IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i19p12078-d923866.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Assessing the Impact of Marine Tourism and Protection on Cultural Ecosystem Services Using Integrated Approach: A Case Study of Gili Matra Islands

Author

Listed:
  • Urai Ridho A. M. F. Banarsyadhimi

    (School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia
    Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Management of Pontianak, Directorate General of Marine Spatial Management, Ministry of Marine Affairs and Fisheries Republic of Indonesia, Pontianak 78114, West Kalimantan, Indonesia)

  • Paul Dargusch

    (School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia)

  • Fery Kurniawan

    (Department of Aquatic Resources Management, Faculty of Fisheries and Marine Sciences, IPB University (Bogor Agricultural University), Bogor 16680, West Java, Indonesia
    Center for Coastal and Marine Resources Studies, IPB University (Bogor Agricultural University), Bogor 16680, West Java, Indonesia)

Abstract

Cultural ecosystem services (CES) are intangible benefits people obtain from an ecosystem through physical and cognitive interactions. Understanding CES provides vital insights into how activities impacting ecosystem services also impact people. Gili Matra Islands, a set of three small tropical islands located in West Nusa Tenggara Province, Indonesia, are an increasingly busy marine tourism destination and a marine protected area. By integrating a hedonic monetary value model with a eudaemonic non-monetary value model, this study examines the impacts of tourism and marine protected area management on cultural ecosystem services in the Gili Matra Islands. Results showed that the distance had significantly influenced property prices to coastlines, beach spots and coastlines with sunset views. In addition, the property prices of each individual island showed significant correlations with particular marine tourism and protection features. Less restricted marine protected zones and coastlines were the most significantly influencing variables to the strong eudaemonic well-being dimensions expressed by residents. The Spiritual dimension produced the highest score and was most significantly affected by several features. This study utilised higher accuracy of properties and residents’ location, enabling more accurate assessments of interaction between CES and the features. This study also discusses how these novel insights in the small island’s CES case can inform vulnerability assessments, reviews of recreation taxes, and spatial planning for marine protected areas and help optimise beach nourishments.

Suggested Citation

  • Urai Ridho A. M. F. Banarsyadhimi & Paul Dargusch & Fery Kurniawan, 2022. "Assessing the Impact of Marine Tourism and Protection on Cultural Ecosystem Services Using Integrated Approach: A Case Study of Gili Matra Islands," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(19), pages 1-23, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:19:p:12078-:d:923866
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12078/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/19/12078/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kenter, Jasper O. & Jobstvogt, Niels & Watson, Verity & Irvine, Katherine N. & Christie, Michael & Bryce, Ros, 2016. "The impact of information, value-deliberation and group-based decision-making on values for ecosystem services: Integrating deliberative monetary valuation and storytelling," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 270-290.
    2. Dexun Jiang & Yiting Guo & Jie Liu & Hao Zhu & Zhijuan Qi & Yuanlong Chen, 2021. "Spatiotemporal Assessment of Water Conservation Function for Ecosystem Service Management Using a GIS-Based Data-Fusion Analysis Framework," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(13), pages 4309-4323, October.
    3. Kaida Chen & Hanliang Lin & Lingyun Liao & Yichen Lu & Yen-Jong Chen & Zehua Lin & Linxi Teng & Aifang Weng & Tianqi Fu, 2022. "Nonlinear Rail Accessibility and Road Spatial Pattern Effects on House Prices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-24, April.
    4. Gopalakrishnan, Sathya & Smith, Martin D. & Slott, Jordan M. & Murray, A. Brad, 2011. "The value of disappearing beaches: A hedonic pricing model with endogenous beach width," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 61(3), pages 297-310, May.
    5. Lau, Jacqueline D. & Hicks, Christina C. & Gurney, Georgina G. & Cinner, Joshua E., 2019. "What matters to whom and why? Understanding the importance of coastal ecosystem services in developing coastal communities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 35(C), pages 219-230.
    6. Qinqin Shi & Hai Chen & Di Liu & Tianwei Geng & Hang Zhang, 2022. "Identifying the Spatial Imbalance in the Supply and Demand of Cultural Ecosystem Services," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(11), pages 1-20, May.
    7. 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.
    8. Spanou, Elisavet & Kenter, Jasper O. & Graziano, Marcello, 2020. "The Effects of Aquaculture and Marine Conservation on Cultural Ecosystem Services: An Integrated Hedonic – Eudaemonic Approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    9. Angulo-Valdés, Jorge A. & Hatcher, Bruce G., 2010. "A new typology of benefits derived from marine protected areas," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 635-644, May.
    10. Abdul Halik & Marco Verweij & Achim Schlüter, 2018. "How Marine Protected Areas Are Governed: A Cultural Theory Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-23, January.
    11. Outeiro, L. & Rodrigues, J. Garcia & Damásio, L.M.A. & Lopes, P.F.M., 2019. "Is it just about the money? A spatial-economic approach to assess ecosystem service tradeoffs in a marine protected area in Brazil," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Or Levkovich & Jan Rouwendal & Ramona Marwijk, 2016. "The effects of highway development on housing prices," Transportation, Springer, vol. 43(2), pages 379-405, March.
    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. Lili Pu & Xingpeng Chen & Li Jiang & Hang Zhang, 2022. "Spatiotemporal Characteristics of Coupling and Coordination of Cultural Tourism and Objective Well-Being in Western China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(1), pages 1-21, December.
    2. Jinzhu Gao & Taitian An & Hongfen Zhang & Kuncheng Zhang & Jiawen Shen & Guangshun He & Xiao Yang & Rui Zhao & Shizheng Tian, 2023. "The Evaluation Method of the Marine Spatial Suitability for Islands from the Perspective of Sustainable Development: A Case Study of the Pingtan Islands," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-23, June.
    3. Márquez, Laura Andreina Matos & Rezende, Eva Caroline Nunes & Machado, Karine Borges & Nascimento, Emilly Layne Martins do & Castro, Joana D'arc Bardella & Nabout, João Carlos, 2023. "Trends in valuation approaches for cultural ecosystem services: A systematic literature review," 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. Spanou, Elisavet & Kenter, Jasper O. & Graziano, Marcello, 2020. "The Effects of Aquaculture and Marine Conservation on Cultural Ecosystem Services: An Integrated Hedonic – Eudaemonic Approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    2. Chakraborty, Shamik & Gasparatos, Alexandros & Blasiak, Robert, 2020. "Multiple values for the management and sustainable use of coastal and marine ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Megan Mullin & Martin D. Smith & Dylan E. McNamara, 2019. "Paying to save the beach: effects of local finance decisions on coastal management," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 152(2), pages 275-289, January.
    4. Chinmoy Ghosh & Venkatesh Panchapagesan & Madalasa Venkataraman, 2024. "On the Impact of Infrastructure Improvement on Real Estate Property Values: Evidence from a Quasi-natural Experiment in an Emerging Market," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 68(1), pages 103-137, January.
    5. Landry, Craig E. & Shonkwiler, J. Scott & Whitehead, John C., 2020. "Economic Values of Coastal Erosion Management: Joint Estimation of Use and Existence Values with recreation demand and contingent valuation data," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    6. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chris, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    7. Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Ros & Church, Andrew, 2016. "Deliberative Democratic Monetary Valuation to implement the Ecosystem Approach," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 308-318.
    8. 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.
    9. Catherine L. Kling & Raymond W. Arritt & Gray Calhoun & David A. Keiser, 2016. "Research Needs and Challenges in the FEW System: Coupling Economic Models with Agronomic, Hydrologic, and Bioenergy Models for Sustainable Food, Energy, and Water Systems," Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) Publications 16-wp563, Center for Agricultural and Rural Development (CARD) at Iowa State University.
    10. 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.
    11. Gregg C. Brill & Pippin M. L. Anderson & Patrick O’Farrell, 2022. "Relational Values of Cultural Ecosystem Services in an Urban Conservation Area: The Case of Table Mountain National Park, South Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-28, April.
    12. Bashar Raisa & Nandy Ananya, 2019. "A more efficient valuation of beaches using tourists’ perspectives and Geographic Information System (GIS): The case of Patenga of Chittagong, Bangladesh," Environmental & Socio-economic Studies, Sciendo, vol. 7(3), pages 54-65, September.
    13. Jerzak, Connor T. & Libgober, Brian, 2020. "The impact of a transportation intervention on electoral politics: Evidence from E-ZPass," Research in Transportation Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    14. Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Integrating deliberative monetary valuation, systems modelling and participatory mapping to assess shared values of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 291-307.
    15. Halkos, George E. & Jones, Nikoleta, 2012. "Modeling the effect of social factors on improving biodiversity protection," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 90-99.
    16. Katikiro, Robert E. & Macusi, Edison D. & Ashoka Deepananda, K.H.M., 2015. "Challenges facing local communities in Tanzania in realising locally-managed marine areas," Marine Policy, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 220-229.
    17. Li, Shicheng & Zhang, Heng & Zhou, Xuewu & Yu, Haibin & Li, Wangjun, 2020. "Enhancing protected areas for biodiversity and ecosystem services in the Qinghai–Tibet Plateau," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    18. Cooper, Nigel & Brady, Emily & Steen, Helen & Bryce, Rosalind, 2016. "Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: Recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services’," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 218-229.
    19. Dan S. Rickman, 2014. "Assessing Regional Quality of Life: A Call for Action in Regional Science," The Review of Regional Studies, Southern Regional Science Association, vol. 44(1), pages 1-12, Spring.
    20. Bryce, Rosalind & Irvine, Katherine N. & Church, Andrew & Fish, Robert & Ranger, Sue & Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Subjective well-being indicators for large-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 258-269.

    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:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:19:p:12078-:d:923866. 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.