-Eye Tuna, Mahi

Mahi, and Swordfish)

These species also are under pressure,although their status is less clear.Wahoo landings increased from 7 tonsin 1997 to 36 tons in 1998 and 39 tonsin 1999. In contrast, tuna landings de-clined from 41 tons in 1997 to 10 tonsin 1998 and 4.3 tons in 1999 (Fun-dación Natura 2002). One species of


101

1960

Lo

bst

er T

ails

(M

etri

c To

ns)

120

100

80

60

40

20

0

1962

1964

1966

1968

1970

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

1998

2000

2002

2004

2006

YearSource: Castrejón 2008.

Figure 6. Historical annual captures of spiny lobster (P. penicillatus and P. gracilis) in the Galápagos Marine Reserve from 1960–2006.

tuna, Thunnus obesus, which is veryeconomically important, is listed asvulnerable (Castrejón 2008). Shiftsinto this industry by demersal fisher-men are expected to intensify pressure.Climate change actually may result inpopulation increases due to the species’affinity to warmer waters, althoughany such increase may be eclipsed byfishing pressure. Qualitative inter-views about previous El Niño eventsindicate that wahoo and mahi mahicaptures increased. As pelagic fish arehighly migratory, they could be moreresilient to a reduction of upwelling. Ashift to open-water fisheries, if properlymanaged, could possibly strengthen theresilience of the coastal ecosystem, pro-vided that overall fishing pressuredoes not increase (CDF 2009). Thesame 200 fishermen in demersal fish-eries also participate in pelagic fish-eries (Murillo 2009). In 2009, 40% ofSan Cristobal fishermen and 29% of Is-abela fishermen were fishing for tunaand wahoo, and 14% of Santa Cruzfishermen were fishing for wahoo.Tuna and wahoo are year-round fish-eries, and interviews found that fisher-

men earn approximately US$700 per

month for tuna and US$600 per month

for wahoo. The pelagic fishery is be-

coming increasingly popular, including

a shift to sport fishing. It may be a vi-

able alternative to the heavily over-

fished sea cucumber, lobsters, and

demersal fish, as long as the CPUE is

capped at a sustainable level to avoid

declines such as those already ob-

served for tuna. Currently, an esti-

mated 30% of the 200 fishermen in

demersal and pelagic fisheries also are

involved in the sea cucumber and

spiny lobster fisheries (Murillo 2009).

Minor Benthic Resources (e.g.

Octopus, Churo, and Canchalagua)

Churo (marine snails), octopus, and

canchalagua (chitons) are captured

throughout the year and are increas-

ingly being consumed by tourists and

local residents. Presently, there is no

regulation on the level of exploitation

of these fisheries. The intertidal zone,

in which these resources thrive, is ex-

pected to be one of the areas most ad-

versely affected by climate change due

to changes in temperature and salinity

and a decrease in pH.

Sharks

According to interviews, illegal shark

fishing is practiced by some fishermen

from all of the islands, although it

seems to be more common among fish-

ermen in Isabela. This practice is im-

portant as a source of income for some

fishing families. Data are not available

on the frequency of illegal shark fish-

ing or the effects of climate change on

sharks, but this and other illegal activ-

ities lower the resilience of the ecosys-

tem, which can exacerbate negative

climate change effects.


102

LEE

POST

ON

/ W

WF

5.3. Adaptive Capacity ofthe Fishing Industry

We found that Galápagos fishermenhave characteristics that indicate a mod-erately strong ability to adapt to change.In terms of social capital, fishermenhave strong social networks within theislands and on the continent. In addi-tion, fishermen are members of coopera-tives that provide institutional supportwhen negotiating the fishing calendarand the total allowable catch of specieswith the GNP. Both of these networkscan be critical support systems duringtimes of hardship. With regard to eco-nomic capital, fishermen are able to ob-tain loans easily, which can providethem with alternative economic invest-ment opportunities in times of change.

Perhaps the most important adaptivestrategy of fishermen is that they arenot specialized. Galápagos fishermencan engage in a wide variety of fish-eries inside the GMR, providing themwith more economic security. Further-more, 90% of fishermen in Galápagoshave alternative livelihood activitiesthat supplement their income fromfishing, though patterns vary by is-land. According to our interviews,when past El Niño events caused cer-tain species to decline, some fishermenshifted to other activities, such as driv-ing taxis or working in their own smallbusinesses. Examples of other alterna-tive economic activities for fishermenare agriculture, construction, tourism,and auto repair.

