Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

Challenges and opportunities of local engagement

in coral restoration at Laughing Bird Caye National Park

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

Martin Main2; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6374-6294

1. School of Natural Resources and Environment, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. Estuaries and Mangroves

Ecology Research Group, Universidad del Valle, Cali, Colombia; Knauss Fellow, National Oceanic and Atmospheric

Administration, Office of Marine and Aviation Operations, Silver Spring, Maryland, USA; natalia.uribe.castaneda@

gmail.com (*correspondence)

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

Received 29-VIII-2025. Corrected 18-IV-2026. Accepted 22-IV-2026.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: Numerous studies have revealed the importance of local support for successful restoration and

conservation initiatives. Much less attention has been devoted to identifying the challenges and opportunities

that influence community support.

Objectives: To identify the challenges and opportunities influencing community engagement in coral reef resto-

ration at Laughing Bird Caye National Park, Belize and its buffer zone.

Methods: We interviewed restoration practitioners and key stakeholders, conducted a SWOT analysis with com-

munity members engaged in restoration efforts, and surveyed the broader public to evaluate local perceptions of

the factors influencing community engagement in coral reef restoration.

Results: Participant responses revealed four systems shaping local engagement: management, social, educational,

and environmental. Key challenges included limited participation in restoration decisions, social dysfunction,

low awareness of coral ecosystems, and environmental threats. Opportunities focused on expanding educational

programs, particularly for youth, supporting local economies and livelihoods, promoting environmental steward-

ship, and strengthening governance through collaboration and local leadership.

Conclusions: Our research revealed challenges that deter community engagement but also identified oppor-

tunities that may transform obstacles into actions to build trust, institutionalize collaborative participation,

and empower local stewardship as a sustainable, community-driven process. Our results are specific to the

community in Placencia, Belize but our methodology provides a potential roadmap for identifying stakeholder

concerns and developing inclusive and effective programs to promote community engagement in restoration and

conservation efforts elsewhere.

Key words: Participatory research methods; qualitative analysis; community engagement, Placencia, Belize,

Caribbean, Laughing Bird Caye.

RESUMEN

Desafíos y oportunidades de la participación local en la restauración de corales

en el Parque Nacional Laughing Bird Caye

Introducción: Numerosos estudios han revelado la importancia del apoyo local para el éxito de las iniciativas

de restauración y conservación. Sin embargo, se ha prestado mucha menos atención a la identificación de los

desafíos y oportunidades que influyen en el apoyo de la comunidad.

https://doi.org/10.15517/h2934847

SUPPLEMENT

2Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

INTRODUCTION

Biodiversity researchers worldwide have

emphasized the importance of involving local

stakeholders and communities in biodiversi-

ty conservation (Cinner et al., 2016; Ison et

al., 2021; Sterling et al., 2017). Community

engagement has been identified as essential

for driving conservation efforts, especially in

addressing environmental challenges and pro-

moting resource-conscious behaviors (Mon-

roe, 2003, Stern, 2000). Dawson et al. (2021)

contend positive conservation outcomes often

depend on Indigenous peoples and local com-

munities (IPLCs) taking a central role in con-

servation efforts, influencing decision-making

processes or having local management institu-

tions integrated within their recognized gover-

nance structures. As a result, many countries

have adopted policies emphasizing community

involvement in managing natural resources

(Ojha et al., 2016). Sterling et al. (2017) conclu-

ded stakeholder engagement is associated with

positive attitudinal shifts towards conservation

and identified four key factors to stakehol-

der engagement: (1) integrating stakeholder

knowledge and values into decision-making,

(2) ongoing inclusion of stakeholder input, (3)

transparent decision-making processes, and (4)

enhanced trust between stakeholders and plan-

ners. Rozzi et al. (2018) emphasize the impor-

tance of promoting partnerships across various

institutional and governmental levels and the

importance of direct engagement through for-

mal and informal education. The integration of

communities in conservation efforts has been

reported to prove successful when partners-

hips are formed and diverse knowledge sys-

tems are combined (Gavin et al., 2018), which

require overcoming challenges associated with

integrating traditional and western scientific

knowledge and power imbalances (Burke, 2023;

Huntington, 2011).

Whereas a good deal of attention has been

devoted to recognizing the importance of com-

munity engagement for conservation efforts,

less emphasis has been placed on evaluating

community and local Indigenous perceptions

of the motivations and challenges that either

promote or hinder the community engage-

ment process. To address this knowledge gap,

our study examined stakeholders’, restoration

practitioners’ and local community members’

perspectives on the engagement process related

Objetivos: Identificar los desafíos y oportunidades que influyen en la participación comunitaria en la restauración

de arrecifes de coral en el Parque Nacional Laughing Bird Caye, Belice y su zona de amortiguación.

Métodos: Entrevistamos a profesionales de la restauración y actores clave, realizamos un análisis FODA con

miembros de la comunidad involucrados en los esfuerzos de restauración y encuestamos al público en general

para evaluar las percepciones locales sobre los factores que afectan la participación comunitaria en la restauración

de arrecifes de coral.

