Introduction

The Bocas del Toro (BDT) archipelago is a series of nine islands located along the Caribbean coast of the northwestern region of Panama. Approximately half of all Caribbean mangrove forests exist within Bocas del Toro (Araújo, 2018). Mangrove forests bridge the gap between land and sea whilst providing resources and supporting livelihoods for the surrounding communities. They yield a wide range of ecological benefits including mitigation of extreme weather events, erosion prevention, carbon sequestration, water purification, and habitat for both terrestrial and aquatic animals (Acharya, 2016; Failler et al., 2015; Srivastava & Mehta, 2021). However, inequities (and unequal power dynamics) in their use and in the distribution of benefits that mangrove forests provide threaten vulnerable coastal regions, communities, and society. Studies examining inequity in the ocean economy focus mainly on fisheries and seafood labor injustices, seafood supply chains, distribution of global fish catch, and exclusivity in policy and decision-making (McCauley et al., 2018; Österblom et al., 2015; Selig et al., 2018; Singh et al., 2021; Williams & Sparks, 2023). Economic valuations of ecosystem services (ES) dominate research and policy, but many scholars argue for a more holistic inclusion of benefits that are not easily quantifiable and for incorporating them into the decision-making process (Chan et al., 2016; Gould et al., 2019; Treviño, 2022).

Cultural Ecosystem Services (CES) are often contextualized as intrinsically derived or are seen as providing important non-monetary benefits, which many argue are discounted, improperly appraised, disregarded and/or inadequately converted into direct monetary values because they do not fit into established categories or cannot be easily quantified (Chan et al., 2012; Cooper et al., 2016; Himes-Cornell et al., 2018; Irvine et al., 2016; Treviño, 2022). Additionally, bias is introduced via the use of CES frameworks rooted in Western ideologies that lack the capacity to unearth CES attributes outside of those that are monetarily quantifiable (Diaz et al., 2018; Shiva, 2014). This continues to breed difficulty in comprehending and conveying CES with nuance and often establishes quantifiable benefits as hierarchically more important than others in policymaking and praxis. Additionally, capturing power dynamics regarding who gets to control and utilize CES and the inequities that arise due to imbalance in governance is not considered.

As part of an effort to convey a more holistic understanding of CES, researchers have critiqued, identified blind spots, and amended foundational CES frameworks, such as the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA) (Berbés-Blázquez et al., 2016; Cheng et al., 2019; Himes-Cornell et al., 2018). Many studies have noted the presence of a gap in research that accurately addresses the cultural significance of mangroves for coastal populations (Bryce et al., 2016; Chan et al., 2012, 2016; Cooper et al., 2016; Daniel et al., 2012; Elwell et al., 2020; Fish et al., 2016; Himes-Cornell et al., 2018; Irvine et al., 2016; Moore et al., 2022; Mowat & Rhodes, 2020; Satz et al., 2013; Treviño, 2022). In this direction, theoretical frameworks have been developed to assess these non-monetary CES benefits more accurately and to help ensure these important attributes are not neglected in resource management policies and discourse (Chakraborty et al., 2020; Chan et al., 2012; Dean et al., 2021; Fish et al., 2016).

This study adds to our understanding of how CES derived from mangroves are important not only to cultural identity (Treviño, 2022), but also to well-being and mental health. Further, we demonstrate how different ethnic groups perceive and value CES and report having unequal access to CES benefits.

The Ngöbe are the most populous Indigenous group in Panama (169,433, INEC, 2014) but have been included in research far less than other minority groups (Mach & Vahradian, 2021). The majority live within the semi-autonomous Ngäbe-Buglé Comarca, but approximately 80,000 live in the adjacent Bocas del Toro province (INEC, 2014). Most of the archipelago’s Indigenous residents live within or close to mangroves and have a history of utilizing, modifying, and deriving various benefits from mangroves (Gordon, 1982). Many Indigenous local (IL) and non-Indigenous local (NIL) residents rely on mangroves for food security, building materials, navigation, storm protection, and many other ES. Importantly, the terms Ngöbe and Ngäbe are often used interchangeably in the literature, however, as the individuals who participated in our study self-identified as Ngöbe, we use this term.

Beginning in the early 2000s, a rapidly developing tourism industry attracted European and North American investors to BDT (Bourque, 2016; Guerrón-Montero, 2020). Tourism-related development has not only led to mangrove deforestation (Windevoxhel & Heegde, 2008), but also to social conflict and inequities in the distribution of their perceived benefits. These conflicts are further exacerbated by neoliberal development policies and the notion of BDT as a ‘resource frontier’ (Srivastava & Mehta, 2021). Recently, mangroves have been removed to establish large hotels and home ventures on Isla Colon and outer islands despite the protection of mangroves under Panamanian law (Gaceta Oficial No 28681-B, 2018). While the Ngöbe often live among the mangroves and incorporate them as a community resource, investors may view them as obstacles to achieving “paradise” featuring pristine white sand beaches. Consequently, they are removing mangroves with increasing regularity. The history of BDT, its peoples, remote location, and close connection to and reliance on mangrove habitats, calls for the consideration of mangrove equity, with a particular focus on cultural valuation of mangroves, while acknowledging the legacy of (neo)colonialism and domestic and foreign capitalist development.

