IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v13y2021i21p12216-d672877.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholders’ Attitudes about the Transplantations of the Mediterranean Seagrass Posidonia oceanica as a Habitat Restoration Measure after Anthropogenic Impacts: A Q Methodology Approach

Author

Listed:
  • Arturo Zenone

    (CNR-IAS, Lungomare Cristoforo Colombo 4521, 90149 Palermo, Italy
    Current Address: Stazione Zoologica Anton Dohrn, Lungomare Cristoforo Colombo 4521, 90149 Palermo, Italy.)

  • Carlo Pipitone

    (CNR-IAS, Lungomare Cristoforo Colombo 4521, 90149 Palermo, Italy)

  • Giovanni D’Anna

    (CNR-IAS, Via Giovanni da Verrazzano 17, 91014 Castellammare del Golfo, Italy)

  • Barbara La Porta

    (ISPRA, Via Vitaliano Brancati 48, 00144 Roma, Italy)

  • Tiziano Bacci

    (ISPRA, Via Vitaliano Brancati 48, 00144 Roma, Italy)

  • Fabio Bertasi

    (ISPRA, Via Vitaliano Brancati 48, 00144 Roma, Italy)

  • Claudia Bulleri

    (Autorità di Sistema Portuale del Mar Tirreno Settentrionale, Piazzale Premuda 6/a, 57025 Piombino, Italy)

  • Anna Cacciuni

    (ISPRA, Via Vitaliano Brancati 48, 00144 Roma, Italy)

  • Sebastiano Calvo

    (Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra e del Mare, Università di Palermo, Viale delle Scienze Ed. 16, 90128 Palermo, Italy)

  • Stefano Conconi

    (VESENDA, Via Fratelli Cuzio 42, 27100 Pavia, Italy)

  • Maria Flavia Gravina

    (Dipartimento di Biologia, Università di Roma “Tor Vergata”, Via della Ricerca Scientifica s.n.c., 00133 Roma, Italy)

  • Cecilia Mancusi

    (ARPAT, Via Marradi 114, 57126 Livorno, Italy)

  • Alessandro Piazzi

    (SETIN srl, Via Guido d’Arezzo 16, 00198 Roma, Italy)

  • Monica Targusi

    (ISPRA, Via Vitaliano Brancati 48, 00144 Roma, Italy)

  • Agostino Tomasello

    (Dipartimento di Scienze della Terra e del Mare, Università di Palermo, Viale delle Scienze Ed. 16, 90128 Palermo, Italy)

  • Fabio Badalamenti

    (CNR-IAS, Lungomare Cristoforo Colombo 4521, 90149 Palermo, Italy)

Abstract

Anthropogenic impacts on Posidonia oceanica meadows have led to a decline of this ecosystem throughout the Mediterranean. Transplantations have often been prescribed as a compensation measure to mitigate the impacts caused by coastal maritime works. Here a Q methodology approach was used to investigate the stakeholders’ attitudes in four case studies of P. oceanica transplants realized in Italian waters. Twenty-two respondents were asked to score 37 statements, and the resultant Q-sorting was analyzed via an inverse PCA using the KADE software. Four discourses, corresponding to the significant axes in the factorial analysis were identified: science and conservation (F1), oriented at a rigorous scientific approach; engineering and industry (F2), oriented at the economic development; environmentalism and participation (F3), oriented at the conservation of seagrass meadows; and transplantation-oriented (F4), oriented at the realization of transplants as compensation measures. The main conflicts and agreements between discourses are assessed and discussed, based on the analysis of the distinguishing statements that contributed to consensus or disagreement among discourses. The benefits of the Q methodology in the identification and mediation of conflicts in the four case studies are discussed, and its potential as a powerful aid in the development of a good environmental governance is acknowledged.

Suggested Citation

  • Arturo Zenone & Carlo Pipitone & Giovanni D’Anna & Barbara La Porta & Tiziano Bacci & Fabio Bertasi & Claudia Bulleri & Anna Cacciuni & Sebastiano Calvo & Stefano Conconi & Maria Flavia Gravina & Ceci, 2021. "Stakeholders’ Attitudes about the Transplantations of the Mediterranean Seagrass Posidonia oceanica as a Habitat Restoration Measure after Anthropogenic Impacts: A Q Methodology Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-13, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:13:y:2021:i:21:p:12216-:d:672877
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/21/12216/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/13/21/12216/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hermelingmeier, Verena & Nicholas, Kimberly A., 2017. "Identifying Five Different Perspectives on the Ecosystem Services Concept Using Q Methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 255-265.
    2. Robin Curry & John Barry & Andew McClenaghan, 2013. "Northern Visions? Applying Q methodology to understand stakeholder views on the environmental and resource dimensions of sustainability," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 56(5), pages 624-649, June.
    3. Sy, Mariam Maki & Rey-Valette, Hélène & Simier, Monique & Pasqualini, Vanina & Figuières, Charles & De Wit, Rutger, 2018. "Identifying Consensus on Coastal Lagoons Ecosystem Services and Conservation Priorities for an Effective Decision Making: A Q Approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 1-13.
    4. Niedziałkowski, Krzysztof & Komar, Ewa & Pietrzyk-Kaszyńska, Agata & Olszańska, Agnieszka & Grodzińska-Jurczak, Małgorzata, 2018. "Discourses on Public Participation in Protected Areas Governance: Application of Q Methodology in Poland," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(C), pages 401-409.
    5. Barry, John & Proops, John, 1999. "Seeking sustainability discourses with Q methodology," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 337-345, March.
    6. Sneegas, Gretchen & Beckner, Sydney & Brannstrom, Christian & Jepson, Wendy & Lee, Kyungsun & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2021. "Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    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. Flavio Borfecchia & Carla Micheli & Luigi De Cecco & Gianmaria Sannino & Maria Vittoria Struglia & Alcide Giorgio Di Sarra & Carlo Gomez & Giuliana Mattiazzo, 2021. "Satellite Multi/Hyper Spectral HR Sensors for Mapping the Posidonia oceanica in South Mediterranean Islands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(24), pages 1-27, December.