Resultados: Las respuestas de los participantes revelaron cuatro sistemas que configuran la participación local:

gestión, social, educativo y ambiental. Los principales desafíos incluyeron la participación limitada en las deci-

siones de restauración, la disfunción social, el bajo conocimiento sobre los ecosistemas de coral y las amenazas

ambientales. Las oportunidades se centraron en ampliar los programas educativos, especialmente para jóvenes,

apoyar las economías y medios de vida locales, promover la responsabilidad ambiental y fortalecer la gobernanza

mediante la colaboración y el liderazgo local.

Conclusiones: Nuestra investigación reveló desafíos que desincentivan la participación comunitaria, pero

también identificó oportunidades que pueden transformar obstáculos en acciones para generar confianza, ins-

titucionalizar la participación colaborativa y fortalecer la gestión local como un proceso sostenible liderado por

la comunidad. Nuestros resultados son específicos para la comunidad de Placencia, Belice, pero nuestra metodo-

logía ofrece una ruta potencial para identificar preocupaciones de los actores y desarrollar programas inclusivos

y efectivos que promuevan la participación comunitaria en la restauración y conservación en otros contextos.

Palabras clave: Métodos de investigación participativa, Análisis cualitativo, Participación comunitaria, Placencia,

Belice, Caribe, Laughing Bird Caye.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

to coral reef restoration activities in Laughing

Bird Caye National Park, Belize. Evaluating

the perspectives of key stakeholders and local

community members is important because the

relationship between local communities and

the marine environment is highly interdepen-

dent; local communities can either hinder con-

servation efforts and contribute to biodiversity

loss or actively engage in efforts to protect the

environment (Mace, 2014). Consequently, the

success of conservation initiatives is influenced

by the communities residing in these areas

(Cinner et al., 2016; Ison et al., 2021). Ulti-

mately, the overall goal of this research was

to identify strategies to promote communi-

ty and key stakeholder engagement in coral

reef restoration and conservation efforts. To

do so, we identified the following objectives:

(1) identify key motivations that influenced

community members, key stakeholders, and

restoration practitioners to engage in coral reef

restoration efforts; (2) identify challenges and

barriers to active participation by key stake-

holders and community members; and, (3)

identify potential strategies to engage commu-

nities more effectively and address dysfunctio-

nalities that impede coral reef restoration and

conservation efforts.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study area: Laughing Bird Caye National

Park (LBCNP) was established in 1991 under

the National Parks System Act (Government of

Belize, 1991). LCBNP is located on the shallow

reef platform of the Mesoamerican Barrier

Reef System, which is the largest barrier reef in

the western hemisphere. The LCBNP is one of

seven sites that comprise the Belize Barrier Reef

System, designated a UNESCO World Herita-

ge Site in 1996 (Government of Belize, 1996;

Fig. 1). Its ecological and economic importance

is significant, with tourism at the site valued at

nearly USD 5 million annually (Nawaz et al.,

Fig. 1. Laughing Bird Caye National Park and surrounding buffer zones (Reproduced from Laughing Bird Caye National

Park Management Plan 2018–2023, Volume One; SEA Belize, Southern Environmental Association (2018).

4Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

2017). Management of the park is coordina-

ted by the Southern Environmental Associa-

tion (SEA) through a participatory five-year

plan that balances biodiversity conservation

with sustainable tourism, including strategies

to reduce the environmental impacts of visitors

(Alicea, 2010). Since 2006, this management

framework has been complemented by active

coral reef restoration. Thousands of Acroporid

coral fragments have been outplanted within

the park and its buffer zone, with communi-

ty participation proving essential for ensu-

ring the long-term success of these initiatives

(Vaughan, 2021).

LCBNP conservation efforts are deeply

connected to the nearby communities of the

Placencia Peninsula, whose livelihoods and

identities are intertwined with the marine envi-

ronment. Placencia Village, founded by Euro-

pean and Creole settlers, lies at the southern

tip of the peninsula, while Seine Bight, about

five miles north, is home to a Garifuna com-

munity descended from African, Carib, and

Arawak peoples officially recognized as one of

Belize’s Indigenous groups (Palacio, 2007). For

much of the twentieth century, local economies

relied on fishing and agriculture; however, over

the past three decades, the rapid expansion of

coastal tourism has reshaped livelihoods (Key,

2002). During 2000–2010, the local population

doubled (Webb, 2024). Today, approximately 6

000 residents, split almost evenly between Seine

Bight and Placencia Village, depend directly

and indirectly on marine resources and tou-

rism, making their involvement in restoration

and conservation efforts both a social and eco-

logical necessity.

Methods: We employed a mixed methods

approach to examine community engagement,

combining qualitative and quantitative data

using the exploratory sequential method (Fet-

ters et al., 2013). The method explores qualita-

tive data first and then uses this data to develop

the quantitative instruments (Creswell, 2009).

We collected data during two field seasons that

totaled four months and included interviews;

SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities,

and threats) analysis; and surveys (Fig. 2). The

precise dates of data collection are not provided

to protect the anonymity of participants. A

more detailed explanation of the instruments

used is available in Uribe-Castañeda et al.

(2014). Interviews conducted with restoration

practitioners were used to gather information

about their strategies for engaging communities

in restoration programs, and with key stakehol-

ders to obtain information on their perspectives

of the engagement process. After preliminary

analysis of the interview data, we developed a

SWOT analysis for community members enga-

ged in coral reef restoration efforts to identify

perceptions of restoration engagement efforts.

