The Ocean Doesn’t Start at the Shore

When people hear the words marine conservation, they usually look toward the ocean.

They think about coral restoration, turtles, sharks, plastic pollution, fishing, anchor damage and divers touching coral.

But there is a fundamental problem with that way of thinking:

The ocean does not start at the shoreline.

What happens on land eventually influences what happens underwater. Wastewater can travel through groundwater. Rain can carry sediment and pollutants toward the sea. Construction can change drainage. Removing vegetation can destabilize sand. Building seawalls can interfere with natural coastal processes.

For a small coral island such as Gili Air, the connection between land and sea is particularly difficult to ignore.

Gili Air is not simply an island surrounded by a marine protected area. It is part of the Gili Matra Conservation Area, together with Gili Meno and Gili Trawangan. The current conservation area covers approximately 2,248 hectares and is managed through different zones designed to protect ecosystems including coral reefs and seagrass.[1]

So a question needs to be asked:

How can we claim to protect the marine park while allowing activities only metres away on land that may negatively affect it?

We Have Been Here Before

The Gili Islands have already experienced a major confrontation over development on their beaches.

In 2017, authorities began removing buildings from the beachfront on Gili Trawangan. Contemporary reporting described bars and restaurants situated only around 5–10 metres from the shoreline, with authorities saying that the developments violated local rules and restricted public beach access.[2]

Gili Air subsequently experienced its own beach-clearing operation.

For people who lived and worked on the islands at the time, the message appeared clear: the beach was not simply empty land waiting to be commercialised.

Permanent structures, concrete buildings, restaurants, bars and associated infrastructure had expanded onto an environmentally sensitive and publicly important part of the island.

Buildings were removed. Concrete disappeared. Businesses moved backwards.

For a while, Gili Air’s coastline had space again.

Then came COVID-19.

Tourism stopped, businesses struggled and investment slowed dramatically. When tourism returned, investment returned with it.

But something else happened.

New businesses appeared. New investors arrived. Beachfront land became extremely valuable again. Structures gradually moved toward the sea.

Today, once again, we can see businesses building extraordinarily close to the shoreline.

And sometimes the next step is almost predictable.

First, we build too close to the sea.

Then the sea threatens the building.

Then we build a wall to protect the building from the sea.

And then we wonder why the beach changes.

The Sea Is Not Attacking Your Business

There is an important distinction that needs to be made.

Coastal erosion is natural.

Beaches move. Sand moves. Waves change with the seasons. Currents redistribute sediment. Storms remove sand and calmer conditions can return it.

A healthy beach is not a concrete floor with a permanent boundary.

It is a dynamic ecosystem.

Problems arise when we place permanent infrastructure inside that dynamic environment and then expect nature to stop moving.

A restaurant or hotel built far enough away from the active shoreline may allow the beach to naturally migrate.

A building constructed extremely close to the water cannot.

Eventually the owner may conclude:

“We need a seawall.”

But the real question should perhaps have been asked years earlier:

Why was permanent infrastructure allowed to be built so close to a naturally moving shoreline that it required a seawall in the first place?

A Seawall Protects a Property. But What Does It Do to the Beach?

From the perspective of a business owner, a seawall can appear perfectly logical.

Waves are approaching your restaurant, hotel or bar. You have invested money. You want to protect your property.

Build a wall.

Problem solved.

Except the problem may only have been transferred.

NOAA describes shoreline armouring—including seawalls, breakwaters and rock revetments—as structures intended to protect coastal property from erosion. But NOAA also warns that armouring can restrict the natural movement of sediment, affect intertidal habitat and contribute to the loss of beaches as coastlines naturally retreat.[3]

This does not mean that every seawall automatically causes the same amount of erosion. Coastal processes are site-specific, and impacts depend on waves, currents, sediment supply, shoreline shape and the design and position of the structure.

But it does mean that building a wall is not environmentally neutral.

A wall changes the boundary between land and sea.

Waves do not disappear because concrete has been placed in front of them.

Water continues moving.

Sand continues moving.

