359
ers and with the help of local fi shery offi cials
including Mr. Tanaka, they found that in some of
the areas where the eelgrass beds were before,
water salinity and seabed conditions had been
deeply changed. The local fi shery offi cials then
helped in artifi cially adjusting the seabed
conditions and salinity by carpeting the seabed
fl oor with grinded oyster shells and mitigating
the wave movements through the use of fl oating
wave-dissipating devices.
As a consequence of a long-term effort, the
amamo-ba in Hinase increased from just 12 ha in
1985 to almost 100 ha in 2009. The recovery is
still in progress, but so far, the application of both
local and scientifi c knowledge has been highly
positive in recreating the habitat and in orchestrating cooperation by the government sector
(prefecture), scientifi c experts, and the fi shing
community.
Still today, as it is the case in some highly
urbanized areas in France, connectivity between
the land and the sea has been lost. In that regard,
one may say that the recent, devastating earthquake and tsunami have restored the Tohoku area
to the state it was in before the era of Japan’s high
economic growth. But the government’s basic
principle is not only to rebuild the once existing
seawalls but to build a continuous wall along the
entire Tohoku coast in Fukushima, Miyagi, and
Iwate prefectures. In Kesennuma, this seawall
will be a giant structure (almost 15 m!), over
three times as high as the previous one, and it will
be sloped (i.e., 91 m wide concrete structure as its
base).
Clearly for Dr. Seino, such a structure standing right at the boundary between land and sea
will destroy the wetlands and tidal fl ats, making
it impossible for them to function again.
Unfortunately and in spite of local opposition, it
looks like the government has no time for discussion (deadline for construction is the fi scal year
2015, i.e., in between April 2015 and March
2016), making it a matter of disaster reconstruction hence not needing any kind of environmental
assessment.
As already highlighted by Prof. Komatsu, the
“forest is the lover of the sea” (Mori wa umi no
koibito), and this was applied as well after the
great Tohoku earthquake in Kesennuma, Moune
Bay, with tree-planting activities.
Prof. Koike proposes to expand these activities further to other Tohoku bays (Mangoku-ura
Bay, Ishinomaki Bay, Matsushima bay, etc.).
After the fi rst 3 years of “repair,” the 4th year of
“expansion” should lead to the multiplication of
sato-umi-related initiatives by local fi shery cooperatives and municipalities.
Considering these kinds of environmental
degradation and thus losses in natural capital
leads to the question of the values underpinned in
the satoyama and sato-umi approach. For
instance, the ecosystems provide direct use values such as food, fi ber, fuelwood, and water
among others. At the same time, satoyama and
sato-umi also produce a number of indirect values that include fl ood and water regulation, nutrient recycling and temperature regulation, carbon
sink, and transport of larvae through currents or
pollination on land. Then, one may consider the
option values, which will include the maintenance of the satoyama or sato-umi harmonious
arrangement for future generations as a basic element of their cultural heritage.
But Dr. Pioch states that values are not absolute numbers since they differ depending on
social groups. For example, local communities
(fi shers) value many of the direct uses like rice
production, fi shery production, and water/nutrients regulation much higher than residents who
might be able to acquire these services from other
sources. Urban residents, on the other hand,
might place high values on the indirect uses such
as climate regulation and cultural services.
These different values of ecosystem services
held by different social groups infl uence the perceptions and attitudes toward satoyama and
sato- umi and their use in preserving biodiversity
and enhancing a sustainable supply of different
ecosystem services. These differences in perception are true between social groups but also in
different cultural context, in different countries.
The real and common challenge lies in whether
or not satoyama and sato-umi can be scaled up so
that they can deliver these economic and human
development opportunities to local communities
in developed and developing countries.
Sato-umi, the Wealth of the Commons: Moderator’s Summary
ers and with the help of local fi shery offi cials
including Mr. Tanaka, they found that in some of
the areas where the eelgrass beds were before,
water salinity and seabed conditions had been
deeply changed. The local fi shery offi cials then
helped in artifi cially adjusting the seabed
conditions and salinity by carpeting the seabed
fl oor with grinded oyster shells and mitigating
the wave movements through the use of fl oating
wave-dissipating devices.
As a consequence of a long-term effort, the
amamo-ba in Hinase increased from just 12 ha in
1985 to almost 100 ha in 2009. The recovery is
still in progress, but so far, the application of both
local and scientifi c knowledge has been highly
positive in recreating the habitat and in orchestrating cooperation by the government sector
(prefecture), scientifi c experts, and the fi shing
community.
Still today, as it is the case in some highly
urbanized areas in France, connectivity between
the land and the sea has been lost. In that regard,
one may say that the recent, devastating earthquake and tsunami have restored the Tohoku area
to the state it was in before the era of Japan’s high
economic growth. But the government’s basic
principle is not only to rebuild the once existing
seawalls but to build a continuous wall along the
entire Tohoku coast in Fukushima, Miyagi, and
Iwate prefectures. In Kesennuma, this seawall
will be a giant structure (almost 15 m!), over
three times as high as the previous one, and it will
be sloped (i.e., 91 m wide concrete structure as its
base).
Clearly for Dr. Seino, such a structure standing right at the boundary between land and sea
will destroy the wetlands and tidal fl ats, making
it impossible for them to function again.
Unfortunately and in spite of local opposition, it
looks like the government has no time for discussion (deadline for construction is the fi scal year
2015, i.e., in between April 2015 and March
2016), making it a matter of disaster reconstruction hence not needing any kind of environmental
assessment.
As already highlighted by Prof. Komatsu, the
“forest is the lover of the sea” (Mori wa umi no
koibito), and this was applied as well after the
great Tohoku earthquake in Kesennuma, Moune
Bay, with tree-planting activities.
Prof. Koike proposes to expand these activities further to other Tohoku bays (Mangoku-ura
Bay, Ishinomaki Bay, Matsushima bay, etc.).
After the fi rst 3 years of “repair,” the 4th year of
“expansion” should lead to the multiplication of
sato-umi-related initiatives by local fi shery cooperatives and municipalities.
Considering these kinds of environmental
degradation and thus losses in natural capital
leads to the question of the values underpinned in
the satoyama and sato-umi approach. For
instance, the ecosystems provide direct use values such as food, fi ber, fuelwood, and water
among others. At the same time, satoyama and
sato-umi also produce a number of indirect values that include fl ood and water regulation, nutrient recycling and temperature regulation, carbon
sink, and transport of larvae through currents or
pollination on land. Then, one may consider the
option values, which will include the maintenance of the satoyama or sato-umi harmonious
arrangement for future generations as a basic element of their cultural heritage.
But Dr. Pioch states that values are not absolute numbers since they differ depending on
social groups. For example, local communities
(fi shers) value many of the direct uses like rice
production, fi shery production, and water/nutrients regulation much higher than residents who
might be able to acquire these services from other
sources. Urban residents, on the other hand,
might place high values on the indirect uses such
as climate regulation and cultural services.
These different values of ecosystem services
held by different social groups infl uence the perceptions and attitudes toward satoyama and
sato- umi and their use in preserving biodiversity
and enhancing a sustainable supply of different
ecosystem services. These differences in perception are true between social groups but also in
different cultural context, in different countries.
The real and common challenge lies in whether
or not satoyama and sato-umi can be scaled up so
that they can deliver these economic and human
development opportunities to local communities
in developed and developing countries.
Sato-umi, the Wealth of the Commons: Moderator’s Summary