Mangrove forests are more than coastal vegetation: they are the foundation of daily life for many communities and a critical buffer against environmental change. Two recently published studies by Cecilia Olima, a researcher in the Integrative Biodiversity and Conservation Science team, provide new insights into how mangroves in Lamu County, Kenya, support livelihoods today, and how future development pathways could determine whether these benefits endure.

Together, the papers tell a connected story: one grounded in present-day household dependence on mangrove resources, the other looking ahead to the long-term consequences of land-use change, governance, and development choices.

Published in Ecosystems and People, 9 December 2025

In Lamu County, mangrove forests are under growing pressure from port expansion, urbanization, and the everyday needs of local households. Yet until now, little was known about how strongly livelihoods depend on mangrove provisioning services or which social factors shape that dependency.

Drawing on a survey of 606 households, this study reveals that mangroves remain central to daily life in coastal communities. Nearly seven in ten households (69%) rely directly on mangrove resources for subsistence or income. Despite this heavy reliance, only 35% of respondents felt that their household needs were adequately met, pointing to a growing mismatch between ecosystem service supply and demand.

The research shows that dependence on mangroves is far from uniform. Factors such as where households are located, their level of education, occupation and proximity to mangrove forests all influence how resources are used and valued. While households engaged in direct resource extraction often reported higher levels of need being met, those with more diversified, market-based livelihoods tended to rely less on mangroves.

Nearly half of surveyed households reported a decline in dependency over time, driven by alternative livelihood opportunities, greater awareness of mangrove importance and the influence of regulatory measures. These findings highlight the need for conservation strategies that do not isolate environmental protection from social realities, but instead promote co-management, sustainable use and livelihood diversification alongside ecosystem conservation.

Published in Regional Studies in Marine Science, January 2026

While the first study focuses on the present, the second looks decisively to the future. As large-scale infrastructure projects and new settlements reshape Lamu’s coastline, the question is no longer whether change will happen—but how different development choices will affect mangrove ecosystems and the services they provide.

Using the Kesho participatory scenario tool, the research team worked with a diverse group of stakeholders to co-develop four plausible development pathways for Lamu County extending to 2063. These narratives were translated into spatially explicit land-use and land-cover change maps using satellite data and stakeholder-informed assumptions. The team then estimated the value of mangroves’ provisioning, regulating and cultural services under each scenario.

The results show that land-cover change alone leads to relatively modest declines in ecosystem service values across all futures. However, when governance quality and ecosystem health are taken into account, the outcomes diverge sharply. Under a sustainable “New Dawn” scenario, annual ecosystem service values rise to approximately USD 10.5 billion, while under a poorly governed “Growth Trap” scenario, they fall to USD 7.6 billion.

The study offers the first participatory, spatially explicit assessment of mangrove futures in Lamu County, demonstrating how development pathways can either enhance or erode the benefits nature provides. Beyond Lamu, the approach provides a flexible framework for aligning local decision-making with broader sustainability goals, including the African Union’s Agenda 2063 and the Sustainable Development Goals.

These studies strengthen approaches we prioritize: co-creating practical solutions with local actors, linking science, policy, and practice, and supporting nature-positive livelihoods alongside conservation. The methods and findings are transferable: pairing household-level “needs met” indicators with participatory scenarios can help pinpoint where local needs outstrip ecosystem capacity, where diversification can ease pressure on locally important ecosystems, and which governance choices most shape long-term benefits for people.