Despite these advantages, however,our surveys show that, in general, fish-ermen have low education levels andfew speak other languages besidesSpanish. Furthermore, only a smallpercentage of fishermen are knowl-edgeable about the Internet.

6. CONCLUSIONS ANDRECOMMENDATIONS:ADAPTATION TOCLIMATE ChANGE INThE GALÁPAGOS

6.1. Conclusions

Given tourism’s heavy dependence onnature and the affinity of tourists foremblematic species, the tourism indus-try may be hard hit if climate changeleads to the extinction of many of thesespecies. A potential decline in genericnature tourism, which currently is themost prevalent type of tourism in the is-lands, is a significant concern becausetourism is extremely important to theGalápagos economy and employment.Generic nature tourism driven by inter-national tourists provides far greaterrevenues than non-nature tourism, andit provides financial support for conser-vation efforts. The residents of SantaCruz, where tourism is concentrated,are heavily dependent on generic na-ture tourism for their livelihoods. How-ever, Santa Cruz residents’ education,language skills, institutional and socialsupport networks, solid financial stand-ing, access to credit, and Internet andcommunication skills will help themshift livelihoods.

Fisheries are highly dependent onhealthy marine ecosystems. Conse-quently, it is expected that climatechange effects—whether positive ornegative—on ecosystem health will di-rectly affect this industry. In particular,sea cucumber, spiny lobster, andcoastal demersal fish, which are al-ready in decline due to overfishing, willlikely decline even further as warmingwaters reduce their habitat range andmake them more accessible to fishing.


103

Although pelagic fish species may be af-fected positively by climate change, thepotential benefits are likely to be out-weighed by a shift in fishing pressurefrom coastal demersals to large pelagicfish. Because of the low contribution offishing to the economy (less than 4%)and employment in Galápagos, how-ever, any changes in the industry arenot expected to have a significant im-pact on the Galápagos economy and em-ployment. In addition, 90% of fishermenhave alternative livelihoods, access tocredit, and strong social and institu-tional networks, so they are in a moder-ately good position to adapt to climatechange, despite their limited educationand communication skills.

6.2. RecommendationsA. Enhance resiliency of species and

habitats

We recommend enhancing the re-siliency of the species and habitats atrisk to climate change, particularlythose that are critical to tourism andfisheries.

For Tourism

a. Protect the species that attract inter-national tourists to the Galápagos:tortoises, sea turtles, marine iguana,penguin, blue-footed booby, sea lion,and land iguanas.

b. Develop strategies to address the un-certainty surrounding climate change.For example, key emblematic speciesmay decline due to climate change,and marketing and promotion cam-paigns should be designed to accom-modate these changes in a mannerthat continues to attract interna-tional tourists and maintains theimage of Galápagos as a unique des-tination.

For Fisheries

a. Establish sustainable managementmeasures for demersal fish, whichare at particular risk from climatechange, in new areas such asseamounts, but also in coastal wa-ters. Study and improve conserva-tion efforts for seamounts,mangroves, and other key areas solocal people can use the areas in asustainable manner. These areashave special importance for the re-gion’s biodiversity, but they havebeen little studied and local fisher-men are increasingly exploiting theresources that can be found there.The vulnerability of these areas willincrease with climate change.

b. Place an emphasis on protecting seacucumber, spiny lobster, and demer-sal species from overfishing, as theyare the most vulnerable to climatechange.

c. Establish sustainable managementregulations for pelagic species thatmay not be heavily fished currentlybut could become more important inthe future due to climate change.

