Introduction

The Southeast Asian ecoregion harbor the world’s most biodiverse mangrove forest ecosystems. In fact, the same region is home to almost a third of all mangroves, with Indonesia alone being home to almost 20% (Spalding & Leal, 2021). Like in any other tropical and subtropical country, mangrove ecosystems provide a wide array of ecological, social, and economic benefits (Sandilyan & Kathiresan, 2012). Ecologically, mangrove forests play a critical role in global climate change mitigation as they hold some of the highest densities of carbon recorded in any ecosystem (Purnobasuki, 2012; Richards et al., 2020). Apart from carbon sequestration, mangroves provide protection for coastal communities against natural calamities such as tropical cyclones and tsunamis (Hochard et al., 2021; Kathiresan & Rajendran, 2005; Sandilyan & Kathiresan, 2015). Mangroves also support the livelihood of various coastal communities in the Asian region. In Myanmar’s Ayeyarwaddy Region, for example, forest products collected from the mangrove forest such as firewood, fishes, crabs, and prawn provide 43% of total household income (Aye et al., 2019). Mangrove-forest-dependent communities such as the Peam Krasaop Fishing Community in Cambodia derive approximately 90% of the fishing catch, and 85% of gross their income, from mangrove-associated species (Seary et al., 2020) whilst in the Indian Sundarbans, more than 21% of the households are entirely dependent on mangrove for their livelihood and about 46% earned half of their income from the forest (Bera & Maiti, 2022).

Unfortunately, despite their global importance, the decline of mangrove forest cover continues in many parts of the world (Bhowmik et al., 2022; Friess et al., 2019; Gandhi & Jones, 2019). Southeast Asia, in particular, exhibits the highest global rates of mangrove loss (Bhowmik et al., 2022; Friess et al., 2019; Gandhi & Jones, 2019). Myanmar and Philippines topped the list of “mangrove loss hotspots”, followed by Malaysia, Cambodia, and Indonesia (Gandhi & Jones, 2019). The estimated mangrove loss in the Philippines is 0.5% per year, however, Myanmar showed to be the hottest hotspot for mangrove deforestation with the highest rates of loss at 0.5–0.7% per year from 2000–2012, more than four times higher than the global average (Friess et al., 2019; Gevaña et al., 2018; Hamilton & Casey, 2016). Moreover, Indonesia, by far has the largest area of mangrove loss of about 749 km² which represents almost half of all global mangrove deforestation (Hamilton & Casey, 2016). Such rates of mangrove loss reflect the pressing global environmental crisis. Several intergovernmental reports indicate that mangrove loss could lead to catastrophic loss and worldwide ecosystem degradation. Available scenarios for nature’s contributions to people (NCP) from mangroves and coral alone anticipate losses worth billions of dollars per year, due to sea-level rise and coastal land encroachment (IPBES, 2018). The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) likewise highlighted the impacts already observed on habitat area and biodiversity, as well as ecosystem functioning and services due to large-scale mangrove mortality (IPCC, 2019).

As defined by Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, the diverse direct and indirect societal benefits provided by mangroves or any other ecosystem may be broadly categorized into four: 1. provisioning (food, fuel, freshwater, and products obtained from ecosystems), 2. regulating (climate and water regulation, and other benefits obtained from the regulation of ecosystem processes), 3. supporting (necessary for the production of all other ecosystem services), and 4. cultural services (non-material and intangible benefits such cultural diversity, and spiritual and religious values) (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Secretariat, 2005). Nevertheless, several researches have focused on provisioning services provided by mangroves and their contribution to local livelihoods and food security (Aye et al., 2019; Gnansounou et al., 2021; Mallick et al., 2021; Seary et al., 2020; zu Ermgassen et al., 2021), health and well-being (Arbiastutie & Diba, 2021; Bibi et al., 2019; Islam et al., 2022; Tamalene et al., 2021), protection from natural hazards (Hochard et al., 2021; Kathiresan & Rajendran, 2005; Sandilyan & Kathiresan, 2015), as well as their value for blue carbon and climate regulation (Adame et al., 2018, 2021; Gevaña et al., 2018; Song et al., 2021).

Whilst various ecosystem services are relatively well represented in literature, cultural ecosystem services are not yet adequately defined or integrated within the ES framework, and are often under-represented, ignored, or neglected particularly in ecosystem services assessment and even in conservation studies given their subjective and largely intangible nature (Daniel et al., 2012; He & Guo, 2021; Horgan et al., 2021; Martin et al., 2016). Cultural ecosystem services encompass the non-material, immanent, and intangible benefits provided by nature associated with spiritual experiences, cultural expression, or aesthetic inspiration, which are hard to quantify or economically valorised (Onofri & Boatto, 2020). Moreover, many policies and practices failed to meaningfully incorporate indigenous and local knowledge in conservation and development planning. In certain cases, conservation projects were implemented with unclear objectives or merely focused on promoting the recreational or touristic value of the region (He & Guo, 2021). As such, incorporating biocultural perspectives into conservation programmes still presents a global challenge.

