Evaluating the social acceptability of Marine Protected Areas

Abstract

Q methodology provides a novel, quantitative approach to reveal stakeholder perspectives and was used to assess social acceptance of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) with fisheries and conservation management goals using the Devon & Severn region, UK as a case study site. Participants sorted a set of statements ( n=42) into a forced-choice frequency distribution and centroid analysis revealed three factors for interpretation: (1) 'pro-conservation', characterised by views that conservation should be prioritised over commercial and economic interests; (2) 'pro-fisheries' who saw fishing as the priority and expressed concerns over the uncertainty of management measures and the number of planned MPAs; and (3) 'win-win' who felt that the current approach to marine management using MPAs would allow both fisheries and conservation goals to be met. Despite some differences in opinion, social acceptability of MPAs was identified across all three discourses, but was limited by the knock-on effects of the exclusion of stakeholders from the implementation of MPAs and the development of management measures. This resulted in disenfranchisement and uncertainty over the future of their activities. The results suggest that social acceptability of MPAs is generated by effective and ongoing stakeholder engagement, transparency and honesty relating to the costs and benefits of designations and a certainty that once sites are in place the resources exist for their effective management. Understanding social acceptability will guide adaptive management and increase the chances of MPA success and the meeting of global targets.