Capturing the importance of natural resources and future activities in St. Paul's, Newfoundland.

摘要

Natural resource-use policies are mostly based on monetary values of goods and services. Rarely are non-market values, including aesthetics, heritage, and ecological integrity captured in non-monetary terms. This study employed the damage schedule approach to elicit the importance of natural resources in St. Paul's, a small outport community, enclave to Gros Morne National Park in Newfoundland, Canada.Local residents and resource managers agreed that lobster, forest, and herring were the most important resources. Local residents and residents in surrounding communities agreed that oil development and exploration was the most beneficial activity to the area, closely followed by local research and management of fish stocks, the first choice of managers and tourists. Qualitative data revealed that while the interest groups had similar values, they had different reasons for valuing the same things. The forest was valued by local residents and residents in surrounding communities for its subsistence use whereas managers and tourists valued it for its aesthetic, ecological, and recreational values. Some respondents in all groups said they had never heard of eelgrass and the saltmarsh. The results of this study provide a tool that captures the values of resource interest groups. Once these values are made explicit, they can more easily be incorporated into natural resource policies and decisions, used as a baseline to monitor changes in values, or to determine the focus of educational programming and monitor its success or effectiveness.The schedule of relative importance presented choice scenarios using a series of photographs of natural resources in the area. The use of photographs made the survey intriguing as well as assisted in accommodating literacy barriers. Four groups of respondents indicated which of the resources being compared was more important. A separate set of paired comparisons asked respondents to indicate which activity they felt was more beneficial to the area. Qualitative data was collected to determine rationale for resource selection and negative impacts that respondents associated with each activity.