    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. Grimsrud, Kristine & Graesse, Maximo & Lindhjem, Henrik, 2020. "Using the generalised Q method in ecological economics: A better way to capture representative values and perspectives in ecosystem service management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    2. Huaranca, Laura Liliana & Iribarnegaray, Martín Alejandro & Albesa, Federico & Volante, José Norberto & Brannstrom, Christian & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2019. "Social Perspectives on Deforestation, Land Use Change, and Economic Development in an Expanding Agricultural Frontier in Northern Argentina," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 1-1.
    3. Dimitra Syrou & Iosif Botetzagias, 2022. "Stakeholders’ Perceptions Concerning Greek Protected Areas Governance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-23, March.
    4. Manuela Rozalia Gabor & Nicoleta Cristache, 2021. "Q or R Factor Analysis for Subjectiveness Measurement in Consumer Behavior? A Study Case on Durable Goods Buying Behavior in Romania," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-24, May.
    5. Röös, E. & Wood, A. & Säll, S. & Abu Hatab, A. & Ahlgren, S. & Hallström, E. & Tidåker, P. & Hansson, H., 2023. "Diagnostic, regenerative or fossil-free - exploring stakeholder perceptions of Swedish food system sustainability," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 203(C).
    6. Buckwell, Andrew & Fleming, Christopher & Muurmans, Maggie & Smart, James C.R. & Ware, Dan & Mackey, Brendan, 2020. "Revealing the dominant discourses of stakeholders towards natural resource management in Port Resolution, Vanuatu, using Q-method," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 177(C).
    7. Buckwell, Andrew & Fleming, Christopher & Muurmans, Maggie & Smart, James & Mackey, Brendan, 2020. "Revealing the dominant discourses of stakeholders towards natural resource management in Port Resolution, Vanuatu, using Q-method," 2020 Conference (64th), February 12-14, 2020, Perth, Western Australia 305231, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    8. S. S. Ganji & A. N. Ahangar & Samaneh Jamshidi Bandari, 2022. "Evaluation of vehicular emissions reduction strategies using a novel hybrid method integrating BWM, Q methodology and ER approach," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(10), pages 11576-11614, October.
    9. Schaal, Tamara & Jacobs, Annie & Leventon, Julia & Scheele, Ben C. & Lindenmayer, David & Hanspach, Jan, 2022. "‘You can’t be green if you’re in the red’: Local discourses on the production-biodiversity intersection in a mixed farming area in south-eastern Australia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 121(C).
    10. Turhan, Ethemcan, 2016. "Value-based adaptation to climate change and divergent developmentalisms in Turkish agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 121(C), pages 140-148.
    11. McNicholas, Grace & Cotton, Matthew, 2019. "Stakeholder perceptions of marine plastic waste management in the United Kingdom," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 77-87.
    12. Sneegas, Gretchen & Beckner, Sydney & Brannstrom, Christian & Jepson, Wendy & Lee, Kyungsun & Seghezzo, Lucas, 2021. "Using Q-methodology in environmental sustainability research: A bibliometric analysis and systematic review," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    13. Späth, Leonhard, 2018. "Large-scale photovoltaics? Yes please, but not like this! Insights on different perspectives underlying the trade-off between land use and renewable electricity development," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 429-437.
    14. Loring, Philip A. & Hinzman, Megan S., 2018. "“They're All Really Important, But…”: Unpacking How People Prioritize Values for the Marine Environment in Haida Gwaii, British Columbia," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 367-377.
    15. Nhem, Sareth & Lee, Young Jin, 2019. "Using Q methodology to investigate the views of local experts on the sustainability of community-based forestry in Oddar Meanchey province, Cambodia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Byrne, Rosemary & Byrne, Susan & Ryan, Ray & O’Regan, Bernadette, 2017. "Applying the Q-method to identify primary motivation factors and barriers to communities in achieving decarbonisation goals," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 40-50.
    17. Ghoochani Omid M. & Bakhshi Azadeh & Nejad Azar Hashemi & Ghanian Mansour & Cotton Matthew, 2015. "Environmental values in the petrochemical industry: A Q-method study in South West Iran," Environmental & Socio-economic Studies, Sciendo, vol. 3(4), pages 1-10, December.
    18. Bredin, Yennie K. & Lindhjem, Henrik & van Dijk, Jiska & Linnell, John D.C., 2015. "Mapping value plurality towards ecosystem services in the case of Norwegian wildlife management: A Q analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 198-206.
    19. Mahlalela, Linda Siphiwo & Jourdain, Damien & Mungatana, Eric Dada & Lundhede, Thomas Hedemark, 2022. "Diverse stakeholder perspectives and ecosystem services ranking: Application of the Q-methodology to Hawane Dam and Nature Reserve in Eswatini," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    20. Sorola, Matthew, 2022. "Q methodology to conduct a critical study in accounting: A Q study on accountants’ perspectives of social and environmental reporting," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 86(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:13:y:2021:i:21:p:12216-:d:672877. 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.