Dataset Information

Social impacts of European Protected Areas and policy recommendations.

ABSTRACT: Effective designation of Protected Areas (PAs) requires the careful consideration of their social impacts as these are perceived by people. These refer to a variety of issues such as the distribution of power, social equity, social relations and more importantly the impact of PAs on human wellbeing. A number of studies have emerged in the past decade aiming to capture social impacts of PAs across the world through non-monetary assessments taking into consideration people's perceptions. Although Europe is the region with the largest in proportion number of Protected Areas across the world it is also a region with very limited scientific evidence on this topic. As the European Union is preparing to implement its new Biodiversity Strategyto ipkmplement this paper aims to provide the first comprehensive review of the literature regarding social impacts of European PAs and highlight new directions for current policy frameworks in the region. The paper focuses on the perceived non-economic social costs and benefits of PAs and identifies 7 key categories of social impacts. We propose that policy planning for biodiversity conservation in Europe should incorporate subjective assessments of social costs and benefits with the aim to achieve an increase of benefits for people and their equal distribution across social groups.

SUBMITTER: Jones N

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7729820 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Oct

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Social impacts of European Protected Areas and policy recommendations.

Jones Nikoleta N Graziano Mariagrazia M Dimitrakopoulos Panayiotis G PG

Environmental science & policy 20201001

Effective designation of Protected Areas (PAs) requires the careful consideration of their social impacts as these are perceived by people. These refer to a variety of issues such as the distribution of power, social equity, social relations and more importantly the impact of PAs on human wellbeing. A number of studies have emerged in the past decade aiming to capture social impacts of PAs across the world through non-monetary assessments taking into consideration people's perceptions. Although ...[more]

PMID: 33343227

Similar Datasets

Project description:Nature-based tourism has the potential to enhance global biodiversity conservation by providing alternative livelihood strategies for local people, which may alleviate poverty in and around protected areas. Despite the popularity of the concept of nature-based tourism as an integrated conservation and development tool, empirical research on its actual socioeconomic benefits, on the distributional pattern of these benefits, and on its direct driving factors is lacking, because relevant long-term data are rarely available. In a multi-year study in Wolong Nature Reserve, China, we followed a representative sample of 220 local households from 1999 to 2007 to investigate the diverse benefits that these households received from recent development of nature-based tourism in the area. Within eight years, the number of households directly participating in tourism activities increased from nine to sixty. In addition, about two-thirds of the other households received indirect financial benefits from tourism. We constructed an empirical household economic model to identify the factors that led to household-level participation in tourism. The results reveal the effects of local households' livelihood assets (i.e., financial, human, natural, physical, and social capitals) on the likelihood to participate directly in tourism. In general, households with greater financial (e.g., income), physical (e.g., access to key tourism sites), human (e.g., education), and social (e.g., kinship with local government officials) capitals and less natural capital (e.g., cropland) were more likely to participate in tourism activities. We found that residents in households participating in tourism tended to perceive more non-financial benefits in addition to more negative environmental impacts of tourism compared with households not participating in tourism. These findings suggest that socioeconomic impact analysis and change monitoring should be included in nature-based tourism management systems for long-term sustainability of protected areas.

Project description:IntroductionA main goal of protected areas is to maintain species diversity and the integrity of biological assemblages. Intensifying land use in the matrix surrounding protected areas creates a challenge for biodiversity conservation. Earlier studies have mainly focused on taxonomic diversity within protected areas. However, functional and especially phylogenetic diversities are less studied phenomena, especially with respect to the impacts of the matrix that surrounds protected areas. Phylogenetic diversity refers to the range of evolutionary lineages, the maintenance of which ensures that future evolutionary potential is safeguarded. Functional diversity refers to the range of ecological roles that members of a community perform. For ecosystem functioning and long-term resilience, they are at least as important as taxonomic diversity.AimWe studied how the characteristics of protected areas and land use intensity in the surrounding matrix affect the diversity of bird communities in protected boreal forests. We used line-transect count and land-cover data from 91 forest reserves in Northern Finland, and land-cover data from buffer zones surrounding these reserves. We studied if habitat diversity and productivity inside protected areas, and intensity of forest management in the matrix have consistent effects on taxonomic, functional and phylogenetic diversities, and community specialization.ResultsWe found that habitat diversity and productivity inside protected areas have strong effects on all diversity metrics, but matrix effects were inconsistent. The proportion of old forest in the matrix, reflecting low intensity forest management, had positive effects on community specialization. Interestingly, functional diversity increased with increasing logging intensity in the matrix.ConclusionsOur results indicate that boreal forest reserves are not able to maintain their species composition and abundances if embedded in a severely degraded matrix. Our study also highlights the importance of focusing on different aspects of biodiversity.

Project description:Marine protected areas (MPAs) are a primary tool for the stewardship, conservation, and restoration of marine ecosystems, yet 69% of global MPAs are only partially protected (i.e., are open to some form of fishing). Although fully protected areas have well-documented outcomes, including increased fish diversity and biomass, the effectiveness of partially protected areas is contested. Partially protected areas may provide benefits in some contexts and may be warranted for social reasons, yet social outcomes often depend on MPAs achieving their ecological goals to distinguish them from open areas and justify the cost of protection. We assessed the social perceptions and ecological effectiveness of 18 partially protected areas and 19 fully protected areas compared with 19 open areas along 7000 km of coast of southern Australia. We used mixed methods, gathering data via semistructured interviews, site surveys, and Reef Life (underwater visual census) surveys. We analyzed qualitative data in accordance with grounded theory and quantitative data with multivariate and univariate linear mixed-effects models. We found no social or ecological benefits for partially protected areas relative to open areas in our study. Partially protected areas had no more fish, invertebrates, or algae than open areas; were poorly understood by coastal users; were not more attractive than open areas; and were not perceived to have better marine life than open areas. These findings provide an important counterpoint to some large-scale meta-analyses that conclude partially protected areas can be ecologically effective but that draw this conclusion based on narrower measures. We argue that partially protected areas act as red herrings in marine conservation because they create an illusion of protection and consume scarce conservation resources yet provide little or no social or ecological gain over open areas. Fully protected areas, by contrast, have more fish species and biomass and are well understood, supported, and valued by the public. They are perceived to have better marine life and be improving over time in keeping with actual ecological results. Conservation outcomes can be improved by upgrading partially protected areas to higher levels of protection including conversion to fully protected areas.

Dataset Information

Social impacts of European Protected Areas and policy recommendations.

Publications

Social impacts of European Protected Areas and policy recommendations.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets