IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v27y2025i2d10.1007_s10668-023-04008-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholders’ perceptions of wetland conservation and restoration in Wakiso District, Uganda

Author

Listed:
  • Anthony Kadoma

    (University of Glasgow)

  • Mia Perry

    (University of Glasgow)

  • Fabrice G. Renaud

    (University of Glasgow)

Abstract

Natural wetlands are critically important to the lives and livelihoods of many people. Human activities result in the degradation of wetlands globally, and more so in developing countries prioritizing fast economic growth and development. With an increasing population in their immediate surroundings, wetlands in Wakiso District, Uganda, have become over-exploited to meet human needs. Policies, plans and projects have been put in place aiming at wetland conservation and restoration, but with limited stakeholder participation, have achieved limited success. Our research objective was to identify stakeholders, their perceptions, and understand the role these perceptions play in wetland conservation and restoration activities. To achieve these objectives, we used the ecosystem services concept within a qualitative, multi-site case study research approach. Findings show that stakeholders hold divergent perceptions on wetland ecosystem services, perceiving them as source of materials, fertile places for farming, cheap to buy and own, as well as being “God-given”. Furthermore, wetlands as habitats are perceived as not prioritized by central government. Implications for conservation and restoration vary with stakeholders advocating for (1) over-use, wise-use or not-use of wetlands and their resources, (2) educating and sensitization as well as (3) the implementation of the available laws and policies. This paper explores the findings and important implications for the conservation and restoration of wetlands in Wakiso District, Uganda.