Energy continues moving.

And the consequences may occur somewhere else.

That is especially important on an island the size of Gili Air.

One Business’s Solution Can Become Someone Else’s Problem

Imagine ten neighbouring beachfront properties.

Property number five builds too close to the shoreline.

Erosion threatens the building, so the owner constructs a seawall.

The wall protects that particular property.

But coastal processes continue around it.

If erosion or sediment movement changes beside the structure, properties four and six may become more vulnerable. They may then decide that they also need walls.

Eventually:

one wall becomes three, three become five, and a natural beach slowly becomes an engineered coastline.

This process is known internationally as coastal armouring.

Research and coastal-management experience show that shoreline armouring can cause beach loss, interfere with sediment movement and degrade coastal habitat.[3][4]

And that creates an uncomfortable question for Gili Air:

Are we protecting buildings from erosion, or are we creating a future in which we need to protect every building because we allowed too many buildings in the wrong place?

Indonesia Already Recognises the Importance of Coastal Setbacks

Indonesia’s national regulatory framework recognises that coastlines need space.

Presidential Regulation No. 51 of 2016 concerning coastal boundaries defines the coastal setback (sempadan pantai) as land along the coastline whose width is proportional to the physical form and condition of the coast, with a minimum reference of 100 metres from the highest tide point toward land. The regulation requires local governments to determine coastal setback boundaries through spatial planning.[5]

That does not mean that every existing building within 100 metres is automatically illegal; local spatial plans, permits, existing rights and other regulations matter.

But the principle behind the regulation is extremely important.

The coastline needs room.

And on Gili Air there is another layer of responsibility: we are living and operating beside a nationally recognised conservation area.

The Gili Matra management framework specifically identifies coral reefs and seagrass as conservation targets and requires activities within the conservation area to comply with applicable regulations and avoid damaging the conservation area’s primary functions.[1]

This should influence how we think about development on the island as well.

A Marine Protected Area Cannot Be Managed Only Underwater

Draw a line on a map around a coral reef and call it protected.

Then imagine what happens directly beside it.

Hotels increase groundwater extraction.

Restaurants increase wastewater production.

Septic systems are installed close to the coastline.

Vegetation is removed.

Concrete covers permeable ground.

Construction sediment enters the water.

Beach walls alter the shoreline.

Boat channels are created through shallow reef areas.

Tourism increases faster than sanitation infrastructure.

Can we then genuinely say that the ecosystem is protected simply because fishing, anchoring or diving is regulated inside a coloured zone on a marine-park map?

Of course not.

Marine ecosystems do not recognise administrative lines.

Water connects everything.

The Septic Tank Behind the Beach Is Also a Marine Conservation Issue

Wastewater may be one of the least visually attractive conservation subjects.

A turtle is easy to photograph.

Planting coral looks good on Instagram.

A septic system does not.

But wastewater management can be every bit as important to coral conservation.

The US Environmental Protection Agency identifies sewage, including wastewater treatment systems and septic systems, as potential sources of nitrogen and phosphorus entering coastal waters. Excess nutrients can stimulate algal growth and create conditions that disadvantage corals.[6]

UN Environment has similarly identified wastewater, nutrients and sediment from land-based activities as significant threats to coral reef health.[7]

This matters enormously for small islands.

If you operate a hotel, restaurant or beach bar beside a coral reef, what happens to your wastewater is not merely a plumbing issue.

It is potentially a marine conservation issue.

If a septic tank is positioned close to the coastline, we should be asking serious questions about design, capacity, groundwater movement, maintenance and leakage.

Not because we want to attack businesses.

Because the reef is immediately next door.

The Same Applies to Construction

Construction does not have to occur underwater to affect coral.

Land clearing and construction can increase sediment entering coastal waters. Sediment can reduce light reaching corals and seagrass, interfere with coral feeding and growth and, in sufficient quantities, physically smother coral.[6][8]

That means development decisions on Gili Air should not end with:

“Do I have enough land to build this?”

They should include:

What happens when it rains?

Where does the wastewater go?

