Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20266957, abril 2026 (Publicado Abr. 22, 2026)

Building local capacity for coral reef restoration:

insights from two Caribbean MPAs

Natalia Uribe-Castañeda1 2 3*; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3797-5894

Martin Main4; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6374-6294

1. School of Natural Resources and Environment, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA; natalia.uribe.cas-

taneda@gmail.com (*Correspondence)

2. Estuaries and Mangroves Ecology Research Group, Universidad del Valle, Cali, Colombia.

3. Knauss Fellow, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Office of Marine and Aviation Operations, Silver

Spring, Maryland, USA.

4. Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida, USA; mmain@ufl.edu.

Received 29-VIII-2025. Corrected 05-XII-2025. Accepted 23-III-2026.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Coral reef restoration requires building local capacity and engaging stakeholders throughout plan-

ning and implementation to reduce conflicts and enhance ecological and socio-economic outcomes.

Objectives: To compare stakeholder perspectives on community engagement in coral reef restoration within the

Seaflower Biosphere Reserve (Colombia) and Laughing Bird Caye National Park (Belize), and to develop tailored

guidelines for effective engagement strategies.

Methods: We conducted a multiple-case study in the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve (Colombia) and Laughing

Bird Caye National Park (Belize), collecting eight months of field data through interviews, surveys, and SWOT

analyses, coding qualitative data and analyzing surveys with unpaired two-sample t-tests.

Results: The primary strategy for enhancing engagement in coral reef restoration was building local capac-

ity, complemented by strategic planning, budgeting, and educational initiatives for youth. Respondents from

Seaflower Biosphere expressed greater concern for coral declines, a stronger sense of reef identity, and felt person-

ally affected by the issues. In contrast, residents of Laughing Bird Caye focused more on economic opportunities,

community meetings, and passive educational approaches.

Conclusions: These guidelines provide a flexible framework for community engagement in coral reef restoration,

emphasizing the importance of understanding socio-cultural and economic contexts, identifying key stakehold-

ers, and fostering trusting, inclusive, and transparent relationships to empower communities and prioritize their

active participation in restoration efforts.

Keywords: participatory research methods; interviews; SWOT analysis; qualitative analysis; Seaflower Biosphere

Reserve; Laughing Bird Caye National Park.

RESUMEN

Desarrollo de la capacidad local para la restauración de arrecifes de coral:

perspectivas de dos AMPs del Caribe

Introducción: La restauración de arrecifes de coral requiere fortalecer la capacidad local e involucrar a actores

clave durante la planificación e implementación para reducir conflictos y potenciar los resultados ecológicos y

socioeconómicos.

https://doi.org/10.15517/chgx9f68

SUPPLEMENT

2Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 74 (S1): e20266957, abril 2026 (Publicado Abr. 22, 2026)

INTRODUCTION

The United Nations (UN) has placed a

significant emphasis on ‘rehabilitating our

environment’ by making it a central pillar of

the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

(United Nations Environment Programme,

2021). To underscore the importance of this

mission, the UN designated 2021–2030 as the

UN Decade of Ecosystem Restoration. This

global initiative aims to reverse the trends of

ecosystem degradation, promote biodiversity

recovery, and ensure the sustainable provision

of ecosystem services, while also addressing the

pressing issue of climate change.

Within this broader framework, the United

Nations has recognized the urgent need to

address the challenges facing coral reefs (United

Nations Environment Assembly, 2019), which

are some of the most biologically diverse and

economically valuable ecosystems on our plan-

et (Souter et al., 2021). The decline of coral reefs

due to factors such as rising sea temperatures,

ocean acidification, pollution, and overfishing

has raised alarms in the scientific community

and among environmentalists worldwide (Sout-

er et al., 2021). The consequences of coral reef

degradation are far-reaching, affecting marine

biodiversity, food security, and livelihoods in

many coastal communities. Recognizing the

imperative need to restore and conserve these

vital ecosystems, the UN adopted Resolution

4/13 during the 4th UN Environment Assembly

in 2019 (United Nations Environment Assem-

bly, 2019). This resolution specifically addresses

the sustainable management of coral reefs and

highlights the role of restoration in achieving

biodiversity goals set forth by the UN Environ-

ment Assembly (United Nations Environment

Assembly, 2019).

The challenges that coral reefs face have

enhanced restoration efforts worldwide, moti-

vating practitioners and researchers to engage

actively in coral reef restoration. Coral reef

restoration is “an active intervention aimed to

assist the recovery of reef structure, function,

and key reef species in the face of rising climate

and anthropogenic pressures, promoting reef

resilience and the sustainable delivery of reef

ecosystem services” (Hein et al., 2021). Recent

decades have witnessed the development of

innovative approaches, such as coral propa-

gation and planting, which has transformed

restoration into a global initiative (Boström-

Einarsson et al., 2020; Suggett et al., 2023). The

global community has recognized the critical

Objetivos: Comparar perspectivas de los actores sobre participación comunitaria en la restauración de arrecifes

de coral en la Reserva de Biosfera Seaflower (Colombia) y el Parque Nacional Laughing Bird Caye (Belice), y

elaborar lineamientos adaptados para el desarrollo de estrategias de participación efectivas.

