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.
The findings and conclusions of this study are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
AbstractAt the federal level, particularly within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), regulatory and programmatic needs have driven the continued development and application of non-market valuation approaches to marine and coastal resources. The evolution of these valuation approaches not only entails adopting the recommendations of the 1993 NOAA blue ribbon panel on contingent valuation, but also an expansion of stated preference approaches with increased use of stated preference choice experiments. Revealed preference approaches have also advanced with more sophisticated random utility models. We provide an overview of this evolution in the areas of natural resources damage assessment, protected resources, recreational fisheries, and coastal management. With the broad adoption of an ecosystem services approach to marine and coastal resource management, the demand for valuation of ecosystem services has grown and will continue to provide the impetus for more studies similar to those presented. Similar to what occurred initially as a result of the blue ribbon study, greater adoption of valuation estimates, particularly for non-use value, may be facilitated by guidance and standards from a high-level or highly respected authority.
La evolución de la valoración no basada en el mercado de recursos marinos y costeros de Estados UnidosLea el abstracto en español 请点击此处阅读中文摘要 请点击此处阅读中文摘要
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.