Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

Public support for protected areas in new forest frontiers in the Brazilian Amazon

  • Helenilza Ferreira Albuquerque Cunha (a1), Adriano Ferreira de Souza (a1) and José Maria Cardoso da Silva (a2)

Summary

Gazetting and maintaining protected areas (PAs) are political processes and, as such, depend on wider society’s support in order to achieve their aims. In this paper, we evaluated the influence of gender, education, age, income, place of origin and place of residence on public support for PAs in the Brazilian state of Amapá, a new tropical forest frontier. We gathered 615 complete interviews with adults living in both rural and urban settings. We found that most (90.5%) of the participants support PAs and that this attitude is more likely to exist among urban than rural participants. We found that gender, education, age, income and place of origin did not influence support for PAs. Biodiversity conservation is the most common reason why PAs receive public support. In contrast, participants who do not favour PAs see them as providing no benefit to people. We suggest that support by local political leaders from dominant and rival political parties for conservation helps to promote acceptance of PAs by stakeholders. However, relatively low support for PAs among rural participants could indicate that the expectations of these populations regarding the social benefits associated with this conservation policy have yet to be fulfilled.

Copyright

Corresponding author

Author for correspondence: José Maria Cardoso da Silva, Email: jcsilva@miami.edu

References

Hide All
Allendorf, TD, Allendorf, K (2013) Gender and attitudes toward protected areas in Myanmar. Society & Natural Resources 26, 962973.
Angelsen, A, Rudel, TK (2013) Designing and implementing effective REDD+ policies: a forest transition approach. Review of Environmental Economics and Policy 7, 91113.
Bragagnolo, C, Malhado, ACM, Jepson, P, Ladle, RJ (2016) Modelling local attitudes to protected areas in developing countries. Conservation and Society 14, 163182.
Byrka, K, Kaiser, FG, Olko, J (2017) Understanding the acceptance of nature-preservation-related restrictions as the result of the compensatory effects of environmental attitude and behavioral costs. Environment and Behavior 49, 487508.
Carrus, G, Bonaiuto, M, Bonnes, M (2005) Environmental concern, regional identity, and support for protected areas in Italy. Environment and Behavior 37, 237257.
Carvalho, WD, Mustin, K (2017) The highly threatened and little-known Amazonian savannahs. Nature Ecology & Evolution 1, 13.
Darby, M (2018) Brazil elects Bolsonaro, who has threatened Amazon and global climate efforts [www document]. URL www.climatechangenews.com/2018/10/29/brazil-elects-bolsonaro-threatened-amazon-global-climate-efforts
Dawson, N, Martin, A, Danielsen, F (2018) Assessing equity in protected area governance: approaches to promote just and effective conservation. Conservation Letters 11, 18.
Dias, TCAC, Cunha, AC, Silva, JMC (2016) Return on investment of the ecological infrastructure in a new forest frontier in Brazilian Amazonia. Biological Conservation 194, 184193.
Drummond, JA, Dias, TCAC, Brito, DMC (2008) Atlas das Unidades de Conservação do Estado do Amapá. Macapá, Brazil: MMA/IBAMA-AP; GEA/SEMA.
Fonseca, GAB, Rodriguez, CM, Midgley, G, Busch, J, Hannah, L, Mittermeier, RA (2007) No forest left behind. PLoS Biology 5, e216.
Friedman, RS, Law, EA, Bennett, NJ, Ives, CD, Thorn, JPR, Wilson, KA (2018) How just and just how? A systematic review of social equity in conservation research. Environmental Research Letters 13, 053001.
Gallazzi, S (2016) Ilegalidades nas terras do Amapá. In: Conflito, Territorialidade e Desenvolvimento: Algumas Reflexões Sobre o Campo Amapaense, eds Lomba, R, Rangel, K, Silva, M, Silva, G, pp. 194213. Macapá, Brazil: Universidade Federal do Amapá.
Garnett, ST, Burgess, ND, Fa, JE, Fernández-Llamazares, Á, Molnár, Z, Robinson, CJ et al. (2018) A spatial overview of the global importance of Indigenous lands for conservation. Nature Sustainability 1, 369374.
Gelissen, J (2007) Explaining popular support for environmental protection: a multilevel analysis of 50 nations. Environment and Behavior 39, 392415.
Gomes, MAF, Barizon, RRM (2014) Panorama da contaminação ambiental por agrotóxicos e nitrato de origem agrícola no Brasil: cenário 1992/2011. Documentos/Embrapa Meio Ambiente 98, 135.
Hilário, RR, Toledo, JJ, Mustin, K, Castro, IJ, Costa-Neto, SV, Kauano, ÉE et al. (2017) The fate of an Amazonian savanna: government land-use planning endangers sustainable development in Amapá, the most protected Brazilian state. Tropical Conservation Science 10, 18.
