IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i18p7665-d414673.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Perception of Nature’s Contributions to People in Rural Communities in the Eastern Amazon

Author

Listed:
  • Rafael Melo de Brito

    (Instituto Tecnológico Vale, Rua Boaventura da Silva, 955, Belém 66055-900, Brazil)

  • Valente José Matlaba

    (Instituto Tecnológico Vale, Rua Boaventura da Silva, 955, Belém 66055-900, Brazil)

  • Vera Lúcia Imperatriz-Fonseca

    (Instituto de Biociências, Universidade de S. Paulo, CEP 05508-090 São Paulo, Brazil)

  • Tereza Cristina Giannini

    (Instituto Tecnológico Vale, Rua Boaventura da Silva, 955, Belém 66055-900, Brazil)

Abstract

Nature’s contributions to people (NCP) are increasingly being considered in decisions by policy-makers because of their relevance to the well-being of people. Learning the value of nature from the perception of communities can help to define priorities and to guide the development of public policies for environmental conservation. The objective of this study was to analyze the perception of the importance, benefits, and problems of NCP among residents of five rural communities, and their opinion about the protected areas of the municipality, considering their socioeconomic characteristics. The method consisted of conducting questionnaire-based, semi-structured, face-to-face interviews with a sample of 214 randomly selected households in five rural communities of Parauapebas (Pará, Eastern Amazon). We used appropriate statistical tests for data analysis. The main results show that the communities were highly homogeneous and that 52% of the households had low income (below a minimum wage of USD 250). A high proportion of respondents gave the highest importance to all categories of NCP (2/3 of respondents for material, 3/4 for non-material, and 4/5 for regulating NCP). The most commonly mentioned benefits of NCP referred to subsistence or livelihood and quality of life (40% of total mentions). Environmental degradation problems were the most cited (38% of total mentions). Almost all respondents stated that they had a positive opinion about the protected areas of the municipality, despite underusing them. This study is relevant because it analyses, for the first time, the perceptions of NCP among residents of rural communities in the Eastern Amazon, an essential aspect for decision-and public policy-making.

Suggested Citation

  • Rafael Melo de Brito & Valente José Matlaba & Vera Lúcia Imperatriz-Fonseca & Tereza Cristina Giannini, 2020. "Perception of Nature’s Contributions to People in Rural Communities in the Eastern Amazon," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-21, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:18:p:7665-:d:414673
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/18/7665/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/18/7665/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Asah, Stanley T. & Guerry, Anne D. & Blahna, Dale J. & Lawler, Joshua J., 2014. "Perception, acquisition and use of ecosystem services: Human behavior, and ecosystem management and policy implications," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 180-186.
    2. Tom Breeze & Nicola Gallai & Lucas A. Garibaldi & Xui S. Li, 2016. "Economic Measures of Pollination Services: Shortcomings and Future Directions," Post-Print hal-01658289, HAL.
    3. Córdoba, Diana & Juen, Leandro & Selfa, Theresa & Peredo, Ana Maria & Montag, Luciano Fogaça de Assis & Sombra, Daniel & Santos, Marcos Persio Dantas, 2019. "Understanding local perceptions of the impacts of large-scale oil palm plantations on ecosystem services in the Brazilian Amazon," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    4. de Groot, Rudolf & Brander, Luke & van der Ploeg, Sander & Costanza, Robert & Bernard, Florence & Braat, Leon & Christie, Mike & Crossman, Neville & Ghermandi, Andrea & Hein, Lars & Hussain, Salman & , 2012. "Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 50-61.
    5. Octavio Rojas & María Zamorano & Katia Saez & Carolina Rojas & Claudio Vega & Loretto Arriagada & Corina Basnou, 2017. "Social Perception of Ecosystem Services in a Coastal Wetland Post-Earthquake: A Case Study in Chile," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(11), pages 1-17, October.
    6. Forest Isbell & Andrew Gonzalez & Michel Loreau & Jane Cowles & Sandra Díaz & Andy Hector & Georgina M. Mace & David A. Wardle & Mary I. O'Connor & J. Emmett Duffy & Lindsay A. Turnbull & Patrick L. T, 2017. "Linking the influence and dependence of people on biodiversity across scales," Nature, Nature, vol. 546(7656), pages 65-72, June.
    7. Scholte, Samantha S.K. & van Teeffelen, Astrid J.A. & Verburg, Peter H., 2015. "Integrating socio-cultural perspectives into ecosystem service valuation: A review of concepts and methods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 114(C), pages 67-78.
    8. Min Song & Lynn Huntsinger & Manman Han, 2018. "How does the Ecological Well-Being of Urban and Rural Residents Change with Rural-Urban Land Conversion? The Case of Hubei, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-22, February.
    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. 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).

