Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

https://doi.org/10.15517/rev.biol.trop..v71iS1.54853

SUPPLEMENT

Applying the SES Framework to coral reef restoration projects

on the Pacific coast of Costa Rica

Nohelia Palou Zúniga1*; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5984-7906

Róger Madrigal Ballestero1,2; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5637-0129

Achim Schlüter3; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0046-7263

Juan José Alvarado4; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2620-9115

1. Centro Agronómico de Investigación y Enseñanza (CATIE), Turrialba, Costa Rica; nohelia.palou@catie.ac.cr

(*Correspondence)

2. Environment for Development (EfD), Centro Agronómico de Investigación y Enseñanza (CATIE), Turrialba, Costa

Rica; rmadriga@catie.ac.cr

3. Leibniz Center for Marine Tropical Ecology (ZMT), Bremen, Germany; achim.schlueter@leibniz-zmt.de

4. Centro de Investigación en Ciencias del Mar y Limnología (CIMAR), San José, Costa Rica; juanalva76@yahoo.com

Received 07-X-2022. Corrected 14-II-2023. Accepted 26-II-2023.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Global and local stressors have led to rapid declines in coral reef health. The high rates of coral

degradation have motivated restoration initiatives worldwide. Evaluation of these initiatives has provided valu-

able information regarding coral restoration techniques and limitations faced by projects. However, most of the

literature is focused on evaluating metrics related to fragment survival rate and growth, leaving a gap in under-

standing how social aspects such as governance structure affect project outcomes.

Objective: The present research applies the Social-Ecological Systems Framework to identify social and ecologi-

cal factors contributing to the success of three coral reef restoration projects in Costa Rica.

Methods: Data was gathered from 50 semi-structured interviews with project members, volunteers, tour opera-

tors, fishers, and related community and government organizations that were analyzed using the categories deter-

mined by the Social-Ecological Systems Framework.

Results: Despite each case’s specific ecological and governance characteristics, research results show that three

main steps have contributed to project success. First, the importance of locals having a positive perception of

coral reef and project benefits; second, the use of network structure to obtain adequate financial and human

resources and third, the importance of compliance with a regulatory framework to create enabling environments

for reef restoration.

Conclusions: Results show no universal solutions for coral reef restoration projects. Project managers must

understand the ecological and social context of the restoration site to boost the benefits that reef restoration proj-

ects can provide, such as an increase in local stewardship, income generation, and the creation of more resilient

communities.

Key words: reef restoration; Costa Rica; social-ecological systems; governance.

2Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

INTRODUCTION

Coral reefs cover 0.2 % of the earth’s

surface; however, almost 50 % of coral reef

live coverage has been lost in the last 30 years

(Burke et al., 2011; Souter et al., 2020). Loss

of coral coverage decreases ecosystem services

such as recreational use, tourism development,

fish biomass production, and coastal protec-

tion, causing direct effects on the livelihood of

people living near coastal zones (Eddy et al.,

2021; Moberg & Rönnbäck, 2003).

The global decline in coral reef ecosystem

services has motivated restoration initiatives

worldwide (Edwards & Clark, 1999). Reef res-

toration initiatives started in the 1960s with arti-

ficial reefs when coral reef degradation became

more visible, and laws for protecting marine

habitats were introduced (Rinkevich, 1995).

In the early 2000s, efforts started eradicating

invasive species and outplants from nurseries

(Goergen et al., 2020). In 2016, emphasis was

given to increasing efficiency and scale using

micro-fragmentation and larval propagation.

During this last wave, efforts have been accom-

panied by the commercialization of initiatives

for touristic purposes (Meyers, 2017). Evalu-

ation of projects conducted in the previous 60

years has helped identify the importance of site

selection, accessibility (Quigley et al., 2022),

water quality, eradication or control of threats

(Shaver et al., 2020), public support (Frey &

Berkes, 2014), adequate human and financial

resources (Wenger et al., 2017), effective gov-

ernance (Cinner et al., 2012), and straightfor-

ward legal mandate (Christie & White, 2007)

as factors for influencing effective restoration

initiatives.

Ecological restoration can be defined as

the process of assisting in the recovery and

management of the ecological integrity of an

ecosystem (Van Diggelen et al., 2001). Suding

RESUMEN

Aplicación del marco SSE a proyectos de restauración de arrecifes de coral

en la costa del Pacífico de Costa Rica.

Introducción: Los factores de estrés globales y locales han llevado a una rápida disminución de la salud de

los arrecifes de coral. Las altas tasas de degradación de los corales han motivado iniciativas de restauración en

todo el mundo. La evaluación de estas iniciativas ha proporcionado información valiosa sobre las técnicas de

restauración de coral y las limitaciones que enfrentan los proyectos. Sin embargo, la mayor parte de la literatura

se centra en la evaluación de métricas relacionadas con la tasa de supervivencia y el crecimiento de fragmentos,

lo que deja un vacío en la comprensión de cómo los aspectos sociales y estructura de gobernanza, afectan los

resultados del proyecto.

Objetivo: La presente investigación aplica el Marco Conceptual de Sistemas Socio-Ecológicos para identificar

los factores sociales y ecológicos que contribuyen al éxito de tres proyectos de restauración de arrecifes de coral

en Costa Rica.

Métodos: Los datos se recopilaron a partir de 50 entrevistas semiestructuradas con miembros del proyecto,

voluntarios, operadores turísticos, pescadores y organizaciones comunitarias y gubernamentales relacionadas que

se analizaron utilizando las categorías determinadas por el Marco Conceptual de Sistemas Socio- Ecológicos.

Results: A pesar de las características ecológicas y de gobernanza específicas de cada caso, los resultados de la

investigación muestran que tres pasos principales han contribuido al éxito del proyecto. Primero, la importancia

de que los locales tengan una percepción positiva de los arrecifes de coral y los beneficios del proyecto; segundo,

el uso de la estructura de la red para obtener recursos financieros y humanos adecuados y tercero, la importancia

del cumplimiento de un marco regulatorio para crear entornos propicios para la restauración de arrecifes.

Conclusiones: A pesar de las características ecológicas y de gobernanza específicas de cada caso, los resultados

de la investigación muestran que tres puntos principales han contribuido al éxito del proyecto. Primero, la impor-

tancia de que los locales tengan una percepción positiva de los arrecifes de coral y los beneficios del proyecto;

segundo, el uso de la estructura de la red para obtener recursos financieros y humanos y tercero, la importancia

del cumplimiento de un marco regulatorio para crear entornos propicios para la restauración de arrecifes.

Palabras clave: restauración arrecifal; Costa Rica; sistemas socio ecológicos; gobernanza.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

et al., 2015 argue the following four funda-

mental principles should be met: 1) increasing

ecological integrity, 2) benefiting and involv-

ing society, 3) long-term sustainability, and

4) the past should inform initiatives. These

principles can be used as pillars for evaluat-

ing project performance. However, most of

the coral reef restoration literature is focused

on evaluating only the ecological aspects of

projects (Bayraktarov et al., 2019). The most

common indicators for project success are coral

colony-level metrics related to corals’ survival

rate and growth (Hein et al., 2017). There is

a knowledge gap in understanding the social

and economic factors that impact the restora-

tion project’s performance. Factors such as

the influence of livelihoods, governance, local

capacity building, and community participation

on project efficiency and sustainability are not

usually considered (Hein et al., 2017; Kittinger

et al., 2012).

Some studies have assessed social factors;

for example, Hein et al. (2019) evaluated vital

stakeholders´ perspectives on coral reef res-

toration efforts in four restoration projects in

Thailand, Maldives, Florida Keys, and the US

Virgin Islands. Their findings show most com-

mon limitations to restoration success are lack

of technical capacity, no connection between

the project and local actors, the scale of threats

outweighs solutions, lack of partnerships, and

lack of science behind efforts. Boström-Einars-

son et al. (2020) reviewed 362 cases evaluat-

ing restoration knowledge related to methods,

success, and failures. The primary limitations

identified relate to poor project design, lack of

experimental control, short temporal scale, and

lack of appropriate and constant monitoring.

Human and coral reef interactions positively

and negatively impact coral reef restoration,

making it necessary to analyze reef restoration

from a social-ecological perspective (Uribe-

Castañeda et al., 2018). Very often, social and

ecological aspects are seen as separate ele-

ments, ignoring interactions between different

cultural, political, social, economic, ecological,

and technological components (Gunderson et

al., 2010). Oversimplifying these interactions

and applying one-size-fits-all solutions to eco-

system management have led to failures such

as a lack of stakeholder involvement, capacity

to control degradation causes, or long-term

sustainability (Wyborn & Bixler, 2013).

Yeemin et al. (2006) highlighted that the

prevention of causes of degradation should be

prioritized before starting restoration projects

to reduce the costs of restoring large areas.

Also, projects in limited demonstration areas

are easier to manage for different purposes,

such as education, tourism, or research. Tri-

alfhianty & Suadi (2017) assessed projects in

North-west Bali, analyzing the relationship

between community perception and participa-

tion in restoration activities. They found that

the level of community participation depends

on how related their livelihood is to coral

reefs and the importance of local leadership

as bridges between science and local aware-

ness. Community participation is assessed in

several studies; Kittinger et al. (2016) showed

that projects that increase community aware-

ness, participation, and shared responsibility

achieve long-term results. Notably, Kittinger et

al. (2016) found that restoration projects helped

develop a skilled workforce, improve eco-

nomic benefits through job creation, increase

the capacity of community organizations to

act on threats to reefs and watersheds, revital-

ize Native Hawaiian cultural practices, and

innovate on using invasive algae as compost

for farmers. Hein et al. (2019) found that com-

munity participation is retributed through jobs,

education, stewardship, and increasing recre-

ation opportunities.

Financing restoration projects is complex

and limited, one of the biggest impediments

to scaling up interventions (Bayraktarov et al.,

2019). Most of it has been in-kind or NGO

sector financing (Goreau & Hilbertz, 2008).

Recently, the private sector has been increas-

ingly funding restoration activities, especially

hotels and dive operators (Bottema & Bush,

2012; Meyers, 2017; Okubo & Onuma, 2015).

Understanding how governance structure and

types of financing influence project outcomes

is relevant for decision-making. Bottema &

4Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

Bush (2012) analyzed private sector-led marine

conservation. Their results highlight the pri-

vate sector’s ability to create awareness both

in tourist and local communities, generate

income, and the capacity to support financial

restoration activities. When government sup-

port is lacking, other reef users need help to

guarantee compliance; for this to occur, trust

is required. In their study, the private sector

gained legitimacy by investing in education and

employment programs. In the same direction,

Okubo & Onuma (2015) analyzed commercial

restoration projects in Okinawa, where diving

tours have incorporated restoration activities.

Results show it is appealing to tourists and cre-

ates environmental awareness. However, they

highlight that this commercial project lacks

long-term ecological integrity emphasis.