The term “biocultural” is a portmanteau of the words “biodiversity” and “culture” which is used to refer to both material and non-material resources provided by nature to sustain our cultural heritage. Biocultural heritage, therefore, encompasses the knowledge, innovations, and traditional practices of indigenous and local communities that are collectively held and inextricably linked to, and shaped by, the socioecological context of communities (Gavin et al., 2015). This also includes the cultural beliefs, values, institutions, knowledge systems, languages and practices that both express and manifest the mutual relationship between humans and the environment (Maffi, 2010). Indeed, in the Southeast Asia, the mangrove forest ecosystem is home to rich biodiversity and local cultures which are both threatened by extinction.

Although many coastal communities have long existed along with the mangrove forest ecosystem, studies exploring its value as a biocultural refugia remain lacking. As defined by Barthel et al. (2013), biocultural refugia are places like mangrove forests in Southeast Asia, that not only shelter species, but also carry knowledge and experiences about the practical management of biodiversity and ecosystem services. As Southeast Asia’s mangrove forests continue to decline, this may likewise lead to the potential loss of various knowledge systems and even the disappearance of ethnic cultures. This global problem is now apparent that a “Scientists’ Warning to Humanity on Threats to Indigenous and Local Knowledge Systems” was released in 2021 (Fernández-Llamazares et al., 2021) whilst the International Union for Conservation of (IUCN) also started recognizing the cultural and spiritual significance of nature (Verschuuren et al., 2021).

In this systematic review, we explored the biocultural contribution of mangroves in the Southeast Asian region. Beyond their ecological importance, this study will examine the role of mangroves in local livelihood, food security, health, and culture of ethnic and local coastal communities; specifically, this research aims to answer the following questions:

1. How do the coastal communities in Southeast Asia directly benefit from mangrove forests?
2. What are the biocultural utilizations of mangroves in Southeast Asia?
3. What is the cultural and spiritual significance of mangrove forests for various coastal communities in the Southeast Asian region?

Methodology

The systematic review and data collection followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses) protocol (Moher et al., 2009; O’Dea et al., 2021). We used the Google Scholar database which covers a relatively diverse types of publications such as preprints, published articles, theses, books, and amongst others. We queried the database using the following terms and their combination: “biocultural”, “bio-cultural”, “Southeast Asia”, “Asia”, “mangrove”, “local knowledge”, “ethnic”, “cultural use”, “traditional use”, and “ethnobotanical”. In the preliminary screening of relevant publications for review, we set the following eligibility criteria for inclusion:

1. It should be a peer-reviewed research article published in the English language with full text. We excluded non-English publications, review articles, synthesis papers, magazine and newspaper articles, reports, thesis and dissertations, conference presentations, web pages, and inaccessible publications.
2. It should be a study conducted in any of the Southeast Asian countries, namely: Brunei, Myanmar, Cambodia, Timor-Leste, Indonesia, Laos, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, and Vietnam.
3. Following the publication of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in 2005, the data will only cover the last 15 years (2007–2022).
4. Irrespective of the research field (i.e., anthropology, economic botany, human ecology, Asian studies, etc.), the research article must be within the dimensions of “People’s connectedness to mangroves” and “Indigenous and local knowledge, skills, practices, cultural and spiritual values and worldviews relevant to mangrove forest ecosystem” modified from Hanspach et al. (2020).

The qualitative data (i.e., cultural and spiritual valorization of mangroves) were categorized in Excel using the concept of “biocultural lenses” described by Hanspach et al. (2020). A chord diagram showing the diverse biocultural utilization of mangroves were then generated using the circlize package in the free statistical software R (Gu et al., 2014).

Results and Discussion

Biocultural research in the last 15 years

In the last 15 years, following the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, literature relevant to the biocultural uses of mangroves remain scarce and limited. Our consolidated works of literature (n=33) (Table 1) suggest that the surge of research interest on the direct benefits provided by mangroves, in particular, its provisioning and cultural ecosystem services, only emerged in the last decade.

Recent publications from 2008 (n=5), 2020 (n=5), and 2021 (n=7) largely contributed to this research area (Figure 2). The low number of publications, however, may reflect the global trend which has shown concomitant declines in the abundance of biological and cultural diversity in the past few decades (Lukawiecki et al., 2022). Many rural and indigenous communities face profound cultural, economic, and environmental changes. As such, local and indigenous knowledge is being transformed globally and eroded when pertaining to ecology (Aswani et al., 2018). Moreover, the undervaluation of the “biological” and “cultural” interconnectedness between nature and human culture may have contributed to mangrove forest loss, cultural erosion, and lack of relevant biocultural research across Southeast Asia.

The majority of these publications were from Indonesia (60%), followed by Malaysia (9%), Philippines (9%), and Thailand (9%) whilst the least number of publications were from Myanmar (6%), Vietnam (3%), and Timor-Leste (3%) (Figure 3). As predicted, most studies come from the countries with the largest mangrove forest cover; Indonesia (2.24 million ha), Malaysia (Malaysia (521,000 ha), Philippines (356,000 ha), and Myanmar (299,000 ha) (Gevaña et al., 2018). On the other hand, Timor-Leste and Singapore have the smallest mangrove forest cover with only about 3000 ha combined (Gevaña et al., 2018). The aforementioned mangrove-rich countries also exhibit the highest cultural diversity in the region. Indonesia, composed of 1128 groups of indigenous peoples, is the largest in Southeast Asia (Buenavista, 2021; Buenavista et al., 2018). It is followed by Philippines with 110 indigenous groups, Myanmar inhabited by 100 indigenous groups, and Malaysia with 57 indigenous groups (Buenavista et al., 2018).

