Full report - Conservation Gateway

Chapter 13 - Human UsesSocio-economic information can inform decisions onindividual site-specific projects and is also needed to supportthe comprehensive marine spatial planning approachesbeing developed worldwide. Marine spatial planningcan reduce conflicts by providing a blueprint for aligninghuman uses with their socially and ecologically compatibletimes and places. These approaches require analysisof tradeoffs between different uses and maintenance ofecosystem services. The data contained in this assessmentis designed to help support marine spatial planning processesbut tradeoff analyses need to developed in stakeholderdriven and very transparent public contexts and arebeyond the scope of our work.There are many approaches for acquisition of the socioeconomicdata that is needed, including:• Ethnographic research• Focus groups and interviews• Cost-benefit analysis• Non-market valuation• Network/power analysis• Opinion polls and surveys• Input-Output economic models (market valuation)• Mapping human use patterns• Community/participatory mappingAccurate and verifiable socio-economic information isvery difficult to acquire and it is costly to develop newdata sets; a comprehensive socio-economic analysis waswell beyond the scope of this assessment. However, informationwas collected using three of the approaches listedabove: an opinion survey, an economic model and preliminaryhuman use mapping. For each approach, this chaptersummarizes: (1) what we measured, (2) how we measuredit, (3) whether or not it can be illustrated spatially, and (4)limitations of the tool.Stakeholders SurveyIn early 2008, the Conservancy conducted a regionalsurvey of marine stakeholders to gain a better understandingof marine resource stakeholder’s priorities and concernsand their thoughts on effective strategies for coastaland marine conservation in the region. Survey questionswere designed to reveal stakeholders’ views about the currentstatus of the region, data gaps, and how assessmentdata products might be designed to maximize their utility.Despite the limitations noted below, survey results wereuseful for informing early stages of assessment work plandevelopment. The survey was used as a communicationstool to stimulate interest and participation from potentialtechnical team members, peer reviewers and dataproviders.What did we measure?Information collected included stakeholder opinions onwhich region-wide stressors were of the greatest concern:Coastal development and related effects (32 percent);Global climate change (21 percent); Fishing-relatedthreats including overharvest, bycatch and habitat damage(20 percent); Pollution, including non-point, point-source,sediments, nutrients and toxins (16 percent). Specificthreats to habitats and species included: non-point sourcepollution, nearshore habitat loss, benthic habitat impacts,and energy development.How did we measure it?The survey was conducted in January and February 2008with an online survey tool (SurveyMonkey.com). The surveyinvitation was sent by email on January 30, 2008, andsent a second time on February 7 to those who had not yetresponded. A total of 279 recipients received the email invitation.This report summarizes results from 139 respondents(49 percent response rate); please see Appendix 13-1for survey results.Northwest Atlantic Marine Ecoregional Assessment • Phase 1 Report 13-