IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i13p8140-d855193.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Large Wood Debris Contributes to Beach Ecosystems but Colombian Beachgoer’s Do Not Recognize It

Author

Listed:
  • Rogério Portantiolo Manzolli

    (Department of Civil and Environmental, Universidad De La Costa, Barranquilla 080002, Colombia
    Department of Geology and Geochemistry, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 28049 Madrid, Spain)

  • David Blanco

    (Department of Civil and Environmental, Universidad De La Costa, Barranquilla 080002, Colombia)

  • Luana Portz

    (Department of Civil and Environmental, Universidad De La Costa, Barranquilla 080002, Colombia
    Department of Geology and Geochemistry, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, 28049 Madrid, Spain)

  • Andrea Yanes

    (Department of Civil and Environmental, Universidad De La Costa, Barranquilla 080002, Colombia)

  • Seweryn Zielinski

    (Department of Hospitality and Tourism Management, Sejong University, 209 Neungdong-ro, Gwangjin-gu, Seoul 05006, Korea)

  • César Augusto Ruiz Agudelo

    (Doctoral Program in Environmental Sciences and Sustainability, Universidad Jorge Tadeo Lozano, Bogotá 110311, Colombia)

  • Andres Suarez

    (Grupo de Investigación en Gestión Marino Costera GEMARC, Universidad De La Costa, Barranquilla 080002, Colombia)

Abstract

Large Woody Debris (LWD) accumulation serves essential ecological functions and benefits society’s coastal ecosystems (e.g., beaches). Thus far, the ecosystem services perspective has paid little attention to LWD. Therefore, we aim to contrast social perceptions on LWD and its ecological significance in Puerto Velero beach, Caribbean, Colombia. In consequence, the contribution of LWD to the conformation and creation of Puerto Velero beach was analyzed, as well as how beachgoers perceive the importance of LWD and if they were willing to pay to remove LWD in this beach. To achieve this, a quantitative convergent approach was then proposed using GIS analysis and remote sensing to understand the contributions of LWD to the Puerto Velero beach ecosystem; and in addition, a survey was performed to determine how beachgoers perceived LWD and how they valued the phenomenon. Results indicate that LWD contributed to beach maintenance; nevertheless, most people neglected LWD values because of its lack of visual attractiveness. As such, ecosystem services targets become conflicted because people positively perceived ecosystem services provided by beaches, but they did not assign importance to the beach dynamics they deemed unattractive, regardless of their vast importance.

