Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

Chapter 21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System M. Glaser, G. Krause, R.S. Oliveira, and M. Fontalvo-Herazo

21.1

The Social-Ecological System (SES) Concept

Marion Glaser The analysis of social-ecological systems (SES) seeks to identify system configurations which produce sustainable futures for major stakeholders at various system levels and scales. Our point of departure for SES analysis has to be a clear generic definition of the concept. For the purposes of our sustainability-oriented social-ecological analyses, a social-ecological system is comprised of three elements. These are: 1. A bio-geophysical system (e.g., ecosystem, coastal territory); 2. The associated social agents (individual and collective) with their institutions;1 3. An identified problem context (e.g., resource overuse, pollution or ecosystemrelated degradation of human livelihoods). At the core of the SES approach to managing human–nature relations is the concept of resilience. Resilience is a system’s ability to reorganize and renew itself without loss of functions or diversity when disturbed (Alcorn et al. 2003). The resilience of any living (including social-ecological) system is centrally affected by the way the system reacts to change. As famously presented by James Lovelock in his virtual “daisyworld”, self-reinforcing negative system feedbacks can reduce and stop an ongoing change. On the other hand, “positive” self-re-enforcing mechanisms, such as the mutual feedbacks between population numbers and rising birth rates over time, will speed up ongoing system changes (Folke et al. 2002). Thus, the character of the self-reinforcing mechanisms of an SES affects its resilience (Olsson et al. 2004b). Resilience also depends on the capacities of an SES for learning and adaptation (Berkes et al. 2003).

1

Institutions are defined as formal and informal norms and rules

U. Saint-Paul and H. Schneider (eds.), Mangrove Dynamics and Management in North Brazil, Ecological Studies 211, DOI 10.1007/978-3-642-13457-9_21, # Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

307

308

M. Glaser et al.

SES resilience analysis needs to be undertaken in relation to a spatially defined unit. Feedbacks which determine the future trajectory of SES development can occur within and between ecological and social system components as well as across spatial and organizational scales. In our current age of the anthropocene (Crutzen and Stoermer 2000; Crutzen 2002), humankind is becoming an ever-more central driver of social-ecological dynamics (Schellnhuber 1999; Berkes and Folke 2002). In line with this, the governance and management of human interactions with nature has become increasingly important for sustainability. This chapter shows how, after assuming a “pristine” mangrove ecosystem in the Caete´ peninsula at the outset of a 10-year research period, the MADAM socio-economic research program constructed a differentiated picture of a complex system in which human–nature interactions are the predominant drivers of mangrove-based social-ecological dynamics (Fig. 21.1). The research program on “Mangrove Dynamics and Management” (MADAM) was initiated and led by biologists. In order to investigate natural dynamics in a “pristine” environment, the work was explicitly located in the Braganc¸a mangrove peninsula, a region which was regarded as relatively free of human interference. During the first few years of research, natural and social scientists worked on different topics and spatial scales in the research region. The socioeconomic research group, whose work is reported here, was a late-comer, initially expected to provide quantitative data for natural science-led questions, which had

GTZ GEF Western hemisphere mangroves

on

ati

m for

e ns co al mes n tio m na ra er rog Int d p an In

American Mangroves

n

tio rva

IBAMA National rural and fishery workers unions

Implementation and illegality

Caeté Mangrovepeninsula

SECTAM wood traders State Fishery workers association

laws ordinances

residents extractivists farmers

ecosystem knowledge use and conservation practices

Natural system

Social system

Fig. 21.1 The social ecological system Braganc¸a/Caete´ mangroves (adapted from Berkes and Folke 2002)

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

309

been formulated during project design with only minor participation of social scientists. The social science point of departure in the interdisciplinary MADAM program was therefore a study area defined by natural scientists: This was translated into the SES concept as follows. Bio-geophysical area: the 130 km2 of mangroves on the Caete´ peninsula between the town of Braganc¸a and the coast on both sides of the Caete´ river (see Chap. 2, Fig. 2.1). Associated social agents: the local communities whose residents extract resources – for subsistence or sale – from the mangroves of this area reside in the ecosystem’s socio-economic impact area (SEIA) The SEIA (Glaser 2003) was spatially delimited through interviews with local leaders and other key informants in over 50 mangrove-near villages in the region about the livelihood strategies of inhabitants. The SEIA geographic boundaries surround the 21 villages whose human population engaged in production/extraction in the mangrove study area. The combination of the spatially defined mangrove study area and its associated SEIA thus produces the spatially explicit delineation of the local/regional part of our social-ecological system (SES) (see Krause et al. 2001; and area map in Chap. 2). This SES contains actors and institutions at multiple nested levels from the local to the national level and beyond, and social and ecological subsystems are connected by drivers and feedbacks (see Fig. 21.1). Although higher-scale drivers were not excluded, most of our analysis here centers on the local and regional levels. Problem context: the overall concern of our research was to identify the major drivers of the Caete´ SES, and especially those drivers which generate identified SES problems such as mangrove deforestation and low incomes for mangrove producers, and to analyze the available options for steering the SES into more sustainable directions.

21.2

Mangrove Values and Livelihoods

Marion Glaser Knowledge about how much of which resources people extract from a biogeophysical system is central in social-ecological assessment. A household survey was carried out which covered 69% of the approximately 2,500 households in the 21 local villages whose residents extract resources from our study mangroves. Figure 21.2 lists the mangrove resources used for subsistence and sale in order of their importance for local households and shows a complex picture of human– nature interdependence. Residents named 20 products and product types, the most important ones for the local household economies being crabs (Ucides cordatus

310

M. Glaser et al. Percent subsistence Percent commercial

70 % of Rural Households

60 50 40 30 20 10

Ca

ran

gu

ejo

(Uc

ide

sc

ord at fi Sir i (C sh, g us) en alli era ne Tu l ct ru Su (Te es sp rur u( . r ) ed Fa os m. p.) My tilid Am ae or fi ) Va é (G rewo od ua ras , w vina oo de sp.) np Mo me ole irõ d s es, icina l he wo Cu o r tuc de b np s a ( man M g ost s dye yrop rove (Rh his p hone u y izo nc ph ora tatus Ma ) rac ma oa ni ( Tam ngle) a U r Sa ca m u, fis h pe qu araco ara an , i Oy Sa mollu ) ste rac s r (F ura c* am ,b ird Se . Ost rna rei d mb ae Ca ram í, she ) lls ujo , sh * ells *

0

Mangrove product

Fig. 21.2 Percentage of households using mangrove products for subsistence and sale (source: Glaser 2003)

and Callinectes sp.), fish, woodworms (Teredo sp.), mussels (Mytilidae) and mangrove wood.2

21.2.1 Mangrove Dependence The major resource, and a keystone species of our ecosystem, is the mangrove crab U. cordatus (Diele 2000; and Chap. 17). Well over 60% of households in the SES catch and directly consume or barter (subsistence) and over 40% also sell this crab. When crab processing and trading activities are included, over 80% of households in the socio-economic impact area derived material benefits (in money or in-kind) from U. cordatus (Glaser and Diele 2004). As crab collectors have few other income sources and are among the poorest coastal dwellers in the region, the subsistence and sale incomes from the U. cordatus crab have a particularly important poverty alleviation function. This is reflected in Fig. 21.2 and in Table 21.1 both of which also show the wide range of other mangrove products which local residents reported to have consumed or sold. 2

There are three mangrove species (see Chap. 5) whose utilization is likely to be much higher than in the data reported here due to persistent underreporting of illegal uses of mangrove resources (for further discussion of tree use see Glaser et al. 2003).

Table 21.1 Mangrove-related income generation for local ecosystem users (1998–1999) 1 2 3 4 5 6 Subsistence Annual value Product % of households (hh) No of hhs with sale/ Sale income income (R$ per (subsistence subsistence income (R$ per hh/ Subsistence Sale hh/month) production) from mangrove month)a U. cordatus (mangrove crab) 64 42 1,026/1,565 159.20 19 356,820.00 Fish (general) 54 31 758/1,320 348.00 35 554,400.00 Callinectes sp. (“siri crab”) 50 6 147/1,223 104.00 83 1,218,108.00 Teredinae (woodworm) 48 6 147/1,174 30.00 244 3,437,472.00 Mytella falcata (mangrove 45 6 147/1,100 60.00 70 924,000.00 estuary mussel) Eleotiedae guavina sp. 36 3 73/808 3.00 12 116,352.00 (“amore´ fish”) 43 (3) 73/1,051 – 13 163,956.00 Mangrove woodb All mangrove productsd 83 68 1,663/1,863 332.00 30 7,305,840.00 a One Brazilian Real (R$) was equivalent to US$ 0.5 at the time of the study b Beams, posts and fuelwood c As the extraction of mangrove wood is illegal, little reliable interview information was available on it (see Glaser et al. 2003) d As in Figure 20.2

n/ac 6,622,764.00

2,628.00

7 Annual value (production for sale) 1,960,070.40 3,165,408.00 1,833,456.00 52,920.00 105,840.00

21 Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System 311

312

M. Glaser et al.

21.2.2 Economic Value and Poverty Table 21.1 shows the economic value of the mangrove ecosystem3 based on one year of fortnightly information of household-level production in 250 households in 10 villages. A total of 67 mangrove products including 56 mangrove-dependent fish species4 were differentiated by local households (Grasso 2000). Grasso (2000) also priced the subsistence and sale production values of major products and showed that, while the U. cordatus does deliver major monetary incomes to local households (see row 3 of Table 21.1), as a whole, mangrove subsistence production values actually surpass the sale value of mangrove products (see totals of columns 6 and 7 of Table 21.1). While commercial mangrove wood exploitation increased the percentage of those living below the poverty line, i.e. further impoverished local households (Glaser et al. 2003), the subsistence-oriented exploitation of the mangrove ecosystem created additional welfare (i.e. a 20% income increase) in the study area (Grasso 2000). There are thus strong incentives for local residents near mangroves to use “their” local mangrove ecosystem sustainably and to protect it from “outside” exploitation. Strong and persistent conflicts between locals and “outsiders” around illegal mangrove logging in the study area (Glaser et al. 2003) confirm this. Poverty alleviation is thus a central social function of the mangroves. For poor ecosystem users, and in particular for female-headed households, the mangrove system provides important subsistence and emergency fall-back foods (see Table. 21.1, and nonshaded bars in Fig. 21.2). Conventional economic valuation, however, disregards subsistence production and focuses only on production which passes through markets. This fails to capture the full poverty alleviation impacts of ecosystems and runs the danger of supporting policies that undermine the social functions of ecosystems. The analysis of ecosystem values therefore needs to adopt a comprehensive view of the services these systems provide to humankind. The three major socio-economic functions of our mangrove ecosystem are (1) income generation, (2) poverty alleviation, and (3) the provision of rural food security.

21.2.2.1

Income Generation

The Caete´ peninsula mangrove ecosystem generates between R$ 773 and 1,005/ year/ha of producer income, depending on method of calculation (Grasso 2000: 89).

3

Mangroves are here understood as encompassing the diversity of flora and fauna associated with the ecosystems in which this tree species predominates. 4 Including 56 mangrove-dependent fish species that were mostly summarized as “fish” in Fig. 20.2.

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

313

This translates into at least R$ 14 million5 of subsistence and commercial product value for the study area mangroves (cf. totals of columns 6 and 7 in Table 21.1). 21.2.2.2

Poverty Alleviation

Half of mangrove-dependent households in our study area lived below the poverty line (R$ 50/month per capita). As mangrove resources degraded, labor productivity, i.e. catch per unit effort in crab collection, decreased (Glaser and Diele 2004). Crab collectors thus needed to invest more time and effort to achieve the same physical production results. Between 1998 and 2001, these productivity falls translated into a lower purchasing power for crab collectors (see Fig. 21.6). Unless producer prices rise or more rewarding alternative income sources are adopted by the concerned households, lower catch per unit effort will further impoverish crab collectors, who are already among the poorest inhabitants of the study area. 21.2.2.3

Food Security

As many as 83% of households in our rural coastal study area directly consumed or bartered crabs, fish, wood and other mangrove products without passing through any market transactions. Eighteen of the 20 mangrove products presented in Fig. 21.2 served as emergency back-up food for the collecting household during hard times. Socio-economic risk insurance, including the mitigation or prevention of hunger, is therefore an important function of the mangrove ecosystem. While the total economic value of the production in question is already high, its socioeconomic importance for the poorest residents on north Brazilian mangrove coasts is even higher (Glaser 2003). 21.2.2.4

Socio-Economic Context and Local Priorities

Mangrove dependence in our SES needs to be seen in the context of locally perceived problems and development priorities. In 1996 at the start of our research programme, less than half the 21 villages in our SES were connected to mains electricity, or had access to basic medical care through a local health post. Only slightly over half the villages had a community centre and only three had partial access to piped water. Fecal coliform bacteria in the drinking wells of households and village schools were the norm (in 21 of 22 sampled domestic wells; R. Lara, personal communication). Most village schools provided only the first years of primary schooling. At a series of village meetings, local residents prioritized village problems in order of importance as follows: 1. The lack of quality education restricts alternative income options. Even after years at the village school, children are unable to read or write. 5

At the time of our survey, this was roughly equivalent to US$ 7 million.