The Social-Ecological Systems Frame-

work (SESF) is a diagnostic tool that allows

to deepen the analysis of social and ecological

interactions affecting coral reef restoration

performance. A framework is a comprehen-

sive structuring tool that depicts an empirical

situation. The SESF was explicitly created to

understand social-ecological systems (Schlüter

& Madrigal, 2012), allowing us to assess

which variables across the ecological and social

realm influence human behavior causing dif-

ferent outcomes in particular resource systems

throughout time (Ostrom, 2007). For achieving

a holistic perspective, the framework distin-

guishes eight categories for analysis: 1) social,

economic, and political settings, 2) resource

systems, 3) resource units, 4) governance, 5)

actors, 6) interactions, 7) related ecosystems,

and 8) outcomes. These categories are subdi-

vided into second-tier variables identified in

the literature to be relevant for common pool

resources management (Ostrom, 2007; Ostrom,

2009). These variables supply a common lan-

guage for comparing cases by analyzing each

case’s ecological, economic, social, and policy

characteristics and outcomes (Delgado-Serrano

& Ramos, 2015; Ostrom, 2007).

The SESF has helped to determine fac-

tors influencing sustainable management in

coastal and marine ecosystems (Basurto et al.,

2013; Leslie et al., 2015; Partelow et al., 2018;

Schlüter & Madrigal, 2012; Torres-Guevara

et al., 2016). Fewer studies have been made

regarding applying the SESF to coral reef man-

agement; most refer to Marine Protected Areas

(MPAs) containing coral reefs. For instance,

Cinner et al. (2012) used the framework to

measure the success of coral reef co-man-

agement across five countries. Their results

show that successful co-management is related

to critical institutional designs, knowledge of

human agency in the ecosystem is high, and

people have a history of being involved in

co-management. Palomo & Hernández-Flores

(2019) applied the framework to a marine

natural protected area in Mexico by analyz-

ing the key elements to achieve sustainable

use in multiple resource systems such as coral

reefs. Findings show that governance systems

within a community change depending on

the type of economic activity performed by

the population, and governance complexity is

related to the equity level of the actors. It also

highlighted how community-based governance

helped people get skills in conservation and

increase stewardship.

Some studies have not applied the SESF

directly but have linked social and ecologi-

cal data to understand how these interactions

influence outcomes and have helped identify

relevant variables for understanding human-

coral reef dynamics. Pollnac et al. (2010)

evaluated 56 marine reserves in the Philippines,

the Western Indian Ocean, and the Caribbean,

finding that fish biomass was influenced by

human population density and compliance with

rules. Cinner et al. (2016) evaluated 2 500

reefs worldwide; their results show that bright

fish spots were linked to high dependence on

marine resources, levels of local engagement,

marine tenure, cultural taboos, and beneficial

environmental conditions. On the other side,

dark spots were linked to intensive capture,

storage capacity access, and recent environ-

mental stress events history. Conclusions from

this study highlight the importance of strength-

ening participation and property rights in fish-

eries. These results help identify what social

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

variables have been influential in other cases.

Rogers et al. (2015) evaluated how the structure

of coral reef communities may change in the

future due to climate change and overfishing by

considering structural complexity and primary

productivity. Their findings show that the effi-

cacy of management depends on biophysical

characteristics and reef state, making marine

reserves more effective with high structural

complexity and restoration more effective for

low complexity reefs.

This study aims to contribute to the knowl-

edge of coral reef restoration projects through

a social-ecological perspective by applying

the Social-Ecological System Framework to

identify the main social and ecological fac-

tors contributing to the successful outcomes of

three restoration projects on the Pacific coast

of Costa Rica. The research analyzes the role of

perception in increasing local participation, the

enabling conditions that allow access to techni-

cal and financial capacity, and how compliance

with the existing regulatory framework contrib-

utes to project success. Emphasis is given to

the influence of different governance structures

on projects’ successful outcomes by comparing

projects led by an NGO, co-managed by the

community and technical government institu-

tion and co-managed by a local university and

a private tourism developer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study Area: Three study cases from the

Pacific Coast of Costa Rica, part of the ETP

were chosen to analyze social and ecologi-

cal enabling conditions for success (Fig. 1).

They share ecological characteristics related to

topography, oceanographic dynamics strongly

influenced by low latitude trade winds, and

inter-annual climate variation associated with

ENSO. The Northern part of the coast has

a dry tropical forest with a dry season from

December to April when the upwelling season

Fig. 1. Location of three coral reef restoration projects working areas (Bahía Culebra, Sámara, and Golfo Dulce. (Google

Satellite, n.d.)

6Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

occurs; meanwhile, the southern part has tropi-

cal rainforest, with rain all year round, which

decreases from December to April. High moun-

tains in the central and southern areas prevent

coastal upwelling (Cortés & Jiménez, 2003).

Also, reefs in the ETP are built by a few coral

species and have a discontinuous distribution

(Reyes-Bonilla et al., 2020).

Regarding social and economic aspects,

the Pacific Coast has experienced economic

growth through tourism due to the country’s

political stability and infrastructure develop-

ment, such as airports and roads (Honey et al.,

2010). The following sections briefly describe

the location where projects are being conducted

and the project history and results. Table 1 sum-

marizes the project description and results.

Bahía Culebra: The bay has an exten-

sion of 7 km, located inside the Papagayo

Gulf (10.619357 °N - 85.655315 °W) in the

northern Pacific of Costa Rica. The bay has

seasonal upwelling from December to April,

having colder and nutrient-rich waters and

decreasing water temperatures (Alfaro & Cor-

tés, 2012). Bahía Culebra is characterized by

having rare and unique coral communities and

reefs. Pocilloporid corals are the primary reef

builders in shallow waters, and Pavona clavus,

Psammocora spp., and Leptoseris papyracea

are primarily found in deeper waters. Branch-

ing corals such as Pocillopora damicornis and

massive such as Pavona clavus account for 42

% and 30 % of live cover, respectively (Cortés

& Jiménez, 2003). Jiménez (2001) states domi-

nance of species in the bay might be influenced

by coral thermal tolerance and exposure to cool

upwelling waters during the dry season. Corals

in this area have been affected by siltation, fish-

ing, and touristic activities, El Niño, extraction

for the aquarium trade, macroalgal prolifera-

tion, and red tides (Cortés et al., 2010).

The bay’s economic development intensi-

fied in the ‘90s due to the Polo Turístico Golfo

de Papagayo (PTGP), which promotes sun, sea,

and sand tourism. The PTGP is managed by

the Instituto Costarricense de Turismo (ICT),

which grants concessions to investors. Main

touristic activities in the bay include sport

fishing, diving, snorkeling, and water ski rides

(Jimenez, 2001; Sánchez-Noguera, 2012).

The restoration project started as a coral

gardening pilot in 2019. It is managed by

a private-public partnership between Sistema

Nacional de Áreas de Conservación (SINAC),

CIMAR, German Corporation for International

Cooperation (GIZ), Península Papagayo, and

RCCR. In 2020, the project was officialized

Table 1

Summary of project relevant information took from interviews with project´s members. Data was taken during fieldwork

conducted from February to June 2022.

Organization Culebra Reef Gardens Asociación Proyecto Corales Raising Coral Costa Rica

Location Bahía Culebra, Guanacaste Sámara, Guanacaste Golfo Dulce, Puntarenas

Managed by Private sector and Academia Community and Government

institutions

NGO

Funded by International cooperation, Private

and public sector (University)

funding

Personal donations, citizen

science events, public sector

(Govt institution) funding

International cooperation and

personal donations

Starting Date 2019 2017 2016

# of transplanted

corals

265 transplanted 4,000 for

growing in structures

600 transplanted 1600 transplanted

% survivance 83.20 % 64 % 90 %

Species Pocillopora spp., Pavona clavus,

Pavona gigantea, Porites lobata

Pavona gigantea, Psammocora

stellata, Porites lobata ,

Pocillopora elegans

Pocillopora spp., Pavona frondifera

Pavona gigantea, Psammocora

stellata

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

to implement an in-situ coral gardening pro-

gram and promote responsible touristic activi-

ties in reefs and nurseries in Bahía Culebra.

CIMAR’s role is to lead ecological monitoring

and provide technical knowledge. Meanwhile,

Península Papagayo contributes by managing

volunteers to clean the structures. Both orga-

nizations make financial contributions to the

project. In the case of CIMAR, they contribute

US$76 000 per year, including equipment,

staff, and materials. The relationship between

both actors is ruled by a cooperation agreement

of three years which will be evaluated by the

end of the period. Project goals are to transplant

5 000 corals in 5 years, recover 30 % of coral

cover, increase biomass and fish diversity by

50 %, establish a responsible tourism program

with three local enterprises, create environmen-

tal awareness in the local community, propose

marine spatial planning for productive activi-

ties related to coral reefs in the zone. The proj-

ect covers around 0.09 ha in Güiri-Güiri, Islas

Pelonas y Playa Blanca. Two hundred sixty-five

coral fragments have been transplanted, and

4 000 fragments of Pocillopora spp. are meant

to stay in the spider and A structures that are

already growing. The project has 83.2 % of

coral survival.

Sámara: Sámara (9.869220° N -

85.515304° W) is located in the Nicoya canton

in the Guanacaste Province. The estimated

population for 2022 is 4 685 habitants (Insti-

tuto Nacional de Estadística y Censos [INEC],

2011). The primary income sources are tour-

ism, fishing, and agriculture (CREST, 2013).

Unlike other areas of the Guanacaste Province

that follow a high-volume tourism strategy

with resort-type hotel infrastructure, Sámara

has small and medium infrastructure focused

on ecotourism. The Refugio Nacional de Vida

Silvestre (RNVS) Isla Chora is located in

Sámara Bay. The bay has a 3 km extension.

Most popular touristic activities include snor-

keling, diving, kayaking, dolphin, whale, and

turtle watching, horseback riding, and sport

fishing. The region has a small Pocillopora or

Porites lobata reef patch (Cortés & Jiménez,

2003); however, these reefs have been affected

due to gravel and clay sedimentation carried by

the Mala Noche and Lagarto rivers (Armstrong

et al., 2010). In addition, anthropogenic and

natural threats have reduced live coral cover to

5 % (C. Perez, personal communication, Febru-

ary 21st, 2022).

In 2016, the Ministry of Environment

and Energy (MINAE) requested the Instituto

Nacional de Aprendizaje (INA) to evaluate the

feasibility of conducting a coral reef restoration

project in Samara Bay. The feasibility analysis

allowed to determine sites for the nursery near

RNVS Isla Chora and transplant sites in Can-

grejal. The project started officially in 2017

when INA approached local tour operators and

tour guides to participate in coral gardening

training to create a group of local volunteers.

The project is co-managed by Asociación

Proyecto Corales Sámara and INA. Asociación

Proyecto Corales is a community organization

with seven active volunteers, mainly from the

tourism sector. INA provides technical knowl-

edge and performs ecological monitoring. The

project cost for Asociación Proyecto Corales is

around US$28 000 per year, including equip-

ment, nursery materials, and transportation.

This money is collected from volunteer dona-

tions, local businesses’ material donations, and

a citizen science monthly event in partnership

with tour operators. INA has funded around

US$12 547 (Perez Reyes, 2021), including the

working hours of 3 INA staff members, equip-

ment, and materials. The project is working in

approximately 0.04 ha and aims to transplant

10 000 fragments with the help of the local

community. Until February 2022, the project

transplanted 600 fragments with a 64 % sur-

vival rate.