Hirschnitz-Garbers, M, Stoll-Kleemann, S (2011) Opportunities and barriers in the implementation of protected area management: a qualitative meta-analysis of case studies from European protected areas. Geographical Journal 177, 321334.
Holmes, G (2013). Exploring the relationship between local support and the success of protected areas. Conservation & Society 11, 7282.
Huddart-Kennedy, E, Beckley, TM, McFarlane, BL, Nadeau, S (2009) Rural–urban differences in environmental concern in Canada. Rural Sociology 74, 309329.
Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (2018) IBGE Cidades [www document]. URL https://cidades.ibge.gov.br/brasil/ap/panorama
Instituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da Biodiversidade (2014) Conselhos Gestores de Unidades de Conservação Federais: Um Guia para Gestores e Conselheiros. Brasília, Brazil: ICMBIO.
Instituto de Pesquisas Científicas e Tecnológicas do Estado do Amapá (2008) Macrodiagnóstico do Estado do Amapá: Primeira Aproximação do ZEE. Macapá, Brazil: Instituto Estadual de Pesquisas Científicas e Tecnológicas do Estado do Amapá.
Kasecker, TP, Ramos-Neto, MB, Silva, JMC, Scarano, FR (2018) Ecosystem-based adaptation to climate change: defining hotspot municipalities for policy design and implementation in Brazil. Mitigation and Adaptation: Strategies for Global Change 23, 981993.
Lo, AY (2014). Negative income effect on perception of long-term environmental risk. Ecological Economics 107, 5158.
Martin, A, Myers, R, Dawson, NM (2018) The park is ruining our livelihoods. We support the park! Unravelling the paradox of attitudes to protected areas. Human Ecology 46, 93.
Minitab 18 Statistical Software (2018) Computer software. State College, PA, USA: Minitab, Inc. [www document]. URL www.minitab.com
Mittermeier, RA, Mittermeier, CG, Brooks, TM, Pilgrim, JD, Konstant, WR, da Fonseca, GAB, Kormos, C (2003) Wilderness and biodiversity conservation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 100, 1030910313.
Mustin, K, Carvalho, WDC, Hilário, RR, Costa-Neto, SV, Silva, C, Vasconcelos, IM, Toledo, JJ (2017) Biodiversity, threats and conservation challenges in the Cerrado of Amapá, and Amazonian savanna. Nature Conservation 22, 107127.
Nastran, M, Istenic, MC (2015) Who is for or against the park? Factors influencing the public’s perception of a regional park: a Slovenian case study. Human Ecology Review 21, 93111.
Palmieri, R, Veríssimo, A (2009) Conselhos de Unidades de Conservação: Guia Sobre sua Criação e seu Funcionamento. Piracicaba, Brazil: Imaflora; Belém, Brazil: Imazon.
Ruellan, A, Ruellan, F (2007) Sete anos de desenvolvimento sustentável no Amapá: um exemplo para a Amazônia. In: Desenvolvimento Sustentável no Amapá: Uma Visão Crítica, eds Ruellan, A, Cabral, M, Moulin, N, pp. 790. Brasília, Brazil: Fundação João Mangabeira.
Santos, ES, Cunha, AC, Cunha, HFA (2017) Hydroelectric power plant in the Amazon and socioeconomic impacts on fishermen in Ferreira Gomes county – Amapá State. Ambiente & Sociedade 20, 191208.
Shan, G, Gerstenberger, S (2017) Fisher’s exact approach for post hoc analysis of a chi-squared test. PLoS ONE 12, e0188709.
Shibia, MG (2010) Determinants of attitudes and perceptions on resource use and management of Marsabit National Reserve, Kenya. Journal of Human Ecology 30, 5562.
Silva, JMC, Chennault, CM (2018) NGOs and biodiversity conservation in the Anthropocene. In: Encyclopedia of the Anthropocene, eds Dellasala, DA, Goldstein, MI, pp. 355359. Oxford, UK: Elsevier.
StataCorp (2017) Stata Statistical Software: Release 15. College Station, TX, USA: StataCorp LLC.
Struhsaker, TT, Struhsaker, PJ, Kirstin, SS (2005) Conserving Africa’s rain forests: problems in protected areas and possible solutions. Biological Conservation 123, 4554.
Triguero-Mas, M, Olomí-Solà, M, Jha, N, Zorondo-Rodríguez, F, Reyes-García, V (2010) Urban and rural perceptions of protected areas: a case study in Dandeli Wildlife Sanctuary, Western Ghats, India. Environmental Conservation 36, 208217.

Keywords

Related content

Powered by UNSILO
Type Description Title
WORD
Supplementary materials

Cunha et al. supplementary material
Cunha et al. supplementary material 1

 Word (19 KB)
19 KB

Public support for protected areas in new forest frontiers in the Brazilian Amazon

  • Helenilza Ferreira Albuquerque Cunha (a1), Adriano Ferreira de Souza (a1) and José Maria Cardoso da Silva (a2)

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed.