IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v90y2020ics0264837719303539.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

To what extent can mine rehabilitation restore recreational use of forest land? Learning from 50 years of practice in southwest Australia

Author

Listed:
  • Rosa, Josianne Claudia Sales
  • Geneletti, Davide
  • Morrison-Saunders, Angus
  • Sánchez, Luis Enrique
  • Hughes, Michael

Abstract

When mining affects natural or semi-natural ecosystems such as forests, rehabilitation often aims at restoring biodiversity. However, to what extent does rehabilitation also restore cultural ecosystem services? This paper investigates the perception of two groups of recreationists that use rehabilitated bauxite mine areas in southwest Australia, bushwalkers and mountain bikers. The area has been continuously mined and progressively rehabilitated for over 50 years. Research was developed through: (i) mapping the distribution of recreation trails, mined areas and rehabilitated areas; (ii) conducting in-depth interviews with recreationists regarding perceptions and usage of forest areas and; (iii) an online survey to gauge forest characteristic preferences for recreational use. The data was subjected to statistical and qualitative analysis. Results showed that bushwalkers usually avoid mined areas while mountain bikers do not and that the recreationists’ perception of rehabilitated areas is largely shaped by the absence of large and old trees and natural landforms. We found that meeting regulatory requirements for rehabilitation, as measured by ecological indicators, does not automatically correlate with acceptable social outcomes. Conclusions highlight the value of reframing mine rehabilitation practices to accommodate cultural services in post-mining land use planning considerations alongside the well-established ecological goals so as to explicitly demonstrate the social benefits of rehabilitation.

