Policy challenges and approaches for the conservation of mangrove forests in Southeast Asia

Many drivers of mangrove forest loss operate over large scales and are most effectively addressed by policy interventions. However, conflicting or unclear policy objectives exist at multiple tiers of government, resulting in contradictory management decisions. To address this, we considered four approaches that are being used increasingly or could be deployed in Southeast Asia to ensure sustainable livelihoods and biodiversity conservation. First, a stronger incorporation of mangroves into marine protected areas (that currently focus largely on reefs and fisheries) could resolve some policy conflicts and ensure that mangroves do not fall through a policy gap. Second, examples of community and government comanagement exist, but achieving comanagement at scale will be important in reconciling stakeholders and addressing conflicting policy objectives. Third, private‐sector initiatives could protect mangroves through existing and novel mechanisms in degraded areas and areas under future threat. Finally, payments for ecosystem services (PES) hold great promise for mangrove conservation, with carbon PES schemes (known as blue carbon) attracting attention. Although barriers remain to the implementation of PES, the potential to implement them at multiple scales exists. Closing the gap between mangrove conservation policies and action is crucial to the improved protection and management of this imperiled coastal ecosystem and to the livelihoods that depend on them.     

The interaction between seaweed farming as an alternative occupation and fisher numbers in the central Philippines

Alternative occupations are frequently promoted as a means to reduce the number of people exploiting declining fisheries. However, there is little evidence that alternative occupations reduce fisher numbers. Seaweed farming is frequently promoted as a lucrative alternative occupation for artisanal fishers in Southeast Asia. We examined how the introduction of seaweed farming has affected village-level changes in the number of fishers on Danajon Bank, central Philippines, where unsustainable fishing has led to declining fishery yields. To determine how fisher numbers had changed since seaweed farming started, we interviewed the heads of household from 300 households in 10 villages to examine their perceptions of how fisher numbers had changed in their village and the reasons they associated with these changes. We then asked key informants (people with detailed knowledge of village members) to estimate fisher numbers in these villages before seaweed farming began and at the time of the survey. We compared the results of how fisher numbers had changed in each village with the wealth, education, seaweed farm sizes, and other attributes of households in these villages, which we collected through interviews, and with village-level factors such as distance to markets. We also asked people why they either continued to engage in or ceased fishing. In four villages, respondents thought seaweed farming and low fish catches had reduced fisher numbers, at least temporarily. In one of these villages, there was a recent return to fishing due to declines in the price of seaweed and increased theft of seaweed. In another four villages, fisher numbers increased as human population increased, despite the widespread uptake of seaweed farming. Seaweed farming failed for technical reasons in two other villages. Our results suggest seaweed farming has reduced fisher numbers in some villages, a result that may be correlated with socioeconomic status, but the heterogeneity of outcomes is consistent with suggestions that alternative occupations are not a substitute for more direct forms of resource management.