Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Enhancing outdoor recreation and biodiversity through payments for ecosystem services: emerging potentials from selected Natura 2000 sites in Italy

  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Efforts in preserving natural and seminatural ecosystems and associated ecosystem services are affected by scarce financial resources. Payments for ecosystem services (PES) are increasingly recognised for creating additional funding, as in protected areas, and outdoor recreation is one important ecosystem service that is promising for successfully implementing PES. Therefore, this study aimed to develop and evaluate potentials for PES schemes related to recreational services in Natura 2000 sites. For 10 sites in different Italian regions, the study first assessed the ecosystem service outdoor recreation and analysed managerial and economic aspects of Natura 2000 sites. Then, various options for PES schemes were defined in a participatory process. Furthermore, we developed a dynamic model for evaluating the effects of PES on ecosystems and related recreational ES. Whereas the provision of recreational opportunities was mostly at a high level, the potential demand varied greatly among the sites, depending on the spatial distribution of potential beneficiaries. Moreover, we found great differences in visitation rates and consequently the actual recreational value. The PES schemes included small payments (€1) via mobile phone by visitors, contributions from regional government and tourism businesses, and visitor fees or tourist taxes among others. This study highlights how economic agreements, such as PES schemes, may support funding of Natura 2000 sites for biodiversity conservation by valorising the benefits of recreational ecosystem services; however, further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of PES in the long term.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://www.naturachevale.it.

References

  • Arlettaz, R., Nusslé, S., Baltic, M., Vogel, P., Palme, R., Jenni-Eiermann, S., et al. (2015). Disturbance of wildlife by outdoor winter recreation: Allostatic stress response and altered activity–energy budgets. Ecological Applications,25(5), 1197–1212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arnberger, A., Eder, R., Allex, B., Sterl, P., & Burns, R. C. (2012). Relationships between national-park affinity and attitudes towards protected area management of visitors to the Gesaeuse National Park, Austria. Forest Policy and Economics,19, 48–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bastian, O. (2013). The role of biodiversity in supporting ecosystem services in Natura 2000 sites. Ecological Indicators,24, 12–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, I. J., Harwood, A. R., Mace, G. M., Watson, R. T., Abson, D. J., Andrews, B., et al. (2013). Bringing ecosystem services into economic decision-making: Land use in the United Kingdom. Science,341, 45–50.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Blicharska, M., Orlikowska, E. H., Roberge, J., & Grodzinska-Jurczak, M. (2016). Contribution of social science to large scale biodiversity conservation: A review of research about the Natura 2000 network. Biological Conservation,199, 110–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burlando, C., Gaglioppa, P., Marino, D., & Pellegrino, D. (2015). Ecosystem services assessment, valuation and market-based approaches. What’s Going on in protected areas? CURSA (pas)SAGGI,2(5), 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Butchart, S. H., Walpole, M., Collen, B., van Strien, A., Scharlemann, J. P., Almond, R. E., et al. (2010). Global biodiversity: Indicators of recent declines. Science,328, 1164–1168.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Castro, A. J., Martín-López, B., López, E., Plieninger, T., Alcaraz-Segura, D., Vaughn, C. C., et al. (2015). Do protected areas networks ensure the supply of ecosystem services? Spatial patterns of two nature reserve systems in semi-arid Spain. Applied Geography,60, 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cimon-Morin, J., Darveau, M., & Poulin, M. (2013). Fostering synergies between ecosystem services and biodiversity in conservation planning: A review. Biological Conservation,166, 144–154.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clements, T., & Milner-Gulland, E. (2015). Impact of payments for environmental services and protected areas on local livelihoods and forest conservation in northern Cambodia. Conservation Biology,29, 78–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Trapani, A. M., Squatrito, R., Foderà, M., Testa, R., Tudisca, S., & Sgroi, F. (2014). Payment for environmental services for the sustainable development of the territory. American Journal of Environmental Sciences,10, 480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • EC (European Commission). (2015). Attitudes of Europeans towards biodiversity. Special Eurobarometer, 436. http://ec.europa.eu/COMMFrontOffice/publicopinion/index.cfm/Survey/getSurveyDetail/instruments/SPECIAL/surveyKy/2091. Accessed 09 February 2017.