Golfo Dulce: One of four tropical fjords

in the world (Quesada-Alpízar et al., 2006),

Golfo Dulce (8.612352° N, - 83.291639° W)

is in Puntarenas Province, between Golfito

and Osa cantons (Fig. 1). Results from the

demographic census made in 2011 estimate

population between both Puerto Jimenez and

Golfito would be 24 703 habitants in 2022

8Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

(INEC, 2011). Historically, the economy near

Golfo Dulce was dictated by agriculture and

gold mining. Nowadays, rice, livestock, tour-

ism, commerce, artisanal, commercial, and

sport fishing account for the most significant

activities in the zone (Román & Angulo, 2013).

Golfo Dulce covers an area of 750 km2.

The gulf is surrounded by two National Parks,

a forest reserve, and a Marine Area for Respon-

sible Fishing (AMPR) (Fargier et al., 2014).

Tidal forces, wind, freshwater entry into the

system, upwelling subsurface water, and basin

topography influence water mixing and cir-

culation in the gulf (Morales-Ramírez, 2011).

Coral reefs and communities found in the gulf

can be divided into two main groups: the ones

located in the inner section of the gulf and

those from the outer area (Cortés, 1990). Most

common species found were Porites lobata,

Pocillopora damicornis and Psammocora stel-

lata. The inner gulf has low coral diversity (1-8

%) and high topographic relief. Meanwhile,

the outer gulf has a higher live coral coverage

(29-46 %) and low topographic relief (Cortés &

Jiménez, 2003).

The restoration project started as a research

initiative of two coral reef experts, with access

to funding and technical knowledge for con-

ducting the project. One of the coral reef experts

was linked to the Costa Rica University (UCR)

and the Centro de Investigación en Ciencias del

Mar y Limnología (CIMAR), which facilitated

access to local marine experts. The restora-

tion initiative began in 2015 as part of a mas-

ter’s thesis (Villalobos-Cubero, 2019). In 2016,

NGO Raising Coral Costa Rica (RCCR) was

created in partnership with UCR, and in 2019

the NGO got its independent status. The cost of

implementing the project for RCCR is around

US$100 000, which includes day of work

payment for volunteers, equipment, materials,

and transportation. 84 % of funds come from

international cooperation, 15 % from personal

donations, and 1 % from citizen science events

(RCCR, 2021).

RCCR intervenes approximately 0.5 ha in

Golfo Dulce. Objectives are defined annually;

for 2022, the goal is to transplant 2 000 corals.

One thousand four hundred corals have been

transplanted with a 90 % survival. RCCR has

three major restoration sites in Playa Nicuesa,

Mogos, and Sandalo. The NGO structure is ver-

tical, with two project managers specializing in

marine biology and coral reef restoration and

seven local coral gardeners.

Method: This research follows a qualita-

tive approach by comparing three case studies

using the SESF as a diagnostic tool (Fig. 2)

(McGinnis & Ostrom, 2014; Ostrom, 2007).

The diagnostic process means asking a series

of questions on a specific system and elabo-

rating on more specific questions based on

the responses provided by previous questions,

allowing it to go from general to particular

(Frey & Cox, 2015).

SESF facilitates the diagnosing task

because it orders a set of variables that

have been proven relevant for understand-

ing resources’ sustainable use (Ostrom, 2009).

First-tier variables help design the general

questions, and then second-tier variables can

be chosen depending on the system’s character-

istics and the information provided through the

data collection.

The case selection method used was most

similar cases (Seawright & Gerring, 2008),

which requires the identification of key vari-

ables of interest that should be similar across

cases and variables that should vary meaning-

fully (Nielsen, 2016). For this study, similar

variables are successful ecological outcomes

with survival rates above 50 % (Harriot &

Fisk, 1988), projects that have been sustained

for more than 18 months, and similar eco-

logical characteristics for being part of the ETP.

This similarity, especially regarding ecological

variables, allows us to focus on the impact of

varying variables such as governance structure

or being surrounded by touristic poles, land

protected areas, or no special management

zone may have on project success with the aim

of understanding if governance structure is an

influential variable for successful outcomes in

coral reef restoration.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

Fig. 2. Social-Ecological Systems Framework including first and second-tier variables (taken from DeCaro & Stokes, 2013).

Related ecosystems (ECO)

ECO1 Climate patterns

ECO2 Pollution patterns

ECO3 Flow into and out of local SES

Social, economic and political

settings (S)

S1 Economic development

S2 Demographic trends

S3 Political stability

S4 Government resource policies

S5 Market incentives

S6 Media organizations

Governance systems (GS)

GS1 Government organizations

GS2 Nongovernment organization

GS3 Network structure

GS4 Property rights systems

GS5 Operational rules

GS6 Collective-choice rules

GS7 Constitutional rules

GS8 Monitoring and sanctioning

processes

Users (U)

U1 Number of users

U2 Socioeconomic attributes of users

U3 History of use

U4 Location

U5 Leadership

U6 Norms/social capital

U7 Knowledge of SES

U8 Importance of resource

U9 Technology used

Resource systems (RS)

RS1 Sector

RS2 Clarity of system boundaries

RS3 Size of resource systems

RS4 Human constructed facilities

RS5 Productivity of systems

RS6 Equilibrium properties

RS7 Predictability of system dynamics

RS8 Storage characteristics

RS9 Locations

Resource Units (RU)

RU1 Resource unit mobility

RU2 Growth or replacement rate

RU3 Interaction among resource units

RU4 Economic value

RU5 Number of units

RU6 Distinctive markings

RU7 Spatial & temporal distribution

Data collection: Data was collected using

semi-structured interviews and participant

observation. Interviews followed a diagnostic

procedure (Cox, 2011; Ostrom, 2007) consist-

ing of broad semi-structured questionnaires

designed for each actor group based on the

SESF first and second-tier variables (Fig. 2) to

ensure the information during cases would be

comparable for the analysis. Using second-tier

variables allows for identifying more specific

details of the resource system management.

Also, a literature review from similar studies

helped identify relevant questions for designing

the interview protocol. Questions were divided

into 1) project data which included questions

regarding motivation to start the project, goals,

criteria for species and site selection, num-

ber of transplanted fragments, survival rate,

10 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

monitoring schedule, and actors involved. 2)

Perception segment included questions on reef

benefits, reef state, significant threats, time liv-

ing in the community, knowledge about project

existence, project benefits and limitations, and

conflicts between reef users. 3) The technical

knowledge, financial capacity, and social capi-

tal section included questions on the quantity of

cleaning and monitoring activities performed

per month, type of funding, key partners, how

project information is shared with different

stakeholders, the number of training sessions

received and by who, how decision making is

made, level of trust in different actors, partici-

pation in community organizations. 4) Regard-

ing rules compliance, questions were directed

to the application of the AMPR, touristic pole,

or the lack of management and what benefits

or challenges they identified from the type of

management in each zone. Data regarding eco-

logical systems and socioeconomic context was

mainly obtained from management plans, mon-

itoring reports, thesis, and published articles.

All primary data was collected between

February 2022 to June 2022 through 50 semi-

structured interviews in Spanish (Table 2).

Following literature related to coral reef resto-

ration projects (Frey and Berkes, 2014; Hein

et al., 2017; Kittinger et al., 2016; Okubo &

Onuma, 2015), individuals were chosen based

on their proximity to sea-related activities and

the information they could provide due to their

role in the community or workplace.

Sampling was done according to the type

of actor. For critical informants, who included

project members and representatives of com-

munity and government institutions, purposive

sampling was selected (Bernard, 2006; Max-

well, 2014). Information from interviews was

triangulated with other data-collecting meth-

ods, such as field notes taken during field

work. Data was collected until reaching satura-

tion point (Bonde, 2013), which refers to the

point where no new data appears, and concepts

of the theory are well developed. This satura-

tion point was determined during the field

work. People outside the projects have little

knowledge on coral reef and most information

shared was similar thus no new or relevant

data was acquired after four to five interviews.

Most of the information regarding the projects

is centralized in project managers. Due to the

homogeneity and level of experience of the

people interviewed, we reached the saturation

point with 50 interviews.

Data was also collected through par-

ticipant observation, mainly by participating in

restoration activities, watching people interact

with restoration sites, and living in each com-

munity for at least three weeks, providing the

perception of the daily reality of each project.

Bahía Culebra has a smaller sample than the

other two sites due to the project’s characteris-

tic of being remotely located in a private com-

plex and because its focus is not a community

project. This may represent limitations to the

study specially regarding the generalization of

perceptions regarding reef and project benefits.

Data analysis: Data was analyzed by

applying qualitative content analysis using

MAXQDA software (VERBI Software,

2021). The analysis consisted of classifying

data from interviews using systematic coding

Table 2

Semi-structured interviews were conducted during field research to identify relevant SESF variables for successful project

outcomes.

Study area Total

interviews

Project

Members/volunteers Fisherman Tour

operators Hotels Community or govt.

organizations

Samara 20 4 4 6 3 3

Bahía Culebra 11 1 1 6 1 2

Golfo Dulce 19 4 3 6 2 4

Total 50

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

classification that allowed the identification of

themes and patterns (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005).

First, transcribed interviews were analyzed, and

relevant data based on the research questions

were highlighted. Afterward, deductive cat-

egory application (Mayring, 2000) was used by

applying SESF first and second-tier variables to

determine coding schemes and the relationship

between codes. Partelow´s (2018) definitions

and indicators of SESF variables were used as

a codebook. Data that could not be coded using

SESF first and second-tier variables were high-

lighted and labeled either as a new category or

subcategory. In the case of perception-related

questions, codes are derived directly from data.

Data was triangulated by gathering informa-

tion from different sources to validate their

context (Creswell, 2014). Data was segmented

by cases, involving constant comparative tech-

niques (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). Once all

data was coded, a list of the frequency of

codes was developed. The text was analyzed

to identify their positive or negative impact on

projects’ ecological outcome of more salient

variables. Information regarding positive or

negative impact was crosschecked with previ-

ous studies of collective action theory (Olson,

1965; Ostrom, 2009; Poteete & Ostrom, 2014)

and coral reef restoration research (Cinner et

al., 2016; Frey & Berkes, 2014; Kittinger et al.,

2012; Kittinger et al., 2016; Okubo & Onuma,

2015; Yeemin et al., 2006). Afterwards, com-

parison tables were developed depicting how

each variable was present in each case.

RESULTS

Results show that despite peculiarities to

each case, they follow similar routes for suc-

cess. Three main factors were present in all

cases: (1) Role of positive perception of bene-

fits from coral reefs and restoration projects; (2)

Role of network structures to achieve adequate

human and financial resources; and (3) Role of

compliance with regulatory frameworks.

The coding process with variables shown

in Fig. 2 displays that these three main fac-

tors were possible due to the interaction of the

following SESF variables: network structures

(GS3), constitutional choice rules (GS7), lead-

ership/entrepreneurship (U5), norms, trusts,

social capital (U6), investment activities (I5),

knowledge of SES (U7), information sharing

(I2), operational choice rules (GS5), monitor-

ing activities (I9), location (RS8), economic

value (RU4), the importance of resource depen-

dence (U8), predictability of system dynamics

(RS6), distinctive characteristics (RU6), history

or past experiences (U3), (S5) markets (Fig. 6).

