Practicing governance: Local perspectives on mangrove management in northern Honduras

Practicing governance: Local perspectives on mangrove management in northern Honduras | Research Square window.SnipcartSettings = { analytics: { enabled: false } }; (function() { var accessVector = localStorage.getItem('access_vector') || ''; window.dataLayer = window.dataLayer || []; if (accessVector) { window.dataLayer.push({ user: { profile: { profileInfo: { snid: accessVector } } } }); } })(); (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start':new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src='https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl;f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f);})(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-K279D39R'); Browse Preprints In Review Journals COVID-19 Preprints AJE Video Bytes Research Tools Research Promotion AJE Professional Editing AJE Rubriq About Preprint Platform In Review Editorial Policies Our Team Advisory Board Help Center Sign In Submit a Preprint Cite Share Download PDF Research Article Practicing governance: Local perspectives on mangrove management in northern Honduras Arie Sanders, Sara Esther Bonilla Anariba, Grant M. Connette, and 3 more This is a preprint; it has not been peer reviewed by a journal. https://doi.org/ 10.21203/rs.3.rs-9261168/v1 This work is licensed under a CC BY 4.0 License Status: Under Review Version 1 posted 5 You are reading this latest preprint version Abstract Mangrove ecosystems are under increasing pressure from coastal development, land-use change, and weak governance arrangements, particularly in regions where institutional capacity is limited. In northern Honduras, these pressures intersect with fragmented management systems and strong dependence on local resource use. This study examines mangrove governance in four municipalities of northern Honduras through a qualitative analysis of local practices, institutional arrangements, and stakeholder interactions. Drawing on interviews, field observations, and document review, we show that governance operates as an adaptive and uneven configuration rather than a fixed institutional model. Formal rules shape part of the system, but everyday practices, informal coordination, and community-led initiatives play a decisive role in sustaining conservation efforts. Our findings highlight persistent fragmentation of governance responsibility, short funding cycles, and limited coordination across levels of government, which weaken long-term planning. At the same time, local actors maintain a wide range of actions from reforestation to monitoring that function with minimal support yet remain essential for the continuity of mangrove stewardship. Material elements such as zoning clarity, boundary markers, and basic enforcement tools further influence what responses are feasible. By situating these elements within an assemblage perspective, the study shows how governance outcomes emerge from the interaction of discursive, institutional, and material conditions. The results offer a grounded understanding of the factors shaping mangrove stewardship in Honduras and point to the importance of strengthening the conditions that enable local action. Assemblage local governance natural resources 1 Introduction Mangroves are an important ecosystem and provide many services, such as buffering coastlines against storms, stabilizing shores, filtering pollutants from water, storing carbon and supporting fisheries by serving as nurseries for fish and crustaceans (FAO, 2023 ). Globally, over four million small-scale fishers rely on mangrove ecosystems for their livelihoods (Hagger et al., 2022 ). Despite their importance, mangroves are disappearing at an unprecedented rate (Bhowmik et al., 2022 ). Coastal development, agricultural and aquacultural expansion, pollution, and overexploitation erode the remaining resources. AccordingIUCN ( 2024 ), it is estimated that 50% of the global mangrove systems are at risk. In Honduras, mangroves cover approximately 0.8% (around 50,000 ha) of the nation's forested areas (Instituto de Conservación Forestal, 2024 ). Although this coverage is modest, it sustains local livelihoods and is critical to national conservation strategies (MiAmbiente, 2017 ). These mangrove areas are found along both the Atlantic and Pacific coastlines, with the Pacific coast encompassing 40,000 ha and the Atlantic coast encompassing approximately 10,000 ha; the latter is located within the Mesoamerican Reef (MAR) ecoregion (Instituto de Conservación Forestal, 2022 ). The predominant species in both coastal areas are Rhizophora mangle (red mangrove), Avicennia germinans (black mangrove), and Laguncularia racemosa (white mangrove). These forests vary considerably, from tall, dense stands along rivers to sparse, dwarf mangroves depending on environmental conditions such as salinity and nutrient availability (Instituto de Conservación Forestal, 2022 ). Honduran mangroves face ongoing anthropogenic and climate-associated threats, with the greatest drivers of loss being expanding aquaculture, residential settlements and salt production on the Pacific coast (Chen et al., 2013 ) and agriculture and urbanization on the Atlantic coast (Sanders et al., 2015 ), combined with an inconsistency in regulatory enforcement (Canty et al., 2018 ; Recio et al., 2016 ) and rising sea levels (World Bank, 2023 ). During the last two decades, Honduras has developed policies focused on marine resource conservation. Important for the mangrove areas is the “National Wetlands Policy 2018–2038”, created by the Ministry of the Environment, which promotes the conservation, rehabilitation, and sustainable use of wetlands, including mangroves, through mechanisms such as the creation and effective management of protected areas, the restoration of degraded habitats, and the promotion of sustainable livelihoods for coastal communities (MiAmbiente, 2017 ). In parallel, national climate policy frameworks stress integrated coastal management actions that link ecosystem protection with climate adaptation measures along the coast (SERNA, 2026 ). Additionally, Honduras has signed international commitments under the Ramsar Convention that aim to promote conservation and sustainable use of wetlands. However, the practical implementation of these regulations is problematic due to challenges posed by lack of clarity around land tenure, the roles of different government authorities, and limited coordination between them. Such issues are especially visible in areas inhabited by Afro-Indigenous communities, where local people report uneven enforcement of conservation rules and restrictions on activities such as fishing, wood collection, and small-scale land use. At the same time, these regulations often fail to reflect local livelihood needs (MacNeill, 2020 ). The situation in Honduras is not unique. reflects broader tensions observed in mangrove governance, where ecological conservation, cultural practices, and economic interests intersect and are often difficult to reconcile (Hagger et al., 2022 ). Our day-to-day experience with marine conservation in the MAR ecoregion has shown that coastal resource governance is intricate and cannot be viewed as a static institutional framework. The interactions and responses among various stakeholders continuously influence the evolution of governance systems, making them context-specific and dynamic. Using a qualitative research approach, we analyze how mangrove governance evolves across four coastal municipalities in Honduras, Omoa, Tela, Trujillo, and Roatán, as local actors, government agencies, and communities adapt, negotiate, or react to socio-environmental pressures. Our research reveals widespread inconsistencies in how conservation regulations are applied or bypassed, coupled with active participation by communities in formal and informal conservation activities, such as replanting mangroves or setting community-based rules parallel to state policies. To understand the complexity of mangrove governance, we use the theoretical framework of assemblage thinking. Li´s (2007) concept of "practices of assemblage," emphasizes that governance develops through ongoing negotiations, shifting alliances, and the constant interplay of discourses, power dynamics, and local contexts. Rather than being driven by top-down controls or fixed regulations, governance in this sense emerges through diverse, often competing, actions. Alongside this, we use Briassoulis ( 2019 ) notion of governance as "multiplicity," which focuses on how governance involves the simultaneous reconciliation of diverse, and often competing, interests, values, and forms of knowledge among stakeholders. In practice, this means that governance is not a unitary process, but a dynamic one in which multiple logics and actors overlap and interact, sometimes in tension and sometimes in cooperation. In its empirical work in the coastal zone of southern Chile, Araos et al. ( 2020 ) demonstrates how these concepts play out in real contexts; governance arrangements there are continually negotiated and reconfigured in response to local socio-environmental challenges, resulting in a patchwork of overlapping institutions, informal agreements, and community-based rules. Taken together, these perspectives underscore that mangrove governance is inherently complex and often chaotic, involving ongoing, fragile collaborations shaped by competing meanings, interests, practical constraints, and localized power struggles over land, identity, and resources. Our main questions for the study were, (1) “How is mangrove governance coming together (assembled) in practice across different coastal communities in Honduras”, and (2) “which discourses and actions sustain or challenge mangrove conservation?” By examining local actions, such as planting, monitoring, restoring or contesting mangrove uses, particularly in relation to land conversion for urban, tourism, or agricultural development versus their conservation and use for small-scale fisheries, and by analyzing how community members and institutions justify these actions, we aim to capture the dynamic and relational aspects of governance. Section 2 details our theoretical framework derived from assemblage thinking. Section 3 presents our data collection methodology and a brief description of study areas. Section 4 presents the results of our research, organized into three subsections. In our last section (5) we present our conclusions and policy implications. 2 Analytical framework Mangrove governance is complex, as evidenced by numerous studies (e.g. Friess et al., 2016 ; Mursyid et al., 2021 ), including in the MAR region (Canty et al., 2018 ) and specifically in Honduras (Recio et al., 2016 ). There are many stakeholders with divergent interests and ambiguities that traditional governance methods, which rely on formal institutions and explicit policy frameworks, struggle to manage. We use an "assemblage thinking" approach to improve our understanding of these dynamics. According to assemblage thinking, governance is constantly constructed and reconstructed through interactions, relationships, and practical actions, rather than being a stable or clearly defined entity. We rely primarily on the theoretical insights of Li ( 2007 ), Briassoulis ( 2019 ) and Araos et al. ( 2020 ) to guide this approach, focusing particularly on how governance emerges through everyday actions, language, and material conditions. Rather than viewing governance as strictly a matter of formal policies and enforcement, Li’s ( 2007 ) work offers a valuable perspective on governance by focusing on the actual practices and activities that unfold in real-world settings. She emphasizes on the ongoing, everyday work required to align diverse interests, manage conflicts, and keep systems functioning, even if imperfectly. Among the practices she identifies are creating temporary agreements among actors, translating complex political conflicts into manageable technical tasks, and adapting strategies to manage setbacks rather than overhauling entire systems. This perspective resonates with mangrove governance in the Honduran context, where local people, NGOs, and government officials are continually engaged in negotiating how mangroves should be used and conserved, often through practical everyday actions such as planting trees, organizing patrols, or informally enforcing rules. Briassoulis ( 2019 ) further highlights that governance is fundamentally about managing multiple, often competing rationalities, such as conservation, economic development, and cultural or community rights. In mangrove areas, these different priorities coexist and frequently collide. Briassoulis ( 2019 ) encourages analysis of how these tensions produce new forms of governance rather than trying to eliminate them. They also emphasize the role of language and discourse (how people talk about mangroves) as crucial for governance. For example, when residents describe mangroves as culturally valuable rather than merely ecologically important, this shapes how conservation is pursued and whose voices matter most in decision-making processes. Araos et al. ( 2020 ) apply assemblage thinking to marine conservation contexts, illustrating how governance emerges from complex, hybrid arrangements involving communities, governments, and NGOs. Here the emphasis is that these arrangements are never fully local or completely external; instead, they are dynamic interactions shaped by local traditions, ecological conditions, state policies, and global discourses. This view aligns with our findings in Honduras: governance emerges from a patchwork of informal rules, community-based initiatives, municipal plans, and national policies, all influenced by the history and ecological realities of each site. Our analytical framework also draws from recent studies on mangrove governance elsewhere. Friess et al. ( 2016 ) and Hagger et al. ( 2022 ) highlight the problems associated with fragmented institutions and unclear responsibilities. Similarly, Nyangoko et al. ( 2022 ) and Savari et al. ( 2022 ) stress the importance of listening closely to local perceptions and incorporating community priorities into governance arrangements rather than imposing external solutions. These studies highlight the need to examine governance in mangrove regions requires examining not only formal institutional structures but also the lived realities, daily practices, and localized forms of action that shape outcomes on the ground. Based on these theoretical insights, our analytical framework focuses on three interconnected aspects of governance: (1) the actual practices people engage in (such as patrolling or planting); (2) the discourses they use to explain and justify these actions; and (3) the material conditions (like physical boundaries, infrastructure, or land-use regulations) that either support or hinder their efforts. Using this framework, we explore how governance is continuously assembled, through negotiation, compromise, and adaptation, in the diverse and complex contexts of Honduras’s coastal mangrove areas. Our study places particular emphasis on gender dynamics, as gender is embedded within each of these dimensions. Gender norms influence whose knowledge counts in governance processes, who participates in conservation activities, and how responsibilities for environmental stewardship are distributed (Dick Frederiksen et al., 2021 ). Accordingly, we treat gender not as an add-on variable but as a constitutive element of governance assemblages. For example, women often lead informal monitoring, mangrove planting, and restoration efforts, multiplying governance practices that remain unrecognized by formal institutions. Moreover, discourses around responsibility and legitimacy are also gendered: women are frequently positioned as "auxiliary caretakers" rather than decision-makers, while men dominate formal regulatory and enforcement spaces (Harper et al., 2024 ; Oloko et al., 2024 ). It is critical that women’s voices, which are often overlooked, are included within these discussions as mangroves are a gendered ecosystem, with women utilizing these systems more frequently (Yadao-Evans et al., 2025 ). Integrating a gender lens into assemblage thinking thus helps illuminate how power, care, authority, and exclusion are produced and contested within mangrove governance. Our goal is not just to analyze existing governance arrangements but also to suggest ways forward. This involves recognizing the diverse meanings and everyday efforts invested in mangrove ecosystems by coastal communities and identifying opportunities for governance practices that are more inclusive, adaptive, and reflective of local realities. 3 Study Area and Methodology 3.1 Study area The research was conducted in four coastal municipalities along Honduras’s northern Caribbean coast: Omoa, Tela, Trujillo, and Roatán. Our site selection process combined several sources of information. First, we used recent satellite imagery to assess the extent and condition of mangrove cover in each municipality, allowing us to identify areas experiencing contrasting degrees of disturbance, conservation, or recovery. Second, members of the research team have been working in municipalities for several years, conducting regular site visits and collaborating with local stakeholders. This ongoing involvement gave us in-depth knowledge of both ecosystems and the changing institutional landscape, which improved our ability to interpret observed changes and contextualize governance processes. These four municipalities were chosen because they collectively illustrate the varied drivers and pressures affecting mangroves in Honduras, as well as the range of formal and informal responses currently in play, from community-based restoration to municipal and national policy interventions. This combination of ecological data, satellite imagery, and embedded field experience allowed us to analyze the interplay between environmental change and governance across different local realities (Punalekar et al., 2025 ). Omoa, located near the border with Guatemala, is rural. Mangroves here face threats from agricultural expansion, particularly African palm plantations, and erosion along beaches and rivers. Although government institutions have a limited local presence, mangrove restoration and small-scale conservation efforts are active and visible, driven by local communities in partnership with NGOs and the municipality. Tela has a prominent Afro-Indigenous Garífuna community and a history of conservation projects. Mangroves here have experienced mixed conditions; some areas show resilience and community-led protection, while others have suffered significant degradation due to urban and tourism pressures. Governance in Tela is complicated by overlapping authorities and tensions between formal laws and Garífuna customary rules. Trujillo, historically a banana-producing area, has seen rapid agricultural transformation, primarily through expansion of African palm cultivation. Mangrove areas in Trujillo consist of a patchwork of degraded and reforested areas, reflecting both conservation efforts and uncontrolled extraction. Institutional governance relies heavily on periodic NGO projects, leading to uneven and temporary management efforts. Roatán, located in the Bay Islands, is heavily urbanized with a local economy driven by tourism. Mangroves face intense pressures from property development, and governance conflicts here are often centered around land rights and property access. While there are formally protected mangrove areas, enforcement is inconsistent, and many mangrove patches have been privatized or severely degraded. Together, these four sites highlight the diversity of mangrove conservation challenges in Honduras, reflecting broader issues of institutional complexity, socio-economic pressures, and community-driven governance initiatives found in coastal areas globally. 3.2 Qualitative approach Our methodological approach was guided by the Drivers–Pressures–State–Impact–Response (DPSIR) framework, which provides a structured lens for analyzing complex socio-environmental systems. The DPSIR model is widely used in ecosystem management to organize information about underlying social and ecological drivers of change, the pressures these drivers exert, the resulting state of the ecosystem, the impacts on people and nature, and the responses by various actors (Ávila-Flores et al., 2017 ; Carnohan et al., 2023 ; Sarmin et al., 2016 ). This framework has been criticized for oversimplifying complex realities (Gari et al., 2015 ; Oesterwind et al., 2016 ). In response to this criticism, we adopted the framework as both an analytical tool for coding qualitative data and to facilitate discussions with stakeholders on mangrove governance. Rather than treating DPSIR as a rigid or linear model, we used it flexibly to capture local perspectives, with particular emphasis on the "Response" dimension, that is, the practical actions and institutional arrangements shaping mangrove management. We used a qualitative, multi-method approach that combined in-depth interviews with a participatory workshop. The research unfolded in two main stages and was conducted with ethical approval from the _________ Institutional Review Board (IRB). First, we conducted semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders on each of the four sites. We used purposive sampling to ensure inclusion of both community members directly involved in mangrove use or conservation and representatives of municipal governments, NGOs, and national institutions. In total, we conducted 81 interviews, all in Spanish, and typically lasting between 20 minutes and one hour (Table 1 ). The interviews explored how people use mangroves, their observations of environmental change, and their experiences and perceptions regarding governance and management. This stage aimed to capture a broad range of perspectives on mangrove governance, management practices, and socio-environmental pressures. After analyzing the interview data using NVivo12 and a coding protocol based on the DPSIR framework, we organized a participatory workshop. This workshop brought together 18 representatives from the four study sites for a facilitated focus group discussion (Table 1 ). Some participants had previously participated in interviews, but this was not a requirement. We designed the workshop to validate and deepen our DPSIR analysis, again focusing on the "Response" component. The group discussion focused on two governance challenges that emerged most prominently from the interview analysis: (i) the degree of community involvement in mangrove management, and (ii) the effectiveness of law enforcement and policy implementation. During the workshop, participants reflected on these issues in relation to their sites, provided feedback on our preliminary findings, and discussed differences and commonalities in governance responses across locations. This process enabled a participatory and comparative assessment of governance strategies without imposing a rigid scenario structure. During the interviews and workshop, we paid attention to how participants described gender and youth’s roles, responsibilities, and constraints in mangrove use and governance. Women were often present in restoration, gleaning, and community-based monitoring but were underrepresented in municipal and institutional decision-making spaces, reflecting patterns documented across global blue carbon and coastal ecosystems (Lopez et al., 2024 ; Lord et al., 2025). These insights were incorporated into the coding and interpretation of DPSIR categories, particularly within “Response” and “Impact,” enabling us to identify how gender dynamics shape exposure to environmental change, governance burdens, and access to conservation benefits. Table 1 summarizes our methodological sequence and participant composition. Table 1 Method sequence Methods Participants Topic Scale Semi-structured interviews Community members, NGOs, government representatives Mangrove use, governance, observed changes, management practices, responses to challenges Site level for each of the four communities of Omoa, Tela, Trujillo, Roatán Focus group (workshop) 18 representatives from all four sites Governance challenges (community involvement, policy enforcement), validation of DPSIR findings All sites represented together We analyzed interview transcripts and workshop data using a structured coding protocol based on the DPSIR framework. This allowed us to organize and summarize the environmental and social context of each site, identify the key pressures and impacts affecting mangroves, and explore the diversity of governance responses and ongoing activities. Insights from the participatory workshop were integrated into the analysis, helping to validate interview findings and enrich our understanding of local strategies and solutions. Participant composition reflected site-specific differences in governance and engagement. In Omoa, for instance, there was strong participation from community leaders and local associations, corresponding to active community-based governance, while in Roatán, participants were more often affiliated with NGOs or municipal institutions, given the greater role of formal governance actors. This variation allowed us to capture a broad spectrum of perspectives and governance experiences along the Honduran Caribbean coast. 