Environment, Development and Sustainability

, Volume 11, Issue 4, pp 905–928 | Cite as

Community-based natural resources management (CBNRM) in Xinhui, Guangdong Province, China

  • Christian Toochi Egbuche
  • Jia’en Zhang
  • Okechukwu Ukaga


Using institutional appraisal focused groups (FG) and participatory appraisals with Dillman Total Design Method (TDM), this study examines community interaction with and utilization of wetland resources in Xinhui, Guangdong Province, China. Field results show high commercial activities and corresponding impacts on coastal environment. Other interacting factors identified include: legislation and ecosystem management, stakeholders’ participation, international guidelines criteria, and utilization of mangrove resources in the region. Sensitivity index and community-based natural resources management collaboration comparison percentile showed significant differences between cumulative distributions of respondents (D = 0.2568, P = 0.078). Likert statement of 11 sensitivity optional indexes in EMS of K–S test at 0.05 level of P = 0.078 also show significant differences in interaction between respondent groups and sensitivity factors. This indicates a dysfunction between regional environmental management systems and CBNRM in Xinhui coastal district. Considering the high tourism potential and economic quest of the region, there is the need for coordinated community enlightenment and further studies on the social, ecological and economic value of wetland resources.


Community-based natural resources management Coastal wetland Environmental management system Mangrove resources Xinhui district Guangdong province China 



Community-based natural resource management


Community participatory appraisals


Environmental management systems


Environmental impact assessment


Geographic information systems


Focused groups


International development research center


Indigenous knowledge


International Organization for Standardization


Millennium Development Goals


Total design methods

K–S test

Kolmogorov–Smirnov test



This study was supported by two Key research Programs of Guangdong Province (2005A30402003, 2006A36702003). We thank Dr. Paul Wallace and Professor Su Zhiyao for taking time to read through the manuscript and proffer important suggestions and comments.


