IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/marpol/v62y2015icp144-152.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The socio-economic effects of a Marine Protected Area on the ecosystem service of leisure and recreation

Author

Listed:
  • Rees, Siân E.
  • Mangi, Stephen C.
  • Hattam, Caroline
  • Gall, Sarah C.
  • Rodwell, Lynda D.
  • Peckett, Frankie J.
  • Attrill, Martin J.

Abstract

Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) are an important tool for the maintenance of marine ecosystem functionality and health and ensuring the onward flow of beneficial ecosystem services that support human well-being. Social and economic factors influence whether and how stakeholders exploit resources or cooperate to conserve them. Environmental managers are now turning from designating MPAs to monitoring their effectiveness. Combining spatial analysis with quantitative and qualitative survey methods this research shows that an MPA (Lyme Bay, SW England) has had varying effects on the delivery of the beneficial ecosystem service of leisure and recreation. In the survey years 2008–2011 dive businesses have increased their frequency of activity inside and outside the MPA and report an increase in turnover; though they perceive little or no effect of the MPA on business. Charter boat operators have seen an overall decline in the frequency of activity outside the MPA and an increase inside the MPA. They perceive that the MPA has increasingly had a positive effect on their business. Sea angling activity has declined at sites outside the MPA and increased at sites within the MPA, suggesting a redistribution of spatial activity. Diving activity has increased both inside and outside the MPA. Divers report that the MPA has influenced where they choose to dive. This corresponds to a potential increase in value of the MPA resource (represented as the proportional expenditure and associated turnover by these groups) of £2.2 million. This research demonstrates that the use of the resource has changed following designation and that MPAs can attract a greater proportion of the leisure and recreation expenditure and associated turnover to sites within the MPA boundary. Moving forward it is important to assess effects both inside and outside MPAs. Integrating high quality social science at MPA sites to track effectiveness can help to adapt and refine management strategies to reflect the needs of the stakeholders and support effective conservation.

