Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ulb/ulbeco/2013-298679.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Call for a collaborative management at Matang Mangrove Forest Reserve, Malaysia: An assessment from local stakeholders’ view point

Author

Listed:
  • Columba Martínez-Espinosa
  • Pieter Wolfs
  • Katherine Vande Velde
  • Behara Satyanarayana
  • Farid Dahdouh-Guebas
  • Jean Huge
Abstract
Effective management of a socio-ecological system (SES) requires a good understanding of: (i) ecosystem functionality, (ii) interactions between social and ecological units, and (iii) stakeholder perceptions and activities. Matang Mangrove Forest Reserve (MMFR) covering 40,200 ha in Peninsular Malaysia is under silvicultural management (with a 30-year forest rotation cycle) for charcoal and timber production since 1902. The aim of this study is to assess the perceptions of (select) local stakeholders on the ongoing mangrove management of MMFR. Earlier, Huge et al. (2016), using Q methodology, identified three main shared perceptions, called discourses: (1) Optimization- ‘keep up the good work, but keep improving’, (2) Change for the better- ‘ecotourism & participatory management for sustainability’, and (3) Continuity – ‘business as usual is the way to go’. The current study is a follow-up to Huge et al. (2016) and reports on a survey which assessed the degree of support of the local stakeholders towards those three management discourses. The core statements of each discourse were presented as questions and then ranked by the participants. Based on the findings of the survey, the local stakeholders were clustered into three main working categories: (i) charcoal and timber workers, (ii) fishermen and (iii) service providers. The interviews held with 114 stakeholders indicated that discourse (2) ‘change for the better’ is the most popular (supported by 72% of the participants) regardless of the stakeholders’ working category. This discourse voices the involvement of local people in decision making, adopts participatory management, and encourages diverse mangrove-based economic activities beyond mere charcoal and timber production. Single-use management (focusing only on maximising charcoal and timber yields) was perceived as not equitably benefiting all local stakeholders. The insights of this study can guide the managers of Matang Mangrove Forest Reserve to improve the sustainability and the local support base for the existing mangrove management regime, e.g. by promoting diverse livelihood options for the local stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Columba Martínez-Espinosa & Pieter Wolfs & Katherine Vande Velde & Behara Satyanarayana & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas & Jean Huge, 2020. "Call for a collaborative management at Matang Mangrove Forest Reserve, Malaysia: An assessment from local stakeholders’ view point," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/298679, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    • Handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/298679
    Note: SCOPUS: ar.j
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/298679/3/Martinez-Espinosaetal_2020_FORECO.pdf
    File Function: Full text for the whole work, or for a work part
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David Christian Rose, 2014. "Five ways to enhance the impact of climate science," Nature Climate Change, Nature, vol. 4(7), pages 522-524, July.
    2. Nibedita Mukherjee & Jean Huge & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas & Nico Koedam, 2014. "Ecosystem service valuations of mangrove ecosystems to inform decision making and future valuation exercises," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/217963, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    3. Othman, Jamal & Bennett, Jeff & Blamey, Russell, 2004. "Environmental values and resource management options: a choice modelling experience in Malaysia," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(6), pages 803-824, December.
    4. Cohen, Dale J. & Cohen, Jon, 2006. "The Sectioned Density Plot," The American Statistician, American Statistical Association, vol. 60, pages 167-174, May.
    5. Luciana Cavalcanti Maia Santos & Maria M.A. Gasalla & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas & Marisa Dantas Bitencourt, 2017. "Socio-ecological assessment for environmental planning in coastal fishery areas: A case study in Brazilian mangroves," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/247041, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    6. Jean Huge & Katherine Vande Velde & Francisco Javier Benitez Capistros & Jan Harold Japay & Behara Satyanarayana & Mohammad Nazrin Ishak & Melissa Quispe Zuniga & Bin Husain Mohd Lokman & Sulong Ibrah, 2016. "Mapping discourses using Q methodology in Matang Mangrove Forest, Malaysia," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/246478, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    7. Peter J. Mumby & Alasdair J. Edwards & J. Ernesto Arias-González & Kenyon C. Lindeman & Paul G. Blackwell & Angela Gall & Malgosia I. Gorczynska & Alastair R. Harborne & Claire L. Pescod & Henk Renken, 2004. "Mangroves enhance the biomass of coral reef fish communities in the Caribbean," Nature, Nature, vol. 427(6974), pages 533-536, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Begum, Flora & de Bruyn, Lisa Lobry & Kristiansen, Paul & Islam, Mohammad Amirul, 2023. "Development pathways for co-management in the Sundarban mangrove forest: A multiple stakeholder perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    2. Buckwell, Andrew & Fleming, Christopher & Muurmans, Maggie & Smart, James C.R. & Ware, Dan & Mackey, Brendan, 2020. "Revealing the dominant discourses of stakeholders towards natural resource management in Port Resolution, Vanuatu, using Q-method," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Villanueva, Anastasio J. & Vernaza-Quiñónez, Lucía & Granado-Díaz, Rubén, 2023. "Disentangling the heterogeneity of mangrove managers' perception of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 213(C).