Variables were chosen due to the frequency of

Fig. 3. Graph representing the frequency of codes related to Resource System and Resource Units set of second-tier variables

identified during the analysis of the interviews.

12 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

their appearance as relevant factors during the

coding process, as shown in Fig. 3, Fig. 4, and

Fig. 5, and their relationship with collective

action and coral restoration literature.

Role of positive perception of benefits

from coral reefs and restoration projects:

During the interviews, people were asked to

mention up to three benefits they perceived

from coral reefs and restoration projects.

Results regarding the perception of benefits

from these two elements show that in all three

study cases (Fig. 7, Fig. 8), people positively

perceive coral reefs as home to marine bio-

diversity, justifying that without corals, there

would be no fish, lobsters, or turtles in the

zone. The second, most important benefit iden-

tified was tourism attraction, which seems to

relate to the first option because the percep-

tion is that people are attracted to coral reefs

due to the number of animals they can see, as

expressed by a key informant in Golfo Dulce

and a tour operator in Bahia Culebra.

Golfo Dulce Key Informant 1: “They are

the marine ecosystem engineers; where there

are coral reefs, we see life and food.”

Bahía Culebra Tour Operator 3: “it´s

a huge touristic attraction, locals like it, and

foreigners come from all over the world to dive

here, and that is really good for us; more cor-

als, the better.”

There is a difference between results from

Sámara and Golfo Dulce compared to Bahía

Culebra mainly because fewer people were

interviewed in this zone than in the other two

Fig. 4. Graph representing the frequency of codes related to the Governance system and Actors set of second-tier variables

that were identified during the analysis of interviews.

Fig. 5. Graph representing the frequency of codes related to Social, Political, and Economic Settings and Interactions set of

second-tier variables identified during the analysis of the interviews.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

Fig. 6. Adaptation of the SESF diagram showing how the salient variables interact to produce a positive perception of

benefits, obtain adequate financial and human resources, and achieve enabling environment for coral reef restoration.

due to less community involvement. Also,

the perception of most interviewees was that

Papagayo gulf did not have many coral reefs.

Results from reef benefits are aligned

with those perceived as project benefits. When

asked about project benefits, restoring marine

biodiversity was the most mentioned. A vol-

unteer from RCCR expressed how changes are

becoming noticeable in a short period. Golfo

Dulce Volunteer 1: “The change in a variety

of fish, seahorses, and lobsters that we now

see is big. In places where everything was dead

before, after 4 or 5 months, we start to see

a change.”

Income generation was the second most

mentioned benefit. Again, it is perceived

directly and indirectly, as explained by a key

informant from Sámara. Sámara Key Infor-

mant 2: “We are seeing jobs being created

just to receive this type of tourism; people

now come to the city and have one more tour-

ist activity to do, so hotels, restaurants, tour

operators, and everyone benefits from it.

This positive perception motivated people

to support project activities. However, there

is a difference in motives to participate in the

project between the groups interviewed, which

is caused by the type of economic activity

performed by the individual. People related

to touristic activities were more willing to

contribute to the project since they perceived

short-term benefits from their contribution due

14 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

to the possibility of generating income from

the project as a touristic attraction, which gave

them a higher economic value perception. On

the other side, fishers who perceived benefits

related to the increase of marine biodiversity

see it as a long-term benefit that did not cause

a significant motivation to participate in resto-

ration activities, as expressed by a fisher from

Golfo Dulce. Golfo Dulce Fisher 1: “I know

the project will benefit because more corals

mean more fish, but the problem is the change

takes time. It could be months or years until we

see the number of fish we used to have, and I

need money and food to take back home. I can´t

just take a day off work. I live from what I earn

every day, and, in the sea, we never know if it´s

going to be a good day but not going to fish is

not an option.”

Projects have also conducted education-

al awareness campaigns to reach locals and

Fig. 8. Results from interviews regarding project benefit perception in Sámara, Golfo Dulce, and Bahía Culebra.

Fig. 7. Results from interviews regarding reef benefit perception in Sámara, Golfo Dulce, and Bahía Culebra.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

tourists about the importance of reefs, caus-

ing an impact on the perception of corals and

project benefits. Most of these educational

outreach activities target youth from schools

and social media. The location also influences

perception, and collective action in three ways:

(1) Projects were in sites of easy access to com-

munities, as in the case of Sámara, or in the

area of influence of local businesses, as in the

case of the hotels in Golfo Dulce and the pri-

vate developer in Bahía Culebra, it was easier

for people to perceive benefits and stewardship

was increased. (2) Accessibility to restoration

sites also reduces transaction costs related

to transportation. (3) All three projects were

in zones with no previous conflict between

reef users.

In the case of Sámara, in the beginning,

the project faced sabotage from local fishers

because of a lack of communication of project

objectives and benefits from the project to the

local community. Fishers feared the project

would take their fishing rights in the area. The

problem was solved with meetings to inform

about project goals, how it would benefit fish-

ers regarding the provision services of reefs,

and by defining in conjunction restoration site

in which the project would not be affected, and

fishers could continue with their activities. A

fisher, a member of the Samara fisher associa-

tion, gave an example. Sámara Fisher 2: “They

focus mainly on tourism, which is fine, but they

should not leave out the fishers. For example,

where they wanted to make the nurseries was

a place on the fishing route. So, I told them

no, you could not put it there because you will

affect us; you must use common sense. They

probably would have set up the project there if

they had not invited me to the meeting, which

could have caused conflicts. We know it is a

good project, but it must be good to everyone,

not just a few.”

Interviews with project volunteers in

Sámara and Golfo Dulce showed that the dura-

tion of living in the community is essential for

increasing collective action. People who lived

in the community where restoration took place

and knew how coral reefs changed through

time were more willing to contribute. When

asked about what will motivate them to partici-

pate in the project, we saw that people with a

negative perception of the reef state due to local

threats, such as sewage water or sedimentation

(Fig. 9), were more willing to participate than

those that had a common perception and per-

ceived global threats, such as climate change

because they saw their actions could not stop

the original problem. This difference in percep-

tion of the reef state and threats was one of

the most significant contrasts between local

actors interviewed in Sámara and Golfo Dulce,

projects with greater community participa-

tion. For instance, a member of the local water

organization in Sámara told us about how teak

plantations damaged corals and the actions they

have been conducting to reduce this type of

threat. Sámara Organization 2: “I have lived in

Sámara all my life, and I saw how we have been

losing our reefs, especially 30 years ago when

the teak plantations started. We are doing our

Fig. 9. Results from interviews regarding reef state

perception.

best to restore the riparian buffer and help give

better conditions for corals to survive. I also

participate in the project because it´s important

for our community.”

In Sámara, reefs are mostly perceived as

very damaged (Fig. 9). People interviewed in

Golfo Dulce considered reef stats primarily

regular. In Bahía Culebra, perceptions were

16 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

divided between regular and damaged. Howev-

er, in Bahía Culebra, when we asked about the

coral reefs’ state or benefits, most people said

the zone doesn’t have coral reefs or just some

small patches. They did not seem to recognize

them as an essential ecosystem in the area.

In the case of Golfo Dulce, the primary

threat perceived is climate change (Fig. 10),

as explained by this tour operator Golfo Dulce

Tour Operator 3: “It´s difficult because Golfo

Dulce is very protected, and we can see coral

reefs are in a good state. We have events such as

El Niño and red tides that affect them, but there

is nothing we can do; that´s nature and climate

change. I don´t participate directly in project

activities, but I help corals by keeping tourists

from damaging them during our tours.”

Role of network structures to achieve

adequate human and financial resources:

Project members were asked about limita-

tions they perceived from restoration projects;

project funding and access to a workforce with

diving skills were among the most mentioned.

Estimations done by RCCR show that certify-

ing someone in diving and coral gardening

costs US$1 200. To balance costs and scale up

their actions, all three projects relied on part-

nerships between local and external actors to

obtain adequate human and financial resources.

These partnerships were possible due to two

main factors; first, positive perception of eco-

nomic value from local businesses such as tour

operators, private developers, and hotels that

motivated them to participate in restoration

activities. Second, trust and social capital were

built through previous social and institutional

interactions, allowing organizations to have a

good reputation between the community and

their partners. For example, in Asociación

Proyecto Corales, most active project members

have participated in other community organiza-

tions, such as the local development organiza-

tion, which has allowed them to individually

create a good reputation in the community that

has an impact on the association. Península

Papagayo performs social outreach activities

focused on education and employment for the

community, allowing a rapprochement between

the community and the project. In the case of

Golfo Dulce, RCCR has focused on educational

outreach activities and providing jobs to locals.

Also, external actors, such as CIMAR and

INA, were also relevant in the three cases to

obtain technical knowledge and access ade-

quate human resources. These external actors

were trusted due to their historical presence as

community public education service providers.

Fig. 10. Results from interviews regarding the perception of significant threats to coral reefs.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

Technical knowledge transferred from external

actors to local actors has allowed the building

of local capacities, which has helped increase

the number of volunteers as coral gardeners.

Coral gardeners work differently depending

on each project. For example, in Sámara, coral

gardeners do not receive payments; in Golfo

Dulce, they receive a US$35 per day of work

retribution; in Bahía Culebra, gardeners are

composed of CIMAR and Peninsula Papagayo

staff. To reduce costs and still access the

skilled workforce, projects have implemented

volunteer programs in which people pay and

access equipment, training, or supervision from

project members. People participating in these

volunteer programs are either members of the

diver community in Costa Rica or tourists.

Costa Rica’s reputation of being an ecotour-

ist destination with well-known diving spots

(Valverde-Sanchez, 2018) is an advantage proj-

ects have when implementing these types of

volunteer programs. These programs have been

strengthened through information sharing,

especially on social media. Social media has

also been used to report on project results and

crowdfunding. Information sharing has been

possible due to network structures enabling

trust ties to exchange information. For exam-

ple, science-related actors and local businesses

at a group level have shared technical and com-

munity knowledge to design projects adapted

to the context of each place. At the individual

level, we have a network of divers and tour

operators that allow volunteer coral gardening

activities. Trust at group and individual levels

has been maintained due to the shared motiva-

tion of restoring marine biodiversity.

External actors have contributed to back-

ing restoration efforts with science. This helped

establish operational choice rules regarding the

site, species selection, and monitoring activi-

ties, contributing to more efficient projects.

For example, scientific knowledge transferred

by external actors allowed them to know about

season and weather variability, giving predict-

ability of system dynamics to determine rules

for restoration sites and activities such as

choosing nursery sites without the presence of

coralivorous fish, sandy bottom, good water

quality, presence of live coral coverage, select-

ing species that have had a presence in or near

the restoration site, choosing structures that

fit in distinctive characteristics of each spe-

cies cleaning restoration sites at least twice a

month, and monitor changes in fish biomass.

Most of the scientific knowledge external

actors have comes from official guides estab-

lished by international coral reef organizations

based on international reef restoration experi-

ences. Also, projects had two and half year’s

experimental phase, where tests regarding the

correct type of species with specific structures

were made. In the case of Bahía Culebra,

knowledge of how to start the project was

transferred from RCCR through a partnership.

