Perspectives in Coastal Human Ecology (CHE) for Marine Conservation T Shankar Aswani

Biological Conservation 236 (2019) 223–235

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Biological Conservation

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/biocon

Review Perspectives in coastal human ecology (CHE) for marine conservation T Shankar Aswani

Departments of Anthropology and Ichthyology and Fisheries Science, Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: Coastal human ecology (CHE) is a mixture of different theoretical and thematic approaches straddling between Actionable scholarship the humanities and social and natural sciences which studies human and coastal/marine interactions at the local- Coastal human ecology (CHE) scale and through intense fieldwork. Topics of interest include human coastal adaptations past and present; the Marine conservation historical ecology of fisheries and future implications; local forms of marine governance and economic systems; Research frontiers local food security and livelihoods, and indigenous/local ecological knowledge systems among many research themes. In this paper, I explore different strands of CHE in the study of tribal, artisanal, and small-scale industrial fisheries from the mid-90s onward that can contribute to the foundational knowledge necessary for designing and implementing successful coastal fisheries management and conservation programs. Marine conservation has often failed due to a lack of understanding of the fine grained marine human-environmental interactions at the local scale. In this context, I also examine developing and future research directions in CHE, and discuss their potential contribution for filling the gap in existing approaches to actionable scholarship in marine conservation. The strength of many CHE approaches lies in their potential for bridging humanism and natural science, and thus CHE approaches are well equipped to address many of the challenges faced by marine conservation practitioners today.

1. Introduction conservation. Bennett et al. (2017) provide an exhaustive array of approaches in the social sciences that are important to consider in in- Coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems are severely threatened forming biological conservation, and more recently, Bennett (2019) has by human activities. While this threat is spread across all habitat types also explained the role of marine social science for the same purpose. (Halpern et al., 2007), coral reefs are among the most vulnerable Generally, these positive reviews focus on social and cultural ap- coastal ecosystems in the world (e.g., Bruno and Selig, 2007). Multiple proaches that seek to understand human consciousness and rationality anthropogenic stressors such as marine pollution and sedimentation, as the principal driver to explain human behavior vis-à-vis the en- overfishing, ocean acidification, plastics, sea level rise, etc. are severely vironment. Less attention, however, is given to research regarding the impacting the oceans and coasts (e.g., Crain et al., 2008), and this de- biological and evolutionary underpinnings of actual human behavior, gradation is likely to worsen as the human population continues to cognition, and environmental use, which is also important to consider. grow and move to the coast (e.g., Neumann et al., 2015). From a re- Levi and Poe (2017) and Aswani et al. (2018) conceptualize the en- search perspective, dealing with human driven threats to coasts and vironmental social sciences for informing marine conservation in the oceans will require mustering and combining a number of natural and context of the Anthropocene, albeit the arguments are general re- social science disciplines to improve marine habitat management and commendations rather than specific prescriptions for local conserva- increase the effectiveness of local interventions. Paying attention to the tion. Scaling-down, which is necessary for concrete conservation in- interactions between humans and the environment for resource man- terventions and outputs, requires a more theoretically focused and agement and conservation has been recognized for decades (e.g., actionable scholarship/science (Palmer, 2012), or what I refer to as Mascia et al., 2003; Mace, 2014), with economic approaches being Coastal Human Ecology (CHE). It is important to note that human emphasized in mainstream management and conservation (e.g., eco- ecology as a field that studies the ecology of humans (e.g., their nu- system services [see Hare, 2016]). trition, health, foraging, cooperative behavior, population dynamics, In recent years, various papers have exalted the importance of other etc. [as other living organism]) has been around for more than a cen- ‘environmental’ (Moran, 2010) and ‘conservation’‘social sciences’ tury and its practice has crisscrossed a number of disciplines and topics (Bennett et al., 2017) for informing biological management and in the natural and social sciences (and has often been named

E-mail address: [email protected]. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.05.047 Received 26 February 2019; Received in revised form 13 May 2019; Accepted 23 May 2019 Available online 04 June 2019 0006-3207/ © 2019 The Author. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/BY-NC-ND/4.0/). S. Aswani Biological Conservation 236 (2019) 223–235 differently). Its use for understanding coastal and marine-humans in- From an applied perspective, CHE researchers can use this fine- teractions has been identified by Ruddle (1996), Castilla (1999) and grained knowledge (e.g., details of human marine foraging behaviors more recently by Jennings et al. (2009) and Berkes (2015) among and indigenous knowledge systems) for employing a common language others, but more details regarding its contemporary breadth and po- that can build better partnerships with natural scientists and local tential for informing marine conservation is necessary. communities for local resource management and/or conservation. This Most of what I call CHE is a hybrid of natural and social sciences is important because many community-based marine conservation and, for the most part, it cross-fertilizes humanism, social sciences, and programs have failed or barely survived (e.g., in Melanesia [e.g., Foale ecology/human ecology more intensively than the other conservation and Manele, 2004]) as a consequence of the frequent lack of detailed or environmental social sciences, albeit all these are deeply interrelated socio-cultural and ecological knowledge about human-environmental and draw concepts and methods from each other. CHE draws from interactions at the local scale. This information can also be scaled-up theories, concepts, and methods from archaeology, paleoecology, an- from the local to the global (through cross-cultural analysis of parallel thropology, human geography and ecology, evolutionary ecology, be- or dissimilar case studies) (e.g., Cinner et al., 2016), which is significant havioral science, experimental/environmental economics, climate sci- because international and global conservation strategies are often in ence, zoology, oceanography, and marine biology among others. CHE complete disjuncture with resident understandings and what occurs or examines different dimensions of human and coastal/marine interac- needs to occur locally. Finally, coastal and nearshore ecosystems, which tions (of both individuals and groups), and focuses on local-scale pro- are at the interface between land and the open sea, as well as the ocean cesses and on intense and long-term fieldwork using a combination of itself, present a set of management challenges that general conservation interdisciplinary qualitative (e.g., participatory observation and open- approaches on land are unsuitable for. Humans adapt and interact with ended interviews) and quantitative (e.g., focal follows, cost-benefit and the coasts and the oceans in different ways than on the mainland, in- nutritional analyses, time allocation studies, etc.) field methods. It is cluding how they view and deploy mobility and navigational knowl- also important to note that CHE studies also include case studies of edge, the way they conceptualize and exploit marine resources (past other aquatic environments including riverine and lake habitats, but in and present), and the kinds of coastal and marine property systems that this paper I retain the epithet ‘coastal’ because the brunt of these studies have developed to use and access marine resources among other di- are in coastal and nearshore marine contexts. mensions. Why should CHE be treated differently than other natural or en- In this paper, I explore different strands of research that I group vironmental/conservation social science approaches? And what can under the umbrella of CHE (which can belong to other disciplines such CHE provide that is missing in the marine conservation tool box? CHE is as archaeology, human geography, ecological anthropology, environ- specifically designed to study how humans adapt (i.e., biologically, mental science, or environmental sociology) (Fig. 1) from the mid-90s cognitively, culturally) and transform (i.e., ecologically, socio- onward, and illustrate how various strands of CHE research in the study economically, and politically) coastal and nearshore marine environ- of tribal, artisanal, and small-scale industrial fisheries can complement ments, as well as discerning how humans closely interact with other and fill gaps in the existing foundational knowledge (e.g., current SES biological organisms and ecological communities, while simultaneously approaches) that is necessary for designing marine conservation stra- studying how these adaptations and transformations themselves re- tegies. I also examine developing and future research frontiers in the ciprocally influence individuals and human systems alike. So, CHE branching ecology of human dimensions as they relate to CHE, and seeks to unveil theoretically the proximate and ultimate causation me- discuss their potential contribution to marine conservation. The criteria chanisms that shape human environmental cognition and behaviour. By for grouping different strands of CHE in this paper approximate understanding how and why local individual and group coupled human- groupings presented by Barnes et al.'s (2013) in a discussion of the nature processes evolve, function, and transform marine coastal and contributions of anthropology to the study of climate change. These marine environments, CHE researchers (which may not call themselves include: (1) the historical context of human-marine interactions, as as such) can better understand the nuances of socioeconomic, political, understanding the past is key to address current environmental pro- cultural, and ecological interactive processes at the local scale. In a blems; (2) studies of contemporary ecological dynamics, socio-eco- more general way, traditional strands of CHE (e.g., human behavioral nomic behavior/institutions, cultural and societal values, political re- ecology, micro-economic behavior, territoriality studies, indigenous lations, and governance institutions that inform our understanding of knowledge systems, etc.) can converge research encompassing the human-marine interactions for marine conservation (which I dis- concerns in humanism and the natural sciences, and therefore can in aggregate into various categories and sub-categories), and (3) the more some ways lead to the disciplinary consilience (Wilson, 1998), or the widely used strand of research that examine human-marine interrela- “interdisciplinarity” that most people today understand as fundamental tions as complex adaptive systems under a rapidly changing environ- for addressing the difficult challenges in marine and terrestrial con- ment and climate for building social and ecological resilience. servation. The selection of this non-exhaustive set of CHE themes (Fig. 1) and This kind of research somewhat differs from the more widely used case studies for marine conservation is also based on my 27 year ex- larger-scale and more holistic attempt to understand coupled human perience in CHE research and in leading or involvement in environ- and natural marine systems under the umbrella of socio-ecological mental management and conservation programs in Oceania, Africa, and systems (SES) theory (e.g., Folke, 2006; Berkes, 2015), or an approach more recently in Macaronesia (Canary Islands). Finally, it is important in which the “system” is the unit of analysis and is an approach epis- to note that advocating for detailed CHE research locally does not dis- temologically similar to the 1960s “ecosystems approach” in the social miss the importance of regional or global research/meta-analyses, as sciences (e.g., Rappaport, 2000 [1968]). CHE shares many concepts and Bruno et al. (2019) have, for instance, demonstrated the inefficiency of objectives with SES but it is epistemologically closer to Steward's local reef closures in sustaining ‘managed resilience’, thus showing that (1955) “culture ecology,” thus differing from SES in its units of analysis local research and action alone are insufficient, and that global analyses (often actor-based but not always [scale]), theoretical scope (often, but of reef protection strategies locally are necessary to show that efforts to not always, underpinned by neoDarwinian principles), and field research curtail CO2 are more urgent than ever. In a different example, Cinner methods (relying on observational/behavioral data rather than ex- et al. (2016) use a number of case studies to show that healthier coral clusively on perceptual survey data). While CHE is well suited for reefs occur in regions that still have effective local governance, such as building conservation interventions from the ground up due to its lo- customary management systems, and where there are high levels of cocentric perspective, SES can provide a bigger picture scenario and local engagement in management. What detailed CHE research can do thus CHE and SES should be conceptualized as complementary and not is provide better social and ecological baseline data/case studies for antagonistic approaches. scaling-up and producing more accurate global analyses and

