IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jresou/v13y2024i1p7-d1311937.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Perception and Contribution of Mangrove Ecosystem Services to the Well-Being of Coastal Communities of Chwaka and Menai Bays, Zanzibar

Author

Listed:
  • Mohamed Khalfan Mohamed

    (School of Geography, Archaeology and Environmental Studies, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2050, South Africa)

  • Elhadi Adam

    (School of Geography, Archaeology and Environmental Studies, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2050, South Africa)

  • Colbert M. Jackson

    (School of Geography, Archaeology and Environmental Studies, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg 2050, South Africa
    Department of Geography, Faculty of Natural and Agricultural Sciences, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein 9300, South Africa)

Abstract

The mangroves in Zanzibar are crucial to the survival of the local population, as they provide essential ecosystem goods and services. However, the actual value of mangrove products is not easily recognized. As a result, it is chiefly concluded that mangrove forests should be converted to uses that generate directly marketable products. This research sought to assess the perception and value of mangrove ecosystem services to the local communities around the Chwaka and Menai Bays. Key informant interviews, focus group discussions, and household surveys were used to collect data. The chi-squared test and one-way ANOVA were used to compare the awareness and perception of mangrove ecosystem services, respectively. The results show that provisioning services were the mangrove ecosystem services most identified by the household surveys, i.e., c. 84%. Supporting, regulating, and cultural services were rated in that order by 46.2%, 45.4%, and 21.0% of the respondents, respectively. This study found that there were statistically significant differences between Chwaka, Charawe, Ukongoroni, Unguja Ukuu, and Uzi wards in terms of households’ awareness of regulating services (χ 2 = 6.061, p = 0.014) and supporting services (χ 2 = 6.006, p = 0.014). There were no significant differences in the identification of provisioning (χ 2 = 1.510, p = 0.919) and cultural (χ 2 = 1.601, p = 0.901) services. Occupations did not determine the reliance on mangrove ecosystem services (χ 2 = 8.015; p = 0.1554). The approach used in this study can provide policymakers and land planners with a framework for the sustainable management of the ecosystem services provided by mangroves.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohamed Khalfan Mohamed & Elhadi Adam & Colbert M. Jackson, 2024. "Assessing the Perception and Contribution of Mangrove Ecosystem Services to the Well-Being of Coastal Communities of Chwaka and Menai Bays, Zanzibar," Resources, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-23, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:13:y:2024:i:1:p:7-:d:1311937
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/13/1/7/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2079-9276/13/1/7/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    2. Ruiz-Frau, A. & Hinz, H. & Edwards-Jones, G. & Kaiser, M.J., 2013. "Spatially explicit economic assessment of cultural ecosystem services: Non-extractive recreational uses of the coastal environment related to marine biodiversity," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 90-98.
    3. Mensah, Sylvanus & Veldtman, Ruan & Assogbadjo, Achille Ephrem & Ham, Cori & Glèlè Kakaï, Romain & Seifert, Thomas, 2017. "Ecosystem service importance and use vary with socio-environmental factors: A study from household-surveys in local communities of South Africa," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 1-8.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schmidt, Katja & Walz, Ariane & Martín-López, Berta & Sachse, René, 2017. "Testing socio-cultural valuation methods of ecosystem services to explain land use preferences," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 270-288.
    2. Ramos, Alya & Jujnovsky, Julieta & Almeida-Leñero, Lucía, 2018. "The relevance of stakeholders’ perceptions of ecosystem services in a rural-urban watershed in Mexico City," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 85-95.
    3. Baraka P. Nyangoko & Håkan Berg & Mwita M. Mangora & Martin Gullström & Mwanahija S. Shalli, 2020. "Community Perceptions of Mangrove Ecosystem Services and Their Determinants in the Rufiji Delta, Tanzania," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-22, December.