Three countries were underrepresented in this systematic review, namely, Singapore, Cambodia, and Laos. Based on the historical data of Singapore, the coastal communities at Kampong Mandai Besar, Kampong Mandai Kechil, and Kampong Lorong Fatimah only inhabit the Mandai mangrove and the surrounding area until the late 1980s before their relocation into public housing (Friess et al., 2012). As such, the use of mangroves for charcoal, firewood, artisanal fishing, and subsistence only appeared in historical accounts and is now considered unimportant in modern-day Singapore (Ng & Low, 1994). Currently, Singapore’s mangrove is either military or state land designated as nature reserves. Moreover, public interaction with mangroves is restricted mainly to four sites that are managed by the National Parks Board of Singapore; Sungei Buloh Wetland Reserve in the northwest, Berlayer Creek, part of Labrador Park Nature Reserve in the south, Pasir Ris Park in the northeast, and Chek Jawa on the island Pulau Ubin, off the northeast coast (Thiagarajah et al., 2015).

On the other hand, relevant research from Cambodia appeared to be very limited and inaccessible. This knowledge gap is exacerbated by the fact that Cambodia lost approximately 42% of its mangrove forests between 1989 and 2017 (1415 ha/year) (Kozhikkodan Veettil & Quang, 2019). Although the mangrove forest is extremely important for Cambodians, present research into mangrove-fisheries has not yet represented the full complexity of socio-ecological benefits accrued from mangrove-fishery (Seary et al., 2020). Furthermore, the absence of pertinent data from Laos could be explained by its landlocked status.

Human Culture and Mangrove Relations

Mangroves showed to be an integral component of different local and ethnic cultures in Southeast Asia. In the 33 reports screened, we identified seven ‘biocultural lenses’ or perceived human benefits of mangroves, both tangible and intangible benefits known to the community (Figure 4). Although cited for multiple uses, results showed that mangroves are mainly valued as food sources (24 reports, 72.7%), cultural and spiritual uses (21 reports, 63.6%), and livelihood sources (19 reports, 57.5%). Other reported uses of mangroves include: construction materials (16 reports, 48.4%), fuelwood and charcoal (14 reports, 42.4%), medicinal use (7 reports, 21.2%), and fish poison and fishing material (2 reports, 6.0%).

It can be argued that many coastal and island communities in Southeast Asia depend largely on mangroves as a significant source of food such as fish, shrimps, crabs, snails, and sago palms. In line with this biocultural view, the coastal communities in Ambon Dalam Bay, Moluccas, Indonesia consider mangroves a “tree of life” (Salampessy et al., 2015). Some mangrove plant species were also reported to be edible. In the case Ashe Mayan tribe in Ayeyarwady Delta, Myanmar, for example, the fruits of Sonneratia spp. fruits were cooked as ingredients of hinn (Burmese curry) and also eaten raw as snacks similar to fruits of Sarcolobus carinatus, and Sarcolobus globosus (Ono & Suzuki, 2013). Moreover, some mangrove dishes are also considered a cultural heritage like the laphet-thoke (Burmese tealeaf salad). The ingredient of this national delicacy includes the calyx lobe and flesh of Sonneratia spp. fruits, the flowers and fruits of Dolichandrone spathacea and the seeds of Avicennia officinalis (Ono & Suzuki, 2013). Another edible mangrove is Avicennia marina locally known as “brayo” which is harvested for food, either as complementary or substitute for staple food in Demak, Indonesia (Damastuti & de Groot, 2019).

As a biocultural refugia, mangroves are also part of various cultural and spiritual beliefs and practices of different indigenous groups in Southeast Asia. It is associated with local wisdom and rituals for various ethnic groups in Indonesia (Sadono et al., 2020; Sugiyanto et al., 2022; Zamzami et al., 2018). It is also used in cultural functions such as in the case of the Mah Meri indigenous community of Klang Islands, Malaysia which utilizes non-timber mangrove forest products for mask and leaf origami traditionally worn by the natives (Hattam et al., 2021). The Ashe Mayan of Myanmar also collects and use inflorescence gathered from the mangrove forests such as those of Derris spp., Phoenix paludosa, and Flagellaria indica for hair accessories, and offerings to Buddhist altars or spirit shrines (Ono & Suzuki, 2013). Apart from material culture, Southeast Asia’s mangrove forest is also associated with traditional forest management systems and customary practices. One of the most noteworthy traditions is the “Sasi” in Maluku Islands, Indonesia. “Sasi” is a form of customary law used in community-based resource conservation. “Sasi” provides provisions on the restriction of entering, taking, or doing something in the mangroves within a specific period (Nanlohy et al., 2015). In Kotania Bay, the “Sasi” does not allow the cutting of young mangrove trees for any purpose; it prohibits the throwing of garbage in the mangrove ecosystems; the use of poison and destructive fishing methods is also prohibited; it does not allow the public from raising livestock for it may damage the mangrove; and most importantly, it also prohibits anyone to take, catch, collect or kill various types of wildlife associated with mangrove ecosystems (Nanlohy et al., 2015).