Although Latin American ecosystems and communities comprise some of the world’s most diverse populations (Moore et al., 2022; Raven et al., 2020) they are the subject of less than 7% of all published CES research (Hernández-Morcillo et al., 2013). Understanding the benefits of CES in non-monetary terms is an opportunity for change regarding tropical mangrove governance, and centering equity within policy and practice. The questions we address here are relevant not only to BDT, but to other regions throughout the tropics where too often local and Indigenous knowledge are not incorporated into governance practices thus hindering relationships between people and place and our collective ability to protect essential ecosystems (Spalding et al., 2023). Additionally, the cultural valuation of mangrove ecosystems is important for local communities' livelihoods and identity, and for weighing the benefits of community investment in conservation and decision-making (Himes-Cornell et al., 2018).

Drawing on frameworks that center culture, equity, and power, we perform a CES evaluation of mangrove forests in BDT. We address two interrelated issues: (i) How the communities located within the BDT archipelago interpret the cultural importance of mangroves, and (ii) How equity and power issues influence how different groups identify, interpret and access CES. We designed semi-structured interviews following Fish et al.’s (2016) CES framework comprising three broad pillars (identity, experience, and capability), and further developed questions utilizing Berbés-Blázquez et al. (2016) for more effectively including social power relations in ecosystem services research. Key findings demonstrate the role of mangrove ecosystems in providing a sense of identity (for some residents) and a space for managing mental health, particularly in the context of COVID-19. In addition, our findings reveal how inequity hampers effective conservation and diminishes important cultural benefits. We also call attention to the difficulty in appraising mangrove CES whilst upholding and respecting diverse perspectives given the need to apply systemic approaches for understanding their benefits, which continues to create challenges concerning decision-making (Fish et al., 2016; Gould et al., 2019).

Literature Review

The Millennium Ecosystem Assessment divides ES into four broad categories: provisioning, regulating, supporting, and cultural services. Within this framework, CES is defined as “nonmaterial benefits obtained from ecosystems” and are categorized into seven groups: spiritual and religious, recreation and ecotourism, aesthetic, inspirational, educational, sense of place, and cultural heritage services. ES assessments have increased since the formation of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in 2005 (Cheng et al., 2019), but more progress is needed to express the complex and multi-faceted benefits that natural resources provide humans (Gunton et al., 2017).

When cultural values are assessed, the focus is often on monetary and easily measured values, such as tourism and recreation (Chakraborty et al., 2020; Hernández-Morcillo et al., 2013), but intangible CES are significant contributors to quality of life and should be included and valued in decision-making (Cheng et al., 2019; Himes-Cornell et al., 2018). Ignoring the non-monetary functions of ecosystems enables techniques that further marginalize vulnerable communities and disproportionately ignore the perceptions of local communities (Hirons et al., 2016; Treviño, 2022). Along with an over-dependence on monetary value, the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment (2005) also fails to address (i) the complexity of human-nature interactions (Dean et al., 2018; Fish et al., 2016; Shultis & Heffner, 2016;), (ii) non-Western definitions of “spirituality” and “aesthetic” (Cooper et al., 2016), and (iii) inequity via power relations within ES evaluations (Agrawal, 2005; Berbés-Blázquez et al., 2016).

Fish et al. (2016) proposed a framework for assessing the interconnectedness of human-nature interaction that evaluates cultural benefits and services by recognizing the importance of including the cultural space, practices, and benefits that these ecosystems provide. They address how these elements shape and enable each other to determine locally derived CES. Incorporating the flow between human and non-human subjects allows for a more thorough understanding of the coevolution between nature and the cultural valuation of nature, which can help convey their reciprocal relationship (Norgaard, 1994).

Fish et al. (2016) identified three pillars within cultural benefits that encompass both tangible and intangible benefits, accounting for a wide swath of potential CES dimensions: identity, experience, and capability, each of which contain more specific attributes and examples, in order to include a wider range of benefits that previous approaches lacked, and their framework has been used to determine the cultural benefits of marine areas (Bryce et al., 2016). Importantly, they center interactions between culture and environment within a particular space thereby highlighting the benefits arising from the relationship rather than benefits flowing unidirectionally from ecosystems to humans (Bryce et al., 2016). Researchers have been inspired by these ideas to look more qualitatively at CES identified by stakeholders in particular contexts, but few examine how equity and power operate in different understandings of and access to CES. This is critical to ongoing calls to “center equity in ocean governance” particularly concerning contexts where ocean-dependent communities are threatened by external extractive pressures (Spalding et al., 2023).

