Global Trends and Prospects of Community Participation in Marine Protected Areas: A Bibliometric Analysis
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Source of Data
2.2. Data Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Temporal and Spatial Distribution of Literature Releases
3.2. Publication Characteristics
3.3. Visualization Analysis of Research Hotspots and Theme Evolution
Cluster | Keywords | Key Points in Representative Literature |
---|---|---|
Cluster 1 (Red) | Co-management, coral reefs, resilience, social–ecological systems, perceptions, coastal management, Caribbean, ecosystem services, management effectiveness, tourism, community involvement, institutions, marine protected area, stakeholder participation | Twenty-five years of community-based and cooperative coral reef conservation in the Philippines demonstrates that effective coastal resource management requires a combination of government support, community participation, environmental education, and economic incentives [67]. |
Cluster 2 (Green) | Governance, fisheries, climate change, management, ecotourism, biodiversity, sustainability, coastal, ocean, common-pool resources, food security, sustainable development, vulnerability | Marine resource management in marine protected areas and locally managed marine areas can mitigate ecological degradation from climate change and promote sustainable fisheries [49]. |
Cluster 3 (Blue) | Community-based management, community-based, Indonesia, conservation planning, livelihoods, local knowledge, Fiji, coral triangle, customary management, adaptive management, decentralization, monitoring | The failure to effectively include local communities in the design and implementation of relevant measures is one of the reasons for the ineffective management of marine protected areas. Community-based marine protected areas and community-based marine resource management can effectively address the alarming depletion of coastal resources [52]. |
Cluster 4 (Yellow) | Marine protected area, fisheries management, ecosystem-based management, artisanal fisheries, community participation, fisheries co-management, integrated coastal management, stakeholders, Brazil, marine spatial planning | Improving marine resource management by enabling local communities to work with state or regional partners to reduce fishing is a priority for Hawaii and American Samoa. Community-based fisheries co-management is an important step toward improving the sustainability of global fisheries [68]. |
Cluster 5 (Purple) | Marine conservation, Philippines, community-based conservation, small-scale fisheries, Marxan, systematic conservation, environmental justice, Oceania | Community-based conservation means marine conservation based on the participation, knowledge, and priorities of local communities and is more conducive to enhancing the ecological and social benefits of MPAs than conventional “people-free” conservation [32]. |
Cluster 6 (Cyan) | Conservation, participation, Mexico, citizen science, community-based monitoring, local ecological knowledge | Local community volunteers (usually fishers) use simple methods (e.g., visual census) with professional marine biologists to regularly monitor and assess coral reef protection in the Philippines. Community-collected fish data typically have higher variance and higher abundance than data collected by biologists. Community-based monitoring can inform the development of management actions (e.g., increased enforcement, stronger organizations, etc.) and encourage stakeholder cooperation [69]. |
4. Discussion
4.1. Research Method Application
Method | Definition | Advantage | Disadvantage | Example | Publication Year of the Examples | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Qualitative analysis | In-depth interview | An in-depth interview is a direct and personal interview used to reveal the motivation, beliefs, and attitudes of the respondents to a certain question [72]. | In-depth interviews are considered non-standard because they are flexible and allow the questions to be rearranged according to the role of each interviewee [77]. | Finding interviewees who will contribute to relevant research and making them willing to be interviewed is difficult, requiring a high level of interviewing skills and experience on the interviewer’s part [78]. | Syamsi et al. [70] conducted in-depth interviews with 18 local community members and government officers about their perceptions of the Korea–Indonesia ecotourism project. The results demonstrated the positive impact of education and community participation. | 2021 |
Thematic analysis | Thematic analysis is a method of pattern recognition in data. The themes are summarized and classified and become new categories for analysis [79]. | Thematic analysis can explain the reasons behind a phenomenon or problem and reveal the laws of human social behavior and the logic of their thoughts. | It is difficult for researchers to determine which aspects of the data to focus on or which theoretical frameworks to use for their analyses. Thematic analysis is more prone to inconsistent or inappropriate use of terminology [80]. | A thematic analysis was used to determine vulnerability risk and the relationship between the attitudes of local people toward designating the Anambas area as an MPA [65]. | 2021 | |
SWOT | SWOT is a strategic planning method used to assess the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats involved in a project [71]. | SWOT maximizes strengths and opportunities, minimizes external threats, and can turn weaknesses into strengths. It takes advantage of opportunities while reducing weaknesses [81]. | The results of this method are often rough and brief, making the analysis superficial and inaccurate [82]. | Micheli and Niccolini [71] used the SWOT framework to identify the pressures and leverage of biological performance in a Mediterranean marine protected area and search for opportunities to improve this performance. | 2013 | |
Quantitative analysis | Structural equation modeling | Structural equation modeling is a theoretical exploratory model that identifies the potential multivariate relationship between the latent and observable variables from an inductive scope [83]. | SEM can simultaneously handle latent factors that are difficult to measure directly and model the links between them. | This method requires the researcher to set up a causal relationship between variables based on a theory or hypothesis. This setting process is highly subjective [84]. | Masud et al. [74] applied SEM to identify factors influencing community participation in managing community-based ecotourism for sustainable MPA development in Peninsular Malaysia. | 2016 |
Principal component analysis | PCA is a statistical method used to analyze the correlation between the variables of dimensions and each dimension through dimension reduction [6]. | Through PCA, large sets of variables can be reduced to integrated sets that maintain as much information as possible to help explore the relationships between the variables [85]. | The individual principal components obtained with PCA are usually linear combinations of the original variables, and the meaning of these principal components is often less intuitive and more difficult to interpret. | Islam et al. [86] recognized the critical factors of MPA governance through PCA. The results showed that local participation played an essential role in successfully managing MPAs in Malaysia. | 2017 | |
Generalized linear models | GLMs are extensions of linear models that use link function to establish a connection between the response and predictors [87]. | The data used in a GLM are not limited. This allows for data with non-linear and non-constant variance structures [88]. | This model may have computational efficiency issues when dealing with large-scale datasets [89]. | Giglio et al. [76] used GLM to verify the perceptions of different stakeholders on the effectiveness of management in three marine protected areas in Brazil. They found that communication between stakeholders and managers was crucial to fair management. | 2019 |
4.2. Key Lessons from Community Participation Cases
4.3. The Effect of Community Participation in MPAs
4.4. Future Research Prospects
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
MPA | Marine Protected Area |
UN | United Nations |
IF | Impact Factor |
CBMRM | Community-based Marine Resource Management |
SWOT | Strengths, Weakness, Opportunity, Threats |
SEM | Structural Equation Modelling |
PCA | Principal Component Analysis |
GLM | Generalized Linear Model |
RAP | Representative Areas Program |
WCS | Wildlife Conservation Society |
GIS | Geographic Information Systems |
MP-RWEPA | Management Plan of the Right Whale Environmental Protection Area |
References
- Harker, A.L.; Stojanovic, T.A.; Majalia, A.M.; Jackson, C.; Baya, S.; Tsiganyiu, K.D. Relationships between Livelihoods, Well-Being, and Marine Protected Areas: Evidence from a Community Survey, Watamu Marine National Park and Reserve, Kenya. Coast. Manag. 2022, 50, 490–513. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Abdurrahim, A.Y.; Adhuri, D.S.; Ross, H.; Phelan, A. Community champions of ecosystem services: The role of local agency in protecting Indonesian coral reefs. Front. Ecol. Evol. 2022, 10, 868218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boncheva, A.I.; Hernandez-Morales, P. Impacts of Climate Change in the El Vizcaino Biosphere Reserve (REBIVI): Challenges for Coastal Communities and the Conservation of Biodiversity. Diversity 2022, 14, 786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vella, P.; Bowen, R.E.; Frankic, A. An evolving protocol to identify key stakeholder-influenced indicators of coastal change: The case of Marine Protected Areas. ICES J. Mar. Sci. 2009, 66, 203–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palomo, L.E.; Hernández-Flores, A. Application of the Ostrom framework in the analysis of a social-ecological system with multiple resources in a marine protected area. PeerJ 2019, 7, e7374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Osuka, K.; Rosendo, S.; Riddell, M.; Huet, J.; Daide, M.; Chauque, E.; Samoilys, M. Applying a Social-Ecological Systems Approach to Understanding Local Marine Management Trajectories in Northern Mozambique. Sustainability 2020, 12, 3904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Elliott, G.; Mitchell, B.; Wiltshire, B.; Manan, I.A.; Wismer, S. Community participation in marine protected area management: Wakatobi National Park, Sulawesi, Indonesia. Coast. Manag. 2001, 29, 295–316. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marques, A.S.; Ramos, T.B.; Caeiro, S.; Costa, M.H. Adaptive-participative sustainability indicators in marine protected are-as: Design and communication. Ocean. Coast. Manag. 2013, 72, 36–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Day, J.C. Effective Public Participation is Fundamental for Marine Conservation-Lessons from a Large-Scale MPA. Coast. Manag. 2017, 45, 470–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Victorian Auditor-General’s Office (VAGO). Public Participation in Government Decision-Making: Better Practice Guide. 23. 2015. Available online: https://www.audit.vic.gov.au/report/public-participation-government-decision-making-better-practice-guide (accessed on 12 July 2024).