Suggested Citation

  • Rees, Siân E. & Mangi, Stephen C. & Hattam, Caroline & Gall, Sarah C. & Rodwell, Lynda D. & Peckett, Frankie J. & Attrill, Martin J., 2015. "The socio-economic effects of a Marine Protected Area on the ecosystem service of leisure and recreation," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 144-152.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:marpol:v:62:y:2015:i:c:p:144-152
    DOI: 10.1016/j.marpol.2015.09.011
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308597X15002626
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.marpol.2015.09.011?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. Rees, Siân & Fletcher, Stephen & Glegg, Gillian & Marshall, Charlotte & Rodwell, Lynda & Jefferson, Rebecca & Campbell, Maria & Langmead, Olivia & Ashley, Matthew & Bloomfield, Helen & Brutto, Daniel , 2013. "Priority questions to shape the marine and coastal policy research agenda in the United Kingdom," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 531-537.
    2. Hynes, Stephen & Tinch, Dugald & Hanley, Nick, 2013. "Valuing improvements to coastal waters using choice experiments: An application to revisions of the EU Bathing Waters Directive," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 137-144.
    3. Costanza, Robert, 1998. "The value of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 1-2, April.
    4. Mario Du Preez & Matt Dicken & Stephen Gerald Hosking, 2012. "The Value Of Tiger Shark Diving Within The Aliwal Shoal Marine Protected Area: A Travel Cost Analysis," South African Journal of Economics, Economic Society of South Africa, vol. 80(3), pages 387-399, September.
    5. 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.
    6. Costanza, Robert & d'Arge, Ralph & de Groot, Rudolf & Farber, Stephen & Grasso, Monica & Hannon, Bruce & Limburg, Karin & Naeem, Shahid & O'Neill, Robert V. & Paruelo, Jose, 1998. "The value of the world's ecosystem services and natural capital," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 3-15, April.
    7. Thur, Steven M., 2010. "User fees as sustainable financing mechanisms for marine protected areas: An application to the Bonaire National Marine Park," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 63-69, January.
    8. Hattam, C.E. & Mangi, S.C. & Gall, S.C. & Rodwell, L.D., 2014. "Social impacts of a temperate fisheries closure: understanding stakeholders' views," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 269-278.
    9. Prayaga, Prabha & Rolfe, John & Stoeckl, Natalie, 2010. "The value of recreational fishing in the Great Barrier Reef, Australia: A pooled revealed preference and contingent behaviour model," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 244-251, March.
    10. Rees, Siân E. & Rodwell, Lynda D. & Attrill, Martin J. & Austen, Melanie C. & Mangi, Steven C., 2010. "The value of marine biodiversity to the leisure and recreation industry and its application to marine spatial planning," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(5), pages 868-875, September.
    11. Chae, Dong-Ryul & Wattage, Premachandra & Pascoe, Sean, 2012. "Recreational benefits from a marine protected area: A travel cost analysis of Lundy," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 971-977.
    12. Hynes, Stephen & Tinch, Dugald & Hanley, Nick, 2013. "Estimating the value of improvements to coastal waters resulting from revisions of the EU Bathing Waters Directive," Working Papers 160058, National University of Ireland, Galway, Socio-Economic Marine Research Unit.
    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. Rasheed, A. Rifaee, 2020. "Marine protected areas and human well-being – A systematic review and recommendations," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    2. Tonin, Stefania, 2018. "Citizens’ perspectives on marine protected areas as a governance strategy to effectively preserve marine ecosystem services and biodiversity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 189-200.
    3. Lucrezi, Serena & Milanese, Martina & Markantonatou, Vasiliki & Cerrano, Carlo & Sarà, Antonio & Palma, Marco & Saayman, Melville, 2017. "Scuba diving tourism systems and sustainability: Perceptions by the scuba diving industry in two Marine Protected Areas," Tourism Management, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 385-403.
    4. Stamatiadou, Valentini & Mazaris, Antonios & Mallios, Zisis & Katsanevakis, Stelios, 2023. "Valuation and mapping of the recreational diving ecosystem service of the Aegean Sea," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 64(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. 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.
    2. George Halkos & Panagiotis Stavros Aslanidis & Angelos Plataniotis & Phoebe Koundouri, 2024. "Global insights on Sustainable Development Goal 14: Reviewing willingness-to-pay levels for marine ecosystem protection and conservation," DEOS Working Papers 2416, Athens University of Economics and Business.
    3. Chun-Hung Lee & Yun-Ju Chen & Chu-Wei Chen, 2019. "Assessment of the Economic Value of Ecological Conservation of the Kenting Coral Reef," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(20), pages 1-17, October.
    4. 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.
    5. Nunes, P.A.L.D. & Nijkamp, P., 2011. "Biodiversity: Economic perspectives," Serie Research Memoranda 0002, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    6. Tonin, Stefania, 2018. "Citizens’ perspectives on marine protected areas as a governance strategy to effectively preserve marine ecosystem services and biodiversity," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PB), pages 189-200.
    7. Christopher Boyce & Mikolaj Czajkowski & Nick Hanley & Charles Noussair & Michael Townsend & Steve Tucker, 2015. "The effects of emotions on preferences and choices for public goods," Discussion Papers in Environment and Development Economics 2015-08, University of St. Andrews, School of Geography and Sustainable Development.
    8. Desbureaux, Sébastien & Brimont, Laura, 2015. "Between economic loss and social identity: The multi-dimensional cost of avoiding deforestation in Eastern Madagascar," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 10-20.
    9. Shrestha, Ram K. & Seidl, Andrew F. & Moraes, Andre S., 2002. "Value of recreational fishing in the Brazilian Pantanal: a travel cost analysis using count data models," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(1-2), pages 289-299, August.
    10. Cong Xu & Shixin Wang & Yi Zhou & Litao Wang & Wenliang Liu, 2016. "A Comprehensive Quantitative Evaluation of New Sustainable Urbanization Level in 20 Chinese Urban Agglomerations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(2), pages 1-19, January.
    11. Fan, Fan & Henriksen, Christian Bugge & Porter, John, 2016. "Valuation of ecosystem services in organic cereal crop production systems with different management practices in relation to organic matter input," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 117-127.
    12. Vorstius, Anne Carolin & Spray, Christopher J., 2015. "A comparison of ecosystem services mapping tools for their potential to support planning and decision-making on a local scale," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 75-83.
    13. Pascoe, Sean, 2019. "Recreational beach use values with multiple activities," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 137-144.
    14. Xichen Ge & Liang Sun & Jiongzhen Chen & Shuangrong Cai, 2022. "Land Utilization, Landscape Pattern, and Ecological Efficiency: An Empirical Analysis of Discrimination and Overlap from Suining, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-19, July.
    15. Pascoe, Sean & Doshi, Amar & Kovac, Mladen & Austin, Angelica, 2019. "Estimating coastal and marine habitat values by combining multi-criteria methods with choice experiments," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    16. Wendong Zhang & Brent Sohngen, 2018. "Do U.S. Anglers Care about Harmful Algal Blooms? A Discrete Choice Experiment of Lake Erie Recreational Anglers," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 100(3), pages 868-888.
    17. Kumar, Sanjay, 2002. "Does "Participation" in Common Pool Resource Management Help the Poor? A Social Cost-Benefit Analysis of Joint Forest Management in Jharkhand, India," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(5), pages 763-782, May.
    18. John Kurien, 2004. "The Blessing of the Commons: Small Scale Fisheries, Community Property Rights, and Coastal Natural Assets," Working Papers wp72, Political Economy Research Institute, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
    19. Mariel Aguilar-Støen, 2015. "Exploring participation in new forms of environmental governance: a case study of payments for environmental services in Nicaragua," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 941-958, August.
    20. Zhongmin, Xu & Guodong, Cheng & Zhiqiang, Zhang & Zhiyong, Su & Loomis, John, 2003. "Applying contingent valuation in China to measure the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in Ejina region," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(2-3), pages 345-358, March.

    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:62:y:2015:i:c:p:144-152. 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.