Moreover, the locals of North Maluku Islands integrate local wisdom in mangrove management. This includes “Oro hatetapiharussiutoadi”, a conservation rule, wherein, locals who use mangroves are obliged to replant in previously logged areas (Tolangara & Rasyid, 2018). The cutting of young mangrove trees is also prohibited under “Oro enamalamoenamaicisipelihara” (Tolangara & Rasyid, 2018). On the other hand, the felling of mature mangrove trees is also highly regulated by customary practice called “Hakawarosemanciadofu”, a traditional ceremony performed by the community (Tolangara & Rasyid, 2018).

In many reports, mangroves are highly valued as a source of livelihood for many rural communities. These profitable mangrove-associated resources include timbers, fish, shellfish (i.e., clams, snails, crabs, shrimps), firewood and charcoal, and various non-timber building materials such as the thatched nipa for walls and roofing (Feurer et al., 2018; Gonzales et al., 2017; Mojiol et al., 2016; Rosaliza, 2018; Sahputra et al., 2019; Singgalen, 2020). Ecotourism is also an important livelihood source for many communities particularly in Indonesia (Purwowibowo et al., 2020; Putri et al., 2014; Singgalen, 2020), Thailand (Vorasiha, 2018), and Malaysia (Hattam et al., 2021). Other uncommon yet, important utilization of mangroves includes their medicinal use for various diseases (Feurer et al., 2018; Mojiol et al., 2016; Oratai Neamsuvan, 2012; Tamalene et al., 2021), and as a source of fish poison and fishing material (Alimbon & Manseguiao, 2021; Ono & Suzuki, 2013).

Conclusion

This systematic review highlights the biocultural utilization of mangroves in Southeast Asia. The publications that mainly contributed in this field were relatively recent, in particular, 2008 (n=5), 2020 (n=5), and 2021 (n=7). Despite the exceptional richness of biocultural diversity in the Southeast Asia, the results indicated a low number of relevant publications (n=33) in the past 15 years. The majority of these biocultural reports were from Indonesia (60%), followed by Malaysia (9%), the Philippines (9%), and Thailand (9%) whilst the least number of publications were from Myanmar (6%), Vietnam (3%), and Timor-Leste (3%). This mirrors the worldwide trend which has shown concomitant declines in the abundance of biological and cultural diversity in the past few decades. Although highly valued for their ecological functions, the consolidated data showed that mangroves are also important for food source, cultural and spiritual use, livelihood source, construction materials, fuelwood and charcoal, medicinal use, and for fish poison and fishing material. Yet, with the rapid and extensive decline of mangrove forest cover across the region, the associated biocultural uses of mangroves are likewise under threat. As a biocultural refugia, mangroves are intimately intertwined with traditional management practices which stemmed from cultural and spiritual importance of mangroves such as the “Sasi” and local conservation wisdom of the people of Maluku Islands, Indonesia. We believed, however, that many Asian cultures remain undocumented and understudied. We therefore recommend a more culture-sensitive approach in various community-based mangrove conservation projects that respectfully integrate the indigenous and local knowledge systems (ILKS) and practices. Studies relating to the biocultural values, both tangible and intangible benefits of mangroves, should be further explored to promote the sustainable utilization and conservation of the remaining mangroves in Southeast Asia.