314

M. Glaser et al.

2. Women are restricted to working in the house and in agriculture. In some villages, women also work in low-paid crab meat processing. 3. The lack of medical facilities. This is especially serious for pregnant women and those afflicted by malaria and dengue fever. 4. Low prices paid to producers. Patron
client relations between fish and crab traders provide an informal risk insurance for crab collectors, fishermen and other mangrove producers against sickness and other sudden financial needs. But producers are obliged to accept prices below those on the open market. 5. No electricity is available in most communities. 6. Scarcity of competent local leaders. Village groups find it difficult to access municipal, state, banking and other “bureaucracies”. Since there are few competent village leaders, there are few community initiatives and disunity prevails. Further problems mentioned in village meetings were the lack of public transport, low drinking water quality, and the absence of childcare facilities to free women to engage in gainful employment. Villages in beach locations were described as exposed to locally unpredictable destructive coastal erosion processes. This reduced investment in agriculture and horticulture as well as physical and social infrastructure (Krause and Glaser 2003).

21.3

The Coevolution of Natural and Social System Drivers at the Local Level

Gesche Krause and Marion Glaser Social and ecological systems are indivisibly linked and co-evolve. Here, we examine two cases of co-evolutionary development in the mangrove-based SES under study. Both areas were subject to efforts by the Brazilian government in the mid-1970s to improve access to mangrove resources. However, after the construction of an access road in the study area, our two example sites moved along very different developmental paths, influenced by their particular combinations of natural and/or social and institutional drivers: In the coastal village of Ajuruteua, site-specific beach morphodynamics and socio-economic processes drove a mangrove fishing village into weakening social-ecological resilience, increasing impoverishment and socio-economic polarization. In the mangrove-adjacent, agricultural/extractivist6 village of Tamatateua, the spatial vicinity to the mangrove ecosystem has allowed the ecosystem to assume the function of buffer or risk insurance so that successful agricultural innovations and investments could be undertaken by community members.

6

In the context of this chapter, extractivism describes the collection or capture of mangrove resources.

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

315

21.3.1 Ajuruteua: A Coastal Village 21.3.1.1

Boundaries and Properties of the SES

The village of Ajuruteua is separated from the Atlantic Ocean by a flat sandy beachdune ridge system, which is known to respond rapidly to changing environmental conditions. Landward shifts of the beach-dune ridge of up to 15 cm/day were observed (Krause and Soares 2004). This moving “barrier” plays a key role for the evolution and protection of the adjacent mangrove area. The village is situated at the northern point of the mangrove peninsula in relative spatial isolation and developed during the mid-1970s following the construction of an access road. Currently, access is possible by boat or along the paved road, which dissects the peninsula in a north
south direction (Krause et al. 2001). Ajuruteua consists of three spatially separated neighborhoods Praia, Vila dos Pescadores, and Bonifacı´o (Fig. 21.3), each with a distinct hydrodynamic signature.7 Fisheries are the main source of income, followed by tourism: the splendor of the beaches in this area promotes tourism along the coastline (Cabral 1997), while the

Fig. 21.3 Schematic map of the three village sections of Ajuruteua. Each village section exhibits specific hydrodynamic signature(s) indicated by roman numerals as different coastal cells Source: Krause and Glaser 2003

7

Following Short (1999) the hydrodynamic signature is defined as the sum of all driving forces (wind direction and force, wave type and frequency, tidal amplitude, etc.) acting on a specific coastline.

316

M. Glaser et al.

mangrove ecosystem continues as a key source of income for the local population (Glaser and Grasso 1998; Grasso 2000; Glaser 2003). If tourism as an alternative source is to be successful, knowledge of local coastal dynamics and their impact on beach topography is required. A large set of sequential beach profiles was therefore collected on a fortnightly basis from 1997 to 2001 to assess the co-evolution of coastal morphodynamic processes, residential distribution, and the development of local social infrastructure (Krause and Soares 2004). Further information was obtained from remote sensing analysis, a household census, and semi-structured interviews, covering the key themes of erosion, resettlement and local strategies in the village sections (Krause et al. 2004). Three community meetings were held to identify local problems and people’s perceptions of local geo-morphological dynamics and associated socio-economic strategies, and to discuss strategic future options. In order to address gender-specific issues, one of these community meetings was held exclusively for women (Krause and Glaser 2003).

21.3.1.2

Co-evolutionary Outcomes

The predominant beach profile at each survey site did not change significantly but all profile types were subject to some erosion. The site-specific hydrodynamic signatures, e.g., major wave direction and forcing, were rather stable over the course of time (Krause and Soares 2004). However, human strategies of coping with erosion increased the future likelihood of erosion events. Local residents identified erosion-linked socio-economic risks that are discussed below. Praia: This beachfront area was the main destination for tourism in this region. There were 166 households in 1997. Since the access road was completed in 1983, wealthier absentee owners who arrived from other areas of the state of Para´ and from the north-east of Brazil, make up the majority of residents. With additional income options in tourism, only 55% of households of this village section still depend mainly on artisanal fishery. The residences of artisanal fishers and tourism workers have shifted to a “second row” of houses, further inland towards the mangroves, having been ousted from beachside locations by better-off tourism entrepreneurs and land speculators. Tourist accommodation is generally more attractive close to the shore (Nordstrom et al. 2002). At Praia, houses were constructed immediately on the dune system, or even in front of the first dune ridge. Natural vegetation generally stabilizes and fixes dune sediments, and its removal for house construction can therefore contribute to increased dune erosion. If this natural fixation is destroyed, the sediment is able to shift freely according to the degree of incoming wind and waves. Tourism activities (in the peak season up to 7,000 people per day on the approx. 2 km2 tourist beach area) may have further decreased dune stability, as dunes have been leveled in parts to make room for housing directly on the shoreline. In places, local hotel owners constructed a row of wooden piles as some measure to hamper the impact of the waves and thus to prevent further cutting back of the dune system. However, they did

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

317

not implement any measures to protect or to promote vegetation growth as a natural stabilizer on the dunes. At the end of our monitoring program, only the rear parts of the stilt houses were still situated on dune sands along the tourism part of the village (Praia). The front stilts were fortified but exposed to the high tide swash. This reduced the income of the local hotel owners: hotels could no longer be accessed from the beach during high tides, and thus the facilities could no longer be fully utilized (Krause and Soares 2004). Vila dos Pescadores: The oldest section of the village is inhabited by the poorest artisanal fishers of the village and by old people. This village section has the most dilapidated and low quality wooden housing with all the signs of low-cost impermanence and the most neglected social infrastructure among the three village sections. A number of households do not have access to freshwater due to saline intrusion into their shallow, hand-dug wells (Krause and Glaser 2003). At Vila dos Pescadores, continuous erosion of 34 cm/year was observed. Flooding at extreme spring high tides of the backwash area caused massive damage to the local fishing families’ housing. The construction of fish traps in the tidal channel opposite the harbor in this village section also added to the erosion problem. These large structures have the shape of isosceles triangles (approx. 200 m side lengths), and accumulated sediments then narrow the tidal channel and increase current velocities (Krause and Soares 2004). Over the past decade, this village section has suffered a continuous population exodus towards the better-protected village section of Bonifacio. With continuous erosion, the number of households fell from 300 in 1987 (Maneschy 1995) to 119 in 1997, of which 73% were engaged in artisanal fishery. In contrast to Praia, the wealthier inhabitants of Vila dos Pescadores moved further inland to avoid the recurrence of losses through erosion. The poor were forced to stay on the eroding shores and live in primitive shelters, as they lacked the financial resources to construct better housing facilities in safer areas. Bonifa´cio: This village section was only formed around 1995, receiving the relatively better-off and/or better networked artisanal fishing households. There were only 74 houses in 1997, but population continuously immigrated from other parts of the State and from Vila dos Pescadores. In Bonifacio, 81% of resident households engage in commercial artisanal fisheries. Over the past decade, a large number of substantial wooden and part-concrete houses were constructed by migrants from Vila dos Pescadores. In 2001, a new health centre and a school were erected with public funding. The village leader resides here, associations and village clubs have moved in, and this neighborhood is increasingly becoming the location for local social meetings (Krause and Glaser 2003). Residents’ migration to Bonifa´cio was accompanied by the removal of large patches of mangroves (Krause et al. 2004). A new harbor was established in the vicinity of this village section, sheltered from the waves but exposed to strong tidal currents. The shore-most mangroves were clear-cut to construct the new harbor, so that the “natural” level of erosion was measurably enhanced through human action.

318

21.3.1.3

M. Glaser et al.

Driving Forces in the SES

Interestingly, the beach profile monitoring showed that very different types of beach profiles existed in close proximity. This may be related to the socio-economic features of the different sections of the study village. We found that, in Ajuruteua, income source diversity was lower than the regional average of 1.9 income sources per household. Interviews suggested a direct causal link between low income source diversity and erosion. The fear of erosion reduced local incentives to invest in trees, horticulture, annual crops and any construction. Local statements on the failure to invest in local infrastructure, such as “It will all be washed away anyway, nobody knows what the sea will do” showed a high degree of fatalism (Glaser 2003). Results of interviews and public meetings indicate that the local inability to predict the temporal spacing and impacts of erosion events is a major reason why locally available surpluses are not channeled into investments in future household productivity. The observed lack of knowledge of coastal dynamics, the so-called “ecological illiteracy”, of recent migrants causes some undesirable back-loops in our SES. Natural sedimentation dynamics and the deforestation of mangrove areas close to the levee increased erosion so that the need for relocation becomes more likely (Krause 2002). In this sense, there is a negative co-evolutionary link between geomorphological and social elements that clearly weakens systemic resilience. The repetition of dysfunctional societal reactions to erosion is a case in point. For instance, inoperative fish traps, which are abandoned rather than removed, enforce undesirable local erosion by artificially trapping sediments (Krause and Soares 2004). Erosion, and the particular way in which the local population reacts to it in its presently uninformed situation, plays the central role in a vicious circle: Income diversity is reduced by erosion, and this diminishes socio-economic stability and diversity and increases poverty which in turn renders beach populations’ livelihoods ever more vulnerable to the dynamic nature of the beach morphology. A better-informed local population, able to appraise geomorphological dynamics, would be able to generate positive co-evolutionary links in this SES. Finally, since settlements in beach and mangrove areas are prohibited in Brazil (Glaser and Krause 2005), there is no public support for relocating the households affected by coastal erosion. Resettlement costs have to be entirely covered by the families affected by coastal erosion in these areas so that the full effects of erosion events most threatens the lives and assets of those who are most vulnerable.

21.3.2 Tamatateua: An Agricultural Village 21.3.2.1

Boundaries and Properties of the SES

Tamatateua is located in the transition zone between the high plateau and the coastal lowland in the direct vicinity of the mangrove peninsula at Braganc¸a

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

319

Fig. 21.4 Subset of a LANDSAT 7etm+ Scene. Canal 3, 2, 1, (RGB). Lat/Long-Projection. The image of 07. 08 1999 displays the coastal area of Braganc¸a. The light patch in the lower part of the image indicates the city of Braganc¸a. The red circuit is the Campo do Tamatateua. The dark areas represent the mangroves. The light colors of the Atlantic Ocean in the upper part of the image result from the high load of suspended material (source: Klose 2004)

(Fig. 21.4). Due to the topographic features of the area and the high groundwater level, the lower parts of the land (campos) are inundated during the wet season, restricting the village settlements and cultivation of agricultural products to six “islands” (elevated land areas surrounding by seasonally flooded lowlands) of roughly 10 km2 in total (Klose 2004). Economic activities encompass mainly subsistence agriculture. Typical crops like manioc, beans and tobacco are cultivated with traditional shifting cultivation techniques. The vicinity of the mangroves supports multi-occupational income structures, such as artisanal fishery, crab collection and honey production. Due to its “island” character, the village has limited space for the further expansion of agriculture. Until the 1990s, the inhabitants of Tamatateua were without reliable access to other rural villages and to Braganc¸a city during the wet season. In the wake of the political interest to facilitate access to coastal resources, sandy embankments which link the islands were established, enabling access to Braganc¸a town throughout the year. Although most of Tamatateua’s natural products are still exchanged or sold in the village itself, the improved infrastructure has increased the potential to sell on regional markets and to invest in the commercialization of agricultural products.

320

M. Glaser et al.

In order to assess the co-evolutionary dynamics between mangrove ecosystem, agricultural production and livelihoods, a remote sensing analysis focused on the changing dynamics between 1986 and 2003. Further information was obtained from several household censuses and semi-structured interviews, covering the themes of livelihoods, perception of mangroves and local agricultural production strategies. In addition, several community meetings were organized to identify local problems and community perceptions of mangroves and local socio-economic strategies.

