Participatory mapping: Exploring landscape values associated with an iconic species

Abstract

Participatory mapping provides a way to collate a wide range of landscape values providing a visual representation to inform conservation planning. We tested the use of an iconic species, the Greater Flamingo, as a lens for participatory mapping to render explicit the socio-cultural values attributed in a landscape. Spatial information on six landscape values in a biodiversity hotspot, the Camargue Biosphere Reserve (southern France) was collected from 113 participants through surveys, interviews and workshops. This data was geolocated through a SoftGIS methodology to map and quantify the overlap of bivariate hotspots identifying value concurrence. The most frequent values recorded through total number of polygons and surface areas were wilderness and recreation. The least frequently mapped values were economic loss and biodiversity. There was frequent concurrence between biodiversity and aesthetic values especially in wetlands (lagoons, salt flats and sea). There was also frequent concurrence between biodiversity and recreational values with more overlap in sites with easy access (along roads and public areas). Our results show that using an iconic species is an effective way to render explicit spatial variations in the values attributed to a landscape and to identify concurrence of values, thus enabling integration of multiple landscape values in conservation planning how to cite :

PPGIS and Public Use in Protected Areas: A Case Study in the Ebro Delta Natural Park, Spain

“…A study by Reference [20] showed that different users have different interests and values, and this is reflected geographically by distinct spatial patterns and even place-based conflicts [14]. This line of thought is consistent with, for example, Reference [29] and other studies that focused on mapping social hotspots and place-based ecosystem services [16,27].…”

“…Public use data have implications for planning and management [1][2][3][4][5][6] and have proved to be useful in assessing crowd perception and satisfaction among types of visitors [8].Public Participatory GIS (PPGIS) is a reference procedure for acquiring georeferenced information from non-expert users [11] and engaging public participation by visitors to protected areas in a spatial dimension [11,12]. It has been used to explore the attitudes of local residents towards protected areas [13], evaluate trade-offs between conservation and land use [14], detect the social acceptance of protected areas [15], and map and weigh landscape values [16], conflicts [17], and user behaviour [18]. The spatial nature of PPGIS enables a wide range of events to be placed into coordinates and mapped [19].…”

Influence of Logos on Social Attitudes toward the Landscape of Protected Areas: The Case of National and Natural Parks in Spain

“…Ernoul et al [52] highlighted the usefulness of iconic species for PA logos in a study of landscape values and their potential to stimulate interest in conservation planning. The general results of our study show a higher preference for logos that contained charismatic species of fauna.…”

Integrative Science to Achieve Long-Term Impact in Conservation: The Use of Participatory Mapping to Improve Trans-disciplinarity

“…The analysis of landscape values shows that people designate values through a range of frames (Plieninger et al, 2015;Luginbühl et al, 2016;Ernoul et al, 2018). The socio-political dimensions of management policy may be different from the ecological needs and management of species (Mathevet and Mauchamp, 2005).…”

“…Participatory mapping of social values has been used in cultural geography (Ramirez-Gomez et al, 2016), conservation sciences (Ernoul et al, 2018), and landscape ecology (Brown, 2013) to incorporate human dimensions in landscape planning, modeling, and decision-support systems (Le Page et al, 2013). Participatory mapping provides a spatial platform to integrate knowledge about complex landscape situations (e.g., climate change, urban sprawl, tourism development, regional planning, landscape management etc.)…”