224 S. Aswani Biological Conservation 236 (2019) 223–235

Fig. 1. Arrow length and thickness indicates thematic, theoretical, and methodological proximity of a research topic to core CHE interests. Legend clockwise: ACA (Archaeology and Coastal Adaptations), INS (Indigenous Navigational Systems), HE (Historical Ecology), HBE (Human Behavioral Ecology), EE (Experimental Economics), FS (Food Security), PE (Political Ecology), CMT (Coastal Marine Tourism), EFC (Ethnography of Fishing Communities), MPA (Marine Protected Areas), MTS (Marine Territorial Systems), LEK (Local Ecological Knowledge), MSS (Marine Socioecological Systems), ECC (Environmental and Climate Change), and PDD (Proximate and Distal Drivers).

concomitantly better local and global conservation policy. In addition, influenced human population growth and the out-of-Africa diaspora of advocating for local CHE research is not necessarily promoting local our species (Klein and Steele, 2013). resource management control exclusively, as research is showing the Based on the analysis of stable isotope of human skeletons, Sealy frequent failure of community-based projects in conserving marine (2006) has suggested that between 4500 and 2000 BP South African ecosystems (e.g. Foale and Manele, 2004). coastal foragers consumed large quantities of high-trophic-level marine mammals in addition to large quantities of marine mollusks, thus 2. Maritime interactions across space and time showing that resource dependency of San or San like foragers extended beyond terrestrial and marine invertebrate resources. What this re- History matters in conservation. Studying ancient human adapta- search shows is that maritime human adaptations have not occurred in tion to marine and aquatic environments is a foundational topic for resource poor areas or as marginal adaptations, but generally occurred understanding coastal human ecological deep history—and history is in relatively productive coastal ecosystem and commonly resulted in a fundamental for grasping context and local trajectory. There are several number of demographic and socio economic factors including high- historical study areas in CHE which are relevant for marine conserva- population densities, sedentism, societal cooperation, and inter- and tion. intra-resource completion and warfare that have had profound impacts of human evolution and cultural development (see Erlandson, 2001). Other research in this field has investigated the ecological effects and 2.1. Archaeology and coastal adaptations (ACA) sustainability implications of California Chumash Indian fishing strategies (fishing up the food web rather than down) over a period of 12 Conceptualizing ancient human adaptations to marine and aquatic thousand years (Erlandson et al., 2009); resource use patterns and environments requires an archaeological and historical understanding. settlement configurations in northwest Australia prior to the Holocene Coastal archaeological research on shell middens and other anthro- (Veth et al., 2016); and shown that Paleoindians in Alaska were con- pogenic features in the landscape have been fundamental for under- suming anadromous salmon as early as 11.500 BP, thus providing standing human dispersal and adaptation to coastal environments evidence that these people were not only “big-game” hunting foragers around many regions of the world. Erlandson (2001) suggests that (Halffman et al., 2015) among many other studies. Pleistocene archaeology reveals the significance of aquatic and mar- Recent and promising research for understanding human resource itime adaptations and their profound impacts on human dispersion and use across space and time encompass (1) the more accurate dating of the development of cultural complexity across many coastal societies in the earliest sustained (prior to 160 thousand years ago) consumption of the world. Such adaptations extend millennia into the past, with re- marine resources (i.e., beyond opportunistic foraging) (e.g., Jerardino, search in South Africa showing that the use of marine coastal resources 2016), (2) a better understanding of the significance (or not) of marine by early Homo sapiens extends as far back as the Middle Pleistocene or resources during periods of glaciation when terrestrial productivity may around 160 thousand years ago. Coastal adaptation and persistent have been affected, particularly surveying areas of abrupt bathymetry consumption of shellfish and other marine invertebrates by early hu- which may have been less affected by sea level changes (e.g., Fisher mans in South Africa, therefore, may have had cognitive and behavioral et al., 2010), and (3) studying the role or marine resources in terms of impacts on human evolution (Jerardino and Marean, 2010) and

225 S. Aswani Biological Conservation 236 (2019) 223–235 the resilience, vulnerability, and persistence/disappearance of human to study the deep history of human-environmental interactions in is- populations along coastal fringes. lands across Polynesian, the Mediterranean, California, and the Car- ibbean. They suggest that human ecological impacts of primary and 2.2. Indigenous navigational systems and trade networks (INS) secondary colonization not always resulted in island ecological degradation, and that understanding the asymmetric progression and This area of study is closely linked to the archaeological study of transformation of ecological niches across islands spatio-temporally can coastal adaptations but differs somewhat in its focal and experimental better guide conservation efforts today. nature. The archaeological study of human navigation and coastal Promising areas of research include the work of Kittinger et al. adaptation strategies stretches back for decades and in the context of (2015) who employ interdisciplinary research to suggest ways of: (1) shipwreck/nautical and underwater archaeology, George Bass' seminal recovering endangered species and ecosystems, (2) managing and research stretched across the Mediterranean to provide a unique conserving fisheries, and (3) educating the public about historical window into the ancient past of maritime cultures (e.g., Bronze Age) changes in the environment. Other research in understanding the nor- through the in situ excavation of ancient shipwrecks (e.g., Bass, 1986). malization of changing human perceptions of resource abundance, or Building upon the Polynesian experimental navigation promoted by shifting baselines (see Pauly, 1995), can explain why people are ac- Finney (1994) and others, archaeologist and ehnohistorians have pon- cepting of the ongoing and irreversible loss of terrestrial and marine dered on the nature of Austronesian colonization of near and remote biodiversity. Oceania by ancient marine voyagers, and concomitant terrestrial- marine environmental impacts (e.g., Kirch and Green, 2001). Other 2.4. Contributions to marine conservation research on navigational systems and exchange networks has included an analysis of prehistoric Western North American Chumash navigation Basically, marine archaeology provides lessons from the past, which and the development of social complexity (Arnold, 1995), and the study are fundamental to grasp local and regional human-environmental in- of the South China Sea interaction and trading spheres since the Iron teraction trajectories. This knowledge can inform present day marine Age (Hung et al., 2013) among a vast literature on the subject. Eth- conservation strategies for building resilience in vulnerable human and nographic and ethnohistorical accounts of seafaring and trade networks ecological communities that are experiencing rapid ecological change also comprises of a large literature including the work Ammarell (1999) (as this has also occurred in the past). In terms of navigational research, on the conceptualization and application of navigational knowledge understanding ancient and present pathways for human movements among the Bugis of Indonesia; Feinberg's (2003) work on Anutan and trade is important for conceptualizing the socio-economic path- Polynesian navigation and culture and society, and Agius (2012) ways of marine resource use and exchange, and the concomitant im- combination of various sources of evidence to build an ethnographic plications of this knowledge for conservation in the past, the present, account of seafaring and its persistence in the Arabian Gulf and Oman and into the future. Finally, conceptualizing the marine historical over the last century and a half. spatio-temporal variability of resources in the context of human ex- In recent novel research, Thomson et al. (2014) have utilized the ploitation can unmask the trajectory of conceptual shifting baselines DNA of ancient Polynesian chickens to better understand navigational and assist in restoring and managing aquatic resources more efficiently pathways of human colonization around Oceania. Similarly, Thorsby now and into the future. Evidence indicates that intimate knowledge of (2016) has used genetics to investigate the unrecorded human inter- cultural and ecological history, from ancient to recent events, is im- population prehistoric encounters and concomitant genetic, linguistic, portant to develop successful conservation projects today. This is illu- and cultural relations between Native Americans and Pacific Islanders. strated by McClanahan and Omukoto (2011) who show the relevance of In other parts of the world, for instance, the Danish NOW project has comparing pre-European colonization historical and modern fish cap- integrated the work of archeologists, anthropologists, and biologists to tures in Kenya for the purpose of designing marine conservation pro- understand ancient resource use patterns and human movements across grams in the region. In another context, failing to grasp the historical the Artic over thousands of years (NOW Project, 2017). complexity of indigenous marine tenure rights and their evolution over time when designing marine protected areas (MPAs) in the Solomon 2.3. The historical ecology of fisheries and seascapes (HE) Islands, or in Oceania more generally, is a recipe for conservation failure. Various projects in the region have collapsed due to, in part, a Marine historical ecology has shown how pre-historic and historic lack of grasping the historical complexity of indigenous tenure rights by human exploitation of particular resources have transformed the conservation practitioners (see Aswani et al., 2017). ecology of particular regions, and mounting historical ecological evidence suggest that humans have radically reduced the numbers of large 3. Ecological and economic behavior in marine environments marine mammals and other fish and invertebrates across most coastal and marine ecosystems in the planet (e.g., Roberts, 2010). In a seminal Conceptualizing human micro- ecological and economic behavior in collaborative research between fisheries and archaeological scientists, coastal marine ecosystems is of fundamental importance for their Jackson et al. (2001) showed that human fisheries overexploitation of conservation. super abundant fisheries resources has led to serious modifications of marine ecosystems through trophic cascade effects. In other work, 3.1. The behavioral and evolutionary ecology of marine foragers (HBE) Sáenz-Arroyo et al. (2006) used the accounts of travelers to reconstruct the size distribution and abundance of marine fauna in the Gulf of Human behavioral ecology (HBE) uses an evolutionary theoretical California, Mexico, between the 16th and 19th centuries. Their analysis framework to study the relationship between human behavior and an shows that categorizing the accounts of missionaries, adventurers, and existing ecological context for recognizing the ultimate causes of others as anecdotal and overblown is erroneous and that such knowl- human behavior. In a marine context, optimal foraging theory (OFT) edge of past richness is necessary to reflect on the trajectories of species models have been used to understand human foraging propensities in abundance and for setting the right management targets for their pre- marine diet breadth (food choices) (e.g., Thomas, 2007) and patch servation and recovery today. Similarly, McClenachan (2009) uses choice (habitat selection) (e.g., Aswani, 1998; Sosis, 2002) to measure photographic archives of recreational fishers in Key West, Florida to foraging behavior and possible (or not) incipient resource management show a drastic decrease in mean size and weight of targeted species and conservation implications. They have also been used to gauge the between 1956 and 2007. foraging practices of past cultures in an archaeological context, as At a larger scale, Braje et al. (2017) used a combination of methods Kennett (2005) has done to reconstruct Chumash diet and foraging