We also conducted surveys with the broader

community by interviewing community mem-

bers selected at random at a local food market

to understand their perceptions and compare

responses collected from restoration practitio-

ners and key stakeholders.

Our research methods were based on the

Ethical Community Engagement Framework

(ECEF) developed by Carter et al. (2022;

Table 1). The ECEF describes a structured

approach to engage communities in ways that

are participatory, inclusive, and transparent

(Carter et al., 2019).

Sampling design: Two semi-structured

interview instruments were developed to analy-

ze community engagement strategies for res-

toration programs in the Laughing Bird Caye

NP and buffer zone. We conducted interviews

Fig. 2. Study design identifying participatory research methods and target audiences.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

in person, who were recruited through chain

referral or ‘‘snowball’’ sampling (Kittinger et

al., 2016), until reaching sample size saturation

(Hennink & Kaiser, 2022). Snowball sampling

involves selecting a few individuals among key

stakeholders and asking them to refer to others

who also meet the criteria to participate in the

study (Etikan et al., 2016). The interviews lasted

between 30 and 90 minutes each. The first set

of interviews was with restoration practitio-

ners. Interviews consisted of eight questions

(Appendix 1) and identified activities carried

out by them, the level of engagement with the

local community, the target audiences, and

the metrics used to evaluate their programs.

The second set of interviews was with key

stakeholders and consisted of 10 questions

(Appendix 2) designed to determine the level of

awareness about community-based restoration

efforts, whether those interviewed participated

in them, the inclusivity of the community enga-

gement efforts, the barriers that could prevent

community members from participating, and

the motivations of key stakeholders to partici-

pate in the program activities.

We conducted a SWOT analysis workshop

to assess the effectiveness of the local com-

munity-based restoration efforts and identify

potential areas for improvement. The four ele-

ments of a SWOT analysis include internal fac-

tors such as strengths and weaknesses, as well as

external factors like opportunities and threats

(Benzaghta et al., 2021). Community members

who participated in the workshop were divided

into four groups, each assigned to one of the

four categories of the SWOT analysis. At the

end of the workshop, a representative from each

group shared the ideas and insights collected

with all the participants. Sample size was dicta-

ted by the number of community participants.

We used data collected during interviews

with restoration practitioners and key stake-

holders and the SWOT analysis to develop a

survey for the broader community using the

ECEF framework developed by Carter et al.

(2022). The survey consisted of 14 close-ended

questions designed to collect information about

the community members’ perceptions of coral

reefs, their challenges, and their conservation

status (Appendix 3). Some questions from the

interviews were changed from open-ended to

close-ended questions with multiple answers,

the answers options were identified according

to the data collected during the interviews and

were designed to identify motivations of com-

munity members to participate in coral reef

restoration activities, the barriers that could

hinder their participation, and the activities in

which they would like to contribute to restoring

the coral reefs. We chose to collect a sample size

double the recommended sample size based on

the anticipated point of theoretical saturation

(Thomson, 2011).

We transcribed the semi-structured inter-

views, translated transcriptions from Spanish to

English, and coded the translated transcriptions

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

6Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

using MAXQDA 2022 qualitative analysis soft-

ware following the guidelines proposed by

Kuckartz & Rädiker, (2019). Coding invol-

ves organizing and interpreting qualitative

data by assigning labels or codes to specific

data segments that represent meaningful and

categorical themes (Saldaña, 2013). We did

three rounds of coding; a first round of open

coding, a second round of category coding,

and a third round of axial coding to ensure

details were preserved in the translation. The

codes were grouped into four themes (parent

codes) aligned with research objectives. SWOT

analyses and survey data are reported using

descriptive statistics and correlations where

appropriate following recommendations of De

Winter et al. (2016).

Approval for the development of these

methods was obtained from the Univer-

sity of Florida Institutional Review Board

(IRB202100741) and the National Institute of

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

RESULTS

We identified 609 information segments

during analysis and coding of interviews of

restoration practitioners and key stakeholders.

Information segments were coded and cate-

gorized into engagement categories (parent

codes) and subcategories (subcodes). We iden-

tified four main systems associated with the

challenges and opportunities influencing com-

munity engagement in coral reef restoration at

Laughing Bird Caye National Park and associa-

ted buffer zone. Based on information gathe-

red from interviews with target audiences, the

systems identified were (1) management, (2)

social, (3) educational, and (4) environmental

(Fig. 3, Fig. 4). Within each thematic group of

categories, we identified subcategories of com-

mon factors and elements that promoted or

hindered local engagement and grouped them

as challenges and opportunities.