References

• Adame, M. F., Brown, C. J., Bejarano, M., Herrera-Silveira, J. A., Ezcurra, P., Kauffman, J. B., & Birdsey, R. (2018). The undervalued contribution of mangrove protection in Mexico to carbon emission targets. Conservation Letters, 11(4), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12445
• Adame, M. F., Connolly, R. M., Turschwell, M. P., Lovelock, C. E., Fatoyinbo, T., Lagomasino, D., Goldberg, L. A., Holdorf, J., Friess, D. A., Sasmito, S. D., Sanderman, J., Sievers, M., Buelow, C., Kauffman, J. B., Bryan-Brown, D., & Brown, C. J. (2021). Future carbon emissions from global mangrove forest loss. Global Change Biology, 27(12), 2856–2866. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15571
• Adulcharoen, W., Suntornvongsakul, K., & Lee, Y. S. (2020). Assessment of sustainable utilization of ecosystem services in different stages of mangrove forest restoration at klong khone sub-district, Samut Songkhram province, Thailand. Applied Environmental Research, 42(1), 43–57. https://doi.org/10.35762/AER.2020.42.1.4
• Alimbon, J. A., & Manseguiao, M. R. S. (2021). Community knowledge and utilization of mangroves in Panabo Mangrove Park, Panabo City, Davao del Norte, Philippines. International Journal of Bonorowo Wetlands, 11(2), 51–57. https://doi.org/10.13057/bonorowo/w110201
• Alongi, D. M. (2014). Mangrove Forests of Timor-Leste: Ecology, Degradation and Vulnerability to Climate Change. In I. Faridah-Hanum, A. Latiff, K. R. Hakeem, & M. Ozturk (Eds.), Mangrove Ecosystems of Asia: Status, Challenges and Management Strategies (pp. 199–211). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8582-7_9
• Arbiastutie, Y., & Diba, F. (2021). Ethnobotanical and ecological studies of medicinal plants in a mangrove forest in Mempawah District, West Kalimantan, Indonesia. Biodiversitas, 22(6), 3164–3170. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d220619
• Aswani, S., Lemahieu, A., & Sauer, W. H. H. (2018). Global trends of local ecological knowledge and future implications. PLoS ONE, 13(4), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0195440
• Aye, W. N., Wen, Y., Marin, K., Thapa, S., & Tun, A. W. (2019). Contribution of Mangrove Forest to the Livelihood of Local Communities in Ayeyarwaddy Region, Myanmar. Forests, 10(414), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3390/f10050414
• Barthel, S., Crumley, C., & Svedin, U. (2013). Bio-cultural refugia-Safeguarding diversity of practices for food security and biodiversity. Global Environmental Change, 23(5), 1142–1152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2013.05.001
• Basri, L. O. A., Mudana, I. W., Habsah, W. O. S., Marhadi, A., Tarifu, L., Burhan, F., & Janu, L. (2017). Pamali, Bajo’s Local Wisdom in the Conservation of Marine Resources. Asian Social Science, 13(12), 63. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v13n12p63
• Bera, R., & Maiti, R. (2022). Mangrove dependency and livelihood challenges — A study on Sundarbans, India. Regional Studies in Marine Science, 50, 102135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsma.2021.102135
• Bhowmik, A. K., Padmanaban, R., Cabral, P., & Romeiras, M. M. (2022). Global Mangrove Deforestation and Its Interacting Social-Ecological Drivers: A Systematic Review and Synthesis. Sustainability, 14(8), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084433
• Bibi, S. N., Fawzi, M. M., Gokhan, Z., Rajesh, J., Nadeem, N., R.R., R. K., R.D.D.G., A., & Pandian, S. K. (2019). Ethnopharmacology, Phytochemistry, and Global Distribution of Mangroves—A Comprehensive Review. Marine Drugs, 17(231), 1–82.
• Buenavista, D. P. (2021). Co-production of knowledge with Indigenous peoples for UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs): Higaonon Food Ethnobotany, and a discovery of a new Begonia species in Mindanao, Philippines. Bangor University.
• Buenavista, D. P., Wynne-Jones, S., & McDonald, M. A. (2018). Asian Indigeneity, Indigenous Knowledge Systems, and Challenges of the 2030 Agenda. East Asian Community Review, 1(3–4), 221–240. https://doi.org/10.1057/s42215-018-00010-0
• Damastuti, E., & de Groot, R. (2019). Participatory ecosystem service mapping to enhance community-based mangrove rehabilitation and management in Demak, Indonesia. Regional Environmental Change, 19(1), 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10113-018-1378-7
• Daniel, T. C., Muhar, A., Arnberger, A., Aznar, O., Boyd, J. W., Chan, K. M. A., Costanza, R., Elmqvist, T., Flint, C. G., Gobster, P. H., Grêt-Regamey, A., Lave, R., Muhar, S., Penker, M., Ribe, R. G., Schauppenlehner, T., Sikor, T., Soloviy, I., Spierenburg, M., … Von Der Dunk, A. (2012). Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services agenda. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 109(23), 8812–8819. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1114773109
• Fatimah, S., Syafrini, D., Wasino, & Zainul, R. (2021). Rendang lokan: history, symbol of cultural identity, and food adaptation of Minangkabau tribe in West Sumatra, Indonesia. Journal of Ethnic Foods, 8(12), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42779-021-00088-2
• Fernández-Llamazares, Á., Lepofsky, D., Lertzman, K., Armstrong, C. G., Brondizio, E. S., Gavin, M. C., Lyver, P. O., Nicholas, G. P., Pascua, P., Reo, N. J., Reyes-García, V., Turner, N. J., Yletyinen, J., Anderson, E. N., Balée, W., Cariño, J., David-Chavez, D. M., Dunn, C. P., Garnett, S. C., … Vaughan, M. B. (2021). Scientists’ Warning to Humanity on Threats to Indigenous and Local Knowledge Systems. Journal of Ethnobiology, 41(2), 144–169. https://doi.org/10.2993/0278-0771-41.2.144
• Feurer, M., Gritten, D., & Than, M. M. (2018). Community forestry for livelihoods: Benefiting from myanmar’s mangroves. Forests, 9(150), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3390/f9030150
