IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v13y2024i7p976-d1427737.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Envisaging Participatory Management in Protected Areas: Local Response to Proposed Conservation Actions in Relation to Environmental Orientation

Author

Listed:
  • Vassiliki Kleftoyanni

    (Green Fund, Kifisia, GR-14561 Athens, Greece)

  • Michael Vrahnakis

    (Department of Forestry, Wood Sciences and Design, University of Thessaly, GR-43131 Karditsa, Greece)

Abstract

Involving local people in natural area management is very important to address the complexity of environmental management issues for the sustainable use of local resources. Participatory methods require the contribution of local stakeholders in decision-making. Mapping the environmental views of local communities allows for the detection of aspects that could facilitate management efforts. This research—in the frame of the Skyros LIFE project and the PAMNATURA project—measures the local acceptability of the conservation actions proposed by the LIFE project in Skyros island (Greece), in relation to recording local people’s environmental orientation using the 15-item revised New Ecological Paradigm (NEP) scale. The research was carried out by means of questionnaires. The LIFE project proposed actions were grouped into three categories according to their theme, i.e., promoting (a) nature protection, (b) agro-pastoralism and (c) ecotourism. The sample seems to largely agree with the LIFE project proposals, while the results showed high scores for most of the NEP scale items, implying pro-environmental beliefs, though there appears to be disagreement or neutrality regarding a few items. The local acceptability of the proposed actions was found to correlate to local people’s environmental concern measured through the NEP scale. Drawing on the results, the implementation of actions related directly or indirectly to economic activities and the preservation of traditional activities, as well as environmental education and interactive informing and consultation, could enhance local participation. Skyros island seems to offer an appropriate social background for applying participatory and adaptive management and implementing conservation programs.

Suggested Citation

  • Vassiliki Kleftoyanni & Michael Vrahnakis, 2024. "Envisaging Participatory Management in Protected Areas: Local Response to Proposed Conservation Actions in Relation to Environmental Orientation," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-18, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:7:p:976-:d:1427737
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/7/976/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/13/7/976/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Quetier, Fabien & Marty, Pascal & Lepart, Jacques, 2005. "Farmers' management strategies and land use in an agropastoral landscape: roquefort cheese production rules as a driver of change," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 171-193, May.
    2. Robert E. O'Connor & Richard J. Bard & Ann Fisher, 1999. "Risk Perceptions, General Environmental Beliefs, and Willingness to Address Climate Change," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 19(3), pages 461-471, June.
    3. Bonaiuto, Marino & Carrus, Giuseppe & Martorella, Helga & Bonnes, Mirilia, 2002. "Local identity processes and environmental attitudes in land use changes: The case of natural protected areas," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 23(5), pages 631-653, 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. Anastasia Mirli & Thomas Bakas & Dionissis Latinopoulos & Ifigenia Kagalou & Mike Spiliotis, 2024. "Participatory Management of a Mediterranean Lagoon Complex Social-Ecological System Using Intuitionistic Fuzzy TOPSIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-21, December.

    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. Jaeyoung Lim & Kuk-Kyoung Moon, 2021. "Can Political Trust Weaken the Relationship between Perceived Environmental Threats and Perceived Nuclear Threats? Evidence from South Korea," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(18), pages 1-13, September.
    2. Siow‐Kian Tan & Siow‐Hooi Tan, 2023. "A creative place‐making framework – Story‐creation for a sustainable development," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(5), pages 3673-3691, October.
    3. Veysel Yilmaz & Pınar Guleç & Erkan Ari, 2023. "Impact of climate change information of university students in Turkey on responsibility and environmental behavior through awareness and perceived risk," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 7281-7297, July.
    4. Xueting Hong & Zhenfang Huang & Xu Huang, 2021. "Place references in Chinese music titles since 1912: changing patterns across regions and time," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Sarah M. Naiman & Shorna B. Allred & Richard C. Stedman, 2021. "Protecting place, protecting nature: predicting place-protective behaviors among nature preserve visitors," Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, Springer;Association of Environmental Studies and Sciences, vol. 11(4), pages 610-622, December.
    6. Abdullah Uslu & Emrullah Erul & José António C. Santos & Sanja Obradović & Margarida Custódio Santos, 2023. "Determinants of Residents’ Support for Sustainable Tourism Development: An Empirical Study in Midyat, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-14, June.
    7. Asim Zia & Katherine Lacasse & Nina H. Fefferman & Louis J. Gross & Brian Beckage, 2024. "Machine Learning a Probabilistic Structural Equation Model to Explain the Impact of Climate Risk Perceptions on Policy Support," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-25, November.
    8. Jiuchang Wei & Weiwei Zhu & Dora Marinova & Fei Wang, 2017. "Household adoption of smog protective behavior: a comparison between two Chinese cities," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(7), pages 846-867, July.
    9. Eva Lindbladh & Carl Hampus Lyttkens, 2003. "Polarization in the Reaction to Health‐Risk Information: A Question of Social Position?," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 23(4), pages 841-855, August.
    10. Yeheng Pan & Yu Xie & Hepeng Jia & Xi Luo & Ruifen Zhang, 2022. "Lower Carbon, Stronger Nation: Exploring Sociopolitical Determinants for the Chinese Public’s Climate Attitudes," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-13, December.
    11. Shihu Zhong & Jie Chen, 2019. "How Environmental Beliefs Affect Consumer Willingness to Pay for the Greenness Premium of Low-Carbon Agricultural Products in China: Theoretical Model and Survey-based Evidence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-20, January.
    12. Paul M. Kellstedt & Sammy Zahran & Arnold Vedlitz, 2008. "Personal Efficacy, the Information Environment, and Attitudes Toward Global Warming and Climate Change in the United States," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 28(1), pages 113-126, February.
    13. W. Douglass Shaw & Mark Walker & Marnee Benson, 2005. "Treating and Drinking Well Water in the Presence of Health Risks from Arsenic Contamination: Results from a U.S. Hot Spot," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 25(6), pages 1531-1543, December.
    14. D. Liliana González-Hernández & Raúl A. Aguirre-Gamboa & Erik W. Meijles, 2023. "The role of climate change perceptions and sociodemographics on reported mitigation efforts and performance among households in northeastern Mexico," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 1853-1875, February.
    15. Céline Nauges & Sarah Ann Wheeler & Kelly S. Fielding, 2021. "The relationship between country and individual household wealth and climate change concern: the mediating role of control," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(11), pages 16481-16503, November.
    16. Iversen, Endre Kildal & Dugstad, Anders, 2024. "Spatial dimensions in stated preference valuation: The role of place attachment," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 136(C).
    17. Brent S. Steel & Erika Allen Wolters & Rebecca L. Warner, 2019. "Public Preferences for Food–Energy–Water Tradeoffs in the Western U.S," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-19, September.
    18. Sigurd Hilmo Lundheim & Giuseppe Pellegrini-Masini & Christian A. Klöckner & Stefan Geiss, 2022. "Developing a Theoretical Framework to Explain the Social Acceptability of Wind Energy," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-24, July.
    19. Byoung Joon Kim & Seoyong Kim & Youngcheoul Kang & Sohee Kim, 2022. "Searching for the New Behavioral Model in Energy Transition Age: Analyzing the Forward and Reverse Causal Relationships between Belief, Attitude, and Behavior in Nuclear Policy across Countries," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-24, June.
    20. Derick A. Akompab & Peng Bi & Susan Williams & Janet Grant & Iain A. Walker & Martha Augoustinos, 2013. "Heat Waves and Climate Change: Applying the Health Belief Model to Identify Predictors of Risk Perception and Adaptive Behaviours in Adelaide, Australia," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-21, May.

    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:jlands:v:13:y:2024:i:7:p:976-:d:1427737. 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.