    4. Das, Manob & Das, Arijit & Saikh, Selim, 2024. "Estimating supply-demand mismatches for optimization of sustainable land use planning in a rapidly growing urban agglomeration (India)," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    5. So-Hee Park & Chuyoun Chang, 2022. "Impact of Changes in Forest Use Caused by the COVID-19 Pandemic on the Perception of Forest Ecosystem Services in the Republic of Korea," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-19, September.
    6. Mengist, Wondimagegn & Soromessa, Teshome & Feyisa, Gudina Legese & Jenerette, G. Darrel, 2022. "Socio-environmental determinants of the perceived value of moist Afromontane forest ecosystem services in Kaffa Biosphere Reserve, Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    7. Juan F. Velasco-Muñoz & José A. Aznar-Sánchez & Marina Schoenemann & Belén López-Felices, 2022. "An Analysis of the Worldwide Research on the Socio-Cultural Valuation of Forest Ecosystem Services," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-22, February.
    8. Cornelis Leeuwen & Jos Frijns & Annemarie Wezel & Frans Ven, 2012. "City Blueprints: 24 Indicators to Assess the Sustainability of the Urban Water Cycle," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 26(8), pages 2177-2197, June.
    9. Stefan Liehr & Julia Röhrig & Marion Mehring & Thomas Kluge, 2017. "How the Social-Ecological Systems Concept Can Guide Transdisciplinary Research and Implementation: Addressing Water Challenges in Central Northern Namibia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-19, June.
    10. Yanzi Wang & Chunming Wu & Yongfeng Gong & Zhen Zhu, 2021. "Can Adaptive Governance Promote Coupling Social-Ecological Systems? Evidence from the Vulnerable Ecological Region of Northwestern China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(20), pages 1-19, October.
    11. Breffle, William S. & Muralidharan, Daya & Donovan, Richard P. & Liu, Fangming & Mukherjee, Amlan & Jin, Yongliang, 2013. "Socioeconomic evaluation of the impact of natural resource stressors on human-use services in the Great Lakes environment: A Lake Michigan case study," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 152-161.
    12. Comino, E. & Ferretti, V., 2016. "Indicators-based spatial SWOT analysis: supporting the strategic planning and management of complex territorial systems," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 64142, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Samira F. Oliveira & Rachel B. Prado & Elaine C. C. Fidalgo & Ana P. D. Turetta & Joyce M. G. Monteiro & Bernadete da C. C. G. Pedreira & Gerson J. Y. Antonio & Renato L. de Assis & Sandro R. A. Oitav, 2024. "Climate Change and Ecosystem Services: A Participatory Approach in a Brazilian Mountainous Region," Journal of Sustainable Development, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 17(5), pages 1-1, September.
    14. Jansson, Åsa, 2013. "Reaching for a sustainable, resilient urban future using the lens of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 285-291.
    15. P. Hlaváčková & D. Šafařík, 2016. "Quantification of the utility value of the recreational function of forests from the aspect of valuation practice," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(8), pages 345-356.
    16. Bolaños-Valencia, Ingrid & Villegas-Palacio, Clara & López-Gómez, Connie Paola & Berrouet, Lina & Ruiz, Aura, 2019. "Social perception of risk in socio-ecological systems. A qualitative and quantitative analysis," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    17. Bordt, Michael, 2018. "Discourses in Ecosystem Accounting: A Survey of the Expert Community," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 82-99.
    18. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    19. Meixler, Marcia S., 2017. "Assessment of Hurricane Sandy damage and resulting loss in ecosystem services in a coastal-urban setting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 28-46.
    20. Juliana Hurtado Rassi, 2020. "Gestión conjunta de ecosistemas transfronterizos: la importancia del trabajo articulado entre los Estados para la conservación de los recursos naturales. Análisis del caso particular de la “Reserva de," Books, Universidad Externado de Colombia, Facultad de Derecho, number 1241, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jresou:v:13:y:2024:i:1:p:7-:d:1311937. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

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

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

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

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

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

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