Where will the sand go?

Will this development eventually require a seawall?

How close is it to the high-tide line?

What ecosystem is immediately offshore?

What happens to the coastline five or ten years from now?

That is what developing inside and beside a marine conservation area should mean.

Is It Ignorance, Lack of Regulation—or Greed?

This is perhaps the most uncomfortable part of the discussion.

Why are we repeating mistakes that the Gili Islands already addressed in 2017–2018?

There may not be one simple answer.

Some investors may genuinely not understand coastal processes.

Some may not know Indonesian coastal regulations.

Some may not understand that Gili Air is part of a nationally managed conservation area.

Some may receive incomplete information when purchasing or leasing land.

Some may assume that because neighbouring businesses have built something, they can do the same.

There may also be confusion between different levels of regulation and responsibility. Research published on Gili Matra has identified inconsistencies between marine spatial-use rules and conservation-management frameworks, as well as weaknesses in coordination among institutions.[9]

Education and clearer coordination are therefore part of the solution.

But ignorance cannot explain everything forever.

At some point, businesses also have a responsibility to investigate the rules governing the place where they choose to invest.

And there is another possibility that should not be ignored:

short-term commercial interests can sometimes be stronger than long-term environmental responsibility.

Beachfront space is valuable.

A restaurant directly on the sand may sell more cocktails.

A hotel room overlooking the ocean may command a higher price.

A larger building may generate more revenue.

A seawall may protect an investment.

The financial benefit belongs primarily to the business.

But if that development contributes to beach loss, wastewater pollution, sedimentation or reef degradation, the environmental cost is shared by everyone.

That is the fundamental imbalance.

The profit is private. The environmental damage is public.

Tourism Depends on the Ecosystem It Is Slowly Replacing

There is an irony here.

Why do tourists come to Gili Air?

They come for the beaches.

They come for clear water.

They come for turtles.

They come for coral reefs.

They come to snorkel.

They come to dive.

They come because Gili Air still feels like a tropical island.

And then tourism development gradually replaces the very environment tourists travelled here to experience.

Beach becomes restaurant.

Sand becomes concrete.

Vegetation becomes accommodation.

Natural shoreline becomes seawall.

Quiet roads become infrastructure corridors.

And eventually we risk creating something very strange:

an island that destroyed part of its natural character in order to accommodate people who travelled here because of its natural character.

That is not sustainable tourism.

Conservation Cannot Only Mean Repairing Coral

At Oceans 5 Gili Air, we believe marine conservation must go further than what happens underwater.

We support reef monitoring, research, marine education, beach clean-ups and conservation activities.

But there is little logic in restoring coral while ignoring the pressures coming from land.

Imagine continually repairing a leaking roof without ever fixing the hole causing the leak.

That is what conservation becomes when we focus entirely on restoration.

Coral restoration has value.

Beach clean-ups have value.

Turtle conservation has value.

Reef monitoring has value.

But conservation also requires prevention.

Sometimes the best coral restoration project is preventing the coral from becoming damaged in the first place.

Conservation Sometimes Means Saying Something Uncomfortable

There is another reason preventative conservation receives less attention.

It can create conflict.

Removing rubbish is popular.

Planting coral is popular.

Releasing turtles is popular.

Questioning coastal development is different.

Suddenly conservation intersects with land ownership, permits, investment, restaurants, hotels, construction companies, government departments and powerful economic interests.

Preventative conservation does not always create beautiful photographs.

Sometimes it creates uncomfortable conversations.

But if conservation organisations, dive businesses, tourism operators and other stakeholders only speak when conservation is easy and popular, who speaks when the actual source of environmental pressure is economically powerful?

A marine protected area needs more than people willing to restore what has already been damaged.

It needs people willing to ask why the damage happened.

The Question of Responsibility

And this brings us to perhaps the most important question.

Suppose a business constructs permanent infrastructure extremely close to the shoreline.

Years later it requires a seawall.

Suppose scientific monitoring eventually demonstrates that shoreline modification contributed to erosion elsewhere.