Suggested Citation

  • Anthony Kadoma & Mia Perry & Fabrice G. Renaud, 2025. "Stakeholders’ perceptions of wetland conservation and restoration in Wakiso District, Uganda," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 3177-3200, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:27:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10668-023-04008-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-023-04008-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-023-04008-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-023-04008-z?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schuyt, Kirsten D., 2005. "Economic consequences of wetland degradation for local populations in Africa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 177-190, April.
    2. Hongjuan Zhang & Qian Pang & Huan Long & Haochen Zhu & Xin Gao & Xiuqing Li & Xiaohui Jiang & Kang Liu, 2019. "Local Residents’ Perceptions for Ecosystem Services: A Case Study of Fenghe River Watershed," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(19), pages 1-19, September.
    3. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    4. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    5. Mairi J. Black & Amitava Roy & Edson Twinomunuji & Francis Kemausuor & Richard Oduro & Matthew Leach & Jhuma Sadhukhan & Richard Murphy, 2021. "Bottled Biogas—An Opportunity for Clean Cooking in Ghana and Uganda," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-14, June.
    6. Robin Grimble & Man‐Kwun Chan, 1995. "Stakeholder analysis for natural resource management in developing countries," Natural Resources Forum, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 19(2), pages 113-124, May.
    7. Aude Zingraff-Hamed & Frank Hüesker & Gerd Lupp & Chloe Begg & Josh Huang & Amy Oen & Zoran Vojinovic & Christian Kuhlicke & Stephan Pauleit, 2020. "Stakeholder Mapping to Co-Create Nature-Based Solutions: Who Is on Board?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(20), pages 1-23, October.
    8. Asah, Stanley T. & Guerry, Anne D. & Blahna, Dale J. & Lawler, Joshua J., 2014. "Perception, acquisition and use of ecosystem services: Human behavior, and ecosystem management and policy implications," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 180-186.
    9. Miller, Stephanie M. & Montalto, Franco A., 2019. "Stakeholder perceptions of the ecosystem services provided by Green Infrastructure in New York City," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-1.
    10. Sandhu, Harpinder S. & Crossman, Neville D. & Smith, F. Patrick, 2012. "Ecosystem services and Australian agricultural enterprises," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 19-26.
    11. Spangenberg, Joachim H. & Görg, Christoph & Settele, Josef, 2015. "Stakeholder involvement in ESS research and governance: Between conceptual ambition and practical experiences – risks, challenges and tested tools," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 201-211.
    12. Dick, Jan & Turkelboom, Francis & Woods, Helen & Iniesta-Arandia, Irene & Primmer, Eeva & Saarela, Sanna-Riikka & Bezák, Peter & Mederly, Peter & Leone, Michael & Verheyden, Wim & Kelemen, Eszter & Ha, 2018. "Stakeholders’ perspectives on the operationalisation of the ecosystem service concept: Results from 27 case studies," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 552-565.
    13. James Omoding & Gretchen Walters & Edward Andama & Salete Carvalho & Julien Colomer & Marina Cracco & Gerald Eilu & Gaster Kiyingi & Chetan Kumar & Council Dickson Langoya & Barbara Nakangu Bugembe & , 2020. "Analysing and Applying Stakeholder Perceptions to Improve Protected Area Governance in Ugandan Conservation Landscapes," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-25, June.
    14. Simangele Dlamini & Solomon G. Tesfamichael & Yegnanew Shiferaw & Tholang Mokhele, 2020. "Determinants of Environmental Perceptions and Attitudes in a Socio-Demographically Diverse Urban Setup: The Case of Gauteng Province, South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-15, April.
    15. Ainscough, Jacob & de Vries Lentsch, Aster & Metzger, Marc & Rounsevell, Mark & Schröter, Matthias & Delbaere, Ben & de Groot, Rudolf & Staes, Jan, 2019. "Navigating pluralism: Understanding perceptions of the ecosystem services concept," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Sandhu, Harpinder & Sandhu, Sukhbir, 2014. "Linking ecosystem services with the constituents of human well-being for poverty alleviation in eastern Himalayas," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 65-75.
    17. Ruiz-Frau, A. & Krause, T. & Marbà, N., 2018. "The use of sociocultural valuation in sustainable environmental management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 158-167.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Delgado, Luisa E. & Marín, Víctor H., 2016. "Well-being and the use of ecosystem services by rural households of the Río Cruces watershed, southern Chile," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PA), pages 81-91.
    2. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    3. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    4. Hui, Ling Chui & Jim, C.Y., 2022. "Urban-greenery demands are affected by perceptions of ecosystem services and disservices, and socio-demographic and environmental-cultural factors," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    5. Evans, Nicole M. & Carrozzino-Lyon, Amy L. & Galbraith, Betsy & Noordyk, Julia & Peroff, Deidre M. & Stoll, John & Thompson, Aaron & Winden, Matthew W. & Davis, Mark A., 2019. "Integrated ecosystem service assessment for landscape conservation design in the Green Bay watershed, Wisconsin," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    6. Braat, Leon C. & de Groot, Rudolf, 2012. "The ecosystem services agenda:bridging the worlds of natural science and economics, conservation and development, and public and private policy," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 4-15.
    7. Frélichová, Jana & Vačkář, David & Pártl, Adam & Loučková, Blanka & Harmáčková, Zuzana V. & Lorencová, Eliška, 2014. "Integrated assessment of ecosystem services in the Czech Republic," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 110-117.
    8. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo & Paletto, Alessandro & Fath, Brian D., 2015. "Assessing, valuing, and mapping ecosystem services in Alpine forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 12-23.
    9. Pascua, Pua‘ala & McMillen, Heather & Ticktin, Tamara & Vaughan, Mehana & Winter, Kawika B., 2017. "Beyond services: A process and framework to incorporate cultural, genealogical, place-based, and indigenous relationships in ecosystem service assessments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 465-475.
    10. Kubiszewski, Ida & Concollato, Luke & Costanza, Robert & Stern, David I., 2023. "Changes in authorship, networks, and research topics in ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    11. Ando Fahda Aulia & Harpinder Sandhu & Andrew C. Millington, 2020. "Quantifying the Economic Value of Ecosystem Services in Oil Palm Dominated Landscapes in Riau Province in Sumatra, Indonesia," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-23, June.
    12. Dalton Erick Baltazar & Jillian Labadz & Roy Smith & Andrew Telford & Marcello Di Bonito, 2022. "Socio-Cultural Valuation of Urban Parks: The Case of Jose Rizal Plaza in Calamba City, The Philippines," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-16, October.
    13. Nápoles-Vértiz, Sonia & Caro-Borrero, Angela, 2024. "Conceptual diversity and application of ecosystem services and disservices: A systematic review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    14. Ochoa, Vivian & Urbina-Cardona, Nicolás, 2017. "Tools for spatially modeling ecosystem services: Publication trends, conceptual reflections and future challenges," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 155-169.
    15. Natho, Stephanie & Hudson, Paul, 2024. "Accounting for the value of ecosystem services of floodplains in Germany – National studies matter," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    16. Carolus, Johannes Friedrich & Hanley, Nick & Olsen, Søren Bøye & Pedersen, Søren Marcus, 2018. "A Bottom-up Approach to Environmental Cost-Benefit Analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 282-295.
    17. Achille Amatucci & Vera Ventura & Anna Simonetto & Gianni Gilioli, 2024. "The Economic Value of Ecosystem Services: Meta-analysis and Potential Application of Value Transfer for Freshwater Ecosystems," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 87(11), pages 3041-3061, November.
    18. Mengist, Wondimagegn & Soromessa, Teshome & Feyisa, Gudina Legese & Jenerette, G. Darrel, 2022. "Socio-environmental determinants of the perceived value of moist Afromontane forest ecosystem services in Kaffa Biosphere Reserve, Ethiopia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    19. Zhang, Jingjing & Pimm, Stuart L. & Xu, Weihua & Shi, Xuewei & Xiao, Yang & Kong, Lingqiao & Fan, Xinyue & Ouyang, Zhiyun, 2020. "Relationship between giant panda populations and selected ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    20. Ebner, Manuel & Fontana, Veronika & Schirpke, Uta & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2022. "Stakeholder perspectives on ecosystem services of mountain lakes in the European Alps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:27:y:2025:i:2:d:10.1007_s10668-023-04008-z. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.