DOI: 10.2166/aqua.2026.238 ISSN: 2709-8028

Wetlands as natural water infrastructure: perceived importance, reported use and importance–use mismatch among surveyed communities near Algerian wetlands

Farrah Samraoui, Molly Elisabeth Brown, Chahrazed Nahli, Sara Snani, Yacine Rouibi, Abdallah Aouadi, Abdellatif Satour, Riad Nedjah, Boudjéma Samraoui

ABSTRACT

Graphical summary of a survey of 816 respondents from 29 villages associated with 16 Algerian wetlands. High perceived importance was reported by 85.0%, low use by 59.6%, and both together by 47.2%. HI–LU prevalence ranged from 7.2% to 67.5% across alternative definitions. Selected adjusted associations concern age and hydroclimatic zone, with arid–zone estimates based on four wetlands. The classification describes a response pattern; its proposed screening role requires independent validation.

Wetlands support water security and local well-being through provisioning services, yet perceived importance may not match reported use. We examined this relationship using 816 service-complete records from 29 villages linked to 16 wetlands in sub-humid north-eastern and arid inland Algeria. Three outcomes were analysed: high perceived importance, low reported use, and high-importance/low-use (HI–LU) mismatch. Population-averaged logistic generalised estimating equations accounted for village clustering; sensitivity analyses tested alternative HI–LU definitions, wetland-level clustering and zone-restricted comparisons. Very or Extremely important was selected by 85.0% of respondents, low use by 59.6% and HI–LU mismatch by 47.2% (primary definition); prevalence ranged from 7.2–67.5% under alternative definitions. Respondents older than 60 years had lower odds of high importance (OR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.16–0.77). Arid-zone respondents had lower odds of high importance (OR = 0.06, 95% CI: 0.02–0.19) and higher odds of low use (OR = 7.75, 95% CI: 1.81–33.14); these contrasts rested on four wetland units. Protection-status estimates were imprecise (only two wetlands recorded as unprotected). High importance can coexist with limited use. HI–LU is an operational classification, not a deficit measure; its screening utility remains unvalidated.

More from our Archive