B. Enhance people’s adaptive capacity.

Much can be done to enhance the adap-tive capacities of people in the tourismand fisheries sectors, along with thelarger Galápagos society. The challengefor authorities, conservationists, andcommunities is to implement win-winapproaches that favor conservation butalso reinforce the resilience of humancommunities.

a. Promote diversification of economiclivelihood activities, particularlywithin the tourism sector where di-versification is currently low. It is es-sential to develop sustainableeconomic activities that are not di-rectly related to tourism and that


104

can bring an alternative source of in-come to the local population to re-duce dependency on the tourismsector. This is especially true in thecase of Santa Cruz but also to somedegree in San Cristobal. Fishermenand tourism workers could be in-cluded in conservation activities—monitoring of illegal fisheries,eradication of invasive species, andcleaning of the Park’s marine andterrestrial areas—to increase thenumber of livelihood activities. Withsome training, local people also couldparticipate in research activities asfield assistants. Some people couldbecome more involved in agriculture,especially organic agriculture, as ispresently taking place with coffee.

b. Strengthen education, particularlyamong fishermen. As is true in manyother parts of Ecuador, people livingin the Galápagos have a low level ofeducation, which limits adaptive ca-pacity. This is particularly true forGalápagos fishermen, who have oneof the lowest education levels of all ofthe sectors. Education must be en-hanced because people who havemore education are better equippedto deal with change in general andwith climate change in particular, asthey have more options to migrate orshift to other economic activities. Ahigh-quality education that in-creases both general knowledge andspecialized skills is essential to pre-pare the society for uncertainty andto lower general vulnerabilities. Stu-dents must be prepared to handlespecific issues while simultaneouslylearning how to adapt flexibly to achanging world.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research was carried out withinthe context of the Galápagos ClimateChange Vulnerability Assessment Proj-ect led by Conservation International inpartnership with WWF, the GalápagosNational Park, the Charles DarwinFoundation, and the Ecuadorian Min-istry of Environment. The results of thiswork were presented at the Vulnerabil-ity Assessment Workshop held in April2009 in Galápagos and will be inte-grated into adaptation recommenda-tions. The aim of the GalápagosClimate Change Vulnerability Assess-ment Project was to provide key scien-tific information on the vulnerability ofGalápagos to climate change, includingresearch on oceanography, vulnerabil-ity of marine and terrestrial species andecosystems, and possible impacts of cli-mate change on key socio-economic sec-tors.

We gratefully acknowledge the finan-cial support of Conservation Interna-tional and WWF.

We would like to mention several indi-viduals who have provided valuablefeedback throughout this study: Noémid’Ozouville, Giuseppe Di Carlo, EliécerCruz, Irma Larrea, Lauren Spurrier,Mauricio Castrejón and Ulf Hardter.

We also would like to thank HarryReyes for contributing new fisheriesdata from the Galápagos National Park.

Finally, we would like to thank PaolaPozo, Tania Quisingo, and Sara Ro-dríguez for their assistance in collectingprimary and secondary information.


105

REFERENCES

Allison EH, Perry AL, Badjeck MC, Adger WN, Brown K, Conway D, Halls AS, Pilling GM,Reynolds JD, Andrew NL. 2009. Vulnerability of national economies to the impacts ofclimate change on fisheries. Fish and Fisheries 10: 173-196.

Castrejón M. 2008. El sistema de co-manejo pesquero de la Reserva Marina de Galápa-gos: situación actual, retos y perspectivas de cambio. Fundación Charles Darwin.

Charles Darwin Foundation. 2009. Galápagos and climate change. Final Technical Re-port.

Epler B. 2007. Tourism, the economy, population growth and conservation in Galápagos.Santa Cruz, Galápagos: Charles Darwin Foundation Internal Report.Galápagos.

Fundacion Natura. 2002. Galápagos Report 2001-2002. Santa Cruz, Galápagos. Grenier C. 2008. Capacidad de carga turística/huella geográfica del turismo en centros

poblados de Galápagos. Estudio de Capacidad de Carga Turística con Base Terrestreen la Provincia de Galápagos- Proyecto “Desarollo Sostenible de los Sectores Produc-tivos de Galápagos”. Santa Cruz, Galápagos: Final Report for Banco Interamericanode Desarrollo and Cámara Provincial de Turismo de Galápagos. Report No. ATN-ME-9410-EC.

Hardner J and Gomez P. 2004. Incorporación de la mano de obra del sector pesqueroartesanal en las actividades turísticas de Galápagos. Palo Alto (CA): Hardner andGullison Associates, LLC.

Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos (INEC). 2006 Galápagos Census. Available athttp://www.inec.gov.ec.

