Mangrove Ecosystem Service Values and Methodological Approaches to Valuation: Where Do We Stand?

Mangroves, seagrass meadows, and salt marshes, collectively termed “Blue Forests,” are counted among the most valuable and productive coastal ecosystems on the planet. A recent literature review of the Blue Forest valuation research identified mangroves as the most frequently analyzed of these ecosystems, yet the literature demonstrates several deficits in terms of geographic location of studies, methods used to value the services, and most notably, a lack of valuation for cultural services. To better understand this, we analyzed the studies dealing specifically with mangroves from the original literature review to quantify what has been valued, where, by which methods, and the variation in the published values. We then use this information to synthesize our current level of knowledge on the type and value of services provided by mangroves, discuss data gaps, and address specifically the collection of data relevant to cultural ecosystem services (CES). Our results shed light on two principle issues affecting the mangrove valuation literature: overuse of benefit transfer in valuing mangrove ecosystem services and a lack of attention paid to the CES that mangroves provide. The mangrove valuation literature is not yet robust, lacking estimates of many ecosystem services, including CES, such as spiritual and aesthetic value. Most published studies focus on a small selection of ecosystem services based on the availability of benefit transfer values and the ability to easily measure values with market prices. Thus, many ecosystem services that cannot be valued monetarily, but that are often equally important to local communities, are ignored. Given the wide range of ecosystem services mangroves provide and the variety of valuation methods that need to be collectively employed, we argue that doing valuation studies well requires a multi-disciplinary approach, bringing together anthropologists, social scientists, ecologists and economists. Thoughtfully and thoroughly including the local stakeholders in valuation studies and the resultant policy discussions leads to a more holistic understanding of the services mangroves provide, and viable solutions with an increase in local willingness to act in accordance with those solutions

Ground-truthing social vulnerability indices of Alaska fishing communities

Community vulnerability is increasingly evaluated through quantitative social indices, typically developed using secondary data sources rather than primary data collection. It is necessary to understand the validity of these indices if they will be used to inform policy and decision making. This paper presents a ground-truthing effort to validate quantitative indices that characterize the well-being of Alaska fishing communities. We utilized ethnographic data collected from 13 representative communities and a capital assets framework to ground-truth the indices, in which qualitative ranks of vulnerability were compared against quantitative indices. The majority (73.8%) of ranks were in complete or moderate agreement and the results indicate that most of the indices are representative of community vulnerability; yet some variables utilized to create the indices could be modified to better reflect realities in Alaska. Indices of commercial fishery engagement and reliance appeared to be more reliable than socio-economic indicators, particularly for smaller fishing communities. We also confirmed that the indices do not capture political, or ecological factors that affect levels of community vulnerability. We conclude that quantitative indices of community vulnerability are useful rapid assessment tools; however, they should be validated, and complemented with ethnographic data prior to their implementation as policy making and management tools

Working Group on Social Indicators (WGSOCIAL; outputs from 2023 meeting)

The Working Group on Social Indicators seeks to improve the integration of social sciences in ICES Ecosystem Overviews and Integrated Ecosystem Assessments through the development of culturally relevant social indicators. To advance progress on this, WGSOCIAL has broadly discussed the context of the social di-mension of fishing. This has led to coordination with other working groups within ICES and outside ICES with the Scientific, Technical and Economic Committee for Fisheries Expert Working Group Social and with the Regional Coordination Group on Economics Issues. WGSOCIAL develops methods for qualitative and quantitative approaches. It has also continued providing input to the updating of ecosystem overviews finalizing those of the Celtic Seas and North Sea. WGSOCIAL has advanced work on the definition and context of trade-offs and trade-off analy sis in the social context of fisheries. To assess social and cultural significance of commercial fishing, WGSOCIAL members have advanced case studies in a number of ICES Member Countries: two regions in Spain, Portugal, the Netherlands, Sweden and Norway. Each case study tackles a different approach with a different context. In addition, WGSOCIAL has advanced work on the topic of what a fishing community is and how the definition can change in different contexts. Lastly, WGSOCIAL has developed a database of social and economic indicators for evaluating fisheries management and identified a comprehensive list of categories and sub-categories of social and economic indicators that could be used to structure the selection of social indicators that inform fisheries managers. As a nest step, WGSOCIAL will identify key social indicators and data gaps for selected ICES Member Countries with recommendations for approaches to close the gaps. To support integrated socio-ecological evaluations in ecosystem-based management, WGSOCIAL has contributed to the development of work on the impacts of wind farms on com-mercial fishing activities. This work will continue in collaboration with WGECON, with whom several parallel terms of reference (ToRs) are shared. WGSOCIAL decided to transfer to the new ICES Human Dimension Steering Group.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Effects of management objectives and rules on marine conservation outcomes

Understanding the relative effectiveness and enabling conditions of different area-based management tools is essential for supporting efforts that achieve positive biodiversity outcomes as area-based conservation coverage increases to meet newly set international targets. We used data from a coastal social–ecological monitoring program in 6 Indo-Pacific countries to analyze whether social, ecological, and economic objectives and specific management rules (temporal closures, fishing gear-specific, species-specific restrictions) were associated with coral reef fish biomass above sustainable yield levels across different types of area-based management tools (i.e., comparing those designated as marine protected areas [MPAs] with other types of area-based management). All categories of objectives, multiple combinations of rules, and all types of area-based management had some sites that were able to sustain high levels of reef fish biomass—a key measure for coral reef functioning—compared with reference sites with no area-based management. Yet, the same management types also had sites with low biomass. As governments advance their commitments to the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework and the target to conserve 30% of the planet's land and oceans by 2030, we found that although different types of management can be effective, most of the managed areas in our study regions did not meet criteria for effectiveness. These findings underscore the importance of strong management and governance of managed areas and the need to measure the ecological impact of area-based management rather than counting areas because of their designation

Using Socioeconomic and Fisheries Involvement Indices to Understand Alaska Fishing Community Well-Being

Over recent years, fisheries managers have been going through a paradigm shift to prioritize ecosystem-based management. With this comes an increasing need to better understand the impacts of fisheries management decisions on the social well-being and sustainability of fishing communities. This article summarizes research aimed at using secondary data to develop socioeconomic and fisheries involvement indices to measure objective fishing community well-being in Alaska. Data from more than 300 communities in Alaska were used to create a database of socioeconomic and fisheries involvement indices of objective well-being and adaptability for Alaska communities dependent on marine resources. Each index was developed using a principal components factor analysis to assess the relative position of each community compared to all other communities in Alaska. We find that creating performance measures, such as the indices presented here, provides a useful way to track the status of socioeconomic conditions and fisheries involvement by communities over time

Fisheries allocations for socioeconomic development: Lessons learned from the Western Alaska Community Development Quota (CDQ) program

International audienceThis paper presents an institutional analysis of the Western Alaska CDQ Program.Lessons learned for a CDQ-type program in the Arctic and elsewhere are presented.Allocations amongst CDQ groups should be stable, transparent and equitable.Evaluations of CDQ-type groups should be evolutionary and contextual.Residents should continually inform the groups' objectives and development strategies

Social Networks of Alaska Fishing Communities

International audienceFishing community social networks function as channels for transfer of fishery knowledge, resources, and business transactions that help mitigate risks and shocks associated with altered access to fishery resources. Research on such networks in Alaska is limited despite their cultural importance and community reliance on fisheries. We contribute to scholarship of fishery social networks by assessing Alaska fishing community perspectives of challenges related to fisheries policy and management, and the existing social networks that aid in overcoming these challenges. Our findings show that the greatest challenges fishing communities face pertaining to fishery management are high costs of participating in catch share programs, restricted subsistence fishing activity due to decline in salmon, and complex regulations. Social networks exist for coping with these challenges; fishery information, and resources such as food, fuel and medicines are shared between communities. However, networks for accessing fishery support services are centralized in fewer larger communities and hubs such as Anchorage. Smaller and remote communities are the most compromised in this regard given the distance they must travel to access fishery support services. Leveraging social networks for sharing resources and improving fishery support services in smaller communities will increase their adaptive capacity and ability to maintain participation in Alaska fisheries

Do Active Participation Measures Help Fishermen Retain Fishing Privileges?

In numerous fisheries management programs, managers have implemented measures to ensure that the benefits of the fishery accrue to those who are actively fishing. Although active participation measures are common in fisheries management, there has been limited research on these measures. This study highlights the variety of objectives that motivate the development of active participation measures and how they have been implemented. We examine the application of these measures in four case study fisheries management programsthe Alaska Halibut and Sablefish Individual Fishing Quota, the Pacific Coast Sablefish Permit Stacking, the Bering Sea and Aleutian Islands Crab Rationalization, and the Alaska State Limited Entry programsand, based on the experiences in these programs, provide recommendations for instituting active participation measures in other management programs

Resilience strategies in the face of short- and long-term change: out-migration and fisheries regulation in Alaskan fishing communities

Historically, communities persisted in remote, isolated areas of Alaska in large part because of the abundance of marine and terrestrial resources, as well as the ability of local people to opportunistically access those resources as they became available. Species switching and the ability to shift effort away from fisheries during poor years allowed local residents to diversify their livelihoods in the face of uncertainties and ecological change. The advent of modern fisheries management, which views Alaskan fisheries as the property of all citizens of the United States, has fundamentally altered the relationship of place-based communities to fishery resources. Local access to fisheries has been particularly affected by the development of transferable fishing privileges, making it possible for fishing rights to leave place-based communities through the choices of individual community members to sell or to move away. When fishing communities in Alaska lose active fishing businesses, over time the loss of various types of community capital will follow, including human, social, cultural, technical, and financial capital. In some cases, communities are able to adapt or transform through diversification of their local economies. In other cases, no alternatives to a fishery-based economy are accessible. We have used resilience theory to explore drivers of change affecting Alaskan fishing communities. Emphasis was placed on two primary change drivers, the regulatory environment and rural out-migration, as well as their interconnections and their impacts on individuals, communities, and the larger social-ecological system. We summarized several government programs that have been implemented to support the continued participation of communities in Alaskan fisheries. In addition, we reviewed informal and private-sector efforts to generate resilience strategies that can facilitate new entry into fisheries or retain fishing businesses and fishing rights within communities, as well as respond to increasing uncertainty related to the global market and climate changes