Or suppose poorly managed wastewater from a property can be linked to declining coastal water quality.

Or construction can be demonstrated to have damaged seagrass or coral habitat.

Then what?

Who pays?

The community?

Government?

Conservation organisations?

Dive centres?

Future investors?

Or should the business that created the impact carry responsibility?

This is where the polluter-pays principle and broader concepts of environmental liability become important.

But responsibility cannot simply be assigned because somebody believes a business caused damage. Environmental impacts must be demonstrated with credible evidence, monitoring and an appropriate legal process.

That is why baseline data are so important.

We need shoreline monitoring.

We need historical imagery.

We need water-quality testing.

We need groundwater monitoring.

We need coral and seagrass surveys.

We need documentation of coastal construction.

We need records of seawalls and shoreline modifications.

Without data, arguments become opinions.

With long-term data, changes can be measured.

Could Businesses Eventually Be Held Responsible?

Potentially, yes—but this is ultimately a legal and evidentiary question, not something a dive centre or conservation organisation can decide.

To establish responsibility for environmental damage, authorities would generally need to determine matters such as:

• what activity occurred;
• whether permits and regulations were followed;
• whether measurable environmental damage occurred;
• whether a credible causal connection exists between the activity and the damage;
• who controlled or authorised the activity;
• and what remedies are available under applicable Indonesian law.

That distinction is important.

Oceans 5 should not point at an individual restaurant, hotel or investor and declare them responsible for reef degradation without evidence.

But we absolutely should be asking whether a system exists to investigate responsibility when evidence demonstrates that development has damaged a protected ecosystem.

Because without accountability, environmental regulations become little more than suggestions.

The Question Gili Air Needs to Ask Now

Gili Air does not have to choose between tourism and conservation.

Tourism is one of the foundations of the island’s economy.

Hotels are necessary.

Restaurants are necessary.

Dive centres are businesses too.

Oceans 5 is part of the tourism industry.

The question is not whether development should stop.

The question is:

What kind of development belongs on a small island surrounded by coral reefs and located within a marine conservation area?

Development should respect the coastline.

It should respect Indonesian regulations.

It should respect zoning.

It should manage wastewater responsibly.

It should avoid unnecessary shoreline armouring.

It should consider groundwater.

It should consider carrying capacity.

And most importantly, investors should understand that buying or leasing land on Gili Air does not separate that land from the ecosystem surrounding it.

You are investing inside an ecological system.

With that opportunity comes responsibility.

We Should Not Need Another Cleanup

The Gili Islands already received a warning in 2017–2018.

Buildings were removed.

Beaches were reopened.

The coastline was given breathing space.

If, less than a decade later, we allow the same pattern to return, what have we learned?

Do we wait until authorities once again arrive and remove buildings?

Do we wait until seawalls line significant sections of the island?

Do we wait until beach erosion becomes impossible to ignore?

Do we wait until water-quality monitoring shows a serious problem?

Do we wait until coral restoration becomes more difficult and more expensive?

Or do we act before that happens?

That is the difference between reactive conservation and preventative conservation.

The Ocean Doesn’t Start at the Shore

When Oceans 5 talks about overdevelopment on Gili Air, it is not because we are against tourism.

We are tourism.

Our existence depends on people travelling to Gili Air.

But our future also depends on Gili Air remaining worth travelling to.

The reef cannot be separated from the beach.

The beach cannot be separated from development.

Development cannot be separated from wastewater.

Wastewater cannot be separated from groundwater.

Groundwater cannot be separated from the sea.

It is one connected ecosystem.

That is why marine conservation must start before we enter the water.

It starts with where we build.

It starts with how we build.

It starts with where our wastewater goes.

It starts with whether we allow the beach to move naturally.

It starts with understanding the consequences before constructing another wall.

And it starts with accepting a simple principle:

If you choose to make money from a protected natural environment, you also have a responsibility not to destroy the environment that makes your business possible.

The ocean doesn’t start at the shore.

And neither should marine conservation.

---

Frequently Asked Questions

Is Gili Air part of a marine protected area?