Challenges: Challenges associated with

management and administrative systems were

identified as the most significant factor hinde-

ring local engagement in coral reef restoration,

accounting for 67 % of all responses across all

challenges categories (Fig. 3). However, there

were key differences identified between res-

toration practitioners/key stakeholders and the

broader community, with key stakeholders and

Fig. 3. Challenges to local engagement in coral reef restoration identified by restoration practitioners, key stakeholders and

the broad community from Laughing Bird Caye National Park and its buffer zone. The percentages of all challenges total

100 %.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

restoration practitioners contending that lack of

enforcement and funding as the main challen-

ges. SWOT analyses with key stakeholders also

identified the lack of significant and consistent

government funding as weaknesses influencing

coral reef restoration efforts. Surveys among the

broader community expressed different con-

cerns, specifically that opportunities to engage

in coral reef restoration are limited with 65 % of

the respondents indicating they had very little

or no participation in coral reef conservation

efforts, especially regarding decisions affecting

coral reef management. The lack of community

engagement appears to be associated primarily

with the lack of opportunities to engage becau-

se we found a significant positive correlation

between sense of personal responsibility and

acknowledgment of community responsibility

for coral reef conservation (rs [60] = 0.53, p

< 0.001), and 83 % of individuals surveyed

indicated they felt a personal responsibility for

protecting the coral reef ecosystem.

Social challenges were identified as the

next most important barrier to community

engagement in coral reef restoration. This

category constituted approximately 15 % of

all interview responses with the most cited

issues being corruption within government

departments, social inequities associated with

opportunities for community members to pro-

vide effective input on decision-making, and

lack of commitment among the community

due to loss of faith in participatory processes

(Fig. 3). SWOT analyses had a slightly diffe-

rent view, reporting limited local awareness,

lack of qualified office staff, and conflict with

local tourism impediments. Community sur-

vey respondents identified two primary factors

presenting social barriers to community invol-

vement - time constraints (59 %) and a shortage

of opportunities and invitations to participate

(25 %). Financial concerns (10 %) were also

identified as a potential barrier to participation

in reef restoration.

The lack of education and awareness (11 %)

emerged as a recurring challenge to communi-

ty engagement in coral reef restoration (Fig.

3). The perspectives on educational needs are

Fig. 4. Opportunities of local engagement in coral reef restoration identified by restoration practitioners, key stakeholders

and broad community in the Laughing Bird Caye National Park and its buffer zone. The percentages of all opportunities

total 100 %.

8Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

noticed in different ways between groups. Res-

toration practitioners primarily viewed the lack

of education as a problem in terms of the

availability of qualified personnel to assist in

restoration efforts, whereas community mem-

bers viewed educational needs in terms of the

lack of outreach activities designed to increase

awareness and understanding of coral reef res-

toration efforts. SWOT analysis indicated that

limited local awareness was a weakness and the

lack of knowledge among boat captains posed a

serious threat to the reef. Community surveys

indicated the lack of community outreach and

educational programs as a need specifically

for youth (15 %), through social media cam-

paigns (15 %), and for adults via community

meetings (13 %).

The least often cited challenge (7 %) to

coral reef restoration efforts from restora-

tion practitioners and key stakeholders were

extrinsic environmental threats such as cli-

mate-related stressors and poor water quality

(Fig. 3). Responses from interviews and the

SWOT analysis identified lack of enforcement

of existing regulations and loss or damage

to mangrove and seagrass habitats associated

with tourism and coastal development as more

important potential threats to the coral reef.

Opportunities: Despite being identified as

a challenge, education was also the most fre-

quently cited opportunity to strengthen com-

munity engagement in coral reef restoration,

representing 36 % of responses from inter-

views (Fig. 4). Within this system, participants

emphasized youth education as the greatest

opportunity to increase awareness of the impor-

tance of the reef to the local community and

develop knowledge and skills necessary to par-

ticipate actively in coral reef restoration. Results

also indicated the importance of experiential

outreach activities, social media campaigns,

and skills training as strategies to engage both

youth and adults and foster long-term com-

mitments to coral reef stewardship. Community

initiatives, such as coral reef festivals, were also

identified as opportunities to increase aware-

ness and participation and provide economic

opportunities to local businesses. SWOT analy-

ses identified similar strategies as strengths and

opportunities, emphasizing engagement of the

local community in an array of potential edu-

cational programs and activities to strengthen

community interest and engagement in reef

restoration efforts. As noted in challenges, sur-

veys of the local community revealed a desire

for increased educational opportunities, with

68 % of responses associated with strategies

to engage including some type of educational

opportunity for the local community.

Social opportunities accounted for 28 % of

responses from interviews, with the strongest

emphasis placed on supporting local economies

and livelihoods (Fig. 4). Respondents emphasi-

zed the importance of strengthening local lea-

dership, advancing equity and inclusion efforts,

and implementing recognition strategies for

community volunteers to promote broad par-

ticipation and ownership of conservation ini-

tiatives. SWOT analyses supported these ideas,

identifying strategies such as active commu-

nity involvement, awards and recognition for

community engagement, and expanding social

media to engage the community more effec-

tively. As discussed in challenges, community

surveys emphasized the desire for increased

opportunities for community engagement, with

83 % of individuals surveyed indicating they

felt a personal responsibility and 94 % ack-

nowledging community-level responsibility for

protecting the coral reef ecosystem. Of note

is that 69 % of those surveyed indicated they

were optimistic or strongly optimistic about the

future of the reef and we identified a significant

correlation among individuals whose primary

motivation for reef restoration was to sustain

local fisheries and individuals whose primary

motivation was to enhance the local economy

(rs [60] = 0.70, p < 0.001). Consequently, there

is optimism and interest in supporting coral

reef restoration among the broad community

and specifically among two important commu-

nity interest groups.