  • EEA (European Environment Agency). (2015). EU 2010 biodiversity baseline—Adapted to the MAES typology. Copenhagen: EEA Technical report No 9/2015.

  • EEA (European Environment Agency). (2016). CORINE Land Cover (CLC) 2012, version 18.5.1. http://land.copernicus.eu/pan-european/corine-land-cover/clc-2012. Accessed 21 October 2016.

  • Engel, S., Pagiola, S., & Wunder, S. (2008). Designing payments for environmental services in theory and practice: An overview of the issues. Ecological Economics,65, 663–674.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleming, C. M., & Cook, A. (2008). The recreational value of Lake McKenzie, Fraser Island: An application of the travel cost method. Tourism Management,29, 1197–1205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gaglioppa, P., & Marino, D. (Eds.). (2016). Manual for the valuation of ecosystem services and implementation of PES schemes in agricultural and forest systems—Application of the governance model “Making Good Natura” in Natura 2000 sites and other areas’ (p. 171). Rome: CURSA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaglioppa P., Scarascia Mugnozza G., Marino D., Guadagno R., Marucci A., Palmieri M., & Bozzano M. (2015). Assessment and governance of ecosystem services and PES provided by Italian forests—Case studies from LIFE + Making Good Natura (MGN) project. In: XIV world forestry congress, Durban, South Africa. Available at http://foris.fao.org/wfc2015/api/file/552d476a9e00c2f116f8e539/contents/46874bbd-7c7a-416f-85ad-602c4b028a12.pdf.

  • Gantioler, S., Rayment, M., ten Brink, P., McConville, A., Kettunen, M., & Bassi, S. (2014). The costs and socio-economic benefits associated with the Natura 2000 network. International Journal of Sustainable Society,6, 135–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gatto, P., Maso, D., & Leonardi, A. (2015). Analisi dei costi per la gestione della Rete Natura 2000 in Regione Lombardia nel periodo 2008–2011 e di stima dei costi nel periodo 2014–2020. Available at: http://www.naturachevale.it/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/allegato-VIII_C21.pdf. Accessed 7th July 2017.

