Including Human Well-Being in 

Resource Management with 

Cultural Ecosystem Services

Rebecca J. Ingram, Kirsten M. Leong, Jamison Gove, Supin 

Wongbusarakum

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

National Marine Fisheries Service

Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-PIFSC-112

https://doi.org/10.25923/q8ya-8t22

November 2020
1 

Including Human Well-Being in 

Resource Management with Cultural 

Ecosystem Services

Rebecca J. Ingram1,2, Kirsten M. Leong2, Jamison Gove2, Supin 

Wongbusarakum3 

1 Azura Consulting LLC

446 Trail View Lane

Garland, TX 75043

2 Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center

National Marine Fisheries Service

1845 Wasp Boulevard

Honolulu, HI 96818

3 Joint Institute for Marine and Atmospheric Research

University of Hawaiʻi

1000 Pope Road

Honolulu, HI 96822

NOAA Technical Memorandum NMFS-PIFSC-112

November 2020

U.S. Department of Commerce

Wilbur L. Ross, Jr., Secretary

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Neil A. Jacobs, Ph.D., Acting NOAA Administrator

National Marine Fisheries Service

Chris Oliver, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries 
2 

Recommended citation

Ingram RJ, Leong KM, Gove J, Wongbusarakum S. 2020. Including human well-being in 

resource management with cultural ecosystem services. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NOAA 

Technical Memorandum NOAA-TM-NMFS-PIFSC-112, 94 p. doi:10.25923/q8ya-8t22

Copies of this report are available from

Ecosystem Sciences Division 

Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center

National Marine Fisheries Service

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

1845 Wasp Boulevard, Building #176

Honolulu, Hawaii 96818 

Or online at

https://repository.library.noaa.gov/
3 

Table of Contents

Executive Summary........................................................................................................................ 7

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 8

NOAA’s West Hawai‘i Integrated Ecosystem Assessment........................................................ 8

Cultural Ecosystem Services Support Human Well-Being ........................................................ 9

Cultural Ecosystem Services in Resource Management ........................................................... 10

Research Objective ................................................................................................................... 12

Methods......................................................................................................................................... 13

Data Collection ......................................................................................................................... 13

Data Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 14

Human Subjects Review ........................................................................................................... 15

Results ........................................................................................................................................... 16

Cultural Ecosystem Service Frequencies and Co-Occurrences ................................................ 16

Place-based Indicators .............................................................................................................. 19

Emergent Themes ..................................................................................................................... 21

Interviewee perspectives on changes in environmental condition ........................................ 21

Social system changes create barriers to CES ...................................................................... 25

Recreation provides access to cultural ecosystem services and human well-being .............. 30

Governance and Management ............................................................................................... 33

Social Networks .................................................................................................................... 37

Reciprocity ............................................................................................................................ 40

Discussion ..................................................................................................................................... 46

Cultural Ecosystem Services Bundling ..................................................................................... 46

Bundling Reciprocity with CES............................................................................................ 47

Monitoring Cultural Ecosystem Services with a diverse set of indicators ............................... 47

Ecological foundation of cultural ecosystem services .......................................................... 47

Collecting community values, beliefs, and perspectives ...................................................... 48

Creating and conserving access to Cultural Ecosystem Services ......................................... 49

Next Steps ..................................................................................................................................... 52

Mahalo Piha (Acknowledgements) ............................................................................................... 53

Literature Cited ............................................................................................................................. 54

Appendix A Interview Guide For Community Leaders .......................................................... 59

Appendix B Interview Guide For Resource Managers ............................................................ 61

Appendix C Data Analysis Codebook ..................................................................................... 63
4 

Appendix D Kai Kuleana Network Analysis ........................................................................... 75

Raw Interview Data Related to Kai Kuleana Network ............................................................. 77

Interview 1 ............................................................................................................................ 77

Interview 2 ............................................................................................................................ 78

Interview 3 ............................................................................................................................ 80

Interview 4 ............................................................................................................................ 81

Interview 5 ............................................................................................................................ 84

Interview 6 ............................................................................................................................ 85

Interview 7 ............................................................................................................................ 87

Interview 8 ............................................................................................................................ 90

Interview 9 ............................................................................................................................ 92

Interview 10 .......................................................................................................................... 94
5 

List of Tables

Table 1. CES codebook definitions in relation to coastal and marine areas ................................. 15

Table 2. Ages of interviewees by decade ...................................................................................... 16

Table 3. Percentage of interviews that discussed each CES and total number of coded sections 

for each CES in all interviews. Blue boxes represent the most frequently mentioned CES.

........................................................................................................................................... 17

Table 4. Categories and explanations for indicator prioritization spreadsheet. Categories for 

prioritization are in the form of “Yes/No” questions. ....................................................... 20

Table 5. Interviewee identified causes for changes in coral reef and ocean characteristics. Each 

number is out of the 24 total interviews. Empty boxes represent 0 interviews. ............... 22

Table 6. Interviewees described how changes in land use and ownership impacted their access 

and created barriers to CES and human well-being, as exemplified in supporting quotes.

........................................................................................................................................... 28

Table 7. Indicators related to governance and resource management, identified via interview 

analysis. Supporting quotes represent evidence of why each indicator was suggested. ... 35
6 

List of Figures

Figure 1. Geographic boundaries (blue line) of the West Hawai‘i Integrated Ecosystem 

Assessment within the Hawaiian Islands. Map created by Joey Lecky. ............................. 8

Figure 2. Cultural Ecosystem Services in Resource Management ............................................... 11

Figure 3. Relative number of co-occurrences between each CES and all other codes. ................ 18

Figure 4. Total number of co-occurrences between CES and other CES only (e.g., Aesthetics cooccurring with Spirituality is counted; Aesthetics co-occurring with Positive Emotions is 

not counted). ..................................................................................................................... 19

Figure 5. Representation of results from Kai Kuleana Network interviews. ................................ 38

Figure 6. Monitoring Cultural Ecosystem Services, Benefits, and Values through Meanings, 

Experiences, and Ecosystem Components ........................................................................ 51
7 

Executive Summary

In this study, we investigated the complex ways in which human well-being is related to the 

coastal and marine environment by looking closely at the ways communities impact, rely on, and 

steward the West Hawaiʻi region. We endeavored to understand how people in West Hawaiʻi 

experience and value cultural ecosystem services (CES) and how those CES influence human 

well-being. Ultimately, we sought to understand how resource management can include 

information about human well-being to support and enhance management practices. 

We collected data by conducting in-depth, semi-structured interviews with community members 

in West Hawaiʻi. Community collaboration was an essential part of this work to ensure that 

indicators are relevant, appropriate, and represent local values and beliefs. Interviews framed 

questions in a manner that prompted interviewees to discuss what CES they experience, connect 

with, benefit from, and value. 

This research aimed to enhance ecosystem assessments specifically by creating place-based, 

biocultural indicators of CES. Our literature review and interview data informed the creation of a 

set of place-based indicators focused on representing CES and human well-being within the 

West Hawaiʻi Integrated Ecosystem Assessment program.

In addition to identifying indicators, our study investigated the diverse ways that people discuss 

CES in relation to human well-being. We observed the frequency that each CES was mentioned 

during interviews and how they were bundled together rather than discussed separately from one 

another. Interviews revealed perspectives on changes in the environment and social system and 

how those changes related to human well-being. Certain changes were credited with impacting 

access to and creating barriers to CES. Recreation, a CES discussed in about 80% of all 

interviews, was notable in how it provided access to a multitude of other CES. Our results also 

highlight that human well-being depends not only on abundant ecosystems, but also on the 

opportunity for reciprocity between people and place. 

In our discussion, we consider the importance of how interviewees intertwined CES during 

interview conversations, an important concept called “bundling.” We then discuss how our 

analysis shaped a robust framework for monitoring CES. Our framework has three overlapping 

segments: ecological foundation of CES; community values, beliefs, and perspectives; and 

creating and conserving access to CES for communities. 

We conclude that our study has helped in finding ways to better integrate CES and human wellbeing into resource management. Our study brings clarity to the different ways that CES and 

human well-being can be better utilized in contemporary resource management.
8 

Introduction

Cultural ecosystem services (CES), commonly referred to as non-material benefits received from 

the environment, are critical to human well-being yet are largely excluded from resource 

management (Chan et al. 2012; Fish et al. 2016b; Infield et al. 2015; Millennium Ecosystem 

Assessment 2005b; Pascua et al. 2017). Destruction or reduction of CES can cause harm to 

human well-being, which can lead to a potential reduction in community resilience to socialecological changes (Infield et al. 2015). Due to the importance of CES to human well-being, 

identifying how to better include them in resource management is paramount. 

NOAA’s West Hawai‘i Integrated Ecosystem Assessment

The West Hawai‘i Integrated Ecosystem Assessment (IEA), a National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) program, is part of NOAA’s efforts to implement 

ecosystem-based management throughout multiple regions. In the Pacific Islands Region, the 

IEA encompasses the west coast of Hawai‘i Island (Figure 1). The overarching goal of an IEA is 

to understand a region’s social-ecological system via monitoring indicators in order to inform 

science-based strategies of resource management (Gove et al. 2019; Levin et al. 2009). 

Figure 1. Geographic boundaries (blue line) of the West Hawai‘i Integrated Ecosystem 

Assessment within the Hawaiian Islands. Map created by Joey Lecky.

The productive marine ecosystem and engaged communities of West Hawaiʻi are the backbone 

of the region. However, the ecological processes underlying this dynamic region are increasingly 

being altered. Local stressors such as population increase, coastal development, land-based 

sources of pollution (e.g., wastewater), fishing pressure, and damaging impacts from tourism 

(e.g., habitat destruction, sunscreen pollution, and animal harassment) are undermining marine 

ecosystem function (Downs et al. 2016; Friedlander et al. 2008; Gove et al. 2019; State of 

Hawaii 2010). Impacts of climate change, such as increasing sea surface temperatures and rising 

sea levels, are exacerbating these local stressors and contributing to the overall decline in the 
9 

condition of coral reef ecosystems in West Hawai‘i (Maynard et al. 2019). For example, elevated 

ocean temperatures in 2014 and 2015 led to the most destructive coral reef bleaching ever 

recorded in this region (Department of Aquatic Resources 2017). Ultimately, these threats 

compromise the numerous services, goods, and benefits that the marine ecosystem provides, 

such as opportunities for fishing and gathering, social cohesion, and cultural practices. Society 

depends on and values opportunities such as these, so it is important to understand how society is 

responding (in both positive and negative ways) to these threats and how they impact human 

well-being. 

IEAs have begun expanding focus to encompass human well-being (Harvey et al. 2016; Levin et 

al. 2016) and incorporate human dimension indicators in relation to regional management goals 

(Dillard et al. 2013). However, the large majority of human dimension indicators used in marine 

resource management, including IEAs, monitor economic rather than sociocultural factors 

(Hornborg et al. 2019). Current efforts within the West Hawai‘i IEA include filling this gap by 

investigating how human well-being is related to the coastal and marine environment.

Diverse communities of place and interest thrive in West Hawai‘i. For our study purposes, we 

looked closely at communities oriented around marine environmental stewardship, conservation, 

and management. We believe that by working with these community members, we can 

encompass a broad range of values, beliefs, and perspectives that the larger population of West 

Hawai‘i may share.

Cultural Ecosystem Services Support Human Well-Being

Ecosystems are fundamentally intertwined with human well-being (Ash et al. 2012), or the 

ability of people to live a life that they value (Wongbusarakum et al. 2014). Human well-being 

can be defined as “a state of being with others and the environment, which arises when human 

needs are met, when individuals and communities can act meaningfully to pursue their goals, and 

when individuals and communities enjoy a satisfactory quality of life” (Breslow et al. 2016). The 

exact definition of human well-being changes according to regional nuances and local values 

(Wongbusarakum et al. 2014), emphasizing the need for place-based focus when exploring the 

topic. Ecosystem contributions to human well-being are both material and non-material, 

including physical, spiritual, social, and/or emotional aspects (Amberson et al. 2016; Chan et al. 

2012). 

There is a clear need to understand how changes in ecosystem dynamics impact human wellbeing (Hernández-Morcillo et al. 2013). Ignoring connections between ecosystems and human 

well-being can undermine the sustainability of the region and resource management goals (Ash 

et al. 2012) by excluding critical information, including how society is positively influencing 

ecosystems. 

Ecosystem assessments have begun incorporating human well-being in various ways, largely 

including it through economic and secondary data. A less common way to incorporate human 

well-being in ecosystem assessments is through CES, a category within the ecosystem service 

framework (Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005a). CES have been defined as non-material 

benefits that people derive through their relationship with an ecosystem, such as spiritual values, 

social relations, and emotional experiences (Chan et al. 2011; Millennium Ecosystem 

Assessment 2005b). CES are critical to a person’s well-being; among other reasons, they foster 
10

and maintain connections to place, identity, values, and experiences (Chan et al. 2012; Fish et al. 

2016a; Infield et al. 2015). In recent studies, West Hawaiʻi stakeholders perceive CES as vital

(McMillen et al. 2017; Pascua et al. 2017), yet also the most vulnerable to ecosystem change 

(Ingram et al. 2018). This calls attention to the need to better understand how CES can be 

incorporated into management. 

Cultural Ecosystem Services in Resource Management

Resource management would benefit from research that can explain the intricacies of how 

communities are identifying, appreciating, and interacting with ecosystem services, and this is 

especially true for cultural services (Pascua et al. 2017). Although difficult, CES have been 

included in resource management in various ways, including directly integrating indigenous 

knowledge (Tipa and Nelson 2008), building place-based indicators grounded in indigenous 

knowledge (Pascua et al. 2017), applying indigenous knowledge to understand the CES present 

in a geographic region (Gould et al. 2015), and applying local knowledge and perceptions to 

understand how different groups of society interact with a place (Biedenweg et al. 2017). 

Investigating CES helps ensure they are considered in decision-making alongside other regularly 

included services (Gould et al. 2015); however, difficulties with integration still remain 

prevalent. 

Participants in early stages of this research described human well-being and ecosystems as a 

holistic system in which people are both environmental stressors and stewards rather than 

thinking about components of an ecosystem as separate entities as some researchers or resource 

managers typically do (Leong et al. 2019). However, without teasing apart components of the 

system, crucial considerations related to CES and human well-being run the risk of being 

overlooked by management. In an effort to develop strategies that balance both of these 

perspectives, our research uses ecosystem monitoring indicators to incorporate CES and human 

well-being specifically. 

Indicator suites can be used to elucidate social-ecological system conditions and dynamics and 

speak to whether the system is doing better or worse according to a decided metric (Rice and 

Rochet 2005). Selecting indicators for any assessment can be precarious since, as Hicks et al. 

(2016) states, indicators “describe what exists, and in doing so, they define what is important.” 

Management can therefore carry a huge influence within a place simply based on which 

indicators are selected for monitoring. Including only indicators of ecological, biological, and 

physical conditions may not be representative of the social conditions. 

Hundreds of biophysical and ecological indicators have been suggested in ecosystem 

assessments, but indicators that represent non-economic social dynamics are largely lacking 

(Breslow et al. 2017; Hornborg et al. 2019). Connections between human well-being and 

ecosystem services are also missing (Dillard et al. 2013), including indicators that measure the 

impact of CES on human well-being (Hernández-Morcillo et al. 2013). In a recent review, 

Rodrigues and Kruse (2017) reviewed 72 studies focused on marine and coastal CES and found 

that just over half of all studies linked CES to human well-being, only two studies created 

indicators that could potentially measure this link, and no studies actually measured the 

contributions of CES to human well-being (Rodrigues and Kruse 2017). 
11

Current indicators that focus on the social dimension of social-ecological systems largely focus

on economic or easily quantified aspects of the system (Figure 2; Breslow et al. 2016; Dacks et 

al. 2019). The social indicators that the West Hawai‘i IEA currently monitor include population, 

tourism, shoreline modification, new development, on-site waste disposal systems, and fishing

pressure (Gove et al. 2019). Of these indicators, it is unknown which and by what magnitude 

they are monitoring ecosystem contributions to CES or human well-being in West Hawai‘i. This 

unknown is not uncommon; the link between measurable, usually biophysical, indicator values 

and how much that value actually matters to or affects people is widely understudied (Olander et 

al. 2018). 

Figure 2. Cultural Ecosystem Services in Resource Management

Indicators that measure CES and human well-being are more robust when developed through a 

participatory process (Biedenweg et al. 2016; Breslow et al. 2016; Hernández-Morcillo et al. 

2013; Pascua et al. 2017). When indicators are developed through a local, participatory process, 

community members are more likely to understand, accept, and support both the process and the 

use of indicators in management (Sterling et al. 2017b). Locally developed indicators can also 

lead to challenges, as indicators suggested by community members may be substantially harder 

to monitor due to time commitment, costs, and feasibility of having locally scaled indicators 

(Sterling et al. 2017b). Despite these challenges, though, locally developed indicators are more 

likely to reflect community member values and the entire social-ecological system. 

More often than not, CES do not exist separately from each other or other services, but are 

interwoven with them (Chan et al. 2011; Klain et al. 2014; Pascua et al. 2017). This leads to 
12

difficulty in managing for CES specifically and individually without accounting for other 

provisioning or regulating services (Chan et al. 2012; Gould et al. 2015). For example, fishing in 

Hawai‘i contributes to multiple ecosystem services at once, including subsistence (provisioning), 

knowledge transmission (cultural), and social cohesion (cultural) (Grafeld et al. 2017). One way 

to address this is by defining and assessing CES at a local level which can address the complex 

nature of CES and their frequent overlap and relationship with other ecosystem service 

categories (Infield et al. 2015). 

Our approach to developing CES indicators is rooted in local community values and beliefs for 

managing social-ecological systems. Our method for developing indicators used open-ended, indepth interviews since this requires local community input. These types of interviews are an 

effective way to approach indicator development because it allows people to freely list ideas and 

potential indicators in a way that is less structured or influenced by a researcher’s methods or 

strategies (Gould et al. 2015). This type of approach, often referred to as biocultural, will lead to 

indicators that are place-based, culturally grounded, and reflect both human well-being and the 

resilience of the associated ecosystem (Sterling et al. 2017b). 

Research Objective

In this study, we investigated community values, beliefs, and perspectives in order to develop 

place-based, biocultural indicators of coastal and marine based CES in relation to human wellbeing. Specifically, we investigated how community members understand and experience CES, 

how that relates to their well-being, and how this understanding can inform place-based 

ecosystem monitoring indicators. 
13

Methods

We invoked a qualitative, mixed inductive and deductive approach to complete this research. 

Data Collection

A detailed literature review, input from field experts, group discussions, and pilot interviews 

were conducted to guide the development of the semi-structured, in-depth interviews used in this 

research (see Leong et al. (2019) and Ingram et al. (2019) for detailed review). Interview 

materials included a consent form, a set of guiding questions, and interviewer prompts including 

a list of human well-being domains pertaining to CES, examples of corresponding attributes for 

each domain, and examples of question prompts for each domain (for copies of these materials 

see Ingram et al. (2019)). 

Our previous work identified key considerations that guided our selection of interviewees; 

including cultural, community, research, and governance/management conditions (Leong et al. 

2019). We choose interview participants using purposive sampling for key informants (Palinkas 

et al. 2015) involved in West Hawai‘i ocean-based conservation. This was the most appropriate 

sampling style for this research since we were seeking informants with a high level of specific 

knowledge on certain topics. Snowball sampling was also utilized, which identified an additional 

7 interviewees. 

We used two semi-structured interview guides (Appendices A and B) during the interviewing 

process; one oriented towards community leaders (Appendix A) and one oriented towards 

individuals in paid resource management roles (Appendix B). Both interview guides addressed 

research questions directly and indirectly. Question prompts from interview guides were only 

used if the interviewee had not already discussed a CES or human well-being domain. No 

interview followed the guide specifically and no interview was identical. The depth and scope of 

any given topic varied depending on the interviewee’s expertise and interests. 

We conducted interviews between April 23, 2018 and March 20, 2019 (this includes pilot 

interviews mentioned above). A total of 24 interviews were completed with 31 people. Three 

interviews were group interviews (group sizes: 2, 4, and 5). One interviewee was interviewed 

twice, both within a group and individually due to this interviewee’s multiple roles in the 

community and a lack of time to explore those roles in the group interview. All interviews were 

conducted by one interviewer. 

Interviews lasted from 45 minutes to 2.5 hours, took place in a mutually agreed upon location 

(e.g., interviewee’s house, coffee shops, public park), and were audio-recorded. Detailed notes 

on interviews were written up within 48 hours of interview completion. The interviewer 

transcribed 7 interviews, and 17 interviews were transcribed by a professional transcriptionist. 

The interviewer checked all the transcripts for accuracy. Interviewees were also sent a copy of 

their transcribed interview to review for accuracy and inform the interviewer of any necessary 

redactions. 
14

Data Analysis

We created an initial codebook prior to coding interviews using a deductive process based on 

research questions (Saldaña, 2013). The codebook consisted of a list of human well-being 

domains, a list of CES, and other topics related to human well-being. We used multiple sources 

to create this codebook: key references (Biedenweg et al. 2016; Breslow et al. 2016; Dillard et al. 

2013; Gould et al. 2014; Michalos et al. 2011; Millennium Ecosystem Assessment 2005a, 2005b; 

Pascua et al. 2017; Smith and Clay 2010; Smith et al. 2013; Wongbusarakum et al. 2014); 

preliminary research (Leong et al. 2019 and Ingram et al. 2018); and collaboration with similar 

research being conducted separately from this work but in the same timeline (Adams et al. 2018). 

The codebook went through multiple iterations during this process.

