IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v99y2020ics0264837720313363.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Recreation vs conservation in Natura 2000 sites: a spatial multicriteria approach analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Rocchi, L.
  • Cortina, C.
  • Paolotti, L.
  • Boggia, A.

Abstract

Because of its high naturalness and biodiversity, Natura 2000 network (N2K) is becoming increasingly important for recreational opportunity, providing benefits in terms of physical and mental health through outdoor experiences. Nature-based tourism (NBT) is tourism based on the natural attractions of an area: the greater the recreation opportunities, the greater the attractiveness to people. N2K sites are suitable places to favour the development of the NBT, as N2K is not a system of strict nature reserves from which all human activities would be excluded. The approach to conservation and sustainable use of N2K areas is much wider, largely centred on people working with nature rather than against it. To do this, a balance between nature-based tourism development and ecological protection should be reached. In this work, we propose the application of spatial multicriteria analysis, in order to analyse multiple conflicting dimensions interacting over time, considering in particular both criteria related to NBT development and ecological protection. The aim of the work was to analyse the opportunities of Nature-based tourism development in N2K in Umbria, one of the Regions of central Italy, which consists of 102 sites. In particular, the work considered the conditions of biodiversity conservation, flora and fauna, as well as the leisure opportunities provided by the sites and the pressure produced by human activities on them. A spatial multicriteria analysis has been carried out to understand the potentiality of the N2K at territorial level. In particular, the proposed methodology would like to support decision makers in the identification of N2K sites in which NBT activities could be improved and developed, in a balanced way according to biodiversity conservation. Results show, according to preferences set by three different kinds of experts, that only a small bunch of N2K sites could be suitable for an increase of the NBT.

Suggested Citation

  • Rocchi, L. & Cortina, C. & Paolotti, L. & Boggia, A., 2020. "Recreation vs conservation in Natura 2000 sites: a spatial multicriteria approach analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:99:y:2020:i:c:s0264837720313363
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105094
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837720313363
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2020.105094?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. 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.
    2. Vallecillo, Sara & La Notte, Alessandra & Zulian, Grazia & Ferrini, Silvia & Maes, Joachim, 2019. "Ecosystem services accounts: Valuing the actual flow of nature-based recreation from ecosystems to people," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 392(C), pages 196-211.
    3. Tang, Zi, 2015. "An integrated approach to evaluating the coupling coordination between tourism and the environment," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 11-19.
    4. Ziv, Guy & Hassall, Christopher & Bartkowski, Bartosz & Cord, Anna F. & Kaim, Andrea & Kalamandeen, Michelle & Landaverde-González, Patricia & Melo, Joana L.B. & Seppelt, Ralf & Shannon, Caitriona & V, 2018. "A bird’s eye view over ecosystem services in Natura 2000 sites across Europe," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 287-298.
    5. Eastwood, A. & Brooker, R. & Irvine, R.J. & Artz, R.R.E. & Norton, L.R. & Bullock, J.M. & Ross, L. & Fielding, D. & Ramsay, S. & Roberts, J. & Anderson, W. & Dugan, D. & Cooksley, S. & Pakeman, R.J., 2016. "Does nature conservation enhance ecosystem services delivery?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 152-162.
    6. Boggia, Antonio & Massei, Gianluca & Pace, Elaine & Rocchi, Lucia & Paolotti, Luisa & Attard, Maria, 2018. "Spatial multicriteria analysis for sustainability assessment: A new model for decision making," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 281-292.
    7. Yoram Wind & Thomas L. Saaty, 1980. "Marketing Applications of the Analytic Hierarchy Process," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(7), pages 641-658, July.
    8. Rocchi, L. & Cortina, C. & Paolotti, L. & Massei, G. & Fagioli, F.F. & Antegiovanni, P. & Boggia, A., 2019. "Provision of ecosystem services from the management of Natura 2000 sites in Umbria (Italy): Comparing the costs and benefits, using choice experiment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 13-20.
    9. Tomaselli, Giovanna & Russo, Patrizia & Riguccio, Lara & Quattrone, Marzia & D’Emilio, Alessandro, 2020. "Assessment of landscape regeneration of a Natura 2000 site hosting greenhouse farming by using a dashboard of indicators. A case in Sicily through the territorial implementation of a "pilot proje," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    10. Iker Etxano & Eneko Garmendia & Unai Pascual & David Hoyos & María-à ngeles Díez & José A. Cadiñanos & Pedro J. Lozano, 2015. "A participatory integrated assessment approach for Natura 2000 network sites," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 33(5), pages 1207-1232, October.
    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. Onur Selcuk & Hatice Karakas & Beykan Cizel & Emre Ipekci Cetin, 2023. "How does tourism affect protected areas?: A multi-criteria decision making application in UNESCO natural heritage sites," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 117(2), pages 1923-1944, June.
    2. Riccardo Beltramo & Giovanni Peira & Alessandro Bonadonna, 2021. "Creating a Tourism Destination through Local Heritage: The Stakeholders’ Priorities in the Canavese Area (Northwest Italy)," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-18, March.
    3. Nikolaos Skarakis & Georgia Skiniti & Stavroula Tournaki & Theocharis Tsoutsos, 2023. "Necessity to Assess the Sustainability of Sensitive Ecosystems: A Comprehensive Review of Tourism Pressures and the Travel Cost Method," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(15), pages 1-18, August.
    4. Mónica de Castro-Pardo & João C. Azevedo, 2021. "A Goal Programming Model to Guide Decision-Making Processes towards Conservation Consensuses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-25, February.
    5. Poli, Giuliano & Cuntò, Stefano & Muccio, Eugenio & Cerreta, Maria, 2024. "A spatial decision support system for multi-dimensional sustainability assessment of river basin districts: the case study of Sarno river, Italy," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    6. Marta Lisiak-Zielińska & Arlinda Cakaj & Anna Budka & Maria Drapikowska & Klaudia Borowiak & Jolanta Kanclerz & Ewelina Janicka, 2021. "Natura 2000 Network vs. Tourism and Investment Potential of Communes—A Case Study of Czarnkowsko-Trzcianecki County," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-17, October.
    7. Hernando, Ana & Sobrini, Iñigo & Velázquez, Javier & García-Abril, Antonio, 2022. "The importance of protected habitats and LiDAR data availability for assessing scenarios of land uses in forest areas," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).

    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. Ghavami, Seyed Morsal, 2019. "Multi-criteria spatial decision support system for identifying strategic roads in disaster situations," International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 23-36.
    2. Heejeong Yun & Dongjin Kang & Youngeun Kang, 2022. "Outdoor recreation planning and management considering FROS and carrying capacities: a case study of forest wetland in Yeongam-gum, South Korea," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 502-526, January.
    3. Daněk, Jan & Blättler, Linda & Leventon, Julia & Vačkářová, Davina, 2023. "Beyond nature conservation? Perceived benefits and role of the ecosystem services framework in protected landscape areas in the Czech Republic," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    4. Samira El Gibari & Trinidad Gómez & Francisco Ruiz, 2019. "Building composite indicators using multicriteria methods: a review," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 89(1), pages 1-24, February.
    5. Banai, Reza, 2010. "Evaluation of land use-transportation systems with the Analytic Network Process," The Journal of Transport and Land Use, Center for Transportation Studies, University of Minnesota, vol. 3(1), pages 85-112.
    6. Chengkun Huang & Feiyang Lin & Deping Chu & Lanlan Wang & Jiawei Liao & Junqian Wu, 2021. "Coupling Relationship and Interactive Response between Intensive Land Use and Tourism Industry Development in China’s Major Tourist Cities," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-17, July.
    7. Pishchulov, Grigory & Trautrims, Alexander & Chesney, Thomas & Gold, Stefan & Schwab, Leila, 2019. "The Voting Analytic Hierarchy Process revisited: A revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 211(C), pages 166-179.
    8. Seung-Jin Han & Won-Jae Lee & So-Hee Kim & Sang-Hoon Yoon & Hyunwoong Pyun, 2022. "Assessing Expected Long-term Benefits for the Olympic Games: Delphi-AHP Approach from Korean Olympic Experts," SAGE Open, , vol. 12(4), pages 21582440221, December.
    9. Seyed Rakhshan & Ali Kamyad & Sohrab Effati, 2015. "Ranking decision-making units by using combination of analytical hierarchical process method and Tchebycheff model in data envelopment analysis," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 226(1), pages 505-525, March.
    10. V. Srinivasan & G. Shainesh & Anand K. Sharma, 2015. "An approach to prioritize customer-based, cost-effective service enhancements," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 35(14), pages 747-762, October.
    11. Mónica García-Melón & Blanca Pérez-Gladish & Tomás Gómez-Navarro & Paz Mendez-Rodriguez, 2016. "Assessing mutual funds’ corporate social responsibility: a multistakeholder-AHP based methodology," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 244(2), pages 475-503, September.
    12. Luis Pérez-Domínguez & Luis Alberto Rodríguez-Picón & Alejandro Alvarado-Iniesta & David Luviano Cruz & Zeshui Xu, 2018. "MOORA under Pythagorean Fuzzy Set for Multiple Criteria Decision Making," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2018, pages 1-10, April.
    13. Paul L. G. Vlek & Asia Khamzina & Hossein Azadi & Anik Bhaduri & Luna Bharati & Ademola Braimoh & Christopher Martius & Terry Sunderland & Fatemeh Taheri, 2017. "Trade-Offs in Multi-Purpose Land Use under Land Degradation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-19, November.
    14. Kumar B, Pradeep, 2021. "Changing Objectives of Firms and Managerial Preferences: A Review of Models in Microeconomics," MPRA Paper 106967, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 13 Mar 2021.
    15. Greco, Salvatore & Ishizaka, Alessio & Tasiou, Menelaos & Torrisi, Gianpiero, 2018. "σ-µ efficiency analysis: A new methodology for evaluating units through composite indices," MPRA Paper 83569, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Anirban Mukhopadhyay & Sugata Hazra & Debasish Mitra & C. Hutton & Abhra Chanda & Sandip Mukherjee, 2016. "Characterizing the multi-risk with respect to plausible natural hazards in the Balasore coast, Odisha, India: a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) appraisal," Natural Hazards: Journal of the International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, Springer;International Society for the Prevention and Mitigation of Natural Hazards, vol. 80(3), pages 1495-1513, February.
    17. Chamoli, Sunil, 2015. "Hybrid FAHP (fuzzy analytical hierarchy process)-FTOPSIS (fuzzy technique for order preference by similarity of an ideal solution) approach for performance evaluation of the V down perforated baffle r," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 432-442.
    18. H. S. C. Perera & W. K. R. Costa, 2008. "Analytic Hierarchy Process for Selection of Erp Software for Manufacturing Companies," Vision, , vol. 12(4), pages 1-11, October.
    19. Kibria, Abu SMG & Costanza, Robert & Soto, José R, 2022. "Modeling the complex associations of human wellbeing dimensions in a coupled human-natural system: In contexts of marginalized communities," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 466(C).
    20. G. La Scalia & F.P. Marra & J. Rühl & R. Sciortino & T. Caruso, 2016. "A fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methodology to optimise olive agro-engineering processes based on geo-spatial technologies," International Journal of Management and Decision Making, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 15(1), pages 1-15.

    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:99:y:2020:i:c:s0264837720313363. 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.