IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i12p6827-d576270.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Context in Landscape Planning: Improving Conservation Outcomes by Identifying Social Values for a Flagship Species

Author

Listed:
  • Lisa Ernoul

    (Tour du Valat, Research Institute for the Conservation of Mediterranean Wetlands, Le Sambuc, 13200 Arles, France
    UMR ESPACE, Aix-Marseille Université, 13080 Aix en Provence, France)

  • Angela Wardell-Johnson

    (Centre for Human Rights Education, Curtin University, Perth 6845, Australia)

  • Raphaël Mathevet

    (Centre d’Ecologie Fonctionnelle et Evolutive, CNRS, Université Paul Valéry Montpellier 3, 34293 Montpellier, France)

  • Alain Sandoz

    (Tour du Valat, Research Institute for the Conservation of Mediterranean Wetlands, Le Sambuc, 13200 Arles, France
    UFR Sciences, Aix-Marseille Université, 13001 Marseille, France)

  • Olivier Boutron

    (Tour du Valat, Research Institute for the Conservation of Mediterranean Wetlands, Le Sambuc, 13200 Arles, France)

  • Loïc Willm

    (Tour du Valat, Research Institute for the Conservation of Mediterranean Wetlands, Le Sambuc, 13200 Arles, France)

  • Stephan Arnassant

    (Parc Natural Régional de Camargue, 13200 Arles, France)

  • Arnaud Béchet

    (Tour du Valat, Research Institute for the Conservation of Mediterranean Wetlands, Le Sambuc, 13200 Arles, France)

Abstract

Sustainable conservation planning depends on understanding local context including the way social values impact a landscape. Flamingos are used here as a flagship species to focus the social values of a broad range of people living in and working in the Camargue in France. A survey questionnaire ( n = 87) was used to identify the range of ways in which people value the landscape and their perception of effectiveness of flamingo management strategies. Survey analysis was conducted through a multi-method approach, triangulating standard descriptive statistics, qualitative data analysis, and multivariate analysis applying numerical taxonomy. Applying numerical taxonomy allowed us to identify and define six social assemblages. Each assemblage had geographical characteristics with distinct values and perceptions in relation to management. The primary residence and geographic identity of the participants was defining, showing clear value differences from participants living in different parts of the delta. The participants most frequently agreed that flamingos contributed to the aesthetic, economic, biodiversity, and recreational values of the landscape. We show how identifying points of consensus and points in contest is necessary for navigating differences in values for conservation planning. This research shows the importance of the local social context in sustainably managing landscape change.