Many ES and CES assessments do not effectively acknowledge how power dynamics influence ecosystem use or value (or devaluations) and therefore, socio-economically disempowered groups are often not accurately represented. Recognizing power imbalance with respect to CES benefits is especially vital. According to Berbés-Blázquez et al. (2016), there are three major assumptions made by studies that mask an unequal power dynamic. First is the assumption of trickle-down CES benefits through all socioeconomic statuses. This assumes equal distribution of benefits from ES among all communities, which is rare. The second is focus on the ES product, without considering the human labor required to procure the benefits. Third, they argue that most research has not considered the historical context and how it has influenced the development of power dynamics in a region. All three assumptions effectively render the power invisible, though it is central to understanding who can use which natural resources, when, and how, and consequently determines the relative benefits stakeholders possessing differing levels of power can garner from these ES, cultural or otherwise.

Theoretical Framework

Analyzing CES literature affirms the need for future studies to comprehensively evaluate CES in a manner capable of incorporating non-monetary intangible benefits, as well as conveying the role of differential power dynamics in mangrove ecosystems. We chose Fish et al.’s (2016) three broad pillars of CES benefits as the principle lens for structuring our interdisciplinary analysis alongside Berbés-Blázquez et al.’s (2016) framework for conceptualizing power relations with respect to ES to ensure our research illuminates often invisible power dynamics when exploring CES (Fig. 1). Thus we used identity, experience, and capability as a starting point for conceptualizing and interpreting the cultural value of mangroves, while Berbés-Blázquez et al. (2016) was used to interrogate how power differentials influence both the understanding of and access to the CES mangroves provide (Fig. 1, Table 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Merged conceptual framework derived from Fish et al. (2016) and Berbés-Blázquez et al. (2016) for including equity and power to analyze how CES benefits are understood and accessed

Full size image
Table 1 Operational definitions of each identified pillar and sub-pillar extrapolated from Fish et al. 2016 (blue). Equity and Power definitions are extrapolated from Berbés-Blázquez et al., 2016 (orange)
Full size table

Methodology

Case Study Context and Rationale

Cultural ecosystem services of mangrove ecosystems in BDT have not yet been researched despite their relative abundance and the high percentage of the population living in proximity to protected mangroves. Our research is also timely in light of intense development pressure (Mach, 2021) causing mangrove removal and disturbances and presents a unique opportunity to evaluate power imbalances as well as important non-monetary mangrove benefits for local stakeholders.

Power dynamics between racial and ethnic groups within the BDT archipelago are strongly intertwined with the history and legacy of colonization, slavery, the construction of the Panama Canal and the presence of the United Fruit Company (Guerron-Montero, 2006). In the late 1880s, Germans moved to the area to develop the banana trade. A steady stream of labor was supplied to the BDT banana farms from people working on the Panama Canal including Chinese, and West Indians. English-speaking Afro-Antilleans were the dominant labor force throughout the reign of the United Fruit Company from 1890 to the 1950s (Pleasant & Spalding, 2021; Stephens, 2008). Due to their dominance in the labor force and long-time presence in the region, Afro-Antilleans made larger economic gains than the Ngöbe, who were not recruited into the banana labor force until after 1950 (Guerrón-Montero, 2011) and this fomented an unequal distribution of power and resources between Afro-Antilleans and the Ngöbe that persists today (Guerrón-Montero, 2011).

More recent migrations of European and North American Lifestyle Migrants (LSM) since the early 1990s have further exacerbated unequal power dynamics as these wealthier, predominantly white, immigrants purchase easily attainable land and access capital streams from their home countries. Perceptions of the value of mangroves among different groups are of particular importance as the land and seascapes of BDT continue to rapidly change because of this influx of LSMs along with the steady rise of tourism. The only pre-Covid estimate of tourist visitations suggested 225,000 visitors to Bocas in 2012 spending $450 USD per person on average (Camargo, 2016), but numbers are likely much greater now.

In BDT, the tourism industry has replaced fishing and other traditional livelihood strategies as the main source of income for Indigenous and Non-Indigenous local community members alike and it is heavily reliant on healthy mangrove ecosystems. However, coastal development is the biggest threat to their stability. Deforestation of mangroves reduces nursery area availability thereby jeopardizing successful migration and growth of some economically important juvenile fishes (Lindeman & DeMaria, 2005). Research into stakeholder values of mangrove CES in Bocas del Toro is important for understanding how power dynamics within and between stakeholder groups influence local management strategies. It can also identify non-market values for consideration in future research and policy dialogues.

Data Collection and Analysis

We conducted an in-depth investigation into the relationship between equity/power and CES in a real-world context (Yin, 2017). We designed it as an exploratory analysis into stakeholder perceptions of, and access to, the cultural value of mangroves in BDT using an interpretivist ontological approach to convey the values expressed by our target stakeholder groups (Creswell, 1994).

Two authors have more than 16 years of combined experience working full-time for a nonprofit environmental study abroad facilitator in this region. Our choice of study communities and participants was based on their rapport with and knowledge of local residents coexisting most extensively with mangrove ecosystems, allowing our research to begin from a place of trust. We conducted two phases of data collection. The first began with seven introductory focus groups with communities on different islands conducted between November 16 and 25, 2021. Following Agee’s (2009) process for developing qualitative research questions, we reviewed phase one data alongside re-engaging with the literature. Participants in focus groups spoke directly about provisioning, regulating, and supporting services for mangroves, often hinting at associated cultural values, but often not elaborating on them even when asked directly. However, they spoke a great deal about equity issues and mangrove loss even although we did not prompt them to do so. Consequently, we decided to explore these topics further.

