Expanding the toolbox: Assessing methods for local outdoor recreation planning

Komossa, Franziska; Wartmann, Flurina M.; Verburg, Peter H.

doi:10.1016/j.landurbplan.2021.104105

Cited by 27 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 58 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Knowledge of spatial trends in citizen science activity can further inform overall management strategies for natural areas and green spaces. The needs and preferences of area visitors are regularly used to make management decisions about natural areas and even to justify ongoing area protection, but because different subsets of visitors prioritize different types of area management, it can be challenging to identify the diverse needs of area visitors (Hornigold et al., 2016; Komossa et al., 2021; Mancini et al., 2019; Muñoz et al., 2020). Our results show that citizen science participants in our study area tend to use the area's trail network differently than other visitors, so their needs may be overlooked if not explicitly considered.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial distribution of biodiversity citizen science in a natural area depends on area accessibility and differs from other recreational area use

Mandeville

Nilsen

Finstad

2022

Ecol Sol and Evidence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Opportunistic citizen science produces large amounts of primary biodiversity data but is underutilized in the conservation and management of protected areas despite these areas' status as citizen science hotspots. Application of these data may be limited by the challenge of understanding sampling patterns associated with opportunistic data at a scale relevant to local area management. An improved understanding of citizen science activity patterns within protected areas could strengthen both data analysis and the local promotion and guidance of citizen science activity.2. We investigated local-scale patterns of citizen science activity, using a case study approach to examine citizen science activity in a recreationally popular natural area that serves as a regional citizen science hotspot. We modelled the relationship between local citizen science activity and 10 spatial covariates broadly related to ease of access and natural interest, factors which have been shown to drive citizen science activity at regional scales. We further compared the distribution of citizen science activity with that of professional data collection and recreational visitor activity in the study area.3. We found that citizen science data largely complement rather than replicate openly available professional data. Citizen science participation was primarily driven by ease of access, especially the presence of trails. However, citizen science use of the trail network differed from other types of recreational trail use, including a weaker preference for well-established trails and a stronger association with developed areas.4. This improved understanding of patterns in citizen science participation may be used to better account for spatial biases in citizen science data and to manage natural areas in a way that supports and guides future citizen science activity.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Spatial distribution of biodiversity citizen science in a natural area depends on area accessibility and differs from other recreational area use

Mandeville

Nilsen

Finstad

2022

Ecol Sol and Evidence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Knowledge of spatial trends in citizen science activity can further inform overall management strategies for natural areas and green spaces. The needs and preferences of area visitors are regularly used to make management decisions about natural areas and even to justify ongoing area protection, but because different subsets of visitors prioritize different types of area management, it can be challenging to identify the diverse needs of area visitors (Hornigold et al 2016, Mancini et al 2018, Muñoz et al 2020, Komossa et al 2021. Our results show that citizen science participants in our study area tend to use the area's trail network differently than other visitors, so their needs may be overlooked if not explicitly considered.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fine-scale spatial distribution of biodiversity citizen science in a natural area depends on area accessibility and differs from other recreational area use

Mandeville¹,

Nilsen²,

Finstad³

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

1. Opportunistic citizen science produces large amounts of primary biodiversity data but is underutilized in the conservation and management of protected areas despite these areas’ status as citizen science hotspots. Application of these data may be limited by the challenge of understanding sampling patterns associated with opportunistic data at a scale relevant to local area management. An improved understanding of citizenscience activity patterns within protected areas could strengthen both data analysis and the local promotion and guidance of citizen science activity.2. We investigated local-scale patterns of citizen science distribution, using a case study approach to examine citizen science activity in a recreationally popular natural area that serves as a regional citizen science hotspot. We modeled the relationship between local citizen science activity and ten spatial covariates broadly related to ease of access and natural interest, which have been shown to drive citizen science activity at regional scales in previous studies. We further compared the distribution of citizenscience activity with that of professional data collection, and with data on recreational visitor activity in the study area.3. We found that citizen science largely complements professional data collection in space. Citizen science participation was primarily driven by ease of access, especially the presence of trails. However, citizen science use of the trail network differed from other types of recreational trail use, including a weaker preference for well established trails and a stronger association with developed areas.4. This improved understanding of patterns in citizen science participation may be usedto better account for spatial biases in citizen science data and to manage natural areas in a way that supports and guides future citizen science activity.

show abstract

“…backcountry skiing in alpine areas). Participatory mapping (Brown & Weber, 2011; Wolf et al, 2015; Komossa, Wartmann & Verburg, 2021) and application-based data (Norman & Pickering, 2017; Ghermandi & Sinclair, 2019) offer alternative approaches for collecting recreation data, but it remains unclear how well the data reflects use of the total recreation population and how the data from different tools complement each other.…”

Section: Case Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alternatively, managers and researchers can use PM to identify areas with recreation. PM engages participants to identify recreation areas or the intensity of recreation activities on a map (Brown & Weber, 2011; Rösner et al, 2014; Wolf et al, 2015; Wolf, Brown & Wohlfart, 2018; Komossa, Wartmann & Verburg, 2021). While PM can provide insight into the presence of and spatial distributions of recreation and recreationists’ behavior, cognitive bias can limit the accuracy and inference to specific times and locations (Brown, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancements in monitoring: a comparison of traditional and application-based tools for measuring outdoor recreation

Capdevila,

McLellan,

Loosen

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Outdoor recreation has experienced a boom in recent years. While outdoor recreation provides wide-ranging benefits to human well-being and is an important feature of many protected and non-protected areas, there are growing concerns about the sustainability of recreation with the increased pressures placed on ecological systems and visitor experiences. These concerns emphasize the need for managers to access accurate and timely recreation data at scales that match the growing recreation footprint. Here, we compare spatial and temporal patterns of winter and summer recreation use using traditional and application-based tools across the Columbia and Canadian Rocky Mountains of western Canada. We demonstrate how recreation use can be estimated using traditional and application-based tools, although their accuracy and utility varies across space, season and activity type. Cameras and counters captured similar broad-scale patterns in count estimates of pedestrians and all recreation activities. Application-based data provided detailed spatiotemporal information on recreation use, but datasets were biased towards specific recreation types and did not represent the full recreation population. For instance, Strava Metro data was more suited for capturing broad-scale spatial patterns in biking than pedestrian recreation. Traditional tools including aerial surveys and participatory mapping captured coarser information on the intensity and extent of recreation, with the former tool capturing areas with low recreation intensity and the latter tool suited for capturing recreation information across large spatial and temporal scales. Application-based data should be supplemented with data from traditional tools including cameras or trail counters to identify biases in data and fill in data gaps. We provide a comparison of each tool for measuring recreation use, highlight each tools' strengths and limitations, and suggest how to use these tools to address real-world monitoring and management scenarios. Our research contributes towards a better understanding of what tools are available to measure recreation and can help direct managers in selecting which tool, or combinations of tools, to use that can expand the rigor and scope of recreation research. This information can support decision-making and lead to the protection of ecological systems while allowing for high-quality recreation experiences.

show abstract

Expanding the toolbox: Assessing methods for local outdoor recreation planning

Cited by 27 publications

References 58 publications

Spatial distribution of biodiversity citizen science in a natural area depends on area accessibility and differs from other recreational area use

Spatial distribution of biodiversity citizen science in a natural area depends on area accessibility and differs from other recreational area use

Fine-scale spatial distribution of biodiversity citizen science in a natural area depends on area accessibility and differs from other recreational area use

Advancements in monitoring: a comparison of traditional and application-based tools for measuring outdoor recreation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About