Assessing wetland ecosystem services and poverty interlinkages: a general framework and case study

Abstract

The wise use of wetlands is expected to contribute to ecological integrity, as well as to secure livelihoods, especially of communities dependent on their ecosystem services for sustenance. This paper provides a conceptual framework capable of examining the goals of wetland management, poverty reduction and sustainable livelihoods. The framework highlights ecological character as a social construct and, with the notion of wetlands as settings for human well-being, builds a concept for assessing the inter-linkages between ecosystem services and livelihoods. The value and broader applicability of our framework is then tested by applying it to a case study from India (Lake Chilika) to evaluate the degree to which the mutual goals of improving both human well-being and the ecological character of wetlands have been achieved. The case study maps changes in human well-being induced in the basin communities due to external vulnerability contexts, institutions and freedoms. It further assesses the response strategies in terms of their impacts on ecological character and poverty status.Key words livelihoods; biodiversity; development; Ramsar Convention; wetlands; ecosystem services; poverty; Chilika Lake Evaluation des liens entre services écosystémiques des zones humides et pauvreté: cadre général et étude de cas Résumé L'utilisation rationnelle des zones humides est censée contribuer à l'intégrité écologique, ainsi qu'à assurer les moyens de subsistance, en particulier des collectivités tributaires de leurs services écosystémiques pour la nourriture et les ressources de base. Cet article fournit un cadre conceptuel capable d'examiner les objectifs de gestion des zones humides, la réduction de la pauvreté et les moyens de subsistance durables. Le cadre souligne le caractère écologique comme une construction sociale et, avec la notion de zones humides comme cadre pour le bien-être humain, construit un concept pour l'évaluation des liens entre les services écosystémiques et les moyens de subsistance. La valeur et l'applicabilité plus large de notre cadre sont ensuite testées en l'appliquant à une étude de cas en Inde (Lac Chilika) pour évaluer à quel niveau les objectifs communs d'amélioration à la fois du bien-être humain et du caractère écologique des zones humides ont été atteints. L'étude de cas dresse la carte des changements dans le bien-être humain, induits, dans les communautés du bassin, par des contextes de vulnérabilité externe, les institutions et les libertés. Il évalue ensuite les stratégies de réponse en termes de leurs impacts sur le caractère écologique et le niveau de pauvreté.

Understanding change in the ecological character of Ramsar wetlands: perspectives from a deeper time – synthesis

“…These include guidance provided for wetland inventory (Tomas Vives 1996;Finlayson et al 2002;Rosenqvist et al 2007;MacKay et al 2009), monitoring (Finlayson 1996b;Finlayson and Mitchell 1999) and assessment (van Dam et al 1999;Anon. 2006;Stratford et al 2011), hydrology and environmental flows (Acreman 2012;Adams 2012), water quality (Verhoeven 2014), ecosystem services (de Groot et al 2006;Kumar et al 2011) and restoration (Erwin 2009;Alexander et al 2011;Alexander and McInnes 2012). Further, guidance for developing pictorial conceptual models of wetlands (Department of Environment and Heritage Protection 2012) could assist with incorporating information from palaeoecology into descriptions of the ecological character of wetlands.…”

Steering Towards Sustainability Requires More Ecological Restoration

“…waterbirds, dolphins), and fishery resources (e.g., fish, crustaceans, crabs), have helped reinstate community-led management through the revival of community fishing cooperatives, bird protection and watershed committees. Other positive impacts observed since the channel was dredged include an increase in salinity, reductions in the expansion of invasive species, and significant increases in the per capita income of the communities that depend on the lagoon (Kumar et al 2011). Although the restoration at Lake Chilika resulted primarily from the success of hydrological modeling and ecological engineering, the Integrated Management Plan was developed with the assistance of biologists focused on avi-and aqua-fauna, restoration experts and landscape planners concerned with coastal ecosystem functioning and connectivity issues, and social scientists addressing local governance and management structures.…”

Environmental livelihood security in Southeast Asia and Oceania: a water-energy-food-livelihoods nexus approach for spatially assessing change. White paper

“…Given its breadth, rather than elaborating exclusive 'alternatives' to the SLA, several authors have described how the SLA could address key criticisms through integration with other approaches and frameworks that link poverty alleviation with environmental resources. For example, Fisher et al (2013) provide a useful overview of nine conceptual frameworks used to link ecosystem services and poverty alleviation (of which SLA is one); Small (2007) outlines attempts to integrate SLA with rights-based and actor-oriented approaches; Kumar et al (2011) describe a framework which draws on the SLA and MA to show interlinks between poverty alleviation and wetlands use; and Schreckenberg et al (2010) consider how the key concepts of SLA have influenced approaches to social impact assessment. Some of the most commonly invoked 'alternatives' or complementary approaches to SLA are discussed here.…”

“…Furthermore, Schreckenberg et al 's (2010) Social Assessment of Protected Areas framework incorporates the MA (MA 2005) definition of ecosystem services, with three categories (provisioning, regulating, and supporting services) included under natural assets and the fourth category (cultural services) included within social assets (Figure 19). Kumar et al (2011) also utilized the MA (2005) concept whereby ecosystem services (of wetlands) are considered to partially constitute natural capital, and through transforming structures and processes, ecosystem services can contribute to all capitals. An understanding of these interactions rationalizes the extent to which ecosystems can contribute to poverty reduction for a given livelihood system (Kumar et al 2011).…”

“…Kumar et al (2011) also utilized the MA (2005) concept whereby ecosystem services (of wetlands) are considered to partially constitute natural capital, and through transforming structures and processes, ecosystem services can contribute to all capitals. An understanding of these interactions rationalizes the extent to which ecosystems can contribute to poverty reduction for a given livelihood system (Kumar et al 2011). …”