226 S. Aswani Biological Conservation 236 (2019) 223–235 strategies in the Channel Islands, California or Nagaoka (2002) for foraging cooperative behavior (beyond cultural ideas and perceptions), prehistoric subsistence change in New Zealand. and this type of detailed micro-ecological information, which is rarely Research on artisanal fishers has used foraging theory to study the collected, can really inform the design of marine resource management spatial mobility of Ecuadorian shellfish foragers and relate their re- and conservation projects locally (see Heinen, 1992). For example, in source patch rotation not only to sustainable resource use but also to my own work, we have imported research results of an OFT analysis of the maintenance of common property institutions (Beitl, 2015). Alvard fishing behavior (Aswani, 1998) into a GIS database for visualizing the and Nolin (2002) have examined subsistence sperm-whale hunting and spatio-temporal mobility of foragers, and in turn, using such informa- discovered that cooperative behavior among fishermen yielded a higher tion for designing spatio-temporal MPAs that protect marine stocks (in per capita caloric return than fishing individually, and hence hinting at part) while having the least negative effect on food security and live- the causes for the evolution of cooperative hunting among human lihoods (see Aswani and Lauer, 2006; cf. Aswani et al., 2017 for un- marine foragers. Approaches like Cost Signaling Theory (CST) have also derstanding problems with conservation work in Melanesia). In a si- been used to show how hunters in Meriam, Torres Strait (Australia) milar context, Sanchirico and Wilen (2001) have used bioeconomic “signal” their underlying abilities as hunters, risk-takers, and leaders by modelling to understand the spatial mobility and dynamics of fishers, generously giving away their turtle hunts in public feasting and waiting and shown how such knowledge can assist in marine reserve design and for no reciprocation by their friends and kin (Bird et al., 2001). Other creation. Experimental economics in fisheries, on the other hand, can evolutionary approaches have dealt with resource provisioning in diagnose stakeholders' propensity to cooperate (or not) under different maritime contexts but have not relied in behavioral models per se to institutional arrangements, particularly as people are subjected to the understand human activities. Henrich and Henrich, 2010) have used pressures of environmental and climatic change. Understanding local cultural evolutionary models to show that many Fijian food taboos held cooperative strategies, or lack thereof, are of great importance for by pregnant women are for marine species that are toxic, and examine predicting the success or failure of any management or conservation familial transmission of this knowledge to explain patterns of Fijian program. This has been illustrated by Barnes et al. (2019) who have social learning and resource management consequences. recently shown that cooperation (through communication regarding Current areas of research in this field are expanding rapidly in- gear use, fishing locations, etc.) between competitors enhances con- cluding: (1) a closer rapprochement between HBE and evolutionary servation outcomes across a number of regions in the world. biology (Nettle et al., 2013) for a more complete understanding of human adaptations in marine environments and behavioral variance in 4. Socio-cultural behavior in marine environments diverse ecological contexts (e.g., tropical, temperate, artic) and (2) the use of more rigorous sampling, data collection, and statistical techni- Research in this area include a wide span of research that is relevant ques to test predictions of forging models like the Marginal Value to marine resource use, management, and conservation including Theorem (MVT) that are yet to be rigorously tested with marine for- fishing ethnographies, coastal and marine tourism, the political ecology agers. This kind of research can help to develop innovative and rigorous of fishing and aquaculture, and coastal food and livelihoods security methods to better understand the spatial mobility, fishery economic and sovereignty. strategies, and responses to the alteration of food webs (e.g., resulting from climate change and overfishing) of fishers. 4.1. Ethnographies of fishing communities (EFC)

3.2. Experimental economics in fisheries (EE) Current ethnographies, mainly drawn from the anthropology of fishing communities, include studies on socialization and social re- Experimental economics in fisheries is used to study cooperative production, psychological factors in fishing, identity, class differentia- behavior in the collective management of small-scale fisheries. For in- tion, gender, cultural heritage and ritual performance, health, and stance, Aswani et al. (2013) examined the effect of various socio-eco- transnationalism and globalization among other areas of research. Of nomic variables (e.g., age, education, ethnicity, occupational status, relevance to CHE (i.e., for documenting and uncovering proximate level etc.) in prompting cooperative behavior among fishers in the Roviana causation processes, or ‘culture’ in marine ecological contexts), for in- Lagoon, Western Solomon Islands. They employed a Public Goods Game stance, includes work such as Pollnac et al. (2012) who identify a (PGG) to understand people's propensity to cooperate or not in a si- number of psychological factors globally (such as notions of ‘adventure’ mulated common property fishing context. Similarly, Lopez et al. and ‘self-reliance’) that are related to fishermen's stout reluctance to (2012) used various “framed” field experiments in fishing communities exist a fishery even when resource scarcity leads to lowering incomes. in the Colombia Caribbean to gauge whether cooperative behavior was In a different context, Walker's (2001) research on gender differentia- more or less likely to occur in the context of imported “regulatory tion in Ghana fisheries, for instance, shows how well intended devel- pressure” or “pro-social emotions,” with the latter being found to be opment projects to empower women actually can have the opposite more significant than the former. Revollo-Fernández et al. (2015) re- effect. Walker describes how loan schemes for women and various searched gender roles and propensity to cooperate in resource man- changes in the law have resulted in the breakdown of traditional gender agement in coastal fishing communities of Baja California, Mexico. roles, economic networks, and livelihood strategies; this leading to a Using various game theory laboratory and field experiments, the au- unrestrained exploitation of marine resources. thors revealed that women had a greater proclivity to cooperate in Cultural heritage has also been an area of research including the fisheries management than men when sanctions and social reprimands work of Nadel-Klein (2003) who studied the comodization of culture were announced in the experiments, thus suggesting the important role and heritage in coastal Scotland as communities reinvent themselves to of women in resource management. mitigate the impacts of North Atlantic fisheries demise. Other research Future research in this new field will have to develop more realistic has explored the health effects of HIV-AIDS of fisher folk households in tools/methods to understand the cooperative behavior and social in- Africa and SE Asia, and has argued for the need to better understand the terconnectivity of actors and institutions in fisheries governance at cultural intricacies of HIV transmission in these communities in order to local, regional, national, and international scales. ameliorate its spread and impact (Allison and Seeley, 2004); human health an important factor in understanding well-being in human-en- 3.3. Contributions to marine conservation vironment coastal interactions. In a global scale, anthropological studies are problematizing issues associated with commodity chains, Marine human behavioral and evolutionary ecology research can markets, and commercialization strategies in fisheries. For instance, explain the underlying causes of human behavior in resource use and Bestor (2001) studied the activities in Tokyo's Tsukiji seafood market to

227 S. Aswani Biological Conservation 236 (2019) 223–235 better conceptualize the cultural specificity of a locality (the fish local stakeholders, and the transformation of local common property market) in the context of global flows of capital and commodity chains rights in Indonesia (Armitage, 2002). in the international seafood trade, which have serious implications for Novel research includes Le Heron et al. (2016) who present ways to marine resource management and conservation. foster non-sectarian groups of stakeholder who actively remove their Current research in this area is producing interesting ethnographies. disciplinary and worldview biases for tackling ‘wicked problems’ in For instance, Moore (2012) in a maritime multispecies ethnography is marine conservation. Future research in political ecology will have to examining the role of lionfish as an alien species introduced into the further investigate how local, national, and international stakeholders Caribbean and how local fishermen are reacting economically and conceptualize, identify, choose, or conform (or not) to the im- symbolically to the challenges and opportunities that invasive species plementation of marine regulations and governance systems. produce both in natural and social spaces. Recently, Pauwelussen and Verschoor (2017) have proposed the concept of “amphibiousness” to 4.4. Coastal food and livelihoods security and sovereignty (FS) better conceptualize the local understanding of the interface between marine foragers and their coral reefs in Indonesia. Such ontological An important concern in CHE research are issues of food security shift, they argue, can better achieve marine conservation outreach goals and sovereignty among fisher folk around the world, particularly in the at the interface between science, technology, and society (STS). In a developing world were economic uncertainty and poverty traps are recent edited volume, Levin and Poe (2017) are examining the multiple more profuse (Cinner et al., 2009). Allison and Ellis (2001) propose that ecological, socioeconomic, political, cultural, and symbolic pathways a “livelihood approach,” which examines how fisher folk cope with and that fishing communities are facing to adapt in the context of the An- adapt to environmental and economic changes, is needed to better in- thropocene, which is an increasingly challenging epoch, as the human form management decisions in small-scale fisheries around the devel- population continues to swell and the marine environment to rapidly oping world. Fabinyi et al. (2017) have also shown how a nuanced degrade. analysis of Philippines fishing communities can unmask the in- completeness of a discourse about food security and fish abundance, 4.2. Coastal and marine tourism (CMT) and shown that policy makers need to better understand the multiple pathways of trade and peoples socioeconomic networks if marine The study of coastal and marine tourism is important because this conservation and food security is to be achieved in the global south. activity is an economic driver in many coastal nations, and is known to Understanding, for instance, the social dynamics of segregated in- have pronounced local effects (e.g., Diedrich, 2007; Miller, 1993), with formation networks in the long-line fishery in Hawaii would have fa- particular implications for conservation, as both a driver for resource cilitated inter-network communications between different stakeholders, degradation and preservation. Frequently, these impacts have been which would have prevented the by-catch of thousands of sharks recorded as being socially and environmentally negative (e.g., Wong, (Barnes et al., 2016). 1998), and these deleterious effects are likely to exacerbate with the Other research has dealt with the issue of marine food sovereignty, looming impact of climate change related processes such as sea level or the capacity of small-scale fishers to control the production, dis- rise and coastal erosion (Moreno and Becken, 2009). tribution and consumption of marine products in lieu of national or Other research on marine tourism has examined issue such the re- multinational corporations, and that the rights of small scale fishers are lationship between tourism and conservation and resource manage- better protected by governments like in South Africa (e.g., Sowman and ment in coastal Papua New Guinea (West, 2006), the strengthening of Cardoso, 2010). Recently, for instance, Cisneros -Montemayor et al. social bonds and trust among communities in Dominica to cope with (2016) conducted a global assessment of almost 2000 coastal in- rising tourism (Holladay and Powell, 2013), the relationship between digenous communities across 87 countries to show the fundamental educational programs and local perceptions of tourism in coastal importance of marine resources to coastal indigenous communities, and Thailand (Bennett and Dearden, 2014), and the use of participatory advocate for the recognition and protection of indigenous knowledge mapping and GIS to map incipient resource use conflicts and tourism in and production systems to enhance the livelihood sovereignty of these the Solomon Islands (Aswani et al., 2015). Current and interesting re- vulnerable communities. In this context, Barbesgaard (2017) has research in this area includes research on the social and ecological vul- cently shown that small-scales fishers, whether indigenous or not, are nerabilities of coastal communities to marine tourism development in increasingly becoming politically active to protect their rights and food small islands states (e.g., Gough et al., 2010), and studies of human- sovereignty, as they fight national and international attempts at ocean cetacean interactive trajectories, and both their deleterious and positive grabbing in the name of blue growth. effects (e.g., Orams, 1997) among other research frontiers. Present promising research includes venues by which people attempt to secure their food security and sovereignty in small-scale 4.3. The political ecology of fishing and aquaculture (PE) fisheries (e.g., Fabinyi et al., 2017). Further work will be required to understand the multiple coping pathways of coastal peoples' as they are Political ecology is a useful lens to examine the often asymmetric increasingly faced by food insecurity fostered by resource degradation relations of power between local actors, involved scientists and con- and the effects of climate change (e.g., global marine hotspots). In this servationists, policy makers, and donors, whose competing interests sense, there is a need to understand the micro-ecological interactions of often affect the outcomes of conservation practices. Scholars using fishers and ciguatera poisoning (Ruddle, 1996) to better gauge the political ecology have been able to assess why even well-intentioned consequences of this dinoflagellate toxin to local health and livelihoods. management schemes designed with consideration for local stake- Also, attention will need to be given on how social asymmetries (e.g., holders (but without a proper assessment of existing power asymme- gender, ethnicity, class, etc.) in coastal marine resource dependent tries, among other things) may end up as “social” failures (e.g., Christie, communities influence food security coping strategies among other 2004). For instance, Campbell (2007) has used a political ecology fra- subjects. mework for studying asymmetries in power relations between local stakeholders and outside agents involved in turtle conservation in Costa 4.5. Contributions to marine conservation Rica, and her research has helped foster the conceptualization of a more just and stakeholder-centered turtle conservation project in the region. First, natural scientists often misunderstand the nature of ethno- Other research has examined the relationship between aquaculture graphic work often as a result of different academic languages and production and mangroves, the unequal access to resources among theoretical paradigms between social and natural scientists. However, stakeholders with the often governmental favoring of industry over ethnographic studies, which often use painstaking qualitative data