Kerr S, Cardenas S, Hendy J. 2004. Migration and the environment in the Galápagos: Ananalysis of economic and policy incentives driving migration, potential impacts frommigration control, and potential policies to reduce migration pressure. Motu Eco-nomic and Public Policy Research.

Murillo JC. 2009. Efectos del manejo de la RMG en los aspectos económicos y de orde-namiento de la actividad pesquera artesanal de Galápagos. Unpublished report forthe Galápagos National Park. San Cristobal, Galápagos.

Snell H and Rea S. 1999. The 1997-98 El Niño in Galápagos: Can 34 years of data estimate120 years of pattern? Noticias de Galápagos: a biannual news publication about sci-ence and conservation in Galápagos, Galápagos National Park Service and theCharles Darwin Research Station: 11.

Simpson MC, Gössling S, Scott D, Hall CM, Gladin E. 2008. Climate Change Adaptationand Mitigation in the Tourism Sector: Frameworks, Tools and Practices. Paris, France:UNEP, University of Oxford, UNWTO, WMO.

Taylor JE and Yúnez-Naude A. 1999. Estudio Económico de Galápagos. Inter-AmericanDevelopment Bank. Unpublished report.

Taylor JE, Stewart M, Hardner J. 2006. Estimating the Importance of the Tourism andFisheries Sectors in the Galápagos Economy. University of California at Davis.

Taylor JE, Stewart M, Hardner J. 2006. Ecotourism and Economic Growth in the Galápa-gos: An Island Economy-wide Analysis. Davis (CA): Department of Agricultural andResource Economics, University of California, Davis. Working Paper No. 06-001.

Wilen JE, Stewart M, Layton DF. 2000. Economic Analysis of the Galápagos Marine Re-serve Resources Management Plan. Davis (CA): University of California, Davis.

Watkins G and Cruz F. 2007. Galápagos en Riesgo: Un Análisis Socioeconómico de laSituación Actual en el Archipiélago. Santa Cruz, Galápagos: Fundación Charles Dar-win. Galápagos.


106

ADDITIONAL LITerATUre

Adger WN. 2003. Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climate change. Eco-nomic Geography 79: 387-404.

Adger WN, Agrawala S, Mirza MMQ, Conde C, O’Brien K, Pulhin J, Pulwarty R, Smit B, andTakahashi K. 2007. Assessment of adaptation practices, options, constraints and ca-pacity. Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution ofWorking Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panelon Climate Change. Parry ML, Canziani OF, Palutikof JP, van der Linden PJ and Han-son CE, Eds. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 717-743.

Anderson DJ. 1989. Differential responses of boobies and other seabirds in the Galápa-gos to the 1986-87 El Niño-Southern Oscillation event. Marine Ecology Series52:209-216.

Boersma, PD. 1998. The 1997-1998 El Niño: Impacts on penguins. Penguin Conservation11 (3):10-11

Cramer W, Bondeau A, Schaphoff S, Lucht W, Smith B, and Sitch S. 2004. Tropical forestsand the global carbon cycle: impacts of atmospheric carbon dioxide, climate changeand rate of deforestation. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biologi-cal Sciences 359(1443): 331-343.

Díaz Guevara C. 2006. Planificación Operativa Regional 2006: Agregación de la planifi-cación operativa regional, organismos regionales de dependencia nacional, organis-mos seccionales y autónomos de la región de Galápagos para el año 2006. PuertoBaquerizo Moreno, San Cristóbal, Galápagos, INGALA

Dockerty T, Lovett A, Appleton K, Bone A, and Sunnenberg G. 2006. Developing scenar-ios and visualisations to illustrate potential policy and climatic influences on futureagricultural landscapes. Agriculture, Ecosystems & Environment 114(1): 103-120.

Dolan AH and Walker IJ. 2003. Understanding vulnerability of coastal communities to cli-mate change-related risks. Journal of Coastal Research, SI 39 (Proceedings of the 8thInternational Coastal Symposium), pg –pg. Itajaí, SC – Brazil, ISSN 0749-0208.

Edgar GJ, Banks SA, Brandt M, Bustamante RH, Chiriboga A, Earle SA, Garske LE, GlynnPW, Grove JS, Henderson S, Hickman CP, Miller KA, Rivera F, and Wellington GM.2009. El Niño, grazers and fisheries interact to greatly elevate extinction risk for Galá-pagos marine species. Global Change Biology DOI 10.1111/j.1365-486.2009.02117.x.

