Logo image
Back
Stakeholder analysis for marine conservation planning using public participation GIS
Journal article   Open access   Peer reviewed

Stakeholder analysis for marine conservation planning using public participation GIS

G. Brown, J. Strickland-Munro, H. Kobryn and S.A. Moore
Applied Geography, Vol.67, pp.77-93
2016
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2015.12.004
pdf
stakeholder_analysis-marine_conservation_planning.pdfDownloadView
Author’s VersionCC BY-NC-ND V4.0,  Open Access
url
Link to Published Version *Subscription may be requiredView

Abstract

Stakeholders are presumed to represent different interests for marine and coastal areas with the potential to influence marine protected area planning and management. We implemented a public participation GIS (PPGIS) system in the remote Kimberley region of Australia to identify the spatial values and preferences for marine and coastal areas. We assessed similarities and differences in PPGIS participants (N = 578) using three operational definitions for "stakeholder" based on: (1) self-identified group, (2) self-identified future interests in the region, and (3) participant value orientation that reflects a preferred trade-off between environmental and economic outcomes. We found moderate levels of association between alternative stakeholder classifications that were logically related to general and place-specific participatory mapping behavior in the study region. We then analyzed how stakeholder classifications influence specific management preferences for proposed marine protected areas (MPAs) in the study region. Conservation-related values and preferences dominated the mapped results in all proposed marine reserves, the likely result of volunteer sampling bias by conservation stakeholder interests participating in the study. However, we suggest these results may also reflect the highly politicized process of marine conservation planning in the Kimberley where conservation efforts have recently emerged and galvanized to oppose a major offshore gas development and associated land-based infrastructure. Consistent with other participatory mapping studies, our results indicate that the chosen operational definition for stakeholder group such as group identity versus interests can influence participatory mapping outcomes, with implications for MPA designation and management. Future research is needed to better understand the strengths and limitations of participatory mapping that is framed in stakeholder perspectives, especially when sampling relies heavily on volunteer recruitment and participation methods that appear predisposed to participatory bias. In parallel, practical efforts to ensure that social research efforts such as this are included in MPA planning must remain of the highest priority for scientists and managers alike.

Details

UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

This output has contributed to the advancement of the following goals:

#14 Life Below Water
#15 Life on Land

Source: InCites

Metrics

513 File views/ downloads
161 Record Views
55 Times Cited - Web of Science

InCites Highlights

These are selected metrics from InCites Benchmarking & Analytics tool, related to this output

Collaboration types
Domestic collaboration
Citation topics
3 Agriculture, Environment & Ecology
3.2 Marine Biology
3.2.92 Fisheries Ecology
Web Of Science research areas
Geography
ESI research areas
Social Sciences, general
Logo image