• Friess, D. A., Phelps, J., Leong, R. C., Lee, W. K., Wee, A. K. S., Sivasothi, N., Oh, R. R. Y., & Webb, E. L. (2012). Mandai mangrove, Singapore: Lessons for the conservation of Southeast Asia’s mangroves. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology, SUPPL.25, 55–65.
• Friess, Daniel A., Rogers, K., Lovelock, C. E., Krauss, K. W., Hamilton, S. E., Lee, S. Y., Lucas, R., Primavera, J., Rajkaran, A., & Shi, S. (2019). The State of the World’s Mangrove Forests: Past, Present, and Future. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 44, 89–115. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-environ-101718-033302
• Gandhi, S., & Jones, T. G. (2019). Identifying mangrove deforestation hotspots in South Asia, Southeast Asia and Asia-Pacific. Remote Sensing, 11(6). https://doi.org/10.3390/RS11060728
• Gavin, M. C., McCarter, J., Mead, A., Berkes, F., Stepp, J. R., Peterson, D., & Tang, R. (2015). Defining biocultural approaches to conservation. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 30(3), 140–145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2014.12.005
• Gevaña, D. T., Camacho, L. D., & Pulhin, J. M. (2018). Conserving mangroves for their blue carbon: Insights and prospects for community-based mangrove management in southeast Asia. In C. Makowski & C. W. Finkl (Eds.), Threats to Mangrove Forests, Hazards, Vulnerability, and Management (Vol. 25, pp. 579–588). Springer Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-73016-5_26
• Gnansounou, S. C., Toyi, M., Salako, K. V., Ahossou, D. O., Jean, T., Akpona, T. J. D., Gbedomon, R. C., Assogbadjo, A. E., & Glèlè, R. (2021). Local uses of mangroves and perceived impacts of their degradation in Grand-Popo municipality, a hotspot of mangroves in Benin, West Africa. Trees, Forests and People, 4, 100080 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2021.100080
• Gonzales, B. J., Sariego, R. S., & Montaño, B. S. (2017). Social benefits and impacts of mangrove resource utilization in Rio Tuba, Bataraza, Palawan, Philippines. AES Bioflux, 9(2), 135–147.
• Gu, Z., Gu, L., Eils, R., Schlesner, M., & Brors, B. (2014). Circlize implements and enhances circular visualization in R. Bioinformatics, 30(19), 2811–2812. https://doi.org/10.1093/bioinformatics/btu393
• Ha, T. T. P., van Dijk, H., & Visser, L. (2014). Impacts of changes in mangrove forest management practices on forest accessibility and livelihood: A case study in mangrove-shrimp farming system in Ca Mau Province, Mekong Delta, Vietnam. Land Use Policy, 36, 89–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.07.002
• Hamilton, S. E., & Casey, D. (2016). Creation of a high spatio-temporal resolution global database of continuous mangrove forest cover for the 21st century (CGMFC-21). Global Ecology and Biogeography, 25(6), 729–738. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12449
• Hanspach, J., Jamila, L., Elisa, H., Stahl, O. A., Gulsrud, N. M., Raymond, C. M., Torralba, M., Claudia, B. M., María, B., Albert, G. C., Beery, T. H., Fagerholm, N., & Plieninger, A. D. T. (2020). Biocultural approaches to sustainability: A systematic review of the scientific literature. People and Nature, 2, 643–659. https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10120
• Hashim, T. M. Z. T., Suratman, M. N., Singh, H. R., Jaafar, J., & Bakar, A. N. (2022). Status and Sustainability of Mangrove Forests: A Case Study from Merbok Mangrove Reserve, Kedah, Malaysia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1019(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1019/1/012023
• Hattam, C., Goh, H. C., Then, A. Y. H., Edwards-Jones, A., Ruslan, N. F. N., Yap, J. S. E., & Moh, H. H. (2021). Using nexus thinking to identify opportunities for mangrove management in the Klang Islands, Malaysia. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 248, 107157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2020.107157
• He, J., & Guo, N. (2021). Culture and parks: Incorporating cultural ecosystem services into conservation in the Tibetan region of Southwest China. Ecology and Society, 26(3). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-12572-260312
• Hirota, I., & Tsuji, T. (2021). Ethno-bamboo Approaches to the Pala’wan in the Mangrove Area of Palawan Island, the Philippines. Southeastern Philippines Journal of Research and Development, 26(2), 47–62. https://doi.org/10.53899/spjrd.v26i2.153
• Hochard, J. P., Barbier, E. B., & Hamilton, S. E. (2021). Mangroves and coastal topography create economic “safe havens” from tropical storms. Scientific Reports, 11(15359), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-94207-3
• Horgan, F. G., Mundaca, E. A., & Crisol-Martínez, E. (2021). Emerging Patterns in Cultural Ecosystem Services as Incentives and Obstacles for Raptor Conservation. Birds, 2(2), 185–206. https://doi.org/10.3390/birds2020014
• IPBES. (2018). The IPBES regional assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services for Asia and the Pacific (M. Karki, S. Senaratna Sellamuttu, S. Okayasu, & W. Suzuki (Eds.)). Secretariat of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3237373
• IPCC. (2019). Summary for Policymakers. In H.-O. Pörtner, D. C. Roberts, V. Masson-Delmotte, P. Zhai, M. Tignor, E. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegría, M. Nicolai, A. Okem, J. Petzold, B. Rama, & N. M. Weyer (Eds.), IPCC Special Report on the Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157964.001003
• Islam, A. T. M. R., Hasan, M., Islam, T., & Tanaka, N. (2022). Ethnobotanical study of plants used by the Munda ethnic group living around the Sundarbans, the world’s largest mangrove forest in southwestern Bangladesh. Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 285, 114853. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jep.2021.114853
