IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i22p9663-d447824.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Awareness and Knowledge of Portugal Residents about Natura 2000

Author

Listed:
  • Sofia S. Oliveira

    (CIIMAR—Interdisciplinary Centre of Marine and Environmental Research, 4450-208 Matosinhos, Portugal
    Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Porto, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal)

  • Joana Pereira

    (CESAM—Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies, Department of Biology, University of Aveiro, 3810-193 Aveiro, Portugal)

  • Paulo Santos

    (CIIMAR—Interdisciplinary Centre of Marine and Environmental Research, 4450-208 Matosinhos, Portugal
    Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Porto, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal)

  • Ruth Pereira

    (Department of Biology, Faculty of Sciences, University of Porto, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal
    GreenUPorto—Sustainable Agrifood Production Research Centre, 4485-646 Vairão, Portugal)

Abstract

Natura 2000 is the European Union’s key strategy to address the current sharp decline in biodiversity. However, according to a recent survey, most Europeans have never heard about it. The present study intended to further explore the perceptions of residents in Portugal about this network of protected areas through the nationwide implementation of a survey. Overall, 232 questionnaires were fulfilled, which showed that most respondents ( n = 126, 54%) had never heard of Natura 2000. Furthermore, even the respondents who knew what Natura 2000 is were not well-informed about it. For instance, on average, they were only able to name 2.8 ± 2.2 sites within Portugal; plus, 66% ( n = 65) could not correctly name any wild species that inhabited their favourite site. Surprisingly, literacy levels were not significantly correlated with the number of visits to the network ( r s = 0.181, p = 0.082), and they were only weakly correlated with the frequency that the respondents engaged in ecological behaviours ( r s = 0.277, p = 0.007). Overall, the current findings are in agreement with similar studies carried out in Poland that revealed that the population was poorly informed about this important network of protected areas. This scenario is especially worrisome, considering that public participation is regarded as a key factor for successful nature conservation initiatives.

Suggested Citation

  • Sofia S. Oliveira & Joana Pereira & Paulo Santos & Ruth Pereira, 2020. "Awareness and Knowledge of Portugal Residents about Natura 2000," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(22), pages 1-12, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:22:p:9663-:d:447824
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/22/9663/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/22/9663/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Fabrizio Sergio & Ian Newton & Luigi Marchesi, 2005. "Top predators and biodiversity," Nature, Nature, vol. 436(7048), pages 192-192, July.
    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. David Rodríguez-Rodríguez & Remedios Larrubia Vargas, 2022. "Protected Areas and Rural Depopulation in Spain: A Multi-Stakeholder Perceptual Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-15, March.

    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. Zachary D Hughes & Eli P Fenichel & Leah R Gerber, 2011. "The Potential Impact of Labor Choices on the Efficacy of Marine Conservation Strategies," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(8), pages 1-10, August.
    2. Moung-Jin Lee & Wonkyong Song & Saro Lee, 2015. "Habitat Mapping of the Leopard Cat ( Prionailurus bengalensis ) in South Korea Using GIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-21, April.
    3. Dennhardt, Andrew J. & Duerr, Adam E. & Brandes, David & Katzner, Todd E., 2015. "Modeling autumn migration of a rare soaring raptor identifies new movement corridors in central Appalachia," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 303(C), pages 19-29.
    4. Ivajnšič, Danijel & Denac, Damijan & Denac, Katarina & Pipenbaher, Nataša & Kaligarič, Mitja, 2020. "The Scops owl (Otus scops) under human-induced environmental change pressure," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(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:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:22:p:9663-:d:447824. 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.