All audio files were imported into NVivo software for analysis (version 12 Pro, QSR 

International, Inc.). We conducted an initial phase of coding by identifying relevant sections of 

each interview that corresponded to pre-identified codes in the codebook and attaching the 

appropriate codes (i.e., selecting and labeling text). New codes were inductively added to the 

codebook as needed for any new concepts or themes that arose during initial coding (Saldaña, 

2013). New codes included new concepts (e.g., “everything or life”) and codes named after the 

actual words used by interviewees (identified as “in vivo codes”). 

Next, we completed a comprehensive coding phase. This consisted of reading through each 

interview to verify the accuracy of existing coded sections, discover any sections of text that 

were missing codes, or re-code sections based on the updated codebook. This process allowed 

for any single section of an interview transcript to have multiple codes attributed to it, which is 

also known as a co-occurrence. 

We structured the final codebook in multiple levels. A level one code is a main category and may 

have “sub-codes” nested underneath it. Similarly, a nested level two code may have “sub-codes” 

nested underneath it as well. The final codebook had 30 level one codes, 47 level two codes, 100 

level three codes, 44 level four codes, and 1 level five code (Appendix C). One of the 30 level 

one codes included, “well-being,” under which the domains of human well-being listed in Leong 

et al. (2019) became sub-codes. “Well-being” also included the sub-code “CES,” which included 

all CES and their associated sub-codes. 

After completing the coding process for all interviews, we had the final list of CES to explore 

during analysis (Table 1; see Appendix C for CES sub-codes). The final list of CES did not 

include any novel CES that we had not previously read in literature (largely due to the 

exploration of West Hawai‘i CES in Pascua et al. (2017)). Metadata for this project and the 

resulting data set with codes by interview are available through NOAA’s InPort enterprise 

management system (PIFSC 2020). Additional details for co-occurrences of codes and 

development of potential cultural ecosystem service indicators are included in the supplemental 

material file.

After analysis, we virtually presented our findings to available interviewees to ensure that our 

interpretation captured interviewee meaning and correctly portrayed interviewee perspectives 

and beliefs, a process called member-checking (Glesne 2011). This process also ensured that we 

did not reveal more information than they intended to be public (Glesne 2011; Seidman 2006). 
15

Table 1. CES codebook definitions in relation to coastal and marine areas

aesthetics satisfaction or meaning from visual characteristics or beauty of the reefs or 

coast; also includes satisfaction from sensory experiences (e.g., soundscapes, 

feel of wind.)

bequest mention of importance of reefs for future generations; includes sharing 

experiences with children and grandchildren

ceremony mention of importance of reefs (or greater coastal/marine area) for ceremonies 

education and 

knowledge

local knowledge about the coastal and marine environment

existence implication that coastal and marine environments matter simply because they 

exist, because they are a part of Earth, and/or because they have a right to exist

fulfilling 

stewardship

caring for coastal and marine environment because it provides 

benefit/satisfaction to a person; ability to care for resources and environment

heritage, 

tradition, 

culture

multi-generational interactions/connections with natural resources; connection 

to cultural traditions, stories, and/or past events; archaeological and historic 

sites; cultural resources; acceptable historical change

identity sense of self, community, personal or communal identity, and/or home in 

relation to the coastal or marine environment

inspiration specifically, for art or other forms of creative expression; local artistic or 

creative practices

recreation playing, leisure, and activities related to coastal and marine environment; 

includes extractive and non-extractive activities

sacred expressions of coastal and marine environment having sacred or religious 

significance

sense of place reefs or coastal environment contribute to one’s sense of belonging or feeling 

at home; sense of self, community, and/or home related to the coastal and 

marine environment

social relations strengthening ties in family or community; presence of strong social ties or 

networks; sense of community; trust in neighbors

spirituality metaphysical forces larger than oneself or beyond one’s comprehension; 

interacting with the coast/ocean to perpetuate spiritual beliefs and practices 

(e.g., divine power)

Human Subjects Review

This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the University of Hawai‘i 

Institutional Review Board with written informed consent from all subjects. All subjects gave 

written informed consent in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The project has exempt 

status for Human Subjects Research from the University of Hawai‘i Committee on Human 

Studies under the exempt project 19449, Socioeconomics of Western Pacific Fisheries. All 

consent forms, raw data, and transcripts are stored electronically and are password-protected. 
16

Results

Interviewees’ ages ranged from 25 to 86 years old (Table 2). Out of 31 interviewees, 21 were 

born in Hawai‘i (9 born in West Hawai‘i specifically). All interviewees had spent a minimum of 

10 years cumulatively living in West Hawai‘i. 

All interviewees were involved in environmental conservation, most were involved via multiple 

routes (e.g., one interviewee was a resource manager and a volunteer for another organization). 

The following totals will not equal 24 due to this overlap in roles. A total of 10 interviewees 

were currently in or retired from a state or federal resource management position. A total of 7 

interviewees worked for non-governmental resource management organizations. A total of 9 

interviewees worked for a private sector company that has a large focus on ocean conservation. 

A total of 12 interviewees are a member of an organization/network focused on place-based 

marine conservation in West Hawai‘i, called the Kai Kuleana Network. 

Table 2. Ages of interviewees by decade

Decade

# of 

interviewees

20s 2

30s 11

40s 2

50s 3

60s 8

70s 4

80s 1

Cultural Ecosystem Service Frequencies and Co-Occurrences 

To determine results, CES that had sub-codes were aggregated with their sub-codes to avoid 

double counting. For example, the code Social Relations was aggregated with its two sub-codes, 

Family Specifically and Sharing, to become one single code. Where relevant, sub-code meanings 

and nuances are teased apart and explored in Results: Emergent Themes. 

Out of the 24 interviews conducted, a total of 6 CES (out of 14) were mentioned during the most 

interviews: Fulfilling Stewardship (88%); Heritage, Tradition, Culture (83%); Recreation (79%); 

Sense of Place (79%); Social Relations (79%); and Spirituality (79%) (Table 3). These six CES 

also had the highest number of coded sections within interviews. Identity was the only CES 

mentioned in over half of interviews that also had a high number of coded sections. This was due 

to 2 interviews having a higher than average number of coded sections for Identity (10 and 7 

versus the average of 2–3 coded sections). 
17

Table 3. Percentage of interviews that discussed each CES and total number of coded 

sections for each CES in all interviews. Blue boxes represent the most frequently 

mentioned CES.

Cultural Ecosystem Service # of interviews # coded sections

Fulfilling Stewardship 88% 67

Heritage, Tradition, Culture 83% 98

Recreation 79% 56

Sense of Place 79% 69

Social Relations 79% 55

Spirituality 79% 47

Education and Knowledge 58% 26

Identity 58% 49

Bequest 54% 24

Aesthetics 42% 15

Existence 38% 12

Sacred 17% 5

Inspiration 8% 2

Ceremony 4% 4

*Identity was the only CES with a high # of sections coded that was not a part of 

the most frequently coded CES.

Relationships can be determined by looking closely at individual segments of text that have 

multiple codes, also known as a co-occurrence. A co-occurrence exists when a single portion of 

the interview text is given more than one code. For example, multiple codes (e.g., provisioning 

services and fulfilling stewardship) are represented in the following quote: 

We have to ʻai1

 of this place in order to understand its value to us. Without that, why take 

care of a place, yeah? If you cannot eat from it. (23FB)

Co-occurrences were examined between individual CES and all codes that exist in the code 

book, which amounted to 421 co-occurrences (Figure 3). This was done in order to better 

understand which concepts (i.e., codes) are associated with CES, whether there are CES that 

do/do not get discussed individually versus together and illuminate which concepts may be a part 

of larger constructs. The CES with the highest number of co-occurrences were Sense of Place 

(67); Heritage, Tradition, Culture (64); Recreation (48); Identity (43); and Social Relations (42). 

Many of the co-occurrences consisted between two CES (e.g., Sense of Place and Recreation), 

1 ʻAi: to eat or food
18

but co-occurrences also existed between CES and non-CES codes (e.g., Fulfilling Stewardship 

and Reciprocity).

Figure 3. Relative number of co-occurrences between each CES and all other codes.

All co-occurrences with a frequency greater than 10 were between a CES and another CES (i.e., 

co-occurrences between CES and non-CES codes, or non-CES codes and other non-CES codes, 

all had a frequency of less than 10). While many CES co-occurred with another CES at least one 

time, only six specific co-occurrences happened 10 times or more: Heritage, Tradition, 

Culture/Spirituality (11 co-occurrences); Sense of Place/Identity (12); Heritage, Tradition, 

Culture/Identity (13); Heritage, Tradition, Culture/Social Relations (15); Heritage, Tradition, 

Culture/Fulfilling Stewardship (17); and Heritage, Tradition, Culture/Sense of Place (23). This 

could imply a strong relationship between these CES specifically, which is relevant when 

creating indicators. 

Additionally, the total number of times that each CES co-occurred with another CES ranged 

from 2–11. This understanding can imply that one indicator may be able to monitor multiple 

CES successfully. Four CES co-occurred with 11 other CES (Fulfilling Stewardship; Heritage, 

Tradition, Culture; Sense of Place; and Social Relation) suggesting that these four CES 

encapsulate many other cultural services, goods, and benefits (Figure 4).
19

Figure 4. Total number of co-occurrences between CES and other CES only (e.g., 

Aesthetics co-occurring with Spirituality is counted; Aesthetics co-occurring with 

Positive Emotions is not counted).

We expected each CES to be mentioned at least once per interview given our attempt to prompt 

for every CES specifically. It is important to recognize that of 24 interviews, 6 CES were 

mentioned in over 75% of interviews: Fulfilling Stewardship; Heritage, Tradition, Culture; 

Recreation; Sense of Place; Social Relations; and Spirituality. These CES were also mentioned 

the most frequently (i.e., more than once) during interviews, along with Identity. Since this 

subset of CES was brought up more often than others, we can attempt to understand why and the 

significance of this in relation to management. The less frequently mentioned/discussed CES 

may be more difficult to talk about, or could be related to the way that interviewees are currently 

valuing CES (which can change easily depending on the context, conversation, and current 

events). Understanding these nuances is important for informing future work by ensuring that 

nothing gets left out of management decisions despite a tendency for the topic to be left 

undiscussed.

Place-based Indicators

We created a place-based list of potential indicators of CES using literature and interviews (see 

Supplementary Information). Creating the list began by compiling all existing indicators related 

to human well-being in relation to marine CES from literature. Using that as a starting point, the 

analyzed interview data were used to identify the relevant indicators, and quotes or concepts next 
20

to each indicator were added. Some quotes or concepts stood out as important but did not yet 

have a matching indicator, so a unique indicator was created. The final list includes over 90 

indicators and identifies what ecosystem service or human well-being domain is represented by 

each indicator. An important aspect of this list is the identification of which ecosystem service 

and human well-being domain is represented by each indicator since that identifies which 

indicators may be capable of monitoring multiple CES and human well-being domains. 

Many indicators support multiple ecosystem services and human well-being domains rather than 

just one. For example, knowing the percentage of residents who express a positive connection to 

the coastal and marine environment could indicate levels of their mental health, sense of place, 

identity, inspiration, and social relations. While literature was used as a reference for identifying 

indicators, interviews alone were used to identify cross-cutting connections to keep the list as 

place-based as possible.

To ensure the list is practical and useful for multiple unique purposes (e.g., cost effective, can 

represent diverse objectives), a method to assist with selecting a smaller set of indicators was 

included. Categories were created to prioritize indicator selection for individual needs (e.g., 

resource managers, scientific assessments, community initiatives) (Table 4). 

Categories take advantage of guidance that emerged from interview data. Literature on indicator 

suites and ranking was used to inform the categories initially; however, most literature was not 

meant to be informative for qualitative indicators of social values or cultural services. Therefore, 

while literature influenced the development, the most crucial aspect of this prioritization was the 

utilization of interview data. 

Table 4. Categories and explanations for indicator prioritization spreadsheet. Categories 

for prioritization are in the form of “Yes/No” questions.

CrossSpanning/Bundled: 

Does the indicator 

measure or tell about 

the status of at least 3 

different ecosystem 

services/human wellbeing domains?

Indicators that can represent multiple CES or human well-being 

domains can be useful when the number of total indicators in a suite is 

limited (due to capacity, funding, time restraints, etc.). This may result 

in an indicator clouding or unequally representing one service/domain 

over another; this can be acceptable so long as that is acknowledged 

upfront and the overall objective can still be addressed. In contrast, if 

an objective is to track one particular service, then the desired answer 

to this category might be ‘No.’

Top CES Mentioned 

in Interviews: 

Is the represented 

CES in the top 6 

mentioned CES in 

interviews?

A ‘Yes’ means the subject matter of the indicator (e.g., ecosystem 

service, ecological resource) was among the most frequently 

mentioned in interviews. This is useful to objectives that want to 

include indicators that might be more salient in West Hawai‘i. While 

the relationship between frequency of mentions and salience is a 

hypothesis, it provides a starting point informed by community 

members in West Hawai‘i rather than similar but not place-based 

studies from a different or global study.
21

Literature Presence: 

Has the indicator been 

identified/discussed in 

other studies or 

management areas to 

track CES previously? 

Indicators that have been identified or discussed in other places or in 

theory may be desirable to an objective if that equates to guidance on 

data collection, understanding the data, etc. In contrast, if an indicator 

has not been in other studies or management areas (i.e., a ‘No’) it is a 

novel indicator that might provide insight differently than other 

indicators, warrant further exploration, and identify the unique 

contributions of this work.

Data: 

Do supporting data 

already exist? Is the 

data set temporal (or 

can it be)? Is the data

set spatial (or can it 

be)?

Determines if data already exist to monitor this indicator. 

Additionally, can be used to identify data gaps for future work. 

Using these categories, a list of CES indicators with existing data was compiled (see 

Supplementary Information). The indicator was labeled as “direct” if interviews identified a 

connection between the particular CES and that indicator’s concept. The indicator was 

considered to be a “proxy” if no connection was found between the CES and indicator from 

interviews, but a co-occurrence existed between the CES and another CES that is directly related 

to the indicator. It is important to note here that the “direct” indicators should still be considered 

less informative than an indicator that uses primary, qualitative data (e.g., surveys). 

Emergent Themes

Common themes emerged during the interview coding process from interview data, field notes, 

and interviewer observations. These themes include connections to CES and human well-being 

domains and are therefore considered relevant here. 

Interviewee perspectives on changes in environmental condition

Interview questions prompted discussions of the condition of the coastal and marine 

environment. When interviewees discussed coral reef and ocean characteristics, the most 

commonly discussed elements were coral specifically (42% interviews), marine species

abundance (50% interviews), coral reefs in general (25% interviews), and the shoreline in 

general (29% interviews). The extreme coral bleaching event that happened in West Hawai‘i 

during 2014 and 2015 was mentioned in seven different interviews despite no specific 

prompting. 

When interviewees discussed changes in coral reef and ocean characteristics, the interviewer 

responded by asking for perspectives on the underlying cause of those changes. Table 5 displays 

interviewee identified causes of environmental changes. Changes in coral health were almost 

exclusively attributed to climate. Changes in marine species abundance were attributed to the 

highest and most diverse set of causes. Changes in coral reefs and shorelines in general had a 

total of seven unique causes.
22

Table 5. Interviewee identified causes for changes in coral reef and ocean 

characteristics. Each number is out of the 24 total interviews. Empty boxes represent 0 

interviews. 

coral health marine species 

abundance

coral reef 

generally

shoreline 

generally

commercial fishing 2 1

overfishing 3 2 1

certain fishing practices 1

access issues 2 1 1

climate 6 1 1

development 4 1 3

invasive species 1

management/regulations 1

pollution 1

population increase 1

tsunami 1 1

Interviewees who see coral reefs frequently (e.g., through diving or snorkeling for work or 

recreation) spoke about changes they had observed. Interviewees used the following 

words/phrases to describe coral observations regarding climate change: rubblefication, die back, 

bleaching, loss, degraded, and damage. One interviewee describes the coral reef that she is most 

familiar with: 

Well, when I first moved here in [1990], I would swim like 200 days a year. I would be, I 

was out there. And the coral health was so much better. It’s pretty much a dead 

wasteland out there now. Even along... And, you know, part of that’s tsunami, part of 

that’s cesspools, part of that is, when I first moved here there were no kayaks. (15FA)

Multiple interviewees also brought up negative feelings that the declines in coral health 

prompted, particularly the coral bleaching events, describing how it affected them directly. 

Words that interviewees used to describe their emotional response to coral health decline include 

fear, sadness, anger, heartbreaking, depressing, and frustrating. One interviewee describes a 

reaction that he sees commonly amongst West Hawai‘i marine scientists:

I think on the emotional level, there has to be some kind of an impact that reflects what's 

happening ecologically. I mean, I know for scientists there are people who are going 

through stages of grief. For our team, absolutely. You know, there’s an emotional toll 

that it takes when it was 50 percent of your coral in a few months. It’s significant. And 

then you get in the water at the same place and you see that it looks totally different and 

it’s hard. And then you’re hoping for recovery after one year. You get in the water a year 
23

later, and it’s worse. There’s an emotional toll for all of that, and you kind of have to 

either ignore or reconcile, somehow. So, for scientists, major emotional impact. (19MB)

Despite this observed negative impact, no one reported observing any behavior changes. One 

interviewee explained the recognition that it was an unprecedented event, yet he did not notice 

behaviors within the general population change in response: 

The coral bleaching, though, I thought would be like a big wake-up call and like warning 

bells for everyone. Everyone who got in the water saw that, whether we were spearfishing 

or counting fish, we noticed something mega had happened and nobody had seen it 

before. It wasn’t in any of the kūpuna2 accounts. Like, there’s no evidence that that ever 

happened before. But if we were to look at the actual change in behavior from that, it 

would be pretty minimal, I think. I don’t think people register this is really strange and 

unusual, but the reason that I came here is still valid and so I’m going to do what I came 

here to do anyway. So there wasn’t this kind of massive recognition that something 

urgent needs to be done outside of the management circles. You know, the Division of 

Aquatic Resources was trying to act with urgency, some of them. (19MB) 

A behavior change might have been expected since so many people in West Hawai‘i view the 

coral reef as part of their community. For example, one interviewee spoke of the coral reef as 

part of her neighborhood when she said, “We had coral bleaching a couple years ago that was 

pretty bad, so when you look at the bay it is not what it was” (15FA). This interviewee was 

intentionally including the coral reef as part of her community by using the word “we.” 

Interviewees discussed a decrease in marine species abundance (i.e., fish, ʻopihi3, limu4

), and 

some did have examples of how their actions have shifted in response. One interviewee gave a 

detailed description of the changes she noticed where she frequently fished, swam, and 

snorkeled: 

We would always go and I mean, you could find everything. Angel’s fish–Potter’s fish5

. 

Now it’s like, you’re lucky if you might see, besides tang6, you’ll see a few butterfly fish7. 

It’s really rare I see parrotfish. Like, this last year, I’ve been in the water more out here 

and I’m like, it’s just gone. Gone. I mean, like, you used to see damselfish8, you used to 

see the āholehole9, you saw all the stuff that you don’t see. The weke10, you don’t even 

see weke. You can find pufferfish11 off one of the walls, they’re still around. Some of the 

2 Kūpuna: (plural form of kupuna) grandparent, ancestor, relative or close friend of the grandparents’ generation; 

also starting point, source; growing

3 ʻOpihi: Limpets in the Cellana family (multiple species exist in West Hawaiʻi) 4 Limu: General name for all kinds of plants living under water, salt and fresh. Also, algae growing in any damp 

places such as ground or rocks. 

5 Potter’s angelfish: Centropyge potteri 6 Yellow tang: Zebrasoma flavescens 7 Butterfly fish: Chaetodontidae family, various species are present in West Hawaiʻi 8 Damselfish: Pomacentridae family, various species are present in West Hawaiʻi 9 Āholehole: Hawaiian flagtail, Kuhlia sandvicensis 10 Weke: full name weke ʻula, Yellowfin goatfish, Mulloidichthys vanicolensis 11 Pufferfish: Diodon hystrix and Diodon holocanthus
24

weke is still down in the, um, like he talks about the ku‘una12, they hang in certain areas 

where there’s current. (15FA)

One interviewee explains how this decline in observed abundance has changed his behavior in 

regard to gathering ʻopihi: 

You know, when I was young enough I could go to places where there was so much ʻopihi

that you would take what you need and not worry that you were denting it. Now when you 

look, sometimes it’s just so little there, you don’t feel good about taking because it’s 

almost like now you’re... it’s at a place of, you know, a point of being depleted as 

[opposed to a] point of being thriving, and being abundant. (4MA)

Another interviewee discussed activities that she and her family do near the ocean, and 

mentioned the decline: 

We, technically, take the kids to play in the water and to fish, just pretend fish. We never 

really fish. Um, from what I’ve heard from fisherman, the fish are dwindling, they’re not 

as easy to catch, they’re smarter, they’ve been overfished. (13FA)

Multiple interviewees attributed increased shoreline access to increased resource use (i.e., fishing 

and gathering) and a decline in marine species. One interviewee stated that before the Queen 

Kaahumanu Highway was built in 1975 it was very difficult, and therefore less common, to visit 

the shoreline, “So that gave the [fishing] grounds time to rest, to recover. But now there are so 

many people, there are so many boats, you know. The resources don’t get chances to recover”

(7MA). 

This same interviewee shared that now it is not uncommon to observe almost 600 cars along a 

particular stretch of shoreline on any given weekend. Another interviewee directly connected 

increased shoreline access with fishery declines: 

Access to the beach was mainly through the ranchers, like Puʻuwaʻawaʻa, down to 

Kīholo, everything was through the ranch land. If you had a boat, then you can come by 

shoreline, by ocean, you could come inside. Everything was—everything was done 

through the ranch land, and once Queen K13 opened up, you know, it became accessible 

to the shoreline, very easily. And you know, we started to see the fish population started 

to dwindle. And limpet, which is the ʻopihi, you know. (6MA)

Many interviewee’s value and trust perspectives from kupuna in regard to fishery decline. An 

interviewee said that while she had seen some declines herself, her biggest reason for believing 

in these species declines was from talking with kūpuna. She said, “In terms of fisheries decline, 

it’s the talking story with the kūpuna that tell me it’s not normal what we’re seeing” (21FB). 

