Aini Nur Furoida*
| Indah Susilowati | Deden Dinar Iskandar
© 2025 The authors. This article is published by IIETA and is licensed under the CC BY 4.0 license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
OPEN ACCESS
Karimunjawa National Park is tasked by the government with implementing a zoning system and sustainability principles to enhance marine conservation efforts. This study aims to evaluate assistance for achieving sustainability in Karimunjawa National Park. This research employed snowball sampling and conducted semi-structured interviews with 130 participants: 65 fishermen, 35 tourist stakeholders, and 30 aquaculture practitioners. This study employed a mixed-method approach, incorporating both descriptive statistical analysis and qualitative descriptive analysis. The findings of this research indicate that the community recognizes the zoning system for sustainability; nonetheless, the economic dimension is more predominant than the social and ecological elements. The dilemma between economic development and ecological preservation is an obstacle for the implementation of economic growth programs in Karimunjawa National Park.
blue growth, marine conservation, Karimunjawa National Park, sustainability
The ocean is a resource of considerable economic worth. Estimates indicate that the maritime sector provides about $1.5 trillion per year to the global economy [1]. Moreover, it serves as a significant hub for human habitation, with over 40% of the global population residing in coastal regions within 150 kilometers of the shoreline [2]. Additionally, the ocean serves as a livelihood source for coastal populations by supplying food and jobs, while also significantly influencing local culture and history [3].
In alignment with global trends, Karimunjawa is leveraging its maritime resources for economic advancement. The Karimunjawa National Park encompasses over 98.65% of its aquatic territory, spanning a total area of 111,625 hectares [4].
The ocean's significance to human life has led to the establishment of a framework for sustainable marine resource management, commonly referred to as the blue economy. This concept has been articulated in numerous international accords as a reflection of humanity's commitment to the well-being of marine ecosystems, ensuring inclusivity and avoiding the marginalization of any community group. According to the World Bank in 2017 [5], the blue economy refers to 'the sustainable use of marine resources for economic growth, improved livelihoods, and employment, while maintaining the health of marine ecosystems. Germand-Duret et al. [6] in 2023 emphasize that this approach integrates the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) with economic growth objectives, ecological conservation, and community welfare. Similarly, United Nations in 2020 [7] defines the blue economy as a maritime economy that prioritizes improving human well-being and social equity while significantly reducing environmental risks and ecological scarcity.
Some studies have reported that the implementation of the blue economy often deviates from established provisions [6, 8-11]. According to these studies, the term blue economy is sometimes merely used as a justification for maximizing economic benefits through the exploitation of marine and coastal resources. While the global concept of the blue economy emphasizes economic growth through marine resource utilization, this approach may overlook the specific social and environmental challenges faced by regions like Karimunjawa. The focus on economic exploitation, particularly in the tourism sector, can result in environmental degradation and unequal distribution of benefits, potentially exacerbating social inequality within local communities [12-15].
Ultimately, blue growth overlooks the unequal distribution of benefits and the potential for significant societal losses if adequate checks and balances are not in place. This leads to environmental and social injustices arising from marine-based development activities [6, 9]. In Karimunjawa, such issues are especially pertinent, given the heavy reliance on marine resources for economic activities, such as tourism and fishing [12, 14]. If not carefully managed, these economic drivers could compromise the sustainability of marine ecosystems and fail to provide equitable benefits to the local population [15].
In line with the mandate of Law Number 5 of 1990, the blue economy seeks to balance human and ecological interests. The diverse objectives of Marine Protected Areas (MPA) also reflect the three pillars of sustainable development: ecology, economy, and society [4, 16]. By emphasizing the growth of the tourism sector, the current driver of the Karimunjawa economy, this study aims to analyze local community support for the blue economy and its role in advancing the three pillars of sustainability: economy, ecology, and social. It is essential to ensure that local development strategies align with sustainable principles, safeguarding both the environment and the well-being of the Karimunjawa community.
The research was carried out at Karimunjawa National Park, namely at Karimunjawa Village and Kemujan Village. The data for this study were collected by direct observation and semi-structured interviews with respondents. This examination was carried out from June to July 2024, coinciding with the peak tourism season during summer holidays for both international and domestic tourists. This timeframe corroborates field observations concerning the effects of tourism growing.