In Phase two, we used GIS mapping to isolate communities living near dense stands of mangroves experiencing demonstrable loss (Fig. 2a). We then decided to utilize a merged theoretical framework (Fig. 1) to explore CES further given the limitations revealed in the first data collection phase. We used in-depth semi-structured interviews to gain responses from more gender and culturally diverse individuals (Table 2). From April 18 to April 28, 2022, we contacted and interviewed individuals living permanently around mangroves at different locations in the BDT archipelago (Fig. 2a), including Bahia Roja, Bahia Honda, Cayo Coral, Solarte (see Fig. 2b), Almirante, Old Bank, Isla Colon, and Salt Creek.

Fig. 2
figure 2

a (top) UC WCMC map of mangrove distribution throughout the Bocas Del Toro archipelago containing communities where sample interviews were conducted. b (bottom) Example of loss occurring near interview sites. Mangrove loss, new growth, and maintained from 1996–2020 on the southern side of Isla Solarte. The overall loss of mangrove forests archipelago-wide is approximately 12.82% and growth is estimated at 3.07% between 1996 and 2020. (Maps created in ArcGIS Pro, data sourced from the UN-WCMC Environment Programme, 2020)

Full size image
Table 2 Demographic data from interviews conducted in April, 2022. The table shows the age, gender and social-ethnic groups of study participants including Indigenous Local (IL), Non-Indigenous Local (NIL) and Lifestyle Migrants (LSM)
Full size table

Interviews lasted between 30 min to three hours and were transcribed and translated. We first attributed responses to their respective CES category (Fish et al., 2016) and further assigned quotes to their groups based on participant self-identification: Non-Indigenous locals (NIL), Indigenous locals (IL), and Lifestyle Migrants (LSM). NIL individuals included those who identified as Latino, Mestizo, or Afro-Caribbean. IL individuals identified as Ngobe. LSM identified as migrants from North America, Europe, Australia, and South America. It is important to acknowledge the nuances of indigeneity in the differentiation between IL and NIL. A group's self-identification as “Indigenous” is often adopted or imposed. Communities that have assumed the label of Indigenous are products of historical politics, bound through cultural identity and group struggle (Li, 2004).

We analyzed the transcripts individually and collaboratively to correct for individual biases throughout the sorting process (Saldana, 2015). After discussing the first content analysis, we selected key cross-cutting sub-themes that emerged to discuss their significance and identify important findings. To further validate our findings and ensure any internal bias was corrected for, we invited members from each community where we conducted interviews to participate in a discussion based on these sub-themes (May 10, 2022) (Yin, 2017).

Results

Our case study focuses primarily on qualitative assessments of the CES of mangrove forests. However, the quantitative data from the content analysis reflect the frequency with which different components were mentioned by members of each group we interviewed (Table 3).

Table 3 Number of mentions categorized by Fish et al. (2016) pillars and sub-pillars per socio-ethnic group
Full size table

Qualitative results are organized utilizing the Fish et al. (2016) framework (Fig. 1, Table 1). The cultural ecosystem framework includes Identity, Experiences, and Capabilities. Qualitative data is categorized beneath each framework pillar to understand how mangroves are culturally utilized throughout the region.

Identity

Identity was the most cited cultural benefit in our interviews (Table 3) and resonated very deeply with many Indigenous Locals (IL), with some even suggesting that the mangroves are like a metaphor for their own resilience over time under challenging and changing conditions. One IL shared a common sentiment, emblematic of a deep-rooted sense of identity tied to mangrove ecosystems:

The mangrove trees are so incredibly resilient, that is why people want to use them for building and for piers. Despite all the problems with the reefs dying, trash everywhere, and people chopping things and building everywhere, the mangroves remain. They have always been here and remain despite difficult conditions. I think we [the Ngöbe] are like the mangroves that way. Despite it all, we remain and do what we must to exist. Often in difficult places.

Beyond seeing mangroves as a metaphor for Ngöbe community resilience, other examples of cultural identity benefits included connecting with ancestors through memory, feeling at home, feeling attached to the mangroves, and feeling a part of a community created around this ecosystem. This has been facilitated through social interactions, which were found to be further enabled within the mangrove ecosystem in activities such as snorkeling, fishing, and traveling around. One Indigenous woman described the mangrove environment: “It has enough benefit to help create friendships, It has been and continues to be a place for us to get together.”

On the topic of the destruction of mangroves, some community members used language reflecting a loss of self and identity. When asked to imagine Bocas without mangroves, one NIL said:

No one has asked me this before. I think first, I'd be very angry because I would want to know what happened. I would feel like they stole something from me. I know it doesn't belong to me, but I feel like it is a part of me and so I would be very angry because I grew up here with these places.