Another example comes from an interviewee who many look to as a kupuna, yet they still gave 

examples of going to kūpuna for insight:

12 Kuʻuna: a place where a net is set in the ocean; interviewee refers to this place regardless of the presence of a net 13 “Queen K” refers to the Queen Kaʻahumanu Highway
25

He’s an elder cousin of mine and the numbers he puts at fish down here in the 40s and 

50s is just astounding. And I’d ask him, ‘Really? That many thousands of fish?’ And he 

says, ‘Certainly.’ (10MA)

At times, interviewees would discuss species’ decline without attributing a specific reason but 

instead talked about the impacts of the decline on their lifestyle. For example, one interviewee 

discussed that now he has to work harder when he goes shoreline fishing, which influences him 

to take home his entire catch rather than throwing certain fish back as he used to commonly do: 

Normally, I throw those back because people use it for bait for ulua14, and stuff, slide 

bait. I took it home because, you know, I walked all the way, that way. What I caught I 

took back. (6MA)

These are examples of observations or beliefs in marine abundance declines from interviewees; 

however, it is important to note that one interviewee shared an opposite perspective. He said that 

he had not noticed any species declines during his 30 years of fishing off of West Hawai‘i. He 

had observed changes in ocean currents, weather patterns, fish life cycles, and human impacts, 

but had never noticed a permanent decrease in fish or catch, only expected cyclical declines.

Interviewees also noted changes to coral reefs and the shoreline generally and attributed changes 

to multiple causes. The diversity in causes is likely due to interviewees discussing different 

locations, species, and activities with which they are most familiar. 

Social system changes create barriers to CES

The topic of access (i.e., increasing/decreasing, access related issues, or generally) was 

mentioned directly during 11 interviews, a total of 24 times, and co-occurred with 46 other 

codes. Access was described in relation to one or more of the following: a physical location, an 

activity, an experience, an emotion, and related values. Sometimes access was used to directly 

refer to a location where a CES was obtained (e.g., a beach provides Recreation and Social 

Relations). Other times, an interviewee described accessing a CES without referring to a specific 

location. For example, one interviewee answered what he would miss about the ocean, in general 

if it were taken away, was access to its existence: 

If I were to miss anything now, immediately right now... is... um... really, access, I guess. 

Through that tranquility and peaceful side of it, that’s what I would miss. I’m not looking 

at any one particular resource, it’s just having [the ocean] there. (4MA) 

Interviewees discussed how access to the coastal and marine environment in West Hawai‘i has 

changed over time. Examples of changes they mentioned included the development of the Queen 

Kaʻahumanu Highway, mandated public shoreline accesses, changes in land ownership, 

guidebooks, and social media. Most interviewees who discussed these changes connected them 

to overuse of and negative impacts to marine resources. 

14 Ulua: Certain species of Carangidae (crevalle, jack, or pompano), the most common is the giant trevally (Caranx 

ignobilis) 
26

The drastic change in access related to the opening of Queen Kaʻahumanu Highway was 

mentioned by 4 interviewees who were alive when it was developed (younger interviewees did 

not mention the highway). These 4 interviewees described how access was more difficult before 

the highway opened because you either had to cross a large amount of difficult terrain or have a 

boat (as described in the previous section). Beyond negatively impacting resources, which 

interviewees described can directly decrease access to CES, one interviewee described another 

way that the increased access impacted his well-being through unintentional lack of respect for 

another person’s place: 

When the road gets put in, Kaʻahumanu Highway in ’75. New airport, [newcomers], 

everyone in the new harbor gets put in, you know, all of those changes coastal-wise have 

dramatically changed. So then when I think about how that impact, naturally you’re 

talking about a lot more residents, tenants, jobs, you know, it’s a good thing. But, then, 

the other thing is that no one took into account is that once you create that puka15, here 

comes [NAME 1] for his baby luau, and we grabbed 300 pounds of heʻe16 for their thing. 

[...] That resource is directly impacted. Did I ask permission? Did I go to [NAME 2]? 

Did I go to [NAME 3]? Did I go to [NAME 4]? So, that creates a guilty conscience in my 

head. Because I was brought up the right way. I should have asked permission before I 

went to someone’s kuleana17 and went and impacted their thing. (14MA)

One interviewee expressed disappointment in the lack of management provided by the State of 

Hawai‘i after the Queen Kaʻahumanu Highway was opened, which demonstrates her value of 

taking care of places within her responsibility (related to the Hawaiian concept of kuleana):

[The State of Hawai‘i] offered no commitment or contribution to the managing of the 

resources. When you’re opening up a previously, you know, maybe optimally exploited 

fishery, then you open it to just relentless pressure. Um, I’m disappointed that as a first 

line of intervention the County didn’t engage. Since they’re the ones that are requiring 

the access. Even if it would have been just as simple as putting up sign and helping with 

signage, you know? Just small measures that if they had been in place when the accesses 

were opened, might’ve done more to inform people. (10MA) 

This perspective was shared by multiple interviewees and is a concept explored further in the 

upcoming section, Reciprocity. 

Another form of access mentioned by multiple interviewees was the public shoreline access 

points created by hotels and resorts due to legal requirements. Interviewees discussed how these 

have impacted marine resources. One interviewee describes the early impacts of these access 

points opening: 

Then, ironically, the building of hotels, so, plenty of people in the community might not 

like the hotels but maybe they worked at the hotels while they were under construction. 

15 Puka: hole; door, entrance, gate, slit, vent, opening 16 Heʻe: Octopus (Polypus spp.) 17 Kuleana: Right, privilege, concern, responsibility, title, jurisdiction, authority, ownership; reason, cause, function, 

justification; small piece of property 
27

They’re in the construction industry. And saw the reefs and would come back by boat or 

whatever and pound the reef. (10MA)

Changes in land ownership was a topic also brought up by some interviewees when discussing 

diverse changes in access. Interviewees pointed out that the many institutional changes that took 

place over the past century took away many of the ways that people were used to purposefully or 

accidentally connecting with their place. Regarding land ownership relating to someone’s 

identity and sense of place, one interviewee said: 

You had that change in how you perceive land, how you perceive yourself, and how 

you’re connected to this place, and if that’s cut off, then you know, you’re alienated from 

the land. And you don’t have as much care as you would if you felt like you were of a 

place. (8MA)

One interviewee discussed how changes in his neighborhood shifted his daily routine of walking 

the shoreline and interacting with neighbors, "Yeah, even if you still can walk [the shoreline] you 

don’t wanna walk it because of all the actions going on there" (2MA). When he uses the word 

“actions,” he is referring to aspects of the neighborhood that he views as dangerous and 

uninviting. One interviewee described how he cannot go to places that are special to him any 

longer, “So I would love to go back. I would love to show my daughter all the places, you know, 

fishing hole, and stuff like that. But access is limited” (6MA). Another interviewee said his 

community is very careful about how they manage their property to ensure that they do not lose 

“control” and thus access to the value of their place:

We have religious connection to that [area]. We have a spiritual connection to that area. 

So as much as possible we don’t like to commercialize that area. So before, we had a lot 

of people that want to have weddings, and stuff like that. So we don’t allow that for that 

reason, once you open that door, you know, then you’re like commercializing it. [...] You 

would lose control over your own property that you’ve been raised on, yeah. (11MA)

A few other interviewees mentioned (directly and indirectly) a shift in how people cared for their 

place when the State of Hawai‘i took ownership of coastal areas and restricted access to certain 

places. Some of these interviewees were upset because they felt the lack of access due to change 

in ownership severed their connection to the place. Several interviewees described ways that they 

are actively working with land owners (State of Hawai‘i and private) to create ways to 

reestablish or maintain physical access to specific locations so that their communities can 

maintain access to cultural benefits (e.g., bequest, ceremony, sense of place, spirituality). 

During five interviews (including two group interviews), guidebooks and social media were 

specifically mentioned to have all but eliminated any difficulties that may have existed in finding 

a location. According to interviewees, this results in overcrowding, exposure of any remaining 

“secret spots,” and an unrelenting pressure on resources. One interviewee describes:

Beaches and what used to be pretty good kept secret spots are now like extremely 

publicized and because of that, you know, people get hurt and then there comes the need 

for creating safety, easier access, and showers and toilets. (26MB)
28

The negative impacts of this increased pressure on coastal and marine resources, results in 

impacts to CES. While explaining this, one interviewee said, “Aloha 18has been exploited. You 

know? [...] In a negative way that then affects kamaʻāina19, and then affects sense of place”

(14MA). 

Two additional ways that increased access to physical locations were using boats to access 

secluded areas with limited or no shoreline access and paving beach entry roads to make driving 

to the beach easier.

Interviewees discussed how changes/impacts to physical access, governance and regulations, 

marine tourism, and environmental conditions create barriers between themselves and CES, 

which affect their well-being (Table 6). In the examples below, interviewees describe ways that 

the condition of the ecological system directly impacts their access to CES and human wellbeing. 

Table 6. Interviewees described how changes in land use and ownership impacted their 

access and created barriers to CES and human well-being, as exemplified in supporting 

quotes. 

Changes/Impacts Quotes

Physical access • creation of shoreline access 

points 

• paved roads to beaches 

• overcrowded beaches, dive 

sites, or fishing spots

• avoiding or changing 

frequently visited locations

“Yeah, even if you still can walk [the 

shoreline] you don’t wanna walk it because 

of all the actions going on there.” (2MA)

Governance & 

Regulations 

• marine management area

• fishery closures 

• changing ownership of 

shoreline property 

• contemporary management

“...A practice is then lost because of 

modern day management systems.” 

(14MA) 

Marine tourism • increases in tour operations

• crowded and unsafe boat 

ramps

• increase in tourists present; 

creating overcrowding of 

sites and overuse of 

resources

“I went away to college for four or five 

years. And, the number of operators, the 

number of boats, I mean, nearly doubled in 

that time. The impacts that they bring and 

the attitudes that they’ve shifted was so, 

um, strong and so palpable, that when we 

came home it definitely felt like a different 

18 Aloha: love, affection, compassion, mercy, sympathy, pity, kindness, grace; greeting, salutation, regards; to love, 

be fond of; to show kindness, mercy, pity, charity, affection; to venerate; to remember with affection; to greet. 19 Kamaʻāina: Native-born, one born in a place; lit. land child
29

Changes/Impacts Quotes

• negative impacts on marine 

resources

place. And the beings that share the space 

with us, definitely have changed their 

attitude as well. It’s almost defensive.” 

(31MB)

Environmental 

conditions 

• declines in marine species 

abundance (ʻopihi, limu, 

reef fish)

• poor water quality (due to 

wastewater and runoff)

• coral bleaching 

• human population increase 

• coastal development 

changing shoreline 

• climate related ocean 

changes (temperatures, 

wind, currents)

“I think the overuse of areas limit what we 

choose to go to. We used to fish a lot more. 

We used to access the ocean a lot more. 

But knowing that it is being overfished, 

that all ʻopihi are being overharvested, we 

have not, we have decided or chose not to 

fish anymore. We don't go pick ʻopihi 

anymore. So it limits what we can do, and 

it’s kind of frustrating because those who 

are trying to do right are being impacted by 

those who choose not to. So where is that, 

you know, that where everybody should be 

equal kind of thing. If everybody takes 

their kuleana then everybody could harvest 

and have, right?” (13FA) 

“Well, I mean just even going to the beach 

up there. I mean, now, or whatever, you're 

like—you just know what’s in the water 

now, you know what I mean. Better not 

have any cuts on me.” (21FB) 

“Yes, [the hotel] provided jobs but it also 

desecrated cultural sites and ran over 

kūpuna iwi20 in this process of the 

development of the old Kona lagoon to this 

[hotel]. And seeing those development and 

hotels come down, and restoring our wahi 

pani21, or sacred sites, and heiau22, to help 

advise us as to the function of these spaces, 

yeah? Better understanding, yeah?” (23FB)

20 Kūpuna iwi: bones of kūpuna; can be referring to burial grounds 21 Wahi pana: legendary place 22 Heiau: Pre-Christian place of worship, shrine; some heiau were elaborately constructed stone platforms, others 

simple earth terraces. Many are preserved today. 
30

Most interviewees agreed that the changes discussed above were having negative impacts. Those 

who did not label the impacts as negative specifically said that it was not their place to decide 

how the general public was affected. However, some did provide ways that it negatively 

impacted their own well-being at other points in the interview. One interviewee responded by 

saying: 

It makes me sad. It makes me sad. And I know that it makes other people frustrated and, 

you know, these personal relationships that I have, I hear frustration, I hear anger. And 

all of us are sad because it’s not healthy and balanced and there’s not respect. And it’s 

frustrating because everybody’s trying to do something about it but it’s really hard to get 

other people who aren’t interested to listen or to do it. So yes, there’s a lot of frustration 

and anger and sadness, I would say, around what we see going on or feel going on. 

(28FB)

The timeline for these changes and their resulting impacts was not always discussed, and when it 

was it was broad/diverse. However, two generalizations can be made. Physical access to 

shorelines and marine regulation tend to have exact dates of creation. As one interviewee 

described, they are the “pulses of intensity” that have created openings to resources that were 

previously very difficult to get to (e.g., Queen Kaʻahumanu Highway, public shoreline accesses 

built as a requirement of coastal development projects, the creation of Honokohau Harbor). In 

contrast, changes in marine tourism and environmental conditions happened over a longer period 

of time, usually with impacts gradually building.

In a drastic contrast to the negative impacts listed above, it is crucial to report that one 

interviewee pointed out that an increase in access to the coastal and marine environment could 

create a deeper connection between a person and place. This interviewee discussed how the 

Queen Kaʻahumanu Highway allowed a greater amount of access for her children:

So, in some ways, [my children have] been more shaped by the coastline than I was 

because they were immersed in it from when they were little. And when they were little,

we spent a lot of time down there. Because we knew the changes were coming. (10MA)

Recreation provides access to cultural ecosystem services and human well-being

Recreation stood out as a conduit between interviewees and other CES. Recreation was 

mentioned in 19 interviews, a total of 56 times, and co-occurred with 48 other codes. Recreation 

was most commonly co-coded with Social Relations (10 co-occurrences); Connection (8), 

Physical Health (8), fish as a provisioning service (8), decreases related to well-being (7), and 

Spirituality (5). Interviewees mentioned recreation alongside 8 other CES: Social Relations (10), 

Spirituality (5), Bequest (4), Sense of Place (4), Identity (3), Heritage, Tradition, Culture (3), 

Fulfilling Stewardship (2), and Existence (1). Additionally, Recreation was coded with mental

and emotional health (4), positive emotions (4), and negative emotions (3). The high number of 

diverse co-occurrences is evidence that recreation cannot be teased apart from other CES or 

human well-being domains. 

When interviewees spoke of recreational activities, they frequently bundled their discussion with 

other CES and human well-being domains. In the following examples, interviewees weave 
31

together multiple CES and human well-being benefits (bolded within quotes) that they obtain via 

recreational activities:

• So, paddling... It’s recreational, it can be sporting, [NAMES] often invite me to pray on 

their canoe races, before the race begins. So it’s a great medium for both physical and 

spiritual connection. (10MA)

• So, paddling, um, is a way to, like, connect with the ocean and also, like, exercise. And, 

paddling is a huge family thing, too. And now it’s probably going to be a little bit more 

because our great Uncle and then Papa’s brother-in-law just passed away. So, coming 

back to the ocean, and then also when like [NAME] passed away, they all went back into 

the ocean. So it’s a way to connect. With family, too. (30FB)

• “So there's definitely a connection now, more emotional than just water sports activity.” 

(29FB)

• Well, from a family’s perspective it really brings us close together because everybody 

has a duty when you go camping, you know? My son and I catch all the fish, the girls 

clean them. And then my son and I do the cooking. The girls kind of like, they take care

of the campsite, and what have you. But the girl’s connection is really one of more 

relaxation. For them it’s a chance to get away, it’s a chance to kind of, let themselves, let 

their hair down, you know? Just get away from things. (4MA)

• I need to go visit Dr. Ocean for mental health, but as well as, I think, spiritual—spiritual 

health and mental health, similar. But you know, physically, too, sometimes. (22MB)

• I do swim, I do freedive. I do paddle, not quite as much as [NAME]. Um, but like I said, 

the majority of my time in the ocean is spent enjoying it, yes, but maintaining and 

cultivating those connections. (31MB)

• It’s special for [the kids] to get out there. And, since I, I personally like that experience, I 

want them to have that experience. That joy of going out there and, uh, kind of getting the 

salt on you and catching a fish, maybe, and just all of that. And, I think a lot of them 

enjoy that. I mean, there’s a lot of smiles. It’s a fun activity. (10MA)

• Mostly just getting in the water and swimming. I wear goggles, I can see what’s going 

on. And the other thing that I’m very interested in, I just like the environment between the 

ocean and the land. (3MA)

• So, I mean that’s why I love surfing because I can’t think about anything else. It fully just 

clears your mind, like you said, and you just focus on breath. (27MB)

• The love of just going in, investigating the ocean. Um, and sharing it. (17MB)

• There's like a heightened awareness of how beautiful and special that place is, that 

carries beyond just the awesomeness of that morning. But there's even an awareness and 

heightened consciousness about each other, and each other's well-being, which then 

translates into the well-being of that place. (26MB)

• And, just the mana23 that was there that morning and the people who are in the lineup 

and the conditions and the size and the fact that I didn’t get to pounded. You know, those 

23 Mana: Supernatural or divine power, miraculous power; a powerful nation, authority; to make powerful; to have 

power, authority; authorization, privilege; miraculous, divinely powerful, spiritual. 
32

things come together to instill or really, like, mark me with such a fondness, such a deep 

love that births a deeper kuleana to really want to take care of that place. (26MB)

The examples above exemplify ways that the condition of the ecological system is directly 

impacting the ways interviewees obtain CES and enhance their well-being. 

Interviewees expressed ways that ecological or social changes in West Hawai‘i have resulted in 

changes to their recreational behavior and can be linked to negative impacts to their well-being. 

In these ways, the access that recreation provided to other CES is diminished for these 

interviewees. Examples provided by interviewees:

● After the die-off I stopped diving for fun, and that was something—I didn’t—I mean, it’s 

tricky because I also bought a house. So, I was busy. But, I used to plan to dive, and now 

I just—I don’t—I haven’t done that since the bleaching event, and it just—yeah, it feels a 

lot different. (20FB) 

● I used to be drawn to more ocean activities, like personally and spiritually. And now—I 

mean, yeah, I’ll go surfing, but I also just go to the pool because I don’t want to see it—

or because there’s people or because I know there’s like brown water and there’s 

chemicals. I don’t know. (24FB) 

● I’ve noticed the changes. Just in Kahaluʻu. And it’s only a short period of time that I’ve 

been around and I remember, there’s a lot more people in Kahaluʻu. It’s so inundated. 

You don’t see the Hawaiian families like before, that would go down to the beach. You 

don’t see that. That’s one change I notice in my short time that I’ve been paying 

attention. Again, it’s all our family around, but in those times that we would come for 

family reunions or birthday parties, I notice that as one change. I don’t see them going 

holoholo24 as they used to. You would usually see one person out there with those glasses 

that they wear to kind of see through the water, with the throw net up and back. I used to 

see people, you know, Hawaiians doing that when I was here when I was younger. But I 

don’t see that anymore. (23FB) 

● [My family doesn’t] come swim that much, fish, and stuff like that. So those are some of 

the changes, yeah. I'm not sure if it’s because of accessibility, trying to get down, yeah. 

Because now you’re going to have to go to public access. (6MA)

● I do surf and I used to swim a lot more in the ocean. I don’t as often anymore. I used to 

snorkel. [...] Um, probably for swimming, it’s mostly like ease of access and parking and 

like, life of convenience. Like, it’s a lot quicker for me to just pop into the pool and like 

shower off and come back to work on a lunch hour. And snorkeling is just because it’s 

depressing and it’s not like—you know, when I was 16 or 17 and kicking around at 

Hoʻokena every other day, you know, envisioning the... Just what I know now, like, both 

academically and just watching the things shift and change and being immersed in like 

the feeling of documenting the decline for the last so many years. It’s, it’s not an outlet 

anymore. (24FB)

● Ways in which I used to, you know, whether with friends, ʻohana25, or by myself go to the 

beach to go surf, like before or after work. All of a sudden, you know, there is a paved 

24 Holoholo: To go for a walk, ride, or sail; to go out for pleasure, stroll. 25 ʻOhana: Means family, relative, kin group. 
33

walkway or there is an extension of a parking lot. Now, they have, like, parking fees for a 

lot of places, which ultimately feeds back into the system to, ideally, take care. But just 

like, you know, if you build it they will come. It’s like an extremely large parking lot was 

built and I can’t really get into places because there’s no place to park. (26MB) 

Governance and Management 

All interviews included questions pertaining to the governance and management of marine 

resources. Exact questions varied due to how the interviewee was involved in marine 

management (e.g., state manager, owner of/involved in conservation non-profit or business) and 

the unstructured nature of each particular interview. Interviewees expressed many ways in which 

their community participates in conservation through governmental and management processes. 

Five interviews included discussions of adaptive management. One interviewee defined it as, 

“the ability—well, to use the best information available to us to make decisions when managing 

the resource, whether things go off limit or there’s closed seasons or closed areas” (24FB).

Interviewees said that adaptive management was either necessary or desirable for several 

reasons, including the greater perceived potential for it to mitigate impacts of a larger population, 

the ability to react much faster in regulation or rule-making, and the ability to be proactive rather 

than reactive.