4 Results 4.1 Drivers–Pressures–State–Impact indicators Before analyzing governance responses, we focus in this section on the Drivers–Pressure– State–Impact indicators to characterize the main socio-ecological conditions identified by respondents in each study site. Although some overarching drivers and pressures were common across all four locations, such as urban growth, economic development and weak regulation enforcement, their specific manifestations and impacts varied between locations. In Omoa, participants highlighted coastal erosion and riverbank instability as critical issues. They commonly attributed these problems to upstream deforestation, sand extraction, and rapid agricultural expansion, especially African palm ( Elaeis guineensis ) plantations (Table 2 ). Respondents also expressed concerns about informal settlements and the clearance of mangroves for housing development, pointing to the limited capacity and willingness of local authorities to enforce environmental protections. Additionally, they noted a significant weakening of traditional community norms that previously discouraged mangrove removal, attributing this decline to population growth driven by internal migration, shifting livelihoods, and changing local attitudes toward environmental stewardship. According to a community member: “The change has been significant, both for the trees and our lives. Before, the sea was far away, but now it’s at our doorstep. Fortunately, some of us moved, but those still living there face real difficulties. When bad weather comes, the sea can reach their houses. There are no more trees to protect us, the sea just keeps advancing.” Another participant described, “During strong storms, with waves of eight meters or more, mangroves can suffer significant damage. Strong winds also knock down trees, especially those already undermined by erosion.” In Tela, conditions varied considerably. Some mangrove areas showed resilience and regeneration due to active community engagement, particularly by Garífuna communities relying on customary management practices (Table 2 ). However, other areas faced degradation from growing tourism and urban infrastructure projects. Participants frequently cited pressures such as wetland infilling for new constructions, road building, and poor municipal enforcement of zoning rules. As mentioned by a technician of an environmental NGO: “The fact that African palm is also planted around here, and all the agrochemicals that come in contact with the soil eventually run off into the lagoon, this has also affected the ecosystem” . Community members described a range of impacts, including declines in fish stocks, saline water intrusion affecting agriculture, and limited access to mangrove resources traditionally used by local families for wood, food, and cultural purposes. As one participant observed, “ We’ve started to see more palm, more cattle, and other crops. All these little things have us worried about the state of the mangroves, not just in Janet Kawas, but also in Punta Izopo, which are vulnerable” . Another stated, “ I think it's complicated, but just because the mangrove is still in good condition in some areas doesn’t mean there aren’t impacts. In certain places, you can see the effects, like reduced access and less fish. ” The situation in Trujillo was more severe. Respondents consistently pointed to large-scale agricultural conversion, specifically African palm plantations, as the predominant driver of mangrove loss (Table 2 ). “ Here in this agricultural department, monocultures like African palm have expanded significantly in areas close to the refuge and even inside it. This expansion has contributed to the silting up of the lagoon, reducing water inflow. This sedimentation is especially worrying given the high water demand of palm cultivation.” They observed substantial deforestation and habitat fragmentation along coastlines and riverbanks. “I have personally seen alarming deforestation along the road to Castilla. Some of these areas are inside the refuge, others outside, but all are wetlands. This became especially noticeable around 2021, after the start of the pandemic. It’s sad to see how much mangrove has been cleared along this road.” Although reforestation initiatives were occasionally implemented, primarily through NGO interventions, these efforts were described as fragmented and inadequately maintained, with limited local ownership. Community members also mentioned increasing reliance on mangroves for firewood and artisanal use, driven by the absence of clear access regulations or sustainable alternatives. They further noted tangible impacts, such as declining fish populations, worsening erosion, sedimentation issues, and reduced food security for many households dependent on mangrove-associated resources. “Flooding has become more frequent, which negatively affects our community. Also, in the fishing sector, production has dropped, so fishers must go farther and spend more on fuel. This impacts both the local economy and the whole ecosystem” In Roatán, the intensity of pressures was most pronounced, linked to rapid tourism development and urbanization (Table 2 ). Participants described systematic infilling and clearing of mangroves to build hotels, resorts, private residences, and other infrastructure, often done without proper regulatory oversight. Mangrove ecosystems here were described as highly fragmented and degraded, with only isolated patches surviving outside formally protected zones. Respondents also highlighted broader impacts beyond environmental degradation, such as heightened vulnerability to storms and hurricanes. As one noted, “Residents closest to the mangroves are the most at risk, from waves, hurricanes, and coastal flooding. When mangroves are gone, there’s nothing to protect their homes .” Additional impacts included increased privatization of formerly public coastal spaces, and rising social conflicts stemming from restricted community access to natural resources. “The biggest impact on mangroves now is uncontrolled population growth, overuse, and land conversion, expanding buildings and infrastructure, which restricts access for those who’ve always depended on the coast.” Across these four municipalities, DPSI indicators demonstrated that mangrove degradation involved much more than ecological factors alone. Social, political, and economic conflicts, particularly those related to land tenure, resource access, and community livelihoods, were deeply intertwined with environmental decline. A municipality employee working in coastal conservation in Omoa stated: “A decade ago, there were lots of blue crabs along the highway, but now they’re rare. The loss of these resources means more people cut mangroves for firewood, worsening the poverty cycle. When the ecosystem declines, poverty increases.” A comprehensive summary of these DPSI indicators is provided in Table 2 . Table 2 Summary of DPSIR conditions across the four study sites Site Drivers Pressures State Impacts Omoa Agricultural expansion (African palm), population growth Mangrove clearing, sand mining, informal construction Visible erosion, declining canopy, fragmented reforestation Loss of shoreline stability, reduced fish habitats Tela Tourism development, urban expansion, cultural shifts Wetland filling, dumping, erosion from roads Mixed: healthy stands and degraded patches Saline intrusion, reduced wood access, fish decline Trujillo Palm cultivation, migration, weak institutional presence Firewood extraction, land conversion, sedimentation High loss of coverage, isolated regeneration areas Food insecurity, reduced biodiversity, erosion Roatán Tourism, real estate development, land speculation Filling of mangroves, infrastructure expansion Severe fragmentation, loss of connectivity Storm vulnerability, privatized access, ecological loss (mangroves, fishery) 4.2 Response Indicators: Governing Mangroves in Practice Across the four municipalities, local and informal governance practices played essential roles in mangrove conservation, often compensating for the absence or inefficiency of formal institutional structures. For example, in Omoa, community groups and local schools frequently organized small mangrove nurseries and conducted planting events without significant external support. Community members described these efforts as driven by necessity, stating, "If we don't plant and protect the mangroves, nobody else will. " In Omoa, women were described as key participants in mangrove nursery management and community planting campaigns, yet their contributions remained informal and rarely recognized by authorities. Similarly, in Trujillo, informal women's groups, and local NGOs periodically organized reforestation activities, reflecting community-driven, small-scale responses to mangrove degradation. “Most of the reforestation and conservation work is done by local people, who know the area and have been trained to care for it. The community participates in all the trainings, they know the pros and cons, and that’s helped us earn their support.” These informal efforts illustrated how mangrove conservation often relies heavily on local initiative rather than institutional mandates or resources. In Tela, informal governance arrangements were more deeply embedded in cultural practices, especially within Garífuna communities. Here, community members described a dual system where formal municipal regulations existed alongside and sometimes conflicted with traditional community rules for mangrove use and conservation. One Garifuna respondent explained, “Mangroves represent who we are, our history and our future” , highlighting how conservation is closely tied to identity and ancestral responsibility. Conversely, in Roatán, informal governance practices often emerged in reactive forms, such as informal patrols organized by residents or ad-hoc negotiations between community members and developers to mitigate ecological damage. As one participant noted, “ When we see mangroves being cleared, sometimes we organize to talk to the developer, but often there’s little we can do if they already have their permits.” Despite the presence of several active institutions, including municipal governments, national environmental agencies (such as the Forest Conservation Institute, ICF), and various NGOs, their governance activities appeared fragmented, inconsistent, and sometimes contradictory. In Tela, participants described multiple institutions operating simultaneously but often without coordination or shared objectives. This created substantial confusion and local frustration. One participant from Tela succinctly expressed this frustration: “ The municipality hands out permits, traditional authorities reject them, and NGOs come, start projects, then vanish when funds run dry.” This fragmented landscape undermined local trust and complicated effective mangrove governance. Similarly, in Trujillo, institutional action depended heavily on NGO-driven initiatives. Respondents explained that while NGOs frequently initiated mangrove planting projects, these interventions rarely incorporated robust long-term planning or maintenance strategies. One community member pointed out that “ seedlings often perished soon after projects ended ”, emphasizing the unsustainable nature of short-term project-based governance approaches In Omoa, institutional governance was absent or reactionary, activated primarily after significant environmental damage or public outcry. In Roatán, institutional governance was often selectively enforced, favoring influential developers or private interests over community-based conservation. “ Developers openly disregard environmental regulations, treating fines as just another cost of doing business,” one resident in Roatán stated. This selective and politicized enforcement further undermined public confidence in formal governance structures. Across all four locations participants described mangrove governance as heavily influenced by institutional gaps, inconsistencies, and failures. In Roatán, community members navigated these challenges by engaging in informal negotiations, pragmatically accepting certain developments, or occasionally organizing resistance efforts. In Tela and Trujillo, local actors often turned to informal agreements and personal relationships to manage mangrove use, especially when formal channels were ineffective or unavailable. Garífuna communities in Tela strategically balanced their traditional norms with selective engagement in formal processes, acknowledging that explicit confrontation with authorities was often counterproductive. “ We follow our rules, but sometimes you have to work with the municipality if you want to get anything done,” explained a local leader in Tela. In each community, governance gaps were not empty spaces, but instead were areas where local actors actively negotiated, improvised, and pragmatically adapted. Participants described informal monitoring, rotating responsibilities for reforestation activities, and self-regulation practices as essential strategies to cope with governance deficiencies. These adaptive practices highlighted the resilience and proactive agency of local communities under challenging governance conditions. Governance practices at the four sites also emerged through temporary, often fragile alliances among actors responding to specific events or projects. In Trujillo, participants frequently described brief collaborative efforts between municipal staff, community members, and NGOs during externally funded reforestation initiatives. However, these collaborations often dissolved quickly after project completion, leaving behind unfinished or unsustainable interventions. “ After the project ends, the nursery falls apart and nobody maintains it. The seedlings die,” explained a participant. Similarly, in Tela, short-term alliances formed around cultural projects or ecotourism initiatives, but these relationships frequently broke down due to mistrust or conflicts over benefit-sharing among stakeholders. In Omoa, governance collaborations usually arose reactively, driven by acute environmental crises such as beach erosion, as well as visible ecological issues like the increasing accumulation of plastic waste along the coastline. Participants described brief periods of community mobilization and municipal engagement immediately following such events, rarely translating into long-term or stable partnerships. In Roatán respondents highlighted strategic but superficial alliances between developers and local government officials, often aimed at complying minimally with environmental regulations without genuine conservation commitments. “ Sometimes the government just wants to show they did something, but nothing really changes on the ground ,” one community member observed. Such temporary alliances demonstrated the highly contingent and context-specific nature of mangrove governance practices, which depended heavily on fluctuating external conditions and temporary alignment of actor interests. 4.3 Narrating Responsibility Mangrove governance in the studied areas is not only shaped by direct actions or institutional arrangements but is also profoundly influenced by how actors talk about mangroves, their value, and responsibilities associated with their management. Various narratives emerged across the four sites, reflecting competing visions and interpretations about who should protect mangroves, why they should be protected, and what actions are justified or legitimate. These narratives do not merely reflect perceptions; rather, they actively shape governance by legitimizing actors, framing specific issues, and influencing which strategies become accepted or contested. This discursive dimension aligns closely with Briassoulis's (2019) perspective that governance involves multiple, coexisting discourses and rationalities that interact, sometimes clash, and produce distinct governance arrangements. Across the four study sites, a dominant discourse consistently portrayed mangrove protection as an institutional responsibility external to local communities. Many respondents frequently invoked the roles of government agencies such as the Forest Conservation Institute (ICF), municipal authorities, or NGOs as primary agents responsible for enforcement and conservation actions. In both Omoa and Roatán, for example, residents frequently described mangrove degradation as directly resulting from institutional inaction or negligence. One respondent from Omoa stated: " Mangroves are destroyed because authorities simply do not do their job." This narrative typically portrayed communities as passive observers or victims of institutional failures, effectively shifting accountability away from local actors and obscuring underlying social or economic drivers behind mangrove degradation. Simultaneously, a counter-discourse emphasizing community responsibility and stewardship emerged strongly in Trujillo and Tela. Here, mangrove ecosystems were described not merely as ecological assets but as being deeply tied to community heritage and cultural identity. Garífuna respondents in Tela particularly framed mangrove protection within the context of ancestral responsibility and intergenerational continuity, stating that " mangroves represent who we are, our history and our future." Similarly, women-led reforestation initiatives in Trujillo invoked moral narratives centered around collective local responsibility, clearly expressing a belief that protection would not occur without direct community intervention. These narratives directly challenged external or top-down governance models, asserting the legitimacy of place-based knowledge, cultural values, and grassroots initiatives. A third and distinct narrative emerged prominently in Roatán and, to a lesser extent, Tela, framing mangroves as barriers or obstacles to economic development and modernization. Developers and local officials described conservation regulations as outdated or unnecessarily restrictive, positioning mangrove protection in opposition to tourism growth, urbanization, and infrastructure development. This discourse reflected an economic rationality, where ecological value was explicitly balanced against financial or developmental gains. Interviewees in Roatán frequently used phrases like "development must move forward" or "conservation needs to be flexible," effectively redefining mangrove value in pragmatic economic terms rather than ecological or cultural ones. Discourses of ambiguity or resignation were also common across all sites. Many respondents described reluctance to report illegal mangrove clearing, often expressing skepticism that reporting infractions would lead to any meaningful action. This recurring experience of inaction appears to shape how people interpret the problem itself. Rather than seeing mangrove loss because of weak enforcement, power asymmetries, or institutional failure, some respondents framed it as something that is difficult to control or simply part of ongoing change. In this sense, resignation does more than reflect frustration; it shifts how the issue is understood. By downplaying questions of accountability and responsibility, it recasts mangrove conservation as a technical or inevitable problem rather than one that requires political engagement or structural change. As suggested by Li ( 2007 ), such discursive shifts can depoliticize environmental issues by obscuring the underlying relations of power that shape outcomes. Instrumental environmental discourses featured prominently across sites, particularly when communities engaged with NGOs or external funding agencies. Community groups often strategically employed environmental language emphasizing mangrove ecosystems as "carbon sinks," "essential biodiversity habitats," or providers of "ecosystem services." Although these narratives did not always align with local cultural or practical understandings of mangrove value, they effectively secured external support or legitimacy. Such discursive hybridity illustrates what Araos et al. ( 2020 ) describes as the strategic flexibility of local actors who skillfully navigate between institutional and community narratives to sustain mangrove governance efforts. 