{"title":"Measuring the human-dimension of outdoor recreation and its impacts on terrestrial wildlife","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.jort.2024.100808","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Inclusion and measurement of the various human-dependent factors that modulate wildlife responses to non-consumptive outdoor recreational activities is crucial for improving our understanding of the complex nature by which these activities influence wildlife. A wide range of methods exist to collect this information, yet little is known about whether and how they are used to improve our understanding of the impact of outdoor recreational activity on wildlife. Here, we critically assess the methods used to measure the outdoor recreational activity in 242 studies that focused on discerning their impacts on terrestrial mammals and birds. We identified and categorised the methods used into nine classes: available records, disturbance treatments, observations, camera trapping, GPS tracking devices, traffic counters, audio recordings, questionnaires, and interviews. We found that almost half of the studies (45.5%) used more than one method. Notably, while most studies used available records (59.1%), their use has decreased, and the less commonly used methods (e.g., camera trapping and GPS tracking devices) are encouragingly becoming more prevalent. We also found that even though the diversity of methods is increasing, their use has been limited to collecting information on the intensity of the outdoor recreation, despite the capacity of many to collect additional information (e.g., the behaviour and perceptions of recreationists). This review highlights the need for future studies to expand the range of methods used to measure the outdoor recreational activity, collaborate across disciplines, and consider the broader diversity of information that can be gathered on recreationists.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":46931,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism-Research Planning and Management","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213078024000768/pdfft?md5=c95b0e069078ffa9c69f72e90ba6aa67&pid=1-s2.0-S2213078024000768-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism-Research Planning and Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213078024000768","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HOSPITALITY, LEISURE, SPORT & TOURISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Inclusion and measurement of the various human-dependent factors that modulate wildlife responses to non-consumptive outdoor recreational activities is crucial for improving our understanding of the complex nature by which these activities influence wildlife. A wide range of methods exist to collect this information, yet little is known about whether and how they are used to improve our understanding of the impact of outdoor recreational activity on wildlife. Here, we critically assess the methods used to measure the outdoor recreational activity in 242 studies that focused on discerning their impacts on terrestrial mammals and birds. We identified and categorised the methods used into nine classes: available records, disturbance treatments, observations, camera trapping, GPS tracking devices, traffic counters, audio recordings, questionnaires, and interviews. We found that almost half of the studies (45.5%) used more than one method. Notably, while most studies used available records (59.1%), their use has decreased, and the less commonly used methods (e.g., camera trapping and GPS tracking devices) are encouragingly becoming more prevalent. We also found that even though the diversity of methods is increasing, their use has been limited to collecting information on the intensity of the outdoor recreation, despite the capacity of many to collect additional information (e.g., the behaviour and perceptions of recreationists). This review highlights the need for future studies to expand the range of methods used to measure the outdoor recreational activity, collaborate across disciplines, and consider the broader diversity of information that can be gathered on recreationists.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism offers a dedicated outlet for research relevant to social sciences and natural resources. The journal publishes peer reviewed original research on all aspects of outdoor recreation planning and management, covering the entire spectrum of settings from wilderness to urban outdoor recreation opportunities. It also focuses on new products and findings in nature based tourism and park management. JORT is an interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary journal, articles may focus on any aspect of theory, method, or concept of outdoor recreation research, planning or management, and interdisciplinary work is especially welcome, and may be of a theoretical and/or a case study nature. Depending on the topic of investigation, articles may be positioned within one academic discipline, or draw from several disciplines in an integrative manner, with overarching relevance to social sciences and natural resources. JORT is international in scope and attracts scholars from all reaches of the world to facilitate the exchange of ideas. As such, the journal enhances understanding of scientific knowledge, empirical results, and practitioners'' needs. Therefore in JORT each article is accompanied by an executive summary, written by the editors or authors, highlighting the planning and management relevant aspects of the article.