Many interviewees participate in government processes related to managing resources, 

expressing that it was necessary to participate in governing their places rather than leave it 

entirely up to government agencies. Interviewees had different specific goals in relation to 

management, but all were related to protecting natural resources that their communities rely on. 

Multiple people explained that their community was attempting or had a desire to work with the 

State of Hawai‘i to improve management.

One interviewee explained how the State of Hawai‘i is another level of community. While this 

interviewee was the only one to state this directly, the idea or concept was expressed indirectly 

by multiple interviewees. In every instance, seeing the State of Hawai‘i as another level of 

community was connected to co-management of resources or communities. The interviewee who 

directly stated this concept explains: 

I wouldn’t call them, I wouldn’t describe them as the same community that, you know, 

you live in. But it is a community of people, as well. And those people have a 

responsibility to look after the community. Community. And, they play a really important 

role because they the rule-makers. We’ve delegated some of our community’s 

responsibility to manage our own resources, we’ve delegated to the state. The State needs 

help. And, the way that we can help them is to inform them of what’s important to us. 

Help them, uh, have rules that then support what we would like to see in our community. 

And, help them actually enforce it if they had to. Um, they not gonna delegate too much 

of the enforcement to us, ah, not yet, but that’s not to say it’s out of the question. But, 

when we start thinking and when the state starts to think along the lines the community 

thinks, then I think we become, you know, closer in terms of our working relationship. 

I’m not, it’s not competitive, it’s not adversarial, but it’s not actually how a community or 

a family would work together, you know. But, I consider them to be a very important 
34

community to us. And, they should be family, because we’ve pretty much relegated to 

them a lot of rule-making authority over our own resources. (4MA)

One interviewee explained why community co-management has become prevalent today: 

I think the drive for community co-management really came from the fact that there was 

a loss of confidence in the agencies responsible for management, DAR, doing what 

needed to be done. And it was like, we have to do it ourselves at this local scale because 

they’re not going to do it on that larger scale. (5MA)

One interviewee described why it is critical to allow for co-management, or in the least some 

level of community connection with resources, saying that without it, “then the connection can 

be further eroded. So it’s a negative feedback loop that gets created if the ability for people to 

feel empowered and participate goes away” (19MB). 

Another interviewee touched on this same topic of land ownership affecting connection to place, 

but in their community they were affected by changes in land ownership (specifically, family 

owned land becoming state owned land) which negatively impacted their connection to their 

coastal place. The loss of access to their connection to a place that held many benefits and values 

for them, such as sense of place and ancestral connection, motivated them to create comanagement agreements. Through co-management, the community is able to take care of their 

place, and the community has been focused on “reestablishing that connection to the beach” 

(4MA):

So the families are now returning to the land, and taking care of it. So ownerships not, 

doesn’t matter. It’s their connection to the place. So, all the people that we have working 

there, they have a direct connection to the place. (4MA)

Another interviewee described the purpose and value that guides his work in a similar regard: 

“It’s really about: people are part of the ecosystem, and if you take them out of the equation then 

you’re impairing the system” (8MA). 

Importantly, another interviewee also added to this narrative that it is not about pushing anyone 

out or not being inclusive. She said:

I think that we do our work a disservice when we dismiss the opposition out of hand. I 

think understanding everybody, to the extent that we’re able, improves the quality of the 

conversation. (10MA)

While that interviewee was specifically describing rule and decision-making processes, another 

interviewee echoed this idea in a different way: 

We worked together collaboratively with representatives for the previous landowner and 

establishing a plan not only for our family but for the community to enjoy this space with 

that understanding of place and space and its importance to not only the family but to the 

community that uses the space. (23FB)
35

Due to the importance to interviewees of having community involved in the governance of place, 

including indicators of resource management was important. As one interviewee said in 

reference to community and management entities working together, “It’s a good thing. No better 

people to be managing the resources than the very community that is it.” (26MB). Using 

interview data, we developed indicators that could be used to track community involvement and 

satisfaction with governance of resources and resource management (Table 7).

Table 7. Indicators related to governance and resource management, identified via 

interview analysis. Supporting quotes represent evidence of why each indicator was 

suggested.

Indicator Supporting Quote

Community 

perceptions of the 

condition of the 

marine environment 

(i.e., are things 

better, worse, the 

same)

Interviewee 1: “Right? So, I think, like, coupled with the decline in 

resources and impact of the reef, you also have this decline in memories, 

decline in that connection. And, to me it’s sad, but it also makes those 

places-” 

Interviewee 2: “More and more special.”

Interviewee 1: “Well, it... worth protecting.” 

Community feels 

that its voice is 

heard in 

management 

processes; 

opportunities for 

participation and 

equity 

“You know, it’s like, [they] don’t listen. It’s a one-way transmission, 

right? Their ears don’t work. It's like, you’re wasting time. You turn 

around and walk out. [...] Ok. That’s a wasted meeting. [...] Yeah. So, to 

make a difference, you have to be a moderate. Otherwise you don’t get 

listened to.” (10MA) 

“We were talking about that draft environmental assessment that occurred. 

And you know, it’s just really widely circulated in the people that I kind 

of, like, network with. It’s all, where’s the cultural impact statements, who 

did they talk to? You know, they didn’t talk to any one of us. And I think 

that’s really lacking. And I think the State should be saying to them, 

before they accept any environmental assessment or statement, well, 

which communities did you talk to? That’s the State, I see that as the State 

looking after the community in its responsibility.” (4MA) 

“It is, it’s a good thing. It’s a good thing. No better people to be managing 

the resources than the very community that is it.” (26MB) 

“You know, that’s part of why I want to be involved, because I want to do 

more than just hope for it to go well and for good decisions to be made.” 

(22MB)

Community 

perspectives 

(support, confusion, 

satisfaction, etc.) on 

marine managed 

areas

“I have every, you know, every intention, hope, and prayer that it’s gonna 

get better. So we have an opportunity to influence the condition of the 

fishery but not the human population.” (10MA) 
36

Indicator Supporting Quote

Community 

opportunities for 

marine education 

“You know, you have to educate the locals because they’re not one that 

goes to meetings. When the law changes, you have to educate the locals, 

because they’ve been doing it for years. And all of a sudden, oh, I cannot 

spear? No, no, you cannot spear, the law changed, yeah. And the net size, 

because they keep it—well, they kept it at their house for the longest time, 

don’t know that the mesh size changes, yeah? And thinking that it’s okay 

because they did it before.” (6MA)

Community 

perspectives 

(support, confusion, 

satisfaction, etc.) on 

regulation and 

enforcement

“I think that the current regulations and requirements are necessary, but I 

don’t think that they’re applied effectively. [...] Does that make sense? 

So, I know we need regulations because a community this diverse will not 

self-regulate because of the drastically different interests even though it 

may all be tied to ocean there are different goals with the ocean 

inspiration. And I see that the regulations are pushed through or that they 

are applied, but there is no enforcement and a lot of the times it feels when 

they're being established uninclusive (Arkema et al.) where a lot of 

community members feel unheard, where they don’t care to follow them.” 

(28FB) 

“And now it’s like there is no taking care. There is no... it’s pure harvest 

and it’s pure recreation. So it’s... These places have been passed down in 

their importance, like I said, culturally and ecologically, yes. And, we are 

blessed enough to be able to continue our practice of not just having fun 

and viewing the area but continuing the practice of caring for it to our 

degree. But there’s only so much you can care for a place if every other 

person who uses it does not do the same.”

Community trusts in 

"experts" and 

government 

agencies that 

manage marine 

environments 

“I felt, like, really disheartened and scared because I got really concerned 

and, like, I don’t want to say hopelessness, but it almost felt... like I just 

thought the entire world was going to change after that. Um, and then, not 

from a bleaching, but I lost a lot of faith in government after that. Because 

I was involved in the [process]. And it was supposed to be a time of kind 

of like adaptive management and getting something out within the year. 

And two years go by, nothing. And, still yet, nothing. [...] So, if you have 

such a huge disaster like that and can’t really do anything different, it’s 

super disheartening.” (30FB) 

“I think a lot of management is actually about relationship. It’s not about 

rules. [...] If everybody’s thinking alike, and knows what to expect from 

other folks, and respects, then I think the rules become less, uh, less 

important.” (4MA)

Funding availability 

for co-management 

initiatives

“Volunteerism [sic] is important but people have... They’ve got to feed 

their families. They can’t just do that.” (4MA) 
37

Indicator Supporting Quote

Infusing 

contemporary 

management with 

heritage, traditional 

practices, and 

culture (e.g., kapu

practices)

“But you get stuck in this legislative wheel of ‘this is how things are 

done,’ but that whole system is built upon the rubble of an older system 

that worked. You know what I mean? And then you get agencies and 

government where it’s, ‘Here’s our laws, here’s our mission.’ Our mission 

is for the betterment of the resources and the culture. [...] But, all of those 

things are being trumped by their current management systems where it’s: 

‘I want to take that tax and that percent of all these companies,’ instead of 

managing them so the resources and culture don’t take a hit. So, it’s, it’s a 

strange balance of today’s system that doesn’t make sense to me.” (31MB)

Fish consumption 

advisories (e.g., 

pono practices)

“Because now it’s all about protection of the fish and protect... We 

wouldn’t have to be protecting it if we knew how for use it properly. It’s a 

privilege to gather and feed our families. And taking what we’re going to 

eat is enough. That is what has stopped, I think. That practice of being 

able to take what you’re going to eat. And you know, if, whatever, if you 

just so happened you catch more, you share. Not go sell them to the 

market for make money, but to feed.” (23FB)

Social Networks 

“Together we’re stronger” (21FB) 

Informal and formal social networks exist in West Hawai‘i and one in particular, the Kai 

Kuleana Network, was formed with a focus on restoring abundance to coastal and marine 

environments. Because of this focus, members of this network comprised a large portion of our 

interviewees. This afforded the option to ask this subset of interviewees some additional 

questions to understand how conservation-oriented networks might be having a positive impact 

on the environment. 

Sixteen interviewees were members of or affiliated with Kai Kuleana Network. These interviews 

all included at least one question about the Kai Kuleana Network. The content of the responses 

was similar and differed only in the amount of time spent on the discussion or the number of 

times the Network was brought up. Discussion of the Kai Kuleana Network included how the 

Network creates a space that is ultimately another level of community for people, provides 

support to community goals and initiatives, supports connection to place, and supports an 

integration between traditional and contemporary management (Figure 5). 
38

Figure 5. Representation of results from Kai Kuleana Network interviews.

According to interviewees, the Kai Kuleana Network provides another source of community to 

members; a place where people “have people” and “allies.” Multiple interviewees spoke 

positively of being involved, for example one interviewee said, “I’m also a member of, you 

know, Kai Kuleana. To me that’s one of the best organizations that I've been involved with”

(3MA). Another interviewee expressed that before her own community directly benefited from 

involvement with the Network, it was still “nice to hear and see everybody, I guess that’s a part 

of maintaining relationships with people in our community” (23FB). She also said that the 

Network has had a “positive influence, and being able to learn about what other people are 

doing in their communities has been helpful” (23FB).

These interviewees said that communities show up in support of one another because they 

understand that if they show up for one another, then they in turn receive support when they need 

it. They said that the Kai Kuleana Network is a place to share stories of strategies and struggles 

and provides an avenue “to learn from others’ mistakes or others’ successes and apply it to their 
39

own community” (21FB). One interviewee expressed inspiration from seeing other communities 

have success achieving their goals and was eager to “find a way to circle it here” (2MA). 

More than one interviewee credited the Kai Kuleana Network with having a part in conservation 

successes (e.g., Kaʻūpūlehu 10-year fishing closure). The Network creates opportunities for comanagement and participation in the political realm of marine management by creating the place, 

encouraging empowerment, and providing a mechanism to inform contemporary management. 

Through the help of the Kai Kuleana Network, challenges with community management blocks

can be overcome. As one interviewee said, “the people there know how to manage their 

resources already, they just can’t. [...] There’s too much outside pressures coming in over which 

we got no control” (4MA).

These types of networks are believed to be essential to strengthening the connection between 

communities and their place, and that connection is essential to their motivation to care for the 

place. Without a way for communities to be a part of taking care of their place, “the connection 

[to place] can be further eroded. So it’s a negative feedback loop that gets created if the ability 

for people to feel empowered and participate goes away” (19MB). This interviewee went on to 

say:

I think that's why the networks are so important and that’s why it’s important for us to 

help them be able to thrive and sustain themselves here and Maui Nui, the Kua, statewide 

and global networks. Those are really important for if we’re going to see a comanagement future where the people of communities are actually really involved in what 

happens in their place.

One important distinction mentioned by some interviewees between the Kai Kuleana Network 

and other grass-roots community groups is their institutional support from government agency 

and non-profits which provides structure, funding, and facilitation. The Nature Conservancy’s 

role in the Kai Kuleana Network was discussed as vital to its success. Examples of this value 

included the facilitator’s role, organization of meetings, and funding for things like maps, 

posters, and other community needs.

Kai Kuleana Network was not the only conservation network identified during interviews (e.g., 

Hui Loko) as being a huge help and important to the success of conservation goals. When 

directly asked how the absence of their other network might affect the success of their 

conservation efforts, one interviewee said, “I think I would just feel more alone, like we’re at this 

alone” (24FB).

One interviewee (10MA) brought up the presence of a fishing network (unprompted) and 

described it as being a part of his well-being, his daily life, and his traditions. The importance of 

the fishing network to not only his own but his community’s well-being is evidenced by his 

descriptions of “that intelligence” which it provides through group-sharing of information about 

fishing conditions, the way the network allows for “various roles in this community.” These 

roles included providing fishing opportunities to friends and family or sharing catch with older 

fisherman who are unable to fish anymore which, “allow some of those people who can no 

longer fish, a connection. Can’t, right? So they still have that connection.”
40

For more results regarding the Kai Kuleana Network, refer to Appendix D.

Reciprocity 

Reciprocity is the concept that a person will respect and care for a place, and everything in that

place, because they are a part of an integrated community which does not separate “human” and 

“environment” (Berkes et al. 2000; Vaughan 2018). As one interviewee explained, “I still believe 

that if you take care of the land, take care of the ocean, it’s going to take care of you, and that’s 

my upbringing from my parents, my kūpunas [sic] before me” (6MA). This concept can also be 

understood as a reciprocal connection between all things, human/non-human and living/nonliving. As one interviewee explained, “It’s hard to separate anything from the ocean. Like place 

or animal, because it’s all connected, so I can’t put one over the other” (30FB).

The concept of reciprocity was brought up during interviews repeatedly, with no specific 

prompting. Reciprocity was mentioned directly in 13 interviews, a total of 25 times. Reciprocity 

had co-occurrences with 10 other CES: Heritage, Tradition, Culture (8), Fulfilling Stewardship 

(6), Recreation (3), Sense of Place (3), Social Relations (3), and Spirituality (3), Sacred (2), 

Identity (2), Aesthetics (2), and Bequest (1). Almost always, interviewees brought up the concept 

of reciprocity in a manner that discussed CES. The following quotes are examples of this. One 

interviewee demonstrated how reciprocity is a part of her heritage and culture:

Our tūtūs26 [sic] already understood that. They were well aware of what was there. And 

how they maximize the use of their resources in a pono27 fashion. That’s why [the 

resources are] still there because it’s, you know, they made sure they knew what they was 

doing and they didn’t... They left a light footprint on a place because they understood the 

reciprocity of that process, of that gathering, I think. Because had they not felt that way, 

it would have been exhausted, we wouldn’t have limu, we wouldn’t have fish. But, I truly 

believe that they believed in that reciprocity process of we give back, you give us. You 

feed us, we feed you, kind of reciprocity, and that’s what I think is lost today, that we’ve 

gotta bring back. (23FB)

In another example, an interviewee responded to a prompt about sense of place by bringing up 

multiple aspects of human well-being, CES, and reciprocity:

Sense of place for me is a feeling of belonging and responsibility. I feel at peace here, I 

feel at home here. I can’t imagine being anywhere else. Maybe for visits, maybe for some 

extended periods, but I always am drawn back to this place, and I get goosebumps as I 

say it. And that it’s also my responsibility to care for and respect this place. Respect 

every place I visit, but this, this is like taking care of home, and I feel very strong sense of 

responsibility to take care of it and to learn from it. (28FB)

26 Tūtū: Grandma, grandpa. 27 Pono: Goodness, uprightness, morality, correct or proper procedure, excellence, well-being, prosperity, welfare, 

benefit, equity, true condition or nature, duty; moral, righteous, just, in perfect order, accurate, correct, eased, 

relieved; should, ought, necessary.
41

In another example, an interviewee discussed how caring for his place was a part of his identity:

It’s a constant state of taking care, keeping them secret, keeping them healthy and then 

returning the blessings that they give you of joy, of dinner, of connection. Because it all 

shapes me of who I am today. (31MB)

Reciprocity was also discussed through stories of sharing food with family and friends, bringing 

food to elders, holding reverence for a place, pono practices, kapu28 areas, the desire to become a 

steward to a place, and bringing young children to the ocean so that they may learn to respect 

and care for it. 

Interviewees discussed ways that they care for the marine environment, their family and friends, 

and their greater communities. During the coding process, it became clear that interviewees 

frequently wove reciprocity together with certain related CES. This is important when 

considering if and how reciprocity could be included within place-based indicators.

The next two sections will explore how interviewees cultivate connections to place in relation to 

reciprocity, and how they discussed the way that the mindset of reciprocity may be disappearing 

from the general population. 

Connection to place creates and enhances reciprocity

Interviewees discussed diverse ways that they connect with particular places or the coastal and 

marine environment, specifically how they create connections, maintain connections via 

memories, cultivate new or existing connections, and the ways that disconnections can manifest. 

Of the many ways connection was discussed, consensus arose as to the underlying importance 

for connection to place as the foundational motivation to care for that place, echoing the concept 

of reciprocity. One interviewee explained, “We live on an island, it’s a healthy thing to have a 

relationship with the shoreline” (10MA).

Interviewees discussed how the CES Fulfilling Stewardship; Sense of Place; Heritage, Tradition, 

Culture; and Social Relations support a connection with place. The concept of reciprocity weaves 

together multiple CES and expresses itself through a connection to place. One interviewee 

exemplifies this by bundling together many emotions, values, and benefits:

You know, whenever you’re in the water here, you can feel the connection. You can feel 

the mana. [...] I feel my use of it is definitely a practice. Where it’s maintaining 

connections, like [NAME] said. Family members are there. And, maintaining connections 

to both place and the beings in those places was important. And, being away from that is 

just like being away from home and family. (31MB)

In many circumstances, interviewees discussed ways that they cultivate a connection with place 

that included some form of stewardship (either for a specific location or the island as a whole). A 

particularly important common theme that emerged from interviews was how reciprocity (and 

connections to place more broadly) relate to a person’s sense of place and stewardship of place. 

28 Kapu: Taboo, prohibition; special privilege; sacredness; prohibited, forbidden; sacred, holy; no trespassing, keep 

out.
42

As one interviewee said, “We all have that story to tell, and we'll tell it in our own way with our 

own emphasis, but that connection will give us reason to care for something.” If a connection to 

place is part of the root of stewardship (“to care for something”), then it can be suggested that 

bolstering that connection can enhance the level of stewardship between a person and their place. 

As one interviewee explained, “So, engaging with this place and space, whether it’s in the ocean 

or the land, I think it’s a kuleana in itself and reconnecting.” Learning how to enhance this 

reciprocal relationship may enhance stewardship in the region, ultimately creating a positive 

feedback loop. In contrast, if the reciprocal relationship is degraded, this could create a negative 

feedback loop. Some interviewees discussed their observations of ways that reciprocity is 

declining from the general population. They believe it is important to find ways to reverse this 

decline and revive the positive feedback loop. 

In the quotes below, interviewees describe the ways that they cultivate a connection by caring 

for, stewarding, sharing, and otherwise enhancing kuleana. 

● Getting involved in Na Kilo ʻAina29 is one of the biggest ways that I connect because I’m 

helping youth to connect. (13FA)

● So, we have annual meetings [in my community]. They’re events. We’re gonna be doing 

another [event], talk story event. Where people come and share stories. [...] Stories they 

remember of the area. Dance. Music. Other things. (13FA)

● I do swim, I do freedive. I do paddle, not quite as much as [NAME]. Um, but like I said, 

the majority of my time in the ocean is spent enjoying it, yes, but maintaining and 

cultivating those connections. (31MB)

● And, it allows some of those people who can no longer fish, a connection. Can’t [fish], 

right? So they still have that connection. (10MA)

● And then for me it’s like really important that there’s food for the future and that like the 

connection to the ocean is something that is strong. It’s not just talked about in meetings, 

but people are getting in the water, they understand their resources and that like intimate 

connection is to me just as valuable as all the science and the fish counts and stuff like 

that. (21FB)

● I always tell [the kids], you know, you guys live in the best place in the world. People pay 

big dollars to come over here to enjoy what you have right in your backyard. You know, 

spend time connecting in these areas. Spend time in the areas. You know, try hand pole 

fishing or get a pair of goggles and go snorkeling, try catching one wave or just go hike 

on all the different trails that DLNR maintains over here. But I tell them, when you do go 

outdoors, there’s responsibility. The biggest responsibility is safety. (12MA)

● So, if we’re taking people on the trails, it’s usually education. I would say, education is 

one thing but we’re also hoping for a reconnection. (18MB)

● So, again, being able to reconnect with a place and understand its resources. (23FB)

Related to stewardship and touched on by the above quotes, one interviewee highlighted the 

relationship between a connection to place and heritage, specifically:

29 Na Kilo Aina is a West Hawai‘i based youth program focused on stewardship and place-based learning. 
43

I think that the connection with knowing that my ancestors reside in the area, you know, 

and not only the lineal and familial connection but also in a sense spiritual because you 

know they’re overseeing you and the work that you’re doing, and hopefully you satisfy 

them. (23FB) 

Many interviews discussed two primary ways to enhance a Sense of Place: eating locally sourced 

food and using traditional place names and/or moʻolelo30. Seven interviewees spoke about the 

importance of eating locally sourced food (i.e., caught or gathered on island) and how that 

supports a connection to place. One interviewee said, “We have to ʻai of this place in order to 

understand its value to us. Without that, why take care of a place, yeah? If you cannot eat from 

it” (23FB). Another interviewee said: 

And so the diversity of flavors, and just restoring the ʻono31, restoring the taste that we 

have for the things of the sea. And the way that those things of the sea contribute not only 

nutritionally, but aesthetically and the flavor aspect to our lives. Our lives are just richer 

when we eat like that. (10MA)

Eight interviewees said that sharing moʻolelo and/or using traditional place names builds respect 

and connection between people and place. “The moʻolelo associated with [the place] and like 

how the place names really are clues into the resource management” (21FB). According to 

interviewees, this is because moʻolelo and traditional place names tell you about the relationship 

that kūpuna had with the place, the resources, the habitat, and allows for deepening their own 

connection. During the member-checking process, one interviewee said, “If Hawaiians had a 

name for it, it had a cultural purpose” (15FA). Another interviewee explains:

I think that is just one example of maintaining the integrity of place, by using the 

traditional names that our kūpuna gifted this place because this is what the place meant 

to them. I think that’s very important for us in the maintenance of our relationships with 

ʻāina32 and connection with kūpuna. (23FB)

For connections that had been altered or erased due to environmental and social changes (e.g., 

land ownership changes), interviewees described that through their memories they can hold onto 

connections. Some of these interviewees even said that suited them more than trying to recreate 

or re-establish a replacement connection. Interviewees said that those connections can be 

accessed through “moʻolelo” and “emotional attachment.” As one interviewee highlighted, the 

memories are also motivation for stewardship:

So, I think, like, coupled with the decline in resources and impact of the reef, you also 

have this decline in memories, decline in that connection. And, to me it’s sad, but it also 

makes those places [...] worth protecting. (31MB) 

30 Moʻolelo: Story, tale, myth, history, tradition, literature, legend, chronical, record. 31 ʻOno: Delicious, tasty, savory; to relish, crave; deliciousness, flavor, savor. 32 ʻĀina: Land, earth; Lit. that which feeds
44

Declines in the reciprocity mindset

Interviewees spoke of the presence of reciprocity as a mindset, which can be exemplified 

through pono practices and ʻaina momona33. According to many interviewees, this mentality has 

disappeared from part of the general population. One interviewee described his observation of a 

changing mindset in regards to reciprocity:

Now it’s like there is no taking care. There is no... it’s pure harvest and it’s pure 

recreation. So it’s... These places have been passed down in their importance, like I said 

culturally and ecologically, yes. And, we are blessed enough to be able to continue our 

practice of not just having fun and viewing the area, but continuing the practice of caring 

for it to our degree. But there’s only so much you can care for a place if every other 

person who uses it does not do the same. (31MB)

Many interviewees shared the perspective that increased access to the ocean is leading to a 

mentality of overuse. These interviewees gave examples supporting the idea that there is a shift 

in identity happening; a movement from depending directly on resources to one of extraction and 

commercialization. One interviewee described the shift: 

Fishermen who used to provide for their family are now construction workers. Or what 

not. But now you have a change in the way you use the ocean and a change in the way 

you interact with the fish and other beings in the ocean. So that’s the way I see it as... of, 

practices get lost. Culture gets pushed back in this new era and today we can see those 

big changes because small changes over time add up until it reaches a point where you 

say... and you look back at old pictures or you look back at old memories and you’re like, 

‘Wow, this is substantially different than it was.’ Not just the resource. The coastline 

itself. The people themselves. The practice. The actual cultural identity of the people and 

their practice. (31MB)

Some interviewees discussed a growing disconnect between younger generations and the 

environment as an intergenerational mindset shift. One interviewee expressed that in previous 

generations, people generally shared the expectation that they would care for marine resources 

collectively. This same interviewee then said that in the present day, “we don’t share the same 

sort of homogeneous vision on what marine [re]sources means to us” (4MA).

Another example of this shift came from an interviewee describing how people no longer take 

only what they need in an effort to not overuse: 

Yeah, because the fishing koʻa34, the whole purpose is to feed the fish so that they stay 

there and they get fat and when it’s harvest time you go and pick them up. But it is in the, 

what do you call it? The line of the barge. And it’s along this coastline. So we do have 

other people who know about [the koʻa] and who come and fish there without feeding 

[the fish]. So, it’s kind of this practice of, how do we get fisherman to understand, even in 

33 ʻĀina momona: Land that is rich, abundant, plentiful, sweet, and fat. 34 Koʻa: fishing grounds, fishing shrine
45

the ocean, there are boundaries that if you’re going to fish from here, you need to give 

back. It’s not like a free-for-all. (13FA)

Many interviewees discussed the way that the general population’s values and perspectives seem 

to be shifting in what they value. The interview guide did not deeply investigate this; however, 

understandings of how this shift could be affecting connections between people and the ocean 

did emerge. One interviewee explains:

You take care of what you value. And, I think we’re losing that connection, we’re not 

valuing our ancestors like we did before. And we’re not valuing the spiritual connection 

as much as we did before. [...] So, we’re beginning to value different things and I think 

that’s maybe the challenge for us. It’s that we don’t see the values that perhaps the older 

generations saw. And so if we’re gonna lose that value, we’re gonna probably lose that 

connection. (4MA)

Part of the reciprocity mindset is taking care of community. Interviewees described ways in 

which this reciprocity and sharing mindset has changed over time: 

● Now you get a lot more younger fishermans [sic] and no respect. I talk to some of the old 

fisherman and they say, “Man you don’t wanna fish out there now, it’s just no respect.” 

But when we started, you know, all the old timers, we had great respect for one another. 

[...] The “pass,” is how you do everything. Everything by letting everybody get their 

pass. Now you make one pass, and you let this young guy make his pass, and you start 

yours, they turn around and cut you right off. Right in front of your face. Like, [they’re 

saying], ‘this is not your ocean, this is my ocean.’ (2MA)

● We call it the ‘give away,’ right? You always give away 10 percent of your catch. That’s 

still done by some of the old timers, but the newer guys not so much. (15FA)

● And I would just say that, people diving their home waters... There aren’t that many 

people who would call that their home waters. We tend not to go... We [tended] to go 

where home is, unless we’re invited by somebody else into their home. And that’s not the 

norm so much anymore. (10MA)

Many interviewees talked of specific behavior changes that they had observed or personally 

experienced related to this mentality shift. One interviewee said she knows that fewer people are 

subsistence fishing and more people prefer to buy fish from grocery stores which can increase 

convenience but decrease attachment with place. Another interviewee discussed a shift in his 

own fishing habits because going fishing now requires more work to avoid large crowds, making 

the activity undesirable to him. Multiple interviewees discussed the dwindling practice of sharing 

food or catch with friends and family (particularly those who could not go fishing themselves). 
46

Discussion

In this section, we begin with a discussion on the importance of how interviewees bundled CES 

together rather than teasing them apart to explain different meanings. We then discuss how our 

analysis shaped a framework for monitoring ecosystems that better incorporates CES and human 

well-being. Our framework has three sections: ecological foundation of CES; community values, 

beliefs, and perspectives; and creating and conserving access to CES. 

Cultural Ecosystem Services Bundling

A co-occurrence refers to when an interviewee discussed more than one CES or human wellbeing domain at the same time (i.e., in the same sentence or while answering a single question). 

These instances showed us which CES and human well-being domains are coupled together, a 

concept commonly known as “bundled” (Klain et al. 2014) and supported by Fish et al. (2016b), 

who posits that it is likely more beneficial to attempt to incorporate CES in management through 

the lens that CES support and reinforce one another rather than exist separately. Pascua et al. 

(2017) found that West Hawai‘i workshop participants deliberately spoke of CES and associated 

values together and were uncomfortable with the concept of separating them. This type of 

bundling emerged from our interview data, despite a lack of prompting for it specifically. 

As an example of bundling, one interviewee provides examples of aesthetics CES and mental 

and emotional health when saying that, “Looking at [the ocean] is what calms me down.” 

(28FB) However, by expanding on what else she said immediately before and after this sentence, 

it is clear that so many other services, benefits, and values are bundled. The entire quote reads, 

For me, personally, I feel spiritually connected to the ocean because it is what brings me 

joy. Looking at it is what calms me down. There's a sense of purpose when I look at the 

ocean. There's a sense of connection when I look at the ocean. Things make sense when 

I'm in the water... (28FB) 

In the single activity of “looking at the ocean,” she is experiencing numerous CES. She 

continues to say that her spiritual connection and these aesthetic benefits are the foundation for 

her volunteer and paid work in ocean conservation fields, which alludes to the related concept 

that CES can create and deepen a connection to place that inspires a desire to care for, or 

steward, a place (Chan et al. 2011; Daniel et al. 2012). This is another important understanding 

for management, which may be attempting to uncover motivations or bolster community 

engagement with and support of resource management. 

The concept of bundling represents a way to increase the monitoring ability of indicators. During 

the member-checking process, one interviewee said that the bundling concept could be a way to 

view CES through a “macro” lens as compared to the “micro” lens that looking at each CES 

individually provides. This interviewee continued on saying that bundling could be a great way 

to capture the less frequently mentioned CES that may be otherwise left out of discussions. This 

relates to the idea that some indicators can be “cross-cutting” in the sense that they monitor 

multiple CES and human well-being domains. This is helpful for a number of reasons, including 

the facts that many CES do not currently have supporting data, collecting primary data is timeconsuming and expensive, and collecting primary data for some indicators will be difficult due to 

the abstract or difficult to discuss nature of these CES. 
47

Interview data provide a starting point to understand the concept of bundling multiple services, 

benefits, and values together in West Hawai‘i, and warrant further exploration. The concept of 

bundling raises more questions, such as: how does the larger population of West Hawai‘i bundle 

CES?; what ways does bundling highlight or obscure CES that may be difficult to discuss?; and 

does the length of time someone lives in Hawai‘i affect how they bundle their services, benefits, 

and values? Understanding these connections between CES and human well-being assists in 

identifying appropriate and widely informative indicators, ultimately leading to a greater ability 

to support and enhance community well-being. 

Bundling Reciprocity with CES

The concept of reciprocity was discussed in half of the interviews. This was not unexpected as it

was discussed during scoping for this research (Leong et al. 2019) and is present in regions with 

prevalent Indigenous culture (Gould et al. 2014; Pascua et al. 2017; Vaughan 2018). However, it 

is important to note that interview guides did not have specific questions to prompt the 

discussion of reciprocity. The concept emerged via bundling, during discussions of human wellbeing and CES. 

The reciprocal relationship between people and place has been expressed in multiple studies 

regarding connections between CES and community well-being (Pascua et al. 2017; Poe et al. 

2016; Shackeroff 2008). Arguably one of the greatest influences on identity across the Hawaiian 

Islands is the strong relationship and connection to the land and ocean that people hold. Native 

Hawaiian culture believes that in order to receive from your place, you must contribute and care 

for your place (Bryant 2011). It is clear that relationship with place, meaning either a geographic 

location or what that location may represent, significantly contributes to the well-being of 

communities in West Hawai‘i. Importantly, interviews show that these values permeate current 

perspectives and attitudes toward the environment. 

Despite its deep cultural importance, the concept of reciprocity is largely absent from 

contemporary resource management and ecosystem assessment efforts. Our suggested placebased indicators attempt to integrate the reciprocity concept in two ways: first, by creating 

indicators that inherently bundle the reciprocity concept (e.g., most of the indicators for 

Fulfilling Stewardship would monitor ability and desire to care for a place);second, by 

suggesting that the CES most frequently bundled with reciprocity could be prioritized (e.g., 

Heritage, Tradition, Culture and Fulfilling Stewardship). This is an important inclusion due to 

the significance of the reciprocity concept, its connections to other CES, and interviewee 

descriptions of a decline of the reciprocity mindset in present day populations. 

Monitoring Cultural Ecosystem Services with a diverse set of indicators

Ecological foundation of cultural ecosystem services

Monitoring CES has traditionally relied on indicators that focused on ecological aspects and 

social threats (e.g., pollution, urban sprawl), demographics, and economics. Understanding these 

foundational aspects is crucial, especially since interview data provided examples of how the 

ecological state can directly and indirectly impact CES and human well-being. 
48

The ecological condition of a place creates the opportunity for a reciprocal relationship between 

human and non-human. Previous research has assumed that healthy biophysical and ecological 

conditions create opportunities for CES and therefore enhance human well-being. This research 

examined the assumption explicitly. 

Interviewees were asked about their perspectives on changes to environmental conditions and 

how changes affect the way they connect with their place. The rich and diverse discussions 

exemplify how the ecological condition of West Hawai‘i does impact physical, mental, and 

emotional well-being. Interviewees gave examples of ways that they are affected by the marine 

ecological condition, such as how snorkeling and seeing a dead/unhealthy coral reef creates 

sadness. The concept of reef grief (Marshall et al. 2019) was also expressed by multiple 

interviewees who hold management roles. One interviewee explained how the existence of a 

healthy ocean was enough to enhance her well-being, even if she was not allowed to go in it, "If I 

couldn’t ever go in it, but the ocean were to survive, then I’d know it’s ok. But if the ocean were 

to disappear, then, my life would be over" (30FB). (It is important to note that this sentiment was 

not shared by all interviewees, and many said that they would not be okay if they could not go to 

the ocean. This is explored more in the following section.) These are examples of how 

monitoring the ecological condition can give insight into the human dimension. 

Both prompted and unprompted, interviewees gave examples of how the ecological condition 

affects their well-being. However, other than the understanding that the ecological condition 

ultimately generates the possibility for experiencing marine-based CES, we do not know how 

critical elements such as personal values and levels of access differ amongst the community. 

Therefore, more diverse indicators are needed. 

The goal of the West Hawaiʻi IEA, which is generally shared by ecosystem assessments as a 

whole, does not currently focus on if or how people are engaging with CES, but rather focuses 

on ensuring that the ecological condition allows for the opportunity for engagement (i.e., high 

fish abundance and biomass translates to fisher satisfaction). Our research helped to confirm that 

this link exists and should continue to be monitored. However, while ecological indicators are 

important, they alone do not give an entire representation of how the environment is linked to 

human well-being. The depth and diversity in interviewee values, beliefs, and perspectives in 

relation to marine CES exemplifies the need to monitor another side of the story.

Collecting community values, beliefs, and perspectives

Human well-being consists of people’s livelihood and possessions, but also how they feel about 

it. Measuring one side without the other will not result in a complete assessment. Understanding 

social values in relation to ecosystem services is crucial for management because these values 

illuminate how society feels, prioritizes, and makes decisions based on such meanings (Hicks et 

al. 2016; Lau et al. 2018). 

As explained above, the commonly used human dimension indicators in ecosystem assessments 

monitor CES and human well-being via quantitative, secondary data. Unfortunately, these data 

cannot inform whether or not community members are satisfied with the CES supported and 

provided by the marine environment. If the selected indicators do not represent the diverse range 

of community values and perspectives, then community well-being is likely not included in the 
49

assessment. This will almost certainly and unsurprisingly jeopardize community support (Dacks 

et al. 2019). To get a more robust understanding of this, we need primary data that measure 

people’s values (e.g., what aspects of CES do they value?) and perspectives (e.g., do they see 

those aspects changing?). 

Many suggested CES indicators will require primary data on how people in West Hawai‘i value 

CES. Primary data collection (e.g., surveys and interviews) can identify and monitor nonmaterial indicators (e.g., values, beliefs, and perspectives) and support the material social 

indicators also included in the West Hawai‘i IEA (Biedenweg et al. 2016; Breslow et al. 2017; 

Breslow et al. 2016). Systematic and longitudinal primary data collection could capture 

perceptions of status, changes, and trends of the region in order to understand how environmental 

changes affect human well-being (Sterling et al. 2017a). 

As an example of this, we can examine interviewee perspectives of marine species decline. Since 

most interviewees either worked or volunteered for a marine conservation effort, perspectives of 

marine species decline were anticipated. However, interviews revealed not only if species 

declines are observed, but also—perhaps more importantly—how declines are impacting the 

lives and well-being of communities. Even though ecological data may monitor a species 

decline, it cannot monitor this additional piece of crucial information. 

Another current gap in understanding lies in how people who disagree or have no opinion about 

marine species decline perceive the availability of CES, impacts to well-being, and opinions on 

current marine management efforts. One interviewee involved in resource management stated 

directly that it would be helpful to have these types of perspectives collected and shared, since 

resource managers are generally unaware of this information which hinders their management 

abilities. According to this interviewee, this is a weak point in the management process. 

Creating and conserving access to Cultural Ecosystem Services

Pivoting away from a linear perspective of ecosystem production of services that have an end 

point in human well-being, this research follows the understanding that Fish et al. (2016b) 

summarizes in regards to CES specifically, stating that CES arise from interactions and 

relationships between people and place, and are therefore “interpretive in character.” This means 

that every person’s understanding and experience of a CES will differ at least slightly, which was 

verified during our interviews, which significantly complicates management of CES. Rather than 

managing for individual CES, it may instead be a more appropriate goal for management to 

protect the existence and availability of the CES for all.

With this objective in mind, our research refers to “access” as an activity, experience, or other 

conduit/channel that allows a person to gain the benefits created by CES. Tracking “access” 

during coding revealed this emergent understanding; the codes developed intricate and dynamic 

definitions as interviews continued. The value, and even the existence, of any particular CES or 

CES bundle differed depending on the interviewee (which has been found in similar studies, see 

Klain et al. (2014)), but one constant was the necessity of access for a person to receive any CES 

(be it the service itself, or associated goods, benefits, and values). 
50

This concept is relevant to the condition of the marine environment and human well-being. As an

example, during the member-checking process one interviewee said that, “I assert that people 

who have inhabited places for generations have a relationship with the ecosystem and removing 

or hindering access is an impairment [to the people and the environment]” (8MA). This quote is 

exemplifying the fact that by removing access to an activity, experience, or place, the motivation 

to be an environmental steward is “impaired,” thus affecting the well-being of both the people 

and the place. 

As shown in the results, interviewees discussed recreation as a conduit to multiple layers of CES 

and human well-being. Additionally, interviewees described how a decline in opportunity for or 

quality of recreational activities would result in declines in multiple CES that contribute to 

human well-being (e.g., mental and emotional health, physical health, Social Relations) and the 

well-being of the environment (e.g., Fulfilling Stewardship). Recreation is a commonly used 

indicator in ecosystem assessments because it can typically be tracked or measured more easily 

than other CES. However, in those instances, recreation is usually taken to provide insight into 

the leisure activity itself or its economic inputs, rather than its potential to be a channel for any 

other CES. Understanding how recreation may or may not serve as a proxy for other CES is 

important for finding unique ways to understand non-material, difficult to measure CES. Cooccurrences and the bundling concept can illuminate the diverse meanings of recreation and how 

it relates to other values that are intrinsically present within recreation. 

In the same way that recreation creates access to CES and enhances well-being, co-management 

and/or community participation in management may be another conduit for enhanced connection 

with place and well-being. Interviews highlighted that engaging in management of a place could 

be a successful way to support both the existence of and access to particular CES. This 

emphasizes the importance of supporting co-management strategies and creating opportunities 

for stewardship (e.g., stewardship networks, beach clean-ups, and citizen science). These types 

of actions can play an important role in ensuring community well-being and bolstering CES, 

such as sense of place, social relations, and identity. 

Social networks appear to be one way to support co-management. Interviewees spoke of many 

examples of how their stewardship network or other social network supported their well-being, 

emphasizing that an “end goal” of the network is only one small part of the benefits provided. 

Interviewees gave examples of how these networks offer immense value along the journey of 

achieving a goal in ways of social support, creating relationships with additional community 

members, sharing success/failure stories, organizational structure and facilitation, and even 

creating specific and actionable conservation goals for a community.

The goal of the West Hawaiʻi IEA, as well as many other ecosystem assessments, does not and 

should not focus on the "uptake" or "use" of CES, but rather ensuring that the opportunity exists 

by focusing on ecological spaces and cultural practices (Fish et al. 2016b). Understanding access 

in its many facets can help highlight priorities for resource management because providing and 

protecting access may be a large part of how management addresses barriers to CES (Figure 6).

Creating management that provides and protects the access to the activities and experiences that 

create or support CES may be the most promising area for action right now. 
51

Figure 6. Monitoring Cultural Ecosystem Services, Benefits, and Values through 

Meanings, Experiences, and Ecosystem Components
52

Next Steps

The importance of this work for contemporary resource management lies in an increased 

understanding of how CES contribute to human well-being, and how communities access, 

benefit from, and value CES. By integrating community values and perspectives into 

contemporary resource management, such as through the West Hawaiʻi IEA, we can increase 

support and success of efforts to support human well-being. 

This research also points to avenues for important further research. While the link between 

ecological condition and CES has been demonstrated by this research, the next critical step is 

collecting primary data on community values, beliefs, and perspectives regarding CES. This type 

of data can also assess the success of creating and conserving access to CES for communities. 

Primary data collection can include surveys and spatial analyses or representations. 
53

Mahalo Piha (Acknowledgements)

This research exists solely because of the generosity of interviewees. Their dedication to 

protecting their place is admirable and inspiring. We extend deepest gratitude to each and every 

person who gave their moʻolelo, ʻike, and noʻeau to this research in effort to continue their 

kuleana. Me ke aloha pumehana. 

We would like to acknowledge and thank the input provided by project mentors. We also thank 

NOAA’s Integrated Ecosystem Assessment for fiscal and institutional support.
54

Literature Cited

Adams A, Gould R, Brooks J. 2018. Cultural ecosystem services and coral reefs in west hawaii. 

