The Ocean is for Sharing, Not Ownership

Original article: El mar se comparte, no se reparte

By Héctor White Mañao, Indigenous leader and participant in the development of Law N°20.249 (Lafkenche Law)

If the country wishes to discuss changes to the Lafkenche Law, there’s a principle that must not be overlooked: the ocean is for sharing, not for dividing.

Recently, the notion has emerged that the Coastal Marine Spaces of Indigenous Peoples (ECMPO) represent the appropriation of coastal areas, restricting access or hindering other productive activities. Nothing could be further from the intent behind this law’s creation.

Those of us who participated in its development never aimed to create exclusive zones for a select few. Our goal was to establish a framework acknowledging a historical reality: for generations, Indigenous communities, artisanal fishermen, shoreline gatherers, divers, sailors, and many others have collectively utilized the same ocean.

The Lafkenche Law was conceived to protect this coexistence and safeguard our food sovereignty, not to replace it with another form of exclusion.

The ECMPO does not confer ownership over the ocean. The ocean remains a national public resource. What the law recognizes is the possibility of managing specific areas through plans approved by the state, ensuring the inclusion of various users who engage in activities within the region.

Management does not imply possession; it means caring for, organizing, and fostering agreements.

This is why it is concerning that the public debate has been shaped more by myths than by the realities of the territories. There are claims of a closed ocean, when in fact, there are examples showcasing the exact opposite.

For instance, in Hualaihué, the ECMPO Mañihueico-Huinay formally integrates Indigenous communities, fishermen’s unions, mollusc farmers, tourism enterprises, neighborhood associations, and educational institutions into a unified governance structure. This embodies the spirit of the law.

If there are administrative aspects that need improvement, it is legitimate to discuss them. There will always be room to refine procedures, reduce processing times, or strengthen institutions. However, the principle that inspired this legislation should remain unchanged: acknowledging that the coastal zone does not belong to a single actor and that its future hinges on the coexistence of those who have historically inhabited it.

Chile faces increasingly serious challenges in preserving its marine ecosystems and developing a sustainable coastal economy. In light of this, we need more dialogue, more shared governance, and greater territorial participation, not less.

The Lafkenche Law was not designed to divide the ocean. It was established to ensure that the ocean does not end up concentrated in the hands of a few and that those who have always depended on it also have a voice in its management. This principle should not be negotiable. Because the ocean, as it has always been along our coasts, is for sharing; not for dividing.

Héctor White Mañao