The respondents represent Karimunjawa's tourism, capture fisheries, and aquaculture economies. A total of 130 respondents were sampled: 65 fishers, 35 tourists, and 30 marine cultivators. Snowball sampling was employed to determine this study's sample size. The technique allows study in unfamiliar areas by obtaining from a key respondent (a prominent individual in the subject field) for afterwards respondents until the data is homogeneous. Number of samples is adjusted to estimated population proportion in each economic actor. Snowballing sampling may not represent the population, but this study seeks to reach the statistically valid minimum sample size of 30 interviews per actor.
The research study used a mixed method, incorporating statistical descriptive analysis, including frequency and percentage, alongside qualitative descriptive analysis to provide comprehensive results [17]. The study seeks to identify and analyze based on the three pillars of sustainability as contained in his writings [18, 19]—social, economic, and ecological—structured into a positive statement to assess the sustainability level of blue growth in Karimunjawa. There are several tools to investigate the study: 1) using a questionnaire to find out whether or not zoning is known in Karimunjawa, 2) using mapping using GIS to create a map of the distribution of economic activities and zoning systems in Karimunjawa, 3) assessment the respondent using a scale from 1 to 10 (strongly disagree to strongly agree) with a standard format. Then calculation average, see Eq. (1).
AverageperStatement=TheSumofValuesn (1)
To complete the result also use each evaluation gathered from respondents is subsequently computed by assigning weights to each dimension (social, economic, ecological) through a weighted average score technique, encompassing the following stages:
Calculating formula:
Step 1: Calculate average score per dimension for each respondent. See Eq. (2).
Score1,2,3=∑k1,2,3j=1Ri,jk1,2,3 (2)
Step 2: Calculate weighted score for each respondent. See Eq. (3).
TotalScore=(w1∗Score1)+(w2∗Score2)+(w3∗Score3) (3)
Step 3: Calculate total of overall average for all respondents. See Eq. (4).
TheTotalScore=∑ni=1TotalScoreOverallRespondentn (4)
Notations used:
n: number of respondents (130)
k1: number of questions in the social dimension (5)
k2: number of questions in the economy dimension (6)
k3: number of questions in the ecology dimension (5)
w1, w2, w3: weigth for each dimension (e.g., social=30%, economic=30%, ecological=40%)
Note: *Ecology weighs 10% more than social and economic dimensions because Karimunjawa National Park, a marine conservation area, must maintain the sustainability of marine and coastal ecosystems (ecology) per Law Number 5 of 1990.
Ri,j: score of respondent i for question j
The number of results based on calculation Eq. (1) until Eq. (4) obtained is classified based on five ranges in Table 1, as follows:
Table 1. Scoring scale
|
Scoring Scale |
Categorize |
|
0-2 |
Very Low |
|
2-4 |
Low |
|
4-6 |
Medium |
|
6-8 |
High |
|
8-10 |
Very High |
Source: Study [20]
3.1 Sustainability practice in Karimunjawa National Park
Karimunjawa National Park has a zoning system as a strategy for nature conservation. The zoning system is established to achieve sustainability by harmonizing the area's ecological preservation with the welfare of the residents who inhabited Karimunjawa prior to its designation as a conservation area [16, 21]. This system is established in accordance with the interpretation of Law Number 5 of 1990 of the Republic of Indonesia. The zoning of Karimunjawa National Park was initially established in the Decree of the Director General of PHPA No. 127/Kpts/DJ-VI/1989, dated December 28, 1989, and is categorized into four zones: core, protection, utilization, and buffer. Following that, it was amended in 2005 by the Decree of the Director General of PHKA No. SK. 79/IV/Set-3/2005, establishing seven zones. Last amended in 2012 by the Decree of the Director General of PHKA No. SK. 28/IVSET/2012, it was modified to include nine zones: core, jungle, marine protection, land utilization, marine tourism utilization, marine cultivation, traditional fisheries and religious culture.
Community knowledge of zoning regulations is required for the effective implementation of sustainability initiatives. Table 2 presents the investigation of zoning knowledge data among economic actors, including fishermen, marine farmers, and tourism stakeholders. The zone questions directed at respondents concentrated solely on five of the nine relevant zones: the core zone, jungle zone, catch fisheries zone, cultivation zone, and tourism zone. The five zones were selected as not all zones directly influence the interaction between local residents and conservation areas. Only these five zones are particular to economic activities and carrying out of nature protection. The other zone such as religious-cultural zones, may be more synergistic with community, but less interaction with economic and marine resources.