Role of compliance with regulatory

frameworks: Costa Rica banned trawling fish-

ing in 2013 (Sentence No. 2013–10540, 2013).

Project members and fishers identified this

fishing method as one of the most extensive

threats corals had and perceived that the pro-

hibition helped improve the environment for

coral reefs. In general, interviewees highlighted

compliance with this legal framework and a

positive perception of its effects on marine bio-

diversity. Sámara Fisher 1: “I have been living

here for more than 40 years, and I remember

when I was a kid, my father would capture

many fishes, and with time, the quantity of fish

decreased. Trawlers were the worst thing that

happened to the seas; they destroyed every-

thing. Now we see a change, but still, more

time is needed to see a difference. We as fishers,

must fight for the sea, the government wanted

to allow trawlers again, and we fought against

it because we know how bad it is.”

In 2019, MINAE, through decree N°

41774, established the promotion of restora-

tion and conservation initiatives for recovering

coral reef ecosystems. This decree is the first

regulatory framework in Costa Rica to address

coral reef restoration projects by stipulating the

creation of a multilevel governance structure to

facilitate cooperation for restoration initiatives

and creating an official restoration protocol

18 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

(Sistema Nacional de Areas de Conservación,

Sociedad Alemana de Cooperación Internacio-

nal [SINAC-GIZ], 2020). This protocol gives

the guidelines for submitting a restoration

project, including the rules that a biologist or

natural resources manager must lead each proj-

ect proposal. In addition, projects must last a

minimum of two years to guarantee at least one

year of monitoring. Finally, research depart-

ments approve restoration proposals from the

Conservation Area where the project belongs.

Key informants from Sámara and Golfo Dulce

shared insights into how they have contributed

and benefited from this legal framework:

Golfo Dulce Key Informant 1: “Due to

our experience in coral restoration, the govern-

mental conservation institution ordered us the

design the official coral restoration protocol

for Costa Rica. There we stated biological dif-

ferences between the Pacific and Atlantic coast

corals, specified rules for starting a project,

and how to monitor them.”

Sámara Key Informant 1: “I am in charge

of assisting with the Coral Council meetings.

When the project started, we received technical

assistance through this committee.”

As seen before, water quality is an essential

element for effective coral reef restoration. Our

study shows the relationship between regula-

tory framework aiming to reduce deforestation

and positive water quality. Golfo Dulce is sur-

rounded by National Parks, Forest Reserve, and

an AMPR and is the only place to achieve natu-

ral regeneration rates in coral reefs. Fournier

et al. (2019) evaluated anthropogenic impacts

from plantations near the Coto Colorado river,

which covers 95 % of the agricultural area

and drains into the gulf. Their results show

the importance of the 2 100 ha of mangrove

to cushion the impact of land-based pollution.

Another study by Cortés (1990) demonstrates

that corals have natural regeneration rates;

for example, at Punta Nicuesa, Cortés (1990)

reported a 45.9 % increase in live coral cover

in 1985/1988. Alvarado et al. (2015) report an

83.4 % live coral cover for the same zone. The

project Manager from RCCR also says their

monitoring shows natural regeneration rates

and greater resistance to stress events such as

changing water temperatures.

Golfo Dulce Key Informant 2: “There is

not much being done by the government to pro-

tect the oceans; it´s still something new, but we

can´t deny national parks have helped reduce

deforestation and provide a good environment

for corals.”

In Bahía Culebra, the legal document

establishing rules in the Touristic Pole is the

Management Plan approved in 1995 by the

ICT board, which includes regulations on the

conservation of protected areas, reduction and

control of possible pollution sources, waste-

water, and solids recycling, among others. An

employee from one of the hotels in the PTGP

highlighted compliance with the management

plan.

Bahía Culebra Hotel 1: “Our business

complies with requirements to operate in the

touristic pole. We treat 100 % of the water we

use, and none is thrown to the sea; we reuse it

to water our golf camps.”

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, this is the first study to

use the SESF applied to coral reef restoration

projects. SESF proved relevant to studies that

aim to explain how sustainable outcomes are

achieved because it connects real issues related

to the system of interest to the decision-making

process at multiple levels. Our results show

that even though projects have differences in

governance structures, they have followed simi-

lar paths for achieving successful outcomes.

This path must include three critical enabling

conditions for achieving successful restoration:

(1) Positive perception of benefits both from

coral reefs and projects to achieve collective

action; (2) Network structures to get adequate

financial and human resources; (3) The impor-

tance of compliance with an existing regulatory

framework to create enabling environments for

projects development and coral reef ecology.

Perceptions can be used as evidence

for assessing environmental outcomes to

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

understand stakeholders´ conception of social

and ecological outcomes of a specific initia-

tive and the social acceptability of conserva-

tion or restoration governance (Bennett, 2016).

Our study found that positive perceptions of

coral ecosystem services and project benefits

influenced collective action to restore the coral

reef. In the three projects, we found a posi-

tive perception of both coral and project ben-

efits related to resource dependence, the high

economic value of reefs, duration of living

in the community, knowledge of the human

agency, project location, and information shar-

ing. Studies made in México and Indonesia

about perceptions of coral reefs and restoration

projects show wealth (Cinner & Pollnac, 2004)

and local leadership involvement, degree of

interaction with the project, and overall proj-

ect results (Trialfhianty & Suadi, 2017) also

influence perceptions.

Depending on the group of reef users

being studied, the resource’s type, use, and

governance vary (Palomo & Hernández-Flores,

2019). Tour operators and fishers in the three

cases seemed to positively perceive coral reefs

and project benefits. However, the willingness

to participate in the project was greater among

tourism-related actors than among fishers. The

main difference is that fishers’ positive percep-

tion is related to increasing fish biomass which

is a long-term benefit that doesn’t seem to

compensate for using their time to contribute to

the project because of economic reasons. Cin-

ner & Pollnac (2004) used Maslow’s hierarchy

of needs to show the relation between wealth

and involvement in environmental activities

in a coastal community in Mexico. Wealthier

residents were able to meet basic needs and

have more economic security for contribut-

ing to environmental conservation, which is

related to a fulfilling sense of belonging. In

our research, tourists-related actors were more

willing to participate because they perceived

the short-term benefits of restoring coral reefs.

Diedrich (2007) found similar results with a

positive correlation between tourism and coral

reef conservation awareness in Belize.

Analyzing the type of governance struc-

tures and motivations to start a restoration proj-

ect matters because it affects project design,

stakeholder participation, monitoring, and

long-term ecological integrity. Even though

the three cases have different governance struc-

tures, they all share similarities of being proj-

ects with a biotic rationale, which means their

main goal is to recover lost aspects of local

diversity (Clewell & Aronson, 2006). These

types of inspiration seem to be a tendency

in the region, as shown by Bayraktarov et al.

(2020) review of coral reef restoration projects

in Latin America, where 42 % of projects have

biotic motives, followed by an 8 % with ideal-

istic and pragmatic reasons.

Reviews of projects implemented in the

Caribbean, Western Atlantic, and Indonesia

highlight the importance of partnerships for

having adequate scientific, logistical, technical,

institutional, and interpersonal skills (Johnson

et al., 2011; Lamont et al., 2022). In the case

of Latin America, Bayraktarov et al. (2020)

showed that NGOs and foundations are the

most common type of project leaders. They

establish partnerships with universities, con-

servation management bodies and regulators,

local associations, national and international

business partners, international environmental

NGOs, tourist operators, private donations,

international grant schemes, and local com-

munity groups. These partnerships are estab-

lished mainly to fill funding gaps and provide

a skilled workforce. Goreau & Hilbertz (2008)

highlight that NGOs or foundations financed

by international cooperation grants are the

most common governance structure for reef

restoration projects. Hesley et al. (2017) and

Lirman & Schopmeyer (2016) identified the

dependence on grants as the main cause of

long-term failure of coral restoration led by

NGOs because these funds usually last between

1-3 years. In that perspective, the fact that

RCCR primary mission is working with coral

restoration helps to focus all resources on

this work, unlike the other case studies where

organizations leading do not deal exclusively

with coral reef restoration or depend totally on

20 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

volunteer work. However, if we evaluate long-

term performance, RCCR may have a more

significant challenge in maintaining stability

than the other two cases because their central

workforce depends on the payment workers

receive. They will also have to reduce critical

activities such as continuous monitoring if they

fail to diversify funds other than grants.

Besides motivation, the three study cases

share the involvement and funding of activi-

ties from the public sector through external

actors such as the local university or technical

learning government institution. These external

actors have enabled science efforts backing

restoration activities, which has allowed proj-

ects to have experimental phases to determine

what species and structures work best for

the specific ecological conditions in the zone

and provide continuous monitoring. This test-

ing phase is present in the three cases. It has

allowed the projects to use small-scale pilot

projects to demonstrate success and build rela-

tionships with key stakeholders to contribute to

scaling up. A review of restoration projects in

Thailand recommends pilot projects as a good

management practice for successful restora-

tion (Yeemin et al., 2006). Nonetheless, it is

not the case in many projects, as shown by the

Boström-Einarsson et al. (2020) review, where

60 % of projects out of 362 lack standardized

monitoring, with the median of projects per-

forming less than 18 months of monitoring.

Also, external actors have had an essential

role in building local capacities through the

implementation of workshops on coral garden-

ing and providing educational benefits to local

communities (Bottema & Bush, 2012; Hein et

al., 2019; Okubo & Onuma, 2015).

However, external science-related actors

alone could not perform all the work. Transfer-

ring knowledge is essential to success because

it builds local capacities, increasing local stew-

ardship (Hein et al., 2019). It´s the case in

Sámara, where the project is being co-managed

by community and government institutions.

The local organization makes decisions regard-

ing cleaning or fundraising activities; mean-

while, the public sector institutions support

technical decisions and monitoring. We found

that past experiences, trust, social capital,

and benefit perception influence community

involvement. These variables depend on who is

leading the project and the history of the resto-

ration site. Sámara is being led by locals who

participate in other community organizations,

allowing trust and social capital to be devel-

oped (Pretty, 2003). Similar results regarding

the importance of social capital and trusted

leaders have been found in projects evaluated

in Indonesia by Frey & Berkes (2014) and Par-

telow & Nelson (2020). In the case of the local

community interviewed in Bahía Culebra, they

were less likely to participate in the restoration

project because: (1) They perceived Península

Papagayo as a powerful actor that already had

all the resources needed to conduct the proj-

ect, (2) It´s their responsibility to compensate

for the damage caused by the building of the

touristic pole, and (3) Locals feel excluded

from possible benefits that could be obtained

from the project due to difficulty accessing

restoration sites.

Bottema & Bush (2012) analyzed private

restoration initiatives conducted in Indone-

sia and found similar challenges in getting

acceptance and participation from locals. They

recommend state support for private initia-

tives to create lasting institutional arrange-

ments. In Golfo Dulce, the project started as

a research initiative, and project managers are

not locals, affecting community participation.