Feddema JJ, Oleson KW, Bonan GB, Mearns LO, Buja LE, Meehl GA, and Washington WM.2005. The importance of land-cover change in simulating future climates. Science310(5754): 1674-1678.

Fussel H-M. 2007. Vulnerability: A generally applicable conceptual framework for climatechange research. Global Environmental Change 17(2): 155-167.

Karl TR and Trenberth KE, 2003. Modern global climate change. Science 302(5651): 1719-1723.

Kates RW. 2009. Cautionary tales: adaptation and the global poor. In: Lisa E, Schipper Fand Burton I, Eds. The Earthscan Reader on Adaptation to Climate Change. Earth-scan, London, pp. 283-294.

Kelly M and Adger K. 2009. Theory and Practice in Assessing Vulnerability to Climatechange and Facilitating Adaptation. In: Lisa E, Schipper F and Burton I, Eds. TheEarthscan Reader on Adaptation to Climate Change. Earthscan: London, pp. 169-186.

Perch-Nielsen SL, Bättig MB, and Imboden D. 2008. Exploring the link between climatechange and migration. Climatic Change 91(3): 375-393.

Llerena A., Márquez C., Snell HL and Jaramillo A. 2004. Abundancia de Amblyrynchuscristatus en El Niño (97-98) y La Niña (01-02) en Santa Cruz, Galápagos. Ecología Apli-cada 3.

McLachlan JS, Hellmann JJ and Schwartz MW. 2007. A framework for debate of assistedmigration in an era of climate change. Conservation Biology 21(2): 297.

McLeman R. and Smit B. 2006. Migration as an adaptation to climate change. ClimaticChange 76(1): 31-53.

Adaptability of the Tourism and Fishing Sectors │ ChApTer 5

107

Murillo JC, Chasiluisa C, Bautil B, Vizcaíno J, Nicolaides F, Moreno J, Molina L, Reyes H,García L, Villalta M and Ronquillo J. 2003. Pesquería de pepino de mar en Galápagosdurante el año 2003. Análisis comparativo con las pesquerías 1999–2002. En: Evalu-ación de las pesquerías en la Reserva Marina de Galápagos. Informe Compendio2003. Fundación Charles Darwin y Dirección Parque Nacional Galápagos: Santa Cruz,Galápagos, Ecuador.

O'Connor RE, Bord RJ and Fisher A. 1999. Risk perceptions, general environmental be-liefs, and willingness to address climate change. Risk Analysis 19(3): 461-471.

Reuveny R. 2007. Climate change-induced migration and violent conflict. Political Geog-raphy 26(6): 656-673.

Lisa E, Schipper F and Burton I, Eds. 2009. The Earthscan Reader on Adaptation to Cli-mate Change. Earthscan Publishing for a Sustainable Future: London, England.

Salazar S. and Bustamante RH. 2003. Effects of the 1997-98 El Niño on population sizeand diet of the Galápagos sea lion (Zalophus wollebaeki). Noticias de Galápagos62:40-45.

Solecki WD and Oliveri C. 2004. Downscaling climate change scenarios in an urban landuse change model. Journal of Environmental Management 72(1-2): 105-115.

Steinfartz S., Glaberman S., Lanterbecq, D., Marquez C. Rassman K. and Caccone A. 2007.Genetic impact of a severe El Niño event on Galápagos Marine Iguanas (Am-blyrhynchus cristatus). PLoS ONE 2: e1285.

Valle CA., Cruz F., Cruz JB., Merlen G. and Coulter MC. 1987. The impact of the 1982-1983El Niño-Southern Oscillation on seabirds in the Galápagos Islands, Ecuador. Journalof Geophysical Research. C. Oceans 92:14437-14444.

Vargas FH, Harrison S., Rea S. and Macdonald DW. 2006. Biological effects of El Niño onthe Galápagos penguin. Biological Conservation 127:107-114.

Watkins G. and Oxford P. 2008. Galápagos: Both Sides of the Coin. Enfoque Ediciones:Quito.


