In Jamaica, activists are preparing for a series of court cases next week to challenge the privatization of beaches and the colonial-era laws governing coastal access. The Jamaica Beach Birthright Environmental Movement (Jabbem) is leading the legal battle to prevent the government from ceding shorelines to large hotel chains. Campaigners argue that these closures deprive locals of livelihoods, leisure, and health, while enriching private investors. The legal challenge targets five specific locations: Mammee Bay and Little Dunn’s River in St Ann, the Blue Lagoon in Portland, Bob Marley beach in St Andrew, and Flankers/Providence beach in Montego Bay. Jabbem seeks to end the 1956 Beach Control Act, which grants the state ownership of the foreshore and seabed. Activists claim the law perpetuates inequity and serves the tourism industry at the expense of citizens. Jabbem’s founder, Devon Taylor, stated that the sea is a primary source of wild food and that denying access sets up residents to “starve.” The government has presented a different perspective on the issue. Matthew Samuda, the minister of environment and climate change, stated that the government must consider how to convert natural assets into economic benefits for all citizens. He noted that the tourism sector employs between 112,000 and 116,000 Jamaicans and supports an additional 300,000 to 350,000 people through connected industries. While Samuda acknowledged that the “idea of access needs to be explored,” he emphasized the need for economic benefit. He also noted that recent approvals for new developments have required developers to carve out corridors to the sea. Campaigners also expressed concerns regarding the National Reconstruction and Resilience Authority (Narra) Act, passed in March to fast-track rebuilding after Hurricane Melissa. They argue the act weakens the 1882 Prescription Act, which protects public access routes used continuously for 20 years. While Samuda defended the Narra Act as a necessary tool for urgent procurement and resilience, shadow environment minister Omar Newell questioned if the act was designed to consider long-term environmental impacts.