This research used observation, secondary data, semi-structured interviews with key informants, and questionnaire surveys to collect the information. This was done in two steps: I) First mapping the structure of the value chain at each site, II) then survey with a representative set of respondents in each node, and also interview some key informants. The main topics were: (1) fishing and trade characteristics, (2) effort and history, (3) catch volume and value, (4) assets and expenses, (5) barriers to entry and upgrading opportunities, (6) market structure and conduct, (7) relations affecting fisher and trader behaviour, (8) household characteristics, and (9) demographics. The research aimed to provide a better understanding of how a set of commodities flow from the point of extraction all the way to the end consumer, who benefits in this trade and opportunities for improvement in the chain the SPACES project conducts interviews with fishers, traders, processing companies as well as observations at landings sites and markets. The commodities in focus are mixed reef fish (e.g. rabbitfish, grouper, goatfish), octopus, small pelagics, and mangrove pole.This project aims to better understand the links between ecosystem services (ES) and wellbeing in order to design and implement more effective interventions for poverty alleviation. We do this in the context of coastal, social-ecological systems in two poor African countries; Kenya and Mozambique. Despite recent policy and scientific interest in ES, there remain important knowledge gaps regarding how ecosystems actually contribute to wellbeing, and thus poverty alleviation. Following the ESPA framework, distinguishing ecological processes, 'final ES', 'capital inputs', 'goods' and 'values', this project is concerned with how these elements are interrelated to produce ES benefits, and focuses specifically on how these benefits are distributed to (potentially) benefit the poor, enhancing their wellbeing. We thus address the ESPA goal of understanding and promoting ways in which benefits to the poorest can be increased and more people can meet their basic needs, but we also identify conflicted tradeoffs, i.e. those which result in serious harm to either the ecosystem or poor people and which need urgent attention. Several fundamental questions are currently debated in international scientific and policy fora, relating to four major global trends which are likely to affect abilities of poor people to access ES benefits: (1) devolution of governance power and its impacts on local governance of ecosystems and production of ES, (2) unprecedented rates and scales of environmental change, particularly climate change, which are creating new vulnerabilities, opportunities and constraints, 'shifting baselines', and demanding radical changes in behaviour to cope, (3) market integration now reaches the most remote corners of the developing world, changing relationships between people and resources and motivations for natural resource management, (4) societal changes, including demographic, population, urbanisation and globalisation of culture, forge new relationships with ES and further decouple people from direct dependency on particular resources. Study sites have been chosen so as to gather empirical evidence to help answer key questions about how these four drivers of change affect abilities of poor people to benefit from ES. We aim for direct impact on the wellbeing of poor inhabitants of the rapidly transforming coastal areas in Mozambique and Kenya, where research will take place, while also providing indirect impact to coastal poor in other developing countries through our international impact strategy. Benefits from research findings will also accrue to multiple stakeholders at various levels. Local government, NGOs and civil society groups - through engagement with project activities, e.g. participation in workshops and exposure to new types of analysis and systems thinking. Donor organizations and development agencies - through research providing evidence to inform strategies to support sector development (e.g. fisheries, coastal planning and tourism development) and methods to understand and evaluate impacts of different development interventions - e.g. through tradeoff analysis and evaluation of the elasticities between ecosystem services and wellbeing. International scientific community - through dissemination of findings via conferences, scientific publications (open access), and from conceptual and theoretical development and new understandings of the multiple linkages between ecosystem services and wellbeing. Regional African scientists will benefit specifically through open courses offered within the scope of the project, and through dissemination of results at regional venues. Our strategies to deliver impact and benefits include (1) identifying 'windows of opportunity' within the context of ongoing coastal development processes to improve flows of benefits from ecosystems services to poor people, and (2) identifying and seeking to actively mitigate 'conflicted' tradeoffs in Kenya and Mozambique.

1. Participant Observation: random, informal conversations around the landing sites, market, at night after fieldwork in the villages. 2. Semi-structured Interviews for mapping with key informants. 3. Questionnaire: one for fishers, one for traders of fish/octopus and two for mangrove poles 4. KI interviews/In-depth interviews with key informants, such as the "beach recorder" or the official at the site and older fishers or traders. The point of KI Interviews was to capture aspects that are not appropriate to ask in a time-constrained questionnaire or are too complicated. From these interviews we wanted to know more on: - Nature of relationships (people satisfied? what are the relations or perceptions of them like) - Influences of overfishing or trading activities, what influences actors in their businesses? - Changes in the seafood market system over time, 5-10-15 years, major changes. 5. Triangulation: to ensure that findings are triangulated, especially from the observations, more than one person was always asked the same question