Perceptions of Mangrove Co-benefits and Their Link to Sdgs Among the Digo and Duruma of Vanga in Kwale County, Kenya

Abstract

Mangroves are among the most productive ecosystems known for their diverse provisioning, regulating, supporting, and aesthetic Ecosystem Services (ES). The ecosystem directly supports the livelihoods, food security, and nutrition of people in about 128 countries through the provision of products like fuelwood and fish while protecting them by stabilizing shorelines, reducing flooding, and mitigating other natural disasters like tsunamis and climate change. In so doing, the ecosystem promotes various sustainable development goals (SDGs). This study is anchored both in the recognition that the aforementioned important relationship remains underexplored and in the realization that there exists very limited research on co-benefit scenarios. Little is also documented on the cognitive views of mangrove resource users, limiting the trace of progress under SDGs. This study, therefore, provides an in-depth analysis of the relationship between mangroves and SDGs and the perceptions of this relationship among communities living adjacent to the ecosystem. The study adopted a mixed-methods approach, employing questionnaire survey, secondary data review, and focused group discussions (FGDs). Secondary data sources included reports, journal essays, internet sources, and book chapters related to ES and SDGs. The focus of these reviews was to compile a matrix representing the ES and SDG targets. Community perception was disaggregated by age, gender, level of education, and income while development was categorized into local, national, and international levels. Local development was limited to village boundaries, national development to the country’s boundaries while international development was development beyond national boundaries. Analysis of secondary data indicated that mangrove ecosystem services directly contribute to the achievement of at least 13 SDG targets, while also reinforcing at least 19 targets. About 45.4% of the community members, in this study, understood the roles of mangroves in development; of this percentage, the majority (79.5%) linked the ecosystem to local (village-level) development. Approximately 43.1% of the respondents with an understanding of the referred relationship could link the ecosystem to both local and national development, while only 13.5% of them could link the ecosystem to local, national, and international development. Forty-three percent of the community (43%) had no idea of the relationship between mangroves and development, while 11.6% felt that mangroves do not contribute to development in any way. The highest proportion (49.2%) of the respondents who knew the roles of mangroves in local development mentioned income generation from the sale of wood

products, ecotourism, and proceeds from conservation as the main contributors, while 21% mentioned provisioning of affordable building materials. About 40.9% of the respondents who knew the roles of mangroves in national development listed benefits such as revenue generation from licensing of mangrove cutters, export of wood products, and ecotourism, while 22.6% mentioned income generation from mangrove-related businesses. Critical ecosystem services like shoreline protection and ocean hazard barrier ranked among the least ES despite two of the study villages being islands susceptible to ocean hazards. The majority of community members perceive mangrove-related development in terms of extractive benefits like timber and fuelwood. This suggests that communities place a high priority on meeting their socioeconomic needs resulting in possible trade-off of ecological benefits key to the resilience of the coastal communities. The study therefore recommends: 1. A more disaggregated approach in framing and implementing development and governance frameworks. This means placing the primary natural resource users and their contextual socio-economic dynamics at the center of decision-making from inception to implementation. 2. That governance and development strategies be sustainably refined to reflect the needs and desires of local communities to improve acceptability and cost-effectiveness. 3. That resource managers endeavor to promote viable options for destructive forest products to reduce extractive pressure on the ecosystem while promoting community livelihood. 4. Additional research into ways in which resource management may be aligned to meet both the socioeconomic needs of communities as well as ecological well-being