Yes. Gili Air, Gili Meno and Gili Trawangan form the Gili Matra Conservation Area. Its management framework uses different zones and identifies ecosystems including coral reefs and seagrass as conservation priorities.[1]

Are buildings automatically illegal if they are within 100 metres of the sea?

Not necessarily. Indonesian Presidential Regulation No. 51 of 2016 defines the coastal setback using a minimum 100-metre reference from the highest tide point, but implementation involves local spatial planning, permits, existing rights and other applicable rules.[5] The legality of a particular building therefore needs to be determined by the competent authorities rather than assumed from distance alone.

Are seawalls bad for beaches?

They can be. Seawalls can protect individual infrastructure, but coastal research shows that hard shoreline armouring can interfere with natural sediment movement, restrict landward beach migration and contribute to habitat and beach loss. Effects vary depending on local coastal conditions and the structure involved.[3][4]

Can septic tanks affect coral reefs?

Potentially. Poorly designed, overloaded or leaking wastewater systems can introduce nutrients and contaminants into groundwater and coastal waters. Excess nutrients can encourage algal growth and reduce coral-reef resilience.[6][7]

Does coastal development affect coral even when construction happens on land?

Yes. Sediment, wastewater, nutrients and altered drainage from land-based development can reach coastal waters. Sedimentation can reduce light, interfere with coral growth and, at sufficiently high levels, smother coral.[6][8]

Is Oceans 5 against tourism development on Gili Air?

No. Oceans 5 is itself a tourism business. The issue is not tourism versus conservation. The issue is whether tourism development respects the ecological limits, regulations and conservation status of the island and surrounding marine environment.

Can a business be held responsible for environmental damage to the marine park?

That depends on Indonesian law, permits, evidence and the circumstances of the individual case. A credible process would require proof of environmental damage and evidence connecting that damage to a particular activity. This is why scientific monitoring and proper enforcement are essential.

What is preventative marine conservation?

Preventative conservation tries to remove or reduce environmental pressures before serious damage occurs. Wastewater management, coastal setbacks, responsible construction, water-quality monitoring and protection of natural shorelines are examples. Reef restoration addresses damage; prevention attempts to stop some of that damage from occurring in the first place.

---

References

[1] Directorate General of Marine Spatial Management / Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries. Management Plan for the Gili Air, Gili Meno and Gili Trawangan Conservation Area 2023–2042, including the Gili Matra zoning and conservation objectives.

[2] The Jakarta Post (2017). “Buildings demolished as Gili cleanup starts.” Contemporary reporting on the removal of beachfront businesses on Gili Trawangan and the enforcement of shoreline rules.

[3] National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). What is shoreline armoring? Explanation of seawalls, breakwaters, revetments and their potential effects on beaches, sediment movement and coastal habitats.

[4] NOAA, Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. The Impacts of Coastal Protection Structures in California’s Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary. Discussion of beach loss, passive erosion and ecological consequences associated with shoreline armouring.

[5] Republic of Indonesia. Presidential Regulation (Perpres) No. 51 of 2016 concerning Coastal Setback Boundaries (Batas Sempadan Pantai). The regulation remains in force and establishes the national framework for determining coastal setback boundaries.

[6] United States Environmental Protection Agency. Threats to Coral Reefs. Overview of threats including coastal development, sedimentation, sewage, septic systems, nutrient pollution and physical damage.

[7] United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP). Wastewater Pollution on Coral Reefs: Science-to-Policy Brief on Managing Wastewater to Support Coral Reef Health and Resilience.

[8] United Nations Environment Programme. Scientific synthesis on wastewater, sediment and coastal-development impacts on coral reefs, including reduced light penetration and sedimentation affecting coral and seagrass ecosystems.

[9] Sidqi et al. Marine Spatial Utilization for Ecotourism Based on Ostrom’s Rules-in-Use in Gili Matra Conservation Area. The study identifies regulatory inconsistencies and institutional coordination challenges affecting sustainable ecotourism management within Gili Matra.