    2. Tanner, Michael K. & Moity, Nicolas & Costa, Matthew T. & Marin Jarrin, Jose R. & Aburto-Oropeza, Octavio & Salinas-de-León, Pelayo, 2019. "Mangroves in the Galapagos: Ecosystem services and their valuation," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 12-24.
    3. Begum, Flora & de Bruyn, Lisa Lobry & Kristiansen, Paul & Islam, Mohammad Amirul, 2023. "Development pathways for co-management in the Sundarban mangrove forest: A multiple stakeholder perspective," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).
    4. Park, Mi Sun & Shin, Seongmin & Lee, Haeun, 2021. "Media frames on urban greening in the Democratic People's Republic of Korea," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    5. Wood, Apanie L. & Butler, James R.A. & Sheaves, Marcus & Wani, Jacob, 2013. "Sport fisheries: Opportunities and challenges for diversifying coastal livelihoods in the Pacific," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 305-314.
    6. Hassan, Suziana & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Thorsen, Bo Jellesmark, 2019. "Urban-rural divides in preferences for wetland conservation in Malaysia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 226-237.
    7. Yamamoto, Yuki, 2023. "Living under ecosystem degradation: Evidence from the mangrove–fishery linkage in Indonesia," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    8. Knudby, Anders & Brenning, Alexander & LeDrew, Ellsworth, 2010. "New approaches to modelling fish–habitat relationships," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(3), pages 503-511.
    9. Birol, Ekin & Villalba, Eric Rayn & Smale, Melinda, 2009. "Farmer preferences for milpa diversity and genetically modified maize in Mexico: a latent class approach," Environment and Development Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 521-540, August.
    10. Shrestha, Kripa & Shakya, Bandana & Adhikari, Biraj & Nepal, Mani & Shaoliang, Yi, 2023. "Ecosystem services valuation for conservation and development decisions: A review of valuation studies and tools in the Far Eastern Himalaya," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    11. Sarkki, Simo & Karjalainen, Timo P., 2015. "Ecosystem service valuation in a governance debate: Practitioners' strategic argumentation on forestry in northern Finland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 13-22.
    12. Sonja Ayeb-Karlsson & Dominic Kniveton & Terry Cannon, 2020. "Trapped in the prison of the mind: Notions of climate-induced (im)mobility decision-making and wellbeing from an urban informal settlement in Bangladesh," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 6(1), pages 1-15, December.
    13. Sonja Ayeb-Karlsson, 2020. "No Power without Knowledge: A Discursive Subjectivities Approach to Investigate Climate-Induced (Im)mobility and Wellbeing," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-15, June.
    14. Farrell, Katharine N. & Löw Beer, David, 2019. "Producing the ecological economy: A study in developing fiduciary principles supporting the application of flow-fund consistent investment criteria for sovereign wealth funds," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    15. Baraka P. Nyangoko & Håkan Berg & Mwita M. Mangora & Martin Gullström & Mwanahija S. Shalli, 2020. "Community Perceptions of Mangrove Ecosystem Services and Their Determinants in the Rufiji Delta, Tanzania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, December.
    16. Tuan, Tran Hu & Lindhjem, Henrik, 2008. "Meta-analysis of nature conservation values in Asia & Oceania: Data heterogeneity and benefit transfer issues," MPRA Paper 11470, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Ekin Birol & Sukanya Das, 2010. "The Value of Improved Public Services : An Application of the Choice Experiment Method to Estimate the Value of Improved Wastewater Treatment Infrastructure in India," Development Economics Working Papers 23062, East Asian Bureau of Economic Research.
    18. Okello, Afrika Onguko & Otieno, David Jakinda & Nzuma, Jonathan Makau & Kidoido, Michael Mukembo & Tanga, Chrysantus Mbi, 2022. "Smallholder farmers’ willingness to pay for commercial insect-based chicken feed in Kenya," International Food and Agribusiness Management Review, International Food and Agribusiness Management Association, vol. 26(1), October.
    19. Baulcomb, Corinne & Fletcher, Ruth & Lewis, Amy & Akoglu, Ekin & Robinson, Leonie & von Almen, Amanda & Hussain, Salman & Glenk, Klaus, 2015. "A pathway to identifying and valuing cultural ecosystem services: An application to marine food webs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 11(C), pages 128-139.
    20. Mat Alipiah, Roseliza & Anang, Zuraini & Abdul Rashid, Noorhaslinda Kulub & Smart, James C. R. & Wan Ibrahim, Wan Noorwatie, 2018. "Aquaculturists Preference Heterogeneity towards Wetland Ecosystem Services: A Latent Class Discrete Choice Model," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 52(2), pages 253-266.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Ecosystem services; Forest management; Local-population perception; Mangrove management; Socio-ecological system; Stakeholder involvement;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/298679. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Benoit Pauwels (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecsulbe.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.