228 S. Aswani Biological Conservation 236 (2019) 223–235 collection methods (e.g., participant observation, open-ended inter- stocks. views, life-histories, etc.) as well as survey/quantitative data for un- Other researchers are also incorporating LEK into GIS databases to derstanding local processes, can open venues for developing sharing document and better comprehend fishers' marine cognition and spatio- knowledge networks for better communication between coastal devel- temporal resource use and access, and to use this knowledge to build opers and local communities as well as regional and national authorities partnerships with local communities for marine resource conservation for appropriate and inclusive resource management and conservation. (e.g., Stoffle et al., 1994). For instance, researchers have used partici- They can also inform the public of commodity chains, markets, and patory GIS for demarcating and cataloguing Miskito Indians reefs in commercialization strategies in fisheries to better inform consumers Nicaragua (Nietschmann, 1995), and to produce habitat maps with about the consumption of vulnerable and/or endangered marine spe- Grenadine Islands fishing communities that were informative to re- cies. Finally, ethnographies can take a closer look at the effects of cli- source managers (ecologically valuable) and which represented local mate change not only on the socio-economic or environmental aspects perceptions of habitat use and distribution (Baldwin and Oxenford, of fishing communities, but also on the effects to their social and cul- 2014). Other work has mapped local perceptions of environmental and tural identity (e.g., sense of place), which have an effect on how people climate change in Madagascar, and evaluated how these perceptions interact with the environment. are influenced by markets, religion, and NGOs among other forces Second, marine tourism research can provide information for de- (Lemahieu et al., 2018) veloping tourist initiatives that minimize local conflicts and assists in The inclusion and empowerment of LEK for enhancing resource ameliorating environmental impacts. Third, political ecology can stewardship (through such measures as MPAs) and for building resi- identify existing power asymmetries between stakeholders interacting lience to human generated environmental and climate change has in any marine resource management and conservation arena, and also gained prominence (e.g., Alexander et al., 2011; Narchi and Price, in aquaculture, and show how such differences can lead to marine re- 2015). In this context, researchers have increasingly examined the source degradation or not. That is, it can unmask the various roles of match between LEK and scientific knowledge for gauging their corre- players involved in environmental use, degradation, and management spondence, and practical applicability to management and conservation for improving resource management approaches and environmental in a rapidly changing environment, and for empowering local and in- justice locally, particularly in political contexts where corruption is digenous communities (e.g., Garcia-Quijano, 2007). Other current areas endemic. In this context, Finkbeiner et al. (2017) have used political of research include growing calls for the documentation, inclusion, and ecology to critically evaluate the Malthusian narrative in the analysis of empowerment of LEK for enhancing resource stewardship (through overfishing by the poor and marginalized, and have examined the root such measures as Marine Protected Areas [MPAs]) and for building causes of resource degradation (e.g., technology and the unhinged resilience to natural disasters and to human generated environmental consumption by developed countries), and suggest ways for using this disturbances and climate change (e.g., Mercer et al., 2010). Other re- knowledge for improving fisheries policies around the world. Finally, searchers have examined the relationship between LEK (as “rules of research on coastal livelihoods can furnish information to better protect thumb”) and the selection of marine habitats and preys across spatio- vulnerable coastal populations and environments. That is, the public temporal variability, or as suggested by Peloquin and Berkes (2009), and policy makers need to understand the multiple coping pathways of discerning the way fishers deal with multiple variables at multiples coastal peoples' as they are increasingly faced by livelihood insecurity scales during foraging. and health threats fostered by rouge fleets, resource degradation New research is also looking at the erosion of marine LEK and its through political corruption, and the effects of climate change. This consequences. For instance, Patankar et al. (2015) have shown the kind of local livelihood research can assist in global analyses, such as rapid decline of traditional authority and marine management (in- Béné et al. (2016) research on the connection between local fisheries clusive of local knowledge) in the Nicobar Archipelago (India) six years and aquaculture with poverty alleviation, which shows that this link is following the 2004 tsunami has resulted in institutional decline locally. still inconclusive. This calls for the urgent attention not only to LEK documentations but also for helping coastal small-scale and indigenous communities to 5. Marine knowledge and governance systems empower their knowledge systems vis-à-vis uninterested governments and predatory fisheries multinationals. A vast literature that closely intersects with CHE is on human marine indigenous ecological knowledge and governance systems, and 5.2. Marine territorial systems and co-management (MTS) this work is important for informing the design of marine protected areas (MPAs) and other marine resource management and conservation Like the study of knowledge systems, research on the sub-theme of programs locally. marine territoriality has a long standing tradition and includes a vast literature in anthropology and human geography alone (e.g., Kishigami 5.1. Marine local and indigenous ecological knowledge (LEK) and Savelle, 2005). Generally, these systems are informal or formal means by which coastal people and communities' appropriate sea space Marine indigenous, traditional, and local knowledge (or LEK) has to limit resource use and access using a wide range of territorial stra- developed over time as people interact with their natural environment, tegies (Ostrom, 2009). Past and present attention has focused on the and these socially and culturally embedded knowledge systems are role of customary marine/sea tenure (e.g., Hviding, 1996), informal dynamic and co-evolving with social and ecological changes (Berkes, (e.g., Durrenberger and Pálsson, 1987) and formal Territorial User 2015). Research around the world has shown the importance of doc- Rights in Fisheries (TURFs) (e.g., Gelcich and Donlan, 2015), and the umenting LEK for grasping fishers' decision-making processes as they role of small-scale fishers' organization, e.g., cooperatives (Jentoft, interact with the marine environment (Johannes, 2002). Marine har- 1989)orcofradías (Bavinck et al., 2015), in co-management for reg- vesting (and its concomitant environmental effects) is constrained by ulating the access and use of marine resources in open or common the flow of information between fishers and the environment, the property systems. variability of spatio-temporal events, and the asymmetric distribution Oceanic customary sea tenure systems are generally inclusive tribal of target species across marine environments. For instance, Silvano territorial domains that often extend from island mountain peaks across et al. (2006) have shown the importance of coastal Brazilian eth- the lagoons and reefs and into the open ocean. Research has shown that noichthyology to understand patterns of migration of many commercial these are context-dependent and historically situated customary rights species and attendant fishermen's foraging decisions, and for pairing over sea space designed to control the use, access to, and transfer of that knowledge with scientific research for the management of local marine resources through various strategies (see Cinner and Aswani,

