Abstract
Marine protected areas (MPAs) are created to manage people’s behavior in their use of coastal and marine resources. Although MPAs have strived to deliver the objects of resource protection, they often face challenges in translating the accrued benefits into enhanced livelihoods of local communities in and around their areas of jurisdiction. We used Mnazi Bay-Ruvuma Estuary Marine Park (MBREMP) in Tanzania to appraise the scenario of pro-poor conservation. The purpose of comparison between park and non-park villages was done to verify the hypothesis that establishment and operations of MPAs impairs local socio-economic practices without robust provision of alternative livelihood safety nets. Agriculture remains a persistent livelihood occupation both in park and non-park villages. Artisanal fishing is a substantial livelihood occupation in seafront villages but a secondary activity in overall. Income and expenditure patterns indicated that non-park villages are better-off with significantly high income to expenditure ratios. Fishing make the most contribution to income in sea front villages as agriculture is doing in non-fishing villages. Impacts on livelihoods emanate from disrupted resource use patterns which significantly influence the communities’ perception on need, role and overall acceptance of the marine park. Traditional access and user rights are marred by MPA operations putting at stake livelihood security of the communities therein. Alternative strategies have not yet been given due thrust and local communities remain insecure in accessing political assets such as cooperatives, community credit schemes and financial assets such as government and/or commercial banking sponsored schemes and loans. Local communities are already carrying the costs of denied access to livelihood sources, but the marine park is not quick enough to translate the accrued value and benefit of the improved resource base in enhancing local communities’ livelihood and welfare. Reducing pressure on marine resources through sound management interventions will have to be accompanied by mitigating measures to safeguard household food security, such as compensation, and developing alternative sources of income. There is still considerable polarization between conservation and socio-economic welfare of the people. MPAs should focus on combining resource management with livelihood opportunities that provide economic benefits in the short-run to address economic disruptions emanating from disrupted access to the once common resources.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Barbier EB (2007) Natural resources and economic development. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 428 pp
Biostockpro (2012) What is the right income expenditure ratio for your family? http://www.biostockspro.com/fuel/financial-planning/family-budget-planning/. Accessed 01 June 2012
Birdsall N, Pinckney T, Sabot R (2001) Natural resources, human capital, and growth. In: Auty RM (ed) Resource abundance and economic growth. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 57–75
Brockington D, Igoe J, Schmidt-Soltau K (2006) Conservation, human rights and poverty reduction. Conserv Biol 20:424–470
Chatty D, Colchester M (eds) (2002) Conservation and mobile indigenous peoples: displacement, forced settlement, and sustainable development. Berghahn Books, Oxford, 420 pp
Christensen J (2004) Win-win illusions: facing the rift between people and protected areas. Conserv Pract 5(1):12–19
Chuenpagdee R, Bundy A (eds) (2005) Innovation and outlook in fisheries: an assessment of research presented at the 4th World Fisheries Congress. Fisheries Centre Research Report, vol 13(2). University of British Columbia, Vancouver, 113 pp
Coad L, Campbell A, Miles L, Humphries K (2008) The costs and benefits of protected areas for local livelihoods: a review of the current literature. Working paper. UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre, Cambridge, UK
CONCERN (2004) Community empowerment for livelihood security programme. Baseline Survey Report, CONCERN Worldwide Tanzania, Dar es Salaam
Crossland CJ, Kremer HH, Lindeboom HJ, Marshall Crossland JI, Le Tissier MDA (eds) (2005) Coastal fluxes in the anthropocene – the land-ocean interactions in the coastal zone project of the international geosphere-biosphere programme, Global change – the international geosphere-biosphere program series. Springer, Berlin, 231 pp
Fiske SJ (1992) Sociocultural aspects of establishing marine protected areas. Ocean Coast Manag 18:25–46
Halpern B (2003) The impact of marine reserves: do reserves work and does reserve size matter? Ecol Appl 13(1):117–137
IUCN (2010) Building policy for supporting livelihoods through conservation: review of bottlenecks to influencing environmental and development policy. IUCN ESARO Office, Nairobi, iv + 18 pp