108

Annex IList of participants

International Workshop of Experts for the Analysis of the Vulnerability of Biodiversity and Human Wellbeing Associated to Climate

Change in the Galápagos Islands

Last/First Name Affiliation Country/locationArana, David AGROCALIDAD Galápagos, Ecuador

Banks, Stuart Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Blake, Stephen Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Bush, Mark Florida Institute of Technology USA

Cajas Cadena, José AGROCALIDAD Ecuador

Castrejón, Mauricio Consultant/WWF Galápagos, Ecuador

Causton, Charlotte Charles Darwin Foundation USA

Cazar, Salvador Conservation International Ecuador

Diaz Granados, María Claudia Conservation International Colombia

Cole, Julia University of Arizona USA

Cruz, Eliécer WWF Galápagos, Ecuador

Cueva, Filemón Asociación de Cafetaleros Galápagos, Ecuador

De Koning, Free Conservation International Ecuador

Deem, Sharon Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Denkinger, Judith Universidad San Francisco de Quito Galápagos, Ecuador

Di Carlo, Giuseppe Conservation International USA

D’Ozouville Noémi Consultant/Conservation International Galápagos, Ecuador

Drews, Carlos WWF Costa Rica

Edgar, Graham University of Tasmania Australia

Espinosa, Eduardo Parque Nacional Galápagos Galápagos, Ecuador

Farell, Sergio Consultant/NOAA Mexico

Farmer, Ginny Conservation International USA

Gardener, Mark Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Glynn, Peter University of Miami USA

Goyes, Patricio INOCAR Ecuador

Grenier, Christophe Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Guevara, Alexandra Universidad San Francisco de Quito Ecuador

Hannah, Lee Conservation International USA

Hardter, Ulf WWF Galápagos, Ecuador

Henderson, Scott Conservation International Galápagos, Ecuador

Krutwa, Annika Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Kuhn, Angela Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Loose, Ana María Factor Verde Galápagos, Ecuador

López, Javier Parque Nacional Galápagos Galápagos, Ecuador

Manzello, Derek NOAA USA

Martínez, Camilo SENPLADES Ecuador

Martínez, Rodney Centro Internacional para la Investigación del Fenómeno Ecuadorde El Niño (CIIFEN)

Martínez, Priscilla Fundación Nazca Ecuador

Mena, Carlos Universidad San Francisco de Quito Ecuador

Merlen, Godfrey Galápagos, Ecuador

ANNExES

109

Moss, Richard WWF USA

Muñoz, Edgar Parque Nacional Galápagos Galápagos, Ecuador

Naranjo, Sixto Parque Nacional Galápagos Galápagos, Ecuador

Nunez, Pablo FEMM Italy

Ortiz, Fernando Conservation International Galápagos, Ecuador

Palacios, Daniel NMFS, NOAA USA

Peñaherrera, César Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Pidgeon, Emily Conservation International USA

Pozo, Pablo CAPTURGAL Galápagos, Ecuador

Quesada, Marco Conservation International Costa Rica

Quiroga, Diego Universidad San Francisco de Quito Ecuador

Rea, Solanda Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Reck, Gunter Universidad San Francisco de Quito Ecuador

Restrepo-Correa, Alejandra Florida Institute of Technology USA

Reyes, Harry Parque Nacional Galápagos Ecuador

Rivera, Ariel Tetra Tech Puerto Rico

Rodríguez, Ana María Conservation International Ecuador

Ruiz, Diego Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Sachs, Julian University of Washington USA

Salazar, Sandie GAIAS Galápagos, Ecuador

Salazar, Xavier Municipio de Santa Cruz Galápagos, Ecuador

Santos, José Escuela Politécnica Ecuador

Santos, Virgilio Municipio de Santa Cruz Galápagos, Ecuador

Schubauer, Anna Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Spurrier, Lauren WWF USA

Suárez, Luis Conservation International Ecuador

Sumalla, Radish University of British Columbia Canada

Suzuki, Haruna Universidad San Francisco de Quito Ecuador

Tiernan, John Paul Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Tirado, Nathalia Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Trueman, Mandy Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Tyman, Zackary SIT Ecuador USA