229 S. Aswani Biological Conservation 236 (2019) 223–235

2007). In SE Asia, studies include research topics such as the interplay paramount importance in people's concerns of MPAs and their con- between customary and national laws in fishery conflicts and the comitant acceptance, or not, of management (Blount and Pitchon, adaptation of marine tenure in the design of marine protected areas, 2007). This is demonstrated in Christie's (2004) research in Philippines including work in Indonesia (Adhuri, 2013) and the Philippines (Weeks and Indonesia coastal communities, which shows that MPAs that have et al., 2010). been deemed to be biologically successful in the short term are in fact Other areas of research on marine common property and open ac- social failures—a situation that threatens the aimed long-term biolo- cess resources have been the study of the development of informal and gical success of MPAs. Simply, if people don't cooperate conservation formal territoriality in artisanal and commercial fisheries. For instance, targets cannot be achieved, and as pointed out by Ferse et al. (2010) Acheson's long-term research (Acheson, 2003) has shown how after local peoples need to be seen as allies and not enemies, and properly decades of informal territorial strategies for “capturing the commons,” integrated into community-based natural resource management plan- Maine lobster fishermen have been able to politically and formally ning and monitoring, as there is no other option. activate some state-sanctioned regulations for controlling the lobster Current and growing areas of CHE inquiry of MPAs include interest fishery, while simultaneously maintaining informally, and often in the social and economic impacts of MPAs and how they intersect through illegal means, control of their lobster fishing grounds. Simi- with ecological ones, including such factors as food security, health, larly, Begossi (1995) has shown how informal ownership of fishing resource rights, employment and income opportunities, and community spots at Búzios Island, Brazil has been used to regulate territorial in- organization and cohesion (Mascia et al., 2010). Others, like Jentoft terloping by outsiders. Other researchers have focused on government et al. (2012) have also examined how people's perceptions of the social sanctioned formal TURFs, and these have been characterized as effec- and economic impacts of MPAs in Spain structure their acceptability or tive for managing invertebrate resources and small-scale fisheries. In not of these management regimes, and call for a critical evaluation of South America, for instance, research in Chile, Mexico, and Brazil have peoples' cultural perceptions of MPAs to better guide their design and shown that TURFs can be successful socially and biologically at sus- implementation process. Similarly, Bennett and Dearden (2014) have taining coastal fisheries (e.g., Gelcich and Donlan, 2015). Similarly, shown that most communities in Andaman Coast of Thailand have a other research has been social and political investigations on the de- negative perception of MPAs resulting from their views of negligible velopment of co-management systems across the world (e.g., economic, subsistence, and governability benefits. McGoodwin, 1995; Pinkerton, 2011). Today, an array of co-management regimes exist with different control balances and management 5.4. Contributions to marine conservation strategies among different stakeholders, and are less or more successful at creating sustainable fisheries and fishing societies (Sen and Nielsen, Documenting and understanding local knowledge systems can allow 1996). for ways to better integrate LEK and Western science for building cul- Research frontiers in this topic are rapidly moving in various di- turally sensitive ways of designing and implementing natural resources rections. For example, various authors have examined ways of com- management and conservation policies locally. This is particular bining different customary and modern territorial arrangements for poignant because the repercussions of ignoring LEK (whether one be- developing hybrid governance and co-management systems(e.g., lieves that it is useful for conservation or not) have grave consequences, Aswani and Ruddle, 2013), community-based marine protected areas as both biological and cultural (biocultural) diversity are inter- networks (e.g., Weeks et al., 2010), and disaster management plans connected (Maffi, 2005), and are fundamental for both ecosystem using LEK (e.g., Mercer et al., 2010) as examples. For instance, Weeks health and human adaptive resilience to stochastic and anthropogenic and Jupiter (2013) have illustrated how Fiji's approach of combining driven climatic and environmental change. On the other hand, under- traditional systems of coastal tenure management and modern co- standing local governance systems can lead to a nuanced understanding management systems has become a successful model for marine con- of variability in tenure systems and assist in the creation of co-man- servation to be followed by other Island states. Gelcich and Donlan agement or hybrid marine management systems (e.g., CMT-Ecosystem (2015) have been tracking the evolution of relatively young territorial Based Management [EBM]) for more environmental successful and so- systems such as formal TURFs and co-management systems in South cially just conservation programs. America to gauge their resilience to socioeconomic changes, surges in Failure to understand the nature of local tenure systems and the resource scarcity, the effects of climate change, and other socio- complexity of polycentric and nested tenure rights has led to marine economic and biophysical fluctuations. In regions where customary conservation problems in Melanesia in (e.g., Foale and Manele, 2004; systems have never been recognized or even properly recorded, such as Aswani et al., 2017). Finally, a critical study of MPAs stakeholders can in a post-apartheid South Africa, researchers are documenting tradi- uncover how indiscriminately applying conservation policies can result tional tenure systems and finding ways to bridge them with current in people's displacement from their adjacent marine territories, possible municipal, regional, and national legislation to improve rural liveli- conflict and violence, and asymmetric power relationships between hoods of coastal peoples (e.g., Sunde et al., 2013). Finally, Pauwelussen different stakeholders (e.g., tourist service providers and local fishers). (2015) expanding on Wilson's (2006) work has shown the mismatch This kind of case study research can assist in the study of MPAs in between social and biological interconnectivity in the context of tra- various regions of the world, as Pollnac et al. (2010) have shown that ditional Indonesia marine trade networks and the designation of marine rule compliance and concomitant ecological benefits are often asso- conservation. ciated with a complex combination of socio-economic and political factors rather than merely to enforcement and/or MPA rules. Thus a 5.3. Marine protected areas and social and ecological impacts (MPA) CHE analysis of MPAs can help the public and policy makers to ameliorate conflicts and, more generally, for creating MPA networks that Researchers have not only been interested in the ecological impacts carefully integrate local knowledge and governance systems into MPA of MPAs, but also the social and economic ones. For instance, in a wide design. analysis of marine and terrestrial protected areas, West et al. (2006) examine globally the political processes in the implementation and 6. Marine interactions in complex adaptive systems governability of protected areas that often result in people's displacement from the land and sea, conflict and violence, and asymmetric In the last two decades' complex adaptive systems thinking under power relationships, and reflect on how protected areas shape people's the umbrella of socio-ecological systems (SES) theory has grown in lives and living spaces. These kinds of analyses are extremely important many social and environmental sciences. As mentioned, CHE shares because they show that issues of social and economic equity are of many concepts with SES but differs in its units of analysis, theoretical

230 S. Aswani Biological Conservation 236 (2019) 223–235 scope, and ﬁeld research methods. Nevertheless, because SES is inter- the importance of analyzing perceptual social data for better resource ested in the interaction between natural and social processes operating management. at diverse spatio-temporal scales, it intersects with CHE in many ways and needs to be included in this discussion. 6.4. Contributions to marine conservation

6.1. Marine socioecological systems (MSS) SES research can conceptualize dynamics and causal flows in coupled human and natural coastal systems at various spatial, temporal, SES research is often conducted by multidisciplinary teams and and organizational scales, and this knowledge can help design man- often relies on modelling tools for its analysis. For instance, Österblom agement regimes that better respond to climate and environmental et al. (2013) use model-based scenarios to couple human and marine change hazards and opportunities (in some case). Detailed CHE studies systems to better forecast management actions in the future to sustain can help to better understand lower scale processes and hence enhance marine socioecological systems. In another example, Cinner et al. a SES analysis as it is scaled up to regional, national or international (2012) have proposed the use of Ostrom's (2009) diagnostic framework scales (i.e., feed into SES analyses more accurate localized social and for understanding the conditions that cause problems or create oppor- ecological data). In the context of climate change and vulnerability tunities in the governance of small-scale coral reef fisheries. Regulatory research, CHE can show how local and indigenous peoples around the efforts in marine ecosystems have separated ecological and social dy- world experience and respond to climate change, and this again can namics failing to account for the integrated essence of human-nature feed into SES analyses. This can furnish a broader understanding of how systems, and the effects of key synergies and trade-offs such as the climate change affect household food security, well-being, and health ecological legacies of historical livelihoods and ocean/land uses (Berkes among other topics (e.g., Crate, 2011), and allow for developing et al., 2008). The following decade will see the burgeoning of SES ap- adaptive marine conservation response plans that include local world- proaches to analyze and model human interactions in marine ecosys- views, perceptions, and concerns. Finally, understanding the role of tems. Recent research is already analyzing the social and economic proximate and distal drivers can provide better information regarding factors that result in differences in people's ideas and perceptions of the actual causes of marine resource degradation and this, in turn, may ecosystem services (e.g., Hicks and Cinner, 2014), using participatory better inform policy for marine conservation. modelling and scenarios approaches to estimate trade-offs between morally incommensurable values (or “taboo” trade-offs) in tropical 7. Discussion fisheries (e.g., Daw et al., 2015: 1), and gauging perceptual asymmetries in peoples estimations of environmental and climatic change Coastal human ecology (CHE) as defined in this paper is an ap- (Ensor et al., 2018). proach that crisscrosses various disciplines and themes to study human behavioral, cognitive, and cultural coastal adaptations, and also ex- 6.2. Environmental and climate change and coastal vulnerability (ECC) amines human driven ecological, socioeconomic, and political transformation of coastal and nearshore marine ecosystems. Simultaneously The study of environmental and climate change and associated CHE studies how and why these environmental adaptations and trans- coastal vulnerability is often framed under SES theory (e.g., Cinner formations themselves reciprocally affect individual and human system et al., 2012), albeit not all CHE research on this topic is couched in this behavior (i.e., anthropogenic environment feedback loops). Indeed, framework. Current CHE concerns include understanding the inter- most of the CHE research presented in this paper pertains to tribal, connectedness of social, economic, and political systems with ecological artisanal, and small-scale industrial fisheries because studying large- ones, and to identify the cultural factors and processes which make scale global industrial fishing poses a number of methodological and adaptation to these transformations more or less likely, and which make theoretical challenges for CHE, which are not intractable as demon- people's experiences to climate change multifaceted (e.g., Crate and strated by studies in urban human ecology, but CHE is better suited for Nuttall, 2016). For instance, Lazrus (2012) proposes a framework to scaling down and examining local processes. Yet a lococentric approach study population responses to climate change in small islands that ex- is fundamental if there is to be any hope for concrete conservation amines local knowledge and concomitant agency to adapt to change, actions and outputs, as global treaties and conservation targets (e.g., local perceptions of risk and vulnerability, and issues related to en- Convention on Biological Diversity [CBD]) are failing given the rapid vironmental justice, equity, and power. Others have used archaeology recorded decline of all Earth's ecological systems (Ripple et al., 2017). (e.g., Morrison and Addison, 2008) and ecological anthropology (e.g., CHE is not a panacea for marine conservation, but a fine scale approach Berkes and Jolly, 2002) to analyze longitudinal responses of marine to discern the nuances of socioeconomic, political, cultural, and eco- harvesters to climate change. logical interactive processes. In addition, there is no concrete empirical evidence (beyond case studies) to demonstrate that what I call CHE is 6.3. Proximate and distal drivers of resource use (PDD) more effective than other approaches for informing marine conservation. Yet, given that hundreds of millions of people still depend on Am emerging area of research in SES is understanding the role of artisanal fisheries and that the most biodiverse ecosystems, such as proximate and distal drivers in marine resource use and management, or coral reefs, are found mostly in undeveloped regions, resorting to re- the importance of direct impacts, such as overfishing vis-a-vis those search approaches and tools that can more realistically describe re- which have indirect effects, such as governance structures or global sident human-marine interactions to inform conservation does not seem markets, on marine ecosystems (Cinner and Kittinger, 2015). For in- to be that farfetched. stance, Hicks et al. (2016) have examined a number of distal social While the prevailing SES paradigm in environmental studies can drivers (e.g., new markets, technological innovations, etc.) that can provide a comparatively more holistic approach to studying human- lead to ecosystem shifts across a number of marine environments, and environmental interaction, CHE approaches are more appropriate for suggest ways to identify these social drivers as early indicators of im- scaling down locally. Unlike a SES analysis, which often relies on local/ pending resource degradation for better policy designation. Similarly, regional/national survey data (e.g., people's perceptions and secondary Brewer et al. (2013) show how Solomon Islands reef fisheries, parti- rationalizations of past, present or future behavior) to feed its models or cularly vulnerable species, are significantly impacted by population for calculating aggregate indices, most CHE depends on a combination growth and foreign markets. In new research, Forster et al. (2017) ex- of qualitative and quantitative methods that painstaking record local amine differences among stakeholders in their perception of the effect perceptions/attitudes and behaviors over time. This detailed and of proximate and distal drivers on Caribbean coral reefs, and highlight longitudinal effort often contrasts with the snap-shot data collection

