By Nirmal Jivan Shah
The European Court of Auditors has delivered an awkward verdict on the world’s largest trading bloc. The EU has yet to build a network of marine protected areas that effectively protects its seas. If wealthy Europe struggles to do this, what can small island states achieve with far fewer people and far less money? [1, 2]
About 14% of EU waters were designated as protected in 2023. Strict protection is estimated to cover less than 1%, against a 10% target. The auditors found gaps in offshore and deep-sea protection, and poorly connected sites. They consider the 2030 targets unlikely to be met. [2]
Here in Seychelles, we have designated 32.6% of our Exclusive Economic Zone for marine protection. That is more than 44 million hectares, roughly the combined size of the United Kingdom, Greece, the Netherlands and Belgium. Some zones are intended for high biodiversity protection; others allow regulated use. The responsibility falls on a country with just over 100,000 Seychellois citizens and an annual economy worth about US$2.4 billion. [3, 4, 5, 6]
An ocean of work and too few hands
The 2025 Marine Spatial Plan assessment found staff shortages and high turnover. Research also showed how short grants disrupted conservation work. Better salaries may help retain staff, but cannot resolve a national shortage of workers. [7, 8]
Training can help. Donors can offer courses in financial management or project development, but associations may have nobody suitable, or nobody they can spare, to attend. The point is that workshops cannot fill vacant posts or cover an institution’s running costs, the crux of the problem.
Ageing, falling birth rates, drug addiction and chronic diseases put pressure on Seychelles’ already small labour supply. Low unemployment leaves employers with few available recruits. [15, 16] The shortage is across the board. Almost 400 budgeted government posts remained vacant at mid-year. The private sector is no better off – currently expatriates fill about 40% of private-sector jobs. [15]
Regional and international recruitment is constrained by Seychelles’ work permit policy and rules for expatriate labour, with some jobs being reserved for Seychellois. Donors need to fund staffing options that work within these limits, alongside continuing operating costs. [17]
The bill beneath the blue
We knew expansion would cost more. The 2019 Biodiversity Finance Plan had already identified annual funding gaps in the smaller protected-area system and warned that the proposed marine expansion would increase the bill. [9]
An October 2024 costing study put annual operating needs for 2025 at US$35–51 million, depending on the standard of management. That estimate covered the expanded system, some terrestrial areas and coordination. It estimated that another US$10–42 million a year would be needed beyond existing spending. [10]
No sanctuary from the heat
Climate change makes the task harder. A study of 21 Seychelles reefs over two decades spanning the 1998 mass bleaching event found that marine reserves retained benefits for fish biomass, the total weight of fish. But after bleaching, coral cover was no higher in reserves than in fished areas. Fishing restrictions remain useful but protected status cannot stop a marine heatwave. [12]
Seychelles’ 2021 climate pledge estimated adaptation costs through 2030 at US$339 million, including work on coasts, fisheries and biodiversity. Some activities were already funded, and some work overlaps with protected-area management. We should plan and fund the work together, taking care not to count the same costs twice. [11]
Protection needs a payroll
Even securing finance takes staff. The government’s Climate Finance Mapping report identifies shortages of people to find funding, write proposals and carry out approved projects. The IMF reported in 2024 that some externally financed projects in Seychelles had been abandoned during operation because the original funding had not covered continuing labour and running costs. Buying equipment is easier than keeping it working for years. [13, 14]
Governments and donors need to fund conservation for as long as they expect it to continue. That means salaries and fuel for patrols, money for repairs, and regular surveys to find out whether protection is working. Satellite surveillance and AI systems can fill gaps but still need people to examine alerts and investigate suspected offences. Conservation organisations need budgets that let them retain staff between projects and funded roles in management and monitoring.
We have responsibilities at home, as well. We must show the public where the money goes and what it achieves. Agencies need to coordinate their work. International partners can help with dependable grants, shared surveillance and specialist expertise, but our classification as a high-income country limits access to cheaper finance. [14]
Europe’s experience should make donors think again about what they expect small islands to deliver through short term grants and training workshops. Every agreement to protect more ocean should say who will pay for the staff and running costs, and for how long.
(Cover image: Matteo Parisi – Pexels)