Variations in community perceptions of ecosystem services within the Tana River estuary, Kenya: Implications for ocean governance

Coastal communities in the Tana estuary, Kenya, rely on a variety of economic sectors linked to ecosystem services, including small-scale fisheries (SSF), commercial prawn fisheries, and tourism. Despite its environmental and social importance, the estuary has been negatively impacted by overexploitation, pollution, and climate change. As a result, developing integrated management approaches for this area is a priority. The integrated approach to ecosystem services (ES) evaluation has widespread support because it emphasizes people’s views of ecological value to human well-being and aims to provide a solution to the rapid depletion of our planet’s natural resources. This study applied mixed methods to understand the perspectives of the communities on ES. It was hypothesized that perceptions of ES differ across communities with different socioeconomic characteristics, and this hypothesis was tested in two communities (Ozi and Kipini) that share the same ecosystem but have different socioeconomic characteristics. Kipini is an area near the ocean, whereas Ozi is a rural area further upstream. Differences were noted in the valuation of cultural services, while there were similarities in provisioning and regulating services. Mangroves, other trees, and river systems were considered to have higher ES provision than the ocean, floodplains, and settlement areas. The Ozi community ranked the ocean higher than the Kipini community, even though Ozi was located further upstream from the ocean; consequently, the perception that communities benefit more from resources that they are close to could be false. The relevance of using social ES identification to determine the distribution of benefits from coastal ES is highlighted in this study and will be beneficial for informing decision-making and developing all-inclusive governance structures.

expansion, driving environmental concerns to the bottom of the priority list. Rural communities whose livelihoods depend on sectors that rely on ecosystem quality, such as fishing and tourism, have been harmed because of the environmental deterioration of coastal zones (Owuor et al., 2017). Creating management measures to protect and increase these ecosystem services would be beneficial to such communities.
Effective management strategies must be developed in such a way that they have no negative impact on community well-being; otherwise, such management approaches in rural coastal regions result in a vicious cycle of environmental degradation and poverty (Pelletier et al., 2019). Understanding the socio-economic value of ecosystems to various user groups is critical for resource management and governance. It aids in the understanding of resource use patterns and the benefits of coastal ecosystem services to the different user groups.
Mapping and valuing ES can help the understanding of the complex socio-economic and environmental importance of coastal ecosystems to a wide range of users (Asah et al., 2014;Grêt-Regamey et al., 2015). Creating maps of ES and assigning a value to the ES using community participation highlights the importance of individual ecosystems, and how it can be utilized as part of a community-based decision-making process.
This approach has been used to understand ecosystems globally, such as the Mida creek in Kenya (Owuor et al., 2017) and the St. Lawrence estuary in Canada ( Jacob et al., 2021). In these cases, the approach proved to be effective in highlighting the importance of ecosystems to different user groups, which can help guide decision-makers in the conservation and management of such complex ecosystems.
The Tana River estuary is one of East Africa's most important estuarine wetlands. Because of its extensive mangrove area, the estuary offers essential ecosystem services such as biodiversity preservation for endangered species, pollution mitigation, cultural services, and food production, notably for small-scale fishers Mwamlavya et al., 2021). The Convention on Wetlands of International Importance designated the area as an important ecological and bird reserve in 2012 (Ramsar, 2012). Despite the critical importance of the area, human activities such as conversion of mangroves into farm areas, mangrove overexploitation for timber and firewood, overfishing, poor land use and agricultural practices and interruption of water flow from upstream (Samoilys et al., 2011;BirdLife International, 2016) continue to impact this estuary.
Kenya has a well-developed coastal and marine protection governance structure, but it lacks an estuary-specific integrated management plan (Momanyi, 2016 (Momanyi, 2016).
The Kenyan government is speeding up efforts to improve the Tana estuary's long-term management, including funding studies that will aid in determining the value of ecosystem services to various user groups (van Beukering et al., 2015). Several studies have been conducted in this area, although the majority of them have concentrated on a single issue, such as fisheries (Fulanda, 2003;Munga et al., 2016), socio-economics (Odhiambo-Ochiewo et al., 2016, and ecosystem biodiversity (BirdLife International, 2016;Samoilys et al.,, 2011). Fewer studies, (e.g., van Beukering et al., 2015), have provided an in-depth assessment covering social, cultural, economic and ecological aspects for a multi-disciplinary overview of the Tana River estuary. This research intends to close this gap by giving more comprehensive assessments of the region by mapping and contrasting ES across various user groups (Ingram et al., 2012).
Understanding how and why ES decisions differ between societies and social groups has important implications for environmental management since it can help identify conflicting values and winners and losers in various circumstances (Daw et al., 2011;Lapointe et al., 2019). Different impressions of ES have been documented in both urban and rural groups (e.g., Shi et al., 2016;Lapointe et al., 2019). This might be due to the community's reliance on the environment -communities that rely on ecosystems for direct revenue are more likely to engage in ecosystem protection and maintenance (Lindsey et al., 2007).
This study applied an integrated approach (Yang et al., 2015) to examine local community perceptions on the ES provided by the Tana River estuary on the north coast of Kenya. Two distinct communities, Kipini and Ozi, which share the same ecosystems, although one is located farther upstream with limited access to amenities such as roads, electricity, and piped water, were the basis of this assessment. Because of the socioeconomic and geographical contrasts between the two communities, the study was able to investigate how socioeconomic position and ecosystem access influenced the residents' views of ecosystem services. This will address the current gaps in the knowledge needed to understand how these communities interact with this ecosystem, which will have ramifications for the Tana estuary's governance, management, and conservation.

Study area
Tana River is the longest river in Kenya. Its estuary contains a diverse range of habitats, including mangroves, deltas, estuaries, and beaches, which sustain a wide range of fish, trees, and birds (van Beukering et al., 2015). This study focused on the settlements of Kipini and Ozi in the Tana River estuary. Kipini is closest to the river mouth while Ozi is situated approximately 20 km upstream from Kipini ( Fig. 1). Coastal and marine fisheries are one of the most significant economic activities in Kipini's peri-urban population, with artisanal fishers and artisanal catch rates among Kenya's highest (Abila, 2010;GoK, 2016b). Ozi is a rural village, with most of its residents reliant on riverine agriculture and fishing (van Beukering et al., 2015).

Data collection and analysis
Data was collected through household surveys and focus group discussions and was combined in a matrix approach with Land Use Land Cover (LULC) mapping to understand the perception of ES by the two communities. LULC is the classification of human activity and natural components on the landscape over time using recognized scientific and statistical techniques.
Remote sensing software approaches, such as supervised and unsupervised classification, are used for LULC classification (Di Gregorio, 2005).

Household survey
Structured interviews were conducted in the communities to obtain data on the demographics, the use of the different ecosystems in the area, and the ES they provided to the community. There are 801 households  The LULC classes were combined with ES, based on the definition by Kandziora et al. (2013). The matrix from this combination was presented to respondents for ranking/scoring using the Likert scale. The participants were asked how important each ecosystem type was for providing ES. Ranking was done after a discussion among the participants and after consensus reached. Valuing ranged from 1 (low) to 5 (high) (Burkhard et al., 2009). The matrix is shown in Table   1 and a summary of the methodological approach is shown in Figure 2.
Two focus group discussion workshops were conducted in Kipini and Ozi in April 2017. All the relevant stakeholders in natural resources management

Results
The most significant source of income for the residents of Kipini was fishing, which was followed by farming and trading. Farming of rice, bananas and mango was the primary source of income in Ozi, followed by fishing and trading. Between the two communities, there were considerable educational disparities, with Kipini having more educated people than Ozi. However, there were no substantial financial differences between the two villages (Fig. 3).
Mangroves, palms, and floodplains are among the LULC types found in the Tana estuary. Mangroves predominate closer to the river mouth, whereas farmlands on the floodplains predominate farther upstream (Fig. 1). Distance / proximity of the two settlements of Kipini and Ozi to the various LULC classes vary. Kipini is near the coast and mangroves, but Ozi is nearer to other LULC classes like palm trees and floodplains. Kipini was closer to the areas with evident cut mangroves than Ozi (Fig. 4).

Variation in ES scores between Kipini and Ozi
Both the Kipini and Ozi community indicated that mangroves and other trees provide the following ecosystem services: firewood, charcoal, erosion protection, carbon sequestration, cultural shrines, education, and research, whereas the inhabited places supported minimal ecosystem services (Fig. 5)    Other trees, palms, rivers, beaches, and flood plains scored highest in value, while ocean and settlement scored lowest. Other trees received the highest scores from Ozi, followed by mangroves, river, ocean, flood plains, and palms with the beach receiving the lowest score. Carbon sequestration, construction poles, timber, flood and erosion prevention, firewood, fishing equipment materials, and wild fruits are among the top ranked uses of other trees (Fig. 6). The Wilcoxon rank-sum test indicated a difference in ranking between the two locations for the river and ocean LULC classes (Table 2).

Discussion
This study sought to find whether there was a differ-  Previous studies have shown that coastal erosion is a major concern for many coastal areas in Kenya and that mangroves can offer coastal protection against erosion, storm surges, and floods (Kairu and Nyandwi, 2000;Zhang et al., 2012).