Table 2 shows core zones and marine protection zones are important because they safeguard coral reefs, fish, and other ecologically sustainable biota. Nearly 90% of economic players, including maritime workers, fishermen, and tourism actors, know the core zone, according to Table 2. According to 30% of economic actors, maritime conservation zones are unknown. The public knows about the core zone because it has strict law enforcement, both preventatively with physical signs and surveillance patrols and repressively with warnings, arrests, and fines [22, 23]. Marine protection zones enable human activities, including research, teaching, and restricted tourism, with law enforcement is lax [12]. So it's understandable if the public knows less about marine protection zones than core or industrial zones. Tourism actors (74%) and fisherman (63%) who use the tourism zone are knowledgeable about it. Only 43% of marine farmers were unaware of tourism special zones. Tourism zone is known to more than 50% of economic actors who use it, but agricultural zone is only known to 50% of cultivators. Considering they use the fishing zone most, 17% of fisherman know about it, which is surprising. Meanwhile, 51% of tourism players know the fishing zone better than fishermen. One factor is the stringent regulations for establishing tourism businesses Fafurida et al. [24] in 2020, coupled with the interest of those involved in tourism in the beauty of marine and coastal ecosystems, which are the primary attractions for tourist. as discovered by Setiyanto et al. [23] in 2024, tourism entrepreneurs are inclined to possess greater knowledge areas as prerequisites for comprehension and actions aimed at preserving marine ecosystem.
The subsequent result involves the investigation of mapped regions of economic activity—capture fisheries, aquaculture, and tourism— with the zoning area delineated by the Karimunjawa National Park Office in compliance with regulation No. SK. 28/IVSET/2012. This evaluation is depicted in Figure 1 for the investigation of the Karimunjawa Islands and in Figure 2 for the analysis of Karimunjawa Island and Kemujan Island, which are the islands with the biggest population and the epicenter of Karimunjawa's economic activity. Table 3 delineates the zoning violations detected by the analysis of tourism economic activity points inside the designated zoning area, as depicted in Figures 1 and 2.
Table 2. Zoning knowledge
|
Zoning Knowledge |
Economic Actors |
|||||
|
Marine Cultivators (n=30) |
Fishermen (n=65) |
Tourism Actors (n=35) |
||||
|
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
Freq. |
% |
|
|
Know Core Zone |
28 |
93.33 |
57 |
87.69 |
28 |
80.00 |
|
Know the Marine Protection Zone |
2 |
6.67 |
7 |
10.76 |
10 |
28.57 |
|
Know the Marine Cultivation Zone |
15 |
50.00 |
2 |
3.08 |
17 |
48.57 |
|
Know the Marine Tourism Zone |
13 |
43.33 |
41 |
63.08 |
26 |
74.29 |
|
Know the Traditional Fisheries Zone |
5 |
16.67 |
11 |
16.92 |
18 |
51.43 |
Note: The core zone is a protected area with no economic activity but limited research access. The Marine Protection Zone is an ecological preservation support zone with limited access to research, education, and tourism. Economic zones—marine cultivation, tourism, and traditional fisheries—support blue economic activity
Table 3. Violations zoning by economic activities in Karimunjawa National Park
|
Economic Activities |
Ecology Zone |
||
|
Sectors |
Business |
Core Zone* |
Marine Protection Zone** |
|
Tourist |
Snorkeling/Diving |
- |
V 4 points (1 point in Menjangan Kecil island, 1 point in Sintok island, 1 point in Tengah Island, 1 point in cemara besar island |
|
Beach |
V 2 points (2 points Tanjung Boma) |
- |
|
|
Traditional Capture Fisheries |
Fisher |
V 2 points (1 point in near Taka Malang, 1 points near Tanjung Boma) |
V 3 points (2 points in Cemara Besar island, 1 in Sintok island) |
|
Aquaculture |
Seaweed Cultivation |
- |
- |
|
Grouper Cultivation |
- |
- |
|
|
Shrimp Cultivation |
- |
- |
|
Note: * Marine resource protection, research restrictions, and prohibition of economic activities; ** Protection of marine resources, research, education, and limited tourism activities
Figure 1 indicates that infractions by fishing and tourism activities within the core zone and marine protection were absent in the western region of the Karimunjawa archipelago.