Kamukuru AT, Mgaya YD, Öhman MC (2004) Evaluating a marine protected area in a developing country: Mafia Island Marine Park, Tanzania. Ocean Coast Manag 47:321–337
Kideghesho JR, Roskat E, Kaltenborn BP (2007) Factors influencing conservation attitudes of local people in Western Serengeti, Tanzania. Biodivers Conserv 16(7):2213–2230
Lanjouw P, Ravallion M (1995) Poverty and household size. Econ J 105(433):1415–1434
Lewis D (1997) Rethinking aquaculture for resource-poor farmers: perspective from Bangladesh. Food Policy 22(6):533–546
Malleret D (2004) A socio-economic baseline assessment of the Mnazi Bay – Ruvuma Estuary Marine Park. IUCN EARO Publication Service Unit, Nairobi, x + 126 pp
Malleret D, Simbua J (2004) The occupational structure of the Mnazi Bay – Ruvuma Estuary Marine Park communities. IUCN EARO Publication Service Unit, Nairobi, vi + 42 pp
Mangora MM, Shalli MS (2012) Socio-economic profiles of communities adjacent to Tanga Marine Reserve Systems, Tanzania: key ingredients to general management planning. Curr Res J Soc Sci 4(2):141–149
Mascia MB (2000) Institutional emergence, evolution, and performance in complex common pool resource systems: marine protected areas in the Wider Caribbean. PhD thesis, Department of the Environment, Duke University, Durham, NC
Mascia MB (2001) Designing effective coral reef marine protected areas: a synthesis report based on presentations at the 9th International Coral Reef Symposium. IUCN World Commission on Protected Areas-Marine, Washington, DC
Mascia MB (2004) Social dimensions of marine reserves. In: Dahlgren C, Sobel J (eds) Marine reserves: a guide to science, design, and use. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 164–186
McShane TO, O’Connor S (2007) Hard choices: understanding the trade-offs between conservation and development. In: Redford KH, Fearn E (eds) Protected areas and human livelihoods, WCS working paper no. 32. Wildlife Conservation Society, Bronx, pp 145–152
McShane TO, Wells MP (2004) Integrated conservation and development? In: McShane TO, Wells MP (eds) Getting biodiversity projects to work: towards better conservation and development. Columbia University Press, New York, pp 3–9
Pollnac R, Christie P, Cinner JE, Dalton T, Daw TM, Forrester GE, Graham NAJ, McClanahan TR (2010) Marine reserves as linked social–ecological systems. http://www.pnas.org/content/107/43/18262.full
Pomeroy RS, Oracion EG, Pollnac RB, Caballes DA (2004) Perceived economic factors influencing the sustainability of integrated coastal management projects in the Philippines. Ocean Coast Manag 48:360–377
Pomeroy RS, Mascia MB, Pollnac RB (2006) Marine protected areas: the social dimension. FAO expert workshop on marine protected areas and fisheries management: review of issues and considerations, Background paper 3, FAO Rome, Italy
Robinson JG (1993) The limits to caring: sustainable living and the loss of biodiversity. Conserv Biol 7:20–28
Ruitenbeek J, Hewawasam I, Ngoile M (2005) Blueprint 2050: sustaining the marine environment in mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar. The World Bank, Washington, DC, 144 pp
Scherr S (2000) A downward spiral? Research evidence on the relationship between poverty and natural resource degradation. Food Policy 25:479–498
Sesabo JK, Lang H, Tol RSJ (2006) Perceived attitude and marine protected areas (MPAs) establishment: why households’ characteristics matters in coastal resources conservation initiatives in Tanzania. Working paper FNU-99. Research Unit Sustainability and Global Change and Centre for Marine and Atmospheric Science, Hamburg University, Hamburg
Sunderlin WD, Gorospe MLG (1997) Fishers organizations and modes of co-management; the case of San Miguel Bay, Philippines. Hum Organ 56(3):333–343
Tobey J, Torrel E (2006) Coastal poverty and MPA management in mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar. Ocean Coast Manag 49(11):834–854
URT (1997) Mtwara region socio-economic profile. United Republic of Tanzania, The Planning Commission, Dar es Salaam and Regional Commissioner’s Office, Mtwara
URT (2002) Population and housing census report 2002. United Republic of Tanzania, National Bureau of Statistics, Dar es Salaam
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mangora, M.M., Shalli, M.S., Msangameno, D.J. (2014). Livelihoods of Coastal Communities in Mnazi Bay-Ruvuma Estuary Marine Park, Tanzania. In: Behnassi, M., Syomiti Muteng'e, M., Ramachandran, G., Shelat, K. (eds) Vulnerability of Agriculture, Water and Fisheries to Climate Change. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8962-2_17
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-8962-2_17
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-8961-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-8962-2
eBook Packages: Earth and Environmental ScienceEarth and Environmental Science (R0)