Also, past experiences of exclusion in the

decision-making process of land and marine

regulations (National Parks and AMPR) (Far-

gier et al., 2014) have left local groups, such

as fishers associations, suspicious that more

conservation activities will affect their property

rights. RCCR has been working since 2019

to address the lack of information about the

project goal and increase community involve-

ment through local workshops and educational

outreach activities with schools. Strengthening

local communities’ governance, such as prop-

erty rights, seems to have an impact on coral

reef conservation (Cinner et al., 2016)

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

The private sector, through tourism-related

businesses, has also been critical for funding

and scaling up restoration activities. Meyers

(2017) highlights the positive use of tourism

to get a skilled workforce and funding for

restoration. However, well-planned commer-

cial projects may positively impact coral reef

restoration (Westoby et al., 2020). Okubo and

Onuma (2015) research on Okinawa commer-

cial projects presents three significant prob-

lems derived from profit-driven projects. The

first has to do with the use of fragments from

natural coral colonies that are already dete-

riorated and the effect it may have on natural

processes corals are having. Second is the need

for genetic or species diversity to be used. For

example, projects tend to use Acropora, which

has a commercial interest because of its beauty

and faster growth rates. The third increase

in market restoration activities could cause

scarcity of donor fragments, increasing costs

of restoration, which could increase poaching

and thus lead to even more deterioration. The

level of involvement of the private sector var-

ies in each case for our study. For example,

in Bahía Culebra, there is an agreement to

co-manage the project between the local uni-

versity and private developer, and responsibili-

ties between both sides are established under

a written agreement. In Sámara, we identified

private touristic-related owners participating

from the local community organization and

donating equipment, hotel rooms, and their

time as volunteers. Also, Sámara partnered

with a local tour operator for the citizen sci-

ence event. Finally, in the case of Golfo Dulce,

private support comes mainly from “house

reefs” (Liburd & Becken, 2007). In the three

cases, decision-making is not profit-driven;

instead, decisions are managed by science-

related actors to improve ecological integrity

by using lessons learned from other projects’

best practices in scientific or grey literature and

through experimental phases.

Private partnerships are mainly used to

establish volunteer programs through citizen

science. Volunteer programs help projects

obtain funding and a skilled workforce, which

is more difficult for reef restoration than shore-

based activities such as mangrove restoration

because diving or boating skills are less com-

mon (Hesley et al., 2017). The main difference

in volunteer programs between projects is

that funding from the private sector in Bahía

Culebra covers most of the expenses from

volunteers compared to the other two, which

allows for a more constant list of volunteers for

Bahía Culebra.

Results from our study highlight the

importance of compliance with regulatory

frameworks to reduce coral causes of deg-

radation. All official restoration guides state

that effective restoration must first control the

causes of degradation (Goergen et al., 2020;

Quigley et al., 2022; Shaver et al., 2020). Coral

reef restoration should complement other con-

servation strategies, such as sustainable fishing

practices and marine spatial planning (Lirman

& Schopmeyer, 2016). Good water quality is

critical for choosing restoration sites (Goer-

gen et al., 2020; Shaver et al., 2020). In Golfo

Dulce, good water quality is possible due to

the protection of forests surrounding the gulf

through the declaration of national parks and

forest reserves. The existence of mangrove for-

ests in the zone (Fournier et al., 2019) goes up

to 2 100 ha. A study in the Caribbean supports

incorporating habitat diversity, including man-

groves and seagrass meadows, to reduce threats

to coral reefs (Mumby et al., 2004). In the case

of Sámara, almost all the mangrove forest has

been deforested, so sedimentation from teak

plantations in the mountains directly affects

coral reefs. Besides that, sewage water is not

being treated, thus affecting water quality.

Sánchez-Noguera et al. (2018) present

a study from 2010-2011 on water quality

in Bahía Culebra. Using the geometric aver-

age of FC/100ml, Bahía Culebra obtained <

1.8, corresponding to excellent water qual-

ity classification. The study concludes that

Bahía Culebra has a high degree of sanitary

quality in its coastal waters, which has been

constant over time. In Bahía Culebra, the regu-

latory frameworks contributing to water qual-

ity come from the Touristic Pole Management

22 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

Plan, which determines wastewater and solids

recycling rules. However, the study highlights

the importance of monitoring and access to

information regarding compliance with the

Management Plan.

There is a global gap in environmen-

tal policies for coral reef restoration projects

(Westoby et al., 2020). Nevertheless, regula-

tory frameworks play a crucial role in translat-

ing scientific knowledge into basic restoration

standards, mobilizing financial resources, and

enabling environments for cooperation. For

example, coral reef restoration legislation in

Costa Rica is still in the initial phase but has

effectively facilitated best practices and knowl-

edge to restoration stakeholders.

Regarding long-term sustainability chal-

lenges, we identified global ones, such as

changes in the predictability of system dynam-

ics due to climate change, which could affect

survival rates. For projects to be prepared for

these challenges, technology like underwater

temperature sensors and constant in-field mon-

itoring is necessary to understand how corals

react to stress events and what species or frag-

ments are more resilient so they can be used as

donors. National challenges include narrow-

ing university or technical learning govern-

ment institutions’ funding, which could broadly

compromise the ecological monitoring of the

restoration programs, especially in Bahía Cul-

ebra and Sámara. Projects must communicate

their results in social and economic terms for

high-level decision-makers to understand the

importance of funding this activity. Relevant

metrics could include the number of jobs cre-

ated or the revenue gathered through tourism or

restoration activities.

Finally, at the local level, we found the

challenge of reducing local causes of degrada-

tion, which requires interinstitutional coordina-

tion between the community, private sector,

and government through marine spatial plan-

ning. Other challenges are more context- or

governance-dependent; for example, science

or NGO-led initiatives typically guarantee eco-

logical integrity but fail to create local steward-

ship. For community and NGO-led initiatives,

it’s important to diversify their funding. For

all three projects, monitoring and researching

which techniques or species are working better

for their specific environmental conditions and

the importance of sharing these results with

the entire restoration community are essen-

tial. Also, for scientific purposes, the country

should standardize the results reporting (Goer-

gen et al., 2020; Shaver et al., 2020), contribut-

ing to making projects more comparable and

knowledge regarding the best techniques or

structures for growing corals or species resil-

ience to stress events would be available for

the reef restoration community to learn of. The

three projects evaluated in this study have dif-

ferences in the number of corals transplanted,

and the coral genus used that can influence the

overall survival rate. That is why we included

other aspects, such as project durability and

local involvement, to determine project success

and not focus only on ecological outcomes but

overall project performance. Also, all three

projects continue to be implemented and thus

are evolving continuously to solve the different

challenges faced. The results shown here are

statical; they reflect a specific period of each

project. Coral reef restoration initiatives are

still recent in Costa Rica; findings from this

study contribute to providing insights for future

restoration project design and implementation

strategies that can reduce transaction costs

hence making projects more cost-effective and

appealing to a more significant number of

stakeholders, especially during these times

when the United Nations declared the Decade

on Ecosystem Restoration (2020-2030) (Fisch-

er et al., 2021).

Ethical statement: the authors declare

that they all agree with this publication and

made significant contributions; that there is no

conflict of interest of any kind; and that we fol-

lowed all pertinent ethical and legal procedures

and requirements. All financial sources are

fully and clearly stated in the acknowledge-

ments section. A signed document has been

filed in the journal archives.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The authors are grateful to the communi-

ties and project members from Asociación

Proyecto Corales Sámara, Raising Corals Costa

Rica and Culebra Reef gardens that shared their

time and knowledge with us. Furthermore, the

present research would not have been possible

without the funding of the German Academic

Exchange Service (DAAD) and support from

the Tropical Agricultural Research and Higher

Education Center (CATIE) and the Leibniz

Center for Marine Tropical Ecology (ZMT).

REFERENCES

Alfaro, E. J., & Cortés, J. (2012). Atmospheric forcing of

cool subsurface water events in Bahia Culebra, Gulf

of Papagayo, Costa Rica. Revista de Biología Tropi-

cal, 60 (S2), 173–186 https://doi.org10.15517/RBT.

V60I2.20001

Alvarado, J. J., Beita-Jiménez, A., Mena, S., Fernández-

García, C., & Guzmán-Mora, A. G. (2015). Eco-

sistemas coralinos del Área de Conservación Osa,

Costa Rica: estructura y necesidades de conserva-

ción. Revista de Biología Tropical, 63(S1), 219–259.

https://doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v63i1.23105

Armstrong, E., Degnall, E., Obasare, R., & Scott-Solomon,

E. (2010). Sedimentation in Mangrove Forests in

Sámara, Costa Rica. Worcester Polytechnic Institute.

Basurto, X., Gelcich, S., & Ostrom, E. (2013). The social-

ecological system framework is a classificatory

knowledge system for benthic small-scale fisheries.

Global Environmental Change, 23(S6), 1366–1380.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.08.001

Bayraktarov, E., Banaszak, A. T., Maya, P. M., Kleypas,

J., Arias-Gonzalez, J. E., Blanco, M., Calle-Triviño,

J., Charuvi, N., Cortes-Useche, C., Galvan, V., Sal-

gado, M. A. G., Gnecco, M., Guendulain-Garcia, S.

D., Delgado, E. A. H., Moraga, J. A. M., Maya, M.

F., Quiroz, S. M., Cervantes, S. M., Morikawa, M.,

… Frias-Torres, S. (2020). Coral reef restoration

efforts in Latin American countries and territories.

PLoS ONE, 15, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.

pone.0228477

Bayraktarov, E., Stewart-Sinclair, P. J., Brisbane, S., Bos-

tröm-Einarsson, L., Saunders, M. I., Lovelock, C.

E., Possingham, H. P., Mumby, P. J., & Wilson, K. A.

(2019). Motivations, success, and cost of coral reef

restoration. Restoration Ecology, 27(5), 981–991.

https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12977

Bennett, N. J. (2016). Using perceptions as evidence

to improve conservation and environmental

management. Conservation Biology, 30(S3), 582–

592. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12681

Bernard, H. R. (2006). Research Methods in Anthropology.

Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Rowman &

Littlefield Publishers.

Bonde, D. (2013). Qualitative market research: When

enough is enough. http://www.raptureconsulting.

com/uploads/2/4/3/8/24380515/how_many_qualitati-

ve_ interviews.pdf

Boström-Einarsson, L., Babcock, R. C., Bayraktarov, E.,

Ceccarelli, D., Cook, N., Ferse, S. C. A., Hancock, B.,

Harrison, P., Hein, M., Shaver, E., Smith, A., Suggett,

D., Stewart-Sinclair, P. J., Vardi, T., & McLeod, I.

M. (2020) Coral restoration – A systematic review

of current methods, successes, failures and future

directions. PLoS ONE, 15(1), e0226631. https://doi.

org/10.1371/journal.pone.0226631.

Bottema, M. J. M., & Bush, S. R. (2012). The durability of

private sector-led marine conservation: A case study

of two entrepreneurial marine protected areas in Indo-

nesia. Ocean and Coastal Management, 61, 38–48.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2012.01.004

Burke, L., Reytar, K., Spalding, M., Perry, A. (2011). Reefs

at Risk Revisited. World Resources Institute.