21.3.2.2

Co-evolutionary Outcomes

The land-use types in Tamatateua are unevenly distributed between the islands. An increase in agricultural areas and an intensification of cultivation has occurred since the construction of the road. Our interviews confirmed a strong link between improved infrastructure and increases in marketing activities. Two new activity types were introduced in response to the establishment of the main road that allows year-round mobility: 1. Establishment of little shops that provide goods for basic needs; 2. Trade with mangrove products such as fish, crabs and honey. The latter is drawn on mangrove products as a new income option for the village. Most former fishermen and crab collectors declared that they had given up artisanal fishery and moved into the trade with mangrove products (Klose 2004). The road has gained relevance for local livelihoods throughout the years as reflected in the steadily increasing number of little shops. Most buildings and lands permanently under agricultural crops are concentrated on the central “islands” of Tamatateua. The preferred but limited arable land along the main street is today under permanent agriculture. These fields, locally called pastos com leira, are cultivated with an innovative method which was invented locally only recently. After one year of fallow, land is cleared of vegetation, and livestock fertilize the soil for 1–2 weeks before elevated rows of earth are shaped and then are sown or planted. In the subsequent year, up to two harvest cycles are possible before the next year-long fallow period. This cultivation method is only implemented in Tamatateua. It produces higher yields than the traditional shifting cultivation that is still used in the neighboring villages, which are further away from the mangrove forest. This kind of local development of new – and therefore risky – agricultural methods has only been observed in a handful of areas worldwide (Siegmund-Schultze, personal communication). In Tamatateua, it is supported by the proximity of the mangrove ecosystem and its resources. The more remote “islands” at the edge of the village are covered with secondary forests (caporeira) and cultivated with traditional slash and burn techniques as is still common in many rural areas in the tropics (Hiroaka 1995; Conklin 1961; Fox et al. 2000). The improved infrastructure which facilitates communications is an important driver of agricultural innovation in Tamatateua. Mangrove goods and services act as an economic buffer and fall-back option in times of crisis for local households.

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

321

This reduces the risk associated with innovation and has allowed the necessary local scope for experimentation with new production techniques (Klose et al. 2005). Not only agricultural innovation but also the collectively established mangrove honey house in the village demonstrates this. The charismatic village leader who acted as a key steward and source of information in the transformation of the local agricultural system was a further important support to the transformative innovations that occurred in Tamatateua. A key steward, or “policy entrepreneur” (Kingdon 1995), is a person who improves problem perception of a community and initiates key processes (Olsson et al. 2004a), vis-a´-vis attaining a political objective. As such a key steward, the village leader of Tamatateua was able to communicate the potentialities of novel production techniques and maintaining mangroves according to the State regulations effectively among the local residents. The co-evolution of Tamatateua’s agricultural system with the adjacent mangrove system has promoted innovation and higher productivity in land and labor use (e.g., crop intensification, development of better tools). The perception of mangroves not only as an important source of alternative livelihood but also as a “piggy bank” or form of risk insurance has generated additional room for manoeuvre for villagers. A high level of cooperation and social cohesion within the village, probably promoted by the joint work in agriculture, also promoted innovative transformation. The establishment of a village radio station, where local affairs are discussed, is an example. After the village leader unexpectedly died in 2003, other locals took over as stewards and maintained the village development momentum, underlining the importance of local social capital. The strong local quest for sustainable well-being made families and especially adolescents decide to remain resident in Tamatateua. This stands in marked contrast to the general trend of rural migration to the cities elsewhere in Brazil (Fischlowitz and Engel 1969; Henkel 1994).

21.3.2.3

Driving Forces in the SES

The current social-ecological system of Tamatateua was shaped by the government decision to facilitate better road access to coastal resources in the mid-1970s. Since then, this local SES has been moving along an innovative and positive development path. The relatively high level of social capital in the village, in combination with local innovative leanings, and a higher incidence of social and occupational diversity in Tamatateua acted as key drivers of change. Innovation, especially in creating new alternative sources of income in agriculture, was possible because, in the context of open access to nearby mangroves, the perceived risk to livelihoods was low. In Tamatateua, the late village leader, Elias da Silva, was an important key steward who perceived and used the advantages of the public policy move to facilitate better access to coastal resources, whilst at the same time was capable of effectively communicating these to the local residents. This leader promoted new local system perceptions by focusing on the formerly underestimated role of mangroves for local livelihoods. This initiated social-institutional key processes,

322

M. Glaser et al.

which triggered innovations in agricultural production techniques and supported the realization of new income options from the mangrove ecosystem. These processes have direct links to local resource use dynamics and ecosystem state. Changes in environmental perceptions, socio-economic dynamics and local mangrove use and protection are interlinked. The interviews and public meetings showed that high local social cohesion and the local willingness to protect mangroves and their goods and services are the major reasons that locally available surplus is directed towards more productive innovative forms of agriculture.

21.3.3 Social-Ecological Systems as Co-evolving Entities Co-evolutionary trajectories can vary substantially between natural entities, within small geographic areas and over time. Such differences can be analyzed by carefully tracing the rationales and actions of human agents in their feedbacks with natural dynamics. Social structure and processes are thus co-evolving components of socialecological systems. They play a similarly central role as indicators for the state of a coastal system as for instance the hydrodynamic signatures have come to play. The need to include nature and its dynamics in the analysis of the sustainability of human uses of nature is evident in both our village examples. To the construction of an access road, which was the original force driving the transformation for both villages, Ajuruteua and Tamatateua, each responded with very different trajectories of development. While the interactions between human activities and natural forces reenforced erosion with a host of associated problems, which drove Ajuruteua to its current negative path, the inhabitants of Tamatateua developed their own initiatives and succeeded in driving their local SES onto a positive transformative new trajectory. However, Tamatateua’s positive trajectory of change was only possible with a change in the perception of the nearby mangrove area. From the local viewpoint, it changed from a source of subsistence for the poorest to an emergency resource for innovative farmers. Thus, what appears to be a typically homogenous agricultural frontier development at first glance is driven by local land-use decisions and perceptions of the specific environment in which people are located. The recognition of the connectedness between socio-economic well-being and the mangroves provided security so that the risks of experimenting with innovative agricultural approaches were locally rated as acceptable. The identified undesirable linkages (or, in systems language, mutually reinforcing “positive” feedbacks) between geomorphological and socio-economic instability in Ajuruteua are, however, not cast in stone. Local empowerment with available research knowledge may facilitate more desirable co-evolutionary patterns. Better knowledge, for instance, on the patterns and drivers of local erosion, would enable local people to increase their adaptive capacities and strategies vis-a`vis the natural sources of instability so that alternative options for action may surface for the local residents.

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

323

In both villages, local knowledge systems appear as a central element in the search for desirable social-ecological co-evolution patterns.

21.4

Sustainability Visions and Indicators

21.4.1 Introduction Marion Glaser and Martha Fontalvo-Herazo In order to support the governance and management of social-ecological dynamics, an integrated and comprehensive vision of an ecologically and socially sustainable future for the regional mangrove-people complex was needed. This required: 1. The participatory and – ideally consensual – envisioning of desirable future(s) for the SES; and 2. A long-term monitoring system to ascertain whether important system variables are developing in desirable directions. To pursue these objectives, we initially assessed the societal interpretations and aims relating to possible sustainable future(s) for our mangrove SES. For this, major stakeholders in our system, such as the MADAM natural and social scientists, environmental administrators and political decision-makers, ecosystem users and other groups interested in or affected by coastal management, were interviewed on an individual, household or focus group basis (Glaser et al. 2006). Table 21.2 shows the diversity of coastal management objectives identified for the major coastal management stakeholders. Stakeholders0 rationalities and their objectives differed greatly and Table 21.2 necessarily presents a simplified picture: The number of stakeholder groups in our social-ecological system was much larger than listed,8 and differences in coastal management objectives existed not only between but also within stakeholder groups. For instance, the attitudes and perceptions between MADAM scientists from different disciplines differed. While some included the satisfaction of human basic needs, participation and human well-being into their definition of the goals of sustainable system management, most natural scientists associated sustainable mangrove management exclusively with levels of resource exploitation. Social scientists, on the other hand, saw the objectives of sustainable management as

8

Seven spatial/organizational levels with over 30 different stakeholder groups, each with a specific combination of coastal management priorities, were identified over the 10-year duration of the research program in a long-term iterative process (Glaser and da Silva Oliveira 2004).

324

M. Glaser et al.

Table 21.2 Stakeholder-specific sustainable coastal management objectives for the mangrove coast of Braganc¸a, Para´, North Brazil Stakeholder Sustainable coastal management aims in the research area MADAM program Create new system knowledge, protect mangrove ecosystem GTZ/ProRenda Decentralize administrative structures, create alternative incomes for poor rural residents United Nations Development Program Sustainable coastal resource management (UNDP) through the promotion of income alternatives for mangrove-adjacent communities Federal University of Para´ State (UFPA) Build human capacity, generate new knowledge Federal environmental authority Effectively administrate federal protected areas (IBAMA/CNPT) State Development Bank (BASA) Effective funding of production Federal administration of land (DPU) Administrate territories, prevent extractive use of mangrove areas National and State Associations of Improve quality of life, productivity and social Fisherfolk (MONAPE and MOPEPA) organization of coastal fisherfolk Socio-environmental NGOs (e.g. FASE) Organize poor coastal dwellers, promote environmentally sound production Ministry of Health of Para´ State (SESPA) Improve public health in coastal areas Ministry of the Environment of Para´ State Administrate nature and protected areas, promote (SECTAM) environmental education and research Military police of Para´ Implement nature protection laws and guarantee public safety Municipal school office Provide primary and environmental education Municipal agriculture and environment Promote agricultural development and office environmental protection Fisherfolk cooperative (Colonia dos Improve access of fisherfolk to old age and health Pescadores) security Rural workers’ cooperative (Sindicato dos Improve quality of life, productivity and social Trabalhadores Rurais) organization of rural workers Local social-environmental NGO Promote social organization and environmental (AMOVMARE´) education of mangrove-adjacent rural populations

related to the level of human quality of life, to a balance between human needs and the limits of nature, equity and justice and to the need for participatory structures. Over time, the scientists of the various disciplines learnt much from each other and the MADAM researcher team generated an important base for productive interdisciplinary research. However, even after years under the umbrella of the same research program and working within the same geographical region, the definition of sustainable coastal management remained somewhat contested between the natural and social scientists on the program (for more details, see Glaser et al. 2006).

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

325

21.4.2 Case Study: An Indicator System as an Integrative and Transdisciplinary Tool To ensure transparency and to facilitate the management of social-ecological dynamics according to agreed objectives, the ability to monitor change over time is essential. In the context of our work on the north Brazilian coast, the first step was to define sustainability in the specific regional social, ecological and cultural context of our regional SES taking into account the diversity of stakeholder viewpoints shown in Table 21.2. Sustainability thresholds then needed to be established, and the combined functioning of the social-ecological system needed to be regularly monitored and analyzed. We thus started the development of an integrated indicator system for the Caete´ mangrove SES (Fontalvo-Herazo 2004; FontalvoHerazo et al. 2007). Sustainability criteria were our second step towards indicator development. Good indicators provide relevant information about important changes to guide future decisions and actions. Indicators are valuable when spatial and temporal coverage is sufficient to allow meaningful comparisons. Central criteria for a good indicator are: scientific validity and reliability of statistical measurement, resonance with decision-makers and ecosystem users, responsiveness to change, and data availability with affordable inputs (Ehler 2003; Bossel 1999). Many early ecosystem and coastal management indicator systems were resource-specific and eco-centric (e.g., IUCN 2001). Thus, human “consumption” was only interpreted as “ecosystem predation”, and “social” indicators reflected an exclusive orientation towards the preservation of ecosystems in their “pristine” state (Kumari 1995; Ruffino and Isaac 1995). Human well-being, on the other hand, was frequently omitted from management objectives in such approaches. Data on people’s perceptions of and responses to changes in their natural environment and equity and distribution issues surrounding the regulation of human uses of nature were scarce to nonexistent (Bradbury and Rayner 2002). Our indicator development for the sustainable management of our mangrove SES (Fontalvo-Herazo 2004; Fontalvo-Herazo et al. 2007) aimed to move beyond this. Visions of a desirable future and a set of corresponding coastal management indicators were developed by natural and social scientists as well as by different village groups (of men and women, with different occupations) in an iterative, participatory way. Participatory workshops for problem identification, future visioning and interactive indicator development were held with villagers. This was followed by a period of technical indicator development which also used a system-based “filtering process” to reduce the indicators to a manageable number without losing the ability to assess the fulfillment of central stakeholder concerns and of social-ecological system viability conditions (Fontalvo-Herazo 2004; Glaser 2007; Fontalvo-Herazo et al. 2007). The resulting set of indicators was merged into an incipient SES monitoring system.