  1. Adugna, G. (1996). The dynamics of knowledge systems vs. sustainable development: A sequel to the debate. Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor, 4(2). Online:
  2. Aksornkoae, S., Priebprom, S., Saraya, A., Kongsangchai, J., Sangdee, P., et al. (1984). Research on the socio-economics of dwellers in mangrove forests, Thailand. Bangkok, Thailand: Faculty of Forestry, Kasetsart University.Google Scholar
  3. Ayling, R., & Kelly, K. (1997). Dealing with conflict: Natural resources and dispute resolution. Commonwealth Forestry Review, 76(3), 182–185.Google Scholar
  4. Baines, G., & Hviding, E. (1992). Traditional environmental knowledge from the Marovo area of the Solomon Islands. In M. Johnson (Ed.), Lore: Capturing traditional environmental knowledge (pp. 91–110). Ottawa, ON, Canada: Dene Cultural Institute; International Development Research Centre.Google Scholar
  5. Bann, C. (2000). An economic analysis of alternative mangrove management strategies in Koh Kong Province. Cambodia.Google Scholar
  6. Berkes, F. (1987). The common property resource problem and the fisheries of Barbados and Jamaica. Environmental Management, 11, 225–235. doi: 10.1007/BF01867201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Berkes, F. (1993). Traditional ecological knowledge in perspective. In J. Inglis (Ed.), Traditional ecological knowledge: concepts and cases (pp. 1–9). Ottawa, ON, Canada: International Program on Traditional Ecological Knowledge; International Development Research Centre.Google Scholar
  8. Campbell, A., Mitchell, I. W., & Rowat, R. (1956). Methods and program planning in rural extension (324 pp.). The Netherlands: H. Veenman & Zonen, Wageningen.Google Scholar
  9. Carson, T., & Kalyan, H. (2002). Scoping report: Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) —A case study initiative. Phnom Penh: WWF.Google Scholar
  10. Cernia (1985). Quoted in IIED (1994), 18Google Scholar
  11. Christensen, N. L., Bartuska, A. M., Brown, J. H., Carpenter, S., Antonio, C. D. Õ., Francis, R., et al. (1996). The report of the Ecological Society of America Committee on the Scientific Basis for Ecosystem Management. Ecological Applications, 6, 665–691. doi: 10.2307/2269460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. DENR—Department of Environment and Natural Resources. (1998a). How to participate in the community-based Forest Management Program (22 pp.). Philippines: Forest Resource Management Project DENR.Google Scholar
  13. de Koninck, R. (1994). Forest policies in Southeast Asia: Taming nature or taming people? In de Koninck, R. (Ed.), Le défi forestier en Asie du Sud-Est (pp. 33–48). Québec, Canada: Groupe de recherche en amélioration des céréales, Université Laval.Google Scholar
  14. Dillman, D. A. (1978). Mail and Telephone Surveys—The total design method. New York, NY: Wiley.Google Scholar
  15. Edwards, A. (1957). Techniques of attitude scale construction. New York: Appleton, Century and Crofits.Google Scholar
  16. Eisenhardt, K. M., & Bourgeois, L. J. III. (1988). Politics of strategic decision making in high-velocity environments: Toward a midrange theory. Academy of Management Journal, 31(4), 737–770. doi: 10.2307/256337.
  17. Ferrer, E. M. (1992). Learning and Working Together: Towards a Community –Based Coastal Resources Management. Quezon City: Research and Extension for Development Office University of Philippines Diliman.Google Scholar
  18. Huber, G. P., & Power, D. J. (1985). Retrospective reports of strategic-level managers: Guidelines for increasing their accuracy. Strategic Management Journal, 6(2), 171–180. doi: 10.1002/smj.4250060206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. International Development Research Centre (IDRC) (2004). Reports, Community-Based Natural Resource Management (ASIA).
  20. International Institute of Rural Reconstruction (IIRR). (1996). Recording and using indigenous knowledge: A manual (211 pp.). Cavite, Philippines: IIRR.Google Scholar
  21. International Institute of Rural Reconstruction (IIRR). (1998). Participatory methods in community-based coastal resource.Google Scholar
  22. International Institute of Rural Reconstruction (IIRR). (2002). Public awareness for agriculture in Africa. Wageningen, The Netherlands: Technical Centre for Agricultural and Rural Cooperation (CTA).Google Scholar
  23. International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) (n.d.). From Problems to Strength. htpp://
  24. Judd, C., Smith, E., & Kidder, L. (1991). Research methods in social relations. Chicago: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  25. Kerlinger, F. N. (1986). Psychology; Sociology; Research; Statistical methods (3rd ed.). New York Holt, Rinehart and Winston. In R. de Koninck (Ed.) (1994), Le défi forestier en Asie du Sud-Est. Groupe de recherche en amélioration des céréales [Forest policies in Southeast Asia: Taming nature or taming people?] (pp. 33–48). Québec, QC, Canada: Université Laval.Google Scholar
  26. Kumar, N., Louis, W. S., & James C. A. (1993). Conducting inter organizational research using key informants. The Academy of Management Journal, 36(6), 1633–1651.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Likert, R. (1932). A technique for measurement of attitudes. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  28. Malone, C. R. (1995). Ecosystem management: Status of the federal initiative. Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America, 76(3), 158–161.Google Scholar
  29. Mam, K. (1996). Community-based resources management: General concept and implication for Cambodia. In Prepared for the workshop on coastal fishery management organized by NEAP and MoE.Google Scholar
  30. Merton, R. K., & Kendall, P. L. (1956). The focused interview. American Journal of Sociology, 10(1), 541–557.Google Scholar
  31. Michaud, J. (1994). Montagnes et forêts frontalières dans le nord Thailand is: l’état face au montagnards. In R. de Koninck (Ed.), Le défi forestier en Asie du Sud-Est.Groupe de recherche en amélioration des céréales (pp. 89–114). Québec, QC, Canada: Université Laval.Google Scholar
  32. Mintzberg, H., Raisinghani, D., & Theoret, A. (1976). The structure of “unstructured decision processes. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21, 246–275. doi: 10.2307/2392045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Nakashima, D. (1990). Application of native knowledge in El A: Inuit, Eiders and Hudson Bay Oil. Ottawa: Report for the Canadian Environmental Assessment Research Council.Google Scholar
  34. Quarto, A. (2003). Local Thai communities rescue the sea and themselves by protecting Mangroves. National Wetlands Newsletter, 25(1), 5.Google Scholar
  35. Ruddle, K. (1993). The transmission of traditional ecological knowledge. In J. Inglis (Ed.), Traditional ecological knowledge: Concepts and cases. International Program on Traditional Ecological Knowledge (pp. 17–31). Ottawa, ON, Canada: International Development Research Centre.Google Scholar
  36. Samanta, R. K., & Prasad, M. V. (1995). An indigenous post-harvest technology. Indigenous Knowledge and Development Monitor, 3(2).
  37. The World Bank/WBI’s CBNRM Initiative. (1998). Community based Natural Resource Management in Nepal Nontimber Forest Products and Biodiversity Conservation.Google Scholar
  38. Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. New York, NY: Wiley Sons.Google Scholar
  39. Ukaga, O., & Maser, C. (2004). Evaluating sustainable development: Giving people a voice in their destiny (p. 203). Sterling, VA, USA: Stylus Publishing.Google Scholar
  40. Walters, J. S., Maragos, J., Siar, S., & White, A. T. (1998). Participatory coastal resource assessment: A handbook for community workers and coastal resource managers (p. 113). Cebu City, Philippines: Coastal Resource Management Project and Silliman University.Google Scholar
  41. WCED (World Commission on Environment and Development). (1987). Our common future. New York, NY, USA: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Wilk, R. (1995). Learning to be local in Belize: Global systems of Common Difference. In Daniel. Miller (Ed.), Worlds apart: Modernity through the prism of the local (pp. 110–133). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. World Rainforest Movement. (2004). China: Ramsar Mangroves lost to Shrimp Farming.

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian Toochi Egbuche
    • 1
  • Jia’en Zhang
    • 2
  • Okechukwu Ukaga
    • 3
  1. 1.South China Agricultural UniversityGuangzhouChina
  2. 2.South China Agricultural UniversityGuangzhouChina
  3. 3.University of MinnesotaCloquetUSA

Personalised recommendations