In the eastern region, multiple violations occurred, including fishing and snorkeling operations within the marine conservation zone surrounding Cemara Besar Island, Sintok Island, and Gosong Tengah Island, whilst examining Karimunjawa Island and Kemujan Island in detail (see Figure 2), two beaches—Kanjen Beach and Gincu Beach—that are part of the coastal ecology of the Tanjung Boma core zone are in violation. Although the other two are situated in proximity to the core zone, specifically fishing at Tanjung Boma and Taka Malang, there exists a significant possibility of zone infringements, particularly as not all core zones are subjected to stringent security measures. As stated by the respondent:
".... We rarely pass through the core zone. Well, who was invited to form the core zone at that time? There were community representatives, yes and after all, not all of the community agreed at that time, yes, but they are the ones who make the rules, yes, Wes who implement the rules, but if we look at the field, they do not guard and supervise" (Fisherman Respondent-4).
"……. What happened was that they were caught entering the zone, so they were processed by the authorities. The strictest was on Parang Island, which was experienced by my friend. After being caught, they were given a warning. The one who saw it was the forest police from Semarang because there is a guard post on Parang Island… yes ma’am, I was once caught entering a prohibited zone, my catch was confiscated, my fishing gear was taken, but my boat wasn’t… so I didn’t get anything when I got home…” (Fisherman Respondent-6).
“… yes ma’am, so in Cemara Kecil (marine protection zone) there are no signs or buoys… so people usually go there… the guard is on Parang Island… (Fisherman Respondent-7).
Repressive measures in the core zone have indeed been enforced so that more than 80% of respondents are aware of the core zone (see Table 2), these results are also shown in Figures 1 and 2 that there is no activity in the core zone. Although violations are still indicated to have occurred because there are two fishing points near the core zone plus repressive enforcement which turns out not to be comprehensive, only strict in the west of the Karimunjawa Islands around Parang Island. Meanwhile, the core zone located in Taka Menyawakan is indeed difficult for fishermen to reach, so there is no fishing activity in the area. Unlike the core zone, violations in the marine protection zone are more common, there are a total of 7 activities that should not be carried out in the marine protection zone. This result is in accordance with the finding that very few respondents know about the existence of this zone. This is because this zone is included in limited use so that there is no law enforcement that applies if economic actors carry out activities in the marine protection zone. The results obtained in this study regarding sustainability practices are actually very surprising because economic actors are said to have carried out activities at predetermined locations (no activities in the core zone). In general, they support the successful implementation of sustainability based on the division of geographic areas, this surprising result also seems to be supported by the determination of a small and narrow core zone, which is 0.39% of the total conservation area. This means that the tendency to fulfill economic interests is more dominant in conservation management in Karimunjawa.
Figure 1. Map of economic activities and zoning in Karimunjawa Archipelagos
Note: Black circle is activities not in accordance with their zone, yellow circle is activity near the core zone
Source: WCS (2022) [4]; BTNK (2023) [25]; Google Maps (2024); Observation (2024), In-depth Interview (2024), processed
Figure 2. Map of economic activities and zoning in Karimunjawa Island and Kemujan Island
Note: Black circle is activities not in accordance with their zone, yellow circle is activity near the core zone
Source: WCS (2022) [4]; BTNK (2023) [25]; Google Maps (2024); Observation (2024), In-depth Interview (2024), processed
Numerous respondents noted that the community recognized their entry into the core zone, despite awareness of its prohibition on activities, attributed to the lack of rigorous enforcement. The findings suggest that the community lacks consciousness regarding the importance of the core zone in natural resource management. Their priorities are short-term economic rewards over long-term environmental benefits of core zone conservation [22, 26, 27]. The findings are corroborated by Lukman et al. [28] in 2022 found that Karimunjawa fishermen ignore zoning laws due to tourism-driven fish demand and fish in the core zone, which has more fish. Core zones are appealing fishing sites because of the substantial fish populations that they contain. This is because core zones serve as spawning grounds, nursery grounds, and feeding grounds for fish [29]. Despite the Marine Protection zone lacks stringent regulations, monitoring excessive exploitation within the zone may prove challenging. The use of natural resources in the area must be regulated and preserved, as this region serves as a buffer zone adjacent to the core zone. In the end, the delineation of zones and the allocation of economic activity centers have been largely beneficial; however, additional research is required about the community's pro-environmental initiatives.