- Tissot, B.N.; Walsh, W.J.; Hixon, M.A. Hawaiian Islands Marine Ecosystem Case Study: Ecosystem- and Community-Based Management in Hawaii. Coast Manag. 2009, 37, 255–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Horvat, K.P.; Gasperic, P.; Leban, K.; Ticar, J.; Smrekar, A. Participatory Approach to Wetland Governance: The Case of The Memorandum of Understanding of the Secovlje Salina Nature Park. Sustainability 2022, 14, 9920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Granek, E.F.; Brown, M.A. Co-management approach to marine conservation in Moheli, Comoros Islands. Conserv. Biol. 2005, 19, 1724–1732. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Oliveira, J.G.C.; Campos-Silva, J.V.; Ladle, R.J.; Batista, V.D. Linking social organization, attitudes, and stakeholder empowerment in MPA governance. Mar. Policy 2021, 130, 104543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosendo, S.; Brown, K.; Joubert, A.; Jiddawi, N.; Mechisso, M. A clash of values and approaches: A case study of marine protected area planning in Mozambique. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2011, 54, 55–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Espectato, L.N.; Monteclaro, H.M.; Arceo, H.O.; Catedrilla, L.C.; Baylon, C.C. Community perceptions on the role of inter-local government units alliance in coastal resource management: The case of Banate Bay alliance in Iloilo, Philippines. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2022, 219, 106059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Begossi, A.; May, P.H.; Lopes, P.F.; Oliveira, L.E.C.; da Vinha, V.; Silvano, R.A.M. Compensation for environmental services from artisanal fisheries in SE Brazil: Policy and technical strategies. Ecol. Econ. 2011, 71, 25–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Trimble, M.; de Araujo, L.G.; Seixas, C.S. One party does not tango! Fishers’ non-participation as a barrier to co-management in Paraty, Brazil. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2014, 92, 9–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Peer, N.; Muhl, E.K.; Janna, J.; Brown, M.; Zukulu, S.; Mbatha, P. Community and Marine Conservation in South Africa: Are We Still Missing the Mark? Front. Mar. Sci. 2022, 9, 884442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Turicchia, E.; Cerrano, C.; Ghetta, M.; Abbiati, M.; Ponti, M. MedSens index: The bridge between marine citizen science and coastal management. Ecol. Indic. 2021, 122, 107296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cheung, S.Y.; Leung, Y.F.; Larson, L.R. Citizen science as a tool for enhancing recreation research in protected areas: Applications and opportunities. J. Environ. Manag. 2022, 305, 114353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joly, C.A. The Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Biota Neotrop. 2022, 22, e2022e001. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fajardo, P.; Beauchesne, D.; Carbajal-López, A.; Daigle, R.M.; Fierro-Arcos, L.D.; Goldsmit, J.; Zajderman, S.; Valdez-Hernández, J.I.; Maigua, M.Y.T.; Christofoletti, R.A. Aichi Target 18 beyond 2020: Mainstreaming Traditional Biodiversity Knowledge in the conservation and sustainable use of marine and coastal ecosystems. PeerJ 2021, 9, e9616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Weeks, R.; Jupiter, S.D. Adaptive Comanagement of a Marine Protected Area Network in Fiji. Conserv. Biol. 2013, 27, 1234–1244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Olaya-Restrepo, J.; Schiavetti, A.; Barbeitos, M.S. A multilayered network analysis of social participation in the management of Marine Protected Areas in Brazil. Mar. Policy 2022, 146, 105329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tranter, S.N.; Estradivari; Ahmadia, G.N.; Andradi-Brown, D.A.; Muenzel, D.; Agung, F.; Amkieltiela; Ford, A.K.; Habibi, A.; Handayani, C.N.; et al. The inclusion of fisheries and tourism in marine protected areas to support conservation in Indonesia. Mar. Policy 2022, 146, 105301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahman, M.K.; Masud, M.M.; Akhtar, R.; Hossain, M.M. Impact of community participation on sustainable development of marine protected areas: Assessment of ecotourism development. Int. J. Tour. Res. 2021, 24, 33–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- de Freitas, R.R.; Costa, R.C.; Alvite, C.M.D.; Balensiefer, D.C.; de Barros, C.R.D.B.; Prado, J.H. Challenges for fishers’ engagement in Marine Protected Areas: Lessons from Right Whale Environmental Protection Area, Southern Brazil. Mar. Policy 2022, 143, 105135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Funk, L.; Wilson, A.M.W.; Gough, C.; Brayne, K.; Djerryh, N.R. Perceptions of access and benefits from community-based aquaculture through Photovoice: A case study within a locally managed marine area in Madagascar. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2022, 222, 106046. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masud, M.M.; Shahabudin, S.M.; Baskaran, A.; Akhtar, R. Co-management approach to sustainable management of marine protected areas: The case of Malaysia. Mar. Policy 2022, 138, 105010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Diggon, S.; Butler, C.; Heidt, A.; Bones, J.; Jones, R.; Outhet, C. The Marine Plan Partnership: Indigenous community-based marine spatial planning. Mar. Policy 2021, 132, 103510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rice, W.S.; Sowman, M.R.; Bavinck, M. Informing a conservation policy-praxis disjuncture: A ‘commons’ perspective to tackling coastal-marine community-conserved area implementation in South Africa. Biol. Conserv. 2021, 261, 109296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kleitou, P.; Rees, S.; Cecconi, F.; Kletou, D.; Savva, I.; Cai, L.L.; Hall-Spencer, J.M. Regular monitoring and targeted removals can control lionfish in Mediterranean Marine Protected Areas. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 2021, 31, 2870–2882. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller, A.E.; Davenport, A.; Chen, S.; Hart, C.; Gary, D.; Fitzpatrick, B.; Muflihati; Kartikawati; Sudaryanti; Sagita, N. Using a participatory impact assessment framework to evaluate a community-led mangrove and fisheries conservation approach in West Kalimantan, Indonesia. People Nat. 2020, 2, 1061–1074. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Katikiro, R.E.; Macusi, E.D.; Deepananda, K.H.M.A. Challenges facing local communities in Tanzania in realising locally-managed marine areas. Mar. Policy 2015, 51, 220–229. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Smallhorn-West, P.; Cohen, P.J.; Phillips, M.; Jupiter, S.D.; Govan, H.; Pressey, R.L. Linking small-scale fisheries co-management to UN Sustainable Development Goals. Conserv. Biol. 2022, 36, 6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- von der Porten, S.; Ota, Y.; Cisneros-Montemayor, A.; Pictou, S. The Role of Indigenous Resurgence in Marine Conservation. Coast. Manag. 2019, 47, 527–547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ban, N.C.; Frid, A. Indigenous peoples’ rights and marine protected areas. Mar. Policy 2018, 87, 180–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jiang, L.; Yang, T.; Yu, J. Global trends and prospects of blue carbon sinks: A bibliometric analysis. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022, 29, 65924–65939. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Weng, G.; Pan, Y.; Li, C.; Wang, N. A scientometric review of tourism carrying capacity research: Cooperation, hotspots, and prospect. J. Clean. Prod. 2021, 325, 129278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lu, Z.; Li, W.; Wang, Y.; Zhou, S. Bibliometric Analysis of Global Research on Ecological Networks in Nature Conservation from 1990 to 2020. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Picone, F.; Buonocore, E.; Chemello, R.; Russo, G.F.; Franzese, P.P. Exploring the development of scientific research on Marine Protected Areas: From conservation to global ocean sustainability. Ecol. Inf. 2021, 61, 101200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thiault, L.; Collin, A.; Chlous, F.; Gelcich, S.; Claudet, J. Combining participatory and socioeconomic approaches to map fishing effort in small-scale fisheries. PLoS ONE 2017, 12, e0176862. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Twichell, J.; Pollnac, R.; Christie, P. Lessons from Philippines MPA Management: Social Ecological Interactions, Participation, and MPA Performance. Environ. Manag. 2018, 61, 916–927. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lopes, R.; Videira, N. A Collaborative Approach for Scoping Ecosystem Services with Stakeholders: The Case of Arrabida Natural Park. Environ. Manag. 