Through research, restoration of agro-ecological sites, and a renaissance of cultural awareness in Hawaiʻi, there has been a growing recognition of the ingenuity of the Hawaiian biocultural resource management system. The contemporary term for this system, “the ahupuaʻa system”, does not accurately convey the nuances of system function, and it inhibits an understanding about the complexity of the system’s management. We examined six aspects of the Hawaiian biocultural resource management system to understand its framework for systematic management. Based on a more holistic understanding of this system’s structure and function, we introduce the term, “the moku system”, to describe the Hawaiian biocultural resource management system, which divided large islands into social-ecological regions and further into interrelated social-ecological communities. This system had several social-ecological zones running horizontally across each region, which divided individual communities vertically while connecting them to adjacent communities horizontally; and, thus, created a mosaic that contained forested landscapes, cultural landscapes, and seascapes, which synergistically harnessed a diversity of ecosystem services to facilitate an abundance of biocultural resources. “The moku system”, is a term that is more conducive to large-scale biocultural restoration in the contemporary period, while being inclusive of the smaller-scale divisions that allowed for a highly functional system.

Across the Pacific Islands, declining natural resources have contributed to a cultural renaissance of customary ridge-to-reef management approaches. These indigenous and community conserved areas (ICCA) are initiated by local communities to protect natural resources through customary laws. To support these efforts, managers require scientific tools that track land-sea linkages and evaluate how local management scenarios affect coral reefs. We established an interdisciplinary process and modeling framework to inform ridge-to-reef management in Hawai‘i, given increasing coastal development, fishing and climate change related impacts. We applied our framework at opposite ends of the Hawaiian Archipelago, in Hā‘ena and Ka‘ūpūlehu, where local communities have implemented customary resource management approaches through government-recognized processes to perpetuate traditional food systems and cultural practices. We identified coral reefs vulnerable to groundwater-based nutrients and linked them to areas on land, where appropriate management of human-derived nutrients could prevent increases in benthic algae and promote coral recovery from bleaching. Our results demonstrate the value of interdisciplinary collaborations among researchers, managers and community members. We discuss the lessons learned from our culturally-grounded, inclusive research process and highlight critical aspects of collaboration necessary to develop tools that can inform placed-based solutions to local environmental threats and foster coral reef resilience.

Significant NGO/Foundation support, co-management implementation remains limited. This study uses a mixed methods approach that relies on semi-structured interviews and archival data sources to conduct an institutional analysis of transaction and transformation costs. These costs serve as barriers to co-management implementation. The study identifies several social and organizational barriers preventing co-management implementation including: governmental structure and operations; planning and administrative processes; organized opposition from special interests; and consensus building processes. The institutional analysis further reveals a wide range of transaction and transformation costs associated with this governance transformation that prevent adoption of co-management. We conclude by identifying some actions that can help reduce these implementation barriers to co-management transitions and prevent conservation stalemates.

Ayers, A. L., J. N. Kittinger, and M. B. Vaughan. 2018. Whose right to manage? Distribution of property rights affects equity and power dynamics in comanagement. Ecology and Society 23(2):37. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10124-230237

Indigenous and place-based communities worldwide have self-organized to develop effective local-level institutions to conserve biocultural diversity. How communities maintain and adapt these institutions over time offers lessons for fostering more balanced human–environment relationships—an increasingly critical need as centralized governance systems struggle to manage declining fisheries. In this study, we focus on one long-enduring case of local level fisheries management, in Kahana, on the most populated Hawaiian island of O‘ahu. We used a mixed-methods approach including in-depth interviews, archival research, and participation in community gatherings to understand how relationships with place and local governance have endured despite changes in land and sea tenure, and what lessons this case offers for other communities engaged in restoring local-level governance. We detail the changing role of konohiki (head fishermen) in modern times (1850–1965) when they were managing local fisheries, not just for local subsistence but for larger commercial harvests. We also highlight ways in which families are reclaiming their role as caretakers following decades of state mismanagement. Considerations for fisheries co-management emerging from this research include the importance of (1) understanding historical contexts for enhancing institutional fit, (2) enduring community leadership, (3) balancing rights and responsibilities, and (4) fostering community ability to manage coastal resources through both formal and informal processes.