ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL

Restoring Ecosystems, Restoring Community: Socioeconomic and Cultural Dimensions of a Community-Based Coral Reef Restoration Project

Authors:John N. Kittinger1,2,*; Trisann M. Bambico1; Edward W. Glazier1; Dwayne Minton3; Alyssa Miller4; Manuel Mejia3; Nahaku Kalei3; Bradley Wong3

Affiliations:1 Center for Ocean Solutions, Stanford University, Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment, 99 Pacific Street, Suite 555E, Monterey, CA 93949 USA2 Impact Assessment, Inc., Pacific Islands Office, Honolulu, HI USA3 The Nature Conservancy of Hawai‘i, 923 Nu‘uanu Avenue, Honolulu, HI 96817 USA4 Mālama Maunalua, 377 Keahole Street, Suite E-209, Honolulu, HI, 96825 USA* [corresponding author] Email: jkittinger@gmail.com; phone: +1 831-333-2077

Outline1.0 Supplementary Methods2.0 Additional Results3.0 Additional Tables and Figures4.0 References

1

1.0 Supplementary Methods

1.1 Interview methodsInterviews followed accepted social science research methods and techniques (Bernard 2006; Miles and Huberman 1994) and the confidentiality of participants’ responses was protected. Our interview protocol consisted of a series of structured questions targeting specific social dimensions of the invasive algae removal effort. These topical categories included: (1) Stakeholder Characterization; (2) Background Information and Respondent Association with the Bay; (3) General Benefits; (4), Specific Benefits (specific to stakeholder group); and, (5) Perceptions of Environmental Change. In recognition of the fact that different stakeholder groups benefited in different ways from the restoration project, we developed a series of interview protocols with a common set of questions, as well as additional questions specific by stakeholder group (e.g., questions on composting algae for farmers that were interviewed). In addition to these structured interviewing topics, we also employed unstructured interviewing techniques that allowed respondents to talk freely about topics of their own choosing that they deemed relevant to the algae removal effort. Generally, respondents elaborated on their perceptions of the benefits of the project (to themselves or the broader community) and provided more description on their association and relationship to the bay and the Maunalua community. We also coupled our interview instrument with other ethnographic research approaches among our target population including participant observation, archival research, and document analysis, all of which can provide valid data that are useful for social and economic assessments (Bernard 2006).

Key respondents were identified using a chain referral or “snowballing” sampling method to identify individuals and their network of social contacts (Penrod et al. 2003, Bernard 2006). A purposive sampling approach was employed among identified individuals to preferentially interview stakeholders who were highly knowledgeable about Maunalua Bay ecosystems and the community. Purposive sampling is a type of sampling in which “particular settings, persons, or events are deliberately selected for the important information they can provide that cannot be gotten as well from other choices” (Maxwell 2009:235). This sampling typology is commonly employed in studies seeking to characterize specific dimensions of a topic or set of issues, and is a valid method for achieving representativeness or comparability among a broad set of cases or topics (Teddlie and Yu 2007).

1.2 Data analysisQuantitative interview data were transcribed from surveys and interview notes and entered into Microsoft excel. Data were reviewed for accuracy and subsequently imported into SPSS statistical software for analysis (SPSS 2001). To analyze qualitative interview data, we relied on an iterative methodology to describe, categorize, and interpret our qualitative data – a method commonly used in grounded theory approach (Glaser and Strauss 1967; Martin and Turner 1986). We reviewed qualitative responses and coded responses into categories, and repeated the process in an iterative fashion to identify patterns (sensu Kittinger et al. 2012a). Our approach focused on identifying patterns rather than on theory generation (Miles and Huberman 1994), and the iterative methodology was employed to establish rigor in our analysis

2

while simultaneously grounding the results in empirical observations from respondents (Schatzman 1991; Robrecht 1995; Thomas and James 2006).

2.0 Additional Results

2.1 Demographic resultsRespondents varied in age from 18 – 72 years of age (Table S1; Figure S1), with most respondents in the younger (18-25 years old) (23.6%) and middle-aged (31-40 years old) (28.4%) categories. 65.9% of interviewees were male and 34.1% were female. Ethnicity varied broadly among respondents, and the vast majority of respondents reported mixed ethnicities, which is common in Hawai‘i.

Almost 12% of respondents had a high-school level education or equivalent, whereas more than 48% had completed either an associate’s or bachelor’s degree (Table S1). 24.7% of respondents had completed a graduate degree program. Most individuals reported a household income between $0-29,999 (83.3%) and a smaller portion reporting incomes in the $30,000-49,999 range (16.7%) (Tables S2 and S3).

3.0 Additional Figures and Tables

Figure S1: Age distribution among respondents interviewed about the Maunalua IAR project from August 2010 – April 2011 (n=85).

3

Age Group # of Responses % of Respondents18-25 20 23.6%26-30 13 15.4%31-40 24 28.4%41-50 10 11.9%51-60 9 10.7%60+ 9 10.6%

Table S1: Age distribution among respondents interviewed about the Maunalua invasive algae removal project from August 2010 – April 2011 (n=85).

Community Involvement in the IAR project% of

respondentsHave participated in the IAR project (n=87) 80.50%Have participated in supporting activities for the IAR project (n=88) 52.30%Have talked with other community members about the IAR project (n=88) 96.60%The IAR project has gotten you or others you know more involved in Maunalua Bay (n=85) 74.10%

Table S2: Community involvement and perceptions of the invasive algae removal (IAR) project.

Educational Level % of respondentsSome high school 3.5%High school diploma or GED 11.8%Some college 11.8%Associates degree 8.2%Bachelors degree 40.0%Graduate degree 24.7%

Table S3: Educational levels among respondents interviewed about the Maunalua IAR project from August 2010 – April 2011 (n=85).

Household members that earn income % of respondents1 person 14.9%2 people 43.3%3-5 people 37.3%6+ people 4.5%

Table S4: Number of household members than earn income among interviewees (n=67).

4

Estimated household incomeHousehold Income

(% of respondents) (n=41)

Individual Income (% of respondents)

(n=18)$ 0 - 29,999 9.8% 83.3%$ 30,000 - 49,999 22.0% 16.7%$ 50,000 - 74,999 12.2% -$ 75,000 - 99,999 17.1% -$ 100,000 - 199,999 34.1% -$ 200,000+ 4.9% -

Table S5: Estimated household and individual income among interviewees.

First association with Maunalua Bay # of respondents % of respondents

1950-1960 7 4.7%1961-1970 6 4.0%1971-1980 9 6.1%1981-1990 9 6.2%1991-2000 6 4.1%2000-2005 15 9.8%2006-2011 31 20.3%

Table S6: Reported date ranges for respondents’ initial association with Maunalua Bay (n=86).

Assessment of the condition of the Bay

Condition of the Bay

Severely Degraded Degraded

Neither Good nor

Bad HealthyVery

HealthyFirst association with bay 13.60% 28.80% 22.70% 22.70% 12.10%Immediately before the IAR project started 32.90% 51.20% 15.90% 0% 0%During or immediately after IAR project completion 9.40% 34.10% 34.10% 21.20% 1.20%

Table S7: Respondents’ assessment of the condition of the bay at different times (n=86).

Initial Exposure to the IAR Project % of respondentsCommunity Event 3.4%Organization Representative 8.0%Internet 1.1%Television 4.5%Newspaper 8.0%Word-of-mouth 58.0%First-hand experience 17.0%

Table S8: Reported mechanisms for initial exposure to the invasive algae removal (IAR) project in Maunalua Bay (n=88).

5

Response variableStrongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Healthier and more physically fit 37.50% 42.50% 15.00% 2.50% 2.50%Sense of accomplishment 47.50% 50.00% 2.50% 0.00% 0.00%Personal gratification 46.20% 51.30% 2.60% 0.00% 0.00%Household economic benefits 17.50% 50.00% 12.50% 17.50% 2.50%Good work environment 42.50% 57.50% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Table S9: Perceptions of social benefits of the ARRA-funded IAR project among Pono Pacific crew members (n=40).

Prior employment status # of responses %Unemployed 20 50.0%Part-Time 7 17.5%Full-Time 12 30.0%Retired 1 2.5%

Table S10: Status of interviewees prior to being hired by Pono Pacific.

Income change # of responses %Increased substantially 7 17.90%Increased moderately 16 41.00%Stayed the same 6 15.40%Decreased moderately 6 15.40%Decreased substantially 4 10.30%

Table S11: Changes in income as a result of ARRA jobs among Pono Pacific workers (n=39).

Estimated household incomeHousehold Income (%

of respondents)Individual Income (%

of respondents)$ 0 - 29,999 18.2% 16.7%$ 30,000 - 49,999 27.3% 83.3%$ 50,000 - 74,999 18.2% -$ 75,000 - 99,999 18.2% -$ 100,000 - 199,999 13.6% -$ 200,000+ 4.5% -

Table S12: Estimated household income among Pono Pacific crew members (n=39).

6

Response variable: “As a result of the use of invasive algae on their farm:”

Strongly Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly

DisagreeHave learned new ways to compost (n=3) 2 1Have not benefited economically (n=2) 1 1Is an efficient use of natural resources (n=4) 3 1Supports the idea of sustainability (n=4) 4Increases awareness of land-sea connections (n=4) 4

Does not increase connections between farmers and the local community (n=4) 1 3

Table S13: Farmers perceptions of the benefits of using invasive algae on their farms.

Box 1: Uka-to-kai (land-to-sea) linkages in coastal restoration

Off-loading invasive algae into compost piles in Kamilo Nui, Maunalua Bay, O‘ahu

Local farmers benefited from the IAR project by using the invasive algae as a soil and fertilizer supplement, offsetting costs, and increasing farm productivity. Researchers, farmers, and community members forged partnerships to investigate the most efficient way to compost the invasive algae (Yuen 2010; Radovich and Hue 2010). Additionally, local organizations have investigated the potential for a sustainable local business venture that could return monetary benefits to the local community.