A Community on Ecosystem Services (ACES) Annual Meeting. Arlington, VA.

Amberson S, Biedenweg K, James J, Christie P. 2016. “The heartbeat of our people”: Identifying 

and measuring how salmon influences quinault tribal well-being. Society & Natural 

Resources. 29(12):1389-1404. 

Arkema KK, Verutes GM, Wood SA, Clarke-Samuels C, Rosado S, Canto M, Rosenthal A, 

Ruckelshaus M, Guannel G, Toft J et al. 2015. Embedding ecosystem services in coastal 

planning leads to better outcomes for people and nature. Proceedings of the National 

Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 112(24):7390-7395. 

Ash N, Blanco H, Garcia K, Tomich T, Vira B, Zurek M, Brown C. 2012. Ecosystems and 

human well-being. Washington, UNITED STATES: Island Press. 

Biedenweg K, Harguth H, Stiles K. 2017. The science and politics of human well-being: A case 

study in cocreating indicators for puget sound restoration. Ecology and Society. 22(3). 

Biedenweg K, Stiles K, Wellman K. 2016. A holistic framework for identifying human 

wellbeing indicators for marine policy. Marine Policy. 64:31-37. 

Breslow SJ, Allen M, Holstein D, Sojka B, Barnea R, Basurto X, Carothers C, Charnley S, 

Coulthard S, Dolšak N et al. 2017. Evaluating indicators of human well-being for 

ecosystem-based management. Ecosystem Health and Sustainability.1-18.

Breslow SJ, Sojka B, Barnea R, Basurto X, Carothers C, Charnley S, Coulthard S, Dolšak N, 

Donatuto J, García-Quijano C et al. 2016. Conceptualizing and operationalizing human 

wellbeing for ecosystem assessment and management. Environmental Science & Policy.

Bryant E. 2011. Innovation or degradation: An analysis of hawai'i's cultural impact assessment 

process as a vehicle of environmental justice for kanaka maoli. APLPJ. 13:230. 

Chan K, Goldstein J, Satterfield T, Hannahs N, Kikiloi K, Naidoo R, Vadeboncoeur N, 

Woodside U. 2011. Cultural services and non-use values. Natural capital: Theory & 

practice of mapping ecosystem services. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. p. 206-

228. 

Chan KMA, Guerry AD, Balvanera P, Klain S, Satterfield T, Basurto X, Bostrom A, 

Chuenpagdee R, Gould R, Halpern BS et al. 2012. Where are cultural and social in 

ecosystem services? A framework for constructive engagement. BioScience. 62(8):744-

756. 

Dacks R, Ticktin T, Mawyer A, Caillon S, Claudet J, Fabre P, Jupiter SD, McCarter J, Mejia M, 

Pascua Pa et al. 2019. Developing biocultural indicators for resource management. 

Conservation Science and Practice. 1(6):e38.
55

Daniel TC, Muhar A, Arnberger A, Aznar O, Boyd JW, Chan KM, Costanza R, Elmqvist T, Flint 

CG, Gobster PH. 2012. Contributions of cultural services to the ecosystem services 

agenda. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 109(23):8812-8819. 

Department of Aquatic Resources. 2017. Coral bleaching recovery plan: Identifying management 

responses to promote coral recovery in hawaii. In: DLNR, editor. Honolulu, HI.

Dillard MK, Goedeke TL, Lovelace S, Orthmeyer A. 2013. Monitoring well-being and changing 

environmental conditions in coastal communities: Development of an assessment 

method. Silver Spring, MD.: NOAA/National Centers for Coastal Ocean Science, NOAA

Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 174. 

Downs C, Kramarsky-Winter E, Segal R, Fauth J, Knutson S, Bronstein O, Ciner FR, Jeger R, 

Lichtenfeld Y, Woodley CM. 2016. Toxicopathological effects of the sunscreen uv filter, 

oxybenzone (benzophenone-3), on coral planulae and cultured primary cells and its 

environmental contamination in hawaii and the us virgin islands. Archives of 

environmental contamination and toxicology. 70(2):265-288. 

Fish R, Church A, Willis C, Winter M, Tratalos JA, Haines-Young R, Potschin M. 2016a. 

Making space for cultural ecosystem services: Insights from a study of the uk nature 

improvement initiative. Ecosystem Services. 21:329-343. 

Fish R, Church A, Winter M. 2016b. Conceptualising cultural ecosystem services: A novel 

framework for research and critical engagement. Ecosystem Services. 21:208-217. 

Friedlander A, Aeby G, Brainard R, Brown E, Chaston K, Clark A, McGowan P, Montgomery 

T, Walsh W, Williams I et al. 2008. The state of coral reef ecosystems of the main 

hawaiian islands. In: Waddell JE, Clarke AM, editors. The state of coral reef ecosystems 

of the united states and pacific freely associated states: 2008. Silver Spring, MD: NOAA 

Technical Memorandum NOS NCCOS 73. NOAA/NCCOS Center for Coastal 

Monitoring and Assessment’s Biogeography Team. p. 219-261, 558. 

Glesne C. 2011. Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. Pearson Education, Inc. 

Gould RK, Ardoin NM, Woodside U, Satterfield T, Hannahs N, Daily GC. 2014. The forest has 

a story: Cultural ecosystem services in kona, hawai'i. Ecology and Society. 19(3):29. 

Gould RK, Klain SC, Ardoin NM, Satterfield T, Woodside U, Hannahs N, Daily GC, Chan KM. 

2015. A protocol for eliciting nonmaterial values through a cultural ecosystem services 

frame. Conservation Biology. 29(2):575-586. 

Gove JM, Lecky J, Walsh WJ, Ingram RJ, Leong K, Williams ID, Polovina JJ, Maynard J, 

Whittier R, Kramer KL. 2019. West hawai'i integrated ecosystem assessment ecosystem 

status report. NOAA Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center Special Report (SP-19-

001). 

Grafeld S, Oleson KL, Teneva L, Kittinger JN. 2017. Follow that fish: Uncovering the hidden 

blue economy in coral reef fisheries. PloS one. 12(8):e0182104. 
56

Harvey CJ, Reum JC, Poe MR, Williams GD, Kim SJ. 2016. Using conceptual models and 

qualitative network models to advance integrative assessments of marine ecosystems. 

Coastal Management. 44(5):486-503. 

Hernández-Morcillo M, Plieninger T, Bieling C. 2013. An empirical review of cultural 

ecosystem service indicators. Ecological Indicators. 29(C):434-444. 

Hicks CC, Levine A, Agrawal A, Basurto X, Breslow SJ, Carothers C, Charnley S, Coulthard S, 

Dolsak N, Donatuto J et al. 2016. Engage key social concepts for sustainability. Science. 

352(6281):38. 

Hornborg S, van Putten I, Novaglio C, Fulton EA, Blanchard JL, Plagányi É, Bulman C, 

Sainsbury K. 2019. Ecosystem-based fisheries management requires broader performance 

indicators for the human dimension. Marine Policy. 108:103639. 

Infield M, Morse-Jones S, Anthem H. 2015. Guidelines for the rapid assessment of cultural 

ecosystem services (grace): Version 1. Fauna & Flora International.

Ingram RJ, Leong KM, Wongbusarakum S. Forthcoming 2019. Bringing human well-being into 

the west hawaii integrated ecosystem assessment program. PIFSC Internal Report, IR-19-

005. 

Ingram RJ, Oleson KLL, Gove JM. 2018. Revealing complex social-ecological interactions 

through participatory modeling to support ecosystem-based management in hawai‘i. 

Marine Policy. 94:180-188. 

Klain SC, Satterfield TA, Chan KMA. 2014. What matters and why? Ecosystem services and 

their bundled qualities. Ecological Economics. 107:310-320. 

Lau JD, Hicks CC, Gurney GG, Cinner JE. 2018. Disaggregating ecosystem service values and 

priorities by wealth, age, and education. Ecosystem Services. 29:91-98. 

Leong KM, Wongbusarakum S, Ingram RJ, Mawyer A, Poe M. 2019. Improving representation 

of human well-being and cultural importance in conceptualizing the west hawaiʻi 

ecosystem. Frontiers in Marine Science. 6:231. 

Levin PS, Breslow SJ, Harvey CJ, Norman KC, Poe MR, Williams GD, Plummer ML. 2016. 

Conceptualization of social-ecological systems of the california current: An examination 

of interdisciplinary science supporting ecosystem-based management. Coastal 

Management. 44(5):397-408. 

Levin PS, Fogarty MJ, Matlock GC, Ernst M. 2009. Integrated ecosystem assessments: 

Developing the scientific basis for ecosystem-based management of the ocean. PLoS 

Biol. 7(1):e14. 

Marshall NA, Thiault L, Beeden A, Beeden R, Benham C, Curnock MI, Diedrich A, Gurney GG, 

Jones L, Marshall PA et al. 2019. Our environmental value orientations influence how we 

respond to climate change. Frontiers in Psychology. 10(938). 
57

Maynard J, Gove J, Tracey D, Johnson J, Lecky J, Conklin E, Hooidonk Rv, Donovan M, 

Hospital J, Kleiber D et al. 2019. Coral reefs: Vulnerability to climate change in west 

hawai‘i.

McMillen H, Ticktin T, Springer HK. 2017. The future is behind us: Traditional ecological 

knowledge and resilience over time on hawai‘i island. Regional Environmental Change. 

17(2):579-592. 

Michalos A, Smale B, Labonté R, Muharjarine N, Scott K, Moore K, Swystun L, Holden B, 

Bernardin H, Dunning B. 2011. The canadian index of wellbeing. Canadian Index of 

Wellbeing, Waterloo.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005a. Ecosystems and human well-being. Washington, 

DC: Island Press.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. 2005b. Ecosystems and their services. Washington, DC: 

Island Press.

Olander LP, Johnston RJ, Tallis H, Kagan J, Maguire LA, Polasky S, Urban D, Boyd J, Wainger 

L, Palmer M. 2018. Benefit relevant indicators: Ecosystem services measures that link 

ecological and social outcomes. Ecological Indicators. 85:1262-1272. 

Palinkas LA, Horwitz SM, Green CA, Wisdom JP, Duan N, Hoagwood K. 2015. Purposeful 

sampling for qualitative data collection and analysis in mixed method implementation 

research. Adm Policy Ment Health. 42(5):533-544. 

Pascua P, McMillen H, Ticktin T, Vaughan M, Winter KB. 2017. Beyond services: A process 

and framework to incorporate cultural, genealogical, place-based, and indigenous 

relationships in ecosystem service assessments. Ecosystem Services.

[PIFSC] Pacific Islands Fisheries Science Center. 2020. Including Human Well-Being in 

Resource Management with Cultural Ecosystem Services, 

https://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/inport/item/62739 

Poe MR, Donatuto J, Satterfield T. 2016. “Sense of place”: Human wellbeing considerations for 

ecological restoration in puget sound. Coastal Management. 44(5):409-426. 

Rice J, Rochet M-j. 2005. A framework for selecting a suite of indicators for fisheries 

management. ICES Journal of Marine Science (1054-3139) (Elsevier), 2005-05 , Vol 62 , 

N 3 , P 516-527. 62. 

Rodrigues JG, Kruse M. 2017. Marine and coastal cultural ecosystem services: Knowledge gaps 

and research priorities. One Ecosystem. 2:e12290. 

Saldaña J. 2013. The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Sage. 

Seidman I. 2006. Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for researchers in education and 

the social sciences. New York: Teachers College Press.
58

Shackeroff JM. 2008. The historical ecology and social-ecological systems of kona coast coral 

reefs: Towards' peopled'approaches to marine science and management. Duke University. 

Smith C, Clay P. 2010. Measuring subjective and objective well-being: Analyses from five 

marine commercial fisheries. Human Organization. 69(2):158-168. 

Smith LM, Case JL, Smith HM, Harwell LC, Summers J. 2013. Relating ecoystem services to 

domains of human well-being: Foundation for a us index. Ecological Indicators. 28:79-

90. 

State of Hawaii. 2010. Hawaii coral reef strategy: Priorities for management in the main 

hawaiian islands 2010-2020. Honolulu, HI. 

Sterling E, Filardi C, Toomey A, Sigouin A, Betley E, Gazit N, Newell J, Albert S, Alvira D, 

Bergamini N. 2017a. Biocultural approaches to well-being and sustainability indicators 

across scales. Nature Ecology & Evolution.1. 

Sterling E, Ticktin T, Kipa Kepa Morgan T, Cullman G, Alvira D, Andrade P, Bergamini N, 

Betley E, Burrows K, Caillon S et al. 2017b. Culturally grounded indicators of resilience 

in social-ecological systems. Environment and Society. 8(1):63. 

Tipa G, Nelson K. 2008. Introducing cultural opportunities: A framework for incorporating 

cultural perspectives in contemporary resource management. Journal of Environmental 

Policy & Planning. 10(4):313-337. 

Vaughan MB. 2018. Kaiaulu: Gathering tides. Oregon State University Press. 

Wongbusarakum S, Madeira EM, Hartanto H. 2014. Strengthening the social impacts of 

sustainable landscapes programs. Arlington, VA, The Nature Conservancy.
59

Appendix A Interview Guide For Community Leaders

Discuss interview objectives

1. Understand the meaning of human well-being within communities of West Hawai‘i in 

relation to the coastal and marine environment 

2. Identify human well-being categories that are salient to West Hawai‘i communities

3. Understand how “cultural ecosystem services,” intangible values, and the meanings of 

“resources” are related to the well-being of West Hawai‘i communities

4. Understand if resource management can help to maintain or improve the well-being of 

West Hawai‘i communities 

Interview objectives relate directly to the larger goals of the West Hawai‘i Integrated Ecosystem 

Assessment. These include: (1) contribute knowledge and refine science-based strategies for 

protecting and improving both ecosystem services and well-being for West Hawai‘i residents; (2) 

develop a set of human well-being indicators related to cultural ecosystem services; and (3) 

produce knowledge that can be used to support the integration of community values in resource 

management. 

Possible questions

1. Introduction 

a. What is your name? 

b. How long have you lived in West Hawai‘i? 

c. What communit(y/ies) are you a part of?

d. What is your age? (If not comfortable, age group is fine.) 

e. What do you do for a living? (If retired, what did you do?) Feel free to be general 

if you don’t want to get specific. 

f. What types of activities do you do along the coast or in the ocean? How often? (If 

activities are solo activities: What about activities with your friends or family?)

2. Status of ecosystem and connections to well-being

a. Can you tell me what a healthy coastal and marine environment would look and 

feel like to you? 

b. What changes do you notice related to the coastal and marine environment? 

i. Do these changes seem to happen slowly or quickly? 

ii. How have you or your larger community responded to changes? 

3. Identifying human well-being categories for cultural ecosystem services

a. I’m going to ask you to tell me a bit about how you connect with the coastal and 

marine environment from multiple perspectives: your own, your families, and 

your communities. 

i. First, how do you connect with the coastal and marine environment? 

Connections can be an activity, experience, feeling, or anything else that 

helps you cultivate your relationship with the place. 
60

ii. What about your family, are there different connections when we look at it 

from this perspective? 

iii. And your greater community? 

iv. Is there a larger scale, beyond community, that you want to mention? 

b. Of these different ways you and your community createand maintains these 

connections that we’ve discussed, which is the most irreplaceable? What would 

you miss the most if it were to disappear? 

c. Earlier we discussed changes to the coastal and marine environment. Do these 

changes affect your connection to this place or the activities you do here? 

i. Do you expect to see more changes in the future? What types of changes? 

Are any of these changes related to a changing climate? 

d. Are there particular experiences with the coastal and marine environment that you 

hope your kids or other kids within your community will experience? What are 

they, and why are they important? 

i. Were these experiences important in past generations? Why are they so 

particularly important across generations? 

e. Has an experience in the coastal or marine environment taught you something(s)? 

i. Sometimes we learn new things outside of traditional classroom settings, 

do you have an example of this? 

f. Are there specific places on the coast are very important to you? 

i. Are these specific places important for educational, heritage, or spiritual 

reasons? Can you describe why they are important? Are there reasons that 

are not physical or tangible? 

ii. Are there places that remind you of important past events that are 

important to you, your family, or community? Can you share with me 

what the experience of those places and/or your attachment to them feels 

like? (Stories of the experience is an example answer.)

g. What about other connections?* 

4. Science and management helping the community

a. In your opinion, can marine/resource management help to maintain or improve 

you and your community’s well-being? Can you give me some examples of how? 

i. Has being a part of the Kai Kuleana Network been beneficial to your 

community? If yes, how so? 

b. Are there ways that scientific research can improve you/your community’s wellbeing? 

5. Conclusion 

a. We’ve discussed many ways that your connection to this land and ocean affects 

your everyday life here. Are there any other connections that we haven’t talked 

about that you want to mention? 

b. Do you have any questions for me before we end?
61

Appendix B Interview Guide For Resource Managers

Definition of “resource manager” for research purposes:

Resource manager can be defined as someone who holds a paid position with an organization, 

agency, etc. whose mission includes promoting the restoration and sustainability of natural areas 

and resources. 

Possible questions

1. Go over consent form and description of project/purpose of the interview 

a. An update on the types of interviews completed so far; focus has been on 

identifying cultural connections between people/communities and the marine 

environment, in an attempt to bolster support for these elements in management 

strategies

2. Introduction(s) and background of interviewee(s)

a. Name/age/years lived in West Hawai‘i 

b. What communit(y/ies) are you a part of?

c. What is your professional role in resource management? How long have you 

worked in this position? What brought you into this field of work? 

3. Status of ecosystem and connections to well-being

a. Can you tell me what a healthy coastal and marine environment would look and 

feel like to you? 

b. What changes do you notice related to the coastal and marine environment? 

i. Do these changes seem to happen slowly or quickly? 

ii. Do you expect to see more changes in the future? What types of changes? 

Are any of these changes related to a changing climate? 

iii. How have you or your agency responded to changes? How have your 

management strategies changed or evolved in response to environmental 

changes? 

4. Community perceptions, feelings, and response to perceived or real environmental 

changes

a. What communities do you talk or work with? 

i. How do you engage with these communities? 

ii. Does your organization see themselves as an extension of the community? 

(Too what extent/why? How?) 

iii. Are you happy with this level of engagement? Why? Do you find it 

effective for your goals? 

iv. What would you change if you could change anything? 

b. Do you think that the general population feels any sense of urgency toward 

protecting or restoring the marine environment? What makes you think that? 
62

c. Earlier we discussed changes to the coastal and marine environment. Do you see 

these changes affecting the way that communities interact and connect with the 

marine environment? 

5. Using spatial information in management strategies

a. How do you use maps in your work? 

b. What spatial information do you wish you had? 

c. Have you ever thought about using maps for anything related to social values or 

communities in some way? 

6. Science and management helping the community

a. In your opinion, how can marine resource management help maintain or improve 

you a community’s well-being? 

b. Do you see co-management as a positive option/route for communities in 

Hawai‘i?

