Mangrove rehabilitation in the west coast of Aceh: issues and perspectives

The condition of mangroves pre- and post- tsunami and the socioeconomic role of mangrove forests in the livelihoods of coastal communities along the west coast of Aceh province, Indonesia are examined. The findings indicate that community livelihoods are significantly linked to the mangrove ecosystem. However, most of the mangrove rehabilitation programs are conservation orientated, aimed primarily at land conservation, and are not necessarily linked with livelihood options for local people or integrated resource management. This is a cause for concern as rehabilitation will only succeed when conservation measures are balanced with local community needs to obtain sustainable benefits from the rehabilitated systems. The rehabilitation efforts do involve the communities to a certain extent, but a more holistic and integrated approach needs to be adopted to ensure better management and sustainability of the rehabilitated mangrove forests.

Mangrove rehabilitation and coastal resource management: a case study of Cogtong Bay, Philippines

The Cogtong Bay experience represents a bold attempt to pursue a shared responsibility between the government and local residents for rehabilitating coastal resources. Some of the factors that provided the impetus to co-management arrangements were the recognition of resource management problems, dependence on coastal resources for livelihood and the desire for more sustainable resource use. This paper draws attention to the importance of legitimate user/property rights, vigilant law enforcement efforts, common commitment among stakeholders and continuing support from local leadership in viable co-management arrangements.

Architectural research and its enemies

Like the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) that preceded it, the UK government's proposed Research Excellence Framework (REF) is a means of allocating funding in higher education to support research. As with any method for the competitive allocation of funds it creates winners and losers and inevitably generates a lot of emotion among those rewarded or penalised. More specifically, the 'winners' tend to approve of the method of allocation and the 'losers' denigrate it as biased against their activities and generally unfair. An extraordinary press campaign has been consistently waged against research assessment and its methods by those involved in architectural education, which I will track over a decade and a half. What follows will question whether this campaign demonstrates the sophistication and superior judgment of those who have gone into print, or conversely whether its mixture of misinformation and disinformation reveals not just disenchantment and prejudice, but a naivety and a depth of ignorance about the fundamentals of research that is deeply damaging to the credibility of architecture as a research-based discipline. With the recent consultation process towards a new cycle of research assessment, the REF, getting under way, I aim to draw attention to the risk of repeating past mistakes. Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010.