2016, 58, 323–342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Amjad, A.; Siddiqui, P.J.A.; Ahmad, N.; Amir, S.A.; Masroor, R.; Shafique, S.; Burhan, Z.U.N. Ecology of Fish Communities in Coral Habitats Along the Coast of Pakistan: Potential Threats and Conservation Strategies. Pak. J. Zool. 2021, 53, 1341–1351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Camargo, C.; Maldonado, J.H.; Alvarado, E.; Moreno-Sánchez, R.; Mendoza, S.; Manrique, N.; Mogollón, A.; Osorio, J.D.; Grajales, A.; Sánchez, J.A. Community involvement in management for maintaining coral reef resilience and biodiversity in southern Caribbean marine protected areas. Biodivers. Conserv. 2009, 18, 935–956. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Harvey, B.J.; Nash, K.L.; Blanchard, J.L.; Edwards, D.P. Ecosystem-based management of coral reefs under climate change. Ecol. Evol. 2018, 8, 6354–6368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- D’agata, S.; Darling, E.S.; Gurney, G.G.; McClanahan, T.R.; Muthiga, N.A.; Rabearisoa, A.; Maina, J.M. Multiscale determinants of social adaptive capacity in small-scale fishing communities. Environ. Sci. Policy 2020, 198, 56–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wever, L.; Glaser, M.; Gorris, P.; Ferrol-Schulte, D. Decentralization and participation in integrated coastal management: Policy lessons from Brazil and Indonesia. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2012, 66, 63–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quintana, A.C.E.; Giron-Nava, A.; Urmy, S.; Cramer, A.N.; Dominguez-Sanchez, S.; Dyck, S.R.; Aburto-Oropeza, O.; Basurto, X.; Weaver, A.H. Positive Social-Ecological Feedbacks in Community-Based Conservation. Front. Mar. Sci. 2021, 8, 652318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ferse, S.C.A.; Costa, M.M.; Manez, K.S.; Adhuri, D.S.; Glaser, M. Allies, not aliens: Increasing the role of local communities in marine protected area implementation. Environ. Conserv. 2010, 37, 23–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Camacho, R.A.; Steneck, R.S. Creating a TURF from the bottom-up: Antigua’s community-based coral reef no-take reserve. Bull. Mar. Sci. 2017, 93, 217–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marriott, S.E.; Cox, C.; Amolo, R.C.; Apistar, D.; Mancao, R.H.; de Mutsert, K. Implications of Community-Based Management of Marine Reserves in the Philippines for Reef Fish Communities and Biodiversity. Front. Mar. Sci. 2021, 8, 731675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Villasenor-Derbez, J.C.; Amador-Castro, I.G.; Hernandez-Velasco, A.; Torre, J.; Fulton, S. Two Decades of Community-Based Marine Conservation Provide the Foundations for Future Action. Front. Mar. Sci. 2022, 9, 893104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ban, N.C.; Picard, C.R.; Vincent, A.C.J. Comparing and Integrating Community-Based and Science-Based Approaches to Prioritizing Marine Areas for Protection. Conserv. Biol. 2009, 23, 899–910. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Alexander, S.M.; Epstein, G.; Bodin, O.; Armitage, D.; Campbell, D. Participation in planning and social networks increase social monitoring in community-based conservation. Conserv. Lett. 2018, 11, e12562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quintana, A.; Basurto, X.; Van Dyck, S.R.; Weaver, A.H. Political making of more-than-fishers through their involvement in ecological monitoring of protected areas. Biodivers. Conserv. 2020, 29, 3899–3923. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Russ, G.R.; Alcala, A.C. Management histories of Sumilon and Apo Marine Reserves, Philippines, and their influence on national marine resource policy. Coral Reefs 1999, 18, 307–319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aswani, S.; Albert, S.; Sabetian, A.; Furusawa, T. Customary management as precautionary and adaptive principles for protecting coral reefs in Oceania. Coral Reefs 2007, 26, 1009–1021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cinner, J.; Huchery, C. A Comparison of Social Outcomes Associated with Different Fisheries Co-Management Institutions. Conserv. Lett. 2014, 7, 224–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Thaman, B.; Icely, J.D.; Fragoso, B.D.D.; Veitayaki, J. A comparison of rural community perceptions and involvement in conservation between the Fiji Islands and Southwestern Portugal. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2016, 133, 45–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hogg, K.; Noguera-Mendez, P.; Semitiel-Garcia, M.; Gray, T.; Young, S. Controversies over stakeholder participation in marine protected area (MPA) management: A case study of the Cabo de Palos-Islas Hormigas MPA. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2017, 144, 120–128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- DiBattista, J.D.; West, K.M.; Hay, A.C.; Hughes, J.M.; Fowler, A.M.; McGrouther, M.A. Community-based citizen science projects can support the distributional monitoring of fishes. Aquat. Conserv. Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst. 2021, 31, 3580–3593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albasri, H.; Sammut, J. A Comparison of Vulnerability Risks and Conservation Perceptions between Mariculture, Fishery and Ecotourism Livelihood Groups in a Multi-Use MPA in Indonesia. Sustainability 2021, 13, 12897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lim, V.C.; Justine, E.V.; Yusof, K.; Ariffin, W.N.S.W.M.; Goh, H.C.; Fadzil, K.S. Eliciting local knowledge of ecosystem services using participatory mapping and Photovoice: A case study of Tun Mustapha Park, Malaysia. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0253740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- White, A.T.; Vogt, H.P. Philippine coral reefs under threat: Lessons learned after 25 years of community-based reef conservation. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2000, 40, 537–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Levine, A.S.; Richmond, L.S. Examining Enabling Conditions for Community-Based Fisheries Comanagement: Comparing Efforts in Hawai’i and American Samoa. Ecol. Soc. 2014, 19, 24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Uychiaoco, A.J.; Arceo, H.O.; Green, S.J.; De la Cruz, M.T.; Gaite, P.A.; Aliño, P.M. Monitoring and evaluation of reef protected areas by local fishers in the Philippines: Tightening the adaptive management cycle. Biodivers. Conserv. 2005, 14, 2775–2794. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Syamsi, M.N.; Lee, J. A Longitudinal Study of the Local Community Perspective on Ecotourism Development in Lombok, Indonesia. Water 2021, 13, 2398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Micheli, F.; Niccolini, F. Achieving Success under Pressure in the Conservation of Intensely Used Coastal Areas. Ecol. Soc. 2013, 18, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schmidt, R.; Le Corre, N.; Hughes, M.; Peuziat, I. The view from the inside: Institutional dimensions of public communication of two coastal and marine protected area networks in France. Coast Manag. 2020, 48, 210–231. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pollnac, R.; Seara, T. Factors Influencing Success of Marine Protected Areas in the Visayas, Philippines as Related to Increasing Protected Area Coverage. Environ. Manag. 2011, 47, 584–592. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masud, M.M.; Aldakhil, A.M.; Nassani, A.A.; Azam, M.N. Community-based ecotourism management for sustainable development of marine protected areas in Malaysia. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2016, 136, 104–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pajaro, M.G.; Mulrennan, M.E.; Alder, J.; Vincent, A.C.J. Developing MPA Effectiveness Indicators: Comparison within and Across Stakeholder Groups and Communities. Coast. Manag. 2010, 38, 122–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Giglio, V.J.; Moura, R.L.; Gibran, F.Z.; Rossi, L.C.; Banzato, B.M.; Corsso, J.T.; Pereira-Filho, G.H.; Motta, F.S. Do managers and stakeholders have congruent perceptions on marine protected area management effectiveness? Ocean Coast. Manag. 2019, 179, 104865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Casagrande, A.; Salvatore, R.; Rover, O.J.; Chiodo, E.; Fantini, A. Artisanal mollusc fisheries co-management in Brazil and Italy: Institutional innovations to address environmental crisis. J. Environ. Manag. 2021, 291, 112671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- MacDougall, C.; Fudge, E. Planning and recruiting the sample for focus groups and in-depth interviews. Qual. Health Res. 2001, 11, 117–126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fereday, J.; Muir-Cochrane, E. Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. Int. J. Qual. Methods 2006, 5, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kiger, M.E.; Varpio, L. Thematic analysis of qualitative data: AMEE Guide No. 131. Med. Teach. 2020, 42, 846–854. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Arslan, O.; Er, I.D. A SWOT analysis for successful bridge team organization and safer marine operations. Process Saf. Prog. 2007, 27, 21–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gao, C.Y.; Peng, D.H. Consolidating SWOT analysis with nonhomogeneous uncertain preference information. Knowl.