Suggested Citation

  • Lisa Ernoul & Angela Wardell-Johnson & Raphaël Mathevet & Alain Sandoz & Olivier Boutron & Loïc Willm & Stephan Arnassant & Arnaud Béchet, 2021. "Context in Landscape Planning: Improving Conservation Outcomes by Identifying Social Values for a Flagship Species," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-12, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6827-:d:576270
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6827/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/12/6827/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johnson, Dana N. & van Riper, Carena J. & Chu, Maria & Winkler-Schor, Sophia, 2019. "Comparing the social values of ecosystem services in US and Australian marine protected areas," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 1-1.
    2. Bennett, Nathan James & Dearden, Philip, 2014. "Why local people do not support conservation: Community perceptions of marine protected area livelihood impacts, governance and management in Thailand," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(C), pages 107-116.
    3. Ruiz-Frau, A. & Hinz, H. & Edwards-Jones, G. & Kaiser, M.J., 2013. "Spatially explicit economic assessment of cultural ecosystem services: Non-extractive recreational uses of the coastal environment related to marine biodiversity," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 90-98.
    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. Wai Soe Zin & Aya Suzuki & Kelvin S.-H. Peh & Alexandros Gasparatos, 2019. "Economic Value of Cultural Ecosystem Services from Recreation in Popa Mountain National Park, Myanmar: A Comparison of Two Rapid Valuation Techniques," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-20, December.
    2. Minh-Hoang Nguyen & Minh-Phuong Thi Duong & Manh-Cuong Nguyen & Noah Mutai & Ruining Jin & Phuong-Tri Nguyen & Tam-Tri Le & Quan-Hoang Vuong, 2023. "Promoting Stakeholders’ Support for Marine Protection Policies: Insights from a 42-Country Dataset," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(16), pages 1-19, August.
    3. Timothy K Marcella & Scott M Gende & Daniel D Roby & Arthur Allignol, 2017. "Disturbance of a rare seabird by ship-based tourism in a marine protected area," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-23, May.
    4. Radisti A. Praptiwi & Carya Maharja & Matt Fortnam & Tomas Chaigneau & Louisa Evans & Leuserina Garniati & Jito Sugardjito, 2021. "Tourism-Based Alternative Livelihoods for Small Island Communities Transitioning towards a Blue Economy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-11, June.
    5. Sukuryadi & Nuddin Harahab & Mimit Primyastanto & Bambang Semedi, 2021. "Collaborative-based mangrove ecosystem management model for the development of marine ecotourism in Lembar Bay, Lombok, Indonesia," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(5), pages 6838-6868, May.
    6. Hatim Albasri & Jesmond Sammut, 2021. "A Comparison of Vulnerability Risks and Conservation Perceptions between Mariculture, Fishery and Ecotourism Livelihood Groups in a Multi-Use MPA in Indonesia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-17, November.
    7. Ryan S. Naylor & Carter A. Hunt & Karl S. Zimmerer & B. Derrick Taff, 2021. "Emic Views of Community Resilience and Coastal Tourism Development," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-18, August.
    8. Schmidt, Katja & Walz, Ariane & Martín-López, Berta & Sachse, René, 2017. "Testing socio-cultural valuation methods of ecosystem services to explain land use preferences," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 270-288.
    9. Marko Böhm & Jan Barkmann & Sabina Eggert & Claus H. Carstensen & Susanne Bögeholz, 2020. "Quantitative Modelling and Perspective Taking: Two Competencies of Decision Making for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(17), pages 1-32, August.
    10. Evan Artis & Noella J Gray & Lisa M Campbell & Rebecca L Gruby & Leslie Acton & Sarah Bess Zigler & Lillian Mitchell, 2020. "Stakeholder perspectives on large-scale marine protected areas," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(9), pages 1-17, September.
    11. Benedikt Hora, 2018. "Private Protection Initiatives in Mountain Areas of Southern Chile and Their Perceived Impact on Local Development—The Case of Pumalín Park," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-22, May.
    12. Qiujin Chen & Yuqi Zhang & Yin Zhang & Mingliang Kong, 2022. "Examining Social Equity in the Co-Management of Terrestrial Protected Areas: Perceived Fairness of Local Communities in Giant Panda National Park, China," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-17, September.
    13. Totin, Edmond & Segnon, Alcade & Roncoli, Carla & Thompson-Hall, Mary & Sidibé, Amadou & Carr, Edward R., 2021. "Property rights and wrongs: Land reforms for sustainable food production in rural Mali," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    14. Samia Sediri & Michel Trommetter & Nathalie Frascaria-Lacoste & Juan Fernandez-Manjarrés, 2020. "Transformability as a Wicked Problem: A Cautionary Tale?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-19, July.
    15. Emmanouil Tyllianakis & Lenka Fronkova & Paulette Posen & Tiziana Luisetti & Stephen Mangi Chai, 2020. "Mapping Ecosystem Services for Marine Planning: A UK Case Study," Resources, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-27, April.
    16. Outeiro, Luis & Villasante, Sebastian & Oyarzo, Hugo, 2018. "The interplay between fish farming and nature based recreation-tourism in Southern Chile: A perception approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 90-100.
    17. Karimi, Azadeh & Yazdandad, Hossein & Fagerholm, Nora, 2020. "Evaluating social perceptions of ecosystem services, biodiversity, and land management: Trade-offs, synergies and implications for landscape planning and management," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 45(C).
    18. Tam, Chui-Ling, 2015. "Timing exclusion and communicating time: A spatial analysis of participation failure in an Indonesian MPA," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 122-129.
    19. Chan, Cheryl & Armitage, Derek & Alexander, Steven M. & Campbell, Donovan, 2019. "Examining linkages between ecosystem services and social wellbeing to improve governance for coastal conservation in Jamaica," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    20. Rodríguez-Robayo, Karla Juliana & à vila-Foucat, V. Sophie & Maldonado, Jorge H., 2016. "Indigenous communities’ perception regarding payments for environmental services programme in Oaxaca Mexico," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 163-171.

    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:13:y:2021:i:12:p:6827-:d:576270. 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.