Empty Bellies: Mangrove Restoration And The Importance Of A Just Transition For Local Communities
We’re sitting in a marquee amongst the mangroves, our makeshift classroom, protected against the sun but not the humid heat. After a long day of restoration workshopping, my energy levels are flagging. The community, however, are energised, inspired to keep learning and discussing, all with a smile and lots of laughs.
“Owning the land, conserving it, but not making money makes no sense.” Ahmed says.
“Absolutely, we need our land to make money.” Mr Arman agrees.
“This is an important point. We always need to think: how does this work help empty bellies?” Fuad (Better Together Indonesia)
This is the heart of the problem. If the community aren’t able to make money from mangrove restoration, and put food in their family’s bellies, then they will be forced to return to profitable but potentially destructive practices.
I’m lucky to be working with Better Together Indonesia, and closely with the Blue Marine Foundation, on the Bagek Kembar mangrove restoration project. The project is a community-based ecological mangrove restoration project in West Lombok, Indonesia. The project site is 200 hectares of mangroves, with 25 hectares to be restored of abandoned aquaculture ponds. We recently held a week of workshops and discussions, led by Blue Forests, with the community, increasing technical knowledge of ecological mangrove restoration (EMR explained) and discussing challenges to overcome.
This community needs to make money and feed itself somehow. If mangroves aren’t helping with empty bellies, then they will understandably be forced to return to potentially ecologically destructive practices such as cutting down mangroves for firewood or aquaculture ponds. Mangrove restoration project partners need to recognise that restoration needs to be economically viable for the community, and that this is a central pillar of project success and not an after-thought or “co-benefit”.
This transition from ecologically destructive to sustainable practices is commonly described as “a just transition”. This term is used in different industries and contexts, but overall means making sustainable development and actions in a fair and inclusive way. In the context of ocean conservation and restoration, it is recognising that this work needs to be done, but that the communities affected need to be empowered to make a just transition from potentially ecologically damaging to more sustainable livelihoods.
The Bagek Kembar community has been forced into destructive practices through economic hardship, combined with bad government policy. The average daily income is currently ~£2 USD per day, which explains why the mangroves were cut down in the first place to make way for aquaculture ponds in the 1970s. This is not an isolated incident, with 800,000 hectares of mangroves cut down across Indonesia since the 1970s to make way for aquaculture (mainly shrimp).
Before we get into the value of mangroves for the local community, it’s worth noting their many ecosystem services, also described as “co-benefits”, including but not limited to carbon. Mangroves provide a variety of important ecosystem services including the provision of timber and fuel-wood, storm and erosion protection, and habitat creation for a variety of animals. These services are not only valuable ecologically, but also to humans who are, for example, protected against storm surges and provided with more healthy fish stocks.
Recognising their value in carbon capture and storage, one avenue for financing projects is by certifying as a (blue) carbon credit project. This is particularly relevant in Indonesia which has recently launched its national carbon registry, allowing Indonesian projects to list carbon credits, having previously put a halt to international carbon credit sales. However, carbon credit sales aren’t a silver bullet. Not all projects can access financing from carbon credits, with some projects being too early stage, some too small, and some finding carbon verification too expensive. Even in contexts where carbon credits are accessed, the funding going to the community can be modest (in a local project to Bagek Kembar, the community is receiving a measly 2% of proceeds) and does not always lead to livelihood opportunities for the local community. Overall, while carbon finance can provide funding to communities, it is not always enough, which is why projects need to look to alternative income streams. Too often, carbon projects see improving community livelihoods as a “co-benefit”, secondary to carbon, but they are the central pillar without which the project is destined to fail.
So, what sustainable income streams are there? Every project and community is different so there’s not one size fits all, but there are certainly income streams that have been successful and are good case studies. Naming a few: eco-tourism to see plant and animal biodiversity; sustainable aquaculture combining mangrove restoration and fishing heritage; creating natural products including tea from mangrove leaves and honey. It’s important to recognise that there are both coastal and non-coastal livelihood opportunities. While coastal opportunities such as aquaculture, seaweed, eco-tourism are attractive and often effective, they should not be seen as the only option. For some projects, terrestrial livelihood opportunities (provided to coastal communities) can be more appropriate and effective. For example, for the Bagek Kembar project (as you can see below), terrestrial integrated farming methods including stingless beekeeping and goat farming are being developed and provide fantastic land-based livelihood opportunities for this coastal community.
Importantly, mangrove restoration projects and their associated livelihood just transitions need to be achieved with the community, not forced upon them. As said by Yusran (Blue Forests), “we need to plant mangroves in hearts as well as heads.” The community needs to have ownership and love for the mangroves for the project to work. Community concerns of any size need to be heard, addressed and explained with/to the community. For example, Blue Forests had a project recently where the community wanted it in writing that Blue Forests wouldn’t cut down their mangroves for charcoal. This seems obvious (since Blue Forest is a conservation organisation), but to them it’s not, so they had this written into a contract. Also, nothing beats speaking the same language (literally and metaphorically), which is why working with geographically local partners and local language partners is important. Ultimately, it comes down to trust. The community are making important decisions about their land and livelihoods. Trust isn’t built in a day, it takes time and effort.
Restoration projects, whether blue carbon or otherwise, need to be thought of through the lens of community and livelihoods as much, if not more, than carbon. Not only is the provision of a just transition ethical, but also, sustainable community livelihoods are the central pillar without which projects are destined to fail.
—
To support community development at Bagek Kember alongside mangrove restoration, Better Together Indonesia is raising a Community Development Fund. The fund will finance education and livelihood projects which benefit the community and provide a just transition to sustainable non-destructive livelihoods.
More information can be found here.
If you are interested in supporting this meaningful fund, please contact Fuad (Better Together Indonesia) at fuadandhika.rahman@gmail.com
Author:
Hamish Richardson (Volunteer Project Manager at Better Together Indonesia Foundation)
Official Link:
