Mangrove deterioration and revitalization: “Naturework” and the treatment of nature

“Naturework”

During my university studies, one concept left an indelible mark on my understanding of human-environment relations: "naturework," a term coined by sociologist Gary Alan Fine in 1997 [1]. This theoretical framework illuminates the complex ways we construct meaning in our relationship with the natural world.

Fine defines naturework as "the technique by which social actors individually and collectively make sense of and express their relationship to the environment, dealing with perceived threats to that environment" [1]. This concept proves particularly valuable in understanding how different societies and groups interpret their interactions with nature through distinct cultural lenses.

At its core, naturework suggests that our relationship with nature isn't just about the physical reality of trees, animals, and ecosystems – it's deeply cultural and social. When we see a forest being cut down or a species becoming endangered, we might not react the same way. Instead, our response depends on our community's values, beliefs, and ways of making meaning. Fine articulates three distinct perspectives through which societies engage with nature.

The protectionist vision actively “deprivileging human exceptionism,” arguing that threatened species and ecosystems possess inherent rights that transcend immediate human interests. Central to this perspective is the concept of "being away" – the notion that environmental policy should maintain a deliberate distance between humans and nature. This vision advocates for the protection of ecosystems and wildlife independent of human benefit [1].

The organic vision presents a holistic approach, dissolving the conventional boundary between humanity and nature. This perspective sees engagement with nature as a path to self-discovery and personal identity formation. Individuals incorporate experiences with nature, such as birdwatching, rock climbing, or mushroom foraging, into their core identity. Interestingly, while this vision emphasizes unity with nature, it frequently relies on protectionist principles to preserve the natural spaces necessary for such meaningful connections [1].

Of particular interest is Fine's examination of the humanist vision, which frames nature primarily as a resource for human utilization. Under this perspective, the wild becomes what scholars term "the pragmatics of use" – a repository of resources awaiting human exploitation and management. As Livingston [1] pointedly observes, this ideology of conservation stems fundamentally from our "vested" interests in nature, where protection efforts are inherently tied to human benefit. Kevles [1] extends this argument, suggesting we bear an obligation to manage natural resources prudently, ensuring their availability for future generations.

The humanist vision manifests in various contemporary practices. For instance, forest management under this framework typically focuses on maintaining timber yields rather than preserving biodiversity for its own sake. Similarly, water conservation efforts often prioritize human consumption needs over ecosystem requirements.

The deterioration and restoration of mangrove area in Ca Mau

The concept of naturework illuminates the story of mangrove degradation and restoration in Ca Mau, Vietnam's southern tip. Through Fine's framework, we can see how local communities' essentially humanistic perspective towards mangroves - viewing nature primarily as a resource for human use - has fundamentally shaped the region's environmental trajectory.

During the aquaculture boom of the 1980s and early 1990s, mangroves were seen purely through the lens of economic utility, or more precisely, as obstacles to economic progress. This perspective led to dramatic environmental changes: between 1979 and 2013, Ca Mau lost a staggering 68,000 hectares (60.9%) of its mangrove forests to shrimp ponds [2]. The broader Mekong Delta witnessed similar transformation, with over 160,000 hectares of mangroves cleared for shrimp development from 1953 to 1995 [3, 4].

However, the story takes an interesting turn in the 1990s, when both farmers and government began reframing their relationship with mangroves - though still within a humanistic framework. Rather than seeing mangroves as obstacles, farmers started recognizing their instrumental value in maintaining pond conditions and reducing disease risks in shrimp farming [5].

The government responded with robust policy frameworks, including the innovative Forest Land Allocation program. Since 1995, this program has allowed households to manage mangrove forests while benefiting from both protection payments and controlled logging rights. Combined with international support from organizations like the World Bank and UNDP, these efforts contributed to the recovery of approximately 13,600 hectares of mangroves in Ca Mau during 2003-2013 [2].

Yet, the story isn't all rosy. The reality of mangrove conservation in Ca Mau reveals a persistent challenge: despite restoration initiatives, deforestation continues at a concerning rate. A study by Tinh et al. [6] documented two interrelated coastal phenomena: progressive shoreline erosion and the widespread construction of sea dikes. These dikes serve a dual purpose—expanding inland territory for aquaculture operations while simultaneously acting as barriers against saltwater intrusion. Moreover, existing agricultural and socioeconomic activities continue to encroach on areas designated for mangrove restoration. While the 1995 Forest Land Allocation policy attempted to incentivize conservation by granting households management rights and limited conversion allowances (20-40%) for aquaculture, implementation has fallen short of expectations. For example, farmers continue to clear mangroves to expand shrimp aquaculture operations, often exceeding legal limits. My interviews with intensive mangrove-shrimp system operators reveal widespread non-compliance with the mandated 60% forest coverage requirement. These farmers candidly acknowledge their disregard for regulations, citing both the absence of meaningful oversight and their conviction that the current ratio is economically unsustainable. Many expressed a desire for government policies that would better reflect local agricultural conditions and economic realities. This situation exemplifies the humanistic perspective in action: farmers consistently prioritize economic utility over environmental preservation [6].

Moving forward, the solution lies in developing mechanisms that align environmental goals with economic incentives. Joffre et al. [5] emphasize the critical importance of balancing benefits from both shrimp and timber production—an insight that points toward more nuanced policy approaches. Rather than imposing purely restrictive measures, successful interventions should incorporate well-designed benefit-sharing mechanisms, meaningful quality standards, and context-appropriate. The challenge, therefore, is to craft policy frameworks that transform mangrove conservation from an economic burden into a strategic advantage, effectively working within—rather than against—local communities' humanistic relationship with their environment. This context underscores the potential significance of Mangrove Payment for Forest Environmental Services (MPFES)—the focus of my research project—as an innovative mechanism that directly links conservation outcomes with farmer benefits. By bridging the gap between environmental preservation and economic incentives, MPFES emerges as a promising approach worthy of rigorous investigation.

References: 

[1] Fine, G. A. (1997). Naturework and the taming of the wild: The problem of “overpick” in the culture of mushroomers. Social Problems, 44(1), 68-88. 

[2] Son, N. T., Chen, C. F., Chang, N. B., et al. (2015). Mangrove mapping and change detection in Ca Mau Peninsula, Vietnam, using Landsat data and object-based image analysis. IEEE Journal of Selected Topics in Applied Earth Observations and Remote Sensing, 8, 503-510. https://doi.org/10.1109/JSTARS.2014.2360691 

[3] Minh, T. H., Yakupitiyage, A., & Macintosh, D. J. (2001). Management of the integrated mangrove-aquaculture farming systems in the Mekong delta of Vietnam (p. 24). Khlong Nueng, Thailand: Integrated Tropical Coastal Zone Management, School of Environment, Resources, and Development, Asian Institute of Technology. 

[4] Veettil, B. K., Ward, R. D., Quang, N. X., et al. (2019). Mangroves of Vietnam: Historical development, current state of research and future threats. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 218, 212-236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2018.12.021 

[5] Joffre, O. M., Bosma, R. H., Bregt, A. K., van Zwieten, P. A., Bush, S. R., & Verreth, J. A. (2015). What drives the adoption of integrated shrimp mangrove aquaculture in Vietnam?. Ocean & Coastal Management, 114, 53-63. 

[6] Tinh, P. H., MacKenzie, R. A., Hung, T. D., Vinh, T. V., Ha, H. T., Lam, M. H., ... & Huyen, B. T. (2022). Mangrove restoration in Vietnamese Mekong Delta during 2015-2020: Achievements and challenges. Frontiers in Marine Science, 9, 1043943.