Christie, P., & White, A. T. (2007). Best practices for

improved governance of coral reef marine protected

areas. Coral Reefs, 26(S4), 1047–1056. https://doi.

org/10.1007/s00338-007-0235-9

Cinner, J. E., Huchery, C., MacNeil, M. A., Graham, N. A.

J., McClanahan, T. R., Maina, J., Maire, E., Kittinger,

J. N., Hicks, C. C., Mora, C., Allison, E. H., D’Agata,

S., Hoey, A., Feary, D. A., Crowder, L., Williams,

I. D., Kulbicki, M., Vigliola, L., Wantiez, L., …

Mouillot, D. (2016). Bright spots among the world’s

coral reefs. Nature, 535(7612), 416–419. https://doi.

org/10.1038/nature18607

Cinner, J. E., McClanahan, T. R., MacNeil, M. A., Gra-

ham, N. A. J., Daw, T. M., Mukminin, A., Feary, D.

A., Rabearisoa, A. L., Wamukota, A., Jiddawi, N.,

Campbell, S. J., Baird, A. H., Januchowski-Hartley,

F. A., Hamed, S., Lahari, R., Morove, T., & Kuan-

ge, J. (2012). Comanagement of coral reef social-

ecological systems. Proceedings of the National

Academy of Sciences of the United States of Ame-

rica, 109(14), 5219–5222. https://doi.org/10.1073/

pnas.1121215109

Cinner, J. E., & Pollnac, R. B. (2004). Poverty, perceptions

and planning: why socioeconomics matter in the

management of Mexican reefs. Ocean and Coas-

tal Management, 47(9–10), 479–493. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2004.09.002

Clewell, A. F., & Aronson, J. (2006). Motiva-

tions for the restoration of ecosystems.

24 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

Conservation Biology, 20(S2), 420–428. https://doi.

org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00340.x

Cortés, J. (1990). The coral reefs of Golfo Dulce, Costa

Rica: Distribution and community structure. Atoll

Research Bulletin, 344, 1–37.

Cortés, J., & Jiménez, C. E. (2003). Corals and coral reefs

of the Pacific of Costa Rica: history, research and

status. In Cortés, J. (Ed.), Latin American coral reefs.

(pp. 361–385). Elsevier Science B. V.

Cortés, J., Jiménez, C. E., Fonseca, A. C., & Alvarado, J.

J. (2010). Status and conservation of coral reefs in

Costa Rica. Revista de Biología Tropical, 58(S1),

33–50. https://doi.org/10.15517/rbt.v58i1.20022

Cox, M. (2011). Advancing the diagnostic analysis of

environmental problems. International Journal of the

Commons, 5, 346–363.

CREST (Center for Responsible Travel). (2013). Un retra-

to de la realidad económica en Nosara y Sámara:

Proporcionando las herramientas para el Desarrollo

Sostenible. Center for Responsible Travel.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative,

quantitative and mixed methods Approaches (4th

Ed.). Sage.

DeCaro, D. A., & Stokes, M. K. (2013). Public partici-

pation and institutional fit: A social-psychological

perspective. Ecology and Society, 18(4), 40. https://

doi.org/10.5751/ES-05837-180440

Delgado-Serrano, M. D. M., & Ramos, P. A. (2015).

Making Ostrom’s framework applicable to characteri-

ze social ecological systems at the local level. Inter-

national Journal of the Commons, 9(2), 808–830.

https://doi.org/10.18352/ijc.567

Diedrich, A. (2007). The impacts of tourism on coral

reef conservation awareness and support in coastal

communities in Belize. Coral Reefs, 26(4), 985–996.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-007-0224-z

Eddy, T. D., Lam, V. W. Y., Reygondeau, G., Cisneros-

Montemayor, A. M., Greer, K., Palomares, M. L.

D., Bruno, J. F., Ota, Y., & Cheung, W. W. L. (2021).

Global decline in capacity of coral reefs to provide

ecosystem services. One Earth, 4(9), 1278–1285.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2021.08.016

Edwards, A. J., & Clark, S. (1999). Coral transplantation:

a useful management tool or misguided meddling?

Marine Pollution Bulletin, 37(8–12), 474–487.

Fargier, L., Hartmann, H. J., & Molina-Ureña, H. (2014).

Marine Areas of Resposible Fishing: A path towards

small-scale fisheries co-management in Costa Rica?

Perspectives from Golfo Dulce. In F. Amezcua, & B.

Bellgraph (Eds.), Fisheries Management of Mexi-

can and Central American Estuaries. (pp. 155-180).

Springer.

Fischer, J., Riechers, M., Loos, J., Martin-Lopez, B., &

Temperton, V. M. (2021). Making the UN Decade on

ecosystem restoration a social-ecological endeavour.

Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 36(1), 20–28.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2020.08.018

Fournier, M., Castillo, L., Ramírez, F., Moraga, G., &

Ruepert, C. (2019). Evaluación preliminar del área

agrícola y su influencia sobre la calidad del agua

en el Golfo Dulce, Costa Rica. Revista De Ciencias

Ambientales, 53(1), 92–112. https://doi.org/10.15359/

rca.53-1.5

Frey, J. B., & Berkes, F. (2014). Can partnerships and

community-based conservation reverse the decline

of coral reef social-ecological systems? International

Journal of the Commons, 8(1), 26–46. https://doi.

org/10.18352/bmgn-lchr.408.

Frey, U. J., & Cox, M. (2015). Building a diagnostic

ontology of social-ecological systems. International

Journal of the Commons, 9(2), 595–618. http://doi.

org/10.18352/ijc.505

Goergen, E. A., Schopmeyer, S., Moulding, A. L., Moura,

A., Kramer, P., & Viehman, T. S. (2020). Coral reef

restoration monitoring guide: Methods to evaluate

restoration success from local to ecosystem scales.

National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science (NOAA).

https://doi.org/10.25923/xndz-h538

Google Satellite. (n.d.). [Costa Rica] Retrieved Sept-

ember 10, 2022, from https://mt1.google.com/vt/

lyrs=s&x={x}&y={y}&z={z}

Goreau, T. J., & Hilbertz, W. (2008). Bottom-up community

based coral reef and fisheries restoration in Indone-

sia, Panama, and Palau. In R. France (Ed.), Handbook

of regenerative landscape design (p. 143-159). CRC

Press.

Gunderson, L., Kinzig, A., Quinlan, A., & Walker, B.

(2010). Assessing resilience in social-ecological sys-

tems: Workbook for practitioners. The Resilience

Alliance.

Harriot, V. J., Fisk, D.A. (2016). Coral transplantation

as a reef management option [Paper presentation].

Proceedings of the Sixth International Coral Reed

Symposium, Bali, Indonesia

Hein, M. Y., Birtles, A., Willis, B. L., Gardiner, N., Bee-

den, R., & Marshall, N. A. (2019). Coral restoration:

Socio-ecological perspectives of benefits and limita-

tions. Biological Conservation, 229, 14–25. https://

doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2018.11.014

Hein, M. Y., Willis, B. L., Beeden, R., & Birtles, A. (2017).

The need for broader ecological and socioeconomic

tools to evaluate the effectiveness of coral restora-

tion programs. Restoration Ecology, 25(6), 873–883.

https://doi.org/10.1111/rec.12580

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

Hesley, D., Burdeno, D., Drury, C., Schopmeyer, S., &

Lirman, D. (2017). Citizen science benefits coral

reef restoration activities. Journal for Nature Con-

servation, 40, 94–99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

jnc.2017.09.001

Honey, M., Vargas, E., & Durham, W. H. (2010). Impact of

tourism related development on the Pacific Coast of

Costa Rica. CREST (Center for Responsible Travel)

Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approa-

ches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative

Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. https://doi.

org/10.1177/1049732305276687

Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Censos. (2011). Costa

Rica: Población total por grupos de edad, según

provincia, cantón y sexo. Instituto Nacional de Esta-

dística y Censos, Gobierno de Costa Rica

Jiménez, C. (2001). Arrecifes y ambientes coralinos de

Bahía Culebra, Pacífico de Costa Rica: aspectos bio-

lógicos, económico-recreativos y de manejo. Revista

de Biología Tropical, 49 (S2), 215–231.

Johnson, M. E., Lustic, C., Bartels, E., Baums, I. B.,

Gilliam, D. S., Larson, L., Lirman, D., Miller, M. W.,

Nedimyer, K., & Schopmeyer, S. (2011). Caribbean

Acropora Restoration Guide: Best Practices for Pro-

pagation and Population Enhancement. The Nature

Conservancy.

Kittinger, J. N., Bambico, T. M., Minton, D., Miller, A.,

Mejia, M., Kalei, N., Wong, B., & Glazier, E. W.

(2016). Restoring ecosystems, restoring community:

socioeconomic and cultural dimensions of a commu-

nity-based coral reef restoration project. Regional

Environmental Change, 16(2), 301–313. https://doi.

org/10.1007/s10113-013-0572-x

Kittinger, J. N., Finkbeiner, E. M., Glazier, E. W., &

Crowder, L. B. (2012). Human dimensions of coral

reef social-ecological systems. Ecology and Society,

17(4), 17. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-05115-170417

Lamont, T. A. C., Razak, T. B., Djohani, R., Janetski, N.,

Rapi, S., Mars, F., & Smith, D. J. (2022). Multi-

dimensional approaches to scaling up coral reef

restoration. Marine Policy, 143, 105199. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.marpol.2022.105199

Leslie, H. M., Basurto, X., Nenadovic, M., Sievanen, L.,

Cavanaugh, K. C., Cota-Nieto, J. J., Erisman, B. E.,

Finkbeiner, E., Hinojosa-Arango, G., Moreno-Báez,

M., Nagavarapu, S., Reddy, S. M. W., Sánchez-

Rodríguez, A., Siegel, K., Ulibarria-Valenzuela, J. J.,

Weaver, A. H., & Aburto-Oropeza, O. (2015). Opera-

tionalizing the social-ecological systems framework

to assess sustainability. Proceedings of the National

Academy of Sciences of the United States of Ame-

rica, 112(19), 5979–5984. https://doi.org/10.1073/

pnas.1414640112

Liburd, J. J., & Becken, S. (2017). Values in nature conser-

vation, tourism and UNESCO World Heritage Site

stewardship. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 25(12),

1719–1735. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2017

.1293067

Lirman, D., & Schopmeyer, S. (2016). Ecological solutions

to reef degradation: optimizing coral reef restoration

in the Caribbean and Western Atlantic. PeerJ, 4,

e2597. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.2597

Maxwell, J. (2014). Designing a qualitative study. In L.

Bickman, & D. J. Rog (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook

of Applied Social Research Methods (pp. 214–241).

