Co-management, or shared governance, is an approach for sustainable and effective mangrove protection and management. It also provides livelihood for local people and contributes to better governance of natural resources. The results of the fixed-point photo monitoring from the coast of Soc Trang Province (Vietnam) from Nov. 2012 until Jan. 2015 clearly show the impacts of T-fences on sedimentation and, as a result, on natural regeneration of mangroves. Mangrove foresters need a sound understanding of mangrove ecology and of coastal processes and morphodynamics. The most effective way of planting mangroves is to learn from nature, i.e. mimic how nature plants, which species nature plants and the way nature creates a species zonation. This zonation leads to optimised coastal protection through wave attenuation by above-ground root structures along with soil stabilisation by below-ground root structures (see illustration in "How do the building blocks interact in the solution?").

Involvement of technical departments and local authorities and people in the planning, design and construction process was important to ensure acceptance, support, long-term commitment and ownership. The most effective way to restore eroded foreshores is to use permeable t-fences which create calm water conditions for sediment deposition and reduce erosion. Construction of the T-fences must follow quality standards and must be well supervised. This cost-effective approach will only be feasible within a specific set of boundary conditions (see graphic below). If these limiting criteria are exceeded to only a small extent, adaptations such as strengthening the fence with concrete poles must be considered. If the limiting criteria are exceeded to a large extent, use of T-fences is not feasible. Other factors to be considered are location of the fences to minimise lee erosion, as well as proximity to the shoreline and length of submergence periods to minimise damage by shipworms. The duration of submergence and exposure to waves also affect the effort required for maintenance.

Devoting enough time to develop the instruments and testing them was crucial for successful data collection. The team did not have to go back to collect further information. Ensuring enough funding and time for all project phases is critical. Partners had time and staff for planning, developing instruments, building alliances, collecting data, integrating the information and for organizing expert reviews. These phases lasted 10 months. However, the final edition and design of the catalog along with appropriate and authorized pictures and diagrams lasted another 10 months - far more time than expected, due to lack of funding and available staff. The delay put at risk the acceptance of the product among stakeholders, whose enthusiasm will naturally fade away.

In order for the pluralistic governance board to effectively make joint decisions, it is important for all stakeholders involved to understand the need for a co-management partnership. For example, authorities should treat communities as equal and strategic partners and vice versa. Co-management will normally yield best results if the involvement of all in the partnership is voluntarily. However, in some situations where power also means money, political supports from higher levels or national policies promoting the practice of sharing power among different stakeholders can be helpful. Members of the board also need to understand and get used to the learning by doing practice. As a whole, they should aim for achieving better results but also learn to accept failures and how to constructively criticize mistakes.

The co-management agreement is subject to modification during the learning-by-doing process. Key actors involved in shared governance should understand the need to modify the agreement based on lessons learned during implementation. The co-management agreement provides the basic principles for the co-management partnership among key actors but does not limit their collaboration in making joint decisions to specific terms and problems mentioned in the agreement. Partners, such as authorities and communities, should continue to discuss and deal with any issue raised during their partnership. The co-management agreement is not the same as a fixed form of a benefit sharing mechanism even though it consists of sections specifying what resources can be collected by people and their responsibilities in forest protection. Instead, a co-management agreement is the result of negotiations and has a lot to do with adaptive management and governance issues.

• Tapping the expertise of fellows and encouraging them to self-organize around learning and action projects (seeded with resources) help them develop their leadership skills.
• Fellows’ projects are more likely to succeed if they are part of the work plan of their organization.
• Seed funding is needed to launch projects.

Local perceptions of what constitutes a “priority” ecosystem service for valuation may differ from that of project developers and researchers. In addition, data constraints may limit the extent of the valuation study. It may thus be necessary to negotiate with locals during the preliminary diagnostics phase what services meet their needs and those of the project, and which can be valued. The wide range of services provided by mangroves and surrounding coastal-marine ecosystems make a full valuation exercise very challenging. Thus, most valuation studies are partial and depend on a set of assumptions and a variety of different methods. Good working relationships with government representatives in charge of data processing and archiving, as well as a solid understanding of the details of the local livelihoods and business models is highly advantageous, which is why a livelihoods study should be conducted in parallel.