4.4 Infrastructure, Regulation, and Space Alongside practices and discourses, the governance of mangroves in Honduras also involves tangible physical and spatial elements, such as enforcement infrastructures, legal frameworks, signage, boundaries, and material management facilities. These material dimensions significantly influence the governance process, determining what actions become feasible, which spaces are governed, and how enforcement unfolds in practice. Rather than neutral or passive elements, these physical and spatial factors actively shape governance possibilities, effectively enabling or constraining specific governance practices. As Briassoulis ( 2019 ) emphasizes, governance processes are always materially embedded and spatially mediated, profoundly shaped by physical realities and spatial arrangements. Across the four study sites, the physical presence of governance infrastructures, such as signage marking protected mangrove areas, varied widely, often appearing inconsistent, inadequate, or symbolically ineffective. In Omoa and Trujillo, for example, mangrove protection signs were visibly deteriorated or altogether absent in critical areas, effectively signaling weak institutional presence or regulatory abandonment. Community respondents frequently interpreted this material absence as reflecting broader institutional neglect or disinterest, undermining local confidence in regulatory frameworks. As one Trujillo resident put it: "If protection signs disappear or fall apart, then probably the rules have disappeared too." In Roatán, the spatial and material dimensions of governance were characterized by private property boundaries and physical barriers. Developers and private landowners often construct fences or walls around mangrove areas, effectively privatizing formerly public or communal spaces and severely limiting community access. These spatial arrangements reinforced social exclusion and deepened community tensions, as residents described losing traditional fishing grounds or culturally significant coastal access points. Here, governance was experienced primarily through spatial control, emphasizing the power dynamics embedded in land-use decisions and material infrastructures. Across all sites, community respondents frequently highlighted discrepancies between formal legal protections and actual spatial enforcement or demarcation. National mangrove protection laws and local zoning regulations existed on paper, yet their practical application was often inconsistent or unclear due to unclear boundary demarcations, unresolved land tenure issues, or limited enforcement resources. Garífuna communities in Tela particularly emphasized conflicts between official municipal zoning maps and customary territorial claims, underscoring how legal and cartographic frameworks often conflicted with historical community practices and understandings of territorial governance. This discrepancy between formal regulations and lived realities contributed significantly to local confusion, disputes, and governance ineffectiveness. The practical enforcement infrastructure itself, such as patrol capacities or monitoring equipment, was similarly weak and inconsistently deployed across sites. Environmental patrols conducted by municipal units (UMAs) were infrequent, insufficiently resourced, and often tied directly to temporary NGO-funded projects rather than institutionalized within municipal budgets or structures. In Trujillo, community members explicitly described environmental patrols as dependent on temporary external funding cycles, with enforcement activities sharply declining once projects concluded. Such episodic enforcement practices reinforced perceptions of governance as reactive and opportunistic rather than consistent or committed. Governance effectiveness also depended significantly on the physical and material infrastructure associated with mangrove restoration efforts, such as community-run nurseries and planting facilities. In Omoa and Trujillo, community-led reforestation initiatives often relied on temporary infrastructure provided by NGOs, including seedling nurseries, irrigation systems, or basic tools. However, once NGO projects ended, these physical facilities often deteriorated rapidly, lacking sustained maintenance or long-term local resource commitments. Consequently, mangrove restoration activities frequently stalled or collapsed entirely, highlighting the critical role of sustained material and financial support for effective governance. 4.5 Discussion Our findings highlight the role played by informal community-based governance practices across all study sites. Such practices included community-organized reforestation initiatives in Omoa, informal monitoring and customary management in Tela, and adaptive responses to institutional gaps in Roatán and Trujillo. These findings support Araos’s et al. (2020) notion of hybrid governance assemblages, demonstrating how local communities often fill institutional voids through adaptive, place-based governance efforts. However, these local governance practices are fragile, contingent upon temporary external resources or driven by necessity rather than sustained institutional support. This fragility underscores the importance of recognizing and actively supporting informal governance mechanisms to enhance their durability and effectiveness. In practical terms, this could mean providing stable, long-term funding to community conservation groups, facilitating ongoing training and capacity-building that is not tied solely to donor cycles, creating spaces for dialogue between formal institutions and local actors, and institutionalizing the recognition of customary governance practices within legal frameworks. For example, local reforestation programs should be designed with long-term local stewardship and resource commitment in mind, rather than short-term projects. In addition, emerging blue economy approaches could offer new pathways for sustained support (ECLAC, 2025 ). These include linking mangrove conservation to sustainable tourism initiatives, small-scale fisheries value chains, and carbon financing schemes. Payment for environmental services mechanisms, such as blue carbon credits or coastal protection payments, could provide direct incentives for communities engaged in mangrove restoration and protection. Pilot programs that compensate local groups for maintaining ecosystem services, such as shoreline stabilization or nursery habitats for fisheries, could help bridge the gap between informal practices and formal policy frameworks. Legal and policy frameworks could also explicitly recognize and support the role of customary law and local associations in mangrove management. By not viewing governance solely through institutional structures or clearly defined policies, we emphasize how governance emerges from interactions among actors, competing narratives, and the physical realities of each context. Drawing on Li ( 2007 ), Briassoulis ( 2019 ), and Araos et al. ( 2020 ), our findings contribute to a more nuanced understanding of environmental governance, highlighting its inherently relational, contested, and context-dependent nature. Our results align with observations from previous studies (Friess et al., 2016 ; Hagger et al., 2022 ), confirming that formal mangrove governance is often fragmented, insufficiently resourced, and frequently mismatched with local social-ecological complexities. However, by applying an assemblage perspective, our study extends beyond merely documenting governance failures, revealing instead how governance actively occurs through daily practices, informal negotiations, temporary alliances, and adaptive local responses. Governance in this sense is not simply decentralized or multi-level, but dynamically and continuously assembled by various actors working within, between, or around formal institutions and informal arrangements. These insights align with global trends in mangrove governance.Oliveira et al.(2024) review of coastal governance cases emphasizes that effective governance must integrate political, social, economic, and ecological factors, suggesting that approaches grounded in multiple realities (e.g., tenure, policies, community behaviors) have a higher chance of success. Further, practical success requires recognizing that mangroves are not just ecological assets but also part of communities' social fabric, yet they often remain under-supported without dedicated governance infrastructures (Hagger et al., 2022 ). For practitioners and policymakers, this means that interventions must look beyond top-down approaches and strengthen the informal practices that naturally emerge from local contexts (Walker et al., 2022 ). A critical lesson is that effective mangrove governance requires not only recognizing informal community practices but also actively integrating them into polycentric frameworks that coordinate across scales and institutions. Institutional fragmentation emerged as a significant governance challenge across the municipalities. Our analysis revealed how diverse institutional actors, including municipal authorities, national agencies like the ICF, and NGOs, frequently operated without clear coordination or shared objectives. This lack of coordination created substantial ambiguity, weakened public trust, and undermined conservation effectiveness. These findings resonate with Friess’s et al. (2016) observations of mangrove governance challenges in other contexts, emphasizing how institutional fragmentation often exacerbates rather than resolves conservation problems. Thus, enhancing governance requires improving institutional coordination, clarifying roles, and establishing mechanisms for ongoing, rather than episodic, collaboration among multiple actors and levels in formal and/or informal governance structures. A transferable lesson for other contexts is the value of developing formal and informal platforms for regular coordination and communication between actors, such as joint working groups or multi-stakeholder forums, which persist beyond individual projects or political cycles. Building shared objectives and mutual accountability among government, NGOs, and community groups is key to avoiding duplication, filling institutional gaps, and maintaining momentum in conservation efforts. Temporary governance alliances and episodic collaborations emerged frequently in our findings, particularly driven by external project cycles, donor funds, or acute environmental events. In Trujillo, Tela, and Omoa, governance coalitions were often transient, forming briefly around specific projects or crises but rarely translating into sustained or institutionalized partnerships. This temporary and episodic nature of governance aligns with Li’s ( 2007 ) observation that governance assemblages are continuously negotiated, fragile, and contingent on shifting alignments among diverse interests. Such temporary alignments, while enabling short-term action, limit long-term conservation effectiveness and sustainability. Therefore, recognizing the inherent instability of these temporary assemblages and actively working to build longer-lasting governance relationships remains crucial. To build lasting alliances, conservation interventions should be designed with built-in mechanisms for transition from externally driven partnerships to locally anchored, self-sustaining governance. This might involve supporting leadership development, fostering local ownership of conservation infrastructure, and ensuring that local groups are included in project planning and monitoring from the outset. Studies from Eastern Africa (Friess et al., 2016 ; Nyangoko et al., 2022 ) and Southeast Asia (Mursyid et al., 2021 ) show that such long-term strategies can help scale informal conservation efforts and prevent governance fragmentation. Discourse analysis highlighted how narratives about mangroves significantly shaped governance practices and perceptions. Dominant narratives included framing governance as primarily an external institutional responsibility, local communities as passive victims, or mangroves as obstacles to economic development. Conversely, alternative narratives emphasized community agency, cultural identity, and local stewardship responsibilities. These competing narratives reflect governance multiplicity, highlighting the coexistence and contestation of different governance rationalities and values (Briassoulis 2019 ). Discourses observed in the four municipalities also carried gendered undertones. Narratives framing mangrove protection as an institutional responsibility diminished the visible role women play in everyday stewardship. Meanwhile, development-oriented narratives in Roatán tended to privilege male-dominated sectors (tourism and real estate), sidelining women’s cultural and subsistence relationships to mangroves (Rasquinha, 2024 ; Reid, 2024 ). Similar dynamics are documented in gendered analyses of coral reefs and blue carbon systems, where men’s economic values overshadow women’s ecological and cultural priorities (Lau & Ruano-Chamorro, 2021 ; Lopez et al., 2024 ). Understanding and engaging these discursive dimensions of governance is critical, as they influence how governance is understood, justified, enacted, and contested in everyday practices. For conservation practitioners, this means that effective communication and engagement strategies must address these diverse narratives. Efforts to build support for conservation can be strengthened by connecting with local values, cultural identities, and experiences, rather than relying solely on external or technical rationales. Narrative-based approaches, such as participatory storytelling, community mapping, or intergenerational dialogues, can help bridge competing perspectives and foster a sense of shared stewardship. The material and spatial dimensions of governance also emerged as critically important, demonstrating how tangible infrastructures and spatial arrangements profoundly influence governance outcomes. Across all sites, limited physical governance infrastructures, such as insufficient patrol resources, missing signage, unclear property boundaries, and temporary reforestation facilities, significantly undermined conservation effectiveness. Particularly in Roatán, privatized control over mangrove areas showed how government works in real life through physical exclusion and access to space, making power differences and social inequality worse. Recognizing the importance of these physical and spatial dimensions suggests practical opportunities for strengthening governance by investing in durable, community-supported infrastructures and clarifying spatial boundaries and property regimes. More generally, ensuring equitable and secure access to mangrove areas, through participatory mapping, land tenure regularization, or co-management agreements, can help reduce conflict and improve long-term stewardship and contribute to effective conservation (Sangat et al., 2025 ). Physical investments (such as signage, patrol equipment, and durable nurseries) should be paired with capacity-building so that local actors can maintain and use these resources over time. Lovelock et al. ( 2024 ) suggest that integrating physical infrastructure with community ownership of mangrove areas can mitigate spatial governance challenges. Our findings provide a broader understanding of environmental governance beyond traditional institutional frameworks. They demonstrate how governance practices continuously emerge, transform, and reassemble through daily interactions, discursive negotiations, spatial-material arrangements, and shifting alliances among diverse actors. For mangrove governance in Honduras, this means interventions cannot rely solely on formal institutional reforms or externally imposed solutions. Instead, they require fostering enabling conditions, such as strengthening informal community initiatives, improving institutional coordination, creating sustained local governance alliances, engaging diverse governance narratives, and investing in robust physical and spatial governance infrastructures. The governance of coastal wetlands can benefit from these flexible, context-specific frameworks that connect local initiatives to broader environmental and social goals, as demonstrated in Oliveira et al. ( 2024 ). Across the four sites, several recurring patterns emerge that help explain how mangrove governance operates in practice. These are summarized below in Table 3 . Table 3 Lessons learned for mangrove governance in northern Honduras Community governance plays a central role Local groups often step in where formal institutions are weak. Their contribution is consistent, but long-term support remains limited. Coordination gaps persist across institutions Overlapping mandates and weak communication create confusion. This affects enforcement and slows collective action. Short project cycles limit continuity Many initiatives depend on external funding. Once support ends, activities tend to decline and local ownership remains fragile. Unclear tenure shapes local behavior Ambiguity around access and use of rights reduces incentives for stewardship and can lead to conflict. Basic infrastructure is often overlooked Small, practical elements, such as nurseries, signage, and local monitoring, play an important role but receive little attention. Local meanings influence engagement Mangroves are valued through livelihoods, risk reduction, and cultural ties. Technical arguments alone are rarely sufficient. Inclusion remains uneven Participation is present, but influence in decision-making is limited, especially for women and youth. 5 Conclusions This study shows that mangrove governance in northern Honduras emerges from a mix of formal arrangements, everyday practices, and shifting relations among actors. Rather than a stable model, governance functions as an adaptive configuration shaped by interactions, obligations, and the practical constraints facing municipalities and communities. Governance effectiveness depends less on institutional design alone and more on how people coordinate, interpret responsibilities, and maintain the material conditions that allow collective action to continue. Across the four municipalities, institutional fragmentation and short cycles of funding limited the continuity of conservation efforts. At the same time, community-led practices, reforestation, monitoring, and customary forms of regulation, remained central. These initiatives produced tangible results but operated with minimal support and little protection from political or economic fluctuations. Their persistence underscores how much governance work occurs through incremental, informal efforts that rarely appear in policy documents but are essential for keeping the system functioning. Discursive and material elements also shaped outcomes. Narratives about legitimacy, development, and responsibility influenced whose priorities were recognized and how conflicts were managed. Material infrastructures, zoning clarity, boundary markers, enforcement tools, and nursery maintenance, proved fundamental, not secondary. They anchored expectations and made certain forms of action more feasible than others. Taken together, these findings indicate that improving mangrove governance involves strengthening the conditions under which local actors already operate, rather than introducing entirely new arrangements. Supporting long-term collaboration, reducing fragmented responsibilities, and maintaining the basic material infrastructure that enables local initiatives can create more stable grounds for conservation. This perspective emphasizes governance as something assembled through ongoing practice, shaped by institutions, but sustained through the everyday work of people who live beside and depend on the mangroves. Declarations Funding NNH22ZDA001N-LCLUC 5.1 Ethics statements The study received Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval from a U.S.-based research institution prior to implementation. All participants were informed about the objectives of the research and their rights, including the option to decline to answer any question or withdraw from the interview at any time without consequence. Data were handled confidentially and in accordance with established ethical research standards 5.2 Clinical Trial Number i not applicable 5.3 Competing interests The authors declare no competing interests. Author Contribution A.S. led the research design. A.S. and S.E.B.A. coordinated data collection, including interviews and the participatory workshop. A.S. led the analysis and drafted the manuscript. G.M.C., S.M.P., A.J.N., and S.W.J.C. contributed to site selection, the analytical approach, and interpretation of the results. All authors discussed the findings, provided critical revisions, and approved the final manuscript. Data Availability The qualitative data that support the findings of this study are not publicly available due to privacy and confidentiality considerations. However, the codebook used for data analysis is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request. References Araos, F., Anbleyth-Evans, J., Riquelme, W., Hidalgo, C., Brañas, F., Catalán, E., Núñez, D., & Diestre, F. (2020). Marine Indigenous Areas: Conservation Assemblages for Sustainability in Southern Chile. Coastal Management , 48 (4), 289–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2020.1773212 Ávila-Flores, G., Hinojosa-Arango, G., Juárez-Mancilla, J., & Arzipe-Covarrubias, O. (2017). The Use of the DPSIR Framework to Estimate Impact of Urbanization on Mangroves: A Case Study from La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico. Transactions on Ecology and the Environment , 223 , 459–469. https://doi.org/10.2495/SC170401 Bhowmik, A. K., Padmanaban, R., Cabral, P., & Romeiras, M. M. (2022). Global Mangrove Deforestation and Its Interacting Social-Ecological Drivers: A Systematic Review and Synthesis. Sustainability , 14 (8), 4433. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084433 Briassoulis, H. (2019). Governance as multiplicity: The Assemblage Thinking perspective. Policy Sciences , 52 (3), 419–450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-018-09345-9 Canty, S. W., Preziosi, R. F., & Rowntree, J. K. (2018). Dichotomy of mangrove management: A review of research and policy in the Mesoamerican reef region. Ocean & Coastal Management , 157 , 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.02.011 Carnohan, S. A., Trier, X., Liu, S., Clausen, L. P., Clifford-Holmes, J. K., Hansen, S. F., Benini, L., & McKnight, U. S. (2023). Next generation application of DPSIR for sustainable policy implementation. Current Research in Environmental Sustainability , 5 , 100201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2022.100201 Chen, C. F., Son, N. T., Chang, N. B., Chen, C. R., Chang, L. Y., Valdez, M., Centeno, G., Thompson, C., & Aceituno, J. (2013). Multi-Decadal Mangrove Forest Change Detection and Prediction in Honduras, Central America, with Landsat Imagery and a Markov Chain Model. Remote Sensing , 5 (12), 6408–6426. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs5126408 Dick Frederiksen, S., Elias, M., Zaremba, H., & Aynekulu, E. (2021). Developing gender-equitable ecological restoration initiatives: A synthesis of guidance to improve restoration practice . The Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT. ECLAC (2025). Blue horizon of Latin America and the Caribbean 2025: Progress and challenges regarding the targets of Sustainable Development Goal 14 (LC/TS.2025/51). https://hdl.handle.net/11362/84909 FAO (2023). The world’s mangroves 2000–2020. FAO. https://doi.org/10.4060/cc7044en Friess, D. A., Thompson, B. S., Brown, B., Amir, A. A., Cameron, C., Koldewey, H. J., Sasmito, S. D., & Sidik, F. (2016). Policy challenges and approaches for the conservation of mangrove forests in Southeast Asia. Conservation Biology , 30 (5), 933–949. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12784 Gari, S. R., Newton, A., & Icely, J. D. (2015). A review of the application and evolution of the DPSIR framework with an emphasis on coastal social-ecological systems. Ocean & Coastal Management , 103 , 63–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.11.013 Hagger, V., Worthington, T. A., Lovelock, C. E., Adame, M. F., Amano, T., Brown, B. M., Friess, D. A., Landis, E., Mumby, P. J., Morrison, T. H., O'Brien, K. R., Wilson, K. A., Zganjar, C., & Saunders, M. I. (2022). Drivers of global mangrove loss and gain in social-ecological systems. Nature Communications , 13 (1), 6373. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-33962-x Harper, S. J., Gurney, G. G., Darling, E., Mangubhai, S., Jupiter, S., Lestari, W. P., Holmes, K. E., Sumaryati, S., Sulisyati, R., Fox, M., & Ban, N. C. (2024). Gender differences in the perceived impacts of coastal management and conservation. Ocean Sustainability , 3 (1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44183-024-00070-w Instituto de Conservación Forestal (2022). Estado Actual del Ecosistema de Manglar en Honduras . Inventario Nacional Forestal . https://icf.gob.hn/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Estado_Actual-del-Ecosistema-de-Manglar-en-Honduras_compressed.pdf Instituto de Conservación Forestal (2024). Anuario Estadístico Forestal de Honduras – 2023. IUCN (2024). Red List of Mangrove Ecosystems. IUCN. https://iucn.org/resources/conservation-tool/iucn-red-list-ecosystems/red-list-mangrove-ecosystems Lau, J., & Ruano-Chamorro, C. (2021). Gender Equality in Coral Reef Socio-ecological Systems: Literature Review . CARE. Li, T. M. (2007). Practices of Assemblage and Community Forest Management. Economy and Society , 36 (2), 263–293. https://doi.org/10.1080/03085140701254308 Lopez, D. E., Karam, A., & Yadao-Evans, W. (2024). Gender Equality in Blue Carbon Ecosystems: A Literature Review (KIT Working Paper). KIT Royal Tropical Institute. Lovelock, C. E., Bennion, V., de Oliveira, M., Hagger, V., Hill, J. W., Kwan, V., Pearse, A. L., Rossini, R. A., & Twomey, A. J. (2024). Mangrove ecology guiding the use of mangroves as nature-based solutions. Journal of Ecology , 112 (11), 2510–2521. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.14383 MacNeill, T. (2020). Indigenous food sovereignty in a captured state: the Garifuna in Honduras. Third World Quarterly , 41 (9), 1537–1555. https://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2020.1768840 MiAmbiente (2017). Política Nacional de Humedales de Honduras 2018–2038. MiAmbiente; DiBio. Mursyid, H., Daulay, M. H., Pratama, A. A., Laraswati, D., Novita, N., Malik, A., & Maryudi, A. (2021). Governance issues related to the management and conservation of mangrove ecosystems to support climate change mitigation actions in Indonesia. Forest Policy and Economics , 133 , 102622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102622 Nyangoko, B. P., Berg, H., Mangora, M. M., Shalli, M. S., & Gullström, M. (2022). Local perceptions of changes in mangrove ecosystem services and their implications for livelihoods and management in the Rufiji Delta, Tanzania. Ocean & Coastal Management , 219 , 106065. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106065 Oesterwind, D., Rau, A., & Zaiko, A. (2016). Drivers and pressures – Untangling the terms commonly used in marine science and policy. Journal of Environmental Management , 181 , 8–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.05.058 de Oliveira, M., Morrison, T., O'Brien, K. R., & Lovelock, C. E. (2024). Governance of coastal wetlands: Beyond the community conservation paradigm. Ocean & Coastal Management , 255 , 107253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2024.107253 Oloko, A., Teh, L., Le Billon, P., Cheung, W., Harper, S., & Sumaila, U. R. (2024). Making the case for gender-inclusive fisheries governance, policies and climate adaptation. Discover Oceans , 1 (1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44289-024-00038-1 Punalekar, S. M., Nowakowski, A. J., Canty, S. W. J., Fergus, C., Huang, Q., Songer, M., & Connette, G. M. (2025). Characterizing Role of Spatial Features in Improving Mangrove Classification: A Case Study over the Mesoamerican Reef Region. Remote Sensing , 17 (16), 2837. https://doi.org/10.3390/rs17162837 Rasquinha, D. (2024). Manning the mangroves: gender, regional identities, and social history shape mangrove forest dependence and governance. Ecology and Society , 29 (1). https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-14809-290117 Recio, M. E., Kuper, J., Vallejo, M., Sommerville, M., & Jhaveri, N. (2016). Central America Mangroves, tenure, and REDD+ Assessment . USAID Tenure and Global Climate Change Program. Reid, M. (2024). Gendered and socio-ecological dynamics of mangrove ecosystem services in Guinea-Bissau's coastal communities [MSc] . WUR. Sanders, A., McLean, D., & Manueles, A. (2015). Assessment of Land Use Effect on Climate Change Sensitivity on the Northern Coastal Zone of Honduras . Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3866.5045 Sangat, S. S., Rosero, M., Olsson, E., Nowakowski, A. J., Drescher-Lehman, J., Roehrdanz, P. R., Noon, M. L., McManus, N., Perz, S. G., Angel, M., Krieger, J. M., Brock, C., Coutinho, B., Martinez, C., Douglas, L. R., Bernard, C., Trustfull, L., Raik, D., Troëng, S., & Alie, K. (2025). Afro-descendant lands in South America contribute to biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation. Communications Earth & Environment , 6 (1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-025-02339-5 Sarmin, N. S., Hasmadi, M., Pakhriazad, I., H. Z., & Khairil, W. A. (2016). The DPSIR framework for causes analysis of mangrove deforestation in Johor, Malaysia. Environmental Nanotechnology Monitoring & Management , 6 , 214–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enmm.2016.11.002 Savari, M., Damaneh, H. E., [Hamed Eskandari], Damaneh, H. E., & [Hadi, E. (2022). Factors involved in the degradation of mangrove forests in Iran: A mixed study for the management of this ecosystem. Journal for Nature Conservation , 66 , 126153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2022.126153 SERNA. (2026). Contribución Determinada a Nivel Nacional (NDC 3.0) de Honduras . Secretario de Estado en el despacho de Recursos Naturales y Ambiente. Walker, J. E., Ankersen, T., Barchiesi, S., Meyer, C. K., Altieri, A. H., Osborne, T. Z., & Angelini, C. (2022). Governance and the mangrove commons: Advancing the cross-scale, nested framework for the global conservation and wise use of mangroves. Journal of Environmental Management , 312 , 114823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.114823 World Bank. (2023). Country Climate and Development Report Honduras . World Bank Group. Yadao-Evans, W., Lopez, D. E., Aigrette, L., Arce-Peña, N., Beeston, M., Canty, S. W. J., de Silva, S., Grimm, K. E., Hamilton, J., House, J., Howard, J., James, R., Lawless, S., Mangubhai, S., McDougall, C., Montgomery, K., Naggea, J., Nightingale, M., Pidgeon, E., & Ying, L. (2025). Advancing interdisciplinary science of gender is key to the success of blue carbon initiatives. Nature Communications , 16 (1), 10184. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-65593-3 Additional Declarations No competing interests reported. Cite Share Download PDF Status: Under Review Version 1 posted Reviewers agreed at journal 06 May, 2026 Reviewers invited by journal 02 Apr, 2026 Editor assigned by journal 02 Apr, 2026 Submission checks completed at journal 02 Apr, 2026 First submitted to journal 29 Mar, 2026 You are reading this latest preprint version Research Square lets you share your work early, gain feedback from the community, and start making changes to your manuscript prior to peer review in a journal. As a division of Research Square Company, we’re committed to making research communication faster, fairer, and more useful. We do this by developing innovative software and high quality services for the global research community. Our growing team is made up of researchers and industry professionals working together to solve the most critical problems facing scientific publishing. Also discoverable on Platform About Our Team In Review Editorial Policies Advisory Board Help Center Resources Author Services Accessibility API Access RSS feed Manage Cookie Preferences © Research Square 2026 | ISSN 2693-5015 (online) Privacy Policy Terms of Service Do Not Sell My Personal Information {"props":{"pageProps":{"initialData":{"identity":"rs-9261168","acceptedTermsAndConditions":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"archivedVersions":[],"articleType":"Research Article","associatedPublications":[],"authors":[{"id":618636672,"identity":"c7f3698f-7298-4ff4-912a-58085afe137e","order_by":0,"name":"Arie Sanders","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Zamorano Pan-American Agricultural School","correspondingAuthor":true,"prefix":"","firstName":"Arie","middleName":"","lastName":"Sanders","suffix":""},{"id":618636673,"identity":"6c2431bb-c7c6-4aae-94e1-face171e0dcd","order_by":1,"name":"Sara Esther Bonilla Anariba","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"WorldFish","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Sara","middleName":"Esther Bonilla","lastName":"Anariba","suffix":""},{"id":618636674,"identity":"48dcfdce-a435-4e09-9b31-6a4e48c6131d","order_by":2,"name":"Grant M. Connette","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Smithsonian Institution","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Grant","middleName":"M.","lastName":"Connette","suffix":""},{"id":618636675,"identity":"b61b7996-f6e5-4501-8e66-db3e753db3d2","order_by":3,"name":"Suvarna M. Punalekar","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Smithsonian Institution","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Suvarna","middleName":"M.","lastName":"Punalekar","suffix":""},{"id":618636676,"identity":"4afcf28c-228c-4862-8f38-071788ef080a","order_by":4,"name":"A. Justin Nowakowski","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Smithsonian Institution","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"A.","middleName":"Justin","lastName":"Nowakowski","suffix":""},{"id":618636677,"identity":"222fc0d4-e339-41cb-b0bf-6d5c12d3b9ef","order_by":5,"name":"Steven W.J. Canty","email":"","orcid":"","institution":"Smithsonian Institution","correspondingAuthor":false,"prefix":"","firstName":"Steven","middleName":"W.J.","lastName":"Canty","suffix":""}],"badges":[],"createdAt":"2026-03-29 23:08:44","currentVersionCode":1,"declarations":"","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9261168/v1","doiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9261168/v1","draftVersion":[],"editorialEvents":[],"editorialNote":"","failedWorkflow":false,"files":[{"id":108976374,"identity":"a81b67eb-3033-48bd-a506-b85cf30d5254","added_by":"auto","created_at":"2026-05-11 11:08:41","extension":"pdf","order_by":0,"title":"","display":"","copyAsset":false,"role":"manuscript-pdf","size":382143,"visible":true,"origin":"","legend":"","description":"","filename":"manuscript.pdf","url":"https://assets-eu.researchsquare.com/files/rs-9261168/v1/a0a9b479-3887-463d-8c03-737acf8bedbf.pdf"}],"financialInterests":"No competing interests reported.","formattedTitle":"Practicing governance: Local perspectives on mangrove management in northern Honduras","fulltext":[{"header":"1 Introduction","content":"\u003cp\u003eMangroves are an important ecosystem and provide many services, such as buffering coastlines against storms, stabilizing shores, filtering pollutants from water, storing carbon and supporting fisheries by serving as nurseries for fish and crustaceans (FAO, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR10\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e). Globally, over four million small-scale fishers rely on mangrove ecosystems for their livelihoods (Hagger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Despite their importance, mangroves are disappearing at an unprecedented rate (Bhowmik et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR3\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Coastal development, agricultural and aquacultural expansion, pollution, and overexploitation erode the remaining resources. AccordingIUCN (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR17\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e), it is estimated that 50% of the global mangrove systems are at risk.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Honduras, mangroves cover approximately 0.8% (around 50,000 ha) of the nation's forested areas (Instituto de Conservaci\u0026oacute;n Forestal, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR16\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Although this coverage is modest, it sustains local livelihoods and is critical to national conservation strategies (MiAmbiente, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). These mangrove areas are found along both the Atlantic and Pacific coastlines, with the Pacific coast encompassing 40,000 ha and the Atlantic coast encompassing approximately 10,000 ha; the latter is located within the Mesoamerican Reef (MAR) ecoregion (Instituto de Conservaci\u0026oacute;n Forestal, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). The predominant species in both coastal areas are \u003cem\u003eRhizophora mangle\u003c/em\u003e (red mangrove), \u003cem\u003eAvicennia germinans\u003c/em\u003e (black mangrove), and \u003cem\u003eLaguncularia racemosa\u003c/em\u003e (white mangrove). These forests vary considerably, from tall, dense stands along rivers to sparse, dwarf mangroves depending on environmental conditions such as salinity and nutrient availability (Instituto de Conservaci\u0026oacute;n Forestal, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR15\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). Honduran mangroves face ongoing anthropogenic and climate-associated threats, with the greatest drivers of loss being expanding aquaculture, residential settlements and salt production on the Pacific coast (Chen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR7\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2013\u003c/span\u003e) and agriculture and urbanization on the Atlantic coast (Sanders et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR33\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e), combined with an inconsistency in regulatory enforcement (Canty et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e; Recio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) and rising sea levels (World Bank, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR39\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring the last two decades, Honduras has developed policies focused on marine resource conservation. Important for the mangrove areas is the \u0026ldquo;National Wetlands Policy 2018\u0026ndash;2038\u0026rdquo;, created by the Ministry of the Environment, which promotes the conservation, rehabilitation, and sustainable use of wetlands, including mangroves, through mechanisms such as the creation and effective management of protected areas, the restoration of degraded habitats, and the promotion of sustainable livelihoods for coastal communities (MiAmbiente, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR23\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e). In parallel, national climate policy frameworks stress integrated coastal management actions that link ecosystem protection with climate adaptation measures along the coast (SERNA, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR37\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2026\u003c/span\u003e). Additionally, Honduras has signed international commitments under the Ramsar Convention that aim to promote conservation and sustainable use of wetlands.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eHowever, the practical implementation of these regulations is problematic due to challenges posed by lack of clarity around land tenure, the roles of different government authorities, and limited coordination between them. Such issues are especially visible in areas inhabited by Afro-Indigenous communities, where local people report uneven enforcement of conservation rules and restrictions on activities such as fishing, wood collection, and small-scale land use. At the same time, these regulations often fail to reflect local livelihood needs (MacNeill, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR22\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e). The situation in Honduras is not unique. reflects broader tensions observed in mangrove governance, where ecological conservation, cultural practices, and economic interests intersect and are often difficult to reconcile (Hagger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur day-to-day experience with marine conservation in the MAR ecoregion has shown that coastal resource governance is intricate and cannot be viewed as a static institutional framework. The interactions and responses among various stakeholders continuously influence the evolution of governance systems, making them context-specific and dynamic. Using a qualitative research approach, we analyze how mangrove governance evolves across four coastal municipalities in Honduras, Omoa, Tela, Trujillo, and Roat\u0026aacute;n, as local actors, government agencies, and communities adapt, negotiate, or react to socio-environmental pressures. Our research reveals widespread inconsistencies in how conservation regulations are applied or bypassed, coupled with active participation by communities in formal and informal conservation activities, such as replanting mangroves or setting community-based rules parallel to state policies.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTo understand the complexity of mangrove governance, we use the theoretical framework of assemblage thinking. Li\u0026acute;s (2007) concept of \"practices of assemblage,\" emphasizes that governance develops through ongoing negotiations, shifting alliances, and the constant interplay of discourses, power dynamics, and local contexts. Rather than being driven by top-down controls or fixed regulations, governance in this sense emerges through diverse, often competing, actions. Alongside this, we use Briassoulis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) notion of governance as \"multiplicity,\" which focuses on how governance involves the simultaneous reconciliation of diverse, and often competing, interests, values, and forms of knowledge among stakeholders. In practice, this means that governance is not a unitary process, but a dynamic one in which multiple logics and actors overlap and interact, sometimes in tension and sometimes in cooperation. In its empirical work in the coastal zone of southern Chile, Araos et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) demonstrates how these concepts play out in real contexts; governance arrangements there are continually negotiated and reconfigured in response to local socio-environmental challenges, resulting in a patchwork of overlapping institutions, informal agreements, and community-based rules. Taken together, these perspectives underscore that mangrove governance is inherently complex and often chaotic, involving ongoing, fragile collaborations shaped by competing meanings, interests, practical constraints, and localized power struggles over land, identity, and resources.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur main questions for the study were, (1) \u0026ldquo;How is mangrove governance coming together (assembled) in practice across different coastal communities in Honduras\u0026rdquo;, and (2) \u0026ldquo;which discourses and actions sustain or challenge mangrove conservation?\u0026rdquo; By examining local actions, such as planting, monitoring, restoring or contesting mangrove uses, particularly in relation to land conversion for urban, tourism, or agricultural development versus their conservation and use for small-scale fisheries, and by analyzing how community members and institutions justify these actions, we aim to capture the dynamic and relational aspects of governance. Section 2 details our theoretical framework derived from assemblage thinking. Section 3 presents our data collection methodology and a brief description of study areas. Section 4 presents the results of our research, organized into three subsections. In our last section (5) we present our conclusions and policy implications.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"2 Analytical framework","content":"\u003cp\u003eMangrove governance is complex, as evidenced by numerous studies (e.g. Friess et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Mursyid et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e), including in the MAR region (Canty et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR5\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2018\u003c/span\u003e) and specifically in Honduras (Recio et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR31\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). There are many stakeholders with divergent interests and ambiguities that traditional governance methods, which rely on formal institutions and explicit policy frameworks, struggle to manage. We use an \"assemblage thinking\" approach to improve our understanding of these dynamics. According to assemblage thinking, governance is constantly constructed and reconstructed through interactions, relationships, and practical actions, rather than being a stable or clearly defined entity. We rely primarily on the theoretical insights of Li (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e), Briassoulis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) and Araos et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) to guide this approach, focusing particularly on how governance emerges through everyday actions, language, and material conditions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRather than viewing governance as strictly a matter of formal policies and enforcement, Li\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e) work offers a valuable perspective on governance by focusing on the actual practices and activities that unfold in real-world settings. She emphasizes on the ongoing, everyday work required to align diverse interests, manage conflicts, and keep systems functioning, even if imperfectly. Among the practices she identifies are creating temporary agreements among actors, translating complex political conflicts into manageable technical tasks, and adapting strategies to manage setbacks rather than overhauling entire systems. This perspective resonates with mangrove governance in the Honduran context, where local people, NGOs, and government officials are continually engaged in negotiating how mangroves should be used and conserved, often through practical everyday actions such as planting trees, organizing patrols, or informally enforcing rules.