This further showcases how NILs view mangroves as an integral part of their identity, and value them far beyond the services they provide.

When asked about mangrove deforestation all stakeholder groups expressed negative feelings. LSMs regularly mentioned how services provided by mangroves would be destroyed by their removal. More than half of LSM interviewees stated that without the mangroves, Bocas wouldn’t be Bocas. For them, mangroves are an important component of a desirable sense of place that led to their choosing to migrate to Bocas rather than other places:

Yeah, I kayak or paddleboard through them. Really beautiful. I like the environment that it's located in and everything.

There's a lot of them [mangroves] and yeah, it's awesome. It's one of the great things about Bocas. A lot of people think Bocas is like a beach-in-sun kind of destination, when in reality it's more like an ecotourism destination where mangroves make up the most part of the archipelago, you know, and this is what the ecotourism, the biodiversity that we have here is actually the greatest feature of our destination as opposed to, like, beaches.

Both IL and NIL expressed a deeper sense of connection to the mangroves than LSM, often citing identity and rootedness when discussing the ecosystem. This can be summarized through testimony from an IL woman when she was asked about the benefits her community receives from the mangroves: “Identity. It is a part of us, the mangroves are a part of us,” and it highlights the deep tie that exists between locals and mangroves. Unlike LSMs, IL and NIL identify themselves as a part of the ecosystem. LSMs, however, recognized that the mangroves represent an important part of Bocas’ identity, but not necessarily their own.

Experiences

While IL and NIL suggested mangroves provided CES through being intertwined with their identities, LSM spoke of them more as a location to gain experiential CES benefits such as tranquility, escape, inspiration, and discovery. Although lifestyle migrants expressed feeling connected to the mangroves and valued their aesthetic and provisioning aspects, they often described these ecosystems as separate from their identity: “Well, just nature. You know, if you're surrounded by mangroves, you're in a pretty untouched, pristine place,” and continued to describe this feeling of being surrounded as a part of the aesthetic beauty that attracted them to this place and they value knowing there are mangrove stands to escape to. Some small business owners also talked about how mangroves provide some of the best places to take tourists to snorkel and experience aquatic life. In that sense, mangroves provide experiences they enjoy as well as derive direct economic value from.

Participants from every stakeholder group reported mangroves as a place where they felt happy, calm, and tranquil, particularly in the context of seeking out places to experience these mental health benefits in response to the COVID-19 Pandemic. In our study, some participants cited spending more time in and around mangroves during the COVID-19 pandemic and claimed that the mangroves provided a mental escape from the stresses of life. One IL said:

One can go in here and come out there. That's part of the beauty inside the mangroves. There are small entrances and exits and it is beautiful that you can get in here. And it's quiet. It is a part of the beauty of the community, and we need those spaces to help appreciate what we have.

A NIL said she spends time watching the mangroves:

Sometimes you leave depression… because you get distracted by everything. Both (by) the mangrove and the life and everything else happening in them, you get distracted for a moment. The mangroves make ferns and they make flowers. I mean, they have their own community within them, their own conservation. And this adds beauty both for ourselves and for people coming from other countries to see something different.

ILs and NILs also suggested mangroves provided a place to have an experience of escaping, just as LSMs did, which suggests that the experiential component of Fish et al.’s (2016) CES framework may contain the most convergence of ideas among local stakeholders.

Capabilities

ILs and NILs described their traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) gained through close contact with mangrove forests, social interactions within them, and generational storytelling about them. Many, particularly Indigenous stakeholders, also discussed remembering fondly and feeling nostalgic for the past when they were taught how to utilize mangroves for sustenance and for navigating in cayucos (canoes) during storms. These sentiments demonstrate the connectivity between identity (rootedness, sense of place, belonging and spirituality) and capabilities (knowledge, dexterity, and judgment) for these groups:

Visiting mangroves has a way of reconnecting me with the past. I remember learning how to look for fish with my brother and appreciating the presence of the other animals around while providing for my family. They [the mangroves] help me to stay in touch with my teachers even if they have passed.

Many also discussed how the mangroves provide a sense of general security gained through experiential proximity over time:

The mangroves form a fundamental role in the protection of housing and of the whole community, the whole island really, and that makes us feel secure. Because what they do is to serve as a barrier so that when the tide rises, it doesn't penetrate inwards and damage the land we use for planting and gardening. So you see they serve as that barrier, so that when the weather is bad, the tide can't go in and damage the land that is usable with the salt water. Because they don't damage them [the fields] you can plant and do anything with the soil that is there, which provides us with security and peace of mind.

Some LSMs discussed health and dexterity related to various forms of recreation in the mangroves. Some spoke of paddleboarding and kayaking through the mangroves for physical and mental health benefits (see above). LSM also suggested that they enjoyed learning about the mangroves and collecting new insights about them over time.