231 S. Aswani Biological Conservation 236 (2019) 223–235

Fig. 2. Conceptual qualitative SES model of intermediate complexity incorporating different CHE data for considering 2 spatial areas and links with human systems. Model can also be constructed as a quantitative model of current ecosystem services losses, and simulate a “post climate change scenario” (projections) for marine resources in coral reefs (Courtesy of Eva Plaganyi). methods that are frequently used by SES researchers on rapid visits to is no short-cut for gaining the necessary detailed CHE data to inform communities and regions. Nevertheless, SES provides a general “big marine conservation, and universities, donors, and governments need picture” framework in which CHE studies can be incorporated to better to invest in long-term CHE research—the best research often being conceptualize, measure, and/or forecast human-ecological interactions decadal—if they are to gain useful local data for theory/knowledge at various spatial and temporal scales, thus providing more reliable data building and for practical and real conservation interventions on the for SES models. Integrating CHE data into SES models and analyses also ground. increases the number of management levers and probability of suc- To encourage a new generation of committed CHE researchers, in- cessful implementation of management policies and actions (Plaganyi terdisciplinary training within the auspices of disciplinary boundaries per. comm.) (see Fig. 2 for an example). These approaches, therefore, will need to intensify. For example, marine science program students are complementary. could get simultaneous training in marine ecology and fisheries an- Unfortunately, the number of CHE researchers is declining for var- thropology, while anthropology or human geography students inter- ious reasons. Within the social sciences and humanities this is often the ested in resource management/conservation and food security could be result of university departments in the Northern and Southern hemi- trained in fisheries science and management, and marine ecology more sphere focusing on humanistic training and relegating scientific/natural generally. These types of cross-fertilizing engagements, which are al- science and interdisciplinary research to a minor role or to none at all. ready occurring at various research institutions (although not deeply What's more, there is a generalized antagonism against ecological and enough in my opinion), could happen either through joint inter- and naturalist thinking when dealing with human beings, which is bizarre multidisciplinary training programs, or through co-supervision with given our scientifically established evolutionary history. As a result, fisheries biologists for social science students, or alternatively anthro- resource economists and other natural scientists are now viewed as the pologists/human geographers for marine science students as an option. bearers of the “social” component or analysis in the understanding of In essence, both humanities/social science and natural science students human-environmental interactions in marine ecosystems (Pauly, 2006). need a broader training to be able to communicate CHE effectively with On the other hand, natural scientists have marginal social science scientific and local communities (e.g., communicating science in a training and are often not articulate in the details of human ecology, culturally appropriate way), policy makers, and the public more gen- which is so necessary for understanding local human-environment erally. This is particularly poignant because as pointed out by E. O coupled processes. In addition, students today regardless of discipline, Wilson (1998), disciplinary consilience is of fundamental importance to are generally unwilling to spend 12 months in the field (for various address current social and ecological problems, and in this respect CHE socioeconomic and cultural reasons), which is the minimum time that is, in principle, well equipped for building bridges between the huma- researchers should spend in the field, as generally understood by senior nities and natural sciences. CHE academics. A year fieldwork requirement is to observe a full annual cycle and thus be able to capture all the spatio-temporal variation in human behavior vis-à-vis the marine environment. Regrettably, there

232 S. Aswani Biological Conservation 236 (2019) 223–235

8. Conclusion Aswani, S., Gurney, G.G., Mulville, S., Matera, J., Gurven, M., 2013. Insights from experimental economics on local cooperation in small-scale fisheries management. Glob. Environ. Chang. 23, 1402–1409. For informing marine conservation, CHE research on itself is not Aswani, S., Diedrich, A., Currier, K., 2015. Planning for the future: mapping anticipated enough and a wider intervention for conservation will require the in- environmental and social impacts in a nascent tourism destination. Soc. Nat. Resour. tensification of transnational activities such as ocean global scientific 28, 703–719. Aswani, S., Albert, S., Love, M., 2017. One size does not fit all: critical insights for ef- research, marine nature video production, the use of social media, ci- fective community-based resource management in Melanesia. Mar. Policy 81, tizen science and networks, and so forth. However, CHE researchers are 381–391. well positioned to build bridges between local worldviews and liveli- Aswani, S., Basurto, X., Ferse, S., Glaser, M., Campbell, L., Cinner, J.E., Dalton, T., hood requirements and global biodiversity conservation needs. Jenkins, L.D., Miller, M.L., Pollnac, R., Vaccaro, I., 2018. Marine resource management and conservation in the Anthropocene. Environ. Conserv. 45, 192–202. Environmental social scientists generally are good translators of larger Baldwin, K., Oxenford, H.A., 2014. A participatory approach to marine habitat mapping drivers of planetary environmental change (e.g., globalization, moder- in the Grenadine Islands. Coast. Manag. 42, 36–58. Barbesgaard, M., 2017. Blue growth: savior or ocean grabbing? J. Peasant Stud. 45, nization, etc.) and local socioeconomic, cultural, and historical pro- – fi 130 149. cesses that de ne people's ideas and behaviors (Aswani et al., 2018; Barnes, J., Dove, M., Lahsen, M., Mathews, A., McElwee, P., McIntosh, R., Moore, F., Bennett et al., 2017). CHE researchers particularly can use their skills O'reilly, J., Orlove, B., Puri, R., Weiss, H., 2013. Contribution of anthropology to the honed from on-the ground long-term research to scale-up from the local study of climate change. Nat. Clim. Chang. 3, 541. Barnes, M., Bodin, Ö., McClanahan, T., Kittinger, J., Hoey, A., Gaoue, O., Graham, N., to the global, as often international and global conservation strategies 2019. Social-ecological alignment and ecological conditions in coral reefs. Nat. are in complete discrepancy with local people's understandings and Commun. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-019-09994-1. objectives. Solving overfishing, ocean acidification, rising sea levels, the Barnes, M.L., Lynham, J., Kalberg, K., Leung, P., 2016. Social networks and environmental outcomes. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 113, 6466–6471. expansion of hypoxic zones and plastics in our oceans will require a Bass, G.F., 1986. A Bronze Sge shipwreck at Ulu Burun (Kaş): 1984 campaign. Am. J. societal effort that neither natural nor social scientists can solve alone, Archaeol. 269–296. and international, regional, and local interventions will be needed. In Bavinck, M., Jentoft, S., Pascual-Fernández, J.J., Marciniak, B., 2015. Interactive coastal governance: the role of pre-modern fisher organizations in improving governability. this sense, CHE researchers through their long-term engagements with Ocean Coast. Manag. 117, 52–60. people and nuanced understanding of their social and ecological sys- Begossi, A., 1995. Fishing spots and sea tenure: incipient forms of local management in tems can provide, in part, the foundational knowledge that is so ne- Atlantic Forest coastal communities. Hum. Ecol. 23, 387–406. cessary for environmental education and to perhaps begin changing our Beitl, C.M., 2015. Mobility in the mangroves: catch rates, daily decisions, and dynamics of artisanal fishing in a coastal commons. Appl. Geogr. 59, 98–106. environmental attitudes for saving the oceans. It is also time to stop Béné, C., Arthur, R., Norbury, H., Allison, E.H., Beveridge, M., Bush, S., Campling, L., pretending that “big science” and international environmental treaties Leschen, W., Little, D., Squires, D., Thilsted, S.H., 2016. Contribution of fisheries and alone can solve environmental problems locally. Perhaps we need to aquaculture to food security and poverty reduction: assessing the current evidence. World Dev. 79, 77–196. reinvigorate research traditions (e.g., human and culture ecology) that Bennett, N.J., 2019. Marine social science for the peopled seas. Coast. Manag. 47. https:// scale down to uncover micro-ecological and micro-socioeconomic doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2019.1564958. processes, and using this actionable knowledge to build marine con- Bennett, N.J., Dearden, P., 2014. Why local people do not support conservation: community perceptions of marine protected area livelihood impacts, governance and servation programs one at the time (whether governance is community- management in Thailand. Mar. Policy 44, 107–116. based, top-down, or a hybrid), and then use cross-case and cross-cul- Bennett, N.J., Roth, R., Klain, S.C., Chan, K., Christie, P., Clark, D.A., Cullman, G., Curran, tural examples to scale-up to regional, national, and international in- D., Durbin, T.J., Epstein, G., Greenberg, A., 2017. Conservation social science: understanding and integrating human dimensions to improve conservation. Biol. terventions. Conserv. 205, 93–108. Berkes, F., 2015. Coasts for People: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Coastal and Marine Acknowledgements Resource Management. Routledge. Berkes, F., Jolly, D., 2002. Adapting to climate change: social-ecological resilience in a Canadian western Arctic community. Conserv. Ecol. 5, 18. I want to thank Antonietta Jerardino and Andrea Sáenz-Arroyo for Berkes, F., Colding, J., Folke, C. (Eds.), 2008. Navigating Social-Ecological Systems: comments on drafts of this paper. Building Resilience for Complexity and Change. Cambridge University Press. Bestor, T.C., 2001. Supply-side sushi: commodity, market, and the global city. Am. Anthropol. 103, 76–95. References Bird, R.B., Smith, E., Bird, D., 2001. The hunting handicap: costly signaling in human foraging strategies. Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 50, 9–19. Blount, B.G., Pitchon, A., 2007. An anthropological research protocol for marine pro- Acheson, J.M., 2003. Capturing the Commons: Devising Institutions to Manage the Maine tected areas: creating a niche in a multi-disciplinary cultural hierarchy. Hum. Organ. Lobster Industry. Upne. 66, 103–111. Adhuri, D.S., 2013. Selling the Sea: A Study of Conflict over Marine Tenure in Kei Islands, Braje, T.J., Leppard, T.P., Fitzpatrick, S.M., Erlandson, J.M., 2017. Archaeology, historical Eastern Indonesia. ANU Press. ecology and anthropogenic island ecosystems. Environ. Conserv. 44, 286–297. Agius, D.A., 2012. Seafaring in the Arabian Gulf and Oman: People of the Dhow. Brewer, T.D., Cinner, J.E., Green, A., Pressey, R.L., 2013. Effects of human population Routledge. density and proximity to markets on coral reef fishes vulnerable to extinction by Alexander, C., Bynum, N., Johnson, E., King, U., Mustonen, T., Neofotis, P., Oettlé, N., fishing. Conserv. Biol. 27, 443–452. Rosenzweig, C., Sakakibara, C., Shadrin, V., Vicarelli, M., 2011. Linking indigenous Bruno, J.F., Selig, E.R., 2007. Regional decline of coral cover in the indo-Pacific: timing, and scientific knowledge of climate change. BioScience 61, 477–484. extent, and subregional comparisons. PLoS One 8, e711. Allison, E.H., Ellis, F., 2001. The livelihoods approach and management of small-scale Bruno, J.F., Côté, I.M., Toth, L.T., 2019. Climate change, coral loss, and the curious case fisheries. Mar. Policy 25, 377–388. of the parrotfish paradigm: why don't marine protected areas improve reef resilience? Allison, E.H., Seeley, J.A., 2004. HIV and AIDS among fisherfolk: a threat to ‘responsible Annu. Rev. Mar. Sci. 11, 307–334. fisheries'? Fish Fish. 5, 215–234. Campbell, L.M., 2007. Local conservation practice and global discourse: a political Alvard, M.S., Nolin, D.A., 2002. Rousseau's whale hunt? Coordination among big-game ecology of sea turtle conservation. Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 97, 313–334. hunters. Curr. Anthropol. 43, 533–559. Castilla, J.C., 1999. Coastal marine communities: trends and perspectives from human Ammarell, G., 1999. Bugis Navigation. Yale University Southeast Asia Studies. exclusion experiments. Trends Ecol. Evol. 14, 280–283. Armitage, D., 2002. Socio-institutional dynamics and the political ecology of mangrove Christie, P., 2004. Marine protected areas as biological successes and social failures in Forest conservation in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia. Glob. Environ. Chang. 12, Southeast Asia. Am. Fish. Soc. Symp. 42, 155–164. 203–217. Cinner, J., Aswani, S., 2007. Integrating customary management into marine conserva- Arnold, J.E., 1995. Transportation innovation and social complexity among maritime tion. Biol. Conserv. 140, 201–216. hunter-gatherer societies. Am. Anthropol. 97, 733–747. Cinner, J.E., Kittinger, J.N., 2015. 22 linkages between social systems and coral reefs. In: Aswani, S., 1998. Patterns of marine harvest effort in Southwestern New Georgia, Ecology of Fishes on Coral Reefs, pp. 215. Solomon Islands: resource management or optimal foraging? Ocean Coast. Manag. Cinner, J.E., Daw, T., McClanahan, T.R., 2009. Socioeconomic factors that affect artisanal 40, 207–235. fishers' readiness to exit a declining fishery. Conserv. Biol. 23, 124–130. Aswani, S., Lauer, M., 2006. Incorporating fishermen's Local Knowledge and Behavior Cinner, J.E., McClanahan, T.R., Graham, N.A.J., Daw, T.M., Maina, J., Stead, S.M., et al., into Geographical Information Systems (GIS) for Designing Marine Protected Areas in 2012. Vulnerability of coastal communities to key impacts of climate change on coral Oceania Human Organization. vol. 65. pp. 80–102. reef fisheries. Glob. Environ. Chang. 22, 12–20. Aswani, S., Ruddle, K., 2013. Design of realistic hybrid marine resource management Cinner, J.E., Huchery, C., MacNeil, M.A., Graham, N.A., McClanahan, T.R., Maina, J., programs in Oceania. Pac. Sci. 67, 461–476. et al., 2016. Bright spots among the world's coral reefs. Nature 535, 416–419.