326

M. Glaser et al. Principle (First level)

Criteria (Second level) High education, culture and recreation are accessible to everybody

Well - being of coastal population is assured

Governance performance is assured

Population health and social security are guaranteed

•Percentage of people studying •School facilities •Number of cultural and recreation events

•Health resources and facilities •Number of malaria and dengue cases •Mortality rate under 5 years old

Basic infra-structure facilities are guaranteed

•Density of people by house rooms •House quality

Empowerment of coastal population is guaranteed

•Number people that belongs to an association •Participation in research and technology projects •Citizen participation

Social conditions

•Mean family income •Employment rate •Number of inhabitants

Governance mechanisms are established

•Formulated and implemented local development plans ratio •Village representation at municipality council

Coastal ecosystem status is maintain

•Land use change over time •Species diversity •Percentage of mangroves trees area cut •Percentage of secondary forest trees area cut •Percentage of seasonal field wetlands area burned •Percent of beaches and dunes area •Coastal and marine protected areas •Fisheries grounds •Mangrove areas differentated by mangrove types

Ecosystem use is sustainable

•Mangrove extractivisim •Number of crabs collected •Quantity of fish specles landing at the villages

Coastal ecosystems integrity is assured

Economic diversification is needed Economic structure is assured

Indicator (Third level)

•Number of income alternatives

Production level is maintained

•Amount of agriculture products for sale •Financial support to small producers and fishermen •Amount of fish for sale •Amount of crabs for sale

Market structure is guaranteed

•Number of commercial products •Number producers selling directly to the market

Fig. 21.5 Indicators for monitoring the sustainability of a mangrove-based social-ecological system (adapted from Fontalvo-Herazo 2004 and Fontalvo-Herazo et al. 2007)

Our case study process and the resulting indicator system (Fig. 21.5)9 are thus prototypes for a generic approach to the participatory visioning and monitoring of sustainable SES futures. Our assumption was that stakeholders whose decisions determine the future of their natural and social environment need a central role in

9

Figure 20.5 shows just the social dimension which was elaborated by all stakeholders groups.

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

327

determining what this future might be and how its attainment might be assessed. Monitoring systems and the data they provide have an impact on system governance and management. Our hypothesis was that a participatively designed and implemented monitoring system will empower SES stakeholders to take an active part in sustainable management. In our study area, the continuing self-organization of previously disorganized village and mangrove producers beyond the time horizons of the MADAM program confirmed this hypothesis (Glaser and Diele 2004; Glaser 2007). The aim of implementing participatory SES monitoring on a long-term basis remained far from achieved in our study region in late 2005, by the end of the MADAM program. However, local residents in mangrove-adjacent areas, crab collectors and fisherfolk, honey collectors, and also young researchers at the regional university had clearly gone through important learning processes related to local self-organization for coastal management. Village development programs had moved onto a self-sustaining basis, villages were maintaining their own support networks (including a community radio, a number of associations and training programs), and regional associations of mangrove stakeholders were forming and continuously increasing the scope of their activities and ambitions, accompanied by the supporting analysis of regionally based academics. Different uses of the locally rooted integrated sustainability monitoring system that we propose are possible. The “star diagram” or “sustainability wheel” in Fig. 21.6, for instance, achieved the visualization, in an integrated comparable manner, of some central biological, social and economic indicators on the sustainable development of the crab fishery in our study region over a 4-year period (1998–2001). As indicator values move towards the outer edges of the four data axes,10 sustainability increases. The choice of indicators in Fig. 21.6 is problem-based and transdisciplinary, i.e. it includes the priorities of nonacademic stakeholders as well as social and natural science criteria. Thresholds of concern distinguish those dimensions of sustainability that remain within the absolute limits of SES viability and sustainability from those that do not. For instance, the crab fishery income passed its threshold of concern in our monitoring period when full-time work no longer provided incomes equivalent to the minimum wage level to the crab collector.11

21.4.3 The Social Dimension The most striking difference between the indicator system we developed in our case study and many other indicator systems of sustainable coastal management 10

More data axes are possible, so that such visualizations could take the shape of a star or a wheel with many “spokes” or even an amoeba as Bell and Morse (1999) have named such dynamic integrated presentations of multi-faceted change. 11 Brazilian minimum wages are based on the regularly assessed cost of a “basket” of goods for the satisfaction of basic local needs.

328

M. Glaser et al.

concerns the relative importance of the social dimension of ecosystem management. The “social” in our case study system is an integral and coevolving part of the social-ecological system. In our participatory analyses, a clear primacy of social aspects emerged: 50 of the 77 indicators of “a desirable future for the region and community” which were developed by residents related to social issues. This should not surprise us: as local system stakeholders gain a voice in ecosystem management, their priorities are likely to move center stage. While the ordering of social priorities differed between men and women in our case study SES,12 all village respondents emphasized health, transport and communications infrastructure, political representation and better education as required for local communities to maintain a viable mangrove ecosystem. In contrast to this, early social indicators merely monitored the human consumption of ecosystem goods and services. For this, bio-physical indicators – for instance on rates of fish reproduction or tree growth – were combined with social data such as human population size and growth and resource use rates. Effective ecosystem management, however, also needs to include the priorities of those who depend on the ecosystem. Indicators on social-ecological sustainability therefore also need to provide information on social sustainability. Transdisciplinary approaches which involve the active participation of different system actors Social School attendance ( %) 100

2001

1998

90

Sustainability thresholds 80 70 1,8

1.4

Economic Crab fishery income (% of minimum wage)

1,2

0,8

0,6

6

7

8

60 80 110

9

10

Biological Capture size of U. cordatus crabs(cm)

140

170 200

Economic Productivity of labour (crabs per man day)

Fig. 21.6 “Star diagram” or “sustainability wheel” for the visual integration of indicators

12

On gender issues and changing female room for manoeuvre in the MADAM program area, see Henrique (2005).

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

329

Box 21.1. Interlinked Vicious Circles: Social-Ecological Dynamics in a Mangrove-Based SES Rural people living near the mangroves around Braganc¸a see low family income, little formal education, high risks to health, and a decrease in natural resources availability as their major problems. For many young people and most women, this goes hand in hand with the lack of employment. This increases their dependence on mangrove resources. Most of those who work in the mangroves do not have their own means of transporting products to markets and lack the resources (including public social insurance and formal lines of credit) to cope in difficult times such as illness in the family. In exchange for support in such times of emergency, they therefore accept lower prices for their products from “patron” traders on a one-to-one basis. As their parents only earn near minimum survival incomes, many children drop out of school to contribute to family subsistence. Few manage to finish secondary school and none get to university. Lack of technical training further reduces occupational options. As a result, most rural youth remain unemployed or – unwillingly – take up their parents’ occupations in fishing or mangrove crab collection. This pushes successive generations into the same dependence on the traders of mangrove products and, with growing numbers of local people, it also increases the pressure on local mangroves. Alcoholism, prostitution and drugs consumption are becoming more common among the young. Health services, social security, and sanitary conditions are deficient. Many female-headed households can only afford one meal per day. Especially for poorer local households, mangrove areas are an important emergency buffer, supplying food and other resources. . .

and which combine ecological with economic and social criteria are required to understand the linkages between socio-economic and ecological dynamics. For our mangrove SES, some of the more important social-ecological linkages are described in Box 21.1. Our study SES thus displays a number of “vicious circles” of interlinked, mutually re-enforcing social-ecological dynamics surrounding mangrove use, which clearly undermine social, economic and ecological sustainability. These vicious circles contain important feedback loops between different mangrove resources and mangrove-based livelihoods. Sustainability indicators will improve our understanding of these dynamics over time and prepare the ground for more efficient governance and management. They will also allow an assessment of the various social, institutional, economic and ecological aspects of sustainability and their interconnections. If indicators reflect stakeholder interests, participatory longterm monitoring should support sustainable development. In the final stage of MADAM work in our mangrove SES, we assessed which local organizations might be interested and able to monitor different selected indicators on a regular basis. Residents’ associations, local public health officials

330

M. Glaser et al.

and youth groups, and school classes were identified. Time will tell whether this participatory monitoring survives over the longer term. However, the indicator system developed for our mangrove SES combines the different priorities and knowledge types of a wide circle of system stakeholders, including local residents and researchers, who jointly defined problems, objectives and criteria, dealt with conflicts, and combined their relevant forms of knowledge. The research results of the MADAM program were thus brought into a longer-term inter- and transdisciplinary knowledge generation process. The indicator system lays the foundations for system stakeholders to pursue improved outcomes according to transparently developed sustainability criteria.

21.5

Participatory Management of Coastal Ecosystems

Marion Glaser and Rosete da Silva Oliveira In one of the best known articles on natural resource management, Hardin (1968) argues that common access to a resource always leads to its degradation since the benefits of (over)use accrue in proportion to resource use, while the costs of (over) use are shared equally between all users. Hardin overlooked that social capacities can prevent such “tragedies of the commons”. Since then, the social mechanisms which promote cooperation in the commons have been investigated by hundreds of researchers.13 The clear differentiation between open access and common pool resource management regimes has become crucial in these investigations, and the appropriate degree of participation under different economic, social and ecological conditions has become a central theme. It is agreed today that effective participatory resource management regimes need to be closely matched to regional and local social, economic and ecological conditions (Cinner and Aswani 2007; Ferse et al. 2010; Glaser et al. 2010). However, the active participation of local stakeholders (i.e. community management) is no panacea. Thus the concept of comanagement gained ground. Co-management refers to arrangements where “. . .responsibility for resource management is shared between government and user groups” (Sen and Nielsen 1996). Different degrees of participation for natural resource users are possible under co-management ranging from between “being informed of decisions already taken” to “actively taking and implementing decisions” (sensu Arnstein 1969). Rights and duties in resource management can thus be distributed in different ways between public authority, user groups and other actors implying a range of possible interactions between public and private co-managers under co-management. Co-management has become the main approach in the increasingly common situations of open resource access with a growing human population, rising 13

See homepage of the International Association for the Study of the Commons (IASC).

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

331

unemployment, new technologies, and increasing demand for nature’s products and services. Such conditions also prevail in our study area on the north Brazilian coast. At the same time, the survival strategies of rural people are also still highly dependent on the subsistence goods and services provided by the mangrove ecosystem. Growing commercial pressures on the ecosystem and the failure of coercive, top-down conservation approaches are increasingly obvious features of our system. There are strong and consistent contrasts between the aims of legislation and the outcomes in land use, fisheries and the use of mangrove trees. The implementation of environmental legislation that was developed and “handed down” by the State has failed, and unsustainable outcomes prevail. Inequity with particularly negative social sustainability implications, such as the criminalization of firewood collection by the poor, a lack of social protection for logging workers, and hostility of locals towards conservation authorities have resulted from top-down resource governance and management regimes which ignore local social needs. The Brazilian ban on the use of mangrove wood and its counterproductive on-the-ground outcomes provide a particularly stark example of the negative coevolution of top-down environmental legislation, resource use and social outcomes14: Current Brazilian legislation totally prohibits the use of any mangrove flora. However, on top of a diverse range of mangrove wood uses (Glaser et al. 2003), about 90% of rural residents in mangrove-adjacent areas rely on mangrove wood as their only option for domestic cooking.15 Our investigations concluded that even the best equipped public authority is unlikely to stop the cutting of mangrove trees if it ignores the socio-economic needs of local populations associated with the use of this resource. In accordance with studies elsewhere (Ruddle 1989; Pomeroy 1995; Johannes 1998), dynamics in our north Brazilian mangrove SES thus confirm that resource management which portrays people only as “predators”, without recognizing legitimate livelihood objectives behind human ecosystem uses, has poor implementation prospects. The lack of user participation in the planning and implementation of mangrove management legislation has caused implementation failures for numerous legal restrictions on the exploitation of natural resources. The conclusion that “the laws are good but implementation has to be enforced” needs to be revised where institutional development has occurred in a top-down manner. Without a voice in the development of rules for the conservation and management of their own immediate natural livelihood support system, ecosystem-dependent rural communities have and will continue to devise and implement their own alternative rules and practices. 14

For other examples, see Glaser and Diele (2004) and Chap. 17 on the management of the mangrove crab Ucides cordatus; and Krause and Glaser 2003 on the regulation of coastal land use in our mangrove SES. 15 This result is not reflected in Fig. 21.2 since interviewed rural dwellers do not tend to admit these practices which, though locally considered legitimate, are against the law. Our subsequent, more unconventional investigations allowed us to obtain a more realistic approximation to the real rate of mangrove wood use in the study area (Glaser et al. 2003).

332

M. Glaser et al.

In the context of considerable empowerment of traditional natural resource users (e.g., rubber tappers, indigenous forest dwellers) since the late 1980s (Simonian 2000; Simonian and Glaser 2002), this conclusion has come to be shared by many Brazilian coastal policy-makers and legislators. Under the national constitution of 1988, user participation in the co-management of natural resources thus became possible under the RESEX concept (Allegretti 1994, p. 19). The RESEX explicitly breaks with the top-down, centralized “keep people out” ecosystem conservation which had thus far characterized Brazilian conservation policy. For some experts (Diegues 2007), the RESEX creates an “alternative map of conservation in Brazil”. Its historical roots lie in the late 1980s, when extractive workers, mainly rubber-tappers from the Brazilian Amazon forest, struggled for local resource rights so that they could stop the encroachment of commercial logging companies and instead continue to use ecosystem resources in locally determined socially and ecologically sustainable ways (Allegretti 1989, 1994; Mendes 1989; Menezes 1989). The formal RESEX concept was a response by the Brazilian federal government to growing local and regional social organization, resistance from rainforest people to the loss of their customary rights as well as to growing international criticism of the destruction of tropical forests and local livelihoods. The introduction of the RESEX approach to Brazilian coastal areas and thus the inclusion of coastal fisherfolk began in the late 1990s. The objectives of the RESEX are: 1. 2. 3. 4.