    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. Maczka, Krzysztof & Chmielewski, Piotr & Jeran, Agnieszka & Matczak, Piotr & van Riper, Carena J., 2019. "The ecosystem services concept as a tool for public participation in management of Poland’s Natura 2000 network," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 173-183.
    2. Palola, Pirta & Bailey, Richard & Wedding, Lisa, 2022. "A novel framework to operationalise value-pluralism in environmental valuation: Environmental value functions," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 193(C).
    3. Jones, Sarah K. & Boundaogo, Mansour & DeClerck, Fabrice A. & Estrada-Carmona, Natalia & Mirumachi, Naho & Mulligan, Mark, 2019. "Insights into the importance of ecosystem services to human well-being in reservoir landscapes," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    4. Wisely, Samantha M. & Alexander, Kathleen & Mahlaba, Themb'a & Cassidy, Lin, 2018. "Linking ecosystem services to livelihoods in southern Africa," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PC), pages 339-341.
    5. van den Belt, Marjan & Stevens, Sharon M., 2016. "Transformative agenda, or lost in the translation? A review of top-cited articles in the first four years of Ecosystem Services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 60-72.
    6. Stålhammar, Sanna & Pedersen, Eja, 2017. "Recreational cultural ecosystem services: How do people describe the value?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 1-9.
    7. Ebner, Manuel & Fontana, Veronika & Schirpke, Uta & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2022. "Stakeholder perspectives on ecosystem services of mountain lakes in the European Alps," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 53(C).
    8. Delgado, Luisa E. & Marín, Víctor H., 2016. "Well-being and the use of ecosystem services by rural households of the Río Cruces watershed, southern Chile," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PA), pages 81-91.
    9. Wainger, Lisa A. & Helcoski, Ryan & Farge, Kevin W. & Espinola, Brandy A. & Green, Gary T., 2018. "Evidence of a Shared Value for Nature," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 107-116.
    10. Negev, Maya & Sagie, Hila & Orenstein, Daniel E. & Zemah Shamir, Shiri & Hassan, Yousef & Amasha, Hani & Raviv, Orna & Fares, Nasrin & Lotan, Alon & Peled, Yoav & Wittenberg, Lea & Izhaki, Ido, 2019. "Using the ecosystem services framework for defining diverse human-nature relationships in a multi-ethnic biosphere reserve," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    11. Mwebaze, Paul & Marris, Gay C. & Brown, Mike & MacLeod, Alan & Jones, Glyn & Budge, Giles E., 2018. "Measuring public perception and preferences for ecosystem services: A case study of bee pollination in the UK," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 355-362.
    12. Solomon, Barry D. & Barnett, John Brad & Wellstead, Adam M. & Rouleau, Mark D., 2020. "Deciphering support for woody biomass production for electric power using an ecosystem service framework," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    13. Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Apan, Armando, 2023. "Examining policy−institution−program (PIP) responses against the drivers of ecosystem dynamics. A chronological review (1960–2020) from Nepal," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 132(C).
    14. GAO Tianming & Anna Ivolga & Vasilii Erokhin, 2018. "Sustainable Rural Development in Northern China: Caught in a Vice between Poverty, Urban Attractions, and Migration," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-20, May.
    15. Chaikaew, Pasicha & Hodges, Alan W. & Grunwald, Sabine, 2017. "Estimating the value of ecosystem services in a mixed-use watershed: A choice experiment approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 228-237.
    16. Qu, Yang & Hooper, Tara & Austen, Melanie C. & Papathanasopoulou, Eleni & Huang, Junling & Yan, Xiaoyu, 2023. "Development of a computable general equilibrium model based on integrated macroeconomic framework for ocean multi-use between offshore wind farms and fishing activities in Scotland," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 332(C).
    17. Liu, Duan & Tang, Runcheng & Xie, Jun & Tian, Jingjing & Shi, Rui & Zhang, Kai, 2020. "Valuation of ecosystem services of rice–fish coculture systems in Ruyuan County, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    18. Pan, Ying & Wu, Junxi & Zhang, Yanjie & Zhang, Xianzhou & Yu, Chengqun, 2021. "Simultaneous enhancement of ecosystem services and poverty reduction through adjustments to subsidy policies relating to grassland use in Tibet, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    19. Hackbart, Vivian C.S. & de Lima, Guilherme T.N.P. & dos Santos, Rozely F., 2017. "Theory and practice of water ecosystem services valuation: Where are we going?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 218-227.
    20. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chr, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.

    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:12:y:2020:i:18:p:7665-:d:414673. 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.