In this latest publication, Matt Fortnam and coauthors from the SPACES team compiled evidence from across the SPACES datasets to illustrate how people’s engagement with ecosystem services are fundamentally gendered…
See this Stockholm Resilience Centre news item for a summary of the paper:
and in the blog below Kate Brown discusses the paper in the context of the emerging literature on the structures that determine who can benefit from ecosystem services, and how:
Ecosystem services: The past, the pitfalls and the potential for supporting wellbeing of people in the Western Indian Ocean
Tim Daw’s keynote presentation at the 10th WIOMSA symposium.
What has the science of ecosystems services got to offer the people and policymakers of the WIO region? And what are the opportunities to use this now widespread concept to sustainably support human wellbeing through these turbulent times. I outline key insights, challenges and opportunities from ecosystem services and wellbeing research.
First, Daw reviews where the term ‘ecosystem services’ comes from. He outlines the different usages and some pitfalls and critiques. Then draws on examples from WIO and around the world to illustrate three key insights from research using the concepts of ecosystem services and human wellbeing: 1. The importance of trade-offs 2. The ‘co-production’ of ecosystem services by people and nature, and 3. The complexity of the relationship between humans’ wellbeing and their environment. This leads to two key challenges and research frontiers: How can we interpret and understand change? And how can we navigate hard choices and tradeoffs?
Finally, Daw focuses on two opportunities for this research to contribute in WIO. The first opportunity is to use greater understanding of how ecosystems are linked to wellbeing to generate interventions for sustainably improving people’s lives. The second is for scientists to leap out of our comfort zone into transdisciplinary research with coastal people, policy makers and other disciplines. The insights from research shows that management of ecosystem services is messy, political and uncertain. As, scientists we cannot be expected to provide simple solutions, but we have a responsibility to engage, inform and provoke decision makers at all
levels as they navigate through uncertain futures.
Andrew Wamukota’s presentation at the WIOMSA symposium on the structure-conduct-performance of nearshore marine fisheries in Kenya. This presentation is an exploration of the what we can learn from S-C-P in understanding poverty among actors. An application of S-C-P in nearshore marine fisheries is useful in understanding the behaviour of actors and how these influence their wellbeing. Although data analysis is not really done, there are forward and backward loops inherent at similar nodes (in terms of conduct e.g. no. of customers is +ve for fishers and –Ve for trader). A better understanding of this can be achieved by use of longitudinal data across similar fishers in the region.
Fisheries and mangrove pole value chains in Kenya: A comparative analysis across fisheries and sites
This working paper synthesizes results from value chain mapping of four types of commodities (octopus, small pelagics, mixed reef fish and mangrove pole) across four sites in Coastal Kenya (Jimbo/ Vanga, Tsunza, Kongowea and Mkwiro/Shimoni). Data was collected within the SPACES project, by the SPACES field team in Kenya from 28th November 2014 to 31st January 2015. It draws on information from the site reports from the four sites and outlines the maps of the fisheries and mangroves pole value chains in each site. Each value chain is characterized with respect to number and types of actors involved and a comparative analysis is conducted of value chain characteristics and complexity across fisheries and sites.
The Importance of Selected Individual Characteristics in Determining Market Prices for Fishers and Traders in Kenyan Small-Scale Fisheries
This article examines how selected socioeconomic characteristics of fishers and traders shape market prices at five coastal communities in Kenya. Focus groups elicited perceived factors affecting market prices, which were then tested using quantitative analysis. Ownership of fishing gear by fishers negatively influenced the prices taken. Fish traders who bought larger quantities paid a higher price. There was no significant relation between the choice of fish market by traders and fish price due to the diffused nature of the fish market. Although fish traders had relatively high income than fishers, the link between individual characteristics, market prices, and the outcomes of such interactions is more complicated than commonly perceived. The complexity is enhanced by the heterogeneity in different fisheries and of the prices at different markets and underlines the importance of continued documentation and exploration of the relationships between social and economic status and market prices for fishers and traders.