Community perceptions of the contributions of parks to sustainability in Canada

ABSTRACT

National Parks are thought to contribute to sustainability by addressing conservation, social values and local tourism economies. However, some studies challenge these claims, suggesting that parks can create inequitable flows of costs and benefits to local communities. This study focussed on Pacific Rim National Park Reserve, and five nearby communities. Focus groups and 262 random surveys were used to examine perceived benefits and costs of the park to sustainability. The most important perceived benefits were environmental, followed by economic benefits and social benefits. Perceived costs were rated lower, and were most evident regarding economic impacts (e.g. inflated prices, inflated property values). However, perceptions varied substantially by community, particularly with the First Nations village of Esowista where perceived concerns were greater than in other communities. Contrary to expectations, perceptions were less correlated to length of residence, employment in tourism, employment in the park, involvement in park management or income.

RÉSUMÉ

Nous pensons que les parcs nationaux contribuent au développement durable en s’intéressant aux questions relatives à la conservation, aux valeurs sociales et à l’économie touristique locale. Toutefois, certaines études contredisent ces affirmations en suggérant que les parcs peuvent créer des flux de coûts et des avantages inéquitables pour les communautés locales. Cette étude se concentrait sur la réserve de parc national Pacific Rim et sur cinq communautés avoisinantes. Les avantages et les coûts perçus du parc par rapport au développement durable ont été examinés par l’entremise de groupes de discussion et de 262 enquêtes aléatoires. Les plus importants avantages perçus concernaient l’environnement, suivis par les avantages économiques et sociaux. Les coûts perçus étaient inférieurs et plus évidents en ce qui concerne les répercussions économiques (p. ex. des prix gonflés et surévaluation des propriété). Toutefois, les perceptions variaient considérablement en fonction de la communauté, notamment à Esowista, village des Premières Nations, où les préoccupations perçues étaient plus importantes que dans les autres communautés. Contrairement aux attentes, les perceptions étaient moins dépendantes de: la durée de résidence, l’emploi dans le domaine du tourisme, l’emploi dans le parc, la participation à la gestion du parc ou du revenu.

KEYWORDS:

• Protected areas
• national parks
• sustainability
• perceived impacts
• communities
• First Nations

MOTS CLÉS:

• aires protégées
• parcs nationaux
• développement durable
• durabilité
• répercussions perçues
• communautés

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Notes

1. This research is part of a greater project facilitated by the Protected Areas and Poverty Reduction Alliance: A Canada–Africa Research and Learning Alliance (PAPR). The PAPR project was jointly funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada and the International Development Research Centre, and seeks to address the challenges of reducing rural poverty and ensuring environmental sustainability through a focus on protected areas (PAs) and adjacent communities in Canada, Tanzania and Ghana.

2. A National Park ‘Reserve’ designation denotes ‘… an area managed as a national park but where the lands are subject to one or more claims by Aboriginal people that have been accepted for negotiation by the Government of Canada’ (Parks Canada, 2015).

3. Here, ‘Reserve’ denotes an ‘Indian Reserve’, which is the title given to a piece of land set aside under the Indian Act, which is meant to be for the exclusive use of that band. Reserves are usually much smaller than traditional territories.