Suggested Citation

  • Rosa, Josianne Claudia Sales & Geneletti, Davide & Morrison-Saunders, Angus & Sánchez, Luis Enrique & Hughes, Michael, 2020. "To what extent can mine rehabilitation restore recreational use of forest land? Learning from 50 years of practice in southwest Australia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:90:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719303539
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104290
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837719303539
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.104290?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pleasant, Mary M. & Gray, Steven A. & Lepczyk, Christopher & Fernandes, Anthea & Hunter, Nathan & Ford, Derek, 2014. "Managing cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 8(C), pages 141-147.
    2. Darvill, Rachel & Lindo, Zoë, 2015. "Quantifying and mapping ecosystem service use across stakeholder groups: Implications for conservation with priorities for cultural values," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 13(C), pages 153-161.
    3. Agimass, Fitalew & Lundhede, Thomas & Panduro, Toke Emil & Jacobsen, Jette Bredahl, 2018. "The choice of forest site for recreation: A revealed preference analysis using spatial data," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 445-454.
    4. Hermes, Johannes & Van Berkel, Derek & Burkhard, Benjamin & Plieninger, Tobias & Fagerholm, Nora & von Haaren, Christina & Albert, Christian, 2018. "Assessment and valuation of recreational ecosystem services of landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 289-295.
    5. Raum, Susanne, 2018. "A framework for integrating systematic stakeholder analysis in ecosystem services research: Stakeholder mapping for forest ecosystem services in the UK," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 170-184.
    6. Rozas-Vásquez, Daniel & Fürst, Christine & Geneletti, Davide & Almendra, Osvaldo, 2018. "Integration of ecosystem services in strategic environmental assessment across spatial planning scales," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 303-310.
    7. Vieira, Felipe A.S. & Bragagnolo, Chiara & Correia, Ricardo A. & Malhado, Ana C.M. & Ladle, Richard J., 2018. "A salience index for integrating multiple user perspectives in cultural ecosystem service assessments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PB), pages 182-192.
    8. Burton, Michael & Jasmine Zahedi, Shegufa & White, Ben, 2012. "Public preferences for timeliness and quality of mine site rehabilitation. The case of bauxite mining in Western Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 1-9.
    9. Baral, Himlal & Guariguata, Manuel R. & Keenan, Rodney J., 2016. "A proposed framework for assessing ecosystem goods and services from planted forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 260-268.
    10. Bullock, Craig & Joyce, Deirdre & Collier, Marcus, 2018. "An exploration of the relationships between cultural ecosystem services, socio-cultural values and well-being," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PA), pages 142-152.
    11. Kulczyk, Sylwia & Woźniak, Edyta & Derek, Marta, 2018. "Landscape, facilities and visitors: An integrated model of recreational ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 491-501.
    12. Mayer, Marius & Woltering, Manuel, 2018. "Assessing and valuing the recreational ecosystem services of Germany’s national parks using travel cost models," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 371-386.
    13. Cortinovis, Chiara & Geneletti, Davide, 2018. "Ecosystem services in urban plans: What is there, and what is still needed for better decisions," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 298-312.
    14. van der Plank, Sien & Walsh, Bríd & Behrens, Paul, 2016. "The expected impacts of mining: Stakeholder perceptions of a proposed mineral sands mine in rural Australia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(C), pages 129-136.
    15. Jaligot, Rémi & Kemajou, Armel & Chenal, Jérôme, 2018. "Cultural ecosystem services provision in response to urbanization in Cameroon," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C), pages 641-649.
    16. Jacob, Céline & Vaissiere, Anne-Charlotte & Bas, Adeline & Calvet, Coralie, 2016. "Investigating the inclusion of ecosystem services in biodiversity offsetting," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PA), pages 92-102.
    17. Polizzi, Cecilia & Simonetto, Matteo & Barausse, Alberto & Chaniotou, Ninetta & Känkänen, Riina & Keränen, Silja & Manzardo, Alessandro & Mustajärvi, Kaisa & Palmeri, Luca & Scipioni, Antonio, 2015. "Is ecosystem restoration worth the effort? The rehabilitation of a Finnish river affects recreational ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 158-169.
    18. Richards, Daniel R. & Tunçer, Bige, 2018. "Using image recognition to automate assessment of cultural ecosystem services from social media photographs," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 31(PC), pages 318-325.
    19. Bryce, Rosalind & Irvine, Katherine N. & Church, Andrew & Fish, Robert & Ranger, Sue & Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Subjective well-being indicators for large-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 258-269.
    20. Raymond, Christopher M. & Kenter, Jasper O. & Plieninger, Tobias & Turner, Nancy J. & Alexander, Karen A., 2014. "Comparing instrumental and deliberative paradigms underpinning the assessment of social values for cultural ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 145-156.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Shaobo Liu & Li Liu & Jiang Li & Qingping Zhou & Yifeng Ji & Wenbo Lai & Cui Long, 2022. "Spatiotemporal Variability of Human Disturbance Impacts on Ecosystem Services in Mining Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-20, June.
    2. Souza, Barbara A. & Rosa, Josianne C.S. & Siqueira-Gay, Juliana & Sánchez, Luis E., 2021. "Mitigating impacts on ecosystem services requires more than biodiversity offsets," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 105(C).