• Kathiresan, K., & Rajendran, N. (2005). Coastal mangrove forests mitigated tsunami. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 65, 601–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2005.06.022
• Kozhikkodan Veettil, B., & Quang, N. X. (2019). Mangrove forests of Cambodia: Recent changes and future threats. Ocean and Coastal Management, 181, 104895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2019.104895
• Lukawiecki, J., Wall, J., Young, R., Gonet, J., Azhdari, G., & Moola, F. (2022). Operationalizing the biocultural perspective in conservation practice: A systematic review of the literature. Environmental Science & Policy, 136, 369–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2022.06.016
• Lynch, M., & Turner, S. (2021). Rocking the boat: intersectional resistance to marine conservation policies in Wakatobi National Park, Indonesia. Gender, Place and Culture, 0(0), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/0966369X.2021.1971630
• Maffi, L. (2010). What is Biocultural Diversity? In L. Maffi & E. Woodley (Eds.), Biocultural Diversity: Conservation A Global Sourcebook (1st ed., p. 304). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781849774697
• Mallick, B., Priodarshini, R., Kimengsi, J. N., Biswas, B., Hausmann, A. E., Islam, S., Huq, S., & Vogt, J. (2021). Livelihoods dependence on mangrove ecosystems: Empirical evidence from the Sundarbans. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability, 3, 100077. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2021.100077
• Martin, C. L., Momtaz, S., Gaston, T., & Moltschaniwskyj, N. A. (2016). A systematic quantitative review of coastal and marine cultural ecosystem services: Current status and future research. Marine Policy, 74, 25–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2016.09.004
• Millennium Ecosystem Assessment Secretariat. (2005). Ecosystems and human well-being: a report on the conceptual framework working group of the Millenium Ecosystem Assessment. In Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Island Press. https://www.millenniumassessment.org/en/Framework.html
• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ, 339(July), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.b2535
• Mojiol, A. R., Guntabid, J., Lintangah, W., Ismenyah, M., Kodoh, J., Chiang, L. K., & Sompud, J. (2016). Contribution of Mangrove Forest and Socio-Economic Development of Local Communities in Kudat District, Sabah Malaysia. International Journal of Agriculture, Forestry and Plantation International Journal of Agriculture Forestry and Plantation, 2(2), 122–129.
• Nanlohy, H., Bambang, A. N., Ambariyanto, & Hutabarat, S. (2015). Need To Conservation of Mangrove Ecosystem In Kotania Bay, District Of West Seram, Mollucas: An Approach The Local Wisdom And Behavior. International Journal of Marine Science and Ocean Technology, 2(1), 1–4.
• Ng, P. K. L., & Low, J. K. Y. (1994). Status of Mangroves in Singapore: Conservation Beyond the Year 2000. Third ASEAN-Australia Symposium on Living Coastal Resources, 229–232. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jeffrey-Low/publication/277978704_Status_of_mangroves_in_Singapore_Conservation_beyond_the_year_2000/links/5577f0cc08aeb6d8c01ceadd/Status-of-mangroves-in-Singapore-Conservation-beyond-the-year-2000.pdf
• O’Dea, R. E., Lagisz, M., Jennions, M. D., Koricheva, J., Noble, D. W. A., Parker, T. H., Gurevitch, J., Page, M. J., Stewart, G., Moher, D., & Nakagawa, S. (2021). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses in ecology and evolutionary biology: a PRISMA extension. Biological Reviews, 96(5), 1695–1722. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12721
• Obie, M., & Lahaji. (2020). Coastal and marine resource policies and the loss of ethnic identity of the Bajo tribe. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 9(3), 147–155. https://doi.org/10.36941/ajis-2020-0050
• Ono, K., & Suzuki, K. (2013). Assessment of Subsistence Plant Resource of the Mangrove Forest in the Ayeyarwady Delta, Myanmar. Global Environmental Research, 17(1), 223–232.
• Onofri, L., & Boatto, V. (2020). On the economic valuation of cultural ecosystem services: A tale of myths, vine and wine. Ecosystem Services, 46, 101215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2020.101215
• Oratai Neamsuvan. (2012). A survey of medicinal plants in mangrove and beach forests from sating Phra Peninsula, Songkhla Province, Thailand. Journal of Medicinal Plants Research, 6(12), 2421–2437. https://doi.org/10.5897/jmpr11.1395
• Osawa, T. (2017). Associating Land With People: Land and Collective Identity Among the Suku Asli of Sumatra. Jurnal Antropologi: Isu-Isu Sosial Budaya, 19(2), 109. https://doi.org/10.25077/jaisb.v19.n2.p109-123.2017
• Purnobasuki, H. (2012). Pemanfaatan Hutan Mangrove Sebagai Penyimpan Karbon. Buletin PSL Universitas Surabaya, 28, 1–6.
• Purwowibowo, Santoso, B., Hendrijanto, K., Hariyono, S., & Nufus, B. H. (2020). Local wisdom for mangrove conservation and ecotourism: Case study from Wringinputih, Muncar, Banyuwangi. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 485(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/485/1/012092
• Putri, R. I., Supriatna, J., & Walujo, E. B. (2014). Ethnobotanical Study of Plant Resources in Serangan Island, Bali. Asian Journal of Conservation Biology, 3(2), 44. https://www.ajcb.in/journals/full_papers_dec_2014/AJCB-Vol3-No2-Putri%20et%20al.pdf
• Richards, D. R., Thompson, B. S., & Wijedasa, L. (2020). Quantifying net loss of global mangrove carbon stocks from 20 years of land cover change. Nature Communications, 11(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-18118-z