To protect nature through sustainable utilization To improve the living conditions for the traditional users of natural resources To integrate traditional users into national development processes To promote participation in the sense of users deciding and acting together

Under RESEX co-management, local communities develop local resource management rules and development plans and then form regional associations for wider conservation and development purposes. The federal conservation authority (IBAMA) passes the regionally developed rule framework through a national level approval process and assumes management responsibilities in case of serious infractions, which local communities cannot handle on their own. This bottom-up process of institutional development offers considerable scope for the integration of local priorities. Indeed, the formation of coastal RESEX is only undertaken at the request of local communities, which usually occurs in the context of a natural resource-related conflict or problem. Coastal RESEX belongs to a “second generation” of co-management initiatives in Brazil. In contrast to the “first generation” rainforest RESEX, they are generated within a formal institutional environment, which offers various forms of public support to rural residents. Coastal RESEX, such as that in our study area, are also implemented in much more densely populated, economically and socially more diverse environments than the pioneer rainforest initiatives with their ethnically homogenous isolated and internally cohesive small groups of forest populations (Simonian and Glaser 2002).

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

333

The development of coastal co-management under the RESEX approach in Brazil is an ongoing process. While new local and regional governance and management potentials are apparent, there are also a number of possible problems. The major limitations of the approach in our study area were: Resource scarcity at the state and community level: Beyond the question of who gains from and who bears the costs of coastal co-management, the reoccurring problem of scarce financial and human resources for management at the public and at the community level raises the question: when does co-management become “unaffordable” to community co-managers? A lack of funding for transport and personnel responsible for the RESEX arrangements leaves communities alone with problems they cannot solve (e.g., the encroachment of powerful outsiders) and endangers the chances of successful co-management. Weak public knowledge: There was a need for better public information on the rights and duties associated with the RESEX concept, on legal options and on the limitations of the co-management concept posed by pre-existing legislations. Weak community organization and leadership: Communities themselves identified the inability of local players to assume leadership positions in co-management as a limiting factor and they initiated planning for leadership training. Future success in local self-organization may well hinge on these learning initiatives. Obstacles from powerful official players: The RESEX model was developed in the context of a power struggle between federal and state institutions in Brazil (Glaser and Krause 2005). As public agencies compete for spheres of influence, they eliminate each others’ successes in the process and create serious obstacles to successful co-management. At the time of our study, a reportedly very rare period of cooperative relationships in coastal management existed between the environmental authorities of State of Para´ (SECTAM) and those at the federal level (IBAMA). This allowed local communities to develop their capacities for participatory management under the federal RESEX concept without obstruction from the state level. However, such cooperative relations between state and federal authorities depend on good interpersonal relations between the concerned federal and state officeholders and are extremely vulnerable to political change. Our hesitantly optimistic conclusion is that, during such temporary “windows of opportunity”, local resource co-managers might be sufficiently capacitated and empowered to defend their management rights in periods when federal and state authorities are less cooperative.

21.5.1 Outlook In our co-management case study, alliances in support of coastal co-management had formed behind different, relatively powerful political/ideological interests. Local agents and groups then rallied behind these as client constituencies. Under the coastal RESEX model, the State delegates management responsibilities to local ecosystem users while these gain the right to formulate, but also the obligation to

334

M. Glaser et al.

implement and monitor resource management rules. A particularly important incentive for system users to participate in mangrove management in our study area was the right to exclude outsiders from access to mangrove resources. However, this right, which local users assume to be contained in the RESEX comanagement model, stands in contradiction to other, older Brazilian environmental legislation. The resolution of such ambiguities and increased transparency on the rights of local co-managers now under way will greatly improve the prospects of mangrove co-management in Brazil.

21.6

Scenarios for Mangrove-Based Social-Ecological Systems: Linking Futures Across Stakeholder Rationalities

Gesche Krause and Marion Glaser Since it involves multiple actors with multiple views and interests, the participatory management of social-ecological dynamics needs to be supported by the formulation of group visions of possible and of desirable futures. Scenario-building is a tool for this task. It helps to reveal underlying ambiguities, to improve the transparency and outcomes of local management decisions, and it promotes the understanding of the rationalities and choices of the multiple actors involved.

21.6.1 Setting Up Social-Ecological Scenarios Alternative management options for social-ecological systems can be explored via the participatory development of scenarios. Scenarios are descriptors of what the future could be, rather than predictions of what it will be (Walker et al. 2002). The participatory exploration of plausible futures discloses stakeholder-specific decision-making rationalities. Such scenarios allow for an emphasis on societal values, perceptions, networks and system user priorities (Manuel-Navarrete et al. 2004; Hosang et al. 2005; Bodin et al. 2006). It also allows the exploration of alternative livelihood options. Moreover, ecological feedbacks and management policies influence local livelihood options and can intensify the human modification of ecosystems, creating a vicious circle of poverty and ecosystem degradation (see Box 21.1). The scenario approach focuses on the causes of changes that matter for sustainable management. Such causes of change could be, e.g., ecosystem shifts, which can occur rapidly but may alter the availability of ecosystem services for generations. Therefore they pose special challenges for long-term thinking (Carpenter et al. 2006). In our scenario study, we used interviews with key stewards, local leaders and outcomes of several workshops at village level as well as natural science findings to

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

335

help identify the main contrasts between major possible futures. Although many imaginable futures might be explored, scenarios are most powerful as a small set of clear and strikingly different options (van der Heijden 1996). Assumptions about the future tend to cluster. Therefore, we developed three coherent scenarios in which we placed a special focus on management policies. We based the scenarios on a mixture of qualitative and quantitative analyses of various complex dynamic components of our SES and expert opinions on their interactions. The management scenarios, which will described in more detail below, were (1) “business as usual”, the system polarization scenario, (2) the “worst case”, or threshold shifts scenario which indicates transformation into an unsustainable system, and (3) the “desirable” or adaptive change scenario towards sustainability. The management scenarios focused on two main system drivers: (1) changes in legislation, and (2) the enforcement of mangrove use bans. Here, we explore how management conditions generate SES outcomes. We consider the different rationalities of various mangrove ecosystem user groups and the potential outcomes of their choices of ecosystem use under different management and governance regimes, including various interpretations of social equity in adaptive management. A detailed discussion is found in Krause (2002) and Krause et al. (2008).

21.6.2 Possible Futures of the Mangrove-Based SES 21.6.2.1

SES Boundaries and System Actors

The spatial boundaries of our SES follow the geographic definitions given in Chaps. 1 and 9. As elsewhere in the tropics, our SES agents are mainly children and adolescents, with over 63% of the total population less than 20 years old (IBGE 2000). Most SES residents rely on subsistence production. Land, mangrove and institutional dynamics are the three central arenas where natural and social dynamics co-evolve. A broad definition of institutions, derived from the sociological and anthropological literature, is taken here. They comprise formal and informal norms and rules of the system users. In our SES, crab collectors, fisherfolk, traders, tourists, female-headed households, and other stakeholders interact with each other and the mangrove system on different levels (Glaser 2003). In order to reduce the complexity of this scenario analysis, the following discussion considers only the rationalities of “rich” and “poor” local agents. The majority of the agents are risk takers who live within the SES boundaries. However, an increasing number of agents live outside the local SES in the adjacent town of Braganc¸a or even in Bele´m, the capital of Para´ State. Changes in the local SES do not threaten their livelihood, SES-related risk for them relates to loss of luxury assets, such as weekend housing (personal interviews with residents, 1997–2001). Ecosystem user knowledge, defined as the factor that provides human societies with the means to deal with their natural environment and to actively

336

M. Glaser et al.

modify it (Holling et al. 1998), is not well established in the area. This can be attributed partly to the increasing number of agents who live for the most part of their lives outside the SES, and therefore are not well acquainted with the natural system processes, but also to the rather recent immigration of the local agents in the early 1970s. However, local SES actors share several informal communication arenas: churches, fishing/agricultural associations and football grounds. The football ground is a central component of contemporary rural social capital in Brazil (Mitlewski, personal communication) and local churches play a key role for the degree of social cohesion, social networking and conflict in rural areas (Krause 2002; Krause et al. 2008).

21.6.2.2

Scenario 1: System Polarization

Our first scenario assumes that the observed trends persist; the mangrove ecosystem remains viable, but it is subject to strong exploitation. Management policies are not enforced. Continuous coastal migration and tourism growth create mutual dynamics of self-organized relationships without any prospect of consolidation or management. Such mutual relationships also occur between mangrove productivity and fisher folk survival. The State of Para´ supports ongoing change. Its regulatory efforts are mirrored for instance in the establishment of a permanent health post in the fishing village of Ajuruteua and by a public safety police patrol during peak seasons. Management efforts are mainly directed towards public safety, but aggravate local social disparities as they increase the unequal distribution of incomes and opportunities (Glaser and Krause 2005). The social polarization under illegality continues (Krause et al. 2008). Those agents who are well-connected within the political arena maintain “client” relationships with the local decision-makers. These system dynamics can be described by the adaptive cycle model, in which the temporal changes of a system proceed through phases of growth (r), conservation (k), release (Ω), and reorganization (a) (Gunderson and Holling 2002). The current system characteristic of our SES can be linked to the “r-phase” in which the brief initial stage of development, the r stage, consists of the rapid exploitation and garnering of resources by system components. Since “ecologically illiterate” actors predominate, the SES displays a very limited social memory. Social memory is understood here as the accumulation of experiences concerning management practices and rules-in-use that ensures the capacity of social systems to monitor changes and to build institutions that enable appropriate responses to environmental signals (McIntosh 2000). As newcomers to the system have little option but to use mangrove resources unsustainably, socioeconomic inequality is worsened and the SES may move beyond the limits of sustainability. A case in point here is the intensive use of the mangrove crab (U. cordatus): This does not threaten biological sustainability, but the social sustainability of crab collectors’ households, as the financial returns from crab

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

337

collection decrease below the legal minimum wage which covers the crab collectors’ basic needs (see Fig. 21.6 and Glaser and Diele 2004). At this threshold of concern, territorial disputes between crab collectors increase. This economic overfishing, caused by “business-as-usual” behavior, intensifies polarization and disparities between mangrove crab collectors and other groups. Social polarization, enforced by lack of political representation and formal social rights (e.g. old-age pensions) for crab collectors are a key feature of this scenario. The widening social disparities could eventually propel the SES into a threshold shift scenario. 21.6.2.3

Scenario 2: Threshold Shifts

Management policies are a key influence on the dynamics of this scenario – they can either be poorly designed with respect to ecological and social system thresholds, or attempt to rigorously enforce locally unrealistic policy objectives. For instance, for the latter, if both the State of Para´ and the Federal Government rigorously enforce the legislative objective of nonuse of mangroves as a reaction to the recognition that key mangrove resources have moved beyond a threshold of concern, then social sustainability thresholds are passed. Such a management measure would aim to avoid a system shift towards an ecologically unsustainable situation. The State might confront elites (e.g., tourist entrepreneurs, land speculators and logging companies) and take action against legislative abuses by these powerful groups. The motivation for strict law enforcement may be to warn other mangrove users to respect the law. This may support the ecological sustainability of the system. On the other hand, the resulting de facto expropriation of local communities would cause current livelihood strategies to disintegrate. Thus, a “worst case” scenario for the social system results. However, since it still remains possible to access the mangroves for visiting purposes, such a change of policy may also open novel opportunities. For example, boat access to mangroves for eco-tourism could be established, providing local fishermen with new means of income generation. However, the authorities must provide human resources and support in the initial stages of such an alternative use scenario. At the same time, the mangroves would experience a phase of renewal and self-reorganization, as ecosystem resilience is likely to remain intact. If successfully implemented, this would be a powerful management measure of the State, to achieve a more even distribution of economic wealth. However, since State and other elites are closely intermeshed, this type of change is rather unlikely. The threshold shifts scenario underlines the importance of better understanding the underlying rationalities human resource use as drivers of management decisions and SES dynamics. 21.6.2.4

Scenario 3: Adaptive Change

Our adaptive change scenario assumes that cooperation and community-focused values gain prominence in management efforts prior to a system crisis. System

338

M. Glaser et al.

agents’ norms and values are sustainability-oriented and go beyond mere competition to maximize individual gains (Krause et al. 2008). Our central hypothesis for this scenario is that human reflective capacity is sufficient to establish locally rooted adaptive management and that this can generate a positive SES trajectory. In this scenario, the Brazilian Federal Government overrules the current objective of the State of Para´ on the nonuse of mangroves by supporting the RESEX (Reservas Extrativistas) program. Under the RESEX, the government delegates user-rights to local coastal system users (see Sect. 21.5). This window of opportunity could generate local co-management schemes under the Federal Environmental Agency, IBAMA. This co-management approach focuses on the extent and quality of user participation in mangrove management and facilitates a more equitable distribution of benefits. The federal authorities would support local co-managers financially and technically to develop a mangrove utilization plan. The right to formulate rules locally is a central incentive for local participation. Cooperatives are established by different mangrove producers. Social structures and communication improve. Social capital strengthens and the locally perceived value of mangroves increases. In the long term, local capacity building is improved by schools and professional education. Regional vocational schools are established where mechanics, sales personnel, builders, cooks and nurses are trained. Local access to sources of income other than mangroves thus increases. The University of Braganc¸a intensifies environmental education. This enhances the attractiveness of local mangroves and beaches and contributes to community health. Local agents learn to better reflect on how their behavior influences environmental risks to livelihoods and how innovation generates positive livelihood outcomes. Participatory ecosystem and community management are essential in achieving this desirable trajectory for our SES. Yet, this may be undermined by low social memory and community cohesion in the villages of our SES, caused by high rates of immigration into the region and a range of other factors. Social capacities to cooperate, reflect and adapt are often underestimated in natural resource management (Glaser 2006). The potentials of participation and self-governance have been successfully explored and implemented in the Amazonian rainforest (Simonian and Glaser 2002). The transfer of such a management approach to the coast, although beset with a range of difficulties (Glaser and da Silva Oliveira 2004), is therefore a realistic scenario.

