IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v14y2025i9p1763-d1738032.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Expert Consensus on Buffer Zone Governance: Interface Concepts, Ecosystem Service Priorities, and Territorial Strategies Around Cerro Castillo National Park, Chile

Author

Listed:
  • Trace Gale

    (Centro de Investigación en Ecosistemas de la Patagonia (CIEP), Coyhaique 5951601, Chile
    Cape Horn International Center (CHIC), O’Higgins 310, Cabo de Hornos 6350000, Chile)

  • Emilia Astorga

    (Centro de Investigación en Ecosistemas de la Patagonia (CIEP), Coyhaique 5951601, Chile
    Fisheries, Wildlife and Conservation Science, Human Dimensions Lab, Oregon State University, 2820 SW Campus Way, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA)

  • Andrés Adiego

    (Centro de Investigación en Ecosistemas de la Patagonia (CIEP), Coyhaique 5951601, Chile
    Department of Geography and Territorial Planning, Universidad de Zaragoza, Calle Pedro Cerbuna 12, 50009 Zaragoza, Spain)

  • Andrea Báez-Montenegro

    (Centro de Investigación en Ecosistemas de la Patagonia (CIEP), Coyhaique 5951601, Chile
    Institute of Statistics, Los Laureles 35 Interior, Universidad Austral de Chile (UACh), Campus Isla Teja, Valdivia 5110027, Chile)

Abstract

Buffer zones around protected areas (PA) face complex governance challenges as territorial transitions accelerate globally, yet limited consensus exists on their definition, ecosystem service (ES) priorities, and management strategies. This study employed a three-round Delphi methodology with 23 transdisciplinary experts to build consensus on buffer zone governance around Cerro Castillo National Park in Chilean Patagonia, using the IPBES ecosystem services framework to structure the analysis. Round 1 employed open-ended questions to explore expert perspectives, Round 2 evaluated 56 statements and 15 strategic components using structured questionnaires, and Round 3 refined non-consensus items. Experts achieved 76.7% overall consensus across three thematic areas: PA interface conceptualization (79.2% consensus on 24 statements), ES assessment (91.2% consensus on 34 statements), and territorial transition strategies (15 components evaluated). Water-related services achieved unanimous agreement across multiple IPBES categories, revealing their potential as boundary objects bridging conservation and development perspectives. Educational approaches and voluntary compliance emerged as high-feasibility strategic components, while regulatory frameworks showed high importance but implementation uncertainty. The study demonstrates that structured expert consultation can identify collaborative pathways for buffer zone governance, with water services providing concrete entry points for multi-stakeholder cooperation and education-based strategies offering promising implementation pathways for sustainable territorial transitions.

Suggested Citation

  • Trace Gale & Emilia Astorga & Andrés Adiego & Andrea Báez-Montenegro, 2025. "Expert Consensus on Buffer Zone Governance: Interface Concepts, Ecosystem Service Priorities, and Territorial Strategies Around Cerro Castillo National Park, Chile," Land, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-32, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:14:y:2025:i:9:p:1763-:d:1738032
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/9/1763/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/14/9/1763/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:14:y:2025:i:9:p:1763-:d:1738032. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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.