7. Conclusion

a. What do you wish you had in order to benefit communities in West Hawai‘i? 

b. Do you have any questions for me before we end? 
63

Appendix C Data Analysis Codebook

Code Name Description

aina momona the concept that the land and ocean are abundant and plentiful; providing more 

than what people need or want to take

analogies or metaphors statements making analogies/metaphors

anchialine or fish ponds any mention of anchialine ponds of fish ponds

aquaculture any time someone mentions aquaculture happening or potentially happening 

off of West Hawaiʻi 

can't do anything any comment the speaker makes indicating that there’s nothing they can do to 

address environmental or cultural change; can include comments about why 

other people can't or don't do anything

changes in behavior or mindset when a person changes their behavior in direct response to a change in the 

environment (which was caused by human impact, naturally, or otherwise)

intergenerational changes in behavior occurred across generations

over one person's lifetime changes in behavior occurred within a lifetime

changes occurring elsewhere participant mentions changes occurring in other places (on different islands or 

in a different state/country)

connection any discussion of connection of system to itself or people to system here 

(using words like "connection" specifically

ancestral ancestral/lineal connection

connection to land when someone is talking about their connection specifically to land or mauka 

(can be related to connections to ocean, or stand alone)

connection to ocean when someone is talking about their connection specifically to ocean

connection via memory when someone is talking about their connection that they experience via 

memory

cultivating or stoking a 

connection

when someone is experiencing a bolster in connection

DISconnection experience or observation of disconnection

facilitating a reconnectionexperience or observation of something that creates a once existing connection
64

Code Name Description

levels of connection description of multiple levels of connection

other connections connections that do not fit in other categories

Coral Bleaching Event of 2014-

2015

comments relating to the massive coral bleaching event of 2014-2015

fishing license any mention of opinions or observations of a potential fishing license

hard to explain use this code any time somebody expresses a sentiment like "it's hard to 

explain" or "it's hard to put this in words"

health indicator mentions of reefs as indicator of planet's overall health

human community mentions of human community (as opposed to ecological)

community well-being 

versus individual human 

well-being

specific quotes that describe how community well-being is different than 

human well-being

definitions descriptions of what community looks like, feels like, or can be define as

what communities do 

people belong to and why

direct answer to question

irreplaceable when an interview describes something as "irreplaceable" or uses a synonym

lost value when a place, connection, activity loses value

memorable quotes memorable quotes

Q+A Healthy coast and ocean direct response to interview question about healthy coastlines and oceans

reciprocity two-way relationship; reciprocal relationship

reef or ocean characteristics these codes denote when a speaker is talking about a particular aspect of the 

marine environment or reefs with regard to our questions of interest (e.g., 

change, management)

change valence (related to 

reef or ocean 

characteristics)

these codes can be matched with any other code to indicate change in that 

code in the indicated direction

decrease participant indicates that things have decreased

increase participant indicates that things have increased
65

Code Name Description

no change participant specifically indicates that things have not changed

no net change some things have improved, others gotten worse, overall net zero change

unsure participant specifically states that they are not sure whether or how things have 

changed

coral participant mentions coral specifically (not coral reef)

coral cover participant mentions coral cover specifically

coral health participant mentions the health of the coral specifically

future coastal and marine 

changes

participant mentions changes that can/will happen in the future, according to 

their perspective or observations

hypothetical changes participant mentions a change that may or may not happen

marine species number participant mentions the number of marine species

marine species size participant mentions the size of a marine species

marine species type participant mentions the type of marine species

ocean generally participant refers to the ocean generally, not specifically

reef generally participant refers to the reefs in general, not a specific reef or component

shoreline generally participant refers to the shoreline generally, and not a specific location or 

event

speed of change the speed at which the change happens

fast the changes are discussed as happening quickly

respect or loss of respect when someone mentions respect for the land, ocean, elders, etc.

responsibility for change what/who is responsible for changes in reef or ocean characteristics

speed of change the speed at which the change happens

fast the changes are discussed as happening quickly

slow the changes are discussed as happening slowly

what responsible what is discussed as being responsible for change
66

Code Name Description

access issues any mentions of access being responsible for changes

animal harassment participant discusses humans harassing animals

dolphin 

harassment

harassment to specifically dolphins

fish 

harassment

harassment to specifically fish

manta ray 

harassment

harassment to specifically manta rays

turtle 

harassment

harassment to specifically turtles

aquarium fish trade discussions of the formal aquarium fish trade

certain fishing 

practices

discussions of specific fish practices

climate when changes are attributed to climate

coral bleaching specific mentions of coral bleaching

drought specific mentions of drought

large storm 

events

specific mentions of large storm events

ocean 

acidification

specific mentions of ocean acidification

sea level rise specific mentions of sea level rise

warming water specific mentions of warming water

commercial fishing specific mentions of commercial fishing

creation of private 

property

discussions of how private property changed things

development coastal and shoreline development

economics economy, economics, in general
67

Code Name Description

erosion specific mentions of erosion

invasive species specific mentions of invasive species

management or 

regulations

specific mentions of management or regulations

many factors when a participant identified that multiple factors contributed to change

mechanical harm to 

the reef

when the reef is harmed physically by human contact or direct destruction 

(e.g., anchors)

media media responsible for changes; social media, news outlets, etc

overfishing overfishing mentioned specifically

pollution various types of pollution responsible for changes

ag or other 

fertilizer runoff

Specifically, runoff related to ag

marine debris trash and similar objects

plastics micro plastics

stormwater 

runoff

runoff related to stormwater/storm drains

sunscreen chemical sunscreen damage

waste water 

and sewage

discussions related to waste water, sewage, OSDS, etc

population increase increased population in general

overcrowding places becoming crowded or overcrowded

tsunami direct mentions of tsunami events

volcano direct mentions of volcanic activity

who responsible who is discussed as being responsible for change

government or 

politicians

any level of government
68

Code Name Description

houseless the population of persons who do not have homes/dwellings

immigrants when an interviewee uses the term "immigrants"

locals people who have generational ties to Hawaiʻi

Native Hawaiians people who have Native Hawaiian ancestry

new residents someone who has moved to Hawaiʻi recently; usually defined by interviewee

ocean tourism 

companies

companies who conduct marine tour operations

people general references to people, humans, or humanity being responsible

recreationalists people participating in an activity for enjoyment or sport; not provisioning or 

livelihood alone

tourists short term and non-permanent visitors

scientific research direct mention of how scientific research affects HWB or CES

snowball snowball contacts

social hierarchy when someone mentions the levels of belonging or "right to be" in a place

being from a place versus 

moving there

when discussions that related to the differences that occur when being from 

(i.e., born) a place versus moving to the place at some time

social networks official or unofficial group

fishing network pertains to unofficial network of fisherman in West Hawaiʻi

Kai Kuleana Network pertains to official Kai Kuleana Network

spatial anytime someone mentions a way that CES or HWB could be spatially 

monitored, even if they are not explicitly stating it

stewardship mentions of stewardship at an organizational level; specific examples of 

stewardship

action others should take, 

as believed by speaker

stewardship related actions that the speaker believes others should take

actions others take stewardship related actions that the speaker mentions that others do take
69

Code Name Description

speaker taking action stewardship related actions that the speaker is a part of

surface slicks direct mentions of surface slicks

vog direct mention of volcanic gases

well-being broad code:" catch-all" for people who are not specific in how they are using 

well-being

change valence (related to 

human experiences or 

well-being)

change related to human well-being

decrease examples of decreased well-being

increase examples of increased well-being

net zero change examples of no change overall in well-being (i.e. some good, some bad 

changes, evens out)

no change examples of no changes in well-being

unsure examples of uncertainty in changes to well-being

cultural ecosystem 

services

intangible or non-material ecosystem services; must be referring to 

reefs/ocean/coastal areas

aesthetics satisfaction or meaning from visual characteristics or beauty of the reefs or 

coast; also includes soundscapes, feel of wind--satisfaction from sensory 

experiences; includes things like "i like seeing the reefs" even if don't mention 

beauty specifically

bequest mention of importance of reefs for future generations; includes sharing 

experiences with children

ceremony mention of importance of reefs for ceremonies (or greater coastal/marine area)

education and 

knowledge

learning or teaching opportunities or examples

ingenuity reefs help speaker think about solutions to problems (specifically from a 

biomimicry sort of angle)

knowledge 

transmission 

knowledge transmission from one person/entity to another (place-based, 

observational, formal, informal, etc.)
70

Code Name Description

local and 

traditional 

knowledge

local knowledge about the coastal and marine environment; ability to 

recognize the presence of environmental signs or indicators (e.g. bioindicators)

everything or life code responses that coral reefs are "everything" or that they are "life" to this 

node

existence reefs matter simply because they exist, because they're part of the earth, or 

because they have a right to live; can include mentions of things reef does for 

us here that might also be supporting or regulating if the tone of the comment 

is that they are also valuable because they exist

diversity of 

reef

existence of diversity of coral reef

fulfilling 

stewardship

caring for reefs or coasts because it provides benefit/satisfaction—ability to 

care for resources and environment

successorship When someone mentions the need for the next generation to understand the 

importance of stewardship, specifically in a way unconnected to employment

traditional or 

cultural 

stewardship

customary rights and responsibilities are locally known, practiced, and 

respected; specifically referring to caring for a culture or tradition, which can 

but may not always include acts of environmental stewardship

heritage, tradition, 

culture

connection to cultural stories, traditions, past events, multi-generational 

interactions/connections with natural resources; archaeological and historic 

sites; cultural resources; acceptable historical change; "kinship;" 

different; not 

Native 

Hawaiian 

specifically

general reference, not necessarily related to Native Hawaiian, use this code if 

it is unclear what specific aspect of heritage or culture is being referred to

Native 

Hawaiian 

specifically

specifically discussing Native Hawaiian

identity personal or communal identity if someone mentions feeling connected to the 

reefs because they grew up around them, or going to the beach, or something 

along those lines, code that to this node

identity of 

West Hawaiʻi 

as a whole

discussions or mentions that represent West Hawaiʻi as a whole
71

Code Name Description

inspiration Broadly circulating public discourse about collective responsibilities (e.g., 

caring for place or malama ‘aina); specifically for art or other forms of 

creative expression; local artistic or creative practices

novel experience emergent code for reefs being valuable because they provide a novel 

experience; for mentions of "paradise," combine with recreation code; 

combine with recreation

recreation playing, tourism, activities related to reefs; include non-extractive activities

sacred mention of reefs as having sacred or religious significance

sense of place mention that reefs or coastal environment contribute to one's sense of 

belonging or feeling at home there. sense of self, community, and/or home 

related to the coastal and marine environment

eating locally 

grown and 

caught food

importance of eating local

proper place 

names

importance of using proper/traditional place names

social relations mention of strengthening ties in family or community; presence of strong 

social ties or networks; sense of community; trust in neighbors

family 

specifically

speaking specifically of family interactions

sharing the practice of sharing goods, services, time with others in the community

spirituality mention of metaphysical forces larger than oneself or beyond one's 

comprehension interacting with the coastal/ocean to perpetuate spiritual 

beliefs and practices (e.g., divine power)

religion specifically mentions spirituality in relation to a religion

way of life or 

lifestyle

any mentions of way of life here, and also code to identity. include 

provisioning services (be specific if you can) IF they make reference to an 

economic or provisioning component related to "way of life"

disservice mentions of reefs causing harm to people/communities’ well-being

governance and 

management

in relation to coastal and marine environment

access physical or otherwise (emotional, memory)
72

Code Name Description

decrease decreased access

increase increased access

adaptive 

management

contemporary or community/traditional entities mentioning adaptive 

management

another level of 

community

in vivo code: communities formed by governance structures or interest rather 

than geography

co-management contemporary and community working together

common pool 

resource issue

in vivo code: discussion about common pool resources in a manner that 

suggests the resource is being impacted by common pool "rules" or 

specifically considered common pool

contemporary 

management

formal, "western" style natural resource management

control over lineal 

land

in vivo code: discussions about control over lineal land

effectiveness (or 

success) of 

management

perceptions of management, permits, and regulation; adequate funding and 

staff capacity for achieving management objectives; partners and collaboration

marine management 

areas

legally recognized

merging traditional 

w/contemporary 

management

discussion of ways the modern resource management is or potentially could be 

conducted in tangent with traditional management styles

political 

participation and 

equity

participation in marine management decision-making processes and 

leadership; stakeholder processes; exercising rights/interest in politics; 

management reflects local and traditional values

regulations legally enacted marine laws

succession when people mention the younger generations taking over management of 

resources in management positions

trust trusting contemporary management entities is mentioned or implied (existing 

or lacking)

health human health
73

Code Name Description

mental and 

emotional health

mental/emotional health is mentioned or implied

perspective participant mentions their own perspectives on mental/emotional health

nutritional health specific mentions to nutritional health

physical health physical health is mentioned or implied

negative emotions mentions of how coast/marine create negative emotions

anger interviewee mentioned exact word or synonym

annoying interviewee mentioned exact word or synonym

disheartened interviewee mentioned exact word or synonym

fear interviewee mentioned exact word or synonym

frustration interviewee mentioned exact word or synonym

sadness interviewee mentioned exact word or synonym

stress interviewee mentioned exact word or synonym

neutral well-being claims that reefs don't affect well-being (can put negative well-being here as 

well as a placeholder)

positive emotions mentions of how coast/marine create positive emotions

calm or stress relief interviewee mentioned exact word or synonym

enjoyment interviewee mentioned exact word or synonym

excitement interviewee mentioned exact word or synonym

happiness interviewee mentioned exact word or synonym

hope interviewee mentioned exact word or synonym

joy interviewee mentioned exact word or synonym

provisioning ecosystem 

services

must be referring to reefs/coastal areas

biochemicals examples of provisioning ecosystem services as biochemicals
74

Code Name Description

economic support examples of how provisioning ecosystem services provide economic support

tourism money specifically referring to money/economy related to tourism

food examples of provisioning ecosystem services as food

crab any species of crab but must be referring to eating crab

fish any species of fish but must be referring to eating fish

kalo taro; Colocasia esculenta; but must be referring to eating

limu seaweed; but must be referring to eating

octopus must be referring to eating

opihi limpet; must be referring to eating

other seafood eating seafood

resources equal 

icebox

in vivo code: resources discussed in a way that equates the marine 

environment with storage

salt gathering/eating salt

turtles eating turtles; a practice that is illegal but has historically been an issue

regulating ecosystem 

services

must be referring to reefs/coastal areas

storm protection coastal/marine protection from storm events

water purification water purification processes

water regulation water regulation processes

safety and security security and safety related to real or perceived environmental risks

supporting ecosystem 

services

must be referring to reefs/coastal areas

primary production e.g., photosynthesis

structure of 

ecosystem

structure of coral reef, or shoreline ecosystem
75

Appendix D Kai Kuleana Network Analysis

Significant quotes from interviews with Kai Kuleana Network members

• You know, I think everybody has a piece in doing something really well. You know, all 

of these communities are successful because they’re doing something really well. And 

another community might not be doing what these guys are doing as well as the other 

guys are, and so, to be able to bring together community, like under Kai Kuleana, is a 

good start to do that. 

• KKN member: ...that’s really where we focus our energies and efforts, is trying to figure 

out in some cases how do we get from conversation to action. 

Becky: That’s something that you guys are able to help with? 

KKN member: Well, we need to better, I think. But that’s definitely a part of it. The 

Network is supported by NOAA. And so NOAA has some tangible needs and in the 

absence of any social science indicators, then we rely on the ecological ones, which is 

really a harder sell to show the benefits in that group.

• I hope that people feel empowered from coming to those meetings. I think they do. I've 

never seen – you know, after the meeting people often stick around and they’ll talk story 

with each other and they’ll kind of enhance their connections. 

• And I think that’s why the networks are so important and that’s why it’s important for us 

to help them be able to thrive and sustain themselves here and Maui Nui, the Kua, 

statewide and global networks. Those are really important for if we’re going to see a comanagement future where the people of communities are actually really involved in what 

happens in their place. And if those dissolve, then the theory is that people will get 

disengaged and they’re run roughshod over by special interests and other groups that 

don’t have the connection. And as we’ve talked about, then the connection can be further 

eroded. So it’s a negative feedback loop that gets created if the ability for people to feel 

empowered and participate goes away.

• [In relation to NOAA/HFA support] What isn’t happening and may not need to happen, 

but is something to always consider is to have kind of community-facing staff on this 

island or to have somebody who can spend enough time here to really get to know what’s 

needed. 

• That whole philosophy of forming a network is something that I really believe in. 

Because each community is strong and has amazing people within the community. And, 

each individual community is doing amazing things specific to their place. And then Hui 

Loko and Kai Kuleana is the philosophy of like, together we’re stronger. 

• A good example is the ‘Try Wait’ initiative for Ka’ūpūlehu. Kai Kuleana Network 

showed up. Brought their whole families, brought their whole communities to the public 

hearing. And, it’s the philosophy that, you know your resources the best, we stand by you 

in pushing forward what you know to be best. Whether or not they agree with every 
76

management plan or you know objective of ‘Try Wait’—some didn’t. They believed that 

Ka’ūpūlehu had the right to drive their own ship. You know, navigate their own path. So, 

they showed up in support. 

• In addition, there’s just all the sharing within the networks. Um, sharing of like, what 

they’re going through, and challenges, success stories, creative solutions, funding, getting 

grants for the whole network that can be shared. 

• The resources don’t get chances to recover. That’s why I think it’s important, like, groups 

like Kai Kuleana to take responsibility and try to educate. 

• I'm also a member of, you know, Kai Kuleana. To me that’s one of the best organizations 

that I’ve been involved with. Kai Kuleana. You know, it’s just different communities on 

the coastline from Kohala to South Point, or yeah, Miloli‘i, Ho‘okena, you know. [...] 

Yeah, I mean, I just love those people and they're into protecting their kuleana around 

their communities.

Interviewer Feedback Based on Interview Data

1. What does KKN add to the grassroots smaller groups that already exist in the area? As a 

Network, what extra value is added? 

a. The larger network provides value by offering a venue for sharing information 

about success and challenges. 

b. Opportunity for shared learning. 

c. A place for people with similar values and goals to collaborate. 

2. How does KKN advance co-management of conservation?

a. By providing the space and opportunity to facilitate collaboration amongst 

communities who all share this goal of moving toward co-management. Kai

Kuleana does not require the communities to want to achieve co-management in a 

particular way, so everyone feels welcome. This atmosphere creates a safe space 

to discuss options. It is clearly motivating and inspiring to community members. 

3. What is the value added to the communities by KKN? (That some community members 

may not even realize is happening.) 

a. Empowerment of community members

b. Knowledge building 

c. Opportunity for diverse engagement among different community members, 

agencies, and organizations. Brings multiple levels of management to the same 

meeting. 
77

Raw Interview Data Related to Kai Kuleana Network

Interview 1

Reference 1

Interviewer: Do you, speaking of that community side and building that capacity, what are your 

thoughts on networks like Kai Kuleana?

KKN member: Awesome.

Interviewer: And their ability to organize and support [communities] and stuff?

KKN member: Yup. It’s great. Very happy with The Nature Conservancy. You know, they 

invited us to participate in the Conservation Action Plan that they’re doing for South Kohala. 

And so I was... went in there with the thought, what we were talking about today about people 

are part of the ecosystem. [...] And, so I brought up the concept that people are connected to the 

environment and people, connections should be a target in addition to coral reefs...in addition to, 

you know...

Interviewer: That’s exactly... I agree with you, yeah.

KKN member: So, in addition to all of that, that connection is threatened. And, so, it needs to be 

a target. It was a bit of a challenge [...] but they did embrace it. So it’s... kinship, community 

connections is a target now. And then when you look at what [NAME], them, are doing down at 

[PLACE NAME]. They were given that pond by [NAME], and so they embraced that. That 

concept of community connection, [everyone involved] really embrace this whole thing about 

connecting community. So that was very encouraging, and so I feel like: ‘Wow!’

Reference 2 

KKN member: So. An organization like Kai Kuleana is great because we were actually basically 

working with all of those communities already.

Reference 3 

Interviewer: I think so. I mean, a lot of these are just general stuff and I think that we touched on 

all the main topics which is pretty much about, like I said, the connection to place and

community capacity was a big thing that I wanted to talk about, which we did. And then that the 

power, or, whether or not power does exist in networks. Community networks.

KKN member: Absolutely. You know, I think everybody has a piece in doing something really 

well. You know, all of these communities are successful because they’re doing something really 

well. And another community might not be doing what these guys are doing as well as the other 

guys are, and so, to be able to bring together community, like under Kai Kuleana, is a good start 

to do that.
78

Interview 2

Reference 1 

Interviewer: Right. Okay. I think my only last question -- or last topic, I should say, because -- is 

specifically about Kai Kuleana. And I just want to talk about it directly and ask you what your 

overall impression of the Network has been and -- I mean, you're obviously more than just a part 

of it. I think you can take credit for a lot of the structure and that's a huge component of success. 

Can you just talk to me about how you see Kai Kuleana benefiting people and their 

communities? 

KKN member: I can try. 

Interviewer: Okay. 

KKN member: The real goal there is just to create a safe space for them to determine all that. 

That's the goal of the Network, is they've done their need’s assessment. They've done their 

thinking about who needs to be a part of it. They come prepared to the meetings to share what 

they feel is important and we make sure that there's always space for them to do that. 

They've set up the structure to do pule before the meetings, to do pule before meals. They've set 

up their decision-making structure. Basically, what we have done is help them schedule meetings 

and write down what they say and provide food. And so I think the network, itself -- for the 

successful aspects of what they do, it's all them, themselves. For the parts that might not be quite 

as refined, that's really where we focus our energies and efforts, is trying to figure out in some 

cases how do we get from conversation to action. 

Interviewer: That's something that you guys are able to help with? 

KKN member: Well, we need to better, I think. But that's definitely a part of it. The Network is 

supported by NOAA. And so NOAA has some tangible needs and in the absence of any social 

science indicators, then we rely on the ecological ones, which is really a harder sell to show the 

benefits in that group. And the other thing that I always prepare all of our groups for, and this has 

come in handy in [PLACE NAME], for instance, and [PLACE NAME], is the absence of TNC. 

So we're on an annual budget cycle. The priorities of the organization can change with new 

leadership. So that's why right now there's a little bit more focus on the structure of the Network, 

and I think we have a long way to go for them to be able to be independent, and that's just one of 

my worries, is that we'll run out of time before they get where they need to be to not need us at 

all. 

But so far, through providence and the support of NOAA, we've continued to have time to work 

with our networks and groups, and even the [PLACE NAME] community. I don't know that the

Nature Conservancy is going to always manage the [PLACE NAME]. So something we think 

about is building that succession in. 

I hope that people feel empowered from coming to those meetings. I think they do. I've never 

seen -- you know, after the meeting people often stick around and they'll talk story with each 
79

other and they'll kind of enhance their connections. 

I think this exchange to Molokai was huge, and just in that kind of 24/7 experience -- 24/3 

experience?

Interviewer: Yeah, does it feel like seven? 

KKN member: Yeah, I think so. But building those bonds, and the reason that this is important 

from our perspective is just because when people want to make a change, as you've 

acknowledged there's a lot of people out there who don't know about it at all, who are going to 

oppose it no matter what. It's really hard for an individual or a small community to stand up to all 

of those groups. And I think that's why the networks are so important and that's why it's 

important for us to help them be able to thrive and sustain themselves here and Maui Nui, the 

Kua, statewide and global networks. Those are really important for if we're going to see a comanagement future where the people of communities are actually really involved in what 

happens in their place. And if those dissolve, then the theory is that people will get disengaged 

and they're run roughshod over by special interests and other groups that don't have the 

connection. And as we've talked about, then the connection can be further eroded. So it's a 

negative feedback loop that gets created if the ability for people to feel empowered and 

participate goes away. 

I think the Habitat Focus Area has been really good in that it's gotten a lot of NOAA attention on 

specific geographies, West Hawaiʻi being one and a good recipient of that. And we've worked 

really, like, well with people in NOAA that I didn't know existed before because of that Habitat 

Focus Area. So resources related to sea level, to fish monitoring, to human dimensions, you 

know, have been brought here and are making tangible contributions to the work that we do. 

What isn't happening and may not need to happen, but is something to always consider is to have 

kind of community-facing staff on this island or to have somebody who can spend enough time 

here to really get to know what's needed. 

My perspective on what's needed is just the resources to continue to support communities. So the 

level of support that they're getting now is based on the amount of resources available. More 

resources means more support, means more faster growth. And organizational capacity, 

sustainable financing, archival documentation, a lot of these things are beyond the scope of what 

is happening now, but would be really useful. And then participatory planning at a more regional 

scale is something that NOAA could help a lot with. You know, I think about the MPA Center, I 

think about some of the groups that are within NOAA that are good at what the State's 

proposing, to roll out 30 x 30. And those groups would be really good to at least engage. 