Métodos: Se realizó un estudio de caso múltiple en la Reserva de la Biosfera Seaflower (Colombia) y el Parque

Nacional Laughing Bird Caye (Belice), recopilando datos de campo durante ocho meses mediante entrevistas,

encuestas y análisis FODA, codificando los datos cualitativos y analizando las encuestas mediante pruebas t de

dos muestras independientes.

Resultados: La estrategia principal para fortalecer la participación en la restauración de arrecifes de coral fue

el desarrollo de capacidades locales, complementada con planificación estratégica, elaboración de presupuestos

e iniciativas educativas dirigidas a la juventud. Los encuestados de la Reserva de la Biosfera Seaflower expresa-

ron mayor preocupación por el deterioro de los corales, un sentido más fuerte de identidad con el arrecife y se

sintieron personalmente afectados por estos problemas. En contraste, los residentes de Laughing Bird Caye se

enfocaron más en oportunidades económicas, reuniones comunitarias y enfoques educativos pasivos.

Conclusiones: Estos lineamientos ofrecen un marco flexible para la participación comunitaria en la restauración

de arrecifes de coral, destacando la importancia de comprender los contextos socioeconómicos y culturales,

identificar actores clave y fomentar relaciones de confianza, inclusivas y transparentes, para empoderar a las

comunidades y priorizar su participación en los esfuerzos de restauración.

Palabras clave: métodos de investigación participativa; entrevistas; análisis FODA; análisis cualitativo; Reserva de

la Biosfera Seaflower; Parque Nacional Laughing Bird Caye.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20266957, abril 2026 (Publicado Abr. 22, 2026)

importance of these efforts and has invested

significantly in reef restoration. In the last 10

to 15 years, restoration practitioners reported

that a total of USD 258 million has been spent

to support coral reef restoration initiatives in 56

countries (Hein & Staub, 2021).

In parallel to these global efforts, the UN

has recently introduced ‘The Standards of Prac-

tice to guide ecosystem restoration,’ a compre-

hensive framework that emphasizes the role

of community engagement as a central com-

ponent throughout all phases of ecosystem

restoration projects (Nelson et al., 2024). These

standards emphasize the role of local com-

munities, including the unique role that local

communities can contribute to ecosystem res-

toration (Nelson et al., 2024).

The significance of community engage-

ment in conservation efforts has been highlight-

ed by extensive scholarly research. Community

engagement fosters enhanced environmental

stewardship through collective action (Agrawal

& Gibson, 1999; Ostrom, 1990) and strengthens

the capacity to adapt to climate change (Ayers

& Forsyth, 2009). As Stern (2000) pointed out,

community engagement is recognized as a

key driver for promoting conservation action,

given that involving communities is crucial

for managing environmental issues. Monroe

(2003) emphasized the importance of engaging

communities in environmental conservation,

particularly in an era where resource scar-

city and environmental degradation necessitate

behavioral changes that favor conservation.

With policies related to community engage-

ment in natural resource management being

implemented in nearly every country world-

wide (Ojha et al., 2016), it is evident that com-

munity engagement has assumed a central role

in shaping conservation and environmental

management efforts.

Although the importance of engaging

communities as partners in environmental

conservation is widely recognized, it is equally

important to acknowledge that communities

differ and that these differences influence per-

spectives, needs, and motivations of communi-

ty members. The failure to develop engagement

strategies that address collective concerns and

priorities is not likely to generate the type of

community support needed for successful and

long-lasting partnerships. While prior stud-

ies have highlighted the role of community

engagement in marine conservation, compara-

tively few have applied a structured, compara-

tive, and stakeholder and community driven

approach to inform management and restora-

tion practices across distinct Marine Protected

Areas. In this context, this study provides a

novel and applied contribution by integrating

stakeholders and community perspectives from

two Caribbean MPAs to generate management-

relevant insights for coral reef restoration.

The objectives of this paper were to (1)

evaluate similarities and differences in perspec-

tives toward community engagement among

different stakeholder groups in coral reef resto-

ration programs in two Marine Protected Areas:

the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve in Colombia

and the Laughing Bird Caye National Park in

Belize and (2) to use the information obtained

to construct guidelines for developing success-

ful community engagement strategies that can

be tailored to meet the needs of different com-

munities and directly support adaptive man-

agement and restoration planning in MPAs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Theoretical framework: we used Carter

et al. (2022) ethical community engagement

framework to guide this research and develop

guidelines for engaging communities in coral

reef restoration efforts, with a focus on princi-

ples 1 and 4 (Table 1). Principle 1 addresses the

values of stakeholders and states that “a deep

commitment to intrinsic values about people,

their natural endowments and their agency

is integral to inclusive (and effective) engage-

ment.” We chose to focus on this principle to

incorporate inquiries about diverse engagement

methods from the community perspective. We

also focused on principle 4, which is an ana-

lytical approach to engagement methodologies

that suggests “qualitative methods can be a use-

ful technique for inclusive engagement.”

4Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 74 (S1): e20266957, abril 2026 (Publicado Abr. 22, 2026)

Study Areas: We selected two coral reef

restoration efforts implemented within Marine

Protected Areas (MPAs) in the Caribbean: the

Seaflower Biosphere Reserve in Colombia and

the Laughing Bird Caye National Park in Belize.

These sites were chosen because both initiatives

explicitly prioritize community engagement as

a central component of coral reef restoration.