Relationship Between CES and Local Equity/Power Dynamics

We asked interviewees if they felt they had equal access to mangrove benefits, as well what they felt were the greatest threats to mangroves and whether or not they felt they had the ability to address those threats. When speaking about CES related to mangroves, many shifted the discussion by talking about how mangrove removal and pollution have impacted their ability to access important CES benefits, which they expressed as impacting their general well-being. Many ILs felt that when mangroves are removed, they no longer recognize those places or identify with them; they also discussed the sadness associated with losing interactions with plants and wildlife when mangrove removal occurs:

When mangroves are being cut or are removed it scares away the animals that we love to see and that bring us peace, like sloths. Also, when someone cuts an area, we feel like we can’t go there anymore, like it’s no longer our place, but claimed. Plus, there are no longer any fish there so I guess we don’t have a reason to visit places that were important to us once they have been cut.

Many ILs and NILs spoke not only about how they felt when mangroves were removed, but also about what they believed was the rationale for LSMs to remove mangroves and why they often get away with it despite it being illegal. Many ILs spoke openly about how some in their community used to strategically remove mangroves for both building materials as well as for charcoal production. Related to the capabilities section of CES, they demonstrated how their knowledge and judgment have changed over time and they accepted the rationale that mangroves should be left and that it was illegal to remove them. These interviewees, however, suggested that they felt their access to mangrove CES was being hindered by LSM who operate with different knowledge and derive benefits differently.

Many IL respondents were clear that “it has been forbidden to cut mangroves,” and “if the authorities catch you, you get a fine.” However, in the eyes of many IL, lack of and unequally distributed monitoring from the Ministry of Environment, and incentives for development from the Panamanian Tourism Authority have created two regulatory worlds in Bocas: one where mangrove destruction is illegal and another where it is incentivized. One IL woman from an outer island of BDT speaks to differential enforcement-based socioeconomic status concerning a new luxury hotel that is built on the fringe of a mangrove island:

We the Ngöbe are not going to mess with an island and fell trees there... the mayor, the policeman and all those people come to attack you, to attack me and to take me like this [mimed being taken away in handcuffs]. Why? Because I don't have money...The law is for the poor and there is no law for the rich. Gringos come in, they buy a piece of property and if the mangroves are blocking their view…. Then, whack.

A NIL also said:

Unfortunately, what counts here is the economic aspect. And if I have a lot of money and I like this beach area that has mangroves and I want to build a resort there, I pay the government and I cut everything and I make my resort and unfortunately, although it hurts us, that is how our country is. … I feel that it [the government] does not care if an [environmental] impact is caused or not, they are based more on who has money and who can pay.

While LSM seemed to also highly value ambient clean and healthy mangroves, our results show they tend to display more of a NIMBY (not in my backyard) attitude towards them – seeking to remove them when they hinder their ability to access their properties, block their views, or attract insects. For many, money was seen as the arbiter of power and dictated whether someone had the right to remove mangroves without regard for how this would impact access to CES benefits.

Many LSMs argued that money worked in the opposite direction. Some suggested that the authorities did not bother preventing IL and NIL from removing or polluting mangroves because there was no revenue to be gained from these fines. They felt that these groups were free to do as they pleased with mangroves and other ecosystems while they (LSM) were always being hounded for money and permits to do everything. LSM business owners also discussed how, particularly, ILs’ use of mangroves hinders their ability to derive experiential benefits. One LSM entrepreneur offered this illustrative observation:

Have you seen the entrances to the Ngöbe communities like [name omitted] or [name omitted]? They are disgusting, with trash everywhere. I can’t take guests to visit these communities because it makes them upset to see that. When they want to visit an Indigenous community, they expect to see something pristine and not trash everywhere. It isn’t necessarily their fault though, packaged products like sodas and chips are new to these places and they just don’t have the culture or the knowledge to know how to dispose of these things properly, so they just toss them like they do with banana leaves and husks and don’t understand that it’s different with plastics and bottles. They need to be educated.

Another LSM stated:

The ones that cut most are not the sophisticated, you know, it's the natives. They love it… And they are the ones that cut trees more happily than anybody else.

These quotes illustrate how some interviewees from the other ethnic groups view Indigenous groups as un/(under)educated and suggest that issues with mangrove pollution and cutting could be mitigated with access to better education. Attitudes towards trash in the mangroves also demonstrate why many Indigenous-led tourism initiatives have had difficulty in Bocas (Funari et al., 2020), which further conveys an understanding of how mangrove pollution and removal impacts the ability of IL to benefit monetarily from CES via hosting tourists in their communities.