Environmental opportunities for promo-

ting community engagement represented 22 %

of interview responses and were primarily iden-

tified with evidence of increased interest in reef

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

conservation and restoration among commu-

nity members through direct engagement and

the need for and interest in technical assistance,

such as long-term monitoring identified as

necessary for guiding adaptive management

and ensuring continuity of ecological protec-

tion (Fig. 4). SWOT analysis further indicated

the importance of additional opportunities to

enhance environmental awareness and action

within the community through active commu-

nity involvement. Community surveys identi-

fied opportunities for greater engagement with

local businesses, such as strengthening links

between restoration and sustainable tourism

by promoting meaningful tourist involvement,

such as volunteer programs engaging tourists

who would also contribute financial support for

conservation activities.

Management opportunities were the least

often referred to category, comprising 14 %

of responses (Fig. 4). However, opportunities

associated with management strategies repre-

sented a smaller but significant proportion of

responses, focused primarily on local part-

nerships associated with strategic planning,

budgeting, and policy development including

key governance and organizational needs.

Opportunities to strengthen enforcement and

policy frameworks by creating mechanisms

for collaboration between fisheries, tourism,

and conservation government agencies were

also identified. Participants also identified

opportunities to build community support by

developing community agreements, creating

environmental jobs, and strengthening policies

designed to sustain conservation efforts. SWOT

analyses identified community resources such

as boats and knowledgeable captains and sou-

rces of funding such as local sponsorships as

opportunities to support management activi-

ties. Community surveys indicated interest in

new job opportunities to contribute to monito-

ring and other management activities.

DISCUSSION

Our study at Laughing Bird Caye National

Park highlights the challenges associated with

engaging local communities in coral reef res-

toration and how these are influenced by the

interconnected nature of social, educational,

environmental, and management systems. Our

findings also illustrate how challenges in each

of these areas offer opportunities to enhan-

ce community engagement in restoration and

foster conservation and long-term resilience

of coral reefs. The information we gathered

using participatory research methods from res-

toration practitioners, key stakeholders (inter-

views), and community members engaged in

restoration activities (SWOT analysis), and the

broader public (surveys) were guided by ECEF

principles developed by Carter et al. (2022).

We addressed these principles in our interview,

SWOT, and survey methods by demonstrating

(1) respect for values and motivations that may

influence attitudes, (2) inclusivity, (3) situatio-

nal awareness to build trust, (4) effective use of

qualitative methods to promote engagement,

(5) participatory methods, and (6) respect for

shared ownership and community responsi-

bility for successful outcomes. This approach

proved valuable for gaining trust and partici-

pation among study groups and for eliciting

information that provided insights into local

perceptions of barriers and potential pathways

to increased community engagement in coral

reef restoration and conservation.

Management systems - Governance

barriers and institutional opportunities:

Management-related challenges emerged as the

most significant barrier to community enga-

gement. Across groups, respondents stressed

a lack of community inclusion in decision-

making, insufficient funding, and weak enforce-

ment of existing regulations as serious obstacles

to restoring and protecting the reef ecosystem.

However, there were differences in priorities

between restoration practitioners/key stake-

holders and the broader community. Whereas

restoration practitioners/key stakeholders felt

the biggest challenge was lack of sufficient and

consistent funding, local community members

identified the lack of participation in manage-

ment decisions as the highest priority. Although

10 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

adequate and consistent funding for restoration

efforts is clearly important (e.g., a politician

admitted, “funding is inconsistent and often

tied to short-term projects”), the lack of oppor-

tunities for community members to provide

input on management decisions can discourage

potential support (e.g., a fisher interviewed

stated “rules are written without us”). Con-

sequently, creating opportunities for greater

community input may need to be prioritized to

facilitate community input, which could poten-

tially facilitate greater community engagement

including local support for reef restoration

activities. These findings echo Gill et al. (2017)

and McClanahan et al. (2006), who posit that

top-down governance models often exclude

local voices, undermining legitimacy and com-

pliance. Another management challenge iden-

tified by all groups was the lack of enforcement

of existing regulations designed to protect reef

resources. For example, fishers expressed disi-

llusionment with governance, especially law

enforcement - “laws exist, but nobody enforces

t h e m .” These findings mirror concerns voiced

by Luttinger (1997), who reported that inade-

quate enforcement undermines reef conserva-

tion in the Caribbean

However, many interviewees also recog-

nized management restructuring as a key

opportunity. By reallocating resources, enhan-

cing enforcement, and creating participatory

decision-making spaces, management modifi-

cations could unlock the full potential of com-

munity engagement, including generating new,

local sources of financial aid and in-kind sup-

port. Various ideas were voiced, with politicians

acknowledging the need for stronger legal fra-

meworks and restoration practitioners empha-

sizing the potential for co-management models

- “if fishers and educators are at the table, the

policies will be better and the restoration more

effective.” These insights align with Ostrom’s

(1990) framework on participatory governan-

ce and with Cramer & Kittinger (2021), who

argue for integrating community voices into

formal conservation strategies. Stakeholders

emphasized that greater inclusivity in deci-

sion-making could bridge divides and promote

local support, including co-management - “sha-

ring authority with local communities creates

ownership and reduces dependence on external

funding.” Cinner et al. (2012) reported that

co-management improves ecological outcomes

and Ostrom (1990) determined management

of natural resources requires that rules be

developed and enforced by local users them-

selves. Consequently, strategic management

actions that integrate businesses, policies, and

local leadership represent important opportu-

nities to integrate local support and promote

long-term community engagement in coral

reef restoration.