According to respondents, this helped farmer’s achieve their goals of becoming more sustainable and less reliant on outside (off-island) sources for soil amendments, fertilizers and other materials. Farmers described the algae as having come full circle (recycled), whereby land-based pollution (mud and nutrients) that aided the proliferation of the invasive algae in the bay, was returned to the land, with a beneficial effect on their farming operations. Farmers and community members involved in the composting effort (Figure 2D) noted that the process supported the traditional connections from uka-to-kai (uplands to the sea), and linked stewardship efforts between terrestrial and marine zones, helping the farmers see the connection of the community efforts to their livelihood. “Growing food on the land while helping to restore a habitat for native species in the sea- that’s taking the traditional concept of ahupua aʻ and making it work in a brand-new way” (Yuen 2010).

The non-monetary benefits were described by farmers and others primarily in a sociocultural context about the practice of farming and its value to the community. Through educational and outreach activities school groups, and community members have become involved in the composting effort. As a result, they have become aware of the cultural and agricultural history of Maunalua and have been provided with opportunities to learn how the algae is used as compost at their local farms and what they can do to help in the restoration efforts on land (Franklin

7

4.0 References

Bernard HR (2006) Research methods in anthropology: qualitative and quantitative approaches. AltaMira Press, Oxford, UK

Franklin K (2010) What do you do with 829 tons of algae? Hānai‘Ai/The Food Provider, Sept-Oct-Nov 2010, College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu

Glaser B, Strauss A (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Aldine, New York

Kittinger JN, Bambico TM, Watson TK, Glazier EW (2012a) Sociocultural significance of the endangered Hawaiian monk seal and the human dimensions of conservation planning. Endangered Species Research 17 (2):139-156. [online] http://www.int-res.com/articles/esr_oa/n017p139.pdf. DOI: 10.3354/esr00423

Martin P, Turner B (1986) Grounded theory and organizational research. The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 22 (2):141-157

Maxwell J (2009) Designing a qualitative study. In: Bickman L, Rog DJ (eds) Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, pp 214-253

Miles MB, Huberman AM (1994) Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA

Penrod J, Preston DB, Cain RE, Starks MT (2003) A discussion of chain referral as a method of sampling hard-to-reach populations. Journal of Transcultural Nursing 14:100-107

Radovich T, Hue N (2010) Evaluating limu compost as a soil amendment. Hānai‘Ai/The Food Provider, Sept-Oct-Nov 2010, College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu

Robrecht L (1995) Grounded theory: evolving methods. Qualitative Health Research 5:169-177Schatzman L (1991) Dimensional analysis: notes on an alternative approach to the grounding of

theory on qualitative research. In: Maines DR (ed) Social organization and social process: essays in honor of Anselm Strauss. Aldine, New York, pp 303-314

SPSS (2001) SPSS for Macintosh OSX, Version 19.0.0. SPSS Inc., ChicagoTeddlie C, Yu F (2007) Mixed methods sampling. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1 (1):77-

100. doi:10.1177/2345678906292430Thomas G, James D (2006) Reinventing grounded theory: Some questions about theory, ground

and discovery. British Educational Research Journal 32 (6):767-795Yuen S (2010) Lending a hand from sea to land. 2010 Impact Report Q4, College of Tropical

Agriculture and Human Resources, University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa, Honolulu

Box 1: Uka-to-kai (land-to-sea) linkages in coastal restoration

Off-loading invasive algae into compost piles in Kamilo Nui, Maunalua Bay, O‘ahu

Local farmers benefited from the IAR project by using the invasive algae as a soil and fertilizer supplement, offsetting costs, and increasing farm productivity. Researchers, farmers, and community members forged partnerships to investigate the most efficient way to compost the invasive algae (Yuen 2010; Radovich and Hue 2010). Additionally, local organizations have investigated the potential for a sustainable local business venture that could return monetary benefits to the local community.

According to respondents, this helped farmer’s achieve their goals of becoming more sustainable and less reliant on outside (off-island) sources for soil amendments, fertilizers and other materials. Farmers described the algae as having come full circle (recycled), whereby land-based pollution (mud and nutrients) that aided the proliferation of the invasive algae in the bay, was returned to the land, with a beneficial effect on their farming operations. Farmers and community members involved in the composting effort (Figure 2D) noted that the process supported the traditional connections from uka-to-kai (uplands to the sea), and linked stewardship efforts between terrestrial and marine zones, helping the farmers see the connection of the community efforts to their livelihood. “Growing food on the land while helping to restore a habitat for native species in the sea- that’s taking the traditional concept of ahupua aʻ and making it work in a brand-new way” (Yuen 2010).

The non-monetary benefits were described by farmers and others primarily in a sociocultural context about the practice of farming and its value to the community. Through educational and outreach activities school groups, and community members have become involved in the composting effort. As a result, they have become aware of the cultural and agricultural history of Maunalua and have been provided with opportunities to learn how the algae is used as compost at their local farms and what they can do to help in the restoration efforts on land (Franklin

8