Comparing and integrating community-based and science-based approaches to prioritizing marine areas for protection

We compared and integrated marine protected areas proposed through community and scientific assessments in 2 regions of British Columbia, Canada. The community priorities were identified during individual and group interviews with knowledgeable resource users. The scientific priorities were develope...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology. - 1999. - 23(2009), 4 vom: 29. Aug., Seite 899-910
1. Verfasser: Ban, Natalie C (VerfasserIn)
Weitere Verfasser: Picard, Chris R, Vincent, Amanda C J
Format: Online-Aufsatz
Sprache:English
Veröffentlicht: 2009
Zugriff auf das übergeordnete Werk:Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology
Schlagworte:Comparative Study Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
LEADER 01000naa a22002652 4500
001 NLM190189177
003 DE-627
005 20231223184923.0
007 cr uuu---uuuuu
008 231223s2009 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c
024 7 |a 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01185.x  |2 doi 
028 5 2 |a pubmed24n0634.xml 
035 |a (DE-627)NLM190189177 
035 |a (NLM)19627319 
040 |a DE-627  |b ger  |c DE-627  |e rakwb 
041 |a eng 
100 1 |a Ban, Natalie C  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
245 1 0 |a Comparing and integrating community-based and science-based approaches to prioritizing marine areas for protection 
264 1 |c 2009 
336 |a Text  |b txt  |2 rdacontent 
337 |a ƒaComputermedien  |b c  |2 rdamedia 
338 |a ƒa Online-Ressource  |b cr  |2 rdacarrier 
500 |a Date Completed 10.11.2009 
500 |a Date Revised 24.07.2009 
500 |a published: Print 
500 |a Citation Status MEDLINE 
520 |a We compared and integrated marine protected areas proposed through community and scientific assessments in 2 regions of British Columbia, Canada. The community priorities were identified during individual and group interviews with knowledgeable resource users. The scientific priorities were developed with abiotic and biotic data in Marxan, a decision-support tool. The resulting maps of community-based and science-based priorities were very similar for the inshore areas, which lent credibility to both approaches. The resource users thought the science-based maps were fairly good at highlighting areas important for conservation, but preferred the scenarios that integrated the 2 maps to either constituent map. Incorporating spatial variation in human impacts on the marine areas and commercial fishing, which are both costs of protection, into our Marxan analyses led to scenarios that were different from either constituent map. Our results show the value of integrating community-based and science-based approaches in conservation planning to achieve community acceptance and conservation utility. They also reveal that people's assessments on the basis of their traditional ecological knowledge may serve as a reasonable proxy for scientific approaches in selecting areas of ecological value 
650 4 |a Comparative Study 
650 4 |a Journal Article 
650 4 |a Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't 
700 1 |a Picard, Chris R  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
700 1 |a Vincent, Amanda C J  |e verfasserin  |4 aut 
773 0 8 |i Enthalten in  |t Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology  |d 1999  |g 23(2009), 4 vom: 29. Aug., Seite 899-910  |w (DE-627)NLM098176803  |x 1523-1739  |7 nnns 
773 1 8 |g volume:23  |g year:2009  |g number:4  |g day:29  |g month:08  |g pages:899-910 
856 4 0 |u http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2009.01185.x  |3 Volltext 
912 |a GBV_USEFLAG_A 
912 |a SYSFLAG_A 
912 |a GBV_NLM 
912 |a GBV_ILN_350 
951 |a AR 
952 |d 23  |j 2009  |e 4  |b 29  |c 08  |h 899-910