On Wednesday, February 19, 2025 undergraduate students in environmental sciences, law, social work, administration, and psychology from the University CEPES (Centro Panamericano de Estudios Superiores) in Zitácuaro, Michoacán, Mexico, debated the importance of creating marine protected areas. To do so, they participated in a role-playing game developed by Mundus maris titled ‚Protecting Blue Horizons‘. It was in this occasion adapted to a case involving the Argentina hake (Merluccius hubbsi) fishery in the province of Chubut, Argentina, as part of the Marine Resources course at the University of Belgrano. This also served to foster closer ties between two countries with shared cultural affinities.

Approximately 120 students took on roles with aligned or opposing positions, organizing themselves into groups advised by their professors. The roles included municipal authorities, a conservationist NGO, scientists, artisanal fishers, and representatives from the wind energy and ecotourism industries. During the first 20 minutes, each group explored and analysed their assigned role before expressing their positions to other stakeholders, including rebuttals to opposing viewpoints.

Municipal authorities proposed the creation of the MPA with the aim of conserving the area while also promoting ecotourism as an alternative source of income. They assured that the MPA would be legally established and supported by the municipal council.

The wind energy company argued that the installation of wind farms would not affect fishing or the ecosystem since the turbines would be placed on floating platforms, potentially even creating artificial reefs. They emphasized that the project would bring both economic and environmental benefits. In response to criticism, they asserted that the wind farm would boost ecotourism and increase the region’s energy self-sufficiency. A neighbouring municipality even proposed conducting preliminary studies to assess the feasibility of the wind project and prevent significant environmental damage.

Conversely, the conservationist NGO opposed the wind farm, also expressing distrust in governmental promises. They demanded that the MPA be a „strictly protected zone“ with no human intervention or infrastructure of any kind.

The artisanal fishers voiced their concerns about overexploitation and the impact on their livelihoods. They called for restrictions on industrial fishing to ensure that the MPA benefits local fishers.

Another key sector, the tourism industry, presented two divergent views. One faction opposed the wind farm, fearing that turbine noise could impact hake conservation. The other supported controlled tourism development, promoting best practices to minimize ecological impacts.

After listening carefully to other stakeholders, scientists emphasized the need for strict regulations on fishing and tourism. They proposed using technology to monitor impacts and supported floating wind turbines as a less invasive solution.

The discussion revealed both dissent and consensus. In the conservation-versus-development debate, while the NGO and some fishers advocated for absolute protection of the area with no human intervention, the tourism sector, wind energy company, and municipal authorities saw economic opportunities in the MPA and ecotourism. Furthermore, while the wind energy company and some scientists believed that the turbines would not significantly harm marine life, the NGO and part of the tourism sector feared that the turbines and their cables could cause irreversible negative impacts. Both the NGO and other actors expressed scepticism about the effective implementation of the MPA, considering it a mere „paper protection“. In contrast, the municipal authority and other stakeholders insisted that regulations and economic benefits would be ensured. Artisanal fishers sought to have fishing within the MPA restricted exclusively to local fishers. The municipal authority mentioned that there would be regulations regarding this matter but no absolute restrictions on trade.

Among the points of consensus, all parties agreed that hake should be protected, although they differed on the methods and extent of protection. There was also a shared agreement on the need for prior impact assessments before proceeding with the wind farm construction. While some feared that ecotourism could have negative impacts if not managed properly, there was consensus that well-regulated ecotourism could be a viable economic alternative. All sectors acknowledged the necessity of fishing regulations to prevent overexploitation.

As a conclusion, the debate reflected tensions between economic development and environmental conservation. While some actors saw opportunities in wind energy and ecotourism, others prioritized total protection of the area. A comprehensive strategy based on scientific studies and clear agreements is needed to balance these conflicting interests.

The workshop was coordinated by Magister Diana Laura Tello Silva, Director of Operations at UNICEPES, and Dr. Marcelo L. Morales Yokobori, Vice President of Mundus maris.

If you are interested in the role play ‚Protecting Blue Horizons‘, contact Mundus maris at info[at]mundusmaris.org.