Department of Geography, University of Malaga, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Campus Universitario de Teatinos, s/n, 29071 Malaga, Spain; European Topic Centre, University of Malaga, Ada Byron Research Building, C/Arquitecto Francisco Peñalosa s/n, 29010 Malaga, Spain.
Department of Geography, University of Malaga, Facultad de Filosofía y Letras, Campus Universitario de Teatinos, s/n, 29071 Malaga, Spain.
Sci Total Environ. 2021 Apr 1;763:144399. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.144399. Epub 2020 Dec 25.
Protected areas (PAs) seek to conserve valuable genes, species and ecosystems by applying a legal regime that restricts some socioeconomic activities and also offers opportunities for new ones. As a result, PAs have been claimed by some authors to boost socioeconomic conditions in rural areas mainly through tourism activities. However, others have claimed that PAs contribute to rural depopulation through the worsening of living conditions of local residents because of restrictions resulting from protection regulations. Here, we applied a multiple-paired Before-After-Control-Impact (BACI) research design on a census on protected rural municipalities (cases; N = 52) versus unprotected rural municipalities (controls; N = 55) in Spain to ascertain whether PAs had positive or negative effects on rural populations using three indicators on depopulation with official municipal data from 1996 until 2019: Compound annual growth rate (CAGR); Proportion of reproductive individuals (REP); and Proportion of reproductive females (WREP). We controlled for some confounders such as biophysical characteristics and regional regulations by carefully selecting our sample of municipalities spatially. Our results show that depopulation figures were worse in cases than in controls, with some exceptions whose characteristics should be further explored. Municipalities in Sites of Community Importance (SCIs) performed best against rural depopulation and generally better than their controls, whereas municipalities in Biosphere Reserves and Special Protection Areas (SPAs) showed mostly worse figures. Our findings suggest that, while necessary and important for biodiversity, multiple-use PAs generally entailed negative consequences for Spanish rural populations that need to be offset by State's intervention.
保护区旨在通过实施法律制度来保护有价值的基因、物种和生态系统,该制度限制了一些社会经济活动,并为新的活动提供了机会。因此,一些作者声称保护区主要通过旅游活动来提高农村地区的社会经济条件。然而,也有人声称,由于保护法规导致的生活条件恶化,保护区会导致农村人口外流。在这里,我们在西班牙应用了一种多配对的前后对照影响(BACI)研究设计,对受保护的农村市(案例;N=52)与不受保护的农村市(对照;N=55)进行了普查,以使用官方市政数据从 1996 年到 2019 年的三个人口减少指标(人口增长率、生殖个体比例和生殖女性比例)来确定保护区对农村人口是否有积极或消极的影响:复合年增长率(CAGR);生殖个体比例(REP);生殖女性比例(WREP)。我们通过仔细选择我们的市政样本在空间上进行控制,以控制一些混杂因素,如生物物理特征和区域法规。我们的结果表明,除了一些特征需要进一步探讨的例外情况外,案例中的人口减少情况比对照组更严重。具有社区重要性的地点(SCIs)的市在对抗农村人口减少方面表现最好,通常比其对照组更好,而生物圈保护区和特殊保护区(SPAs)的市则表现出更差的情况。我们的研究结果表明,尽管多用途保护区对生物多样性是必要且重要的,但它们对西班牙农村人口通常带来负面影响,需要由国家干预来弥补。