categories namely (e.g., mangrove category has 
recovered between 75% - 100%, the mangrove 
category has recovered between 50% - 75%% and the 
mangrove category has recovered <50%. Here is the 
results of respondents' assessment of mangrove 
resilience in the study area (Figure 2). 
 
Figure 2. Respondent's assessment of mangrove resilience, 
n = 100. 
The results of the respondents' assessment 
presented in Figure 2, are the mangrove condition has 
not recovered to 50% which is quite limited compared 
with those who have recovered above 50% -100%. 
However, the condition of biota (e.g., fish, shrimp, 
crabs and mollusks), more than 50% of respondents 
said, has not recovered to 50%. It explains the reason 
of mangrove has a faster recoverey compared to the 
biota associated with the location, or biota of 
economic value in the location. Those who are 
exploited have a slower recovery.. Nevertheless, the 
findings of this study were indicators of mangrove 
resilience from a community perspective in 
accordance with the concept of ecological resilience. 
The respondents are able to identify mangrove 
resilience and formulate conservation efforts for its 
preservation. This in turn generates their social 
awareness and views regarding management options. 
It can be stated that they desire the mangrove area to 
be protected, especially from the effort to change the 
mangrove land into pond land, salt fields and new 
settlement. Furthermore, they are also expected the 
mangroves used in an environmentally friendly 
manner through the development of eco-friendly 
cultivation and tourism.  
 
 
 
 
 
 
4   CONCLUSION 
The local people's perspectives on the mangroves 
resilience are significant.  The knowledge of local 
people on mangrove enviromental service is 
extremely relevant in the effort to maintain a balance 
ecosystem. The local people’s knowledge about the 
natural system is a great value to scientific research 
and understanding leading to better conservation 
efforts by all who are involved.  
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT  
The authors are thankful to the Directorate General of 
Strengthening Research and Development, 
Directorate of  Research and Community Service, 
Ministry of Research, Technology  and  Higher  
Education  of  Indonesia  for  providing  the  funding  
for  carrying  out  this  study.  The authors would also 
like to thank Dr. Alifman Hakim, a scientist from the 
University of Mataram Indonesia, for his constructive 
criticism and comments during the preparation of this 
article. 
REFERENCES 
Agil Al-I, Hadiprayitno G, Hamdi L dan Mertha IG. 
2015. Potensi Vegetasi dan Arthropoda 
diKawasan Mangrove Gili Sulat Lombok 
Timur. Biologi Tropis, 15 (2): 62-70. 
Aswani  S,  Lauer  M.  2006.  Incorporating fishers’  
local  knowledge  and  behavior into  
geographical  information  systems (GIS)  for  
designing  marine  protected areas in Oceania. 
Human Organization,. 65:80–101. 
Badola, R.,  Barthwal, S., and Hussain, S.A.2012. 
Attitudes of local communities towards 
conservation of mangrove forests: A case 
study from the east coast of India. Estuarine, 
Coastal and Shelf Science, 96:  188-196 
Berkers, F. 2010. Shifting perspectives on resource 
management: Resilience and the 
Reconceptualization of ‘Natural Resources’ 
and ‘Management. MAST.  9(1): 13-40. 
Chapin, F.S., Kofinas G.P.  and Folke, C.  2009  
Principles of Ecosystem Stewardship: 
Resilience-based Resource Management in 
a Changing World. New York: Springer-
Verlag  
0
20
40
60
Cover Density Biota
34
44
13
59
48
30
7
8
57
% Total responden