Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T06:21:28.069Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The return of ecosystem goods and services in replanted mangrove forests: perspectives from local communities in Kenya

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 December 2007

PATRIK RÖNNBÄCK ,
BEATRICE CRONA  and
LISA INGWALL
PATRIK RÖNNBÄCK*
Affiliation:
Department of Systems Ecology, Stockholm University, SE 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden
BEATRICE CRONA
Affiliation:
Department of Systems Ecology, Stockholm University, SE 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden
LISA INGWALL
Affiliation:
Department of Systems Ecology, Stockholm University, SE 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden
*
*Correspondence: Dr Patrik Rönnbäck e-mail: pat@ecology.su.se
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

Mangroves are severely threatened ecosystems, with loss rates exceeding those of rainforests and coral reefs, stressing the need for large-scale rehabilitation programmes. Not only are ecological evaluations of such planting efforts scarce, but studies of local stakeholders' perceptions and valuation of planted areas are also virtually non-existent. This paper assesses how resource users value natural versus planted mangroves and how they perceive plantation initiatives. Semi-structured interviews with 48 resource users from two Kenyan villages show marked mangrove dependence. Respondents identified 24 ecosystem goods, and ranked a variety of food items, traditional medicine, fuel and construction materials as very important resources. Natural mangroves (11.1 ± 2.5) were rated more highly than plantations (4.8 ± 2.7) in terms of the number and quality of products, except for mangrove poles. Nine ecosystem services were acknowledged, with significant differences between natural (5.2 ± 1.1) and planted (4.1 ± 1.6) mangroves. Most respondents (71%) were positive towards the plantations, and negative attitudes were entirely based on the perception of limited information given to the community prior to planting. Multivariate analyses show distinct patterns among user groups (based on gender, occupation and locality) with respect to recognized goods and services, knowledge of mangrove species and plantations, and attitudes towards threats, community management and existing plantations. Homogeneity of responses within defined user groups accounts for these patterns. Perspectives of local users were analysed in relation to information from interviews with six managers and researchers responsible for existing plantations, as well as scientific studies on the return of ecosystem functions in planted mangroves of the area. Findings are discussed in the context of ecological knowledge, learning within social groups, village setting and history, and primary economic activity. Communication of plantation goals may be fundamental to project success and sustainability, and community participation should take into account the heterogeneous nature of stakeholder groups, in terms of perceptions and valuations of ecosystem goods and services, to avoid conflicts in future plantation use.