233 S. Aswani Biological Conservation 236 (2019) 223–235

Cisneros -Montemayor, A.M., Pauly, D., Weatherdon, L.V., Ota, Y., 2016. A global esti- Jentoft, S., 1989. Fisheries co-management: delegating government responsibility to mate of seafood consumption by coastal indigenous peoples. PLoS One 11, e0166681. fishermen's organizations. Mar. Policy 13, 137–154. Crain, C.M., Kroeker, K., Halpern, B.S., 2008. Interactive and cumulative effects of mul- Jentoft, S., Pascual-Fernández, J.J., De la Cruz Modino, R., Gonzalez-Ramallal, M., tiple human stressors in marine systems. Ecol. Lett. 11, 1304–1315. Chuenpagdee, R., 2012. What stakeholders think about marine protected areas: case Crate, S.A., 2011. Climate and culture: anthropology in the era of contemporary climate studies from Spain. Hum. Ecol. 40, 185–197. change. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 40, 175–194. Jerardino, A., 2016. On the origins and significance of Pleistocene coastal resource use in Crate, S.A., Nuttall, M. (Eds.), 2016. Anthropology and Climate Change: From Encounters Southern Africa with particular reference to shellfish gathering. J. Anthropol. to Actions. Routledge. Archaeol. 41, 213–230. Daw, T.M., Coulthard, S., Cheung, W.W., Brown, K., Abunge, C., Galafassi, D., Peterson, Jerardino, A., Marean, C.W., 2010. Shellfish gathering, marine paleoecology and modern G.D., McClanahan, T.R., Omukoto, J.O., Munyi, L., 2015. Evaluating taboo trade-offs human behavior: perspectives from cave PP13B, Pinnacle Point, South Africa. J. in ecosystems services and human well-being. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112, 6949–6954. Hum. Evol. 59, 412–424. Diedrich, A., 2007. The impacts of tourism on coral reef conservation awareness and Johannes, R.E., 2002. The renaissance of community-based marine resource management support in coastal communities in Belize. Coral Reefs 26, 985–996. in Oceania. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 33, 317–340. Durrenberger, E., Pálsson, G., 1987. Ownership at sea: fishing territories and access to sea Kirch, P.V., Green, R.C., 2001. Hawaiki, Ancestral Polynesia: An Essay in Historical resources. Am. Ethnol. 14, 508–522. Anthropology. Cambridge University Press. Ensor, J.E., Abernethy, K.E., Hoddy, E.T., Aswani, S., Albert, S., Vaccaro, I., Benedict, J.J., Kishigami, N., Savelle, J.M. (Eds.), 2005. Indigenous Use and Management of Marine Beare, D.J., 2018. Variation in perception of environmental change in nine Solomon Resources. Senri Ethnological Studies No. 67 National Museum of Ethnology, Osaka, Islands communities: implications for securing fairness in community-based adap- Japan. tation. Reg. Environ. Chang. 18, 1131–1143. Gedan, K.B., Blight, L.K., 2015. In: Kittinger, J.N., McClenachan, L. (Eds.), Marine Erlandson, J.M., 2001. The archaeology of aquatic adaptations: paradigms for a new Historical Ecology in Conservation: Applying the Past to Manage for the Future. millennium. J. Archaeol. Res. 9, 287–350. University of California Press. Erlandson, J.M., Torben, C.R., Braje, T.J., 2009. Fishing up the food web? 12,000 years of Klein, R.G., Steele, T.E., 2013. Archaeological shellfish size and later human evolution in maritime subsistence and adaptive adjustments on California's Channel Islands. Pac. Africa. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 110, 10910–10915. Sci. 63, 711–724. Lazrus, H., 2012. Sea change: island communities and climate change. Annu. Rev. Fabinyi, M., Dressler, W.H., Pido, M.D., 2017. Fish, trade and food security: moving be- Anthropol. 41. yond ‘availability’ discourse in marine conservation. Hum. Ecol. 45, 177–188. Le Heron, R., Lewis, N., Fisher, K., Thrush, S., Lundquist, C., Hewitt, J., Ellis, J., 2016. Feinberg, R., 2003. Polynesian Seafaring and Navigation: Ocean Travel in Anutan Culture Non-sectarian scenario experiments in socio-ecological knowledge building for multi- and Society. Kent State University Press. use marine environments: insights from New Zealand's Marine Futures project. Mar. Ferse, S.C., Costa, M.M., Manez, K.S., Adhuri, D.S., Glaser, M., 2010. Allies, not aliens: Policy 67, 10–21. increasing the role of local communities in marine protected area implementation. Lemahieu, A., Scott, L., Malherbe, W.S., Mahatante, P.T., Randrianarimanana, J.V., Environ. Conserv. 37, 23–34. Aswani, S., 2018. Local perceptions of environmental changes in fishing communities Finkbeiner, E.M., Bennett, N.J., Frawley, T.H., Mason, J.G., Briscoe, D.K., Brooks, C.M., of Southwest Madagascar. Ocean Coast. Manag. 163, 209–221. Ng, C.A., Ourens, R., Seto, K., Switzer Swanson, S., Urteaga, J., 2017. Reconstructing Levin, P.S., Poe, M.R., 2017. Conservation for the Anthropocene Ocean: Interdisciplinary overfishing: moving beyond Malthus for effective and equitable solutions. Fish Fish. Science in Support of Nature and People. Academic Press. 18, 1180–1191. Lopez, M.C., Murphy, J.J., Spraggon, J.M., Stranlund, J.K., 2012. Comparing the effec- Finney, B.R., 1994. Voyage of Rediscovery: A Cultural Odyssey through Polynesia. tiveness of regulation and pro-social emotions to enhance cooperation: experimental University of California Press. evidence from fishing communities in Colombia. Econ. Inq. 50, 131–142. Fisher, E.C., Bar-Matthews, M., Jerardino, A., Marean, C.W., 2010. Middle and Late Mace, G., 2014. Whose conservation? Science 345, 1558–1560. Pleistocene paleoscape modeling along the southern coast of South Africa. Quat. Sci. Maffi, L., 2005. Linguistic, cultural, and biological diversity. Annual Reviews of Rev. 29, 1382–1398. Anthropology 34, 599–617. Foale, S., Manele, B., 2004. Social and political barriers to the use of marine protected Mascia, M.B., Brosius, J.P., Dobson, T.A., Forbes, B.C., Horowitz, L., McKean, M.A., areas for conservation and fishery management in Melanesia. Asia Pac. Viewp. 45, Turner, N.J., 2003. Conservation and the social sciences. Conserv. Biol. 17, 649–650. 373–386. Mascia, M.B., Claus, C., Naidoo, R., 2010. Impacts of marine protected areas on fishing Folke, C., 2006. Resilience: the emergence of a perspective for social–ecological systems communities. Conserv. Biol. 24, 1424–1429. analyses. Glob. Environ. Chang. 16, 253–267. McClanahan, T.R., Omukoto, J.O., 2011. Implications of modern versus historical fish- Forster, J., Turner, R.A., Fitzsimmons, C., Peterson, A.M., Mahon, R., Stead, S.M., 2017. eries catches for marine protected area goals. Conserv. Biol. 25, 945–955. Evidence of a common understanding of proximate and distal drivers of reef health. McClenachan, L., 2009. Documenting loss of large trophy fish from the Florida keys with Mar. Policy 84, 263–272. historical photographs. Conserv. Biol. 23, 636–643. Garcia-Quijano, C.G., 2007. Fishers' knowledge of marine species assemblages: bridging McGoodwin, J., 1995. Crisis in the world's Fisheries: People, Problems, and Policies. between scientific and local ecological knowledge in southeastern Puerto Rico. Am. Stanford University Press. Anthropol. 109, 529–536. Mercer, J., Kelman, I., Taranis, L., Suchet-Pearson, S., 2010. Framework for integrating Gelcich, S., Donlan, C.J., 2015. Incentivizing biodiversity conservation in artisanal fishing indigenous and scientific knowledge for disaster risk reduction. Disasters 34, communities through territorial user rights and business model innovation. Conserv. 214–239. Biol. 29, 1076–1085. Miller, M.L., 1993. The rise of coastal and marine tourism. Ocean Coast. Manag. 20, Gough, K.V., Bayliss-Smith, T., Connell, J., Mertz, O., 2010. Small island sustainability in 181–199. the Pacific: introduction to the special issue. Singap. J. Trop. Geogr. 31, 1–9. Moore, A., 2012. The aquatic invaders: marine management figuring fishermen, fisheries, Halffman, C.M., Potter, B.A., McKinney, H.J., Finney, B.P., Rodrigues, A.T., Yang, D.Y., and lionfish in the Bahamas. Cult. Anthropol. 27, 667–688. Kemp, B.M., 2015. Early human use of anadromous salmon in North America at Moran, E., 2010. Environmental Social Science: Human-Environment Interactions and 11,500 y ago. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 112, 12344–12348. Sustainability. John Wiley & Sons. Halpern, B.S., Selkoe, K.A., Micheli, F., Kappel, C.V., 2007. Evaluating and ranking the Moreno, A., Becken, S., 2009. A climate change vulnerability assessment methodology for vulnerability of global marine ecosystems to anthropogenic threats. Conserv. Biol. 21, coastal tourism. J. Sustain. Tour. 17, 473–488. 1301–1315. Morrison, A.E., Addison, D.J., 2008. Assessing the role of climate change and human Hare, L., 2016. The Anthropocene trading zone: the new conservation, big data ecology, predation on marine resources at the Fatu-ma-Futi site, Tutuila Island, American and the valuation of nature. Ecol. Soc. https://doi.org/10.3167/ares.2015.060107. Samoa: an agent based model. Archaeol. Ocean. 43, 22–34. Heinen, J.T., 1992. Human behavioural ecology and environmental conservation. Nadel-Klein, J., 2003. Fishing for Heritage: Modernity and Loss along the Scottish Coast. Environ. Conserv. 19, 105–116. (Berg). Henrich, J., Henrich, N., 2010. The evolution of cultural adaptations: Fijian food taboos Nagaoka, L., 2002. The effects of resource depression on foraging efficiency, diet breadth, protect against dangerous marine toxins. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol. Sci. 277, and patch use in southern New Zealand. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 21, 419–442. 3715–3724. Narchi, N.E., Price, L.L. (Eds.), 2015. Ethnobiology of Corals and Coral Reefs. Springer. Hicks, C.C., Cinner, J.E., 2014. Social, institutional, and knowledge mechanisms mediate Nettle, D., Gibson, M.A., Lawson, D.W., Sear, R., 2013. Human behavioral ecology: cur- diverse ecosystem service benefits from coral reefs. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111, rent research and future prospects. Behav. Ecol. 24, 1031–1040. 17791–17796. Neumann, B., Vafeidis, A.T., Zimmermann, J., Nicholls, R.J., 2015. Future coastal po- Hicks, C.C., Crowder, L.B., Graham, N.A., Kittinger, J.N., Cornu, E.L., 2016. Social drivers pulation growth and exposure to sea-level rise and coastal flooding - a global as- forewarn of marine regime shifts. Front. Ecol. Environ. 14, 252–260. sessment. PLoS One 10 (3), e0118571. Holladay, P.J., Powell, R.B., 2013. Resident perceptions of socialecological resilience and Nietschmann, B., 1995. Defending the Miskito reefs with maps and GPS: mapping with the sustainability of community-based tourism development in the Commonwealth of sail, SCUBA, and satellite. Cultural Survival Quarterly 18, 34–36. Dominica. J. Sustain. Tour. 21, 1188–1211. NOW Project, 2017. Department of Anthropology, University of Copenhagen. https:// Hung, H.C., Nguyen, K.D., Bellwood, P., Carson, M.T., 2013. Coastal connectivity: long- now.ku.dk/. term trading networks across the South China Sea. The Journal of Island and Coastal Orams, M.B., 1997. Historical accounts of human-dolphin interaction and recent devel- Archaeology 8, 384–404. opments in wild dolphin based tourism in Australasia. Tour. Manag. 18, 317–326. Hviding, E., 1996. Guardians of Marovo Lagoon: Practice, Place, and Politics in Maritime Österblom, H., et al., 2013. Modeling social—ecological scenarios in marine systems. Melanesia. University of Hawaii Press. BioScience 63, 735–744. Jackson, J.B., et al., 2001. Historical overfishing and the recent collapse of coastal eco- Ostrom, E., 2009. A general framework for analyzing sustainability of social-ecological systems. Science 293, 629–637. systems. Science 325, 419–422. Jennings, S., Kaiser, M., Reynolds, J.D., 2009. Marine Fisheries Ecology. John Wiley & Palmer, M.A., 2012. Socioenvironmental sustainability and actionable science. BioScience Sons. 62, 5–6.

