IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/marpol/v61y2015icp113-120.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Saving the critically endangered Chinese white dolphin in Taiwan: Debate regarding the designation of an MPA

Author

Listed:
  • Liu, Ta-Kang
  • Huang, Hsiao-Yin
  • Hsu, Shao-Liang

Abstract

The Chinese white dolphin is one of the marine mammals that can be frequently sighted in the coastal waters of western Taiwan. The subpopulation of this species in Taiwan is categorized as critically endangered in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Thus, the designation of its habitat as a marine protected area (MPA) should be conducted to protect it from extinction. However, the proposed MPA covers the coastal waters of several counties, where it also overlaps with fishing grounds and a proposed offshore reclamation island for an industrial park. The designation will affect the original marine use and presents a major conflict among multiple stakeholders. This study is a qualitative study that employs semi-structured interviews with stakeholders from competing interests, including local fisheries, industrial developers, the government, academia, and the conservation sector, in order to explore their perspectives and responses regarding the designation of an MPA and the causes of the conflicts among stakeholders. The results showed that the rationale for opposing the establishment of the MPA is the insufficient amount of scientific information and statistical data for determining the appropriate site and size of the MPA. This also makes it difficult to implement any corresponding mitigation measures. With regard to fisheries, the center of the conflict is that the Chinese white dolphin competes for the same fishery resources with fishermen. Compensation for the loss of fishery resources seems costly. Results from this study will help to inform the design of the MPA for the conservation of Chinese white dolphin in Taiwan and to minimize the conflicts between different stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Liu, Ta-Kang & Huang, Hsiao-Yin & Hsu, Shao-Liang, 2015. "Saving the critically endangered Chinese white dolphin in Taiwan: Debate regarding the designation of an MPA," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 113-120.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:61:y:2015:i:c:p:113-120
    DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2015.06.023
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X15001888
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.06.023?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Grimble, Robin & Wellard, Kate, 1997. "Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 55(2), pages 173-193, October.
    2. Jefferson, Thomas A. & Hung, Samuel K. & Würsig, Bernd, 2009. "Protecting small cetaceans from coastal development: Impact assessment and mitigation experience in Hong Kong," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 305-311, March.
    3. Pomeroy, Robert & Douvere, Fanny, 2008. "The engagement of stakeholders in the marine spatial planning process," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 816-822, September.
    4. Liu, Ta-Kang & Kao, Jui-Chuang & Chen, Ping, 2015. "Tragedy of the unwanted commons: Governing the marine debris in Taiwan’s oyster farming," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 123-130.
    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. Marianna Guareschi & Michele Maccari & Juan Pablo Sciurano & Filippo Arfini & Andrea Pronti, 2020. "A Methodological Approach to Upscale Toward an Agroecology System in EU-LAFSs: The Case of the Parma Bio-District," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-21, July.
    2. Parnphumeesup, Piya & Kerr, Sandy A., 2011. "Stakeholder preferences towards the sustainable development of CDM projects: Lessons from biomass (rice husk) CDM project in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3591-3601, June.
    3. Gillespie, Stuart & van den Bold, Mara, 2015. "Stories of change in nutrition: A tool pool:," IFPRI discussion papers 1494, International Food Policy Research Institute (IFPRI).
    4. Ranger, S. & Kenter, J.O. & Bryce, R. & Cumming, G. & Dapling, T. & Lawes, E. & Richardson, P.B., 2016. "Forming shared values in conservation management: An interpretive-deliberative-democratic approach to including community voices," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 344-357.
    5. Yu, Bing & Xu, Linyu, 2016. "Review of ecological compensation in hydropower development," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 729-738.
    6. Anne Hardy & Leonie J. Pearson, 2016. "Determining Sustainable Tourism in Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-18, July.
    7. Katharina Löhr & Christian Hochmuth & Frieder Graef & Jane Wambura & Stefan Sieber, 2017. "Conflict management programs in trans-disciplinary research projects: the case of a food security project in Tanzania," Food Security: The Science, Sociology and Economics of Food Production and Access to Food, Springer;The International Society for Plant Pathology, vol. 9(6), pages 1189-1201, December.
    8. Schouten, Greetje & Leroy, Pieter & Glasbergen, Pieter, 2012. "On the deliberative capacity of private multi-stakeholder governance: The Roundtables on Responsible Soy and Sustainable Palm Oil," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 42-50.
    9. repec:sae:envval:v:18:y:2009:i:2:p:153-176 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Viveros, Hector, 2017. "Unpacking stakeholder mechanisms to influence corporate social responsibility in the mining sector," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 1-12.
    11. Raphael Hoerler & Fabian Haerri & Merja Hoppe, 2019. "New Solutions in Sustainable Commuting—The Attitudes and Experience of European Stakeholders and Experts in Switzerland," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-19, July.
    12. Saint Ville, Arlette S. & Hickey, Gordon M. & Phillip, Leroy E., 2017. "How do stakeholder interactions influence national food security policy in the Caribbean? The case of Saint Lucia," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 53-64.
    13. Edossa, D. C. & Babel, M. S. & Das Gupta, A. & Awulachew, Seleshi Bekele, 2005. "Indigenous systems of conflict resolution in Oromia, Ethiopia," IWMI Books, Reports H038765, International Water Management Institute.
    14. Peter Arbo & Thuy Pham Thi Thanh, 2014. "The missing link in marine ecosystem-based management," ERSA conference papers ersa14p248, European Regional Science Association.
    15. Cécile Barnaud & Annemarie van Paassen, 2013. "Equity, power games, and legitimacy: dilemmas of participatory natural resource management," Post-Print hal-01386409, HAL.
    16. Oluyomi A. Osobajo & David Moore, 2017. "Who is Who? Identifying the Different Sub-groups of Secondary Stakeholders within a Community: A Case Study of the Niger Delta Region of Nigeria Communities," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 10(9), pages 188-209, September.
    17. Segadlo, Nadine, 2021. "Navigating through an external agenda and internal preferences: Ghana's national migration policy," IDOS Discussion Papers 8/2021, German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS).
    18. Ralph V Tafon, 2018. "Taking power to sea: Towards a post-structuralist discourse theoretical critique of marine spatial planning," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(2), pages 258-273, March.
    19. Stefan A. Hajkowicz, 2012. "For the Greater Good? A Test for Strategic Bias in Group Environmental Decisions," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 21(3), pages 331-344, May.
    20. Ramírez, Alejandro & Ortiz, Marco & Steenbeek, Jeroen & Christensen, Villy, 2015. "Evaluation of the effects on rockfish and kelp artisanal fisheries of the proposed Mejillones Peninsula marine protected area (northern Chile, SE Pacific coast)," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 297(C), pages 141-153.
    21. Daniel C. Kenny & Juan Castilla-Rho, 2022. "No Stakeholder Is an Island: Human Barriers and Enablers in Participatory Environmental Modelling," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-26, February.

    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:eee:marpol:v:61:y:2015:i:c:p:113-120. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/marpol .

    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.