Tackling the gaps in ‘market environmentalism’ for mangroves
Can attaching a monetary value to ecosystem services, such as those provided by mangroves, one of the world’s most threatened ecosystems, help improve conservation and livelihoods? There are many critics who claim that such ‘market environmentalism’ has failed to generate results. However, in a recent paper a group of ESPA-funded researchers demonstrate a new economic valuation approach which tackles the gap between valuation and the decision-making processes that shape coastal regions...
Mangrove forests which line the coasts of many developing countries are one of the world’s most threatened ecosystems. Millions of people along these coastlines rely on small-scale fishing for their livelihoods and mangroves provide essential natural services that make this possible. As well as providing a nursery area for fish the forests protect the coastline from erosion and buffer communities against storms. They also provide an important global service, helping to combat climate change by mopping up carbon and safely storing it underground. Yet despite their value mangroves are being cut down to make way for shrimp aquaculture, tourism and other coastal developments. Wood is being extracted by commercial groups and by local communities for firewood and building materials. All these demands mean that mangroves are shrinking by 0.7% every year.
In an effort to have their value recognized scientists and conservationists have generated a growing body of literature attaching an economic value to the many ‘ecosystem services’ that mangroves provide. The calculations show that in the long run, the costs to the communities that rely on the mangroves, and society in general who benefit from mangroves carbon storing ability, often exceed the immediate economic gains. Yet despite their efforts the destruction continues as these values fail to make their way into the calculations that inform coastal development decision-making. This means that many existing policies still focus on short term gains which lead to mangrove destruction, such as providing tax breaks for shrimp aquaculture.
Many critics have called into question the idea of attaching an economic value to ecosystem services warning that it leads to a dangerously simplistic view of ecosystems and that there is little evidence to suggest these values boost conservation. But it may be premature to suggest the attaching monetary values to mangroves is a failure and new ESPA-funded research by a group of scientists from UK, Kenya, and Sri Lanka has led to the development of a new integrated approach that addresses the gaps that exist between valuing ecosystem services and the various groups that influence coastal decision making. They argue valuation is not an end in itself and that it is not lack of information that is driving the destruction. Their economic valuation approach is used within the policy context of Climate Compatible Development (CCD). It aims for a triple win, adapting to the current and future impacts of climate change, reducing greenhouse gas emission and improving the wellbeing of local communities.
The researchers undertook an analysis of the current value of mangrove ecosystem services in Southern Kenya. They then projected how mangrove coverage would change in 20 years times under a business as usual (BAU) approach and demonstrated the economic consequences of these changes. This was contrasted with the CCD approach in which value added and costs avoided were demonstrated if sustainable land management approaches are adopted. The approach involved a much more holistic understanding of policy, legal and institutional arrangements which drive change and the researchers actively engaged with policy makers and other groups.
The researchers estimated that the current value of the south coast mangroves is US $6.5million and that 59% of the value came from the mangroves regulating services, such as storing carbon and storm protection. If the current rate of forest loss continues then in 20 years 43% of forest cover could be lost with 100% at the most vulnerable sites. This could amount to losses of US $47million. In contrast working with key decision makers and groups to develop the CCD scenario, which would involve sustainable forest management and conservation, showed a net present value of US $20million in terms of value added and costs avoided. The policy landscape in Kenya is broadly supportive of CCD and many who were involved in the scenario building workshops were optimistic about the potential pathways to a better future. Currently regulating services, which have the highest economic value, are largely without market. However, this case study and the researcher’s earlier work in Mikoko Pamoja, one of the first carbon credit projects to secure an income for a Kenyan community through mangrove conservation and restoration, demonstrate that economic valuation could be a route to a more sustainable future.