SAGE. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483348858.n7

Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Forum

Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum: Qualitative

Social Research, 1(2), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.17169/

fqs-1.2.1089

McGinnis, M. D., & Ostrom, E. (2014). Social-ecological

system framework: initial changes and continuing

challenges. Ecology and Society, 19(2), 30. https://

doi.org/10.5751/ES-06387-190230

Meyers, R. (2017). An aesthetics of resilience: design and

agency in contemporary coral restoration. Resilience,

5(3), 201–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/21693293.20

16.1241477

Moberg, F., & Rönnbäck, P. (2003). Ecosystem ser-

vices of the tropical seascape: Interactions,

substitutions and restoration. Ocean and Coas-

tal Management, 46(1–2), 27–46. https://doi.

org/10.1016/S0964-5691(02)00119-9

Morales-Ramírez, Á. (2011). La diversidad marina del

golfo dulce, pacífico sur de costa rica: amenazas a su

conservación. Biocenosis, 24, 9–20.

Mumby, P. J., Edwards, A. J., Arias-González, J. E., Linde-

man, K. C., Blackwell, P. G., Gall, A., Gorczynska,

M. I., Harborne, A. R., Pescod, C. L., & Renken H.

(2004). Mangroves enhance the biomass of coral

reef fish communities in the Caribbean. Nature, 427,

533–536

Nielsen, R. A. (2016). Case selection via Matching.

Sociological Methods and Research, 45(3), 569–597.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124114547054

Okubo, N., & Onuma, A. (2015). An economic and ecolo-

gical consideration of precommercial coral transplan-

tation to restore the marine ecosystem in Okinawa,

Japan. Ecosystem Services, 11, 39–44. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2014.07.009.

Olson, M. (1965). The Logic of Collective Action: Public

Goods and the Theory of Groups. Harvard University

Press.

Ostrom, E. (2007). A diagnostic approach for going

beyond panaceas. Proceedings of the National

26 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

Academy of Sciences of the United States of Ameri-

ca, 104(39), 15181–15187. https://doi.org/10.1073/

pnas.0702288104

Ostrom, E. (2009). Collective Action Theory. In C.

Boix, & S. C. Strokes (Eds.), The Oxford Han-

dbook of Comparative Politics (pp. 186–208).

Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/

oxfordhb/9780199566020.003.0008

Palomo, L. E., & Hernández-Flores, A. (2019). Applica-

tion of the Ostrom framework in the analysis of a

social-ecological system with multiple resources in

a marine protected area. PeerJ, 7, e7374. https://doi.

org/10.7717/peerj.7374

Partelow, S. (2018). A review of the social-ecological

systems framework: applications, methods, modifica-

tions, and challenges. Ecology and Society, 23(4), 36.

https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10594-230436

Partelow, S., & Nelson, K. (2020). Social networks,

collective action and the evolution of governance

for sustainable tourism on the Gili Islands, Indo-

nesia. Marine Policy, 112, 103220. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.marpol.2018.08.004

Partelow, S., Senff, P., Buhari, N., & Schlüter, A. (2018).

Operationalizing the social-ecological systems fra-

mework in pond aquaculture. International Jour-

nal of the Commons, 12(1), 485–518. https://doi.

org/10.18352/ijc.834

Perez Reyes, C. (2021). Informe final: Restauración ecoló-

gica de las poblaciones de coral presentes en el Área

de Conservación Tempisque del SINAC (MINAE)

mediante el trasplante de fragmentos de coral. Insti-

tuto Nacional de Aprendizaje (INA)

Pollnac, R., Christie, P., Cinner, J. E., Dalton, T., Daw, T.

M., Forrester, G. E., Graham, N. A. J., & McClana-

han, T. R. (2010). Marine reserves as linked social-

ecological systems. Proceedings of the National

Academy of Sciences of the United States of Ameri-

ca, 107(43), 18262–18265. https://doi.org/10.1073/

pnas.0908266107

Poteete, A. R., & Ostrom, E. (2004). Heterogenei-

ty, group size and collective action: The role of

institutions in forest management. Develop-

ment and Change, 35(3), 435–461. https://doi.

org/10.1111/j.1467-7660.2004.00360.x

Pretty, J. (2003). Social capital and the collective manage-

ment of resources. Science, 302(5652), 1912–1914.

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1090847

Quesada-Alpízar, M.A., & Cortés, J. (2006). Los ecosiste-

mas marinos del Pacífico sur de Costa Rica: estado

del conocimiento y perspectivas del manejo. Revista

de Biología Tropical, 54 (S1), 101–145

Quigley, K. M., Hein, M., & Suggett, D. J. (2022). Trans-

lating the 10 golden rules of reforestation for coral

reef restoration. Conservation Biology, 2022, e13890.

https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13890

Raising Corals Costa Rica. (2021). Executive Summary

2021. https://www.raisingcoral.org/latest-updates

Reyes-Bonilla, H., Alvarado, J. J., Smith, F., Cortés, J.,

Zapata, F. A., Rivera, F., Ayala-Bocos, A., Fried-

lander, A., Quimbayo, J. P., Olivier, D., Martínez,

P., Millán, A. M., Araya, T., Arriaga, A., Olán, M.,

Pérez-Matus, A., & Evie, W. (2020). Status and trends

of coral reefs of the Eastern Tropical Pacific. Status of

Coral Reefs of the World: 2020, 1–13

Rinkevich, B. (1995). Restoration strategies for coral

reefs damaged by recreational activities: the use of

sexual and asexual recruits. Restoration Ecology,

3(4), 241–251.

Rogers, A., Harborne, A. R., Brown, C. J., Bozec, Y. M.,

Castro, C., Chollett, I., Hock, K., Knowland, C.

A., Marshell, A., Ortiz, J. C., Razak, T., Roff, G.,

Samper-Villarreal, J., Saunders, M. I., Wolff, N. H.,

& Mumby, P. J. (2015). Anticipative management

for coral reef ecosystem services in the 21st century.

Global Change Biology, 21(2), 504–514. https://doi.

org/10.1111/gcb.12725

Román, M., & Angulo, J. (2013). Panorama socioeconó-

mico de los cantones de Osa y Golfito: tendencias

y desafíos para el desarrollo sostenible. Stanford

Woods Institute for the Environment.

Sánchez-Noguera, C. (2012). Entre historias y culebras:

más que una bahía (Bahía Culebra, Guanacaste, Costa

Rica). Revista de Biología Tropical, 60 (S2), 1–17.

Sánchez-Noguera, C., Jiménez, C., & Cortés, J. (2018).

Desarrollo costero y ambientes marino-costeros en

Bahía Culebra, Guanacaste, Costa Rica. Revista de

Biología Tropical, 66(S1), S309–S327. https://doi.

org/10.15517/rbt.v66i1.33301

Schlüter, A., & Madrigal, R. (2012). The SES Framework

in a Marine Setting: Methodological Lessons. Ratio-

nality, Markets and Morals, 3, 148–167.

Seawright, J., & Gerring, J. (2008). Case selec-

tion techniques in case study research: A menu

of qualitative and quantitative options. Political

Research Quarterly, 61(2), 294–308. https://doi.

org/10.1177/1065912907313077

Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice

(August 7th, 2013). Sentence No. 2013–10540.

Shaver, E. C., Courtney, C. A., West, J. M., Maynard, J.,

Hein, M., Wagner, C., Philibotte, J., MacGowan, P.,

McLeod, I., Boström-Einarsson, L., Bucchianeri, K.,

Johnston, L., & Koss, J. (2020). A manager’s guide

to coral reef restoration planning and design. NOAA

Coral Reef Conservation Program.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 71 (S1): e54853, abril 2023 (Publicado Abr. 30, 2023)

Sistema Nacional de Áreas de Conservación, Sociedad

Alemana de Cooperación Internacional [SINAC-

GIZ] (2020). Protocolo para la restauración de

arrecifes y comunidades coralinas de Costa Rica.

Sistema Nacional de Áreas de Conservación, Costa

Rica & Agencia de Cooperación Alemana para el

desarrollo (GIZ).

Souter, D., Planes, S., Wicquart, J., Logan, M., Obura, D.,

& Staub, F. (2020). Status of Coral Reefs of the World:

2020. Executive Summary. Global Coral Reef Moni-

toring Network, International Coral Reef Initiative,

Australian Government, & Australian Institute of

Marine Science.

Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative

research: Grounded theory procedures and techni-

ques. Sage.

Suding, K., Higgs, E., Palmer, M., Callicott, J. B., Ander-

son, C. B., Baker, M., Gutrich, J. J., Hondula, K. L.,

LaFevor, M. C., Larson, B. M. H., Randall, A., Ruhl,

J. B., & Schwartz, K. Z. S. (2015) Committing to

ecological restoration. Science, 348, 638–640.

Torres-Guevara, L. E., Lopez, M. C., & Schlüter, A. (2016).

Understanding artisanal fishers’ behaviors: the case of

Ciénaga Grande de Santa Marta, Colombia. Sustaina-

bility, 8(6), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/su8060549

Trialfhianty, T. I., & Suadi. (2017). The role of the

community in supporting coral reef restoration in

Pemuteran, Bali, Indonesia. Journal of Coastal Con-

servation, 21(6), 873–882. https://doi.org/10.1007/

s11852-017-0553-1

Uribe-Castañeda, N., Newton, A., & Tissier, M. L. (2018).

Coral reef socio-ecological systems analysis & res-

toration. Sustainability, 10(12), 1–11. https://doi.

org/10.3390/su10124490

Valverde-Sanchez, R. (2018). Conservation strategies, pro-

tected areas, and ecotourism in Costa Rica. Journal of

Park and Recreation Administration, 36(3), 115–128.

https://doi.org/10.18666/jpra-2018-v36-i3-8355

Van Diggelen, R., Grootjans, A. P., & Harris, J. A. (2001).

Ecological restoration: State of the art or state of the

science? Restoration Ecology, 9(2), 115–118. https://

doi.org/10.1046/j.1526-100X.2001.009002115.x

VERBI Software. (2021). MAXQDA 2022 [Computer

software]. VERBI Software. maxqda.com.

Villalobos-Cubero, T. (2019). Manejo integrado y res-

tauración ecológica de los arrecifes y comunidades

coralinas de Golfo Dulce, Pacífico Sur, Costa Rica

[Unpublished master ‘s thesis). Universidad de

Costa Rica.

Wenger, A., Ahmadia, G., Álvarez-Romero, J. G., Barnes,

M. D., Blythe, J., Brodie, J. E., Day, J. C., Fox, H,

Gill, D. A., Gómez, N. A., Gurney, G., Holmes, K. E.,

Jupiter, S., Lamb, J., Mangubhai, S., Matthews, E.,

Matthews, K., Pressey, R. L., Teneva, L., … Darling,

E. (2017). Coral Reef Conservation: Solution-Scape

White Paper. Wildlife Conservation Society. https://

doi.org/10.31230/OSF.IO/YD4ZG

Westoby, R., Becken, S., & Laria, A. P. (2020). Perspec-

tives on the human dimensions of coral restoration.

Regional Environmental Change, 20(4) 1–13. https://

doi.org/10.1007/s10113-020-01694-7

Wyborn, C., & Bixler, R. P. (2013). Collaboration and

nested environmental governance: scale dependency,

scale framing, and cross-scale interactions in col-

laborative conservation. Journal of Environmental

Management, 123, 58–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

jenvman.2013.03.014

Yeemin, T., Sutthacheep, M., & Pettongma, R. (2006).

Coral reef restoration projects in Thailand. Ocean and

Coastal Management, 49(9–10), 562–575. https://

doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2006.06.002