Education systems - lack of knowled-

ge and the role of environmental learning:

A central challenge, as well as an important

opportunity, identified was the lack of educa-

tion and awareness about coral reef ecosystems

and restoration processes. As with manage-

ment challenges, perspectives on educational

priorities differed between restoration practi-

tioners/key stakeholders (i.e., the need for ski-

lled personnel) and community members (i.e.,

the need for increased community awareness

among youth and adults). As one schooltea-

cher remarked, “many of my students do not

understand what coral reefs are, so they don’t

see why they should care if they disappear” and

fishers emphasized “people only see the ocean as

a source of fish, not as a system that needs care.”

Multiple studies have determined that limited

environmental knowledge reduces participa-

tion in conservation initiatives, which is coun-

terproductive to restoration goals (McClanahan

et al., 2006; Trialfhianty & Suadi, 2017). Conse-

quently, this knowledge gap and the lack of for-

mal and informal education hinders the ability

of communities to fully engage in restoration

because they don’t understand the importance

and benefits of doing so.

Fortunately, education was widely recogni-

zed as the greatest opportunity for promoting

local engagement in coral reef restoration. Par-

ticipants in all stakeholder groups consistently

suggested the need to integrate reef conserva-

tion into school curricula and adult education.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

Educational programs that increase knowledge

of the coral reef ecosystem and the benefits

it provides, especially participatory learning

experiences associated with reef restoration,

can promote interest and support for reef res-

toration and conservation. As one environ-

mental educator explained, “if we can teach the

children early, they will teach their parents, and

we will build a culture that values the reef.” Fur-

thermore, the differences in educational priori-

ties identified by restoration practitioners/key

stakeholders and community members are not

necessarily mutually exclusive because increa-

sed awareness and interest in reef restoration

may encourage the pursuit of more advanced

training to acquire skills needed by restoration

practitioners. These ideas align with Carter et

al. (2022), who reported that participatory lear-

ning enhances pro-environmental behaviors.

By embedding restoration into formal and

informal education, therefore, communities

can bridge knowledge gaps and cultivate long-

term engagement in restoration and conserva-

tion efforts, including more advanced training

to develop needed skillsets.

Social systems – social dysfunctionality

and the potential of social capital: Social

dysfunction, particularly self-interest and dis-

trust, was identified as a major factor that

hinders community engagement and collective

action in support of restoration efforts as evi-

denced by statements such as this - “different

groups don’t talk to each other, they compete

for resources instead of working together.” In

addition to self-interest and distrust within

the community, some community members

also reported mistrust toward government

agencies. Such divisions are counterproduc-

tive, as reported by Bajracharya et al. (2005)

and Cramer & Kittinger (2021), who empha-

size that weak social cohesion undermines

conservation effectiveness.

Opportunities for strengthening social

capital by building partnerships and promo-

ting collaboration were emphasized, such as

developing “joint projects between schools, dive

centers, and NGOs [which] can multiply impact

and reduce duplication.” The need to build

greater trust among community members was

also identified, such as reviving traditional

community gatherings - “we used to meet to

decide how to fish, why not meet to decide

how to restore?” Social engagement was also

recognized as important for people to “feel part

of something bigger.” Such approaches reso-

nate with Ostrom’s (1990) framework, which

emphasizes collective-choice arrangements,

and with Good & Bahr (2021), who found that

collaborative restoration fosters trust and long-

term stewardship. Greiner and Gregg (2011)

found that collaborative engagement improves

both social and ecological outcomes. By fos-

tering collaboration among broad coalitions,

reef restoration can become a platform for

strengthening social dynamics and promoting

community engagement and collective action.

Environmental systems - environmen-

tal threats and the motivation for action:

Our research revealed that the community

identified and was concerned about multiple

environmental stressors affecting reef health.

Extrinsic factors, such as rising sea tempera-

tures, were identified as concerns but of lesser

importance than local factors such as poor

water quality, destruction of mangrove and

seagrass habitat due to coastal development,

and damage to the coral reef from tourism acti-

vities. Lack of enforcement of existing environ-

mental regulations intended to protect the reef

was also identified as a concern. As stated by a

restoration practitioner, “we restore corals, but

the water quality keeps killing them.” Statements

from fishers emphasized declining catches as

evidence of ecosystem degradation, which illus-

trates how declining reef health can negatively

impact local livelihoods. As emphasized by

Edgar et al. (2014) and Hein et al. (2019), res-

toration efforts cannot succeed without also

addressing underlying environmental stressors.

Paradoxically, these same threats were also

seen as motivating opportunities. Dive center

owners explained that “tourists are shocked

when they see bleached reefs, and that can push

them to care,” and politicians noted that visible

12 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

reef decline “creates urgency for policy change.”

Good & Bahr (2021) and Carter et al. (2022)

found that ecological crises can catalyze public

engagement and policy innovation. In this

sense, environmental threats, while daunting,

can serve as catalysts for education, advocacy,

and stronger management interventions.

Conclusions: Our findings identify cha-

llenges that deter community engagement in

coral reef restoration and conservation efforts

related to education, social dynamics, envi-

ronmental threats, and management systems.