• Rosaliza, M. (2018). Akit Tribe and Existence of Mangrove Forest in Berancah Village, Bengkalis, Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 175(1), 012060. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/175/1/012060
• Sadono, R., Soeprijadi, D., Susanti, A., Matatula, J., Pujiono, E., Idris, F., & Wirabuana, P. Y. A. P. (2020). Local indigenous strategy to rehabilitate and conserve mangrove ecosystem in the southeastern gulf of kupang, east nusa tenggara, Indonesia. Biodiversitas, 21(3), 1250–1257. https://doi.org/10.13057/biodiv/d210353
• Sahputra, E., Harahap, R. H., Wahyuningsih, H., & Utomo, B. (2019). Community demography and perception towards mangrove exploitation in Jaring Halus village, North Sumatera. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 348(1), 012049. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/348/1/012049
• Salampessy, M. L., Febryano, I. G., Martin, E., Siahaya, M. E., & Papilaya, R. (2015). Cultural Capital of the Communities in the Mangrove Conservation in the Coastal areas of Ambon Dalam Bay, Moluccas, Indonesia. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 23(Ictcred 2014), 222–229. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2015.01.034
• Sandilyan, S., & Kathiresan, K. (2012). Mangrove conservation: a global perspective. Biodiversity Conservation, 12, 3523–3542. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-012-0388-x
• Sandilyan, S., & Kathiresan, K. (2015). Mangroves as bioshield: An undisputable fact. Ocean and Coastal Management, 103, 94–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.11.011
• Seary, R., Spencer, T., Bithell, M., & McOwen, C. (2020). Measuring mangrove-fishery benefits in the Peam Krasaop Fishing. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 248, 106918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2020.106918
• Setyaningrum, E. W., Erwanto, Z., Prapti, K. P., Jayanti, A. L., Dewi, A. T. K., & Susanti, H. D. (2021). Development of Sustainable Mangrove Areas Based on Empowerment of Coastal Communities in Cemara Beach, Pakis, Banyuwangi, East Java, Indonesia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 718(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/718/1/012053
• Singgalen, Y. A. (2020). Mangrove forest utilization for sustainable livelihood through community-based ecotourism in kao village of north halmahera district. Jurnal Manajemen Hutan Tropika, 26(2), 155–168. https://doi.org/10.7226/JTFM.26.2.155
• Song, A. M., Dressler, W. H., Satizábal, P., & Fabinyi, M. (2021). From conversion to conservation to carbon: The changing policy discourse on mangrove governance and use in the Philippines. Journal of Rural Studies, 82, 184–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2021.01.008
• Spalding, M. D., & Leal, M. (Eds.). (2021). The State of the World’s Mangroves 2021. Global Mangrove Alliance. https://www.mangrovealliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/The-State-of-the-Worlds-Mangroves-2021-FINAL-1.pdf
• Sugiyanto, S., Jalil, A., Asriwandari, H., & Sidiq, R. S. S. (2022). Mangrove and Akit Tribe: Description of Value Orientation and Natural Conservation Effort. Sosial Budaya, 19(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.24014/sb.v19i1.16628
• Sutrisno, A., Zulhafandi, Wahyuni, E., Sidik, J., & Usman, S. (2022). The Relation of Cultural Value Orientation to the Poverty of Communities Around Mangrove Forests and Peatlands in Kayan Sembakung Delta. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1083(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/1083/1/012010
• Tamalene, M. N., Sen, U. K., Bhakat, R. K., Vianti, E., Bahtiar, & Suparman. (2021). Utilization of mangrove plants as a source of Malaria medicine in North Maluku Province, Indonesia. Asian Journal of Ethnobiology, 4(2), 86–92. https://doi.org/10.13057/asianjethnobiol/y040203
• Thiagarajah, J., Wong, S. K. M., Richards, D. R., & Friess, D. A. (2015). Historical and contemporary cultural ecosystem service values in the rapidly urbanizing city state of Singapore. Ambio, 44(7), 666–677. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-015-0647-7
• Tolangara, A., & Rasyid, R. (2018). Mangrove conservation based on local wisdom in North Maluku Province, Indonesia. International Journal of Scientific Development and Research, 3(1), 59–61. http://repository.unkhair.ac.id/92/3/Artikel%20Jurnal%20Internasional%20diluar%20kategori%202%20-%20Mangrove%20conservation%20based%20on%20local%20wisdom%20in....pdf
• Verschuuren, B., Mallarach, J.-M., Bernbaum, E., Spoon, J., Brown, S., Borde, R., Brown, J., Calamia, M., Mitchell, N., Infield, M., & Lee, E. (2021). Cultural and spiritual significance of nature. Guidance for protected and conserved area governance and management. Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series No. 32. IUCN.
• Vorasiha, E. (2018). The travelling route for gastronomic tourism via salt in western region of Thailand. African Journal of Hospitality, Tourism and Leisure, 7(3), 1–9.
• Zamzami, L., Nursyiwan, E., Syahrizal, & Ermayanti. (2018). The Local Wisdom In Marine Resource Conservation In Indonesia: A Case Study Of Newcomers In Pariaman West Sumatra. Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research, 136, 391–400. https://doi.org/10.2991/icosop-17.2018.61
• zu Ermgassen, P. S. E., Mukherjee, N., Worthington, T. A., Acosta, A., Rocha Araujo, A. R. da, Beitl, C. M., Castellanos-Galindo, G. A., Cunha-Lignon, M., Dahdouh-Guebas, F., Diele, K., Parrett, C. L., Dwyer, P. G., Gair, J. R., Johnson, A. F., Kuguru, B., Savio Lobo, A., Loneragan, N. R., Longley-Wood, K., Mendonça, J. T., … Spalding, M. (2021). Fishers who rely on mangroves: Modelling and mapping the global intensity of mangrove-associated fisheries. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 248, 107159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2020.107159