IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v8y2019i11p166-d284010.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How Much is Enough? Improving Participatory Mapping Using Area Rarefaction Curves

Author

Listed:
  • Jennifer C. Selgrath

    (Hopkins Marine Station, Stanford University; Pacific Grove, CA 93950, USA
    Project Seahorse, Institute for the Oceans and Fisheries, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada)

  • Sarah E. Gergel

    (Forest and Conservation Sciences, The University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4, Canada)

Abstract

Participatory mapping is a valuable approach for documenting the influence of human activities on species, ecosystems, and ecosystem services, as well as the variability of human activities over space and time. This method is particularly valuable in data-poor systems; however, there has never been a systematic approach for identifying the total number of respondents necessary to map the entire spatial extent of a particular human activity. Here, we develop a new technique for identifying sufficient respondent sample sizes for participatory mapping by adapting species rarefaction curves. With a case study from a heavily fished marine ecosystem in the central Philippines, we analyze participatory maps depicting locations of individuals’ fishing grounds across six decades. Within a specified area, we assessed how different sample sizes (i.e. small vs. large numbers of respondents) would influence the estimated extent of fishing for a specified area. The estimated extent of fishing demonstrated asymptotic behavior as after interviewing a sufficiently large number of individuals, additional respondents did not increase the estimated extent. We determined that 120 fishers were necessary to capture 90% of the maximum spatial extent of fishing within our study area from 1990 to 2010, equivalent to 1.1% of male fishers in the region. However, a higher number of elder fishers need to be interviewed to accurately map fishing extent in 1960 to 1980. Participatory maps can provide context for current ecosystem conditions and can support guidelines for management and conservation. Their utility is strengthened by better consideration of the impacts of respondent sample sizes and how this can vary over time for historical assessments.

Suggested Citation

  • Jennifer C. Selgrath & Sarah E. Gergel, 2019. "How Much is Enough? Improving Participatory Mapping Using Area Rarefaction Curves," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(11), pages 1-14, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:8:y:2019:i:11:p:166-:d:284010
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/8/11/166/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/8/11/166/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Klain, Sarah C. & Chan, Kai M.A., 2012. "Navigating coastal values: Participatory mapping of ecosystem services for spatial planning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(C), pages 104-113.
    3. Gonzalez, Rhodora M., 2002. "Joint learning with GIS: multi-actor resource management," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 99-111, July.
    4. Brianne A. Altmann & Greta Jordan & Eva Schlecht, 2018. "Participatory Mapping as an Approach to Identify Grazing Pressure in the Altay Mountains, Mongolia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-15, June.
    5. Chambers, Robert, 1994. "Participatory rural appraisal (PRA): Analysis of experience," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 22(9), pages 1253-1268, September.
    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. Depietri, Yaella & Ghermandi, Andrea & Campisi-Pinto, Salvatore & Orenstein, Daniel E., 2021. "Public participation GIS versus geolocated social media data to assess urban cultural ecosystem services: Instances of complementarity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    2. Shane Cronin & Mike Petterson & Paul Taylor & Randall Biliki, 2004. "Maximising Multi-Stakeholder Participation in Government and Community Volcanic Hazard Management Programs; A Case Study from Savo, Solomon Islands," 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. 33(1), pages 105-136, September.
    3. Pingarroni, Aline & Castro, Antonio J. & Gambi, Marcos & Bongers, Frans & Kolb, Melanie & García-Frapolli, Eduardo & Balvanera, Patricia, 2022. "Uncovering spatial patterns of ecosystem services and biodiversity through local communities' preferences and perceptions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 56(C).
    4. Dean Karlan & Bram Thuysbaert, 2019. "Targeting Ultra-Poor Households in Honduras and Peru," The World Bank Economic Review, World Bank, vol. 33(1), pages 63-94.
    5. Md Aboul Fazal Younus, 2017. "An assessment of vulnerability and adaptation to cyclones through impact assessment guidelines: a bottom-up case study from Bangladesh coast," 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. 89(3), pages 1437-1459, December.
    6. Apurba Krishna Deb & C. Emdad Haque, 2011. "‘Sufferings Start from the Mothers’ Womb’ : Vulnerabilities and Livelihood War of the Small-Scale Fishers of Bangladesh," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 3(12), pages 1-28, December.
    7. Chouinard, Jill Anne & Milley, Peter, 2018. "Uncovering the mysteries of inclusion: Empirical and methodological possibilities in participatory evaluation in an international context," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 70-78.
    8. E. Nederlof & Constant Dangbégnon, 2007. "Lessons for farmer-oriented research: Experiences from a West African soil fertility management project," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 24(3), pages 369-387, September.
    9. Dai, Peichao & Zhang, Shaoliang & Gong, Yunlong & Zhou, Yuan & Hou, Huping, 2022. "A crowd-sourced valuation of recreational ecosystem services using mobile signal data applied to a restored wetland in China," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 192(C).
    10. Hanna, Dalal E.L. & Roux, Dirk J. & Currie, Bianca & Bennett, Elena M., 2020. "Identifying pathways to reduce discrepancies between desired and provided ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    11. Glyn Williams & Manoj Srivastava & Stuart Corbridge & René Véron, 2003. "Enhancing pro-poor governance in Eastern India: participation, politics and action research," Progress in Development Studies, , vol. 3(2), pages 159-178, April.
    12. Cardoso, I. M. & Guijt, I. & Franco, F. S. & Carvalho, A. F. & Ferreira Neto, P. S., 2001. "Continual learning for agroforestry system design: university, NGO and farmer partnership in Minas Gerais, Brazil," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 69(3), pages 235-257, September.
    13. John Thompson, 1996. "Moving the Indigenous Knowledge Debate Forward?," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 14(1), pages 105-112, March.
    14. Shutaro Takeda & Go Okui & Nanao Fujimura & Hisae Abe & Yuka Ohashi & Yuki Oku & Kyoko Kiriyama & Naoki Saeki & Yusuke Sasaki & Yingying Zhu & Keitou Shu & Tomoharu Takahashi & Shuntaro Noda & Kazuki , 2018. "The Success of the Link Model Programme in Rural Bangladesh: An Empirical Analysis," Journal of Development Policy and Practice, , vol. 3(2), pages 191-214, July.
    15. Raza, Wameq A & Ara, Jinnat, 2012. "Grant Based Approach to Poverty Reduction: Evidence from Bangladesh," MPRA Paper 52966, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Luke A. Sandham & Jason J. Chabalala & Harry H. Spaling, 2019. "Participatory Rural Appraisal Approaches for Public Participation in EIA: Lessons from South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-16, October.
    17. Julian Andres Castrillon-Gomez & Gerard Olivar-Tost & Johnny Valencia-Calvo, 2022. "Systems Dynamics and the Analytical Network Process for the Evaluation and Prioritization of Green Projects: Proposal That Involves Participative Integration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-26, September.
    18. Alix-Garcia, Jennifer M. & Sims, Katharine R.E. & Costica, Laura, 2021. "Better to be indirect? Testing the accuracy and cost-savings of indirect surveys," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    19. Stefani, Gianluca & Lombardi, Ginevra Virginia & Romano, Donato & Cei, Leonardo, 2017. "Grass Root Collective Action for Territorially Integrated Food Supply Chains: A Case Study from Tuscany," International Journal on Food System Dynamics, International Center for Management, Communication, and Research, vol. 8(4), October.
    20. 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).

    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:8:y:2019:i:11:p:166-:d:284010. 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.