TDA-IME Project Final Report June, 2013 natural mangrove forest. Nonetheless, one important conclusion is that priority should be given to conserving the remaining natural/semi-natural mangrove forests, rather than focusing on restoration/rehabilitation. The conclusions reached by Vo et al. (2012) are also particularly relevant to transboundary mangrove management because different countries, with different social, economic and institutional make-ups, are involved, such that local conditions will determine the values of mangrove ecosystem services. They point out the need to: (a) undertake site specific valuations of ecosystem services; (b) standardize the definition of each ecosystem service and its valuation methods; and (c) strengthen the link between ecosystem valuation and policy-makers. The first two points relate to methodology and are relevant to consideration of further research needed to improve transboundary mangrove management. The third is the most important as it addresses the fundamental question of how to ensure that decisionmakers 84 actually make use of economic valuation data? Development decisions are still usually based on cost-benefit analyses, not ecosystem values; thus Vo et al. (2010) suggest that a tool for accessing the economic values of a particular ecosystem is needed. They also advocate for economic valuation of all the ecosystem’s goods and services (i.e. TEV) because society gives more attention to financial figures and quantities. The challenge of communicating more effectively with decision-makers about the value of mangroves was raised earlier by Gilbert and Janssen (1998). They cautioned that part of the problem may be that ecologists have not communicated their knowledge adequately to decision-makers. Thus, on the one hand there is a need to conduct more comprehensive valuation studies that clearly show the linkages between mangrove ecosystems and economic indicators of human well-being; but on the other, a need to more effectively communicate and apply the findings to improve coastal area policies and management in practice (Emerton, 2006). The analysis by Salem and Mercer (2012) covers 44 previous studies with a total of 149 mangrove ecosystem service observations, with the great majority (74%) coming from Asia. They categorized the observations under 10 ecosystem service headings, with the mean, median and ranges derived from these studies expressed in USD per hectare of mangrove per year (see Table 14). The mean values for forestry and recreational uses are high and similar (each is around USD 38,000 ha/year), while fisheries is slightly below USD 24,000/ha/year. However the median values for the 44 estimates used in the analysis present a very different picture, with the nonuse value (including existence and bequest values) being by far the highest at over USD 15,000 ha/year, followed by indirect use values for water/air purification and waste assimilation (USD 5,801 ha/year) and for coastal protection (USD 3,604 ha/year). While this is the most complete analysis of mangrove economic valuation data available, it also reveals the extreme variation among the data, as shown by the lowest and highest estimates for each product or service category (Tables 15 and 16). This highlights not only the effect of applying different valuation methods, but also that mangrove ecosystem service values are highly country and site-specific. For example, countries with higher per capita GDP value coastal protection and carbon sequestration more highly than lower GDP countries. Moreover, there is also great variation in the reported farm gate prices for even basic products, like mangrove timber and blood cockles, on a country to country and location to location basis (UNEP, 2007).
Transboundary Diagnostic Analysis of Indochina Mangrove Ecosystems
To see the actual publication please follow the link above