  • Geitzenauer, M., Blondet, M., de Koning, J., Ferranti, F., Sotirov, M., Weiss, G., & Winkel, G. (2017). The challenge of financing the implementation of Natura 2000—Empirical evidence from six European Union Member States. Forest Policy and Economics, 82, 3–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greiner, R., & Stanley, O. (2013). More than money for conservation: exploring social co-benefits from PES schemes. Land Use Policy,31, 4–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gürlük, S., & Rehber, E. (2008). A travel cost study to estimate recreational value for a bird refuge at Lake Manyas, Turkey. Journal of Environmental Management,88, 1350–1360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hein, L., Miller, D. C., & de Groot, R. (2013). Payments for ecosystem services and the financing of global biodiversity conservation. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability,5, 87–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ISTAT. (2014). Annuario statistico italiano (Italian statistical yearbook). Rome: Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaung, W., Bull, G. Q., Putzel, L., Kozak, R., & Elliott, C. (2016). Bundling forest ecosystem services for FSC certification: An analysis of stakeholder adaptability. International Forestry Review,18(4), 452–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Juutinen, A., Mitani, Y., Mäntymaa, E., Shoji, Y., Siikamäki, P., & Svento, R. (2011). Combining ecological and recreational aspects in national park management: A choice experiment application. Ecological Economics,70, 1231–1239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kati, V., Hovardas, T., Dieterich, M., Ibisch, P. L., Mihok, B., & Selva, N. (2015). The challenge of implementing the European network of protected areas Natura 2000. Conservation Biology,29, 260–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kiss, A. (2004). Is community-based ecotourism a good use of biodiversity conservation funds? Trends in Ecology & Evolution,19, 232–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsen, F., Petersen, A., Strange, N., Lund, M., & Rahbek, C. (2008). A quantitative analysis of biodiversity and the recreational value of potential national parks in Denmark. Environmental Management,41, 685–695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marino, D., Schirpke, U., Gaglioppa, P., Guadagno, R., Marucci, A., Palmieri, M., et al. (2014). Assessment and governance of ecosystem services: First insights from Life+ Making Good Natura project. Annali di Botanica,4, 83–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marion, J. L. (2016). A review and synthesis of recreation ecology research supporting carrying capacity and visitor use management decisionmaking. Journal of Forestry,114(3), 339–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, M., Müller, M., Woltering, M., Arnegger, J., & Job, H. (2010). The economic impact of tourism in six German national parks. Landscape and Urban Planning,97, 73–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muradian, R., Corbera, E., Pascual, U., Kosoy, N., & May, P. H. (2010). Reconciling theory and practice: an alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics,69, 1202–1208.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuvonen, M., Pouta, E., Puustinen, J., & Sievänen, T. (2010). Visits to national parks: Effects of park characteristics and spatial demand. Journal for Nature Conservation,18, 224–229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paracchini, M. L., Zulian, G., Kopperoinen, L., Maes, J., Schägner, J. P., Termansen, M., et al. (2014). Mapping cultural ecosystem services: A framework to assess the potential for outdoor recreation across the EU. Ecological Indicators,45, 371–385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pęksa, Ł., & Ciach, M. (2015). Negative effects of mass tourism on high mountain fauna: The case of the Tatra chamois Rupicapra rupicapra tatrica. Oryx,49, 500–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pellegrino, D., Schirpke, U., & Marino, D. (2017). How to support the effective management of Natura 2000 sites? Journal of Environmental Planning and Management,60(3), 383–398.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peña, L., Casado-Arzuaga, I., & Onaindia, M. (2015). Mapping recreation supply and demand using an ecological and a social evaluation approach. Ecosystem Services,13, 108–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pirard, R., & Lapeyre, R. (2014). Classifying market-based instruments for ecosystem services: A guide to the literature jungle. Ecosystem Services,9, 106–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reed, M. S., Allen, K., Attlee, A., Dougill, A. J., Evans, K. L., Kenter, J. O., et al. (2017). A place-based approach to payments for ecosystem services. Global Environmental Change,43, 92–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rehnus, M., Wehrle, M., & Palme, R. (2014). Mountain hares Lepus timidus and tourism: Stress events and reactions. Journal of Applied Ecology,51(1), 6–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rixen, C., & Rolando, A. (Eds.). (2013). The impacts of skiing and related winter recreational activities on mountain environments. Sharjah: Bentham Science Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roca, Z. (2016). Second home tourism in Europe: Lifestyle issues and policy responses. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Romagosa, F., Eagles, P. F., & Lemieux, C. J. (2015). From the inside out to the outside. Exploring the role of parks and protected areas as providers of human health and well-being. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism,10, 70–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schägner, J. P., Brander, L., Maes, J., Paracchini, M. L., & Hartje, V. (2016). Mapping recreational visits and values of European National Parks by combining statistical modelling and unit value transfer. Journal for Nature Conservation,31, 71–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schirpke, U., Marino, D., Marucci, A., Palmieri, M., & Scolozzi, S. (2017a). Operationalising ecosystem services for effective management of protected areas: Experiences and challenges. Ecosystem Services,28A, 105–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schirpke, U., Meisch, C., Marsoner, T. & Tappeiner, U. (2018a). Revealing spatial and temporal patterns of outdoor recreation in the European Alps and their surroundings. Ecosystem Services, 31, 336–350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecoser.2017.11.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schirpke, U., Scolozzi, R., Concetti, B., Comini, B., & Tappeiner, U. (2017b). Supporting the management of ecosystem services in protected areas: Trade-offs between effort and accuracy in evaluation. Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management, 19(02), 1750007.

  • Schirpke, U., Scolozzi, R., Da Re, R., Masiero, M., Pellegrino, D., & Marino, D. (2018b). Recreational ecosystem services in protected areas: A survey of visitors to Natura 2000 sites in Italy. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism,21, 39–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schirpke, U., Scolozzi, R., De Marco, C., & Tappeiner, U. (2014). Mapping beneficiaries of ecosystem services flows from Natura 2000 sites. Ecosystem Services,9, 170–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scolozzi, R., Schirpke, U. (2016). Insight Maker(S) to support the management of protected areas and related ecosystem services: Examples for recreational value. In The 34th international conference of the system dynamics society, July 17–21, 2016, Delft, Netherlands.