The Seaflower Biosphere Reserve, located

in the western Caribbean, encompasses the

San Andrés Archipelago and represents the

largest MPA in the region. It is managed by the

Corporation for the Sustainable Development

of the Archipelago of San Andrés, Providen-

cia, and Santa Catalina (CORALINA) under

an integrated, multi-level management frame-

work, with zoning developed collaboratively to

promote ecosystem conservation, sustainable

development, and equitable benefit-sharing

(Taylor et al., 2013). Despite a local economy

heavily dependent on tourism, the Seaflow-

er MPA faces persistent challenges, including

overfishing, coral reef degradation, and illegal

fishing, which have prompted targeted efforts

to engage local communities in coral reef resto-

ration initiatives (Taylor et al., 2013).

Laughing Bird Caye National Park is a

UNESCO World Heritage Site of high ecologi-

cal and economic value, generating nearly USD

5 million annually through tourism (Nawaz et

al., 2017). The park is managed by the Southern

Environmental Association under a participa-

tory management framework that integrates

biodiversity conservation, sustainable tourism,

and long-standing coral reef restoration efforts

supported by active community involvement

(Alicea, 2010). These initiatives are closely

linked to the socio-economic dynamics of

the Placencia Peninsula, where rapidly grow-

ing coastal communities depend heavily on

marine resources and tourism, making local

participation essential for the long-term suc-

cess of conservation and restoration actions

(Webb et al., 2024).

Participatory Research Tools: we con-

ducted a multiple study case, which involves

the analysis of a particular issue by examin-

ing a series of cases within a defined system

(Creswell, 2007). We collected data over eight

months of fieldwork across the two marine

protected areas, which included in-depth semi-

structured interviews with key stakeholders

and restoration practitioners, a SWOT analysis

(Leigh, 2009) with community members, and

surveys of the broader community. A detailed

description of each research method can be

found in Uribe-Castañeda et al. 2024. Inter-

views with restoration practitioners and key

stakeholders were conducted using snowball

sampling until saturation and were comple-

mented by a SWOT workshop and surveys

designed to capture broader community per-

ceptions, motivations, barriers, and desired

participation in restoration activities. Quali-

tative data were transcribed, translated, and

Table 1

Ethical community engagement framework (Carter et al., 2022).

Principle Statement

1A deep commitment to intrinsic values about people, their natural endowments and their agency is integral to

inclusive (and effective) engagement

2An empathetic attitude along with specific interpersonal skills are essential to the engagement process

3Situational awareness is paramount to building trust and achieving inclusion

4In a research context, qualitative methods can be a useful technique for inclusive engagement

5Participatory monitoring, evaluation, and learning enhance facilitators and communities’ ability to reflect,

collaborate, co-create, and adapt to situations

6Without sufficiently deep commitment and ownership of engagement processes, initiatives are less likely to

sustain over time

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20266957, abril 2026 (Publicado Abr. 22, 2026)

coded through a multi-stage thematic analysis,

using MAXQDA 2022 qualitative analysis soft-

ware (Kuckartz & Rädiker, 2019) and com-

pared community surveys responses using an

unpaired two-sample t-test to assess differences

in responses between the two communities (De

Winter et al., 2016).

Research Permits: we obtained approval

for this research from the Institutional Review

Boards (IRBs) of the University of Florida, USA

(IRB202100741); the University of Rosario,

Colombia (Institutional Review Board CEI-UR

492-CS304); and the National Institute of Cul-

ture and History in Belize (ISCR/H/2/132). IRB

approvals were obtained to ensure the protec-

tion of research participants’ welfare and rights

in accordance with federal and state laws, local

policies, and ethical principles. All data col-

lected from respondents were kept anonymous,

de-identified, and confidential.

RESULTS

Interview data revealed that building local

capacity was the strategy most frequently men-

tioned in both communities (Table 2). More

than three-quarters of key stakeholders and

restoration practitioners identified it as the

primary action needed to enhance commu-

nity engagement in coral reef restoration. The

next most important component was strategic

planning and budgeting, which the Seaflower

Biosphere community ranked as a much higher

priority than the creation and enforcement of

new policies; in contrast, policy development

and enforcement were considered of roughly

equal importance at Laughing Bird Caye.

Surveys of the broader community in

both study areas, revealed that the community

believes in the importance of both community

and individual responsibility in protecting coral

reefs (Table 3). Both communities also indi-

cated low levels of trust or confidence regarding

the ability of environmental agencies to take

care of the corals, the future of the corals, and

whether current regulations are effective for

protecting coral reefs (Table 3).

Three significant differences emerged

between these two communities (Table 3). In

the Seaflower Biosphere, respondents expressed

a greater concern about coral reef declines

and a greater sense of identity with the coral

reefs. They also recognized that they would be

personally affected (e.g., economically, qual-

ity of life, etc.) if local coral reefs declined.

Conversely, in Laughing Bird Caye the com-

munity expressed less concern, a reduced sense

of identity, and generally indicated that they did

not feel they would be personally affected if the

health of the coral reefs declined.

Surveys were also used to identify and

prioritize strategies to promote community

engagement. The top seven strategies repre-

sented 90 % of ideas put forward by both com-

munities (Fig. 1). Educational strategies about

coral reefs and why they are valuable were

deemed to be highly important by both com-

munities, especially for youth. Adult educa-

tional and informational strategies were varied

Table 2

Importance of strategies for community engagement strategies identified from interviews with key stakeholders and

restoration practitioners from coral reef restoration programs at Laughing Bird Caye and Seaflower Biosphere Reserve.

Values represent the percentage of total responses (n = number of total interview segments).

Overall strategy Laughing Bird Caye

Response (%), n = 283

Seaflower Biosphere

Response (%), n = 237 Total (%)

Build local capacity 36.62 35.59 72.21

Strategic planning and budgeting 6.81 12.28 19.09

Policies creation and strengthening 6.58 2.14 8.71

Total 50.01 50.01 100.0

Values represent percent of total responses. n: number of total interview segments.

6Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 74 (S1): e20266957, abril 2026 (Publicado Abr. 22, 2026)

and included suggestions such as social media

campaigns, community meetings, and infor-

mational materials like billboards, flyers, and

brochures. Educational programs that also cre-

ated economic opportunities, such as the devel-

opment of a coral reef festival and educational

programs led by locals were suggested by both

communities.

Community members from Laugh-

ing Bird Caye were much more interested in

how coral reef restoration could contribute

to jobs and indicated greater interest in com-

munity meetings and passive forms of edu-

cation such as social media campaigns and

printed information.

Fig. 2. presents the strategies identified

during interviews with key stakeholders and

Table 3

Broad community perceptions about coral reefs were assessed on a 5-point Likert scale and analyzed using an unpaired t-test.

Laughing Bird Caye,

n = 60

Seaflower Biosphere,

n = 60 Unpaired T test

Mean SD Mean SD T test p

Community responsibility 4.28 0.64 4.47 0.83 1.35 0.18

Individual responsibility 4.10 0.66 4.32 0.81 1.61 0.11

Trust in organizations 3.65 0.80 3.35 1.20 1.61 0.11

Optimistic about future 3.67 0.86 3.40 1.12 1.46 0.15

Enough regulations 2.92 0.79 2.90 1.04 0.92 0.10

Concern 3.83 0.92 4.38 0.64 3.79 <0.01

Identity 4.00 0.82 4.47 0.70 3.34 <0.01

Personally affected 2.97 1.62 4.53 0.81 6.71 <0.01

Likert scale: 5 strongly agree - 1 strongly disagree; n: number of people surveyed.

Fig. 1. Community engagement strategies for coral reef restoration between Laughing Bird Caye National Park (Belize) and

the Seaflower Biosphere Reserve (Colombia). Points represent the percentage of survey respondents (n = 60 per site) selecting

each strategy, with lines connecting values across sites to highlight differences.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20266957, abril 2026 (Publicado Abr. 22, 2026)

restoration practitioners, whose perspectives

on what was most important included, but

ranked differently, priorities identified by the

broader public. The most frequently mentioned

strategy identified was the importance of devel-

oping long-term cooperative planning and

budgeting among key stakeholders, particularly

those in reef-related businesses and govern-

ment. Enhancing and formulating outreach

strategies was also recognized as important in

both MPAs, with in-person meetings being

the most cited outreach method, followed by

social media campaigns. The results indicated

that outreach campaigns should prioritize pro-

moting behavioral change. Transdisciplinary

knowledge exchange was noted in both study

areas for its role in training and empowering

practitioners and community members.

DISCUSSION

Our study reveals both similarities and dif-

ferences in how local communities viewed coral

reef restoration across the two study areas. Both

interview and survey data highlight the central

role of building local capacity as the primary

strategy to enhance community engagement,

identified by key stakeholders and practitio-

ners in both areas. Similarly, broader commu-

nity surveys indicate a shared recognition of

the importance of community and individual

responsibility in protecting coral reefs, despite

low levels of trust in environmental agen-

cies and skepticism regarding the effectiveness

of current regulations. Educational initiatives,

particularly those targeting youth, and out-

reach strategies such as community meetings,

social media campaigns, and locally led pro-

grams were also consistently prioritized by both

communities. These convergences suggest that,

regardless of contextual differences, there is a

common understanding across diverse Carib-

bean MPAs that empowering local stakeholders

and fostering awareness are foundational com-

ponents for successful coral reef conservation.

In the Seaflower Biosphere, the community

demonstrated a stronger personal connection

to coral reefs, expressing greater concern for

reef decline, recognizing its potential personal

impacts, and viewing reefs as integral to their

identity. In contrast, responses from the Laugh-

ing Bird Caye community reflected less concern

about reef health or its impacts and greater

interest in how coral reef restoration could con-

tribute to local employment.

These findings provide insights into how

both shared values and context-specific priori-

ties can be leveraged to design locally adapted

engagement strategies, with practical relevance

not only for the studied MPAs but also for

Fig. 2. Local capacity building strategies for coral reef restoration between the two MPAs. Points represent the percentage

of times each strategy was mentioned by key stakeholders and restoration practitioners, with lines connecting values across

sites to highlight differences.

8Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 74 (S1): e20266957, abril 2026 (Publicado Abr. 22, 2026)

similar coastal communities elsewhere (Barnes

et al., 2019; McClanahan et al., 2015). Building

on these insights, we develop guidelines for

strengthening local capacity in coral reef res-

toration. These guidelines are designed to sup-

port both established and emerging programs,

thereby enhancing the overall effectiveness of

restoration efforts (Fig. 3).

The strategies in Fig. 3 reflect those in

Fig. 2 but are organized on a scale from low to

high levels of involvement to generate guide-

lines for building local capacity in coral reef

restoration. These guidelines encompass five

levels structured along a progressive continuum

of engagement, each representing increasing

influence over decision-making and greater

local empowerment in coral reef restoration.

The engagement process begins with rais-

ing awareness through outreach strategies,

then progresses to education programs that

include more structured and longer-term strat-

egies. The third level involves collaborative

and transdisciplinary training with focus on

knowledge exchange. Well-trained and edu-

cated community members will be able to

seek and create opportunities for cooperation

among stakeholders, representing the fourth

level of engagement. The final level culminates

in individuals who are locally aware, edu-

cated, trained, capable of fostering cooperation,

and empowered to lead restoration programs.

Throughout this research, both communities

identified fundamental human values under-

pinning these strategies: trust, respect, inclu-

sion, and transparency. These values form the

foundation of the guidelines and permeate

all actions for building local capacity (Fig. 3).

These findings encompass the ones identified

in the Standard of Practice for Ecological Resto-

ration, particularly Principle 2, which promotes

inclusive governance, social fairness, and equity

(FAO et al., 2021). Carter et al. (2019) further

emphasize that situational awareness is critical

for building trust and achieving inclusion. Our

results align with these findings and extend

them by providing insights derived from real-

world case scenarios. The following sections

further explain the five actions proposed in the

guidelines for building local capacity in coral

reef restoration.

Outreach: Effective outreach should aim

to raise awareness and understanding of the

Fig. 3. Guidelines for building local capacity in coral reef restoration based on data collected through surveys, interviews, and

SWOT analysis from the broad public, key stakeholders, and restoration practitioners associated with Seaflower Biosphere

Reserve, Colombia, and Laughing Bird Caye National Park, Belize.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20266957, abril 2026 (Publicado Abr. 22, 2026)

critical importance of coral reefs while promot-

ing responsible environmental behavior (Rodrí-

guez-Martínez & Ortiz, 1999). The necessity for

outreach campaigns that foster behavior change

is illustrated by the following quote: “We need

to start working on the minds of the people to

achieve conservation outcomes. We must engage

with psychology to change mindsets. To effect this

change, a promoter is needed—an approach that

resonates with people’s self-satisfaction” (Envi-

ronmental Educator).

To achieve this, outreach strategies should

be dynamic, engaging, creative, and rooted in

experiential learning. These strategies could

include a variety of activities suggested by com-

munity members, such as local coral reef festi-

vals, workshops, face-to-face meetings, social

media engagement, annual meetings, distrib-

uting informative materials, participating in

clean-up campaigns, sharing conservation mes-

sages at community events, and creating inno-

vative merchandise.

Research has shown that a deeper under-

standing of the coral reefs ecology, along with

collaborative conservation efforts, plays a cru-

cial role in preserving significant reef areas for

future generations (Sebens, 1994). In this con-

text, involving volunteers and citizen scientists

in coral reef restoration represents a valuable

strategy for enhancing the stewardship of natu-

ral resources (Hein et al., 2019). Citizen science

programs are specifically designed to facilitate

public participation in conservation, monitor-

ing, and research efforts (Pocock et al., 2015).

Education of youth: Youth education

represents a primary step towards building

local capacity in coral reef restoration pro-

grams. This approach recognizes that children

are a receptive demographic, eager to learn

and capable of taking on future leadership

roles in environmental practices. This strategy

aligns with the United Nations’ priorities in the

Decade on Ecosystem Restoration (Nelson et

al., 2024), which emphasizes educational initia-

tives aimed at shaping the values and actions

of future generations. Grimmette (2014) found

that students who participated in science camps

exhibited a significant shift in their perception

of the importance of nature to human well-

being and became more inclined to support

restoration efforts. Bai & Romanycia (2013)

assert that children’s education plays a crucial

role in fostering behavior change towards more

sustainable, caring, healthy, and regenerative

human-nature relations.

While various organizations have initiated

educational programs for children in both areas

of study, these initiatives tend to be isolated,

temporary, and limited in scope. The guide-

lines advocate for a continuous and structured

approach to youth education, ensuring that it

reaches children from diverse socio-cultural

backgrounds. A key strategy to make educa-

tion programs more inclusive and embedded

in coastal communities could be to introduce

an ocean literacy class into school curricula in

regions where children live closely with coral

reefs. The importance of including an ocean

literacy course in school curricula as part of

the education campaign is highlighted in the

following quote: “I believe environmental educa-

tion could be formally integrated into the curric-

ulum for schools. This is especially pertinent for

high schools and could extend to primary schools

as well” (Restoration practitioner).

Transdisciplinary and Collaborative

Training: This action focuses on knowledge

exchange between restoration practitioners and

local stakeholders. The integration of scientific,

traditional, and community-based knowledge

systems enhances understanding of the ecosys-

tem and improves the effectiveness of restoration

initiatives. This strategy aligns with Principle 6

of the Standard of Practice of Ecological Res-

toration (FAO et al., 2021), which states that

“Ecosystem restoration incorporates all types

of knowledge and promotes their exchange and

integration throughout the process.”

This research underscores the significance

of formal certification training programs for

community members engaged in restoration

efforts. Restoration practitioners view certifica-

tions as an important step in their professional

development, providing pathways to future

10 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 74 (S1): e20266957, abril 2026 (Publicado Abr. 22, 2026)

opportunities. This not only engages local com-

munities in restoration activities but also equips

community members with recognized qualifi-

cations that can advance their careers. Certi-

fication programs help establish and promote

professional standards, ultimately benefiting

public welfare (Nelson et al., 2017). However,

a standardized certification process for coral

restoration practitioners is currently lacking

in most Caribbean countries where coral res-

toration efforts are underway. The following

quote underscores the significance of certifica-

tion programs: “No other Caribbean nation has

a Tour Guide Restoration Licensing Program.

Their training is subsidized by grants, involving

approximately 160 hours of class time. After

completing the training, there are several sets of

exams” (Restoration Practitioner).

Cooperative long-term planning and

budgeting: emphasize the essential role of

sustained engagement and resource allocation

for long-term success. Long-term planning and

budgeting involve multiple stakeholders: gov-

ernment bodies, restoration organizations, aca-

demic institutions, community members, and

local businesses. Local stakeholder involvement

is crucial for biodiversity conservation, with

success depending on governance and socio-

cultural contexts (Sterling et al., 2017).

Recognizing the role of local businesses in

the economic benefits derived from coral reefs

is fundamental. Communities in both areas

highlight the need for businesses to contribute

more to restoration efforts. Financial commit-

ments from entities benefiting directly from

the reefs could enhance resource allocation

and local capacity. The necessity for sustained

funding and alternative strategies independent

of government cycles is reflected in a Deci-

sion Maker’s quote: “While it is crucial for the

state to acknowledge that nature operates on a

timescale beyond the annual, establishing strong

ties with the private sector is also a good strategy,

as they may not operate within these periodic

cycles”. Innovative financing frameworks, such

as the Global Fund for Coral Reefs (GFCR),

offer alternatives to traditional grants, thereby

reducing dependence on foundations and diver-

sifying funding for reef restoration (Suggett et

al., 2023). Political support is vital for success-

ful long-term planning and budgeting. This

requires developing cooperative relationships

within government ministries, especially those

related to fisheries and tourism, to better sup-

port coral reef restoration. Integrating isolated

conservation programs into national strategies

will promote increased protection and stricter

enforcement of laws and regulations.

Economic empowerment and local lead-

ership: Empowering locals to take on leader-

ship roles fosters a sense of ownership and

pride in restoration efforts. Local leadership

enhances community-based conservation

interventions (Salerno et al., 2021). The ben-

efits of community-led conservation are encap-

sulated by a scientist who remarked: “Definitely,

get the community behind you. Make sure they’re

on board from the very start. If not, it’s not going

to work. Our reserve boundaries have expanded

multiple times since its establishment, all sparked

by the community recognizing the importance of

our work and requesting further expansion”.

This action aims to reduce social inequal-

ities and foster inclusive engagement. Such

inclusivity aligns with insights from Hallett et

al. (2023), emphasizing the need to address

disparities in the restoration process. Hiring

local professionals ensures that the restora-

tion is authentically rooted in the communi-

ty’s context, values, and aspirations. Fostering

local leadership and financial autonomy can

create self-sustaining initiatives that enhance

the social, economic, and environmental well-

being of communities involved in coral reef

restoration. Strategies must empower locals and

increase their participation in monitoring, stew-

ardship, and enforcement of natural resources,

promoting equitable community engagement.

Conclusion: Guidelines for building local

capacity in coral reef restoration (Fig. 3) were

developed from research in two Caribbean

marine protected areas with diverse cultures,

low-income communities, and significant

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20266957, abril 2026 (Publicado Abr. 22, 2026)

ecological value. The guidelines were designed

with an increasing level of engagement in

mind, though they do not necessarily reflect

the order in which actions should be taken.

They were developed by evaluating perspec-

tives and priorities among different stakeholder

groups within each community, which enabled

us to identify how these communities relate to

the resource, how they wish to be engaged and

empowered, the activities they want to par-

ticipate in, their needs and desires, and how to

prioritize these to build local capacity for resto-

ration programs. Our research benefited from,

and we recommend engagement of, diverse

stakeholder groups.

The two communities expressed different

perspectives on the importance of coral reef

ecosystems, which is likely due to differences in

environmental awareness and economic oppor-

tunities. Understanding the complex interac-

tions between humans, ecological systems and

the socio-cultural and economic characteristics

of the region is crucial for engaging local sup-

port and ultimately for the success of coral

reef restoration (Uribe-Castañeda et al., 2018).

Despite these differences, many similarities

emerged and the guidelines for building local

capacity (Fig. 3) are flexible, allowing them to be

tailored to local needs and desires. These guide-

lines can also be adapted to other geographic

areas and presumably other restoration and

conservation efforts, but doing so requires an

understanding of community needs, develop-

ing programs that are flexible and adaptable to

change, and establishing relationships built on

trust, respect, inclusiveness, and transparency.

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 acknowledgments sec-

tion. A signed document has been filed in the

journal archives.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are deeply grateful to several institu-

tions at the University of Florida for their sup-

port of this research, including the School of

Natural Resources and Environment, the Bio-

diversity Institute, the Tropical Conservation

and Development Program, the Department

of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, and the

College of Agricultural and Life Sciences. We

also thank the International Coral Reef Society,

Wave of Change, and MAXQDA for their finan-

cial contributions. Special recognition is given

to Fulbright for supporting N. U.-C.’s doctoral

studies. We further extend our appreciation

to the organizations, restoration practitioners,

community members, and key stakeholders

who partnered with us throughout this work.

Finally, we acknowledge Nia Morales, Jamie

Loizzo, Joshua Patterson for their support on

the development of this research.

REFERENCES

Alicea, E. (2010). Laughing Bird Caye National Park mana-

gement plan 2011-2016: A component of Belize’s

World Heritage Site (NOAA Document No. 820).

United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, Coral Reef Conservation Program.

https://repository.library.noaa.gov/view/noaa/820/

noaa_820_DS1.pdf

Agrawal, A., & Gibson, C. C. (1999). Enchantment and dis-

enchantment: the role of community in natural resou-

rce conservation.World Development, 27(4), 629–649.

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-750X(98)00161-2

Ayers, J., & Forsyth, T. (2009). Community-based adapta-

tion to climate change.Environment: Science and Poli-

cy for Sustainable Development, 51(4), 22–31. https://

doi.org/10.3200/ENV.51.4.22-31

Bai, H., & Romanycia, S. (2013). Learning from hermit

crabs, mycelia, and banyan. In R. B. Stevenson, M.

Brody, J. Dillon, & A. E. J. Wals (Eds.),International

handbook of research on environmental education(pp.

101–107). Routledge.

Barnes, M. L., Bodin, Ö., McClanahan, T. R., Kittinger, J. N.,

Hoey, A. S., Gaoue, O. G., & Graham, N. A. J. (2019).

Social-ecological alignment and ecological conditions

in coral reefs. Nature Communications, 10(1), 2039–

10. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09994-1

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

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

12 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 74 (S1): e20266957, abril 2026 (Publicado Abr. 22, 2026)

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

Carter, L., Cosijn, M., Williams, L. J., Chakraborty, A.,

& Kar, S. (2022). Including marginalised voices in

agricultural development processes using an ethical

community engagement framework in West Bengal,

India.Sustainability Science, 17(2), 485–496. https://

doi.org/10.1007/s11625-021-01055-1

Carter, L., Williams, L., & Cosijn, M. (2019). The princi-

ples and practices of ethical community engagement:

Resources to support engaging for impact [Technical

report].Australian Centre for International Agricul-

tural Research, Australian Government.

Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research

design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd Ed.).

SAGE.

De Winter, J. C. F., Gosling, S. D., & Potter, J. (2016). Com-

paring the Pearson and Spearman correlation coeffi-

cients across distributions and sample sizes: A tutorial

using simulations and empirical data. Psychological

Methods, 21(3), 273–290. https://doi.org/10.1037/

met0000079

FAO, IUCN, CEM, & SER. (2021).Principles for ecosystem

restoration to guide the United Nations Decade 2021–

2030. [Manual]. Food and Agriculture Organization

of the United Nations. https://openknowledge.fao.

org/handle/20.500.14283/cb6591en

Grimmette, K. A. (2014). The impacts of environmental

education on youth and their environmental awareness

[Undergraduate thesis]. University of Nebraska–Lin-

coln, United States of America.

Hallett, L. M., Aoyama, L., Barabás, G., Gilbert, B., Larios,

L., Shackelford, N., Werner, C. M., Godoy, O., Ladou-

ceur, E. R., Lucero, J. E., Weiss-Lehman, C. P., Chase,

J. M., Chu, C., Harpole, W, S., Mayfield, M. M., Faist,

A. M., & Shoemaker, L. G. (2023). Restoration ecolo-

gy through the lens of coexistence theory.Trends in

Ecology and Evolution, 38(11), 1085–1095. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.tree.2023.06.004

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., & Staub, F. (2021). Mapping the global funding

landscape for coral reef restoration [Technical report].

International Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI). icriforum.

org

Hein, M. Y., Vardi, T., Shaver, E. C., Pioch, S., Boström-

Einarsson, L., Ahmed, M., Grimsditch, G., & McLeod,

I. M. (2021). Perspectives on the use of coral reef

restoration as a strategy to support and improve reef

ecosystem services. Frontiers in Marine Science, 8,

618303. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmars.2021.618303

Kuckartz, U., & Rädiker, S. (2019). Analyzing qualitative

data with MAXQDA: Text, audio, and video. Springer.

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15671-8

Leigh, D. (2009). SWOT analysis. In K. H. Silber, W. R. Fos-

hay, R. Watkins, D. Leigh, J. L. Moseley, & J. C. Des-

singer (Eds.), Handbook of improving performance in

the workplace (Vol. 1–3, pp. 115–140). Pfeiffer. https://

doi.org/10.1002/9780470592663.ch24

McClanahan, T. R., Graham, N. A. J., MacNeil, M. A.,

& Cinner, J. E. (2015). Biomass-based targets and

the management of multispecies coral reef fisheries.

Conservation Biology, 29(2), 409–417. https://doi.

org/10.1111/cobi.12430

Monroe, M. C. (2003). Two avenues for encouraging con-

servation behaviors. Human Ecology Review, 10(2),

113–125.