Utreras, Emily Conservation International Ecuador

Valverde, Susana Factor Verde Galápagos, Ecuador

Vargas, Hernán Fondo Peregrino Panama

Vecchi, Gabriel GFDL, OAS, NOAA USA

Vera, Mariana Charles Darwin Foundation Galápagos, Ecuador

Villalta, Mario Parque Nacional Galápagos Galápagos, Ecuador

Villegas, Tania Ministerio del Ambiente Ecuador

Walsh, Stephen University of North Carolina USA

Xie, Lian North Carolina State University USA


110

Annex IIDeclaration of Santa Cruz

Facing Climate Changes Together in the Galápagos Islands

Within the framework of the International Workshop of Experts for the Analysis ofthe Vulnerability of Biodiversity and Human Wellbeing Associated to Climate Changein the Galápagos Islands held from April 20th to 23rd, 2009 on Santa Cruz Island, withthe participating organizations: Ecuadorian Ministry of Environment, the Munici-pality of Santa Cruz, the Ecuadorian Secretary for Planning and Development (SEN-PLADES), the Galápagos National Park (GNP), the Navy Oceanographic Institute(INOCAR), Centro Internacional para la Investigación del Fenómeno de El Niño (CI-IFEN), the Ecuadorian Agency for Agricultural Quality Assurance (Agrocalidad-SIC-GAL); representatives from Conservation International (CI), WWF, the CharlesDarwin Foundation (CDF), the Universidad San Francisco de Quito (USFQ) and theparticipating experts.

Considering:

1. That the Ecuadorian government contemplates within the National DevelopmentPlan, especially in Objective 4, the identification of responses to climate changeas part of its responsibility to its citizens and the entire World.

2. That the Ministry of Environment is developing the National Strategy against Cli-mate Change.

3. That the Technical Secretariat of Risk Management is developing the NationalPolicy of Risk Management.

4. That the Galápagos Islands, as part of the World Natural Heritage Sites, are apriority site, vulnerable to climate change due to its unique oceanographic,weather, biological and socioeconomic conditions.

5. That the Galápagos Islands are a strategic site and a natural laboratory generat-ing biophysical information that will enable the Republic of Ecuador to prepareand help other countries in the Eastern Tropical Pacific region to plan and be ableto face the challenges posed by climate change.

Agree:1. To consider within the policies, strategies and plans for the Galápagos Islands,

the recommendations and priority action plans identified by the experts in theworkshop.

2. To create a Climate Change Working Group that will enable the formulation andimplementation of an adaptation plan, according to the specific needs of the Galá-pagos; with the participation of public and local national institutions, educationaland research centers, non-governmental organizations, private sector and localcommunities.

3. To apply the precautionary and intergenerational responsibility principles to man-age existing pressures on the environment so as to increase resilience and adaptation against uncertainty of future conditions associated to climate change.

Santa Cruz, Galápagos Islands, April 22nd 2009, celebrating World Earth Day andcelebrating the 50 years of the creation of the Galápagos National Park.

ANNExES

111

WWF’s mission is to stop the degrada-

tion of the planet’s natural environ-

ment and to build a future in which

humans live in harmony with nature

by:

• Conserving the world’s biological

diversity.

• Ensuring that the use of renewable

natural resources is sustainable.

• Promoting the reduction of pollution

and wasteful consumption.

Building upon a strong foundation

of science, partnership and field

demonstration, CI empowers societies

to responsibly and sustainably care for

nature, our global biodiversity, for the

well-being of humanity.

World Wildlife Fund

1250�Twenty-Fourth�St.,�N.W.

Washington,�DC�20037�USA

Web:�www.worldwildlife.org

Tel.:�(202)�495-4800

Fax:�(202)�233-6971

WWF-Galápagos Program

18�de�Febrero�y�Piqueros�esquina

Puerto�Ayora,�Santa�Cruz�Island

Galápagos,�Ecuador

Tel.�&�Fax:�(593�5)�252-6053

Conservation International

22011�Crystal�Drive,�Suite�500�

Arlington,�VA�22202�USA

Web:�www.conservation.org

Tel.:�(703)�341-2400

Fax:�(703)�892-0826

Conservation International in Galápagos

Calle�Juan�León�Mera�s/n�y�Avenida�Scalesia

Puerto�Ayora,�Santa�Cruz�Island

Galápagos,�Ecuador

Tel.:�(593�5)�252-7527

Documents

Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment of the Galápagos ...datagalapagos.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/009... · seamounts, mangroves, and other key areas. b.Protect sea cucumber,