Suggested Citation

  • Rogério Portantiolo Manzolli & David Blanco & Luana Portz & Andrea Yanes & Seweryn Zielinski & César Augusto Ruiz Agudelo & Andres Suarez, 2022. "Large Wood Debris Contributes to Beach Ecosystems but Colombian Beachgoer’s Do Not Recognize It," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(13), pages 1-22, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:13:p:8140-:d:855193
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/13/8140/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/13/8140/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Manhong Shen & Di Mao & Huiming Xie & Chuanzhong Li, 2019. "The Social Costs of Marine Litter along the East China Sea: Evidence from Ten Coastal Scenic Spots of Zhejiang Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-15, March.
    2. Birdir, Sevda & Ünal, Özlem & Birdir, Kemal & Williams, Allan T., 2013. "Willingness to pay as an economic instrument for coastal tourism management: Cases from Mersin, Turkey," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 279-283.
    3. Franklin Torres-Bejarano & Luis C. González-Márquez & Beatriz Díaz-Solano & Ana C. Torregroza-Espinosa & Rubén Cantero-Rodelo, 2018. "Effects of beach tourists on bathing water and sand quality at Puerto Velero, Colombia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 255-269, February.
    4. Danley, Brian & Widmark, Camilla, 2016. "Evaluating conceptual definitions of ecosystem services and their implications," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 132-138.
    5. Wakita, Kazumi & Kurokura, Hisashi & Oishi, Taro & Shen, Zhonghua & Furuya, Ken, 2019. "Exploring the effect of psychometric variables on willingness to pay for marine ecosystem services: A survey in Japan," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 130-138.
    6. Jacob P. Hochard & Stuart Hamilton & Edward B. Barbier, 2019. "Mangroves shelter coastal economic activity from cyclones," Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 116(25), pages 12232-12237, June.
    7. Seweryn Zielinski & Celene B. Milanés & Elena Cambon & Ofelia Perez Montero & Lourdes Rizo & Andres Suarez & Benjamin Cuker & Giorgio Anfuso, 2021. "An Integrated Method for Landscape Assessment: Application to Santiago de Cuba Bay, Cuba," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-30, April.
    8. Louviere,Jordan J. & Hensher,David A. & Swait,Joffre D. With contributions by-Name:Adamowicz,Wiktor, 2000. "Stated Choice Methods," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521788304.
    9. Ambrey, Christopher L. & Fleming, Christopher M., 2011. "Valuing scenic amenity using life satisfaction data," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 106-115.
    10. Tonin, Stefania, 2018. "Citizens’ perspectives on marine protected areas as a governance strategy to effectively preserve marine ecosystem services and biodiversity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 189-200.
    11. Andrea Yanes & Seweryn Zielinski & Marlenny Diaz Cano & Seong-il Kim, 2019. "Community-Based Tourism in Developing Countries: A Framework for Policy Evaluation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-23, April.
    12. Chakraborty, Shamik & Gasparatos, Alexandros & Blasiak, Robert, 2020. "Multiple values for the management and sustainable use of coastal and marine ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    13. Pendleton, Linwood H. & Thébaud, Olivier & Mongruel, Rémi C. & Levrel, Harold, 2016. "Has the value of global marine and coastal ecosystem services changed?," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 156-158.
    14. Albert, Joelle A. & Olds, Andrew D. & Albert, Simon & Cruz-Trinidad, Annabelle & Schwarz, Anne-Maree, 2015. "Reaping the reef: Provisioning services from coral reefs in Solomon Islands," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 244-251.
    15. Williams, Allan Thomas & Rangel-Buitrago, Nelson Guillermo & Anfuso, Giorgio & Cervantes, Omar & Botero, Camilo Mateo, 2016. "Litter impacts on scenery and tourism on the Colombian north Caribbean coast," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 209-224.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. De Ayala Bilbao, Amaya & Hoyos Ramos, David & Mariel Chladkova, Petr, 2012. "Landscape valuation through discrete choice experiments: Current practice and future research reflections," BILTOKI 1134-8984, Universidad del País Vasco - Departamento de Economía Aplicada III (Econometría y Estadística).
    2. Baker, Rick & Ruting, Brad, 2014. "Environmental Policy Analysis: A Guide to Non‑Market Valuation," 2014 Conference (58th), February 4-7, 2014, Port Macquarie, Australia 165810, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    3. Ilaria Rodella & Fabio Albino Madau & Donatella Carboni, 2020. "The Willingness to Pay for Beach Scenery and Its Preservation in Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-28, February.
    4. Khedr, Salma & Rehdanz, Katrin & Brouwer, Roy & van Beukering, Pieter & Dijkstra, Hanna & Duijndam, Sem & Okoli, Ikechukwu C., 2023. "Public preferences for marine plastic litter management across Europe," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 204(PA).
    5. Zhifeng Gao & Ted C. Schroeder, 2009. "Consumer responses to new food quality information: are some consumers more sensitive than others?," Agricultural Economics, International Association of Agricultural Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 339-346, May.
    6. Tin Cheuk Leung, 2013. "What Is the True Loss Due to Piracy? Evidence from Microsoft Office in Hong Kong," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 95(3), pages 1018-1029, July.
    7. Ortega, David L. & Wang, H. Holly & Wu, Laping & Hong, Soo Jeong, 2015. "Retail channel and consumer demand for food quality in China," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 36(C), pages 359-366.
    8. Bodo Herzog, 2018. "Valuation of Digital Platforms: Experimental Evidence for Google and Facebook," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-13, October.
    9. Yamada, Katsunori & Sato, Masayuki, 2013. "Another avenue for anatomy of income comparisons: Evidence from hypothetical choice experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 35-57.
    10. Potoglou, Dimitris & Palacios, Juan & Feijoo, Claudio & Gómez Barroso, Jose-Luis, 2015. "The supply of personal information: A study on the determinants of information provision in e-commerce scenarios," 26th European Regional ITS Conference, Madrid 2015 127174, International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
    11. Sant'Anna, Ana Claudia & Bergtold, Jason & Shanoyan, Aleksan & Caldas, Marcellus & Granco, Gabriel, 2021. "Deal or No Deal? Analysis of Bioenergy Feedstock Contract Choice with Multiple Opt-out Options and Contract Attribute Substitutability," 2021 Conference, August 17-31, 2021, Virtual 315289, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    12. Joanna Coast & Hareth Al‐Janabi & Eileen J. Sutton & Susan A. Horrocks & A. Jane Vosper & Dawn R. Swancutt & Terry N. Flynn, 2012. "Using qualitative methods for attribute development for discrete choice experiments: issues and recommendations," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(6), pages 730-741, June.
    13. Bond, Craig A. & Thilmany, Dawn D. & Bond, Jennifer Keeling, 2008. "What to Choose? The Value of Label Claims to Fresh Produce Consumers," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 33(3), pages 1-26.
    14. Kontoleon Andreas & Yabe Mitsuyasu, 2006. "Market Segmentation Analysis of Preferences for GM Derived Animal Foods in the UK," Journal of Agricultural & Food Industrial Organization, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-38, December.
    15. Choi, Andy S., 2013. "Nonmarket values of major resources in the Korean DMZ areas: A test of distance decay," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 97-107.
    16. Doherty, Edel & Campbell, Danny, 2011. "Demand for improved food safety and quality: a cross-regional comparison," 85th Annual Conference, April 18-20, 2011, Warwick University, Coventry, UK 108791, Agricultural Economics Society.
    17. Koo, Tay T.R. & Wu, Cheng-Lung (Richard) & Dwyer, Larry, 2010. "Ground travel mode choices of air arrivals at regional destinations: The significance of tourism attributes and destination contexts," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 44-53.
    18. Melanie Lefevre, 2011. "Willingness-to-pay for Local Milk-based Dairy Product in Senegal," CREPP Working Papers 1108, Centre de Recherche en Economie Publique et de la Population (CREPP) (Research Center on Public and Population Economics) HEC-Management School, University of Liège.
    19. Xenarios, Stefanos & Amarasinghe, Upali A. & Sharma, Bharat R., 2011. "Valuating agricultural water use and ecological services in agrarian economies: evidences from eastern India," IWMI Reports 158839, International Water Management Institute.
    20. Shu Lin & Haichun Ye, 2013. "Does Inflation Targeting Help Reduce Financial Dollarization?," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 45(7), pages 1253-1274, October.

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:13:p:8140-:d:855193. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.