Nawaz, S., Bood, N., & Shal, V. (2017). Natural heritage,

natural wealth: highlighting the economic benefits of

the Belize Barrier Reef Reserve System World Heritage

Site [Technical Report]. World Wildlife Fund.

Nelson, C. R., Bowers, K., Lyndall, J. L., Munro, J., &

Stanley, J. T. (2017). Professional certification in

ecological restoration: improving the practice and the

profession.Restoration Ecology, 25(1), 4–7. https://doi.

org/10.1111/rec.12484

Nelson, C. R., Hallett, J. G., Romero Montoya, A. E.,

Andrade, A., Besacier, C., Boerger, V., Bouazza, K.,

Chazdon, R., Cohen-Shacham, E., Danano, D., Diede-

richsen, A., Fernandez, Y., Gann, G. D., Gonzales, E.

K., Gruca, M., Guariguata, M. R., Gutierrez, V., Han-

cock, B., Innecken, P. … Weidlich, E. W. A. (2024).

Standards of practice to guide ecosystem restoration

– A contribution to the United Nations Decade on

Ecosystem Restoration 2021–2030 [Technical report].

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United

Nations, Society for Ecological Restoration, & Inter-

national Union for Conservation of Nature. https://

doi.org/10.4060/cc9106en

Ojha, H. R., Ford, R., Keenan, R. J., Race, D., Carias

Vega, D., Baral, H., & Sapkota, P. (2016). Delocali-

zing communities: Changing forms of community

engagement in natural resources governance.World

Development, 87, 274–290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

worlddev.2016.06.017

Ostrom, E. (1990).Governing the commons: The evolution

of institutions for collective action. Cambridge Uni-

versity. Press.

Pocock, M. J. O., Roy, H. E., Preston, C. D., & Roy, D. B.

(2015). The biological records center: a pioneer of

citizen science. Biological Journal of the Linnean

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20266957, abril 2026 (Publicado Abr. 22, 2026)

Society, 115(3), 475–493. https://doi.org/10.1111/

bij.12548

Rodríguez-Martínez, R., & Ortiz, L. M. (1999). Coral reef

education in schools of Quintana Roo, Mexico.Ocean

& Coastal Management, 42(12), 1061–1068. https://

doi.org/10.1016/S0964-5691(99)00061-7

Salerno, J., Andersson, K., Bailey, K. M., Hilton, T., Mwa-

viko, K. K., Simon, I. D., Bracebridge, C., Mangewa,

L. J., Nicholas, A., Rutabanzibwa, H., & Hartter,

J. (2021). More robust local governance suggests

positive effects of long-term community conserva-

tion. Conservation Science and Practice, 3(1), e297.

https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.297

Sebens, K. P. (1994). Biodiversity of coral reefs: what are we

losing and why?Integrative and Comparative Biology,

34(1), 115–133. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/34.1.115

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

& Staub, F. (2021). Status of coral reefs of the world:

2020 report [Technical report]. Global Coral Reef

Monitoring Network (GCRMN) and International

Coral Reef Initiative (ICRI). https://doi.org/10.59387/

WOTJ9184

Sterling, E. J., Betley, E., Sigouin, A., Gomez, A., Toomey,

A., Cullman, G., Malone, C., Pekor, A., Arengo, F.,

Blair, M., Filardi, C., Landrigan, K., & Porzecanski,

A. L. (2017). Assessing the evidence for stakeholder

engagement in biodiversity conservation. Biological

Conservation, 209, 159–171. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

biocon.2017.02.008

Stern, P. C. (2000). New environmental theories: toward a

coherent theory of environmentally significant beha-

vior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407–424. https://

doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00175

Suggett, D. J., Edwards, M., Cotton, D., Hein, M., & Camp,

E. F. (2023). An integrative framework for sustai-

nable coral reef restoration. One Earth (Cambrid-

ge, Mass.), 6(6), 666–681. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

oneear.2023.05.007

Taylor, E., Baine, M., Killmer, A., & Howard, M. (2013).

Seaflower marine protected area: governance for

sustainable development. Marine Policy, 41, 57–64.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.12.023

United Nations Environment Assembly. (2019). Report

of the United Nations Environment Assembly of the

United Nations Environment Programme. Fourth Ses-

sion (Nairobi, 11–15 March 2019). General Assembly,

Official Records (74th session, suppl. 25).

United Nations Environment Programme. (2021). Beco-

ming #GenerationRestoration: Ecosystem restoration

for people, nature and climate [Technical report]. UN

Environmental Programme, & Food and Agriculture

Organization of the United Nations.

Uribe-Castañeda, N., Morales, N., Loizzo, J., Patterson,

J., & Main, M. (2024). Community engagement in

coral reef restoration in the Seaflower MPA, Colom-

bia. Restoration Ecology, 32(8), e14268. https://doi.

org/10.1111/rec.14268

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

Coral reef socio-ecological systems analysis & res-

toration. Sustainability, 10(12), 4490. https://doi.

org/10.3390/su10124490

Webb, W. A., Wells, E. C., Prouty, C., Zarger, R., & Trotz,

M. (2024). Ethics and ambiguity in wastewater deve-

lopment on the Placencia Peninsula, Belize. Annals of

Anthropological Practice, 48(1), 130–145. https://doi.

org/10.1111/napa.12215