Issues such as limited environmental awareness,

fractured social dynamics, persistent ecological

threats, and weak governance undermine enga-

gement. However, our findings also demons-

trate that there are opportunities to transform

obstacles into strengths. Within each challenge

lies a corresponding opportunity:

• education can empower stewardship,

• social collaboration can build trust,

• environmental threats can create a sense of

urgency, and

• governance reforms can institutionalize

participation.

By investing in education, fostering colla-

boration, addressing environmental drivers,

and embracing inclusive governance, coral res-

toration can evolve from isolated interventions

into a sustainable, community-driven process.

Our results revealed how different stake-

holder groups viewed barriers and solutions

to community engagement in restoration and

conservation of the coral reef ecosystem in

Laughing Bird Caye National Park. Although

our research specifically reflects the perspec-

tives of stakeholder groups from a coral reef-

dependent community in Placencia, Belize, the

methods we implemented provide a strategy for

identifying stakeholder concerns and opportu-

nities associated with marine protected areas

elsewhere and potentially for conservation

issues more broadly. By identifying stakeholder

concerns and opportunities, the information

obtained can be used as a roadmap to develop

inclusive, effective, and lasting programs that

promote community engagement in restoration

and conservation efforts.

Author contribution statement: NU-C,

MM, conceived, designed the research, and

wrote and edited the manuscript; NU-C collec-

ted and analyzed the data.

Ethics statement: The authors declare that

they all agree with this publication and that

they have made contributions that justify their

authorship; that there is no conflict of interest

of any kind; and that they have complied with

all relevant ethical and legal requirements and

procedures. All sources of funding are fully

and clearly detailed in the acknowledgements

section. The respective signed legal document

is in the journal’s archives.

See supplementary material

a03v74s1-suppl. 1

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are deeply grateful to several insti-

tutions at the University of Florida for their

support 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 financial contributions. Special recog-

nition 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 Mora-

les, Jamie Loizzo, Joshua Patterson for their

support on the development of this research.

Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075, Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

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) [Mana-

gement Plan]. United States National Oceanic and

Atmospheric Administration, Coral Reef Conser-

vation Program. https://repository.library.noaa.gov/

view/noaa/820/noaa_820_DS1.pdf

Bajracharya, S. B., Furley, P. A., & Newton, A. C. (2005).

Effectiveness of community involvement in deli-

vering conservation benefits to the Annapurna

Conservation Area, Nepal. Environmental Conserva-

tion, 32(3), 239–247. https://www.doi.org/10.1017/

S0376892905002298

Burke, S. (2023). Wisdom from the Elders: kinship care that

honors traditional Indigenous ways. AlterNative: An

International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, 19(3), 635–

645. https://doi.org/10.1177/11771801231189842

Carter, L., Williams, L., & Cosijn, M. (2019). The principles

and practices of ethical community engagement: Resou-

rces to support engaging for impact [Technical report].

Australian Centre for International Agricultural

Research, Australian Government.

Carter, N. H., Cosjin, 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, 485–496. https://doi.

org/10.1007/s11625-021-01055-1

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., & Kuange, J.

(2012). Comanagement of coral reef social-ecologi-

cal systems. PNAS, 109(14), 5219–5222. https://doi.

org/10.1073/pnas.1121215109

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., … Moui-

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

reefs. Nature, 535, 416–419. https://doi.org/10.1038/

nature18607

Cramer, L. A., & Kittinger, J. N. (2021). Reef conserva-

tion off the hook: can market interventions make

coral reef fisheries more sustainable? Frontiers in

Marine Science, 8, 675274. https://doi.org/10.3389/

fmars.2021.675274

Creswell, J.W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantita-

tive, and mixed methods approaches. Sage Publications.

Dawson, N. M., Coolsaet, B., Sterling, E. J., Loveridge, R.,

Gross-Camp, N. D., Wongbusarakum, S., Sangha,

K. K., Scherl, L. M., Phuong Phan, H., Zafra-Calvo,

N., Lavey, W. G., Byakagaba, P., Idrobo, C. J., Chenet,

A., Bennett, N. J., Mansourian, S., & Rosado-May, F.

J. (2021). The role of Indigenous peoples and local

communities in effective and equitable conservation.

Ecology & Society, 26(3), 19. https://doi.org/10.5751/

ES-12625-260319

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

Comparing the Pearson and Spearman correlation

coefficients across distributions and sample sizes:

A tutorial using simulations and empirical data.

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

org/10.1037/met0000079

Edgar, G. J., Stuart-Smith, R. D., Willis, T. J., Kininmonth,

S., Baker, S. C., Banks, S., Barrett, N. S., Becerro, M.

A., Bernard, A. T. F., Berkhout, J., Buxton, C. D.,

Campbell, S. J., Cooper, A. T., Davey, M., Edgar, S. C.,

Försterra, G., Galván, D. E., Irigoyen, A. J., Kushner,

D. J., … Thomson, R. J. (2014). Global conservation

outcomes depend on marine protected areas with

five key features. Nature, 506, 216–220. https://doi.

org/10.1038/nature13022

Fetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2013).

Achieving integration in mixed methods designs—

principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48,

2134–2156. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117

Gavin, M. C., McCarter, J., Berkes, F., Mead, A., Sterling,

E. J., Tang, R., Turner, N. J., & Sterling, E. J. (2018).

Effective biodiversity conservation requires dynamic,

pluralistic, partnership-based approaches. Sustainabi-

lity, 10(6), 1846. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10061846

Gill, D. A., Mascia, M. B., Ahmadia, G. N., Glew, L., Lester,

S. E., Barnes, M., Craigie, I., Darling, E. S., Free, C.

M., Geldmann, J., Holst, S., Jensen, O. P., White, A.

T., Basurto, X., Coad, L., Gates, R. D., Guannel, G:,

Mumby, P. J., Thomas, H., … Fox, H. E. (2017). Capa-

city shortfalls hinder the performance of marine pro-

tected areas globally. Nature, 543, 665–669. https://

doi.org/10.1038/nature21708

Good, C. V., & Bahr, K. D. (2021). The coral conservation

crisis: interacting local and global stressors reduce

reef resiliency and create challenges for conservation

solutions. SN Applied Sciences, 3, 312. https://doi.

org/10.1007/s42452-021-04319-8

Government of Belize. (1991). National Parks (Laughing

Bird Caye) Order. Statutory Instrument No. 167 of

1991.

Government of Belize. (1996). National Parks (Laughing

Bird Caye) Order. Statutory Instrument No. 94 of

1996.

Greiner, R., & Gregg, D. (2011). Farmers’ intrinsic moti-

vations, barriers to the adoption of conservation

practices, and effectiveness of policy instruments:

Empirical evidence from northern Australia. Land

14 Revista de Biología Tropical, ISSN: 2215-2075 Vol. 74 (S1): e20267722, abril 2026 (Publicado May. 07, 2026)

Use Policy, 28(1), 257–265. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.

landusepol.2010.06.006

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

Huntington, H. P. (2011). The local perspective. Nature,

478, 182–183. https://doi.org/10.1038/478182a

Ison, S., Pecl, G., Hobday, A. J., Cvitanovic, C., & Van Put-

ten, I. (2021). Stakeholder influence and relationships

inform engagement strategies in marine conservation.

Ecosystems and People, 17(1), 320–341. https://doi.org

/10.1080/26395916.2021.1938236

Key, C. (2002). The political economy of the transition from

fishing to tourism, in Placencia, Belize. International

Review of Modern Sociology, 30(1–2), 1–18.

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

Luttinger, N. (1997). Community-based coral reef con-

servation in the Bay Islands, Honduras. Ocean &

Coastal Management, 36(1–3), 11–22. https://doi.

org/10.1016/S0964-5691(97)00014-8

Mace, G. M. (2014). Whose conservation? Science,

345(6204), 1558–1560. https://doi.org/10.1126/

science.1254704

McClanahan, T. R., Marnane, M. J., Cinner, J. E., & Kiene,

W. E. (2006). A comparison of marine protected areas

and alternative approaches to coral-reef manage-

ment. Current Biology, 16(14), 1408–1413. https://doi.

org/10.1016/j.cub.2006.05.062

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.

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 University

Press.

Palacio, J. (2007). How did the Garifuna become an

Indigenous people? Reconstructing the cultu-

ral persona of an African-Native American people

in Central America. Revista Pueblos y Fronteras

Digital, 2(4), 401–428. https://doi.org/10.22201/

cimsur.18704115e.2007.4.226

Rozzi, R., May Jr, R. H., Chapin III, F. S., Massardo, F.,

Gavin, M. C., Klaver, I. J., Pauchard, A., Núñez,

M. A., & Simberloff, D. (2018). From biocultu-

ral homogenization to biocultural conservation: A

conceptual framework to reorient society toward

sustainability of life. In R. Rozzi., R. H. May Jr, F. S.

Chapin III, F. Massardo, F., M. C. Gavin, I. J. Klaver,

A. Pauchard, M. A. Núñez, & D. Simberloff (Eds.),

From Biocultural Homogenization to Biocultural Con-

servation (Vol. 3, pp. 1–17). Springer. https://doi.

org/10.1007/978-3-319-99513-7_1

Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative resear-

chers. Sage Publications.

SEA Belize, Southern Environmental Association. (2018).

Laughing Bird Caye National Park: Background, tech-

nical sections & appendices. Management Plan (2018–

2023) (Volume 1) [Management Plan]. SEA Belize,

Southern Environmental Association. https://rris.bio-

pama.org/sites/default/files/2021-02/LBCNP_Draft_

Mgmt_Plan%20Volume%20ONE%20%28final%20

draft%29.pdf

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

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

M., Filardi, C., Landrigan, K., & Porzecanski, A. L.

(2017). Assessing the evidence for stakeholder enga-

gement in biodiversity conservation. Biological Con-

servation, 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

Thomson, S. B. (2011). Sample size and grounded theory.

Journal of Administration and Governance, 5(1),

45–52.

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

nity in supporting coral reef restoration in Pemuteran,

Bali, Indonesia. Journal of Coastal Conservation, 21(6),

873–882. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-017-0553-1

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

Vaughan, D. (2021). Active coral restoration: Techniques for

a changing planet. J. Ross Publishing.

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(2), 130–145. https://doi.

org/10.1111/napa.12215