-Based Syst. 2011, 24, 796–808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Perea-Munoz, J.M.; Miles, A.; Bayle-Sempere, J.T. Sharing goals by timely communication improves fishermen’s satisfaction with marine protected areas: A case study in the Mediterranean. Ambio 2022, 51, 1520–1534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu, X.L.; Heringstad, B.; Gianola, D. Bayesian structural equation models for inferring relationships between phenotypes: A review of methodology, identifiability, and applications. J. Anim. Breed. Genet. 2010, 127, 3–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hoshino, E.; van Putten, E.I.; Girsang, W.; Resosudarmo, B.P.; Yamazaki, S. Fishers’ Perceived Objectives of Community-Based Coastal Resource Management in the Kei Islands, Indonesia. Front. Mar. Sci. 2017, 4, 141. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Islam, G.M.N.; Tai, S.Y.; Kusairi, M.N.; Ahmad, S.; Aswani, F.M.N.; Senan, M.K.A.M.; Ahmad, A. Community perspectives of governance for effective management of marine protected areas in Malaysia. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2017, 135, 34–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Venables, W.N.; Dichmont, C.M. GLMs, GAMs and GLMMs: An overview of theory for applications in fisheries research. Fish. Res. 2004, 70, 319–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Guisan, A.; Edwards, T.C.; Hastie, T. Generalized linear and generalized additive models in studies of species distributions: Setting the scene. Ecol. Model 2002, 157, 89–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vencálek, O.; Hron, K.; Filzmoser, P. A comparison of generalised linear models and compositional models for ordered categorical data. Stat. Model 2020, 20, 249–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rodriguez-Martinez, R.E. Community involvement in marine protected areas: The case of Puerto Morelos reef, Mexico. J. Environ. Manag. 2008, 88, 1151–1160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wendt, D.E.; Starr, R.M. Collaborative Research: An Effective Way to Collect Data for Stock Assessments and Evaluate Marine Protected Areas in California. Mar. Coast. Fish. 2009, 1, 315–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gilman, E. Guidelines for coastal and marine site-planning and examples of planning and management intervention tools. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2002, 45, 377–404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Friedlander, A.M. Marine conservation in Oceania: Past, present, and future. Mar. Pollut. Bull. 2018, 135, 139–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Loury, E.K.; Ainsley, S.M. Identifying Indicators to Evaluate Community-Managed Freshwater Protected Areas in the Lower Mekong Basin: A Review of Marine and Freshwater Examples. Water 2021, 12, 3530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Schemmel, E.; Friedlander, A.M.; Andrade, P.; Keakealani, K.; Castro, L.M.; Wiggins, C.; Wilcox, B.A.; Yasutake, Y.; Kittinger, J.N. The codevelopment of coastal fisheries monitoring methods to support local management. Ecol. Soc. 2016, 21, 34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Casimiro, D.; Ventura, M.A.; Botelho, A.Z.; Guerreiro, J. Ecotourism in Marine Protected Areas as a tool to valuate natural capital and enhance good marine governance: A review. Front. Mar. Sci. 2023, 9, 1002677. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Game, E.T.; Lipsett-Moore, G.; Hamilton, R.; Peterson, N.; Kereseka, J.; Atu, W.; Watts, M.; Possingham, H.P. Informed opportunism for conservation planning in the Solomon Islands. Conserv. Lett. 2011, 4, 38–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marzo, D.; Cavallini, I.; Scaccia, L.; Guidetti, P.; Di Franco, A.; Calò, A.; Niccolini, F. Drivers of Small-Scale Fishers’ Acceptability across Mediterranean Marine Protected Areas at Different Stages of Establishment. Sustainability 2023, 15, 9138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- King, C.; Adhuri, D.S.; Clifton, J. Marine reserves and resilience in the era of COVID-19. Mar. Policy 2023, 141, 105093. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Refulio-Coronado, S.; Lacasse, K.; Dalton, T.; Humphries, A.; Basu, S.; Uchida, H.; Uchida, E. Coastal and Marine Socio-Ecological Systems: A Systematic Review of the Literature. Front. Mar. Sci. 2021, 8, 1–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, V.Y.; Lu, D.J.; Han, Y.S. Hybrid Intelligence for Marine Biodiversity: Integrating Citizen Science with AI for Enhanced Intertidal Conservation Efforts at Cape Santiago, Taiwan. Sustainability 2024, 16, 454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Journal Name | Counts | Research Organization | Counts | Subject Category | Counts |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Ocean Coastal Management (IF: 4.6) | 77 | James Cook University | 48 | Environmental Sciences | 233 |