Keywords

community managementcommunity participationecological knowledgeecosystem goods and serviceslocal users' perspectivemangrove forestsrehabilitation
Type
Papers
Information
Environmental Conservation , Volume 34 , Issue 4 , December 2007 , pp. 313 - 324
Copyright
Copyright © Foundation for Environmental Conservation 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abuodha, P.A.W. & Kairo, J.G. (2001) Human-induced stresses on mangrove swamps along the Kenyan coast. Hydrobiologia 458: 255–265.Google Scholar
Adger, W.N. & Luttrell, C. (2000) Property rights and the utilization of wetlands. Ecological Economics 35: 75–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alongi, D.M. (2002) Present state and future of the world's mangrove forests. Environmental Conservation 29: 331–349.Google Scholar
Bandaranayake, W.M. (1998) Traditional and medicinal uses of mangroves. Mangroves and Salt Marshes 2: 133–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barbier, E.B. (1994) Valuing environmental functions: tropical wetlands. Land Economics 70: 155–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bosire, J.O., Dahdouh-Guebas, F., Kairo, J.G. & Koedam, N. (2003) Colonization of non-planted mangrove species into restored mangrove stands in Gazi Bay, Kenya. Aquatic Botany 76: 267–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crona, B.I. (2006) Supporting and enhancing development of heterogeneous ecological knowledge among resource users in a Kenyan seascape. Ecology and Society 11: 32 [www document]. URL http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss1/art32/Google Scholar
Crona, B.I. & Bodin, Ö. (2006) What you know is who you know? Patterns of communication as prerequisites for co-management. Ecology and Society 11 (2): art. 7 [www document]. URL http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol11/iss2/art7/CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crona, B.I. & Rönnbäck, P. (2005) Utilization of replanted mangroves as nursery ground by shrimp communities in Gazi Bay, Kenya. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 65: 535–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crona, B.I. & Rönnbäck, P. (2007) Community structure and temporal variability of juvenile fish assemblages in natural and replanted mangroves, Sonneratia alba Sm., of Gazi Bay, Kenya. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 74: 44–52.Google Scholar
Crona, B.I., Holmgren, S. & Rönnbäck, P. (2006) Re-establishment of epibiotic communities in reforested mangroves of Gazi Bay, Kenya. Wetlands Ecology and Management 14: 527–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cross, R., Borgatti, S.P. & Parker, A. (2001) Beyond answers: dimensions of the advice network. Social Networks 23: 215–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahdouh-Guebas, F., Mathenge, C., Kairo, J.G. & Koedam, N. (2000) Utilization of mangrove wood products around Mida Creek (Kenya) amongst subsistence and commercial users. Economic Botany 54: 513–527.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahdouh-Guebas, F., van Pottelbergh, I., Kairo, J.G. & Koedam, N. (2004) Human-impacted mangroves in Gazi (Kenya): predicting future vegetation based on retrospective remote sensing, social surveys, and tree distribution. Marine Ecology Progress Series 272: 77–92.Google Scholar
de Groot, R.S., Wilson, M.A. & Boumans, R.M.J. (2002) A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services. Ecological Economics 41: 393–408.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ewel, K.C., Twilley, R.R. & Ong, J.E. (1998) Different kinds of mangrove forests provide different goods and services. Global Ecology and Biogeography Letters 7: 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Field, C.D., ed. (1996) Restoration of Mangrove Ecosystems. Okinawa, Japan: International Society for Mangrove Ecosystems: 250 pp.Google Scholar
Field, C.D. (1998) Rehabilitation of mangrove ecosystems: an overview. Marine Pollution Bulletin 37: 382–392.Google Scholar
Field, C.D. (1999) Mangrove rehabilitation: choice and necessity. Hydrobiologia 413: 47–52.Google Scholar
Glaser, M. (2003) Interrelations between mangrove ecosystems, local economy and social sustainability in Caeté estuary, north Brasil. Wetlands Ecology and Management 11: 265–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Government of Kenya (1994) Kenya Forestry Master Plan. Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources, Nairobi, Kenya.Google Scholar
Hamilton, L.S. & Snedaker, S.C., eds (1984) Handbook for Mangrove Area Management. Honolulu, Hawaii, USA: UNEP and East West Center, Environment and Policy Institute: 126 pp.Google Scholar
Homans, G.C. (1950) The Human Group. London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd.Google Scholar
Kairo, J.G. (1995) Community participatory forestry for the rehabilitation of deforested mangrove areas of Gazi Bay, Kenya. A first approach. Final technical report. BSP/WWF-(USA) and Botany Department, University of Nairobi, Kenya.Google Scholar
Kairo, J.G. & Kivyatu, B. (2000) Mangrove management survey within and adjacent to Kiunga National Reserve. WWF Project KE0087.01, Technical Report. WWF EARO, Nairobi, Kenya/UNESCO, Nairobi, Kenya.Google Scholar
Kaplowitz, M.D. (2001) Assessing mangrove products and services at the local level: the use of focus groups and individual interviews. Landscape and Urban Planning 56: 53–60.Google Scholar
Kovacs, J.M. (1999) Assessing mangrove use at the local scale. Landscape and Urban Planning 43: 201–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moberg, F. & Rönnbäck, P. (2003) Ecosystem services in the tropical seascape: ecosystem interactions, substituting technologies, and ecosystem restoration. Ocean and Coastal Management 46: 27–46.Google Scholar
Mwashote, B.M. & Jumba, I.O. (2002) Quantitative aspects of inorganic nutrient fluxes in the Gazi Bay (Kenya): implications for coastal ecosystems. Marine Pollution Bulletin 44: 1194–1205.Google Scholar
Neis, B., Schneider, D.C, Felt, L., Haedrich, R.L., Fisher, J. & Hutchings, J.A. (1999) Fisheries assessment: what can be learned from interviewing resource users? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science 56: 1949–1963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ostrom, E. (1990) Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Primavera, J.H. (1998) Tropical shrimp farming and its sustainability. In: Tropical Mariculture, ed. de Silva, S., pp. 257–289. London, UK: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Rasolofo, M.V. (1997) Use of mangroves by traditional fishermen in Madagascar. Mangroves and Salt Marshes 1: 243–253.Google Scholar
Reagans, R. & McEvily, B. (2003) Network structure and knowledge transfer: the effects of cohesion and range. Administrative Science Quarterly 48: 240–267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogoff, B. (2003) The Cultural Nature of Human Development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Rönnbäck, P. (1999) The ecological basis for the economic value of mangrove forests in seafood production. Ecological Economics 29: 235–252.Google Scholar
Rönnbäck, P. (2001) Shrimp aquaculture – state of the art. Swedish EIA Centre, report 1, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Uppsala, Sweden: 50 pp.Google Scholar
Rönnbäck, P., Kautsky, N., Pihl, L., Troell, M., Söderqvist, T. & Wennhage, H. (2007) Ecosystem goods and services from temperate coastal habitats – identification, valuation and implications of ecosystems shifts. Ambio (in press).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saenger, P., Hegerl, E.J. & Davie, J.D.S., eds (1983) Global status of mangrove ecosystems. The Environmentalist 3 (suppl. 3): 88 pp.Google Scholar
Spalding, M., Blasco, F. & Field, C. (1997) World Mangrove Atlas. Okinawa, Japan: The International Society for Mangrove Ecosystems: 178 pp.Google Scholar
Stevenson, N.J. (1997) Disused shrimp ponds: option for redevelopment of mangroves. Coastal Management 25: 425–435.Google Scholar
Tri, N.H., Adger, W.N. & Kelly, P.M. (1998) Natural resource management in mitigating climate impacts: the example of mangrove restoration in Vietnam. Global Environmental Change 8: 49–61.Google Scholar
Valiela, I., Bowen, J. & York, J.K. (2001) Mangrove forests: one of the world's threatened major environments. Bioscience 51: 807–815.Google Scholar
Walters, B.B. (2000) Local mangrove planting in the Philippines: are fisherfolk and fishpond owners effective restorationists? Restoration Ecology 8: 237–246.Google Scholar
Walters, B.B. (2003) People and mangroves in the Philippines: fifty years of coastal environmental change. Environmental Conservation 30: 293–303.Google Scholar
Walters, B.B. (2004) Local management of mangrove forests in the Philippines: Successful conservation or efficient resource extraction? Human Ecology 32:177–195.Google Scholar
Walton, M.E.M., Samonte-Tan, G.P.B., Primavera, J.H., Edwards-Jones, G. & Le Vay, L. (2006) Are mangroves worth replanting? The direct economic benefits of a community-based reforestation project. Environmental Conservation 33: 335–343.Google Scholar