Discussion

Our results are part of a growing movement to de-center economic valuations of CES and focus more attention on non-material dimensions of ecosystem services (Gould et al., 2019; Fish et al., 2016; Moore et al., 2022; Rodrigues et al., 2017; Treviño, 2022). Perceptions of CES at a local level aid our understanding of how a community values and assigns importance to its relationship with mangroves and well-being (Moore et al., 2022; Treviño, 2022,). Reviews of the status of CES as applied to mangrove and marine ecosystems suggest a need to identify ways to better assess intangible CES (Moore et al., 2022; Rodrigues et al., 2017). A significant criticism of ES and CES discussed in the work of Mucioki et al. (2021) is the inability of many frameworks to center Indigenous concepts and practices into their assessments thus limiting the ability to, for example, understand how changes in the timing of harvests due to climate change disrupt cultural practices and reduce Indigenous CES (ICES) benefits. The use of frameworks that center local and Indigenous knowledge as integral to CES can expand the conventional understanding of cultural resource use and stewardship (Mucioki et al., 2021). What began as research into achieving a basic understanding of mangrove CES became more complex as many CES mentioned by participants could not readily be assessed due to framework limitations. However, by expanding our framework to accommodate a combination of two approaches (Berbés-Blázquez et al., 2016; Fish et al., 2016) our research does more than just look for all the CES benefits as they are understood by one group of people in a particular location, and instead conveys how diverse communities understand and value CES differently, which has implications for considering how loss is felt and how governance might become more effective.

The first major takeaway from our findings relates to mental health as a CES benefit derived from mangroves and how this connection is understood and assessed by different groups. Moore et al. (2022) found that only 58 studies have focused on mangrove cultural services and values (CSV), and of those, only 3.5% specifically mention how CSV directly impacts health and well-being. Even the limited CES research that considers mental health benefits does so secondarily. The MA framework (2005) places mental health benefits as one subcategory (of many) of ‘tranquility.’ Fish et al. (2016) place “health” beneath the capability pillar in their framework but discussed health more in the context of physical and medicinal benefits rather than mental well-being or health. Our results show, however, that mental health is not only a significant CES for stakeholders as derived from mangroves, but perhaps should even be considered as a dominant CES that deserves more attention, particularly since these mental health benefits were shown to be derived from a combination of many different CES considering how they are typically analytically divided in currently available frameworks. The benefit of mangroves to improve mental health is a vital piece of information that has been overlooked.

A second takeaway is found in participants’ statements suggesting that members from each participant group felt that experiences involving deep immersion in mangroves helped to induce “flow” states (or moments where the ego is temporarily suspended through intense immersion in an activity or place), similar to shinrin-yoku’ or forest bathing (Siah et al., 2023), which are linked to reduced anxiety and depression, positive mental health, and a sense of cohesion between humans and nature (Bang et al., 2017; Csikszentmihalyi, 2008; Isham & Jackson, 2022; Mayer et al., 2019; Stoltz & Schaffer, 2018). Research that emerged from the COVID-19 pandemic revealed declining mental health levels globally (Lakhan et al., 2020) often associated with the nature deficit correlated with lockdowns (Tomasso et al., 2021). By providing a space for relationship building, mangroves promote feelings of belonging, and in turn combat a major cause of depression (Erzen & Çikrikci, 2018; Ishihara, 2018). Thus, immersion in the stillness of the mangroves, away from the rapidly developing areas of the archipelago, continues to provide a refuge for all of the stakeholder groups we interviewed, and many spoke about how these experiences have become increasingly important to their mental health and wellbeing.

The intersectionality of different CES benefits facilitates mental health benefits. While LSM made these connections between experiential components such as discovery, escape, and tranquility, for many IL and NIL, mangroves provide experiential benefits, but were also innately tied to their identity and capabilities – thus suggesting that the mental health benefits for these groups cross cut every pillar from Fish et al.’s (2016) framework. These results echo the work of Chakraborty et al., (2020) who discuss how Indigenous communities often derive recreational benefits from subsistence activities in ways that often go unnoticed and are underappreciated, but adds the component of the importance of identity. Our interview data show how community members receive direct mental health benefits from fishing and foraging with friends and family (also through experiencing other wildlife and flora while engaging in these activities) and through feelings of security when navigating through mangroves in storms. By providing a space for relationship building, mangroves promote feelings of belonging, and in turn combat a major cause of depression and loneliness (Erzen & Çikrikci, 2018; Ishihara, 2018). In this sense, the mangrove environment was seen as the calm in both the literal and metaphorical storms facing many local communities. This is important as livelihoods continue to transition from fishing to operating boats for tourism, a marked shift from spending time in nature to a more urban-focused existence, which potentially creates a transformed sense of cohesion between humans and nature thus interfering with positive CES-derived mental health benefits (Nawrath et al., 2022). Furthermore, close ties between mangroves and IL and NIL identity can facilitate intense negative implications for their mental health and well-being.

Our investigation reveals that there is a complex relationship between inequity and residents’ appreciation for mangrove environments stemming from the historical evolution of power dynamics in BDT. Locals’ experiences of inequity affected how they interacted with and intrinsically valued the mangroves as exemplified by responses to the removal of mangrove forests and economic and social disparities. However, stakeholder groups were inconsistent when placing blame for mangrove deforestation and pollution, as well as current inequities. Notably, the historical politics and group struggle the Ngöbe face have led to misunderstandings of both their practices and intentions with the mangrove forests. Misconceptions of community members’ use of mangrove ecosystems is one of the key challenges for mangrove conservation and is dependent on location and community-specific value systems. “Lacking an understanding of how local populations benefit from ecosystems can create unintended consequences and challenging situations for resource users” (Treviño, 2022: 874). These unintended consequences can be avoided if local and Indigenous community perspectives are centered in CES frameworks and practice, and if high levels of cultural competence are considered in mangrove management strategy and policy.