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBriassoulis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) further highlights that governance is fundamentally about managing multiple, often competing rationalities, such as conservation, economic development, and cultural or community rights. In mangrove areas, these different priorities coexist and frequently collide. Briassoulis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) encourages analysis of how these tensions produce new forms of governance rather than trying to eliminate them. They also emphasize the role of language and discourse (how people talk about mangroves) as crucial for governance. For example, when residents describe mangroves as culturally valuable rather than merely ecologically important, this shapes how conservation is pursued and whose voices matter most in decision-making processes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAraos et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) apply assemblage thinking to marine conservation contexts, illustrating how governance emerges from complex, hybrid arrangements involving communities, governments, and NGOs. Here the emphasis is that these arrangements are never fully local or completely external; instead, they are dynamic interactions shaped by local traditions, ecological conditions, state policies, and global discourses. This view aligns with our findings in Honduras: governance emerges from a patchwork of informal rules, community-based initiatives, municipal plans, and national policies, all influenced by the history and ecological realities of each site.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur analytical framework also draws from recent studies on mangrove governance elsewhere. Friess et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e) and Hagger et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) highlight the problems associated with fragmented institutions and unclear responsibilities. Similarly, Nyangoko et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) and Savari et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR36\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) stress the importance of listening closely to local perceptions and incorporating community priorities into governance arrangements rather than imposing external solutions. These studies highlight the need to examine governance in mangrove regions requires examining not only formal institutional structures but also the lived realities, daily practices, and localized forms of action that shape outcomes on the ground.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBased on these theoretical insights, our analytical framework focuses on three interconnected aspects of governance: (1) the actual practices people engage in (such as patrolling or planting); (2) the discourses they use to explain and justify these actions; and (3) the material conditions (like physical boundaries, infrastructure, or land-use regulations) that either support or hinder their efforts. Using this framework, we explore how governance is continuously assembled, through negotiation, compromise, and adaptation, in the diverse and complex contexts of Honduras\u0026rsquo;s coastal mangrove areas.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur study places particular emphasis on gender dynamics, as gender is embedded within each of these dimensions. Gender norms influence whose knowledge counts in governance processes, who participates in conservation activities, and how responsibilities for environmental stewardship are distributed (Dick Frederiksen et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR8\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e). Accordingly, we treat gender not as an add-on variable but as a constitutive element of governance assemblages. For example, women often lead informal monitoring, mangrove planting, and restoration efforts, multiplying governance practices that remain unrecognized by formal institutions. Moreover, discourses around responsibility and legitimacy are also gendered: women are frequently positioned as \"auxiliary caretakers\" rather than decision-makers, while men dominate formal regulatory and enforcement spaces (Harper et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR14\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Oloko et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR28\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). It is critical that women\u0026rsquo;s voices, which are often overlooked, are included within these discussions as mangroves are a gendered ecosystem, with women utilizing these systems more frequently (Yadao-Evans et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR40\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Integrating a gender lens into assemblage thinking thus helps illuminate how power, care, authority, and exclusion are produced and contested within mangrove governance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur goal is not just to analyze existing governance arrangements but also to suggest ways forward. This involves recognizing the diverse meanings and everyday efforts invested in mangrove ecosystems by coastal communities and identifying opportunities for governance practices that are more inclusive, adaptive, and reflective of local realities.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"3 Study Area and Methodology","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec4\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.1 Study area\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe research was conducted in four coastal municipalities along Honduras\u0026rsquo;s northern Caribbean coast: Omoa, Tela, Trujillo, and Roat\u0026aacute;n. Our site selection process combined several sources of information. First, we used recent satellite imagery to assess the extent and condition of mangrove cover in each municipality, allowing us to identify areas experiencing contrasting degrees of disturbance, conservation, or recovery. Second, members of the research team have been working in municipalities for several years, conducting regular site visits and collaborating with local stakeholders. This ongoing involvement gave us in-depth knowledge of both ecosystems and the changing institutional landscape, which improved our ability to interpret observed changes and contextualize governance processes. These four municipalities were chosen because they collectively illustrate the varied drivers and pressures affecting mangroves in Honduras, as well as the range of formal and informal responses currently in play, from community-based restoration to municipal and national policy interventions. This combination of ecological data, satellite imagery, and embedded field experience allowed us to analyze the interplay between environmental change and governance across different local realities (Punalekar et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR29\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOmoa, located near the border with Guatemala, is rural. Mangroves here face threats from agricultural expansion, particularly African palm plantations, and erosion along beaches and rivers. Although government institutions have a limited local presence, mangrove restoration and small-scale conservation efforts are active and visible, driven by local communities in partnership with NGOs and the municipality.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTela has a prominent Afro-Indigenous Gar\u0026iacute;funa community and a history of conservation projects. Mangroves here have experienced mixed conditions; some areas show resilience and community-led protection, while others have suffered significant degradation due to urban and tourism pressures. Governance in Tela is complicated by overlapping authorities and tensions between formal laws and Gar\u0026iacute;funa customary rules.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTrujillo, historically a banana-producing area, has seen rapid agricultural transformation, primarily through expansion of African palm cultivation. Mangrove areas in Trujillo consist of a patchwork of degraded and reforested areas, reflecting both conservation efforts and uncontrolled extraction. Institutional governance relies heavily on periodic NGO projects, leading to uneven and temporary management efforts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eRoat\u0026aacute;n, located in the Bay Islands, is heavily urbanized with a local economy driven by tourism. Mangroves face intense pressures from property development, and governance conflicts here are often centered around land rights and property access. While there are formally protected mangrove areas, enforcement is inconsistent, and many mangrove patches have been privatized or severely degraded.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTogether, these four sites highlight the diversity of mangrove conservation challenges in Honduras, reflecting broader issues of institutional complexity, socio-economic pressures, and community-driven governance initiatives found in coastal areas globally.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec5\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e3.2 Qualitative approach\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur methodological approach was guided by the Drivers\u0026ndash;Pressures\u0026ndash;State\u0026ndash;Impact\u0026ndash;Response (DPSIR) framework, which provides a structured lens for analyzing complex socio-environmental systems. The DPSIR model is widely used in ecosystem management to organize information about underlying social and ecological drivers of change, the pressures these drivers exert, the resulting state of the ecosystem, the impacts on people and nature, and the responses by various actors (\u0026Aacute;vila-Flores et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR2\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2017\u003c/span\u003e; Carnohan et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR6\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2023\u003c/span\u003e; Sarmin et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR35\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). This framework has been criticized for oversimplifying complex realities (Gari et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR12\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2015\u003c/span\u003e; Oesterwind et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR26\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e). In response to this criticism, we adopted the framework as both an analytical tool for coding qualitative data and to facilitate discussions with stakeholders on mangrove governance. Rather than treating DPSIR as a rigid or linear model, we used it flexibly to capture local perspectives, with particular emphasis on the \"Response\" dimension, that is, the practical actions and institutional arrangements shaping mangrove management.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe used a qualitative, multi-method approach that combined in-depth interviews with a participatory workshop. The research unfolded in two main stages and was conducted with ethical approval from the _________ Institutional Review Board (IRB). First, we conducted semi-structured interviews with key stakeholders on each of the four sites. We used purposive sampling to ensure inclusion of both community members directly involved in mangrove use or conservation and representatives of municipal governments, NGOs, and national institutions. In total, we conducted 81 interviews, all in Spanish, and typically lasting between 20 minutes and one hour (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). The interviews explored how people use mangroves, their observations of environmental change, and their experiences and perceptions regarding governance and management. This stage aimed to capture a broad range of perspectives on mangrove governance, management practices, and socio-environmental pressures.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAfter analyzing the interview data using NVivo12 and a coding protocol based on the DPSIR framework, we organized a participatory workshop. This workshop brought together 18 representatives from the four study sites for a facilitated focus group discussion (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e). Some participants had previously participated in interviews, but this was not a requirement. We designed the workshop to validate and deepen our DPSIR analysis, again focusing on the \"Response\" component. The group discussion focused on two governance challenges that emerged most prominently from the interview analysis: (i) the degree of community involvement in mangrove management, and (ii) the effectiveness of law enforcement and policy implementation. During the workshop, participants reflected on these issues in relation to their sites, provided feedback on our preliminary findings, and discussed differences and commonalities in governance responses across locations. This process enabled a participatory and comparative assessment of governance strategies without imposing a rigid scenario structure.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDuring the interviews and workshop, we paid attention to how participants described gender and youth\u0026rsquo;s roles, responsibilities, and constraints in mangrove use and governance. Women were often present in restoration, gleaning, and community-based monitoring but were underrepresented in municipal and institutional decision-making spaces, reflecting patterns documented across global blue carbon and coastal ecosystems (Lopez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Lord et al., 2025). These insights were incorporated into the coding and interpretation of DPSIR categories, particularly within \u0026ldquo;Response\u0026rdquo; and \u0026ldquo;Impact,\u0026rdquo; enabling us to identify how gender dynamics shape exposure to environmental change, governance burdens, and access to conservation benefits. Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab1\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e1\u003c/span\u003e summarizes our methodological sequence and participant composition.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab1\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 1\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMethod sequence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"4\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMethods\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipants\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTopic\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eScale\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSemi-structured interviews\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity members, NGOs, government representatives\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMangrove use, governance, observed changes, management practices, responses to challenges\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSite level for each of the four communities of Omoa, Tela, Trujillo, Roat\u0026aacute;n\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFocus group (workshop)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003e18 representatives from all four sites\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eGovernance challenges (community involvement, policy enforcement), validation of DPSIR findings\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAll sites represented together\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eWe analyzed interview transcripts and workshop data using a structured coding protocol based on the DPSIR framework. This allowed us to organize and summarize the environmental and social context of each site, identify the key pressures and impacts affecting mangroves, and explore the diversity of governance responses and ongoing activities. Insights from the participatory workshop were integrated into the analysis, helping to validate interview findings and enrich our understanding of local strategies and solutions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipant composition reflected site-specific differences in governance and engagement. In Omoa, for instance, there was strong participation from community leaders and local associations, corresponding to active community-based governance, while in Roat\u0026aacute;n, participants were more often affiliated with NGOs or municipal institutions, given the greater role of formal governance actors. This variation allowed us to capture a broad spectrum of perspectives and governance experiences along the Honduran Caribbean coast.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"4 Results","content":"\u003cdiv id=\"Sec7\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.1 Drivers\u0026ndash;Pressures\u0026ndash;State\u0026ndash;Impact indicators\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eBefore analyzing governance responses, we focus in this section on the Drivers\u0026ndash;Pressure\u0026ndash; State\u0026ndash;Impact indicators to characterize the main socio-ecological conditions identified by respondents in each study site. Although some overarching drivers and pressures were common across all four locations, such as urban growth, economic development and weak regulation enforcement, their specific manifestations and impacts varied between locations.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Omoa, participants highlighted coastal erosion and riverbank instability as critical issues. They commonly attributed these problems to upstream deforestation, sand extraction, and rapid agricultural expansion, especially African palm (\u003cem\u003eElaeis guineensis\u003c/em\u003e) plantations (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Respondents also expressed concerns about informal settlements and the clearance of mangroves for housing development, pointing to the limited capacity and willingness of local authorities to enforce environmental protections. Additionally, they noted a significant weakening of traditional community norms that previously discouraged mangrove removal, attributing this decline to population growth driven by internal migration, shifting livelihoods, and changing local attitudes toward environmental stewardship. According to a community member: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;The change has been significant, both for the trees and our lives. Before, the sea was far away, but now it\u0026rsquo;s at our doorstep. Fortunately, some of us moved, but those still living there face real difficulties. When bad weather comes, the sea can reach their houses. There are no more trees to protect us, the sea just keeps advancing.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e Another participant described, \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;During strong storms, with waves of eight meters or more, mangroves can suffer significant damage. Strong winds also knock down trees, especially those already undermined by erosion.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Tela, conditions varied considerably. Some mangrove areas showed resilience and regeneration due to active community engagement, particularly by Gar\u0026iacute;funa communities relying on customary management practices (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). However, other areas faced degradation from growing tourism and urban infrastructure projects. Participants frequently cited pressures such as wetland infilling for new constructions, road building, and poor municipal enforcement of zoning rules. As mentioned by a technician of an environmental NGO: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;The fact that African palm is also planted around here, and all the agrochemicals that come in contact with the soil eventually run off into the lagoon, this has also affected the ecosystem\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e. Community members described a range of impacts, including declines in fish stocks, saline water intrusion affecting agriculture, and limited access to mangrove resources traditionally used by local families for wood, food, and cultural purposes. As one participant observed, \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eWe\u0026rsquo;ve started to see more palm, more cattle, and other crops. All these little things have us worried about the state of the mangroves, not just in Janet Kawas, but also in Punta Izopo, which are vulnerable\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e. Another stated, \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eI think it's complicated, but just because the mangrove is still in good condition in some areas doesn\u0026rsquo;t mean there aren\u0026rsquo;t impacts. In certain places, you can see the effects, like reduced access and less fish.\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe situation in Trujillo was more severe. Respondents consistently pointed to large-scale agricultural conversion, specifically African palm plantations, as the predominant driver of mangrove loss (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eHere in this agricultural department, monocultures like African palm have expanded significantly in areas close to the refuge and even inside it. This expansion has contributed to the silting up of the lagoon, reducing water inflow. This sedimentation is especially worrying given the high water demand of palm cultivation.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e They observed substantial deforestation and habitat fragmentation along coastlines and riverbanks. \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;I have personally seen alarming deforestation along the road to Castilla. Some of these areas are inside the refuge, others outside, but all are wetlands. This became especially noticeable around 2021, after the start of the pandemic. It\u0026rsquo;s sad to see how much mangrove has been cleared along this road.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e Although reforestation initiatives were occasionally implemented, primarily through NGO interventions, these efforts were described as fragmented and inadequately maintained, with limited local ownership. Community members also mentioned increasing reliance on mangroves for firewood and artisanal use, driven by the absence of clear access regulations or sustainable alternatives. They further noted tangible impacts, such as declining fish populations, worsening erosion, sedimentation issues, and reduced food security for many households dependent on mangrove-associated resources. \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Flooding has become more frequent, which negatively affects our community. Also, in the fishing sector, production has dropped, so fishers must go farther and spend more on fuel. This impacts both the local economy and the whole ecosystem\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Roat\u0026aacute;n, the intensity of pressures was most pronounced, linked to rapid tourism development and urbanization (Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e). Participants described systematic infilling and clearing of mangroves to build hotels, resorts, private residences, and other infrastructure, often done without proper regulatory oversight. Mangrove ecosystems here were described as highly fragmented and degraded, with only isolated patches surviving outside formally protected zones. Respondents also highlighted broader impacts beyond environmental degradation, such as heightened vulnerability to storms and hurricanes. As one noted, \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Residents closest to the mangroves are the most at risk, from waves, hurricanes, and coastal flooding. When mangroves are gone, there\u0026rsquo;s nothing to protect their homes\u003c/em\u003e.\u0026rdquo; Additional impacts included increased privatization of formerly public coastal spaces, and rising social conflicts stemming from restricted community access to natural resources. \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;The biggest impact on mangroves now is uncontrolled population growth, overuse, and land conversion, expanding buildings and infrastructure, which restricts access for those who\u0026rsquo;ve always depended on the coast.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross these four municipalities, DPSI indicators demonstrated that mangrove degradation involved much more than ecological factors alone. Social, political, and economic conflicts, particularly those related to land tenure, resource access, and community livelihoods, were deeply intertwined with environmental decline. A municipality employee working in coastal conservation in Omoa stated: \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;A decade ago, there were lots of blue crabs along the highway, but now they\u0026rsquo;re rare. The loss of these resources means more people cut mangroves for firewood, worsening the poverty cycle. When the ecosystem declines, poverty increases.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e A comprehensive summary of these DPSI indicators is provided in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab2\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e2\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab2\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 2\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSummary of DPSIR conditions across the four study sites\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"5\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c3\" colnum=\"3\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c4\" colnum=\"4\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c5\" colnum=\"5\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSite\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eDrivers\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePressures\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eState\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eImpacts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOmoa\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAgricultural expansion (African palm), population growth\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMangrove clearing, sand mining, informal construction\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eVisible erosion, declining canopy, fragmented reforestation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLoss of shoreline stability, reduced fish habitats\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTela\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTourism development, urban expansion, cultural shifts\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eWetland filling, dumping, erosion from roads\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMixed: healthy stands and degraded patches\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSaline intrusion, reduced wood access, fish decline\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTrujillo\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003ePalm cultivation, migration, weak institutional presence\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFirewood extraction, land conversion, sedimentation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eHigh loss of coverage, isolated regeneration areas\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFood insecurity, reduced biodiversity, erosion\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eRoat\u0026aacute;n\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eTourism, real estate development, land speculation\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c3\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eFilling of mangroves, infrastructure expansion\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c4\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSevere fragmentation, loss of connectivity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c5\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eStorm vulnerability, privatized access, ecological loss (mangroves, fishery)\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec8\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.2 Response Indicators: Governing Mangroves in Practice\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross the four municipalities, local and informal governance practices played essential roles in mangrove conservation, often compensating for the absence or inefficiency of formal institutional structures. For example, in Omoa, community groups and local schools frequently organized small mangrove nurseries and conducted planting events without significant external support. Community members described these efforts as driven by necessity, stating, \u003cem\u003e\"If we don't plant and protect the mangroves, nobody else will.\u003c/em\u003e\" In Omoa, women were described as key participants in mangrove nursery management and community planting campaigns, yet their contributions remained informal and rarely recognized by authorities.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSimilarly, in Trujillo, informal women's groups, and local NGOs periodically organized reforestation activities, reflecting community-driven, small-scale responses to mangrove degradation. \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Most of the reforestation and conservation work is done by local people, who know the area and have been trained to care for it. The community participates in all the trainings, they know the pros and cons, and that\u0026rsquo;s helped us earn their support.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e These informal efforts illustrated how mangrove conservation often relies heavily on local initiative rather than institutional mandates or resources.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Tela, informal governance arrangements were more deeply embedded in cultural practices, especially within Gar\u0026iacute;funa communities. Here, community members described a dual system where formal municipal regulations existed alongside and sometimes conflicted with traditional community rules for mangrove use and conservation. One Garifuna respondent explained, \u003cem\u003e\u0026ldquo;Mangroves represent who we are, our history and our future\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e, highlighting how conservation is closely tied to identity and ancestral responsibility. Conversely, in Roat\u0026aacute;n, informal governance practices often emerged in reactive forms, such as informal patrols organized by residents or ad-hoc negotiations between community members and developers to mitigate ecological damage. As one participant noted, \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eWhen we see mangroves being cleared, sometimes we organize to talk to the developer, but often there\u0026rsquo;s little we can do if they already have their permits.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDespite the presence of several active institutions, including municipal governments, national environmental agencies (such as the Forest Conservation Institute, ICF), and various NGOs, their governance activities appeared fragmented, inconsistent, and sometimes contradictory. In Tela, participants described multiple institutions operating simultaneously but often without coordination or shared objectives. This created substantial confusion and local frustration. One participant from Tela succinctly expressed this frustration: \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eThe municipality hands out permits, traditional authorities reject them, and NGOs come, start projects, then vanish when funds run dry.\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e This fragmented landscape undermined local trust and complicated effective mangrove governance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSimilarly, in Trujillo, institutional action depended heavily on NGO-driven initiatives. Respondents explained that while NGOs frequently initiated mangrove planting projects, these interventions rarely incorporated robust long-term planning or maintenance strategies. One community member pointed out that \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eseedlings often perished soon after projects ended\u003c/em\u003e\u0026rdquo;, emphasizing the unsustainable nature of short-term project-based governance approaches In Omoa, institutional governance was absent or reactionary, activated primarily after significant environmental damage or public outcry. In Roat\u0026aacute;n, institutional governance was often selectively enforced, favoring influential developers or private interests over community-based conservation. \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eDevelopers openly disregard environmental regulations, treating fines as just another cost of doing business,\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e one resident in Roat\u0026aacute;n stated. This selective and politicized enforcement further undermined public confidence in formal governance structures.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross all four locations participants described mangrove governance as heavily influenced by institutional gaps, inconsistencies, and failures. In Roat\u0026aacute;n, community members navigated these challenges by engaging in informal negotiations, pragmatically accepting certain developments, or occasionally organizing resistance efforts. In Tela and Trujillo, local actors often turned to informal agreements and personal relationships to manage mangrove use, especially when formal channels were ineffective or unavailable. Gar\u0026iacute;funa communities in Tela strategically balanced their traditional norms with selective engagement in formal processes, acknowledging that explicit confrontation with authorities was often counterproductive. \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eWe follow our rules, but sometimes you have to work with the municipality if you want to get anything done,\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e explained a local leader in Tela.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn each community, governance gaps were not empty spaces, but instead were areas where local actors actively negotiated, improvised, and pragmatically adapted. Participants described informal monitoring, rotating responsibilities for reforestation activities, and self-regulation practices as essential strategies to cope with governance deficiencies. These adaptive practices highlighted the resilience and proactive agency of local communities under challenging governance conditions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eGovernance practices at the four sites also emerged through temporary, often fragile alliances among actors responding to specific events or projects. In Trujillo, participants frequently described brief collaborative efforts between municipal staff, community members, and NGOs during externally funded reforestation initiatives. However, these collaborations often dissolved quickly after project completion, leaving behind unfinished or unsustainable interventions. \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eAfter the project ends, the nursery falls apart and nobody maintains it. The seedlings die,\u0026rdquo;\u003c/em\u003e explained a participant. Similarly, in Tela, short-term alliances formed around cultural projects or ecotourism initiatives, but these relationships frequently broke down due to mistrust or conflicts over benefit-sharing among stakeholders.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Omoa, governance collaborations usually arose reactively, driven by acute environmental crises such as beach erosion, as well as visible ecological issues like the increasing accumulation of plastic waste along the coastline. Participants described brief periods of community mobilization and municipal engagement immediately following such events, rarely translating into long-term or stable partnerships. In Roat\u0026aacute;n respondents highlighted strategic but superficial alliances between developers and local government officials, often aimed at complying minimally with environmental regulations without genuine conservation commitments. \u0026ldquo;\u003cem\u003eSometimes the government just wants to show they did something, but nothing really changes on the ground\u003c/em\u003e,\u0026rdquo; one community member observed. Such temporary alliances demonstrated the highly contingent and context-specific nature of mangrove governance practices, which depended heavily on fluctuating external conditions and temporary alignment of actor interests.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec9\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.3 Narrating Responsibility\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eMangrove governance in the studied areas is not only shaped by direct actions or institutional arrangements but is also profoundly influenced by how actors talk about mangroves, their value, and responsibilities associated with their management. Various narratives emerged across the four sites, reflecting competing visions and interpretations about who should protect mangroves, why they should be protected, and what actions are justified or legitimate. These narratives do not merely reflect perceptions; rather, they actively shape governance by legitimizing actors, framing specific issues, and influencing which strategies become accepted or contested. This discursive dimension aligns closely with Briassoulis's (2019) perspective that governance involves multiple, coexisting discourses and rationalities that interact, sometimes clash, and produce distinct governance arrangements.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross the four study sites, a dominant discourse consistently portrayed mangrove protection as an institutional responsibility external to local communities. Many respondents frequently invoked the roles of government agencies such as the Forest Conservation Institute (ICF), municipal authorities, or NGOs as primary agents responsible for enforcement and conservation actions. In both Omoa and Roat\u0026aacute;n, for example, residents frequently described mangrove degradation as directly resulting from institutional inaction or negligence. One respondent from Omoa stated: \"\u003cem\u003eMangroves are destroyed because authorities simply do not do their job.\"\u003c/em\u003e This narrative typically portrayed communities as passive observers or victims of institutional failures, effectively shifting accountability away from local actors and obscuring underlying social or economic drivers behind mangrove degradation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eSimultaneously, a counter-discourse emphasizing community responsibility and stewardship emerged strongly in Trujillo and Tela. Here, mangrove ecosystems were described not merely as ecological assets but as being deeply tied to community heritage and cultural identity. Gar\u0026iacute;funa respondents in Tela particularly framed mangrove protection within the context of ancestral responsibility and intergenerational continuity, stating that \"\u003cem\u003emangroves represent who we are, our history and our future.\"\u003c/em\u003e Similarly, women-led reforestation initiatives in Trujillo invoked moral narratives centered around collective local responsibility, clearly expressing a belief that protection would not occur without direct community intervention. These narratives directly challenged external or top-down governance models, asserting the legitimacy of place-based knowledge, cultural values, and grassroots initiatives.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eA third and distinct narrative emerged prominently in Roat\u0026aacute;n and, to a lesser extent, Tela, framing mangroves as barriers or obstacles to economic development and modernization. Developers and local officials described conservation regulations as outdated or unnecessarily restrictive, positioning mangrove protection in opposition to tourism growth, urbanization, and infrastructure development. This discourse reflected an economic rationality, where ecological value was explicitly balanced against financial or developmental gains. Interviewees in Roat\u0026aacute;n frequently used phrases like \"development must move forward\" or \"conservation needs to be flexible,\" effectively redefining mangrove value in pragmatic economic terms rather than ecological or cultural ones.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiscourses of ambiguity or resignation were also common across all sites. Many respondents described reluctance to report illegal mangrove clearing, often expressing skepticism that reporting infractions would lead to any meaningful action. This recurring experience of inaction appears to shape how people interpret the problem itself. Rather than seeing mangrove loss because of weak enforcement, power asymmetries, or institutional failure, some respondents framed it as something that is difficult to control or simply part of ongoing change. In this sense, resignation does more than reflect frustration; it shifts how the issue is understood. By downplaying questions of accountability and responsibility, it recasts mangrove conservation as a technical or inevitable problem rather than one that requires political engagement or structural change. As suggested by Li (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e), such discursive shifts can depoliticize environmental issues by obscuring the underlying relations of power that shape outcomes.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInstrumental environmental discourses featured prominently across sites, particularly when communities engaged with NGOs or external funding agencies. Community groups often strategically employed environmental language emphasizing mangrove ecosystems as \"carbon sinks,\" \"essential biodiversity habitats,\" or providers of \"ecosystem services.\" Although these narratives did not always align with local cultural or practical understandings of mangrove value, they effectively secured external support or legitimacy. Such discursive hybridity illustrates what Araos et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e) describes as the strategic flexibility of local actors who skillfully navigate between institutional and community narratives to sustain mangrove governance efforts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec10\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.4 Infrastructure, Regulation, and Space\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eAlongside practices and discourses, the governance of mangroves in Honduras also involves tangible physical and spatial elements, such as enforcement infrastructures, legal frameworks, signage, boundaries, and material management facilities. These material dimensions significantly influence the governance process, determining what actions become feasible, which spaces are governed, and how enforcement unfolds in practice. Rather than neutral or passive elements, these physical and spatial factors actively shape governance possibilities, effectively enabling or constraining specific governance practices. As Briassoulis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e) emphasizes, governance processes are always materially embedded and spatially mediated, profoundly shaped by physical realities and spatial arrangements.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross the four study sites, the physical presence of governance infrastructures, such as signage marking protected mangrove areas, varied widely, often appearing inconsistent, inadequate, or symbolically ineffective. In Omoa and Trujillo, for example, mangrove protection signs were visibly deteriorated or altogether absent in critical areas, effectively signaling weak institutional presence or regulatory abandonment. Community respondents frequently interpreted this material absence as reflecting broader institutional neglect or disinterest, undermining local confidence in regulatory frameworks. As one Trujillo resident put it: \"If protection signs disappear or fall apart, then probably the rules have disappeared too.\"\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn Roat\u0026aacute;n, the spatial and material dimensions of governance were characterized by private property boundaries and physical barriers. Developers and private landowners often construct fences or walls around mangrove areas, effectively privatizing formerly public or communal spaces and severely limiting community access. These spatial arrangements reinforced social exclusion and deepened community tensions, as residents described losing traditional fishing grounds or culturally significant coastal access points. Here, governance was experienced primarily through spatial control, emphasizing the power dynamics embedded in land-use decisions and material infrastructures.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross all sites, community respondents frequently highlighted discrepancies between formal legal protections and actual spatial enforcement or demarcation. National mangrove protection laws and local zoning regulations existed on paper, yet their practical application was often inconsistent or unclear due to unclear boundary demarcations, unresolved land tenure issues, or limited enforcement resources. Gar\u0026iacute;funa communities in Tela particularly emphasized conflicts between official municipal zoning maps and customary territorial claims, underscoring how legal and cartographic frameworks often conflicted with historical community practices and understandings of territorial governance. This discrepancy between formal regulations and lived realities contributed significantly to local confusion, disputes, and governance ineffectiveness.