4.7 Article

Assessing the value of public lands using public participation GIS (PPGIS) and social landscape metrics

Journal

APPLIED GEOGRAPHY
Volume 53, Issue -, Pages 77-89

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2014.06.006

Keywords

Public lands; Social metrics; Public participation; PPGIS; Place values

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Public lands provide a wide range of values ecological, socio-cultural, and economic but systematic methods to assess the social and cultural values of public lands are underdeveloped. In this study, we present a method that uses public participation GIS (PPGIS) to identify and quantify the social and cultural values associated with different types of public land, ranging from national parks and reserves, to multiple-use lands. In 2014, we conducted a PPGIS study to identify public land values in Victoria, Australia. Over 35,000 landscape value and land use preference locations were mapped by study participants (n = 1905). We analyzed the spatial data for association with public land type, IUCN classification, and an agency level management system. We generated social landscape metrics to quantify values by individual public land units based on value abundance, richness, diversity, and the potential for management conflict. We found statistically significant associations between values and public land type, IUCN protected area classification, and management level of protection. The social landscape metrics indicate that the most highly valued public lands (national parks) have the greatest potential for management conflict, but also reveal several less iconic public lands as having high potential for management conflict. We discuss the strengths and limitations of the PPG'S methods in the study and provide suggestions to improve the process for future assessments of social and cultural values associated with public lands. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available