But the main thing with all of it is local knowledge. So if NOAA's comfortable, kind of having 

partners do that, to fill that role, then there are definitely partners who can and will do it. 

But it might not hurt to have some institutional capacity within NOAA, that would mean 

somebody who has local knowledge over here, sort of, being a part of your team. 
80

Interview 3

Reference 1

Interviewer: Okay. That makes sense. Has being within the Kai Kuleana Network helped your 

community achieve its management goals in any way? 

KKN member: I would say yes, but maybe not directly. But certainly indirectly. First of all, just 

through networking with people who have that like mind. Remember I was talking to you about 

if everybody thinks the same, that they are supposed to be doing this, then there’s no conflict. So 

the group that we’re in, unfortunately, well not unfortunately, but we’re all kind of like minded 

so it really helps to understand that we’re not the only ones who have, you know, those 

challenges of wanting to manage the resources better. We’re not the only ones seeing the decline. 

We’re not the only ones willing to take action. And, in the... I think one of the benefits, and I’m 

looking at this really strategically, I think one of the benefits is the more people we get in Kai 

Kuleana, the more we can help inform some entity like the West Hawai‘i Fishery Council or 

DAR or DOCARE or whatever. And we’re all kind of thinking together. And then when it comes 

to making those changes, if they’re administrative, then we can work as a group, as a 

community. And, I think we can also change the thinking, I guess, of the people in our 

communities or the people who comes into our communities. Left to our druthers in [PLACE 

NAME], the people there know how to manage their resources already, they just can’t. 

Interviewer: They can or cannot?

KKN member: They can’t because it’s just, there’s too much outside pressures coming in over 

which we got no control. 

Interviewer: So there’s support coming out of Kai Kuleana? 

KKN member: Oh yeah. 

Interviewer: You guys are able to support each other, learn from each other?

KKN member: Oh yeah. Learn from each other. Right. 
81

Interview 4

Reference 1 

KKN member: It was important. So what ended up being, is [NAME 1] got involved and 

[NAME 1] made a 15 minute film, and then entered it into the film festival. So, it won its little 

category at the Waimea and Ocean Film Festival in January, but that’s also how we united with 

[NAMES 2 and 3]. Because they were there for the presentation of the Ha‘ena Point one. And, 

[NAME 2], of course, is a hysterical woman, as I am, and so when she sees the part where he 

cries in the movie she lost it. And then she made a vow that she wasn’t gonna let his tradition 

die, and they have been hounding us since then. So, we went up and visted them. And then, um, 

[NAME] been pushing for us to join Fisheries Council and then Kai Kuleana Network invited us 

in. 

Reference 2

KKN member 1: Because the thing we enjoyed about, with The Nature Conservancy and the Kai 

Kuleana Network is the first step is identify the culture and tradition, second step is find your 

kupuna that’s actually living and practicing, third step is humility. Which is what he’s all about. I 

mean he’s humble, right? So, that’s what we were approached to, and what we were appealed to, 

is that these people who are silently doing things in the back and that’s Kai Kuleana Network–

who knew they existed. I didn’t know they existed. He’s good friends with some of them. It’s 

very quiet, very private. But they’ve done all this amazing stuff. And so, we feel really honored.

Reference 3 

KKN member 1: So there, this is the beauty of being connected in that network now, because 

I’m like, we so need that down here.

Reference 4 

Interviewer: So, I’m hearing a lot underneath what you’re saying, being a part of this network 

can strengthen your own abilities—

KKN member 1: Absolutely. Yeah. 

Interviewer: —to do what you feel you need to do down here. 

KKN member 2: Yeah.

Reference 5 

Interviewer: So we talked a lot about the next questions on my list which were mainly about 

things related to Kai Kuleana so I can kind of skip over some of that, but I wanted to ask you 

how, in your opinion, how marine management can help to maintain or even hopefully improve 

your well-being and your community’s well-being and relationship to this place. So, if you have 

anything else to add to that? 
82

KKN member 1 to KKN member 2: What do you like about that [Kai Kuleana] meeting with all 

those people? Or did you? 

KKN member 2: It was a first time for me, and you know, what I see is working for them, and I 

think it can work down here. And you know, we need to go to more meetings so we can see more 

and more of what’s really happened. 

KKN member 1: Do you feel like their supportive of each other in some way? 

KKN member 2: Yeah, they’re really supportive and then, you know, first, I’ve been down that 

area, you know, Pine Trees road area, when it was controlled. And how dirty it was [before], I 

was so surprised, we drove through there and the way the place looks, and how it’s been kept. It 

is just, it’s unbelievable. 

KKN member 1: You know what, that’s old Hawaiian style. You know when I came here you 

guys weren’t dirty. 

KKN member 2: Yeah, it’s old Hawaiian style but it wasn’t that way before. 

KKN member 1: No. How they’ve done it. 

KKN member 2: How they done it now, you know, it’s unbelievable. I was surprised. 

KKN member 1: You know, it’s integrated. 

Interviewer: Of how cleaned up it is? 

KKN member 2: Clean. How clean and how taken care it is. 

KKN member 1: It’s also, it lets the public in, that you have to deal with, like down here. 

KKN member 2: They letting the public in, you know. 

KKN member 1: But in a controlled manner, and providing facilities so you don’t have the 

issues. They’re providing security, they’re providing the gardening and landscaping, they’ve 

paved it. 

KKN member 2: The luas and everything. 

KKN member 1: They keep the luas, you know. So the management of it is amazing. 

Interviewer: That’s something that you could see, envision, that could happen in this area? 

KKN member 2: Envision that could happen in this area. Yeah. 

Interviewer: Whatever that version is works for here?

KKN member 1: Yeah. 
83

KKN member 2: It would be nice if you could bring that in this area. 

KKN member 1: It’s like Kiholo. What Hui Aloha Kiholo has done. It’s like, oh my god, they 

did it. 

Interviewer: Find a way...

KKN member 2: Find a way to circle it to here. 

Reference 6 

KKN member: ...that’s where I think like, when you see like Haʻena Point. We saw their movie 

and how long it took them, but that they’re their own advisory now. Like, they’re here, like here 

with the state. But it’s like, that’s where the indigenous knowledge was recognized by the state. 

So that seems to me like where science can really help. On all levels. Like, whether it’s a cultural 

assessment, because that’s gonna speak the language of the people who own things. The State 

owns it. NOAA owns it. Or you know, the responsibility has come to the government. But, you 

know, you can still work. And that’s like when you see these community based management 

projects, that’s where it’s starting to work. So on some level I think that that. What we’ve seen, is 

like when we’re at the Kai Kuleana meeting, it’s like everybody is freaking out about Chad 

leaving. If he leaves in 2 years. Because like, well, how do we keep Chad?
84

Interview 5

Reference 1 

Interviewer: One thing that led me to talk to Kai Kuleana first is you guys exist and you have a 

definition of place and what that means to you as a group and community? 

[Kai Kuleana Member nods] 

Reference 2 

Interviewer: Has being a part of Kai Kuleana been beneficial or brought some benefit to the 

community? 

KKN member: Yes, and I did just bring that up at [my last community meeting], may I continue 

to speak for them. And they said yes. So that's part of our standard operating procedure, is to 

reaffirm this voice being acceptable to them. And it has been. Yes, and I think also what we 

bring to the other communities in terms of strategic examples. Examples of employing strategy 

to accomplish our desired results. And then for us, having, and the benefit back to us, to have 

allies and to have people that would participate with us in outreach and teaching. And providing 

testimony for one another. So just because of where we are timing wise, you know, more so 

we're providing testimony for other folks at this point than they for us. When we did [an 

initiative], I don't know if Kai Kuleana was born yet, but we did benefit from the E Alu Pu 

Network and so we... E Alu Pu is like a giant Kai Kuleana. 

Interviewer: Okay. 

KKN member: And that was a tremendously interesting experience because not everybody 

agreed with [the initiative], but nobody testified against it. Because with the Hui, as you get to 

know people, even if you don't agree with what they're doing, if you've come to have respect or 

even affection for them you're not so likely to testify against them. You might challenge them at 

your table, but you're not gonna go out and challenge them. So it was interesting, one of the E 

Alu Pu members, one member, an older male, who just didn't like it. But after he came to 

hearing... But he pledged that he wouldn't testify against it. But after he came to the hearing, and 

he saw the hearing, he was wearing our shirt. And when we organized our testimony with 

tremendous deliberation.
85

Interview 6

Reference 1 

Interviewer: Have you felt like being a part of the Kai Kuleana Network has been a positive 

thing for your community? 

KKN member: Yeah, actually. In the beginning I was kind of like, eh, because I was already 

investing and I still am, investing time with [GROUP NAME 1] so, you know, first thought was, 

oh man another group I gotta join. I got enough on my plate! I have so much on my plate and it's 

just overwhelming sometimes. When I was asked by [NAME] to, ‘hey you like attend one 

meeting and represent [GROUP NAME 1]?’ But I don't know if he understand what else 

background I had, and work I was already doing. That kind of grew into the, okay, now I'm kind 

of representing multiple communities. Not only [PLACE NAME 1] for my family, but also 

[PLACE NAME 2] and [PLACE NAME 3] because of [my work], and the management of this 

place that we kind of manage more for educational and access wise, but then also helping to take 

care of these sacred places and wahi pana here in [PLACE NAME 2], kind of naturally kind of 

formed. But I think it's a good thing, recently in the last maybe 2 years, I felt, okay, you know, 

maybe this is a good network to be part of. Just hearing, you know... And I always thought it was 

a good Network. But they're trying to convince [my work] that it's legitimate for me to leave 

during work hours to go for a two to three hour meeting. It was a little bit hard. 

But, I think it is a good. And most recent, I want to just say in the last few years, it kind of 

became, maybe in the last three years since we did the work with the kuʻula, I think has been... 

Helped me to find the relevance. Because before I was like, I'm only here for the [GROUP 

NAME 1] and I don't know if people care for the [GROUP NAME 1] or whatever, but I didn't 

feel invested in [Kai Kuleana] because that was initially how I got invited in, was through 

[GROUP NAME 1]. [...] But once I found my niche as to a function that I can have to 

contribute. Because for me, I like to have one function. I like to be able to contribute. I don't 

wanna be sitting there just to kill time. I no more time for kill like that. So it's like, okay I'm here 

for the [GROUP NAME 1], okay our meeting is only this long, I'm leaving right after. Because 

yeah, good to hear all the updates from the families and finding out how [GROUP NAME 1] can 

help, but... When I found my niche to present on what we were doing with our family place and 

with the kuʻula and what we doing [...] working with the families, then I figured out, hey you 

know, I get one function. I have a function because I can update these communities that come 

from Kohala to South Kona as to what we're doing in [PLACE NAME 2] and [PLACE NAME 

3], and what are we doing with [PLACE NAME 1]. So, once it got to that point, I think, then I 

found the value in Kai Kuleana. But in the beginning, just coming in for [GROUP NAME 1], I 

was like, Oh man I feel like I'm wasting my time. But it was nice to hear and see everybody, I 

guess that's a part of maintaining relationships with people in our community. So, I found that 

value in a sense but, again, I still kind of felt like, yuck, because [...] I don't even know if they 

care. But when I found a way of being more functional in the space, I think that helped. That 

helped a lot. 

Interviewer: Did you get support from Kai Kuleana and help when you were doing the work for 

the different community work that you've done? Like have you felt that they've been able to 

support you. I don't know a lot about the Network. 
86

KKN member: Not yet. So, we've been around when we've helped other communities in the 

Network. I don't know how much it helped to share with them about [our initiatives]. I think, 

[...] but I think just that dialog of interacting to share what we're doing and how we can help 

each other out, I think, has been good to be able to just interact with these people in the 

community. And finding new ways that we can serve, too, [from my work’s side...] The dialog 

part, and knowing if there is a need, and if there is a need I can bring it back to my KS folks that 

do provide funding for the community. You know, the opportunity presented itself and then 

they're fortunate to get the money. 

Reference 2 

KKN member: Yeah. Sorry, we went off track, but Kai Kuleana hasn't helped me yet. Yet. 

Interviewer: Like, directly?

KKN member: Yeah. But it has had a positive influence, and being able to learn about what 

other people are doing in their communities has been helpful for me to understand, too. And 

share this information with [my work]. And see how we can help to meet those needs, and also 

check off those boxes that are essential to our strategic plan and relevant. 
87

Interview 7

Reference 1 

KKN member: But um, with communities, the Hui Loko network and the Kai Kuleana Network 

are the two that I [participate in]... That whole philosophy of forming a network is something 

that I really believe in. Because each community is strong and has amazing people within the 

community. And, each individual community is doing amazing things specific to their place. 

And then Hui Loko and Kai Kuleana is the philosophy of like, together we’re stronger.

Interviewer: Uh huh.

KKN member: A good example is the ‘Try Wait’ initiative for Ka’upulehu. Kai Kuleana 

Network showed up. Brought their whole families, brought their whole communities to the 

public hearing. And, it’s the philosophy that, you know your resources the best, we stand by you 

in pushing forward what you know to be best. Whether or not they agree with every management 

plan or you know objective of ‘Try Wait’--some didn’t. They believed that Ka’upulehu had the 

right to drive their own ship. You know, navigate their own path. So, they showed up in support. 

Interviewer: Mmm hmm.

KKN member: That was huge. And, I think was why ‘Try Wait’ was so successful. Um...

Interviewer: Because of that network support?

KKN member: Because of the network support. 

Interviewer: Ok.

KKN member: So, when it’s time to show up, you have a whole other community showing up in 

support of what you’re trying to push forward.

Interviewer: Yeah.

KKN member: In addition, there’s just all the sharing within the networks. Um, sharing of like, 

what they’re going through, and challenges, success stories, creative solutions, funding, getting 

grants for the whole network that can be shared. 

Reference 2 

Interviewer: Are they stronger for being a part of that network rather than just a community 

themselves, even though they are strong by themselves. 

KKN member: I would say yes.

Interviewer: Ok.

KKN member: I think that there's... each community is unique, right? 
88

Interviewer: Uh huh.

KKN member: Each community has its own dynamics, its own challenges, its own management 

initiatives. Some of them are like further along on the progression of being organized than 

others.

Interviewer: Sure, yeah.

KKN member: But, I do feel that the ones that have joined the networks and have started those, 

like, learning exchanges. [...]

Interviewer: Yeah.

KKN member: They’re stronger because of the training that they get, their ability to learn from 

others’ mistakes or others’ successes and apply it to their own community. It’s... yeah. They’re 

supported, so they don’t feel isolated and so the morale of the community feels like others have 

got their backs. They’re they... they’re not alone. Some of the challenges seem insurmountable 

but when you... you don’t have any money, when you’re not organized, you don’t have a nonprofit, but you have great intentions and you really care. 

Interviewer: Yeah.

KKN member: And some of the times it feels like: Where do you even start?

Interviewer: Totally. 

KKN member: So, here’s this whole group of other communities that have been there. 

Reference 3 

KKN member: So, there was a lot of misinformation about ‘Try Wait’ by the opposition.

Interviewer: Yeah.

KKN member: There was also that public hearing where...

Interviewer: I watched that.

KKN member: It was impressive.

Interviewer: Yeah.

KKN member: So that was where Kai Kuleana showed up.

Interviewer: Ok.

KKN member: You know, they brought the whole family. They brought all of the neighbors 

from all of the communities. And came to that meeting. And that was kind of the climax of all of 

the preparation that had been going on in Kai Kuleana for it. 
89

Reference 4

KKN member: And TNC being in a support role. And them getting more organized, is was 

where I was going with that. So, ‘Try Wait’ was like seeing the power of it, and I think that it 

was impressive for all the communities, too. And they’re like: Ok, we supported Kaʻupulehu, we 

now know that all these people will show up for us when we want to push forward a 

management initiative. And, that’s great. And now Kai Kuleana is even talking about... I don’t, I 

haven’t been at the meetings the last few months. But, getting organized. Forming their own nonprofit. Going for grant funding for Kai Kuleana.
90

Interview 8

Reference 1 

KKN member: That’s great because it’s all because... you know, I mean, we’re all from 

different ahupuaʻa’s and we’re sharing what goes on because we’re concerned of what goes on in 

each... each everybody’s ahupuaʻa, you know, mostly your own, but then you find out that 

certain of the ahupuaʻa’s are having the same kind of situation that you have... And, uh, which 

is... doesn’t only cover from the ocean, but it always goes from the ocean to the mountain, you 

know what I mean? So...

Reference 2

KKN member: Yeah, basically it was, you know, it was just... you know Kona has grown. 

Queen K has come in. Queen K has done a lot of good, but yet it has done a lot of bad too, huh? 

Because it really hurt our, you know, our fishing ground shorelines, you know, because 

accessibility came too easy. Whereas before you’d have to come from Mamalahoa Highway and 

you’d have to catch the trails that come down or come by boats, you know? So that gave the 

grounds time to rest, to recover, but now there are so many people, there are so many boats, you 

know. The resources don’t get chances to recover. That’s why I think it’s important, like, groups 

like Kai Kuleana to take responsibility and try to educate.

Reference 3 

Interviewer: Do you think, um, that the Kai Kuleana Network is a beneficial structure? Or that 

there’s... the communities within that network have been able to... Or, is being a part of that 

network beneficial?

KKN member: Yeah, it’s been a real positive. 

Interviewer: Ok.

KKN member: It’s a positive. Um, the reason why I say it’s a positive is because... the way it’s 

run now, with [NAME]. I mean, [NAME]... I kind of wish it wasn’t with TNC. Not because 

TNC is doing anything wrong, but, like [NAME’S] time... his time is on the clock.

Interviewer: Right.

KKN member: And sooner or later he’s going to leave us. And that’s what I’m saying, I don’t 

want him to leave us because he’s been so influential in guiding us through... through, to the 

point where we are today, you know?

Interviewer: Mmm hmm.

KKN member: Like, I think you heard in the meeting today that you can see that they’re 

searching for everybody to take over the meetings and stuff. I can’t go up there and do that. I 

mean...
91

Interviewer: Yeah, it takes a lot of energy.

KKN member: Yeah. It’s planning and... I don’t know. But, I think it is positive and they speak 

to the right people, the bring the right people to get the right story.

Interviewer: Ok.

KKN member: I mean, we have numerous, numerous talk session with the DLNR Chairman or 

Deputy Chairman or stuff like that. So, you know, they create a lot of avenues to have 

communication.

Interviewer: To get the... whatever change, or whatever... is being...

KKN member: Whatever the situation is. You know, whatever, like say we talking about KLMC 

things, you know, and... But that’s only a 10 year closure and I think [they’re] on the third year 

or something like that...

Interviewer: Mmm hmm.

KKN member: And prior to all that we got the ears to have it closed. It was difficult.

Interviewer: Mmm hmm.

KKN member: And that's part of it. I wish we can do it all the way down the coastline, you 

know.
92

Interview 9

Reference 1 

Interviewer: And then is there any other, I guess, level, beyond your community down here 

specifically that also has values or connections that you would want to mention. I'm thinking, 

greater West Hawaiʻi in general or anything. 

KKN member: Yeah. I'm also a member of, you know, Kai Kuleana. To me that's one of the best 

organizations that I've been involved with. Kai Kuleana. You know, it's just different 

communities on the coastline from Kohala to South Point, or yeah, Miloliʻi, Hoʻokena, you 

know. 

Reference 2 

Interviewer: No worries, that's okay. You said it's the best organization to be involved with?

KKN member: Yeah, I mean, I just love those people and they're into protecting their kuleana

around their communities. Just a really good people. I suppose it's because they're all Hawaiians, 

they all have that in their naʻau, it's part of their culture. So, I enjoy those folks. But that's 

probably the most important connection. 

Interviewer: Do you feel like the Kai Kuleana Network helps everyone achieve their goals for 

their community?

KKN member: Yes. Yeah. 

Interviewer: That's wonderful. 

KKN member: That's why, you know, we've been so effective on, like, by Kona Village, 

Kaʻupulehu. You know their fishing rules?

Interviewer: Mmhhmm, yes. 

KKN member: That's a great thing. 

Interviewer: Definitely. 

KKN member: And they're, you know, that's spreading to other islands. Now it's Molokaʻi, 

Moʻomomi. And Haʻena on Kauai. They've got rules.. 

Reference 3 

Interviewer: That’s a good example. [long pause] Totally flipping the spectrum now, we talked a 

little bit about different management stuff that has gone on down here. Like the fishing 

conservation districts, and [PLACE NAME] being a part of Kai Kuleana and stuff like that. Do 

you feel like your voice, or your community’s voice, has a place in resource management 

decision making?
93

KKN member: Definitely. 

Interviewer: You have felt like there have been examples where you inserted your voice and it 

has been heard?

KKN member: Yes. 

[Talks about first example.]

Interviewer: Has Kai Kuleana been one of the venues that your community has been able to 

voice things? 

KKN member: Yeah. 

Interviewer: Have they been supportive?

KKN member: Yeah. 
94

Interview 10

Not a Kai Kuleana Network member officially; does not attend meetings but is well known and 

involved

Reference 1

Interviewee 1: Because when we go to KMLAC or part of Kai Kuleana, to me the most powerful 

thing is Hawaiians coming together and communicating. Because, we bring our kuleana and our 

manaʻo of mano or of certain places of these special places and every other person who comes to 

the table has their special places, their special practice.

Interviewee 2: Uh huh.

Interviewee 1: Their little stories and their history. And their part of the culture that makes it 

more complete when you come together. But not only does it enrich everyone else from hearing 

it... it gives us a better ability and a better tool and a better, stronger voice to enact the change. 

And, I think, um, you only have that ability when there has been enough of a change.