21.6.3 Inclusion of “the Social Dimension” as Central Element of Sustainability in SES The MADAM research area is an excellent place to compare different coastal and ecological processes and their interactions with various types of human resource use in a rather confined SES setting. Thus, what are the lessons of this short scenario exercise for decision-making in an integrated coastal management framework?

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

339

Clearly, in the particular SES presented here, there is ample need to facilitate collective action for local common-pool resource management supported by the administrations on Municipal, State and Federal level. The scenarios show that, next to the ongoing natural processes, the behavior and choices of different actor groups strongly determine the future of the SES. In which future ways the SES is likely to proceed is strongly based on the options the local agents perceive. For all types of human activities, the ecosystem will set the limits to how large an activity can grow in relation to its resource base. Within this ecosystem framework, the social system with all its institutional and cultural aspects will determine how fast an activity is approaching these limits. This highlights the emerging demand for complex system analysis, which moves away from the spatial-sectoral disposition of ecosystem analysis to more realistic, dynamic and integrative studies of coastal systems. So far, the major costs of environmental degradation are borne to a disproportionally high degree by economically disadvantaged groups (Krause and Glaser 2003). This undermines social justice and causes social tension (Krause et al. 2008). The inability of poor crab collector families to engage in alternative income generation activities is an example. Crab collectors remain locked in the vicious circle of degradation of their very own resources. In the current SES trajectory, there are several thresholds of concern towards the stage where a “worst case” scenario may occur. In contrast, it is surprisingly difficult to imagine a trajectory redirecting the current social polarization trends directly towards a sustainable, resilient SES future. The scenario exercise implies that poverty mitigation is of priority over ecological concerns in this case study. Thus, the social structure has to be viewed as an active component of the SES. The type of social organization of a coastal community may play a similarly important role as an indicator for the state of a SES as the important ecological processes. Therefore, oversimplified definitions of local “community” are at the root of many co-management failures. The importance of social capital and of social and economic diversity and divisions in diverse community types is often ignored and communities are simplistically conceptualised (Davis and Bailey 1996). As every society is as poor as its poorest members (Lakshmi and Rajagopalan 2000), successful management strategies must acknowledge that poverty is both a cause and a consequence of short-term survival strategies and limited long-term perspectives. Especially in the tropical coastal areas, approaches need to keep pace with strong population growth, migration of ecological illiterate agents into the SESs, and with weak institutional enforcement of regulated resource use. The life-support values of many coastal SESs are at risk of being driven to threshold limits, where system shifts are likely. Conflicts over the control of natural resources, inevitably rise when direct and active participation of local agents does not take place so that the groups that retain their traditional access to resources, may find them less productive in the long run. There is therefore a need to establish clearer user-rights regimes for common-pool resources, as well as a well-defined, integrated scientific framework to support active participation and co-management in coastal areas.

340

M. Glaser et al.

Local ability to predict and to affect local life circumstances, to rely on trusted networks in the community and the personal skills to participate, are prerequisites to successful system co-management (Jentoft 2000). Scenarios, such as those in this section, can help decision-makers to assess the positive and negative implications of alternative management regimes. Our scenarios are not forecasts or predictions, but plausible stories about how the future might unfold under alternative management strategies. They illuminate the possible consequences of different policies on the co-evolutionary interaction between stakeholder rationales and values and “their” associated natural systems.

21.7

Appropriate Knowledge for a Mangrove-Based SocialEcological System: Outlook for Future Work

Marion Glaser The major task of science is knowledge generation. The relevance of that knowledge to societal problems is a central challenge. This chapter closes by proposing seven challenges to a science which aims to support the sustainable governance and management of human–nature relations. These challenges were identified during the 10-year research on our mangrove-based social-ecological system on the north Brazilian coast. They are, however, also of more general relevance for the governance and management of the increasingly tightly interlinked social-ecological systems on current-day tropical coasts. Most tropical coastal regions are characterized by rural poverty and natural resource dependence of increasing numbers of resident human populations. Thus, throughout the different sections of this chapter, our mangrove research area, which had originally been selected for study as relatively “pristine” (i.e. untouched by human activities), appears as a tightly interlinked co-evolving social-ecological system whose development path is determined by human–nature interactions. Thus, the great majority of residents on and near the Braganc¸a mangrove peninsula depend on the mangrove ecosystem for important economic, social and cultural aspects of their lives including monetary and subsistence income. Our study area is therefore clearly part of the “mangrove cultures” of coastal north Brazil. The priorities, rationalities, values and knowledge of the direct users of our mangrove ecosystem centrally determine its development trajectory. Moreover, ecosystem changes also feed back into the change trajectory of the social system thus generating coevolving social-ecological change patterns. The seven challenges discussed below all require scientists to identify and generate knowledge and to connect different forms and types of knowledge with each other.

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

341

21.7.1 Identify Undesirable Feedback Loops and Modes of Addressing Them In the language of systems theory and cybernetics, we have shown that the connections between social and natural components of the system display important feedback loops. There is, for instance, strong mutual enforcement between the lack of any social rights (pensions, healthcare, labor rights) for crab collectors and mangrove loggers and the increased resource exploitation levels these groups engage in to secure their survival with the help of patron–client relationships with product traders. A similar “vicious circle” of undesirable feedback loops surrounds the children of mangrove producers. Child labor in the mangroves such as collection of crabs, line fishing, wood collection and bird hunting supports poor mangrove producer families’ subsistence livelihoods; children find the daily food for their families while the crabs, fish or mangrove logs which their parents collect are sold for monetary needs. The products collected by parents are usually marketed through patron
client ties where producers receive low prices in exchange for basic security from their patrons. To complement insufficient family incomes, mangrove producers’ children are therefore responsible for providing daily family meals with their subsistence gathering and fishing activities. These children are therefore hardly able to attend school. Their consequently low levels of formal education leave them little option later but to – unwillingly16 – follow their parents into mangrove production (i.e. crab collection, fishing and/or charcoal-making). This vicious circle renders successive generations of unwilling mangrove producers vulnerable to the same poverty trap. Such “positive”17 feedback loops within our mangrove-based social-ecological system and their undesirable social and ecological implications need to be addressed at the root, as is being currently attempted by the Brazilian bolsa familia which financially supports poor families in return for their children’s regular school attendance.18 To increase the chances of breaking the type of dysfunctional social-ecological circle described here, science needs to provide political decision-makers with a comprehensive understanding of the rationales behind human behaviors towards nature and of non-human nature’s reaction to these. Novel interdisciplinary research approaches, such as participatory multi-agent modeling are being developed for this (Wilson et al. 2007; Yan et al. 2008; Glaser 2011).

16

In over 100 interviews with crab collectors conducted by the MADAM socio-economic research team in the year 2000, none wanted their offspring to become crab collectors but almost all said they themselves collected crabs since no other options had been available to them. However, the great majority of crab collectors’ sons were starting in their fathers’ occupation. 17 Speaking strictly in systems language here. 18 While it is beyond the scope of this chapter to discuss these programs, they been reported to significantly reduce child labor and increase school attendance (Yap et al. 2001).

342

M. Glaser et al.

21.7.2 Assign Adequate Values to Poverty Alleviation Functions The mangrove ecosystem is of central importance for the residents of our study region. Our quantitative findings on the subsistence and commercial value of the mangrove ecosystem were enforced by local residents’ statements such as “The mangrove preserves life in the village,” or “When there is nothing, we go there.” “It is our money tree.” and “We don’t have other work, we are all crab collectors”. The mangrove ecosystem decreases poverty and urban-bound migration from coastal areas, it increases household productivity and promotes social resilience. Indirectly, even criminality, another major alternative to destitution in our case study environment, is presumably mitigated by poverty alleviation through the use of mangrove resources. For the above reasons, we argue that, when poor human populations are heavily and directly dependent on ecosystem resources, the classic concept of economic value underrates the social functions of the mangrove ecosystem. Where the ecosystem assumes major poverty alleviation functions, only the explicit valuation and weighting of this essential social dimension can provide the basis for adequate management. In the context of widespread rural poverty such as in north Brazil, natural resource management needs to carefully take into account subsistence production, i.e., those ecosystem uses which never pass through the market but which nonetheless are central to local populations’ livelihoods. We have shown in Sect. 21.2 that, although commercially exploited species such as the U. cordatus possess a high monetary value, the subsistence production of this species, together with that of a range of minor mangrove resources (listed in Fig. 21.2) is essential for the food security of the majority of poor residents in north Brazilian coastal mangrove villages. In fact the monetary value, and even more so, the poverty alleviation impact of the subsistence production of the mangrove ecosystem surpasses its commercial importance. Mangrove management should therefore pay special attention to subsistence production including the “hunger-abatement foods for the poor” of mangrove origin which are neither marketed nor readily listed in open interviews19 but which buffer the most marginal rural coastal households in situations of absolute need. Not undermining the basis of livelihood security for the poorest SES stakeholders will need to be part of any viable management approach. While even the most holistic ecosystem management cannot achieve all social development objectives, the management of mangroves in our study area needs to at least maintain the current social and poverty alleviation functions of the ecosystem, or to identify workable alternatives for the mangrove-adjacent human populations. That this is not simple humanitarianism is shown by the large number of failed eco-centric approaches to the management of human
nature relationships (Brandon and Wells 1992; Ghimire and Pimbert 1997; Glaser et al. 2003; Glaser 2006) These demonstrate that even the achievement of purely ecological objectives 19

Interviewees tended to be ashamed of admitting to be resorting to the consumption of some products (as one interviewee stated proudly “This is poor people’s food, we do not eat it”).

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

343

of ecosystem management will be undermined if the social functions of the ecosystems in question are simply lost without countermeasures or compensation to those affected. As human populations increase in coastal areas and demands for ecosystem resources from often distant markets grow, mangrove management without social objectives will either have disastrous implications for the economic and social sustainability of the majority of ecosystem-dependent households or remain unimplemented and ineffective. Sustainable and feasible ecosystem management strategies need to recognize the social functions of ecosystem in their particular socio-economic context, value them according to agreed priorities, and take this into account in planning. Identification and valuation are thus clearly part of problem-focused scientific knowledge production and an essential input into the planning and decision-making.

21.7.3 Develop Alternatives to Unsustainable Forms of Behavior Towards Nature Our studies over the years repeatedly and showed that working in the mangroves is not what the overwhelming majority of those who rely on it desire for the future. Crab collectors and other mangrove workers were clearly stating that they hoped for a life less dependent on the physically hard and economically unrewarding extraction of mangrove resources for themselves and for their children. Such local aspirations for change are an opportunity for mangrove governance and management. Within a holistic approach to sustainable coastal life, better quality education and social infrastructure, in combination with scholarships and technical training for village children, would enable households in mangrove-adjacent areas to break the various vicious social-ecological circles surrounding their mangrove dependence which force generations of local people to continue resource extraction from the mangroves against their expressed desires. Addressing the explicit local wish to reduce economic dependence on the mangrove ecosystem would improve socio-economic as well as ecological perspectives. Education on its own will not generate employment and income alternatives in rural areas, but local people prioritize better quality education because without it, the prospects for local youth are bleaker still.

21.7.4 Recognize, Evaluate and Link Knowledge Systems An exclusive focus on the social functions of ecosystems does not ensure sustainable social-ecological dynamics. Natural and social science as well as knowledge from outside the sciences need to be interlinked to create useful synergies.

