Recreational ecosystem services in protected areas: A survey of visitors to Natura 2000 sites in Italy

Abstract The demand for enjoyable recreational environments is growing. At the same time, the increase of urban areas and intensively managed agricultural areas are deemed major threats to ecosystem services provision. Therefore, protected areas are becoming increasingly important for providing recreational ecosystem services. In this study, we analysed visitors’ profiles from on-site surveys at 10 Natura 2000 sites in different Italian regions. We gathered information on recreational activities, behaviour, expenditure, satisfaction of the visitors, and knowledge of Natura 2000. Predominant recreational activities were hiking, cycling, and wine and food tasting. Mean daily expenditure per visitor amounted to 48.56 €. The level of satisfaction with site-specific facilities and features was generally high, whereas knowledge about the Natura 2000 network was scarce. In the light of the visitors’ behaviour, we identified three main types of visitors: the regional excursionist, the local recreationist, and the sportive tourist. The presented findings provide useful insights for Natura 2000 site management and related recreational ecosystem services as well as for guiding visitor management. Management implications Our survey reveals several aspects related to recreational visits of protected areas, which are important for managing ecosystems and visitors: • The revealed main recreational activities can help to improve the recreational opportunities or visitor management. • Estimation of visitor expenditure indicates economic benefits at the local level. • Visitor types describe visitor behaviour and can guide the promotion of the sites. • Suggestions of the respondents for improving the recreational quality of the sites include more initiatives, guided tours and information, as well as the improvement of the roads and the signage system.

[1]  M. Onaindia,et al.  Mapping recreation supply and demand using an ecological and a social evaluation approach , 2015 .

[2]  J. Loomis A Comparison of the Effect of Multiple Destination Trips on Recreation Benefits as Estimated by Travel Cost and Contingent Valuation Methods , 2006 .

[3]  Martin Müller,et al.  The economic impact of tourism in six German national parks , 2010 .

[4]  James D. Absher,et al.  An Examination of the Motivation—Involvement Relationship , 2006 .

[5]  Zhongwei Guo,et al.  Increased Dependence of Humans on Ecosystem Services and Biodiversity , 2010, PloS one.

[6]  Peter Fredman,et al.  Determinants of Visitor Expenditures in Mountain Tourism , 2008 .

[7]  Domingo Alcaraz-Segura,et al.  Do protected areas networks ensure the supply of ecosystem services? Spatial patterns of two nature reserve systems in semi-arid Spain , 2015 .

[8]  C. Pickering,et al.  Impacts of recreation and tourism on plant biodiversity and vegetation in protected areas in Australia. , 2007, Journal of environmental management.

[9]  H. Keselman,et al.  Consequences of Assumption Violations Revisited: A Quantitative Review of Alternatives to the One-Way Analysis of Variance F Test , 1996 .

[10]  A. Juutinen,et al.  Combining ecological and recreational aspects in national park management: A choice experiment application , 2011 .

[11]  M. Grodzińska-Jurczak,et al.  Contribution of social science to large scale biodiversity conservation : a review of research about the Natura 2000 network , 2016 .

[12]  R. Scolozzi,et al.  Mapping Alpine Landscape Values and Related Threats as Perceived by Tourists , 2015 .

[13]  Uta Schirpke,et al.  How to support the effective management of Natura 2000 sites? , 2017 .

[14]  Ulrike Tappeiner,et al.  Mapping beneficiaries of ecosystem services flows from Natura 2000 sites , 2014 .

[15]  C. Folke,et al.  Reconnecting Cities to the Biosphere: Stewardship of Green Infrastructure and Urban Ecosystem Services , 2014, AMBIO.

[16]  B. Trauer Conceptualizing special interest tourism—frameworks for analysis , 2006 .

[17]  D. Haase,et al.  Urban ecosystem services assessment along a rural-urban gradient: a cross-analysis of European cities. , 2013 .

[18]  E. F. Torbidoni Managing for Recreational Experience Opportunities: The Case of Hikers in Protected Areas in Catalonia, Spain , 2011 .

[19]  M. Rounsevell,et al.  The vulnerability of ecosystem services to land use change , 2006 .

[20]  J. Marion A Review and Synthesis of Recreation Ecology Research Supporting Carrying Capacity and Visitor Use Management Decisionmaking , 2016 .

[21]  K. Gaston,et al.  Who Benefits from Recreational Use of Protected Areas , 2010 .

[22]  W. Adams,et al.  The value of valuing nature , 2014, Science.

[23]  Millenium Ecosystem Assessment Ecosystems and human well-being: synthesis , 2005 .

[24]  Andrew McConville,et al.  The costs and socio-economic benefits associated with the Natura 2000 network , 2014 .

[25]  B. King,et al.  Protected areas, conservation and tourism – financing the sustainable dream , 2014 .

[26]  T. Plieninger,et al.  An empirical review of cultural ecosystem service indicators , 2013 .

[27]  Susan J. Winter,et al.  Determining Economic Contributions and Impacts: What is the difference and why do we care? , 2007 .

[28]  Christopher M. Fleming,et al.  The recreational value of Lake McKenzie, Fraser Island: An application of the travel cost method , 2008 .

[29]  R. Scolozzi,et al.  Operationalising ecosystem services for effective management of protected areas: Experiences and challenges , 2017 .

[30]  M. Pérez-Soba,et al.  Mapping cultural ecosystem services: a framework to assess the potential for outdoor recreation across the EU , 2014 .

[31]  F. Kienast,et al.  GIS-assisted mapping of landscape suitability for nearby recreation , 2012 .

[32]  U. Tappeiner,et al.  Supporting the Management of Ecosystem Services in Protected Areas: Trade-Offs Between Effort and Accuracy in Evaluation , 2017 .

[33]  Biodiversity attracts visitors to national parks , 2015, Biodiversity and Conservation.

[34]  Olaf Bastian,et al.  The role of biodiversity in supporting ecosystem services in Natura 2000 sites , 2013 .

[35]  A. Morzillo,et al.  Attitudes, willingness to pay, and stated values for recreation use fees at an urban proximate forest , 2012 .

[36]  C. Pickering,et al.  A review of the impacts of nature based recreation on birds. , 2011, Journal of environmental management.

[37]  Jan Hjort,et al.  Introducing accessibility analysis in mapping cultural ecosystem services , 2016 .

[38]  Carsten Rahbek,et al.  A Quantitative Analysis of Biodiversity and the Recreational Value of Potential National Parks in Denmark , 2008, Environmental management.

[39]  Rebekka R. E. Artz,et al.  Does nature conservation enhance ecosystem services delivery , 2016 .

[40]  U. Pröbstl,et al.  Outdoor Recreation and Nature Tourism:A European Perspective , 2007 .

[41]  Rocco Scolozzi,et al.  Ecosystem services-based SWOT analysis of protected areas for conservation strategies. , 2014, Journal of environmental management.

[42]  B. Allex,et al.  Relationships between national-park affinity and attitudes towards protected area management of visitors to the Gesaeuse National Park, Austria , 2012 .

[43]  E. Oteros‐Rozas,et al.  Assessing, mapping, and quantifying cultural ecosystem services at community level , 2013 .