Aquatic Conservation Marine and Freshwater Ecosystems (IF:2.4) | 29 | University of California System | 24 | Marine Freshwater Biology | 124 |
Coastal Management (IF: 2.5) | 29 | Nature Conservancy | 19 | Water Resources | 113 |
Frontiers in Marine Science (IF: 3.7) | 24 | Duke University | 18 | Ecology | 109 |
Biological Conservation (IF: 5.9) | 17 | CGIAR | 16 | Oceanography | 106 |
Conservation Biology (IF: 6.3) | 17 | NOAA USA | 16 | Biodiversity Conservation | 101 |
Ecology and Society (IF: 4.1) | 16 | University of British Columbia | 16 | Environmental Studies | 69 |
Environmental Conservation (IF: 2.7) | 14 | University of Queensland | 16 | Fisheries | 31 |
Plos One (IF: 3.7) | 13 | University of Hawaii System | 15 | Multidisciplinary Sciences | 21 |
Biodiversity and Conservation (IF: 3.4) | 12 | University of Rhode Island | 15 | Green Sustainable Science Technology | 14 |
Marine Protected Area | Country | Year of Establishment | Year of Literature Publication | The Content of Community Participation |
---|---|---|---|---|
Marine protected area network in Kubulau District [24] | Fiji | 2005 | 2013 | The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) cooperated with communities to establish an MPA network that is locally implemented and managed in the Kubulau District. It improved the resilience of coral reefs to climate change by combining the permanent no-take areas with customary harvested closures. |
Puerto Morelos Reef Marine Protected Area [90] | Mexico | 1998 | 2008 | This MPA is the first to be established through a community-based approach in Mexico. It was initially established to protect artificially threatened coral reefs, and the local communities participated in sustainably utilizing the coral reefs via collaborative co-management. |
Great Barrier Reef Marine Park [9] | Australia | 1975 | 2017 | The Representative Areas Program (RAP) in Australia dealt with environmental issues of community involvement and participatory planning. It ensured that community residents could understand the action plan and put forward valuable recommendations before formulating a draft zoning plan. The communities were invited to discuss the economic, political, and social influence of the zoning plan after the draft was published. As a result, the final zoning plan was created based on expert views and community participation. |
Moheli Marine Park [13] | Union of the Comoros | 1998 | 2005 | Community members participated in boundary delineation and regulation-making in the Moheli Marine Park. Village representatives were selected as “ecoguards” who would be responsible for monitoring their marine resources, implementing park regulations, and representing the interests of the local people. |
Right Whale Environmental Protection Area [28] | Brazil | 2000 | 2022 | Fishers were invited to participate in workshops to discuss the difficulties and needs of small-scale fisheries, their relationship history with the RWEPA, and their expectations for MPA management. The management actions, guidelines, norms, and MPA regions became systematic based on the information provided by participants through three workshop stages. |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Jiang, X.; Liu, F.; Yu, J.; Zhang, K.; Zhang, Z.; Wang, Q. Global Trends and Prospects of Community Participation in Marine Protected Areas: A Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability 2024, 16, 7772. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177772
Jiang X, Liu F, Yu J, Zhang K, Zhang Z, Wang Q. Global Trends and Prospects of Community Participation in Marine Protected Areas: A Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability. 2024; 16(17):7772. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177772
Chicago/Turabian StyleJiang, Xun, Fangming Liu, Jing Yu, Kuncheng Zhang, Zhaohui Zhang, and Quanbin Wang. 2024. "Global Trends and Prospects of Community Participation in Marine Protected Areas: A Bibliometric Analysis" Sustainability 16, no. 17: 7772. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16177772