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe practical enforcement infrastructure itself, such as patrol capacities or monitoring equipment, was similarly weak and inconsistently deployed across sites. Environmental patrols conducted by municipal units (UMAs) were infrequent, insufficiently resourced, and often tied directly to temporary NGO-funded projects rather than institutionalized within municipal budgets or structures. In Trujillo, community members explicitly described environmental patrols as dependent on temporary external funding cycles, with enforcement activities sharply declining once projects concluded. Such episodic enforcement practices reinforced perceptions of governance as reactive and opportunistic rather than consistent or committed. Governance effectiveness also depended significantly on the physical and material infrastructure associated with mangrove restoration efforts, such as community-run nurseries and planting facilities. In Omoa and Trujillo, community-led reforestation initiatives often relied on temporary infrastructure provided by NGOs, including seedling nurseries, irrigation systems, or basic tools. However, once NGO projects ended, these physical facilities often deteriorated rapidly, lacking sustained maintenance or long-term local resource commitments. Consequently, mangrove restoration activities frequently stalled or collapsed entirely, highlighting the critical role of sustained material and financial support for effective governance.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv id=\"Sec11\" class=\"Section2\"\u003e \u003ch2\u003e4.5 Discussion\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur findings highlight the role played by informal community-based governance practices across all study sites. Such practices included community-organized reforestation initiatives in Omoa, informal monitoring and customary management in Tela, and adaptive responses to institutional gaps in Roat\u0026aacute;n and Trujillo. These findings support Araos\u0026rsquo;s et al. (2020) notion of hybrid governance assemblages, demonstrating how local communities often fill institutional voids through adaptive, place-based governance efforts. However, these local governance practices are fragile, contingent upon temporary external resources or driven by necessity rather than sustained institutional support.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThis fragility underscores the importance of recognizing and actively supporting informal governance mechanisms to enhance their durability and effectiveness. In practical terms, this could mean providing stable, long-term funding to community conservation groups, facilitating ongoing training and capacity-building that is not tied solely to donor cycles, creating spaces for dialogue between formal institutions and local actors, and institutionalizing the recognition of customary governance practices within legal frameworks. For example, local reforestation programs should be designed with long-term local stewardship and resource commitment in mind, rather than short-term projects.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eIn addition, emerging blue economy approaches could offer new pathways for sustained support (ECLAC, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR9\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). These include linking mangrove conservation to sustainable tourism initiatives, small-scale fisheries value chains, and carbon financing schemes. Payment for environmental services mechanisms, such as blue carbon credits or coastal protection payments, could provide direct incentives for communities engaged in mangrove restoration and protection. Pilot programs that compensate local groups for maintaining ecosystem services, such as shoreline stabilization or nursery habitats for fisheries, could help bridge the gap between informal practices and formal policy frameworks. Legal and policy frameworks could also explicitly recognize and support the role of customary law and local associations in mangrove management.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eBy not viewing governance solely through institutional structures or clearly defined policies, we emphasize how governance emerges from interactions among actors, competing narratives, and the physical realities of each context. Drawing on Li (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e), Briassoulis (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e), and Araos et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR1\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2020\u003c/span\u003e), our findings contribute to a more nuanced understanding of environmental governance, highlighting its inherently relational, contested, and context-dependent nature. Our results align with observations from previous studies (Friess et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Hagger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e), confirming that formal mangrove governance is often fragmented, insufficiently resourced, and frequently mismatched with local social-ecological complexities. However, by applying an assemblage perspective, our study extends beyond merely documenting governance failures, revealing instead how governance actively occurs through daily practices, informal negotiations, temporary alliances, and adaptive local responses. Governance in this sense is not simply decentralized or multi-level, but dynamically and continuously assembled by various actors working within, between, or around formal institutions and informal arrangements.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThese insights align with global trends in mangrove governance.Oliveira et al.(2024) review of coastal governance cases emphasizes that effective governance must integrate political, social, economic, and ecological factors, suggesting that approaches grounded in multiple realities (e.g., tenure, policies, community behaviors) have a higher chance of success. Further, practical success requires recognizing that mangroves are not just ecological assets but also part of communities' social fabric, yet they often remain under-supported without dedicated governance infrastructures (Hagger et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR13\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). For practitioners and policymakers, this means that interventions must look beyond top-down approaches and strengthen the informal practices that naturally emerge from local contexts (Walker et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR38\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e). A critical lesson is that effective mangrove governance requires not only recognizing informal community practices but also actively integrating them into polycentric frameworks that coordinate across scales and institutions.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eInstitutional fragmentation emerged as a significant governance challenge across the municipalities. Our analysis revealed how diverse institutional actors, including municipal authorities, national agencies like the ICF, and NGOs, frequently operated without clear coordination or shared objectives. This lack of coordination created substantial ambiguity, weakened public trust, and undermined conservation effectiveness. These findings resonate with Friess\u0026rsquo;s et al. (2016) observations of mangrove governance challenges in other contexts, emphasizing how institutional fragmentation often exacerbates rather than resolves conservation problems. Thus, enhancing governance requires improving institutional coordination, clarifying roles, and establishing mechanisms for ongoing, rather than episodic, collaboration among multiple actors and levels in formal and/or informal governance structures. A transferable lesson for other contexts is the value of developing formal and informal platforms for regular coordination and communication between actors, such as joint working groups or multi-stakeholder forums, which persist beyond individual projects or political cycles. Building shared objectives and mutual accountability among government, NGOs, and community groups is key to avoiding duplication, filling institutional gaps, and maintaining momentum in conservation efforts.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTemporary governance alliances and episodic collaborations emerged frequently in our findings, particularly driven by external project cycles, donor funds, or acute environmental events. In Trujillo, Tela, and Omoa, governance coalitions were often transient, forming briefly around specific projects or crises but rarely translating into sustained or institutionalized partnerships. This temporary and episodic nature of governance aligns with Li\u0026rsquo;s (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR19\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2007\u003c/span\u003e) observation that governance assemblages are continuously negotiated, fragile, and contingent on shifting alignments among diverse interests. Such temporary alignments, while enabling short-term action, limit long-term conservation effectiveness and sustainability. Therefore, recognizing the inherent instability of these temporary assemblages and actively working to build longer-lasting governance relationships remains crucial. To build lasting alliances, conservation interventions should be designed with built-in mechanisms for transition from externally driven partnerships to locally anchored, self-sustaining governance. This might involve supporting leadership development, fostering local ownership of conservation infrastructure, and ensuring that local groups are included in project planning and monitoring from the outset. Studies from Eastern Africa (Friess et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR11\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2016\u003c/span\u003e; Nyangoko et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR25\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2022\u003c/span\u003e) and Southeast Asia (Mursyid et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR24\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e) show that such long-term strategies can help scale informal conservation efforts and prevent governance fragmentation.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiscourse analysis highlighted how narratives about mangroves significantly shaped governance practices and perceptions. Dominant narratives included framing governance as primarily an external institutional responsibility, local communities as passive victims, or mangroves as obstacles to economic development. Conversely, alternative narratives emphasized community agency, cultural identity, and local stewardship responsibilities. These competing narratives reflect governance multiplicity, highlighting the coexistence and contestation of different governance rationalities and values (Briassoulis \u003cspan citationid=\"CR4\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2019\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiscourses observed in the four municipalities also carried gendered undertones. Narratives framing mangrove protection as an institutional responsibility diminished the visible role women play in everyday stewardship. Meanwhile, development-oriented narratives in Roat\u0026aacute;n tended to privilege male-dominated sectors (tourism and real estate), sidelining women\u0026rsquo;s cultural and subsistence relationships to mangroves (Rasquinha, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR30\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e; Reid, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR32\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Similar dynamics are documented in gendered analyses of coral reefs and blue carbon systems, where men\u0026rsquo;s economic values overshadow women\u0026rsquo;s ecological and cultural priorities (Lau \u0026amp; Ruano-Chamorro, \u003cspan citationid=\"CR18\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2021\u003c/span\u003e; Lopez et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR20\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e). Understanding and engaging these discursive dimensions of governance is critical, as they influence how governance is understood, justified, enacted, and contested in everyday practices. For conservation practitioners, this means that effective communication and engagement strategies must address these diverse narratives. Efforts to build support for conservation can be strengthened by connecting with local values, cultural identities, and experiences, rather than relying solely on external or technical rationales. Narrative-based approaches, such as participatory storytelling, community mapping, or intergenerational dialogues, can help bridge competing perspectives and foster a sense of shared stewardship.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe material and spatial dimensions of governance also emerged as critically important, demonstrating how tangible infrastructures and spatial arrangements profoundly influence governance outcomes. Across all sites, limited physical governance infrastructures, such as insufficient patrol resources, missing signage, unclear property boundaries, and temporary reforestation facilities, significantly undermined conservation effectiveness. Particularly in Roat\u0026aacute;n, privatized control over mangrove areas showed how government works in real life through physical exclusion and access to space, making power differences and social inequality worse. Recognizing the importance of these physical and spatial dimensions suggests practical opportunities for strengthening governance by investing in durable, community-supported infrastructures and clarifying spatial boundaries and property regimes. More generally, ensuring equitable and secure access to mangrove areas, through participatory mapping, land tenure regularization, or co-management agreements, can help reduce conflict and improve long-term stewardship and contribute to effective conservation (Sangat et al., \u003cspan citationid=\"CR34\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2025\u003c/span\u003e). Physical investments (such as signage, patrol equipment, and durable nurseries) should be paired with capacity-building so that local actors can maintain and use these resources over time. Lovelock et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR21\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e) suggest that integrating physical infrastructure with community ownership of mangrove areas can mitigate spatial governance challenges.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eOur findings provide a broader understanding of environmental governance beyond traditional institutional frameworks. They demonstrate how governance practices continuously emerge, transform, and reassemble through daily interactions, discursive negotiations, spatial-material arrangements, and shifting alliances among diverse actors. For mangrove governance in Honduras, this means interventions cannot rely solely on formal institutional reforms or externally imposed solutions. Instead, they require fostering enabling conditions, such as strengthening informal community initiatives, improving institutional coordination, creating sustained local governance alliances, engaging diverse governance narratives, and investing in robust physical and spatial governance infrastructures. The governance of coastal wetlands can benefit from these flexible, context-specific frameworks that connect local initiatives to broader environmental and social goals, as demonstrated in Oliveira et al. (\u003cspan citationid=\"CR27\" class=\"CitationRef\"\u003e2024\u003c/span\u003e).\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross the four sites, several recurring patterns emerge that help explain how mangrove governance operates in practice. These are summarized below in Table\u0026nbsp;\u003cspan refid=\"Tab3\" class=\"InternalRef\"\u003e3\u003c/span\u003e.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"gridtable\"\u003e\u003ctable float=\"Yes\" id=\"Tab3\" border=\"1\"\u003e \u003ccaption language=\"En\"\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionNumber\"\u003eTable 3\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv class=\"CaptionContent\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLessons learned for mangrove governance in northern Honduras\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e \u003c/caption\u003e \u003ccolgroup cols=\"2\"\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c1\" colnum=\"1\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cdiv align=\"left\" class=\"colspec\" colname=\"c2\" colnum=\"2\"\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003cthead\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCommunity governance plays a central role\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003cth align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLocal groups often step in where formal institutions are weak. Their contribution is consistent, but long-term support remains limited.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/th\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/thead\u003e \u003ctbody\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eCoordination gaps persist across institutions\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eOverlapping mandates and weak communication create confusion. This affects enforcement and slows collective action.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eShort project cycles limit continuity\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMany initiatives depend on external funding. Once support ends, activities tend to decline and local ownership remains fragile.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eUnclear tenure shapes local behavior\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eAmbiguity around access and use of rights reduces incentives for stewardship and can lead to conflict.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eBasic infrastructure is often overlooked\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eSmall, practical elements, such as nurseries, signage, and local monitoring, play an important role but receive little attention.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eLocal meanings influence engagement\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eMangroves are valued through livelihoods, risk reduction, and cultural ties. Technical arguments alone are rarely sufficient.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003ctr\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c1\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eInclusion remains uneven\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003ctd align=\"left\" colname=\"c2\"\u003e \u003cp\u003eParticipation is present, but influence in decision-making is limited, especially for women and youth.\u003c/p\u003e \u003c/td\u003e \u003c/tr\u003e \u003c/tbody\u003e \u003c/colgroup\u003e \u003c/table\u003e\u003c/div\u003e \u003c/p\u003e \u003c/div\u003e"},{"header":"5 Conclusions","content":"\u003cp\u003eThis study shows that mangrove governance in northern Honduras emerges from a mix of formal arrangements, everyday practices, and shifting relations among actors. Rather than a stable model, governance functions as an adaptive configuration shaped by interactions, obligations, and the practical constraints facing municipalities and communities. Governance effectiveness depends less on institutional design alone and more on how people coordinate, interpret responsibilities, and maintain the material conditions that allow collective action to continue.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eAcross the four municipalities, institutional fragmentation and short cycles of funding limited the continuity of conservation efforts. At the same time, community-led practices, reforestation, monitoring, and customary forms of regulation, remained central. These initiatives produced tangible results but operated with minimal support and little protection from political or economic fluctuations. Their persistence underscores how much governance work occurs through incremental, informal efforts that rarely appear in policy documents but are essential for keeping the system functioning.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eDiscursive and material elements also shaped outcomes. Narratives about legitimacy, development, and responsibility influenced whose priorities were recognized and how conflicts were managed. Material infrastructures, zoning clarity, boundary markers, enforcement tools, and nursery maintenance, proved fundamental, not secondary. They anchored expectations and made certain forms of action more feasible than others.\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eTaken together, these findings indicate that improving mangrove governance involves strengthening the conditions under which local actors already operate, rather than introducing entirely new arrangements. Supporting long-term collaboration, reducing fragmented responsibilities, and maintaining the basic material infrastructure that enables local initiatives can create more stable grounds for conservation. This perspective emphasizes governance as something assembled through ongoing practice, shaped by institutions, but sustained through the everyday work of people who live beside and depend on the mangroves.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"Declarations","content":"\u003ch2\u003eFunding\u003c/h2\u003e \u003cp\u003eNNH22ZDA001N-LCLUC\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.1 Ethics statements\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe study received Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval from a U.S.-based research institution prior to implementation. All participants were informed about the objectives of the research and their rights, including the option to decline to answer any question or withdraw from the interview at any time without consequence. Data were handled confidentially and in accordance with established ethical research standards\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.2 Clinical Trial Number i\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003enot applicable\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003e5.3 Competing interests\u003c/p\u003e \u003cp\u003eThe authors declare no competing interests.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eAuthor Contribution\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eA.S. led the research design. A.S. and S.E.B.A. coordinated data collection, including interviews and the participatory workshop. A.S. led the analysis and drafted the manuscript. G.M.C., S.M.P., A.J.N., and S.W.J.C. contributed to site selection, the analytical approach, and interpretation of the results. All authors discussed the findings, provided critical revisions, and approved the final manuscript.\u003c/p\u003e\u003ch2\u003eData Availability\u003c/h2\u003e\u003cp\u003eThe qualitative data that support the findings of this study are not publicly available due to privacy and confidentiality considerations. However, the codebook used for data analysis is available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.\u003c/p\u003e"},{"header":"References","content":"\u003col\u003e\u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eAraos, F., Anbleyth-Evans, J., Riquelme, W., Hidalgo, C., Bra\u0026ntilde;as, F., Catal\u0026aacute;n, E., N\u0026uacute;\u0026ntilde;ez, D., \u0026amp; Diestre, F. (2020). Marine Indigenous Areas: Conservation Assemblages for Sustainability in Southern Chile. \u003cem\u003eCoastal Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e48\u003c/em\u003e(4), 289\u0026ndash;307. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/08920753.2020.1773212\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/08920753.2020.1773212\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003e\u0026Aacute;vila-Flores, G., Hinojosa-Arango, G., Ju\u0026aacute;rez-Mancilla, J., \u0026amp; Arzipe-Covarrubias, O. (2017). The Use of the DPSIR Framework to Estimate Impact of Urbanization on Mangroves: A Case Study from La Paz, Baja California Sur, Mexico. \u003cem\u003eTransactions on Ecology and the Environment\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e223\u003c/em\u003e, 459\u0026ndash;469. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.2495/SC170401\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.2495/SC170401\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBhowmik, A. K., Padmanaban, R., Cabral, P., \u0026amp; Romeiras, M. M. (2022). Global Mangrove Deforestation and Its Interacting Social-Ecological Drivers: A Systematic Review and Synthesis. \u003cem\u003eSustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e14\u003c/em\u003e(8), 4433. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/su14084433\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/su14084433\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eBriassoulis, H. (2019). Governance as multiplicity: The Assemblage Thinking perspective. \u003cem\u003ePolicy Sciences\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e52\u003c/em\u003e(3), 419\u0026ndash;450. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s11077-018-09345-9\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s11077-018-09345-9\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCanty, S. W., Preziosi, R. F., \u0026amp; Rowntree, J. K. (2018). Dichotomy of mangrove management: A review of research and policy in the Mesoamerican reef region. \u003cem\u003eOcean \u0026amp; Coastal Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e157\u003c/em\u003e, 40\u0026ndash;49. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.02.011\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2018.02.011\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eCarnohan, S. A., Trier, X., Liu, S., Clausen, L. P., Clifford-Holmes, J. K., Hansen, S. F., Benini, L., \u0026amp; McKnight, U. S. (2023). Next generation application of DPSIR for sustainable policy implementation. \u003cem\u003eCurrent Research in Environmental Sustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e, 100201. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.crsust.2022.100201\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.crsust.2022.100201\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eChen, C. F., Son, N. T., Chang, N. B., Chen, C. R., Chang, L. Y., Valdez, M., Centeno, G., Thompson, C., \u0026amp; Aceituno, J. (2013). Multi-Decadal Mangrove Forest Change Detection and Prediction in Honduras, Central America, with Landsat Imagery and a Markov Chain Model. \u003cem\u003eRemote Sensing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e5\u003c/em\u003e(12), 6408\u0026ndash;6426. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/rs5126408\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/rs5126408\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eDick Frederiksen, S., Elias, M., Zaremba, H., \u0026amp; Aynekulu, E. (2021). \u003cem\u003eDeveloping gender-equitable ecological restoration initiatives: A synthesis of guidance to improve restoration practice\u003c/em\u003e. The Alliance of Bioversity International and CIAT.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eECLAC (2025). \u003cem\u003eBlue horizon of Latin America and the Caribbean 2025: Progress and challenges regarding the targets of Sustainable Development Goal 14\u003c/em\u003e (LC/TS.2025/51). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://hdl.handle.net/11362/84909\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://hdl.handle.net/11362/84909\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFAO (2023). \u003cem\u003eThe world\u0026rsquo;s mangroves 2000\u0026ndash;2020.\u003c/em\u003e FAO. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.4060/cc7044en\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.4060/cc7044en\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eFriess, D. A., Thompson, B. S., Brown, B., Amir, A. A., Cameron, C., Koldewey, H. J., Sasmito, S. D., \u0026amp; Sidik, F. (2016). Policy challenges and approaches for the conservation of mangrove forests in Southeast Asia. \u003cem\u003eConservation Biology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e30\u003c/em\u003e(5), 933\u0026ndash;949. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.12784\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/cobi.12784\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eGari, S. R., Newton, A., \u0026amp; Icely, J. D. (2015). A review of the application and evolution of the DPSIR framework with an emphasis on coastal social-ecological systems. \u003cem\u003eOcean \u0026amp; Coastal Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e103\u003c/em\u003e, 63\u0026ndash;77. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.11.013\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2014.11.013\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHagger, V., Worthington, T. A., Lovelock, C. E., Adame, M. F., Amano, T., Brown, B. M., Friess, D. A., Landis, E., Mumby, P. J., Morrison, T. H., O'Brien, K. R., Wilson, K. A., Zganjar, C., \u0026amp; Saunders, M. I. (2022). Drivers of global mangrove loss and gain in social-ecological systems. \u003cem\u003eNature Communications\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e13\u003c/em\u003e(1), 6373. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-022-33962-x\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41467-022-33962-x\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eHarper, S. J., Gurney, G. G., Darling, E., Mangubhai, S., Jupiter, S., Lestari, W. P., Holmes, K. E., Sumaryati, S., Sulisyati, R., Fox, M., \u0026amp; Ban, N. C. (2024). Gender differences in the perceived impacts of coastal management and conservation. \u003cem\u003eOcean Sustainability\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e3\u003c/em\u003e(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s44183-024-00070-w\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s44183-024-00070-w\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eInstituto de Conservaci\u0026oacute;n Forestal (2022). \u003cem\u003eEstado Actual del Ecosistema de Manglar en Honduras\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003eInventario Nacional Forestal\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://icf.gob.hn/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Estado_Actual-del-Ecosistema-de-Manglar-en-Honduras_compressed.pdf\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://icf.gob.hn/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/Estado_Actual-del-Ecosistema-de-Manglar-en-Honduras_compressed.pdf\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eInstituto de Conservaci\u0026oacute;n Forestal (2024). \u003cem\u003eAnuario Estad\u0026iacute;stico Forestal de Honduras\u0026thinsp;\u0026ndash;\u0026thinsp;2023.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eIUCN (2024). \u003cem\u003eRed List of Mangrove Ecosystems.\u003c/em\u003e IUCN. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://iucn.org/resources/conservation-tool/iucn-red-list-ecosystems/red-list-mangrove-ecosystems\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"https://iucn.org/resources/conservation-tool/iucn-red-list-ecosystems/red-list-mangrove-ecosystems\" targettype=\"URL\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLau, J., \u0026amp; Ruano-Chamorro, C. (2021). \u003cem\u003eGender Equality in Coral Reef Socio-ecological Systems: Literature Review\u003c/em\u003e. CARE.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLi, T. M. (2007). Practices of Assemblage and Community Forest Management. \u003cem\u003eEconomy and Society\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e36\u003c/em\u003e(2), 263\u0026ndash;293. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/03085140701254308\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/03085140701254308\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLopez, D. E., Karam, A., \u0026amp; Yadao-Evans, W. (2024). \u003cem\u003eGender Equality in Blue Carbon Ecosystems: A Literature Review\u003c/em\u003e (KIT Working Paper). KIT Royal Tropical Institute.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eLovelock, C. E., Bennion, V., de Oliveira, M., Hagger, V., Hill, J. W., Kwan, V., Pearse, A. L., Rossini, R. A., \u0026amp; Twomey, A. J. (2024). Mangrove ecology guiding the use of mangroves as nature-based solutions. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Ecology\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e112\u003c/em\u003e(11), 2510\u0026ndash;2521. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2745.14383\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1111/1365-2745.14383\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMacNeill, T. (2020). Indigenous food sovereignty in a captured state: the Garifuna in Honduras. \u003cem\u003eThird World Quarterly\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e41\u003c/em\u003e(9), 1537\u0026ndash;1555. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1080/01436597.2020.1768840\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1080/01436597.2020.1768840\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMiAmbiente (2017). \u003cem\u003ePol\u0026iacute;tica Nacional de Humedales de Honduras 2018\u0026ndash;2038.\u003c/em\u003e MiAmbiente; DiBio.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eMursyid, H., Daulay, M. H., Pratama, A. A., Laraswati, D., Novita, N., Malik, A., \u0026amp; Maryudi, A. (2021). Governance issues related to the management and conservation of mangrove ecosystems to support climate change mitigation actions in Indonesia. \u003cem\u003eForest Policy and Economics\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e133\u003c/em\u003e, 102622. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102622\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102622\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eNyangoko, B. P., Berg, H., Mangora, M. M., Shalli, M. S., \u0026amp; Gullstr\u0026ouml;m, M. (2022). Local perceptions of changes in mangrove ecosystem services and their implications for livelihoods and management in the Rufiji Delta, Tanzania. \u003cem\u003eOcean \u0026amp; Coastal Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e219\u003c/em\u003e, 106065. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106065\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106065\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOesterwind, D., Rau, A., \u0026amp; Zaiko, A. (2016). Drivers and pressures \u0026ndash; Untangling the terms commonly used in marine science and policy. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Environmental Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e181\u003c/em\u003e, 8\u0026ndash;15. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.05.058\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jenvman.2016.05.058\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ede Oliveira, M., Morrison, T., O'Brien, K. R., \u0026amp; Lovelock, C. E. (2024). Governance of coastal wetlands: Beyond the community conservation paradigm. \u003cem\u003eOcean \u0026amp; Coastal Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e255\u003c/em\u003e, 107253. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2024.107253\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2024.107253\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eOloko, A., Teh, L., Le Billon, P., Cheung, W., Harper, S., \u0026amp; Sumaila, U. R. (2024). Making the case for gender-inclusive fisheries governance, policies and climate adaptation. \u003cem\u003eDiscover Oceans\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e1\u003c/em\u003e(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1007/s44289-024-00038-1\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1007/s44289-024-00038-1\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003ePunalekar, S. M., Nowakowski, A. J., Canty, S. W. J., Fergus, C., Huang, Q., Songer, M., \u0026amp; Connette, G. M. (2025). Characterizing Role of Spatial Features in Improving Mangrove Classification: A Case Study over the Mesoamerican Reef Region. \u003cem\u003eRemote Sensing\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e17\u003c/em\u003e(16), 2837. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.3390/rs17162837\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.3390/rs17162837\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRasquinha, D. (2024). Manning the mangroves: gender, regional identities, and social history shape mangrove forest dependence and governance. \u003cem\u003eEcology and Society\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e29\u003c/em\u003e(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.5751/ES-14809-290117\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.5751/ES-14809-290117\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eRecio, M. E., Kuper, J., Vallejo, M., Sommerville, M., \u0026amp; Jhaveri, N. (2016). \u003cem\u003eCentral America Mangroves, tenure, and REDD+ Assessment\u003c/em\u003e. \u003cem\u003eUSAID Tenure and Global Climate Change Program.\u003c/em\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eReid, M. (2024). \u003cem\u003eGendered and socio-ecological dynamics of mangrove ecosystem services in Guinea-Bissau's coastal communities [MSc]\u003c/em\u003e. WUR.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSanders, A., McLean, D., \u0026amp; Manueles, A. (2015). \u003cem\u003eAssessment of Land Use Effect on Climate Change Sensitivity on the Northern Coastal Zone of Honduras\u003c/em\u003e. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.3866.5045\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.13140/RG.2.1.3866.5045\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSangat, S. S., Rosero, M., Olsson, E., Nowakowski, A. J., Drescher-Lehman, J., Roehrdanz, P. R., Noon, M. L., McManus, N., Perz, S. G., Angel, M., Krieger, J. M., Brock, C., Coutinho, B., Martinez, C., Douglas, L. R., Bernard, C., Trustfull, L., Raik, D., Tro\u0026euml;ng, S., \u0026amp; Alie, K. (2025). Afro-descendant lands in South America contribute to biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation. \u003cem\u003eCommunications Earth \u0026amp; Environment\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e(1). \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-025-02339-5\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s43247-025-02339-5\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSarmin, N. S., Hasmadi, M., Pakhriazad, I., H. Z., \u0026amp; Khairil, W. A. (2016). The DPSIR framework for causes analysis of mangrove deforestation in Johor, Malaysia. \u003cem\u003eEnvironmental Nanotechnology Monitoring \u0026amp; Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e6\u003c/em\u003e, 214\u0026ndash;218. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.enmm.2016.11.002\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.enmm.2016.11.002\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSavari, M., Damaneh, H. E., [Hamed Eskandari], Damaneh, H. E., \u0026amp; [Hadi, E. (2022). Factors involved in the degradation of mangrove forests in Iran: A mixed study for the management of this ecosystem. \u003cem\u003eJournal for Nature Conservation\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e66\u003c/em\u003e, 126153. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2022.126153\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jnc.2022.126153\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eSERNA. (2026). \u003cem\u003eContribuci\u0026oacute;n Determinada a Nivel Nacional (NDC 3.0) de Honduras\u003c/em\u003e. Secretario de Estado en el despacho de Recursos Naturales y Ambiente.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWalker, J. E., Ankersen, T., Barchiesi, S., Meyer, C. K., Altieri, A. H., Osborne, T. Z., \u0026amp; Angelini, C. (2022). Governance and the mangrove commons: Advancing the cross-scale, nested framework for the global conservation and wise use of mangroves. \u003cem\u003eJournal of Environmental Management\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e312\u003c/em\u003e, 114823. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.114823\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1016/j.jenvman.2022.114823\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eWorld Bank. (2023). \u003cem\u003eCountry Climate and Development Report Honduras\u003c/em\u003e. World Bank Group.\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e \u003cli\u003e\u003cspan\u003eYadao-Evans, W., Lopez, D. E., Aigrette, L., Arce-Pe\u0026ntilde;a, N., Beeston, M., Canty, S. W. J., de Silva, S., Grimm, K. E., Hamilton, J., House, J., Howard, J., James, R., Lawless, S., Mangubhai, S., McDougall, C., Montgomery, K., Naggea, J., Nightingale, M., Pidgeon, E., \u0026amp; Ying, L. (2025). Advancing interdisciplinary science of gender is key to the success of blue carbon initiatives. \u003cem\u003eNature Communications\u003c/em\u003e, \u003cem\u003e16\u003c/em\u003e(1), 10184. \u003cspan class=\"ExternalRef\"\u003e\u003cspan class=\"RefSource\"\u003ehttps://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-025-65593-3\u003c/span\u003e\u003cspan address=\"10.1038/s41467-025-65593-3\" targettype=\"DOI\" class=\"RefTarget\"\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/span\u003e\u003c/li\u003e\u003c/ol\u003e"}],"fulltextSource":"","fullText":"","funders":[],"hasAdminPriorityOnWorkflow":false,"hasManuscriptDocX":true,"hasOptedInToPreprint":true,"hasPassedJournalQc":"","hasAnyPriority":false,"hideJournal":false,"highlight":"","institution":"","isAcceptedByJournal":false,"isAuthorSuppliedPdf":false,"isDeskRejected":"","isHiddenFromSearch":false,"isInQc":false,"isInWorkflow":false,"isPdf":false,"isPdfUpToDate":true,"isWithdrawnOrRetracted":false,"journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"human-ecology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"huec","sideBox":"Learn more about [Human Ecology](http://link.springer.com/journal/10745)","snPcode":"10745","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10745/3","title":"Human Ecology","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false},"keywords":"Assemblage, local governance, natural resources","lastPublishedDoi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9261168/v1","lastPublishedDoiUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-9261168/v1","license":{"name":"CC BY 4.0","url":"https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"},"manuscriptAbstract":"\u003cp\u003eMangrove ecosystems are under increasing pressure from coastal development, land-use change, and weak governance arrangements, particularly in regions where institutional capacity is limited. In northern Honduras, these pressures intersect with fragmented management systems and strong dependence on local resource use. This study examines mangrove governance in four municipalities of northern Honduras through a qualitative analysis of local practices, institutional arrangements, and stakeholder interactions. Drawing on interviews, field observations, and document review, we show that governance operates as an adaptive and uneven configuration rather than a fixed institutional model. Formal rules shape part of the system, but everyday practices, informal coordination, and community-led initiatives play a decisive role in sustaining conservation efforts. Our findings highlight persistent fragmentation of governance responsibility, short funding cycles, and limited coordination across levels of government, which weaken long-term planning. At the same time, local actors maintain a wide range of actions from reforestation to monitoring that function with minimal support yet remain essential for the continuity of mangrove stewardship. Material elements such as zoning clarity, boundary markers, and basic enforcement tools further influence what responses are feasible. By situating these elements within an assemblage perspective, the study shows how governance outcomes emerge from the interaction of discursive, institutional, and material conditions. The results offer a grounded understanding of the factors shaping mangrove stewardship in Honduras and point to the importance of strengthening the conditions that enable local action.\u003c/p\u003e","manuscriptTitle":"Practicing governance: Local perspectives on mangrove management in northern Honduras","msid":"","msnumber":"","nonDraftVersions":[{"code":1,"date":"2026-04-08 14:42:37","doi":"10.21203/rs.3.rs-9261168/v1","editorialEvents":[{"type":"communityComments","content":0},{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"130946844648215915578527743695122434104","date":"2026-05-06T16:40:47+00:00","index":"hide","fulltext":""},{"type":"reviewersInvited","content":"","date":"2026-04-02T11:26:32+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"editorAssigned","content":"","date":"2026-04-02T07:28:06+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"checksComplete","content":"","date":"2026-04-02T07:27:53+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""},{"type":"submitted","content":"Human Ecology","date":"2026-03-29T22:53:22+00:00","index":"","fulltext":""}],"status":"published","journal":{"display":true,"email":"[email protected]","identity":"human-ecology","isNatureJournal":false,"hasQc":true,"allowDirectSubmit":false,"externalIdentity":"huec","sideBox":"Learn more about [Human Ecology](http://link.springer.com/journal/10745)","snPcode":"10745","submissionUrl":"https://submission.nature.com/new-submission/10745/3","title":"Human Ecology","twitterHandle":"","acdcEnabled":true,"dfaEnabled":true,"editorialSystem":"em","reportingPortfolio":"Springer Hybrid","inReviewEnabled":true,"inReviewRevisionsEnabled":false}}],"origin":"","ownerIdentity":"fad17320-9237-4b7b-8070-81cfdaca0505","owner":[],"postedDate":"April 8th, 2026","published":true,"recentEditorialEvents":[{"type":"reviewerAgreed","content":"130946844648215915578527743695122434104","date":"2026-05-06T16:40:47+00:00","index":22,"fulltext":""}],"rejectedJournal":[],"revision":"","amendment":"","status":"under-review","subjectAreas":[],"tags":[],"updatedAt":"2026-04-08T14:42:37+00:00","versionOfRecord":[],"versionCreatedAt":"2026-04-08 14:42:37","video":"","vorDoi":"","vorDoiUrl":"","workflowStages":[]},"version":"v1","identity":"rs-9261168","journalConfig":"researchsquare"},"__N_SSP":true},"page":"/article/[identity]/[[...version]]","query":{"redirect":"/article/rs-9261168","identity":"rs-9261168","version":["v1"]},"buildId":"XKTyCvWXoU3ODBz1xrDgd","isFallback":false,"isExperimentalCompile":false,"dynamicIds":[84888],"gssp":true,"scriptLoader":[]}