Due to this need for large fuelwood quantities, households relying on commercial
fuelwood markets tend to spend substantial amounts of money to purchase fuelwood, constituting fuelwood as the third largest household expense category among
all study groups following food and health care (Sect. 7.3.4). Many studies have
reported the significant economic burden of high fuelwood reliance on household
budgets in many rural parts of SSA (Sola et al. 2016; ESMAP 2015). However, it is
interesting to point that the overall monthly expenditure on fuelwood from upland
forests is two times higher compared fuelwood sourced from mangrove forests (Sect.
7.3.4). A possible explanation behind this difference might be the restriction on
mangrove wood extraction in some locations and the remoteness of mangrove
forests from many villages (Sect. 7.3.1). Both these factors might end up increasing
final costs as found in other parts of SSA (Bolognesi et al. 2015; Maurice et al.
2017).
Another major finding is that households engaging in prevalent livelihood options
in the study area also tend to interact in different ways with the mangrove forest.
Although in most areas mangrove fuelwood extraction and land conversion used to
be practically unregulated, the situation has recently changed partly due to stricter
regulation and efforts aiming at enhancing disaster prevention and food security
(Sect. 7.3.1). In fact, many studies from different parts of SSA have identified how
stricter regulation and other socioeconomic imperatives have catalysed changes in
prevailing fuelwood extraction practices (Arnold et al. 2006; Lukumbuzya and
Sianga 2017; Maurice et al. 2017). However, the ban on mangrove fuelwood is
precarious and possibly depends on many economic and cultural factors as discussed
below.
For example, irrigated rice fields in Balessourou and Bentya are not always
maintained properly, as farmers lack the means to undertake such tasks that require
usually large and recurrent investments. Failure to maintain the irrigated perimeters
of improved rice farms (Sect. 7.2.1) may have negative impacts on the surrounding
mangrove forest when such perimeters become unproductive (e.g. due to salinity,
acidification). For example, possible crop yield decreases due to the
underperformance of these irrigation systems may lead to agricultural expansion
and the conversion of new mangrove areas to rice fields as has been identified in
different parts of SSA (FAO 2009; UNEP-WCMC 2007; Juo et al. 2003).
With respect to salt production, only traditional salt producers (TSP) rely on
fuelwood for brine preparation and conditioning before salt extraction (Sect. 7.2.1).
The interviewed salt producers reported that fuelwood costs for salt production
under traditional methods have increased substantially due to the remoteness of
the upland forest from the campsites used for salt extraction (Sect. 7.3.1). However,
two reasons may lead to the possible shift of fuelwood extraction back to the
mangrove forest. The first reason is that fuelwood overexploitation in the upland
areas might cause fuelwood scarcity and as an extent further escalate fuelwood costs
(see above). Studies in many parts of SSA have found that fuelwood scarcity might
increase fuelwood costs (Scheid et al. 2019; Egeru et al. 2014; Sola et al. 2016),
leading to decreasing profit margins for small-scale processors but also incentives for
changing fuelwood procurement areas (Daurella and Foster 2009; Kammen and
236
B. S. Balde et al.
fuelwood markets tend to spend substantial amounts of money to purchase fuelwood, constituting fuelwood as the third largest household expense category among
all study groups following food and health care (Sect. 7.3.4). Many studies have
reported the significant economic burden of high fuelwood reliance on household
budgets in many rural parts of SSA (Sola et al. 2016; ESMAP 2015). However, it is
interesting to point that the overall monthly expenditure on fuelwood from upland
forests is two times higher compared fuelwood sourced from mangrove forests (Sect.
7.3.4). A possible explanation behind this difference might be the restriction on
mangrove wood extraction in some locations and the remoteness of mangrove
forests from many villages (Sect. 7.3.1). Both these factors might end up increasing
final costs as found in other parts of SSA (Bolognesi et al. 2015; Maurice et al.
2017).
Another major finding is that households engaging in prevalent livelihood options
in the study area also tend to interact in different ways with the mangrove forest.
Although in most areas mangrove fuelwood extraction and land conversion used to
be practically unregulated, the situation has recently changed partly due to stricter
regulation and efforts aiming at enhancing disaster prevention and food security
(Sect. 7.3.1). In fact, many studies from different parts of SSA have identified how
stricter regulation and other socioeconomic imperatives have catalysed changes in
prevailing fuelwood extraction practices (Arnold et al. 2006; Lukumbuzya and
Sianga 2017; Maurice et al. 2017). However, the ban on mangrove fuelwood is
precarious and possibly depends on many economic and cultural factors as discussed
below.
For example, irrigated rice fields in Balessourou and Bentya are not always
maintained properly, as farmers lack the means to undertake such tasks that require
usually large and recurrent investments. Failure to maintain the irrigated perimeters
of improved rice farms (Sect. 7.2.1) may have negative impacts on the surrounding
mangrove forest when such perimeters become unproductive (e.g. due to salinity,
acidification). For example, possible crop yield decreases due to the
underperformance of these irrigation systems may lead to agricultural expansion
and the conversion of new mangrove areas to rice fields as has been identified in
different parts of SSA (FAO 2009; UNEP-WCMC 2007; Juo et al. 2003).
With respect to salt production, only traditional salt producers (TSP) rely on
fuelwood for brine preparation and conditioning before salt extraction (Sect. 7.2.1).
The interviewed salt producers reported that fuelwood costs for salt production
under traditional methods have increased substantially due to the remoteness of
the upland forest from the campsites used for salt extraction (Sect. 7.3.1). However,
two reasons may lead to the possible shift of fuelwood extraction back to the
mangrove forest. The first reason is that fuelwood overexploitation in the upland
areas might cause fuelwood scarcity and as an extent further escalate fuelwood costs
(see above). Studies in many parts of SSA have found that fuelwood scarcity might
increase fuelwood costs (Scheid et al. 2019; Egeru et al. 2014; Sola et al. 2016),
leading to decreasing profit margins for small-scale processors but also incentives for
changing fuelwood procurement areas (Daurella and Foster 2009; Kammen and
236
B. S. Balde et al.