Another issue with many CES studies is that most seek only to examine or quantify “benefits” without considering how negative impacts on ecosystems can lead to the opposite of a benefit for certain stakeholders in different ways. Because mangroves are seen as a part of their identity, their loss was shown to elicit more intense detrimental impacts to the mental health of NIL and IL. Research has begun to address the complexities of ecosystem loss and human emotion and could benefit future research into CES related to vulnerable groups and ecosystems.

Ecological grief has been defined as ‘grief felt in relation to experienced or anticipated ecological losses, including the loss of species, ecosystems and meaningful landscapes due to acute or chronic environmental change’ (Cunsolo & Ellis, 2018: 275; Crossley, 2020). Lertzman (2015) suggested that when ecological loss is not properly mourned and left unresolved, stakeholders can develop ‘environmental melancholia’- or being psychologically unable to translate environmental concerns into positive/productive action. In Bocas, this seems to take the form of all stakeholders experiencing CES losses in different ways, but also casting blame on others, rather than collaborating for reforms that might relieve pressures on mangroves from each stakeholder group. It is necessary to caution that relative impact is important to understand, and though every group bears some responsibility for mangrove destruction, it is central to identify which types of practices have the most environmental impact and how these impacts are experienced by different groups. To address the sense of loss that many NIL and IL expressed further investigation is needed to examine how ocean-dependent people across different socio-ethnic groups are experiencing the loss of marine ecosystems in the context of ecological grief (Cunsolo & Ellis, 2018).

Study Limitations

This research demonstrates why CES cannot be studied based on an assumption that they are understood and accessed in the same way by every stakeholder in any given setting. The available frameworks were constraining our ability to grasp broader cross-cutting CES and involve understanding how existing pillars and sub-pillars interact. Furthermore, mental health is not the terminology in which most ILs discuss the issues they are facing, it is our interpretation based on our understanding of how they described the impact of mangrove loss impacting their access to several CES that are important to them.

Although we have close ties to the local and Indigenous communities that participated in our study, our presence as foreigners does not always facilitate full sharing of information, and we strongly recommend incorporation of local and Indigenous researchers as beneficial in the study of CES. Additionally, their participation would also overcome our slight language limitation given that some ILs speak Ngäbere as their first language and may have struggled to express certain deep concepts in Spanish. We do believe, however, that the rapport gained over the years likely allowed for higher levels of deeper sharing than could be gathered by researchers less familiar with the communities and presenting our findings back to the community for comment likely helped to alleviate participants concerns to the extent possible.

Conclusion

Less than 1% of the earth’s surface is covered by mangrove forests (Moore et al., 2022) and approximately 75% of earth’s mangrove forests are found within 15 countries in subtropical and tropical regions (Giri et al., 2011). Though their range and coverage are limited, the ES and CES benefits derived from mangrove ecosystems have global significance. Thus, poor management of mangrove ecosystems at both global and local levels has worldwide consequences. Our study demonstrates the importance of capturing locally identified CES to reveal community-specific benefits of ecosystems (Queiroz et al., 2017) to promote greater equity of mangrove forest governance in BDT. Our findings reveal cultural benefits of mangroves that have been under-researched, most notably mental health relief and strengthening feelings of identity and understanding how these benefits come together differently for different groups of stakeholders. When analyzing participants’ responses by stakeholder groups, similar responses were most often reported when discussing mental health benefits from the sense of peace fostered by the mangroves and the importance of sustainability. However, opinions tended to diverge when discussing mangroves' relation to identity and issues of inequity in BDT.

Our research highlights the need for more equitable mangrove governance throughout BDT to ensure the protection of mangroves and their cultural benefits to all stakeholders. Consideration of local stakeholders' cultural heritage, ancestral knowledge, and identity should be included when designing management plans, especially where power dynamics are uneven (Guerron-Montero, 2005). Additionally, future studies should explore CES frameworks that advance knowledge of locally derived CES and Indigenous CES benefits and that are inclusive of power and equity dynamics (Mucioki et al., 2021). The links between CES and mental health need further exploration and particularly in vulnerable, coastal Indigenous communities throughout BDT where development is rapidly underway. As resources become more scarce and traditional practices and uses of mangroves diminish, more studies are needed to better assess mangrove CES to promote mangrove ecosystem conservation for the well-being of both nature and humans (Malik et al., 2017; Moore et al., 2022). Deforestation of mangroves not only has lasting ecological and economic implications, but as our findings suggest, there are downstream consequences including impacts on intangible CES mitigating feelings of loss, eco-anxiety, eco-grief, and mental health. The exclusion of local and Indigenous voices and communities removes people as active stewards of ecosystems thus ignoring important mutualistic relationships between nature and people (Mucioki et al., 2021). The inclusion of local and Indigenous voices is of paramount importance in the designing, developing and steering of CES not only to identify the needs of their own communities, but for our collective survival.