344

M. Glaser et al.

Local user knowledge is often based on decades or even generations of experience with the behavior of ecosystems. However, even where ecosystem use by heavily nature-dependent subsistence populations predominates, good quality local user knowledge cannot be assumed. Our research on the co-evolution of erosion and local livelihoods (Sect. 21.3) shows evidence of “ecological illiteracy” among ecosystem users in our study area: With a high number of migrants who arrived over the past generation from inland agricultural areas, many local users of the mangrove coast had little knowledge of coastal morphological dynamics including the consequences of their own, often deleterious interactions with it. Since migration is high to most coastal regions across the globe, this is unlikely to be an isolated phenomenon. Failures in ecosystem management in areas with high immigration are more likely, the more the recent arrivals lack experience of living with the type of ecosystems predominant in their new environment. Lacunae in local knowledge can lead to local misconceptions about environmental dynamics and its interactions with human behavior among those whose day-to-day decisions centrally determine the pathways of social-ecological system dynamics. A societally responsible science needs to point out gaps in local knowledge systems and provide the tools to remedy them. New important roles for scientists in the construction of functioning communication between scientists and ecosystem users and in the facilitation of collective learning processes are implied in this. In our example, the “ecological illiteracy” of migrant populations in our coastal SES vis-a`-vis their coastal environments can be addressed by well-designed co-management approaches which include the transfer of systemic knowledge about erosion and its natural and anthropogenic causes from scientists to local “neo-traditional” populations. We have also demonstrated that patterns of social-ecological change can vary substantially within small geographical areas. The origins of such differences can be traced to the different rationales and actions of human agent types in interaction with their dynamic natural environments. Multi-agent-based modeling approaches offer a promising and as yet underexplored way to understand human–nature dynamics in mangrove and other coastal SES. The modeling of the actions and interactions of human and nonhuman living agents is the central innovative feature here. Moreover, the iterative and participatory development and use of multi-agent models can also encourage discussions and interactions among system stakeholders, serve as a didactic instrument in management, and act as a tool for linking different systems of knowledge (Castella et al. 2005; Glaser 2010).

21.7.5 Build an Effective Social Base Our experience in north Brazil shows that long-term research such as the MADAM program can spark off interlinked and complementary processes of knowledge generation and support iterative, adaptive co-management. Inclusive and democratic approaches can support self-organizational dynamics which enable local and

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

345

other stakeholders to jointly identify problems and desirable visions of the future. This appears to be a precondition for moving human–nature systems onto more desirable trajectories of change. Long-term research which has the flexibility which was enjoyed by the 10-year MADAM program to respond to (at least some of) the priorities of local stakeholders can contribute to desirable social-ecological change. Another necessary component of sustainable social-ecological dynamics is the fulfillment of a range of social functions in management. For a social-ecological system, this requires both boundaries and bridging organizations (Olsson et al. 2007) as well as people to assume local key stewardship functions such as trust building, local social coordination and maintenance of information flows (Olsson et al. 2004a). Our case example of Tamatateua with the charismatic key steward in Sect. 21.4 shows how the initial stage of local capacity building, which often relies on key individual leaders, can, in a learning-oriented community, be succeeded by a distribution of stewardship functions among members of ecosystem user communities. Resilience management is a central feature of sustainability-enhancing work in a complex system under conditions of uncertainty. From a social-ecological systems point of view, resilience is system ability to reorganize and renew itself without loss of functions and diversity when disturbed (Alcorn et al. 2003), and while building learning and adaptation capacities (Berkes et al. 2003). Resilience resides in self-reinforcing mechanisms. Social-ecological systems may be slow to change due to their mutually stabilizing self-reinforcing mechanisms (Olsson et al. 2004b). In the context of low predictability, nonlinearity and surprise in complex social-ecological systems, increasing the resilience of desirable system configurations supports either the protection of agreed upon sustainability functions or it enables appropriate adaptation or transformation processes where these are deemed necessary or unavoidable. Scientists need to identify the sources of social and ecological resilience and to identify resilience-supporting measures where ecosystems are to be protected and resilience-weakening measures where undesirable system shifts such as large-scale deforestation or impoverishing ecosystem-dependent populations need to be addressed.

21.7.6 Collectively Envision Desirable Futures Our sections on envisioning and monitoring sustainable developments (Sect. 21.4) and on the participatory management of coastal ecosystems (Sect. 21.5) show that it is necessary and possible to obtain transparency, and even agreement, on the desired functions and outcomes of SES dynamics. Participatory methods for the definition of indicators confront ecosystem users with their current situations and likely futures and stimulate local inventiveness on how to work towards more desirable futures. Given participatory settings with clearly agreed rights and responsibilities for local ecosystem users, sustainable social-ecological systems may thus be successfully pursued with local and regional level system user

346

M. Glaser et al.

participation. Section 21.6 explores a number of plausible future scenarios for our mangrove SES and outlines the management decisions needed to attain them. These alternative scenarios focus on the causes behind events and trajectories of change. Management and governance is then called upon to strengthen the resilience of those structures and processes which produce desirable and sustainable socialecological outcomes and to weaken the resilience of those which generate undesirable outcomes. The “scenario section” (21.6) also emphasizes the importance of group-specific rationalities of different types of mangrove ecosystem users, and the way these depend on the organization of everyday life, on culture and the development of group identities and on communication. We thus interpret human behavior towards nature as the outcome of context-dependent individual choices which greatly depend on the particular social and economic position of the agents in question. This approach allows us to include both the classical dimensions of social inequality such as income and education, as well as cultural and ethical dimensions of resource use rationales such as aesthetics, world views and norms, into deliberations on governance and management. All these dimensions of human–nature systems are subject to interactions between individuals and society, and they are dynamic over time. Our analysis shows that human behavior towards ecosystems and their resources can differ between groups and individuals and that it includes innovative and conservative as well as sustainable and unsustainable aspects. Resource use decisions by individuals, households, companies and other ecosystem stakeholders evolve iteratively and in conjunction with ecological processes. An integrated systems view thus contributes appropriate knowledge for the management of human–nature relations. To promote integrated social-ecological management with such knowledge, innovative knowledge-sharing and decision-making networks and platforms are needed. With our action-oriented research on the north Brazilian coast, we have shown how such platforms can be supported at the local and regional level. Further work needs to be done to upscale such bottom-up approaches to the analysis of local human–nature dynamics to higher institutional scales, which link to decision-makers’ priorities at those levels.

21.7.7 Achieve Relevance and Sustainability at Multiple Scales from the Local to the Global Throughout our 10 years of research work on the north coast of Brazil, the focal scale of our analysis has been the Braganc¸a SES, that is the local and regional spatial level (Fig. 21.1). Our investigations focused on the active stakeholders at this focal level and on the rationales behind their behavior toward the mangrove ecosystem. The local and regional specificity of such analyses is indispensable if governance and management are to be relevant to the problems most pressing to primary stakeholders and decision-makers.

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

347

However, to support the sustainable governance and management of global social-ecological dynamics, analyses of stakeholder values, rationales and behaviors, and of their co-evolutionary interaction with natural dynamics, are also essential at higher spatial levels up to and including the earth system level. Global environmental change (Glaeser 2002), earth system analysis (Schellnhuber 1999; Schellnhuber et al. 2004) and global climate change drive local and regional processes of change in multiple ways. To become relevant to small and medium scale decision-making, global change needs to be analyzed in its specific manifestations at the local and regional level. The creative combination of diverse forms and systems of knowledge, including local, regional, academic and user knowledge, is now needed to develop the regionally specific but globally “nested” adaptive governance and management approaches which are required to persue sustainable futures for ecosystems and humanity who depends on them. Acknowledgements Important members of the MADAM socio-economic research group (1996–2005) were Neila Cabral, Drs Aquiles Simo˜es, Iran Veiga and Adagenor Ribeiro from the Federal University of Para´, Lucinaldo Blandtt, Cidiane Soares Tatiana Santiago, Dyane´s Cunha, Ana-Claudia Duarte, Rosangela Macedo, Rozilda Henrique Drude, Freya Klose and Do¨rte Segebart. Our research group metamorphosed into various forms between 1996 and 2005. In cooperation with residents of the villages of Abacateiro, Acarajo´, Aciteua, Ame´rica, Bacuriteua, Camuta´, Caratateua, Furo Grande, Japeta´, Jiquiri, Patalino, Ponta do Urumajo´, Praia de Ajuruteua, Retiro, Rio Grande, Tacuandeua, Tamatateua, Treme, Vila Bonifa´cio, Vila de Ajuruteua and Vila que Era, we worked on obtaining better common understandings of human–nature relations and produced this and other publications (for Portuguese language, see Glaser et al. 2005). Special thanks are due to Prof Dr Gotthilf Hempel whose concise and insightful comments and great sense of language made this chapter much more readable.

References Alcorn JB, Bamba J, Masiun S, Natalia I, Royo AG (2003) Keeping ecological resilience afloat in cross-scale turbulence: an indigenous social movement navigates change in Indonesia. In: Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (eds) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 299–327 Allegretti MA (1989) Reservas extrativistas: uma proposta de desenvolvimento da floresta Amazoˆnica. Para´ Desenvolvimento 25:3–29 Allegretti MA (1994) Reservas Extrativistas: Parametros para uma Politica de Desenvolvimento Sustenata´vel na Amazonia. In: Arnt R (ed) O Destino da floresta: reservas extrativistas e desenvolvimento sustenta´vel na Amazoˆnia. Relume-Dumara´, Rio de Janeiro, pp 17–47 Anderies JM, Walker BH, Kinzig AP (2006) Fifteen weddings and a funeral: case studies and resilience-based management. Ecol Soc 11:21 Arnstein SR (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Inst Plann 35:215–224 Bell S, Morse S (1999) Sustainability indicators. Measuring the immeasurable. Earthscan, London Berkes F, Folke C (2002) Back to the future: ecosystem dynamics and local knowledge. In: Gunderson LH, Holling CS (eds) Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 121–146 Berkes F, Colding J, Folke C (2003) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

348

M. Glaser et al.

¨ , Crona B, Ernstson H (2006) Social networks in natural resource management: what is Bodin O there to learn from a structural perspective? Ecol Soc 11:2 Bossel H (1999) Indicators for sustainable development: theory, method, applications. A report to the Balaton Group. International Institute for Sustainable Development, Winnipeg Bradbury J, Rayner S (2002) Reconciling the irreconcilable. In: Abaza H, Baranzini A (eds) Implementing sustainable development. Integrated assessment and participatory decisionmaking processes. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, UK, pp 15–31 Brandon K, Wells M (1992) Planning for people and parks: design dilemmas. World Dev 20(4):557–570 Cabral N (1997) O turismo como agente de formac¸a˜o e transformac¸a˜o so´cio-econoˆmica no nordeste do Para´: caso de Ajuruteua. TCC thesis, University of Para´, Bele´m Carpenter SR, Bennett EM, Peterson GD (2006) Scenarios for ecosystem services: an overview. Ecol Soc 11(1):29 Castella JC, Trung TN, Boissau S (2005) Participatory simulation of land-use changes in the northern mountains of Vietnam: the combined use of an agent-based model, a role-playing game, and a geographic information system. Ecol Soc 10(1):27. http://www.ecologyandsociety. org/vol10/iss1/art27 Cinner JE, Aswani S (2007) Integrating customary management into marine conservation. Biol Conserv 140:201–216 Conklin HC (1961) The study of shifting cultivation. Curr Anthropol 2:27–61 Crutzen P (2002) Geology of mankind. Nature 415:23 Crutzen PJ, Stoermer EF (2000) The “Anthropocene”. Global Change Newsl 41:12–13 Davis A, Bailey C (1996) Common in custom, uncommon in advantage: common property, local elites, and alternative approaches to fisheries management. Soc Nat Resour 9:251–265 Diegues CA (2007) Ecological and cultural complexities of artisanal fisheries in Brazil: the role of marine reserves for sustainable use. Paper delivered at the ECOSUMMIT 2007, Beijing Diele K (2000) Life history and population structure of the exploited mangrove crab Ucides cordatus cordatus (Linnaeus, 1763) (Decapoda: Brachyura) in the Caete´ estuary, North Brazil. PhD thesis, University of Bremen, Bremen. ZMT Contribution vol 9 Ehler CN (2003) Indicators to measure governance performance in integrated coastal management. Ocean Coast Manage 46:335–345 Ferse SCA, Ma´n˜ez-Costa M, Schwerdtner Ma´n˜ez K, Adhuri DS, Glaser M (2010) Alliens, not aliens: increasing the role of local communities in MPA implementation. Environ Conserv 37:23–34 Fischlowitz E, Engel MH (1969) Internal migration in Brazil. Int Migr Rev 3:36–46 Folke C, Carpenter S, Elmquist T, Gunderson L, Holling CS, Walker B (2002) Resilience and sustainable development: building adaptive capacity in a world of transformations. Ambio 31:437–440 Fontalvo-Herazo ML (2004). Design of a participative indicator system as a tool for integrated coastal management at Braganc¸a peninsula, Para´, State North Brazil. MSc thesis, University of Bremen, Bremen Fontalvo-Herazo ML, Glaser M, Lobato-Ribeiro A (2007) A method for the participatory design of an indicator system as a tool for local coastal management. Ocean Coast Manag 50:779–795 Fox J, Truong DM, Rambo AT, Tuyen NP, Cuc LT, Leisz S (2000) Shifting cultivation: a new old Paradigm for managing tropical forests. Bioscience 50:521–528 Ghimire KB, Pimbert MP (eds) (1997) Social change and conservation, environmental politics and impacts of national parks and protected areas. Earthscan, London Glaeser B (2002) The changing human–nature relationships in the context of global environmental change. In: Timmerman P (ed) Encyclopaedia for global environmental change, vol 5, Social and economic dimensions of global environmental change. Wiley, Chichester, pp 11–24 Glaser M (2003) Ecosystem, local economy and social sustainability: a case study of Caete´ estuary, North Brazil. Wetl Ecol Manag 11:265–272 Glaser M (2006) The social dimension in ecosystem management: strengths and weaknesses of human–nature mind maps. Hum Ecol Rev 13:122–142