    3. Margarita Ignatyeva & Vera Yurak & Natalia Pustokhina, 2020. "Recultivation of Post-Mining Disturbed Land: Review of Content and Comparative Law and Feasibility Study," Resources, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-17, June.
    4. Ullah, Ayat & Zeb, Alam & Saqib, Shahab E. & Kächele, Harald, 2022. "Landscape co-management and livelihood sustainability: Lessons learned from the billion trees afforestation project in Pakistan," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    5. Abdulrahman A. Zawawi & Nicole Porter & Christopher D. Ives, 2023. "Influences on Greenways Usage for Active Transportation: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-37, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chr, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    2. Meng, Shiting & Huang, Qingxu & Zhang, Ling & He, Chunyang & Inostroza, Luis & Bai, Yansong & Yin, Dan, 2020. "Matches and mismatches between the supply of and demand for cultural ecosystem services in rapidly urbanizing watersheds: A case study in the Guanting Reservoir basin, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    3. Sinclair, Michael & Mayer, Marius & Woltering, Manuel & Ghermandi, Andrea, 2020. "Valuing nature-based recreation using a crowdsourced travel cost method: A comparison to onsite survey data and value transfer," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    4. Crouzat, Emilie & De Frutos, Angel & Grescho, Volker & Carver, Steve & Büermann, Andrea & Carvalho-Santos, Claudia & Kraemer, Roland & Mayor, Sarah & Pöpperl, Franziska & Rossi, Christian & Schröte, 2022. "Potential supply and actual use of cultural ecosystem services in mountain protected areas and their surroundings," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    5. Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Rechciński, Marcin & Tusznio, Joanna & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2022. "Divergent or convergent? Prioritization and spatial representation of ecosystem services as perceived by conservation professionals and local leaders," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    6. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    7. Chowdhury, Koushik & Behera, Bhagirath, 2021. "Traditional water bodies and cultural ecosystem services: Experiences from rural West Bengal, India," World Development Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 24(C).
    8. Spanou, Elisavet & Kenter, Jasper O. & Graziano, Marcello, 2020. "The Effects of Aquaculture and Marine Conservation on Cultural Ecosystem Services: An Integrated Hedonic – Eudaemonic Approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    9. Grzyb, Tomasz & Kulczyk, Sylwia & Derek, Marta & Woźniak, Edyta, 2021. "Using social media to assess recreation across urban green spaces in times of abrupt change," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    10. González-García, Alberto & Palomo, Ignacio & González, José A. & López, César A. & Montes, Carlos, 2020. "Quantifying spatial supply-demand mismatches in ecosystem services provides insights for land-use planning," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    11. Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Integrating deliberative monetary valuation, systems modelling and participatory mapping to assess shared values of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 291-307.
    12. Cooper, Nigel & Brady, Emily & Steen, Helen & Bryce, Rosalind, 2016. "Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: Recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services’," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 218-229.
    13. Fish, Robert & Church, Andrew & Willis, Cheryl & Winter, Michael & Tratalos, Jamie A. & Haines-Young, Roy & Potschin, Marion, 2016. "Making space for cultural ecosystem services: Insights from a study of the UK nature improvement initiative," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 329-343.
    14. Karimi, Azadeh & Yazdandad, Hossein & Fagerholm, Nora, 2020. "Evaluating social perceptions of ecosystem services, biodiversity, and land management: Trade-offs, synergies and implications for landscape planning and management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    15. Pascua, Pua‘ala & McMillen, Heather & Ticktin, Tamara & Vaughan, Mehana & Winter, Kawika B., 2017. "Beyond services: A process and framework to incorporate cultural, genealogical, place-based, and indigenous relationships in ecosystem service assessments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PB), pages 465-475.
    16. Lavorel, Sandra & Rey, Pierre-Louis & Grigulis, Karl & Zawada, Mégane & Byczek, Coline, 2020. "Interactions between outdoor recreation and iconic terrestrial vertebrates in two French alpine national parks," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    17. Ingrid Nesheim & Line Barkved, 2019. "The Suitability of the Ecosystem Services Framework for Guiding Benefit Assessments in Human-Modified Landscapes Exemplified by Regulated Watersheds—Implications for a Sustainable Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-18, March.
    18. Kenter, Jasper O. & Jobstvogt, Niels & Watson, Verity & Irvine, Katherine N. & Christie, Michael & Bryce, Ros, 2016. "The impact of information, value-deliberation and group-based decision-making on values for ecosystem services: Integrating deliberative monetary valuation and storytelling," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 270-290.
    19. Raymond, Christopher M. & Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Transcendental values and the valuation and management of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 241-257.
    20. Cetin, Nuket Ipek & Bourget, Gulhan & Tezer, Azime, 2021. "Travel-cost method for assessing the monetary value of recreational services in the Ömerli Catchment," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 190(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:90:y:2020:i:c:s0264837719303539. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.