3.2 Level of sustainability—social, economic, and ecological—in Karimunjawa
The notion of sustainability emerges from the optimal balance among societal, environmental, and economic needs [19]. The convergence of the three domains demonstrates that prudent decisions concerning sustainable resource management will yield sustainable economic growth and ensure wellbeing of community. Table 4 illustrates the degree of sustainability as determined by public perception.
Table 4 presents the evaluation of respondents concerning the sustainability level of Karimunjawa, derived from the statements provided across the three dimensions. The economic dimension pertains to the facilitation of business development and a notable rise in income levels. Furthermore, there are initiatives aimed at fostering innovation within the realm of entrepreneurship. The social dimension is influenced by enhancing collaboration across sectors and ensuring equitable distribution of natural resource utilization. The ecological dimension provides a rationale for the use of environmentally sustainable marine and coastal ecosystems. The results indicate a high sustainability score for Karimunjawa at 6.34 point. This value is derived from the perceptions of each respondent, which are subsequently weighted with an economic proportion of 30%, social 30%, and ecology 40%. The increased emphasis on the ecological aspect aligns with the primary goal of the Karimunjawa National Park, which is to safeguard marine and coastal ecosystems as stipulated by Law Number 5 of 1990.
The assessment results presented in Table 4 indicate that the economic dimension's implementation is more pronounced compared to the social and ecological dimensions. The rapid economic growth of Karimunjawa can be attributed to the significant expansion of its tourism sector, which is not unexpected. The tourism sector has emerged as a dominant force, leading to the development of various derivative businesses, including resorts, lodging, cafes, and more. Furthermore, Karimunjawa has been identified as a National Priority Strategic Area, as outlined in Presidential Regulation of the Republic of Indonesia Number 88 of 2024. This presidential directive builds upon the framework established in Government Regulation Number 50 of 2011.
Table 4. The level of sustainability Karimunjawa
|
Dimensions |
No. |
Information |
Average per Statement* |
Weighted Score Each Respondent** |
|
Social |
1 |
Supporting agenda’s government to develop economic |
8.1 |
2.01 |
|
2 |
Businesses can coexist with businesses in other sectors |
7.85 |
||
|
3 |
Rapid economic growth encourages the formation of associations |
9.02 |
||
|
4 |
The rapid economic growth is an opportunity to collaborate with businesses in other sectors |
6.00 |
||
|
5 |
I am involved in the preparation of the development agenda’s government |
2.56 |
||
|
Economy |
1 |
The rapid growth in tourism impact increased income of household |
8.74 |
2.65 |
|
2 |
The rapid growth in tourism makes it easier for me to diversify my livelihood |
7.96 |
||
|
3 |
The rapid growth in tourism inspired me to become an entrepreneur |
9.80 |
||
|
4 |
The rapid growth in tourism has made it easier to get training new skills |
8.90 |
||
|
5 |
The growth of the economy has encouraged infrastructure development in this region. |
9.93 |
||
|
6 |
My business continues to operate successfully despite competition from other sectors. |
7.83 |
||
|
Environment |
1 |
The businesses operated by others utilize environmentally friendly technology |
7.22 |
1.63 |
|
2 |
The business operated by others effectively manages their waste/garbage |
5.76 |
||
|
3 |
Stringent sanctions must be enforced to mitigate environmental degradation. |
4.73 |
||
|
4 |
The core zone must be expanded and added |
1.40 |
||
|
5 |
Ecotourism is implemented by limiting the number of tourists |
1.20 |
||
|
Sustainability level |
6.34 (High)*** |
|||
Note: *See Eq. (1); ** See Eq. (2) until Eq. (4); *** See Table 1
The success of tourism in Karimunjawa plays a crucial role in fostering the development of attractions, enhancing accessibility, and improving amenities in the region [30, 31]. The number of tourist visits to Karimunjawa has exhibited a consistent upward trend since 2008, with an increase of 9,986 visitors. This growth became particularly pronounced in 2019, reaching a total of 148,283, predominantly comprised of domestic tourists, totalling 137,653. In 2020, there was a significant reduction in tourist numbers, dropping to 6,165, which was even less than the figures recorded in 2008, largely attributed to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Following the transition into the post-local community have not directly developed Karimunjawa tourism. Low local community participation will lead to an uneven allocation of natural resource benefits, and only players with more investment and authority will limit people's rights to utilise natural resources [6, 32]. Environmental sustainability is needed to keep natural resource elements productive to meet human demands, although the ecological dimension has the lowest point [19]. People are reluctant to spend more on waste or rubbish management since it increases the economic burden. Due to money worries, they are also less willing to curtail tourist visits. This shows that the community wants more tourists, even if it could impair Karimunjawa's environmental carrying capacity [15, 33]. Karimunjawa is sustainable, yet tourism growth has unfairly involved indigenous people and ignored the ecological dimension. So need to transition injustice of blue growth to blue justice, alternatively through Collaboration with stakeholders is needed between local communities, local elites, entrepreneurs, managers, and the government to maintain ecological sustainability [34, 35]. In its development, adaptive co-management [36-38] can be an alternative that can be applied by focusing on the synergy of institutions, communities, and businesses based on scientific studies, knowledge and repeated learning opportunities indirectly based on the condition of marine ecosystems and social welfare.
The local community in Karimunjawa has shown a large amount of support for the growing blue growth. They have come to the realisation that the preservation of the maritime environment is critical to the continued economic well-being of the village. The zoning that has been adopted in Karimunjawa National Park is believed to be effective in separating ecosystems and economic activities. The majority of respondents agreed with the existence of the core zone and its size, as well as the significance of zoning in reducing the impact of environmental hazards. On the other hand, the community's understanding of utilisation zones, such as marine cultivation zones and traditional fisheries zones, is still quite poor, which indicates that additional education is required. In spite of this, the majority of respondents were in agreement that the natural beauty and health of the marine ecosystem had contributed to their well-being. This success has been achieved both directly through economic activities such as tourism and indirectly through the preservation of the environmental ecosystem. Due to the fact that there was a large increase in the number of tourists that visited prior to the pandemic, the tourism industry has become the primary economic driver of the local economy. In accordance with this, there are still obstacles to overcome in order to establish social and biological ecosystems. One of the most important aspects of formulating a developing economy policy in Karimunjawa is having an awareness of the potential conflict that could arise between economic expansion and environmental longing. Support for this blue growth needs to be tempered with an approach that takes a holistic perspective, which places an emphasis on economic advantages and ensures that benefits are distributed fairly while also providing enough protection for the environment.
Equitable distribution of the benefits derived from tourism, as the main economic driver, is another critical aspect. Policymakers should prioritize initiatives that support local employment, implement profit-sharing mechanisms, and reinvest tourism revenues into community development and environmental preservation. This approach not only ensures fairness but also fosters a stronger commitment to sustainability within the community. The long-term success of blue growth in Karimunjawa ultimately requires a holistic and integrated approach that balances economic gains with environmental preservation. By fostering adaptive co-management, can achieve sustainable development that benefits both the local economy and its unique marine ecosystem. These recommendations provide a pathway for policymakers to address existing gaps and ensure the sustained prosperity and environmental integrity of Karimunjawa for future generation.
This study is part of the research that passed the Masters to Doctoral Education Grant scheme for Superior Scholars (PMDSU) No.: SPK 14-08/UN7.P4.3/PP/2020. So, the authors would like to thank and appreciate the Diponegoro University Research and Community Service Institute (Lembaga Penelitian dan Pengabdian Kepada Masyarakat Universitas Diponegoro) for supporting the funding of the publication of this article.
|
GIS |
Geographic Information System |
|
BTNK |
Balai Taman Nasional Karimunjawa (Karimunjawa National Park Office) |
|
PHPA |
Departmen Perlindungan Hutan dan Pelestarian Alam (Forest Protection and Nature Conservation Departement, Ministry of Forest and Environment) |
|
PHKA |
Perlindungan Hutan dan Konservasi Alam (Forest Protection and Nature Conservation, Departement, Ministry of Forest and Environment) |
[1] McBain, D., Reitmeier, L., Kyriacou, G. (2024). What is the blue economy? Grantham Research Institute. https://www.lse.ac.uk/granthaminstitute/explainers/what-is-the-blue-economy/.
[2] Stuchtey, M.R., Vincent, A., Merkl, A., Bucher, M. (2020). High Level Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy. https://www.vliz.be/imisdocs/publications/357071.pdf.
[3] Choudhary, P., Khade, M., Savant, S., Musale, A., Chelliah, M.S., Dasgupta, S. (2021). Empowering blue economy: From underrated ecosystem to sustainable industry. Journal of Environmental Management, 291: 112697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112697
[4] BTNK. (2023). Statistik Balai Taman Nasional Karimunjawa Tahun 2023. https://tnkarimunjawa.id/assets/filepublikasi/3/dokpublik_1709015910.pdf.
[5] World Bank. (2017). What is the blue economy? World Bank. https://www.worldbank.org/en/news/infographic/2017/06/06/blue-economy.
[6] Germond-Duret, C., Heidkamp, C.P., Morrissey, J. (2023). Justice and the blue economy. The Geographical Journal, 189(2): 184-192. https://doi.org/10.1111/geoj.12483
[7] United Nations. (2020). Diving into the blue economy. United Nations. https://www.un.org/en/desa/diving-blue-economy#:~:text=How can building a blue,integral to the 2030 Agenda.
[8] Ayelazuno, J.A., Ovadia, J.S. (2022). Ocean and land grabbing in Ghana’s offshore petroleum industry: From the agrarian question to the question of industrialization. Journal of Agrarian Change, 22(4): 673-702. https://doi.org/10.1111/joac.12502
[9] Bennett, N.J., Blythe, J., White, C.S., Campero, C. (2021). Blue growth and blue justice: Ten risks and solutions for the ocean economy. Marine Policy, 125: 104387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2020.104387
[10] Engen, S., Hausner, V.H., Gurney, G.G., Broderstad, E.G., Keller, R., et al. (2021). Blue justice: A survey for eliciting perceptions of environmental justice among coastal planners’ and small-scale fishers in Northern-Norway. PLoS ONE, 16(5): e0251467. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0251467
[11] Voyer, M., Quirk, G., McIlgorm, A., Azmi, K. (2018). Shades of blue: What do competing interpretations of the blue economy mean for oceans governance? Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 20(5): 595-616. https://doi.org/10.1080/1523908X.2018.1473153
[12] Campbell, S.J., Kartawijaya, T., Yulianto, I., Prasetia, R., Clifton, J. (2013). Co-management approaches and incentives improve management effectiveness in the Karimunjawa National Park, Indonesia. Marine Policy, 41: 72-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2012.12.022
[13] Hafsaridewi, R., Fahrudin, A., Sutrisno, D., Koeshendrajana, S. (2018). Resource management in the Karimunjawa Islands, Central Java of Indonesia, through DPSIR approach. Advances in Environmental Sciences, 10(1): 7-22.
[14] Kaur, S. (2020). Understanding fast and slow variables as a means to effectively manage implications of rapid change in Karimunjawa National Park, Indonesia. University of Waterloo.
[15] Ramadhan, A., Argo, T.A., Salim, W.A. (2021). Investment dilemma of coastal and marine zoning in conservation areas: Case study of Karimunjawa National Park. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 799(1): 012017. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/799/1/012017
[16] Noël, J.F., Weigel, J.Y. (2007). Marine protcted areas: From conservation to sustainable development. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 10(3): 233-250. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSD.2007.017645
[17] Creswell, J.W. (2016). Research design: Pendekatan Metode Kualitatif, Kuantitatif dan Campuran. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar.
[18] Ghimire, B.J. (2023). Three pillars of sustainable development: Challenges versus achievements. Journey for Sustainable Development and Peace Journal, 1(2): 132-146. https://doi.org/10.3126/jsdpj.v1i02.58266
[19] Mensah, J. (2019). Sustainable development: Meaning, history, principles, pillars, and implications for human action: Literature review. Cogent Social Sciences, 5(1): 1653531. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311886.2019.1653531
[20] Sözen, E., Güven, U. (2019). The effect of online assessments on students' attitudes towards undergraduate-level geography courses. International Education Studies, 12(10): 1-8. https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v12n10p1
[21] Agardy, M.T. (1994). Advances in marine conservation: The role of marine protected areas. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 9(7): 267-270. https://doi.org/10.1016/0169-5347(94)90297-6
[22] Yuliana, E., Fahrudin, A., Boer, M., Kamal, M.M., Pardede, S.T. (2016). The effectiveness of the zoning system in the management of reef fisheries in the marine protected area of Karimunjawa National Park, Indonesia. Aquaculture, Aquarium, Conservation & Legislation, 9(3): 483-497.