234 S. Aswani Biological Conservation 236 (2019) 223–235

Patankar, V., D'Souza, E., Alcoverro, T., Arthur, R., 2015. Erosion of traditional marine Silvano, R.A., MacCord, P.F., Lima, R.V., Begossi, A., 2006. When does this fi sh spawn? management systems in the face of disturbances in the Nicobar archipelago. Hum. Fishermen's local knowledge of migration and reproduction of Brazilian coastal Ecol. 43, 697–707. fishes. Environ. Biol. Fish 76, 371–386. Pauly, D., 1995. Anecdotes and the shifting baseline syndrome of fisheries. Trends in Sosis, R., 2002. Patch choice decisions among Ifaluk fishers. Am. Anthropol. 104, Ecology and Evolution 10, 430. 583–598. Pauly, D., 2006. Major trends in small-scale marine fisheries, with emphasis on devel- Sowman, M., Cardoso, P., 2010. Small-scale fisheries and food security strategies in oping countries, and some implications for the social sciences. Maritime Studies 4, countries in the Benguela current Large Marine Ecosystem (BCLME) region: Angola, 7–22. Namibia and South Africa. Mar. Policy 34, 1163–1170. Pauwelussen, A., Verschoor, G.M., 2017. Amphibious encounters: coral and people in Steward, J.H., 1955. The Concept and Method of Cultural Ecology. Bobbs-Merrill Reprint conservation outreach in Indonesia. Engag. Sci. Technol. Soc. 3, 292–314. Series in the Social Sciences. Pauwelussen, A.P., 2015. The moves of a Bajau middlewoman: understanding the dis- Stoffle, R.W., Halmo, D.B., Wagner, T.W., Luczkovich, J.J., 1994. Reefs from space: sa- parity between trade networks and marine conservation. Anthropol. Forum 1–21. tellite imagery, marine ecology, and ethnography in the Dominican Republic. Hum. Peloquin, C., Berkes, F., 2009. Local knowledge, subsistence harvests, and social–ecolo- Ecol. 22, 355–378. gical complexity in James Bay. Hum. Ecol. 37, 533–545. Sunde, J., Sowman, M., Smith, H., Wicomb, W., 2013. Emerging proposals for tenure Pinkerton, E. (Ed.), 2011. Co-Operative Management of Local Fisheries: New Directions governance in small-scale fisheries in South Africa. Land Tenure Journal 1. for Improved Management and Community Development. UBC Press. The Island Chumash: Behavioral Ecology of a Maritime Society. University of California Pollnac, R., Christie, P., Cinner, J.E., Dalton, T., Daw, T.M., Forrester, G.E., Graham, N.A., Press. McClanahan, T.R., 2010. Marine reserves as linked social–ecological systems. Proc. Thomas, F.R., 2007. The behavioral ecology of shellfish gathering in Western Kiribati, Natl. Acad. Sci. 107, 18262–18265. Micronesia 1: prey choice. Hum. Ecol. 35, 179–194. Pollnac, R.B., Bavinck, M., Monnereau, I., 2012. Job satisfaction in fisheries compared. Thomson, V.A., et al., 2014. Using ancient DNA to study the origins and dispersal of Soc. Indic. Res. 109, 119–133. ancestral Polynesian chickens across the Pacific. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 111, Rappaport, R.A., 2000. [1968]. Pigs for the Ancestors: Ritual in the Ecology of a New 4826–4831. Guinea People. Waveland Press. Thorsby, E., 2016. Genetic evidence for a contribution of Native Americans to the early Revollo-Fernández, D., Aguilar-Ibarra, A., Micheli, F., Sáenz-Arroyo, A., 2015. Exploring settlement of Rapa Nui (Easter Island). Front. Ecol. Evol. 4, 118. the role of gender in common-pool resource extraction: evidence from laboratory and Veth, P., Ward, I., Manne, T., 2016. Coastal feasts: a Pleistocene antiquity for resource field experiments in fisheries. Appl. Econ. Lett. 1–9. abundance in the maritime deserts of North West Australia? The Journal of Island and Ripple, W.J., Wolf, C., Newsome, T.M., Galetti, M., Alamgir, M., Crist, E., Mahmoud, M.I., Coastal Archaeology 1–16. Laurance, W.F., and15,364 scientist signatories from 184 countries, 2017. World Walker, B., 2001. Sisterhood and seine-nets: engendering development and conservation scientists' warning to humanity: a second notice. BioScience 67, 1026–1028. in Ghana's marine fishery. Prof. Geogr. 53, 160–177. Roberts, C., 2010. The Unnatural History of the Sea. Island Press. Weeks, R., Jupiter, S.D., 2013. Adaptive comanagement of a marine protected area net- Ruddle, K., 1996. Geography and human ecology of reef fisheries. In: Polunin, N.V.C., work in Fiji. Conserv. Biol. 27, 1234–1244. Roberts, C.M. (Eds.), Reef Fisheries. Chapman & Hall Fish and Fisheries Series, vol 20 Weeks, R., Russ, G.R., Bucol, A., Alcala, A.C., 2010. Incorporating local tenure in the Springer, Dordrecht. systematic design of marine protected area networks. Conserv. Lett. 3, 445–453. Sáenz-Arroyo, A., Roberts, C.M., Torre, J., Cariño-Olvera, M., Hawkins, J.P., 2006. The West, P., 2006. Conservation Is our Government Now: The Politics of Ecology in Papua value of evidence about past abundance: marine fauna of the Gulf of California New Guinea. Duke University Press. through the eyes of 16th to 19th century travelers. Fish Fish. 7, 128–146. West, P., Igoe, J., Brockington, D., 2006. Parks and peoples: the social impact of protected Sanchirico, J.N., Wilen, J.E., 2001. A bioeconomic model of marine reserve creation. J. areas. Annual Reviews of Anthropology 35, 251–277. Environ. Econ. Manag. 42, 257–276. Wilson, E.O., 1998. Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge. Abacus, London. Sealy, J.C., 2006. Diet, mobility, and settlement pattern among Holocene hunter gath- Wilson, J.A., 2006. Matching social and ecological systems in complex ocean fisheries. erers in southernmost Africa. Curr. Anthropol. 47, 569–595. Ecol. Soc. 11, 9. Sen, S., Nielsen, J.R., 1996. Fisheries co-management: a comparative analysis. Mar. Policy Wong, P.P., 1998. Coastal tourism development in Southeast Asia: relevance and lessons 20, 405–418. for coastal zone management. Ocean Coast. Manag. 38, 89–109.

235