Marine reserve establishment and on-going management costs: A case study from New Zealand

Rojas-Nazar, Ursula A.; Cullen, Ross; Gardner, Jonathan P. A.; Bell, James J.

doi:10.1016/j.marpol.2015.06.029

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, Hypothesis 2 is not rejected. This empirical finding is generally consistent with previous research that natural attractions cost more than cultural ones (Rojas-Nazar et al 2015). The attraction assets are found to substantially influence the decision-making of the government appropriations: every 10% increase in the attraction asset will increase the amount of government appropriations by 3.59%, but there is no significant difference in the likelihood of government funding among attractions with different size.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

Which Public Attraction Gets (and Gets More) Government Funding? The Effects of Internal and External Factors

Liu

Zou

Chen

2022

Journal of Travel Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public attractions’ financial viability heavily depends upon sufficient government funding. However, research on government allocations has historically been rare. Drawn on the public administration and finance literature, this study addresses this gap by using a panel dataset of 262 public attractions in China from 2015 to 2018. Double-hurdle models, Heckman two-stage approach, multiple-hurdle approach, and quantile regressions are employed to examine the relationship between government funding, attraction characteristics, and local economic conditions. The findings suggest that attraction characteristics are associated with the amount of government appropriations, but they are less impactful on the attractions’ likelihood of receiving funding. The effects of attraction characteristics on government funding are asymmetric—as attractions’ government funding level increases, attraction type and quality exert stronger impacts while other characteristics influence less. The local economic condition is a significant factor in the amount of government funding. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

Which Public Attraction Gets (and Gets More) Government Funding? The Effects of Internal and External Factors

Liu

Zou

Chen

2022

Journal of Travel Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite being critical to decision-making about natural resource management (Naidoo et al 2006), costs associated with establishing and managing protected areas are often poorly reported, difficult to quantify (Balmford et al 2004;Ban et al 2011), and highly contextual (Rojas-Nazar et al 2015). As a flexible way to integrate the amalgam of costs (e.g., stock assessments, ecological monitoring, staffing, enforcement, etc.)…”

Section: Costsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ocean zoning within a sparing versus sharing framework

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The land-sparing versus land-sharing debate centers around how different intensities of habitat use can be coordinated to satisfy competing demands for biodiversity persistence and food production in agricultural landscapes. We apply the broad concepts from this debate to the sea and propose it as a framework to inform marine zoning based on three possible management strategies, establishing: no-take marine reserves, regulated fishing zones, and unregulated open-access areas. We develop a general model that maximizes standing fish biomass, given a fixed management budget while maintaining a minimum harvest level. We find that when management budgets are small, sea-sparing is the optimal management strategy because for all parameters tested, reserves are more cost-effective at increasing standing biomass than traditional fisheries management. For larger budgets, the optimal strategy switches to sea-sharing because, at a certain point, further investing to grow the no-take marine reserves reduces catch below the minimum harvest constraint. Our intention is to illustrate how general rules of thumb derived from plausible, single-purpose models can help guide marine protected area policy under our novel sparing and sharing framework. This work is the beginning of a basic theory for optimal zoning allocations and should be considered complementary to the more specific spatial planning literature for marine reserve as nations expand their marine protected area estates.

show abstract

“…We cataloged and present here (Tables 2A,B, 3) each piece of literature based on scope, environment considered (marine or terrestrial), the costs reported, type of data, and eligibility for inclusion in our quantitative comparison. Papers and articles include projections for real cases, estimations for hypothetical scenarios, and observations from ongoing efforts Some studies are site-or region-specific, in which case their geographic focus is also referenced (Green et al, 2012;Rojas-Nazar et al, 2015;Pascal et al, 2018). Other studies have used a collection of case examples or data sets to construct cost models to both identify variables that influence costs, as well as to project costs of…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Filling the Data Gap – A Pressing Need for Advancing MPA Sustainable Finance

2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reaching protected area (PA) coverage goals is challenged by a lack of sufficient financial resources. This funding gap is particularly pervasive for marine protected areas (MPAs). It has been suggested that marine conservationists examine examples from terrestrial protected areas (TPAs) for potential solutions to better fund MPAs. However, the funding needs for MPAs and TPAs have not been directly compared, and there is risk of management failures if any such differences are not properly considered when designing MPA financial strategies. We perform an in-depth literature review to investigate differences in distribution of costs incurred by MPAs and TPAs across three primary categories; establishment, operational, and opportunity costs. We use our findings to conduct a snapshot quantitative comparison, which we complement with theoretical support to provide preliminary insight into differences between MPA and TPA costs, and how these may influence financial strategies most appropriate for each type of PA. Our research suggests that TPA costs, and thereby funding requirements, are greater for the time period leading up to and including the implementation phase, whereas MPAs have higher financial requirements for meeting long-term annual operational costs. This may be primarily due to the prevalence of private property rights for terrestrial regions, which are less frequently in place for ocean areas, as well as logistical requirements for enforcement and monitoring in a marine environment. To cement these suggestions in greater analytical certainty, we call for more thorough and standardized PA cost reporting at all stages, especially for MPAs and PAs in developing countries. The quantity and quality of such data presently limits research in PA sustainable finance, and will need to be remedied to advance the field in future years.

show abstract

Marine reserve establishment and on-going management costs: A case study from New Zealand

Cited by 6 publications

References 30 publications

Which Public Attraction Gets (and Gets More) Government Funding? The Effects of Internal and External Factors

Which Public Attraction Gets (and Gets More) Government Funding? The Effects of Internal and External Factors

Ocean zoning within a sparing versus sharing framework

Filling the Data Gap – A Pressing Need for Advancing MPA Sustainable Finance

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About