  • Scolozzi, R., Schirpke, U., Detassis, C., Abdullah, S., & Gretter, A. (2015). Mapping alpine landscape values and related threats as perceived by tourists. Landscape Research,40(4), 451–465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scolozzi, R., Schirpke, U., Morri, E., D’Amato, D., & Santolini, R. (2014). Ecosystem services-based SWOT analysis of protected areas for conservation strategies. Journal of Environmental Management,146, 543–551.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Segerstedt, A., & Grote, U. (2015). Protected area certificates: Gaining ground for better ecosystem protection? Environmental Management,55, 1418–1432.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Siikamäki, P., Kangas, K., Paasivaara, A., & Schroderus, S. (2015). Biodiversity attracts visitors to national parks. Biodiversity Conservation,24, 2521–2534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sonter, L. J., Watson, K. B., Wood, S. A., & Ricketts, T. H. (2016). Spatial and temporal dynamics and value of nature-based recreation, estimated via social media. PLoS ONE,11, e0162372.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Staes, J., Broekx, S., Van Der Biest, K., Vrebos, D., Olivier, B., De Nocker, L., et al. (2017). Quantification of the potential impact of nature conservation on ecosystem services supply in the Flemish Region: A cascade modelling approach. Ecosystem Services,24, 124–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steven, R., Pickering, C., & Castley, J. G. (2011). A review of the impacts of nature based recreation on birds. Journal of Environmental Management,92(10), 2287–2294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tittensor, D. P., Walpole, M., Hill, S. L., Boyce, D. G., Britten, G. L., Burgess, N. D., et al. (2014). A mid-term analysis of progress toward international biodiversity targets. Science,346(6206), 241–244.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Watson, J. E., Dudley, N., Segan, D. B., & Hockings, M. (2014). The performance and potential of protected areas. Nature,515, 67–73.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, M. P., & McShane, T. O. (2004). Integrating protected area management with local needs and aspirations. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment,33, 513–519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitelaw, P. A., King, B. E., & Tolkach, D. (2014). Protected areas, conservation and tourism–financing the sustainable dream. Journal of Sustainable Tourism,22, 584–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wolff, S., Schulp, C. J. E., & Verburg, P. H. (2015). Mapping ecosystem services demand: A review of current research and future perspectives. Ecological Indicators,55, 159–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wunder, S. (2005). Payments for environmental services: Some nuts and bolts (No. CIFOR Occasional Paper no. 42, p. 24p).

  • Wunder, S. (2013). When payments for environmental services will work for conservation. Conservation Letters,6, 230–237.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wunder, S. (2015). Revisiting the concept of payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics,117, 234–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the European Union through the LIFE+ project ‘Making Good Natura’ (LIFE11 ENV/IT/000168).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Alpine Environment, Eurac Research, Viale Druso 1, 39100, Bolzano, Italy

    Uta Schirpke

  2. Department of Ecology, University of Innsbruck, Sternwartestr. 15, 6020, Innsbruck, Austria

    Uta Schirpke

  3. Department of Sociology and Social Research, University of Trento, Via Verdi, 26, 38122, Trento, Italy

    Rocco Scolozzi

  4. Department of Land, Environment, Agriculture and Forestry, University of Padova, Viale dell’Università, 16, 35020, Legnaro, PD, Italy

    Riccardo Da Re & Mauro Masiero

  5. ETIFOR Srl, Spin-Off of University of Padova, Viale dell’Università, 16, 35020, Legnaro, PD, Italy

    Riccardo Da Re & Mauro Masiero

  6. Sapienza University, P.le Aldo Moro, 5, 00185, Rome, Italy

    Davide Pellegrino

  7. Department of Biosciences and Territory, University of Molise, Contrada Fonte Lappone 8, 86090, Pesche, IS, Italy

    Davide Marino

Authors
  1. Uta Schirpke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rocco Scolozzi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Riccardo Da Re
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Mauro Masiero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Davide Pellegrino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Davide Marino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Uta Schirpke.

Appendix

Appendix

See Table 6.

Table 6 Capacity of ES provision of Natura 2000 habitat types according to the European Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC (0 = ‘no significant capacity’, 1 = ‘low capacity’, 2 = ‘medium capacity’, and 3 = ‘high capacity’)
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schirpke, U., Scolozzi, R., Da Re, R. et al. Enhancing outdoor recreation and biodiversity through payments for ecosystem services: emerging potentials from selected Natura 2000 sites in Italy. Environ Dev Sustain 22, 2045–2067 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-018-0276-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-018-0276-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation