Identifying ‘public values’ for marine and coastal planning: Are residents and non-residents really so different?

Abstract

Planning and management for marine and coastal areas is often contentious, with competing interests claiming their preferences are in the ‘public interest’. Defining the public interest for marine and coastal areas remains a wicked problem, however, resistant to resolution. A focus on more tangible ‘public values’ offers an alternative for policy and planning in specific contexts. However, ambiguity surrounds who or what constitutes the ‘public’, with stakeholder engagement often used as a proxy in marine and coastal research. In this study, the outcomes of participatory processes involving the public from diverse backgrounds and geographical locales were explored. A public participation GIS (PPGIS) survey was undertaken in the remote Kimberley region of Australia to identify the spatial values and management preferences for marine and coastal areas. Similarities and differences between the volunteer public (n = 372) and online panel respondents (n = 206); and for the volunteer public only, differences between residents (n = 118) and non-residents (n = 254) were assessed. Online panelists evidenced lesser quality mapping data and did not provide a reliable means of accessing ‘public’ values. Residents were more likely to map general recreational and recreational fishing values while non-locals were more likely to map biological/conservation and wilderness values. Overall, residents and non-residents were more alike than dissimilar in their mapping of values and management preferences, suggesting that the need to preference local views may be overstated, although there may be differences in policy priorities. Future research should focus on the breadth and representativeness of stakeholder interests to access the views of wider society and hence public values, rather than current approaches where local interests are often the primary focus of participatory stakeholder engagement

Valoración Social De Los Servicios Ecosistémicos De Humedales Costeros: Estado Actual Y Perspectivas.

“…De esa manera, entre 2012 y 2017 se publicaron cinco estudios de valoración social en Oceanía, como parte de proyectos de planificación y ordenamiento territorial, con el objetivo de analizar las implicaciones sociales, ecológicas y económicas esperadas por la creación de áreas naturales protegidas y para identificar zonas de conflicto potencial por el uso o administración de recursos naturales entre gobierno y grupos indígenas (Brown et al, 2017;Moore et al, 2017;Munro et al, 2017;Ramm et al, 2017;Kobryn et al, 2018).…”

“…A pesar de su orientación social, la mayoría de las iniciativas para valorar los SE han aplicado enfoques económicos, con prevalencia del valor de mercado (precio, costo evitado, costo de reemplazo), orientados al aprovechamiento inmediato de los recursos (Gómez-Baggethun et al, 2010). Esta situación ha generado consecuencias importantes, como la exclusión en el análisis de los servicios con valores de uso no directo o sin precio, lo que reduce las posibilidades de ser tomados en cuenta y de incluirlos en la toma de decisiones (Munro et al, 2017).…”

Integration of residents’ experiences into economic planning process of coastal villages: Evidence from the Greater Hangzhou Bay Rim Area

“…In sustainable development and planning, the evaluation of public participation should be delivered in environmental, social, and economic dimensions as a collective unit [25]. Munro et al (2017: 9) suggests that coastal planning researchers should focus on the "breadth and representativeness of stakeholder interests" [26]. In other words, both breadth and depth of public value should be developed to cover various facets of rural development.…”

Identifying Potential Conflict in Land-Use Planning Using a Values-Centered E-Participation Tool: A Canadian Case Study in Aggregate Mining

“…[37] used participatory GIS to better understand local preferences for tourism and development planning. Participatory mapping of values was used by [38] and [39] to assess conflict potential in land-use planning, and PPGIS surveys were used by [40] to understand stakeholder values for marine and coastal areas planning and management.…”