Co-management of protected areas to alleviate conservation conflicts: Experiences in Norway

Fedreheim, Gunn Elin; Blanco, Esther

doi:10.18352/ijc.749

Cited by 27 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies have found a lack of support for conservation to be associated with Norwegians’ views of nature as resilient rather than fragile, a lack of trust in science, favorable attitudes towards local-decision making, dependency on natural resources, gender, age and education (women, young and educated people more in favor) [75,91–95]. We confirm some of these results as large portion of property owners and livestock farmers (stakeholders that are likely to have higher resource dependency) were less supportive protection and had lower trust in higher-level environmental authorities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholders’ perceptions of protected area management following a nationwide community-based conservation reform

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People’s perceptions can point to reasons for conservation support or lack thereof. In this study, we surveyed the perceptions of conservation among local stakeholders who participated in protected area (PA) management following a reform towards community-based conservation in Norway. We analyzed the link between perceptions of threats to conservation values, prioritized management actions and trust in PA governance, and assessed how these perceptions aligned with the stakeholders’ preferred overarching conservation approach and their support for PAs. Conservation perceptions differed mostly between property owners and representatives of nature conservation (such as NGOs). Property owners perceived modern farming, grazing and hay making, and securing the interests of rights holders as a priority. They had a lower support for PAs and favored a conservation approach focusing on “people and nature”. Representatives from nature conservation prioritized management actions to increase biodiversity and reduce land development, had higher trust in environmental authorities and identified motorized vehicle use as a threat to conservation values. They had a high support for PAs and favored a conservation approach that mitigates threats from human activity (i.e. “nature despite people”). The nationwide reform aimed at increasing support for PAs, but 31% of the members of the stakeholder advisory councils were willing to downgrade or degazette PAs for the benefit of economic development, which is much more than general population surveys. However, the level of trust in local governance was less polarized among the members of stakeholder advisory councils compared with the former state governance, which suggests that that the community-based conservation reform has the potential to improve collaboration and conflict mitigation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Stakeholders’ perceptions of protected area management following a nationwide community-based conservation reform

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Park restrictions can also impact landowner rights or community livelihoods, usually resulting in strong local opposition [28]. Due to these diverse potential sources of opposition as well as the general need for stakeholder involvement, a common response on the governance level is the use of co-management or decentralized structures [29][30][31][32]. In parallel, increased attention has been devoted to the role of protected areas in rural development, especially in regard with tourism [33,34].…”

Section: Background 21 Land-use and Conservation Conflictsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tourism, Recreation and Wilderness: Public Perceptions of Conservation and Access in the Central Highland of Iceland

Bishop

Ólafsdóttir

Árnason

2022

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Protected area establishment can be a source of land-use conflicts. National parks are particularly prone to such conflicts as they tend to cover large, sometimes remote, areas, involve many stakeholders, and often constitute an important venue for both tourism and outdoor recreation. Identifying potential conflict issues at an early stage is crucial to prevent further escalation and preserve public support for conservation. This article presents the findings of a nation-wide survey focusing on the establishment of the Central Highland National Park (CHNP) in Iceland, with the aim of identifying such points of contention. The results show that while the establishment of the CHNP enjoys broad public support, concerns over access restrictions are the most common reason for opposition. The majority of respondents support limiting the number of visitors to the area, which can hardly be implemented without conflicting with public access rights, deeply embedded in local culture and uses. In this remote area, access facilitation through road and accommodation development, however, appears very divisive, either seen as providing increased opportunities for the general public to enjoy the area or as threatening the authenticity of travel experiences in a wilderness destination, and paving the way for further developments. It is argued that refraining from building up roads is the most diplomatic way to limit visitor numbers without seriously impairing travel freedom, therefore preserving the wilderness qualities of the area while meeting users’ expectations. Ultimately, this study highlights the importance of public opinion research and stakeholder consultation when planning and managing tourism and outdoor recreation in wilderness settings.

show abstract

“…Increases in urban development and tourism were also considered a major driver of conflict, particularly in the Spey catchment. A hotspot was identified by stakeholders in the uplands near the local tourism town, where increases in tourism and recreation are impacting on those "wild" spaces which originally attract people there [86], demonstrating that tourism development has the potential to be a key driver of conflict [87]. Other studies have also found that an increase in the recreational use of an area can cause conflict with biodiversity conservation [88,89], or among different recreational users [90].…”

Section: Drivers Of Conflictmentioning

confidence: 99%

Catchment-Scale Participatory Mapping Identifies Stakeholder Perceptions of Land and Water Management Conflicts

Stosch

Oliver

2022

Land

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Competing socioecological demands and pressures on land and water resources have the potential to increase land use conflict. Understanding ecosystem service provisioning and trade-offs, competing land uses, and conflict between stakeholder groups in catchments is therefore critical to inform catchment management and the sustainable use of natural resources. We developed a novel stakeholder engagement methodology that incorporates participatory conflict mapping in three catchments with a short questionnaire to identify the perceptions of 43 participants from four key land and water management stakeholder groups: environmental regulators, water industry practitioners, the farm advisor community, and academics. The participatory mapping exercise produced heat maps of perceived conflict and land use competition, providing spatial detail of the complex combination of land use issues faced by catchment managers. Distinct, localised hotspots were identified in areas under pressure from flooding, abstraction, and urbanisation; as well as more dispersed issues of relevance at the landscape scale, such as from farming, forestry, energy production, and tourism. Subsequent regression modelling linked perceived conflict to land cover maps and identified coastal, urban, and grassland areas as the most likely land cover types associated with conflict in the study catchments. Our approach to participatory conflict mapping provides a novel platform for catchment management and can facilitate increased cooperation among different catchment stakeholders. In turn, land and water management conflicts can be recognised and their underlying drivers and likely solutions identified in an effort to better manage competing demands on catchment resources.

show abstract

Co-management of protected areas to alleviate conservation conflicts: Experiences in Norway

Cited by 27 publications

References 25 publications

Stakeholders’ perceptions of protected area management following a nationwide community-based conservation reform

Stakeholders’ perceptions of protected area management following a nationwide community-based conservation reform

Tourism, Recreation and Wilderness: Public Perceptions of Conservation and Access in the Central Highland of Iceland

Catchment-Scale Participatory Mapping Identifies Stakeholder Perceptions of Land and Water Management Conflicts

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About