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

349

Glaser M (2007) The ‘Social’ in ecosystem management: theoretical and empirical dimensions. Habilitationsschrift (Professorial qualification), Faculty for Agriculture and Horticulture, Humboldt University of Berlin, Berlin Glaser M (2011) Transdisciplinary multi-agent modelling for social-ecological systems analysis: achievements and potentials. In: Glaser M, Krause G, Ratter B, Welp M (eds) Human–nature interaction in the anthropocene: potentials of social-ecological systems analysis Glaser M, da Silva Oliveira R (2004) The prospects for co-management of mangrove ecosystems on the North Brazilian coast – whose rights, whose duties and whose priorities? Nat Resour Forum 28:224–233 Glaser M, Diele K (2004) Asymmetric outcomes: assessing the biological, economic and social sustainability of a mangrove crab fishery, Ucides cordatus (Ocypodidae) in North Brazil. Ecol Econ 49:361–373 Glaser M, Grasso M (1998) Fisheries of a mangrove estuary: dynamics and interrelationships between economy and ecosystem in Caete´ Bay, North-Eastern Para´, Brazil. Bol Mus Para´ Emilio Goeldi Se´r Zool 14:95–125 Glaser M, Krause G (2005) Integriertes K€ ustenmanagement im fo¨deralen Brasilien: Institutionelle, sektorale und legale Strukturen und die Grenzen der partizipativen Planung. In: Glaeser B (ed) ¨ kologie und Mensch – Integriertes K€ K€uste, O ustenmanagement als Instrument nachhaltiger Entwicklung, vol 2, Edition Humano¨kologie. Oekom, M€ unchen, pp 37–54 Glaser M, Berger U, Macedo R (2003) Local vulnerability as an advantage: mangrove forest management in Para´ state, North Brazil under conditions of illegality. Reg Environ Change 3:162–172 Glaser M, Cabral N, Lobato Ribeiro A (eds) (2005) Gente, ambiente e pesquisa: manejo transdisciplinar no manguezal. UFPA/NUMA, Bele´m Glaser M, Krause G, Saint-Paul U, Harms J, Boehme G (2006) Fach€ ubergreifende Nachhaltigkeitsforschung: Das brasilianisch-deutsche Mangroven-Projekt MADAM. In: Glaeser B (ed) Fach€ubergreifende Nachhaltigkeitsforschung. Stand und Visionen am Beispiel nationaler und internationaler Forscherverb€ unde, vol 4, Edition Humano¨kologie. Oekom, M€ unchen, pp 265–297 Glaser M, Baitoningsih W, Ferse SCA, Nell M, Deswandi R (2010) Whose sustainability? Topdown participation and emergent rules in protected area management in Indonesia. Mar Policy 34:1215–1225 Grasso M (2000) Economic valuation of mangrove ecosystem: understanding the linkages between local communities and mangroves, Caete River Bay (PA, Brazil). PhD thesis, University of Maryland, College Park, USA Gunderson LH, Holling CS (2002) Panarchy: understanding transformations in human and natural systems. Island Press, Washington, DC Hardin G (1968) The tragedy of the commons. Science 162:1243–1248 Henkel K (1994) Agrarstrukturwandel und Migration im o¨stlichen Amazonien (Para´, Brasilien). T€ubinger Beitr€age zur Geographischen Lateinamerikaforschung, Heft 11, T€ ubingen Henrique R (2005) A mulher e as relac¸o˜es de geˆnero em comunidades pesqueiras: O caso de Acarajo´, (Braganc¸a, Para´). In: Glaser M, Cabral N, Ribeiro AL (eds) Gente, ambiente e pesquisa: Manejo transdisciplinar no manguezal. UFPA/NUMA, Bele´m, pp 139–154 Hiroaka M (1995) Land use changes in the Amazon estuary. Glob Environ Change 5:323–336 Holling CS, Berkes F, Folke C (1998) Science, sustainability and resource management. In: Berkes F, Folke C (eds) Linking social and ecological systems. Management practices and social mechanisms for building resilience. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 342–362 Hosang M, Fr€anzle S, Markert B (2005) Die emotionale Matrix. Grundlagen f€ ur gesellschaftlichen Wandel und Innovation. Oekom, M€ unchen IBGE (2000) Censo Demogra´fico de 2000. Brası´lia, Brazil IUCN (The World Conservation Union) (2001) Analytical framework for assessing factors that influence sustainability of uses of wild living natural resources. IUCN SUSG Technical Advisory Committee of the

350

M. Glaser et al.

IUCN Species Survival Commission. http://iucn.org/themes/ssc/susg/anafra.html. Accessed 15 Nov 2005 IUCN (2001) Analytic framework for assessing factors that influence sustainability of uses of wild living natural resources. IUCN SUSG technical Advisory Committee of the IUCN Species Survival Commission. http://iucn,org/themes/SSC/susg/anafra.html. Accessed 15 Nov 2005 Jentoft S (2000) The community: a missing link of fisheries management. Mar Policy 24:53–59 Johannes RE (1998) Government-supported, village-based management of marine resources in Vanuatu. Ocean Coast Manag 40:165–186 Kingdon JW (1995) Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. Harper Collins, New York Klose F (2004) R€aumliche und sozio-o¨konomische Dynamik in der Landwirtschaft am Beispiel von Tamatateua, Para´, Brasilien. MSc thesis, University of Bonn, Bonn Klose F, Krause G, Glaser M, da Silva OR, Bock M, Hanatschek R (2005) Manguezais como uma zona economica de tampa˜o: dinaˆmica especial e socioeconomica num estua´rio no Norte brasileiro. In: Glaser M, Cabral N, Lobato Ribeiro A (eds) Gente, ambiente e pesquisa: manejo transdisciplinar no manguezal. UFPA/NUMA, Bele´m, pp 87–103 Krause G (2002) Coastal morphology, mangrove ecosystem and society in North Brazil. Elements determining options and resilience. PhD thesis, University of Stockholm, Stockholm Krause G, Glaser M (2003) Co-evolving geomorphological and socio-economic dynamics in a coastal fishing village of the Braganc¸a region (Para´, North Brazil). Ocean Coast Manag 46:859–874 Krause G, Soares C (2004) Analysis of beach morphodynamics on the Bragantinian mangrove peninsula (Para´, Northern Brazil) as prerequisite for coastal zone management recommendations. Geomorphology 60:225–239 Krause G, Schories D, Glaser M, Diele K (2001) Spatial patterns of mangrove ecosystems: the Bragantinian mangroves of Northern Brazil (Braganc¸a, Para´). Ecotropica 7:93–107 Krause G, Bock M, Weiers S, Braun G (2004) Mapping land-cover and mangrove structures with remote sensing techniques – a contribution to a synoptic GIS in support of coastal management in North Brazil. Environ Manag 34:429–440 Krause G, Glaser M, Lange H (2008) Soziale Gerechtigkeit in der K€ ustenzone: Szenarien zum Mangrovenmanagement in Para´ (Nordbrasilien). In: Bruckmeier K, Serbser W (eds) Ethik und Umweltpolitik. Humano¨kologische Positionen und Perspektiven. Oekom, M€ unchen, pp 324–348 Kumari K (1995) An environmental and economic assessment of forest management options: a case study of Malaysia. Environ Econ Ser Paper 20 Lakshmi A, Rajagopalan R (2000) Socio-economic implications of coastal zone degradation and their mitigation: a case study from coastal villages in India. Ocean Coast Manag 43:749–762 Lebel L, Anderies JM, Campbell B, Folke C, Hatfield-Dodds S, Hughes TP, Wilson J (2006) Governance and the capacity to manage resilience in regional social-ecological systems. Ecol Soc 11(1):19 Maneschy MC (1995) Ajuruteua. Uma comunidade pesqueria ameac¸ada. University of Para´, Bele´m Manuel-Navarrete D, Kay JJ, Dolderman D (2004) Ecological integrity discourses. Hum Ecol Rev 11:215–229 McIntosh RJ (2000) Social memory in Mande. In: McIntosh RJ, Tainter JA, McIntosh SK (eds) The way the wind blows: climate, history, and human action. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 141–180 Mendes C (1989) Fight for the forest: Chico Mendes in his own words. Latin American Bureau, London Menezes MA (1989) As reservas extrativistas na luta de Chico Mendes. Reforma Agra´ria 191:17–25 Nordstrom KF, Jackson NL, Bruno MS, Butts HA (2002) Municipal initiatives for managing dunes in coastal residential areas: a case study of Avalon, New Jersey, USA. Geomorphology 47:137–152

21

Mangroves and People: A Social-Ecological System

351

Olsson P, Folke C, Hahn T (2004a) Social-ecological transformation for ecosystem management: the development of adaptive co-management of a wetland landscape in southern Sweden. Ecol Soc 9(4):2 Olsson P, Folke C, Berkes F (2004b) Adaptive co-management for building resilience in socialecological systems. Environ Manag 34:75–90 Olsson P, Folke C, Galaz V, Hahn T, Schultz L (2007) Enhancing the fit through adaptive comanagement: creating and maintaining bridging functions for matching scales in the Kristianstads Vattenrike biosphere reserve, Sweden. Ecol Soc 12(1):28 Pomeroy RS (1995) Community-based and co-management institutions for sustainable coastal fisheries management in Southeast Asia. Ocean Coast Manag 25:143–162 Raskin P, Banuri T, Gallopı´n G, Gutman P, Hammond A, Kates R, Swart R (2002) Great transition. The promise and lure of the times ahead. A report of the Global Scenario Group. Stockholm Environmental Institute, Boston Ruddle K (1989) Solving the common-property dilemma: village fisheries rights in Japanese coastal waters. In: Berkes F (ed) Common property resources: ecology and communitybased sustainable resources. Belhaven, London, pp 168–184 Ruffino ML, Isaac VJ (1995) Life cycle and biological parameters of several Brazilian Amazon fish species. NAGA: The WorldFish Center Quarterly 18:41–45 Schellnhuber HJ (1999) ‘Earth system’ analysis and the second Copernican revolution. Nature 402:19–23 Schellnhuber HJ, Crutzen P, Clark W, Held H (2004) Earth system analysis for sustainability. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, p 468 Sen S, Nielsen JR (1996) Fisheries co-management: a comparative analysis. Mar Policy 20:405–418 Short AD (1999) Handbook of beach and shoreface morphodynamics. Wiley, Chichester Simonian LT (2000) Polı´ticas pu´blicas, desenvolvimento sustenta´vel e recursos naturais em a´reas de reservas na Amazoˆnia (Public policies, sustainable development and natural resources in protected areas in the Amazon). In: Coelho MCM (ed) Estado e polı´ticas pu´blicas na Amazonia. CEJUP, Bele´m, pp 9–53 Simonian LTL, Glaser M (2002) Extractive reserves and the question of sustainability: rectent experiences in North of Brazil. In: Lieberei R, Bianchi H, Boehm V, Reisdorf C (eds) Neotropical ecosystems. Proceedings of the German-Brazilian Workshop, Hamburg 2000. GKSS Forschungszentrum Geesthacht, Geesthacht, pp 767–776 van der Heijden K (1996) Scenarios: the art of strategic conversation. Wiley, New York Walker B, Carpenter S, Anderies J, Abel N, Cumming GS, Janssen M, Lebel L, Norberg J, Peterson JD, Pritchard R (2002) Resilience management in social-ecological systems: a working hypothesis for a participatory approach. Conserv Ecol 6(1):14 Wilson J, Yan L, Wilson C (2007) The precursors of governance in the Maine lobster fishery. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 1004(39):15212–15217 Yan L, Wilson J, Wilson C (2008) Modeling the precursors of governance in the Maine lobster fishery. In: Chapman RL (ed) Creating sustainability within our midst: challenges for the 21st century. Pace University Press, New York, pp 85–98 Yap Y-T, Sedlacek G, Orazem P (2001) Limiting child labor through behavior-based income transfers: an experimental evaluation of the PETI Program in rural Brazil. World Bank, Washington, DC