[23] Setiyanto, I., Wijayanto, D., Wibowo, B.A., Dewi, D.A.N.N. (2024). Compliance of fishermen and tour guides with zoning in the Karimunjawa Marine Protected Area. AACL Bioflux, 17(3): 1019-1025. http://www.bioflux.com.ro/aacl.
[24] Fafurida, F., Oktavilia, S., Prajanti, S.D.W., Maretta, Y.A. (2020). Sustainable strategy: Karimunjawa national park marine ecotourism, Jepara, Indonesia. International Journal of Scientific and Technology Research, 9(3): 3234-3239.
[25] Muhidin, Rizki, P.H., Pardede, S. (2022). Karimunjawa coral reef ecosystem monitoring brief report 2022. Wildlife Conservation Society, Bogor. [Indonesian].
[26] Becker, G. (1974). Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach. pp. 383-420. https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c3625/c3625.pdf.
[27] Sutinen, J.G., Kuperan, K. (1999). A socio-economic theory of regulatory compliance. International Journal of Social Economics, 26(1/2/3): 174-193. https://doi.org/10.1108/03068299910229569
[28] Lukman, K.M., Uchiyama, Y., Quevedo, J.M.D., Kohsaka, R. (2022). Tourism impacts on small island ecosystems: Public perceptions from Karimunjawa Island, Indonesia. Journal of Coastal Conservation, 26(3): 14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11852-022-00852-9
[29] Yuliana, E., Farida, I., Boer, M., Fahrudin, A., Kamal, M.M. (2020). Habitat quality and reef fish resources potential in Karimunjawa National Park, Indonesia. Aquaculture, Aquarium, Conservation & Legislation, 13(4): 1836-1848.
[30] Chi, Y., Liu, D. (2023). Measuring the island tourism development sustainability at dual spatial scales using a four-dimensional model: A case study of Shengsi archipelago, China. Journal of Cleaner Production, 388(6): 135775. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.135775
[31] Fernando, P.I.N., Rajapaksha, R.M.P.D.K., Kumari, K.W.S.N. (2017). Tea tourism as a marketing tool: A strategy to develop the image of Sri Lanka as an attractive tourism destination. Kelaniya Journal of Management, 5(2): 64. https://doi.org/10.4038/kjm.v5i2.7518
[32] Hadlos, A., Opdyke, A., Hadigheh, S.A. (2022). Where does local and indigenous knowledge in disaster risk reduction go from here? A systematic literature review. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 79: 103160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2022.103160
[33] Winata, A., Yuliana, E., Hewindati, Y.T., Djatmiko, W.A. (2020). Assessment of mangrove carrying capacity for ecotourism in Kemujan Island, Karimunjawa National Park, Indonesia. Advances in Environmental Sciences, 12(1): 83-97.
[34] Kirana, M., Susilowati, I., Viswanathan, K.K. (2016). The innovation of vulnerable fisheries using ecosystem - Based approach: A test case in Karimunjawa ecosystem, Central Java, Indonesia. Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science, 2: 125-137.
[35] Susilowati, I. (2013). Prospek pengelolaan sumber daya perikanan berbasis ekosistem: Studi empiris di karimunjawa. Journal of Economic Development: Studies on Economic and Development Issues, 14(1): 16. https://doi.org/10.23917/jep.v14i1.148
[36] Islam, M.W., Ruhanen, L., Ritchie, B.W. (2018). Adaptive co-management: A novel approach to tourism destination governance? Journal of Hospitality and Tourism Management, 37: 97-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2017.10.009
[37] Berkes, F. (2009). Evolution of co-management: Role of knowledge generation, bridging organizations and social learning. Journal of Environmental Management, 90(5): 1692-1702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2008.12.001
[38] Armitage, D.R., Plummer, R., Berkes, F., Arthur, R.I., Charles, A.T., et al. (2009). Adaptive co-management for social-ecological complexity. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 7(2): 95-102. https://doi.org/10.1890/070089
