Concern for wetlands should connect ecology and society through science, partnerships and ethics. It is therefore very welcome that a paper with a social science focus such as ‘‘Socio-economic values and traditional strategies of managing wetland resources in Lower Tana River, Kenya’’ by Terer et al. (2004) is published by a natural science journal such as Hydrobiologia. This important step helps us to realise what is required in the majority of research committees (e.g. DIVERSITAS), namely to put into practice a more integrative, interdisciplinary approach to environment related research. Given that human activity is the primary threat to wetlands, then effective solutions for the sustainable management of wetlands lie in understanding how individuals, social networks or indigenous communities (as outlined in the article by Terer et al. (2004)) value wetlands, especially those who have ownership of, and who directly utilise the living resources on which they depend. However, international conventions (like Ramsar), national policies and local regulatory experience have not resulted in the sustainable management of wetlands. This is because such arrangements do not recognise and respond to the underlying motivations of individuals and political processes. There has been considerable progress in understanding the more proximate mechanisms threatening wetlands, such as habitat fragmentation and destruction, as well as the effects of such change on ecosystem functions, goods and services. But incorporating such values into strategies which provide incentives for the sustainable use of wetlands requires the integration of social sciences. The socio-economic assessment of wetland management efforts has been neglected hitherto and there is a lack of detailed studies in this area. Terer et al. mention in this context that, ‘‘in Kenya, major management decisions are usually implemented by government departments and institutions with very little community participation or involvement. This has made the implementation of government policies difficult’’. They close with the statement that ‘‘strategies of involving communities in natural resources management depend on people’s perception, value system and use of those resources’’ but that ‘‘this is often not well understood’’. Terer et al. are right and make a fundamental point with this statement. There are many good reasons for participation, while at the same time there are major difficulties in implementing it. Stoll-Kleemann & O’Riordan (2002) have summarized the reasons that support participatory approaches in natural resources management.