Journal of International Fisheries▶ Article ◀

vol.14，2015

Satoumi Conservation and Sustainability: An Empirical Exploration through aFace-to-face Interview Survey in a Local Fishery Community in Noto Peninsula
Ryo KOHSAKA†, Sakiko KAWABE, Yoshinori FUJIHIRA＊ and Kumi OYAMADA＊＊(Kanazawa University Graduate School of Human and Socio- Environmental Studies／
Kanazawa University Graduate School of Natural Science and Technology／＊＊JFE＊

Steel Corporation Slag Division)
E-mail：†kohsaka@hotmail.com【abstract】
We explored the perceptions of local residents with respect to human intervention inmarine environment, including the degrees of preferences with options for concreteconservation measures. A face-to-face interview survey was conducted with 15 local
residents from Suzu City, located at the northern tip of the Noto Peninsula. The survey
aimed to identify how local residents perceive the role of human intervention inpreserving such an environment. We first examined the extent to which residents areready to accept human intervention and then whether communities involved in fisheryunderstand and appreciate terrestrial conservation activities, including those related toforests. The outcomes from our interviews suggested that local residents perceive astrong linkage between terrestrial and coastal environments. The residents, including
those not directly involved in fishery, were sensitive to the theme of sustainability of
their community, particularly in relation to rural fishery.
【keywords】
small scale fishery, biodiversity conservation, sustainable use, Suzu City

1. Introduction
In Japan, human life is supported by products and services from oceans. Humans
enter these oceans to maintain the rich Satoumi environment (Berque and Matsuda(2013)). The Japanese term Satoumi refers to a type of coastal area where humanintervention (widely believed to be originally targeted at promoting economic
diversification and productivity of species used as staple seafood) indirectly contributes
to an increase in the global biological productivity of the coastal area and to enrich some
aspects of its biodiversity (Japan Satoyama Satoumi Assessment (2010), Berkes (2012),-1-

Ryo KOHSAKA, Sakiko KAWABE, Yoshinori FUJIHIRA and Kumi OYAMADA

Maffi and Woodley (2012)). Critically important here is that human intervention andinfluence are integral parts of the definition of Satoumi. However, to date, theinterlinkage of human society and the role of community fishery related to Satoumi has
not been fully explored (Henocque (2013)).
With rapid economic development following World War II, Satoumi seascapes andtheir surrounding terrestrial environment have dramatically changed in Japan with its
increasing number of harbors with concrete-covered breakwaters and human-madeartifacts, such as tetrapods. These transformations have impacted biodiversity andecosystem services. As a response, environmental strategies for restoring or conserving
biodiversity have regularly been practiced in Satoumi through various methods, such as
the installation of artifacts (e.g., blocks) in the seabed to regenerate ecosystems.
Promotion of such activities requires evaluation in several phases and at various levels.
To promote consistency and success in the restoration and conservation of marine
environment, the Japanese Ministry of Environment identifies four steps for marine
conservation (1):1) Develop an interest in the sea.
2) Understand the importance of marine conservation.
3) Understand how to conserve the sea (understand the need for appropriate humanintervention).
4) Participate in conservation activities.
Focusing on steps (1) to (3), our research aims to determine local understanding of“conservation of Satoumi” and steps taken so far for conservation. The basic phase will
be to determine stakeholders’ awareness and perceptions of the importance of thisactivity. The study further aims to examine measures needed to promote conservation
by surveying local residents’ awareness, as their awareness and understanding are
critical for the sustainability of conservation and restoration activities.

2. Survey method and study site
We conducted an interview survey with the local residents of Suzu City, which islocated at the northernmost tip of Noto Peninsula. In order to safeguard and support
the world’s agricultural and biodiversity heritage system of the peninsula, Noto’s
Satoumi was registered and designated as a Globally Important Agricultural Heritage
System (GIAHS)(2) by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO).
Iida Bay is located within Suzu City, and a branch of the Ishikawa fishery cooperative is-2-

Satoumi Conservation and Sustainability: An Empirical Exploration through a Face-to-faceInterview Survey in a Local Fishery Community in Noto Peninsula

located in the region. The local residents benefit from fishery and tourism from the bay
and the coastal area. The purpose of the interview survey was to identify local fisheryand Satoumi conservation problems. The methodology of the questionnaire wasconceptualized and modified from an existing work done on national parks by Shoji et al.
(2005). The modification is as follows: the degree of preferences is scaled with two
options. The degrees are simpler than the original methodology, as our aim was tointerview local residents, including nonexperts, and to identify general trends.
Existing scientific assessments evaluate certain biological species as tools to mitigate
excess nutrients in eutrophic coastal waters (Petersen et al. (2014)) or apply ecosystem
concepts to marine ecosystems (Shuntov and Temnykh (2013)). In this study, weevaluate the perception of residents with regard to individual measures used toconserve or enrich productivity of the coastal environment. We initially examined theextent to which residents are prepared to accept human intervention and then whether
communities involved in fishery understand and appreciate terrestrial conservation
activities, including forests in river basin areas.
For this research, the interview survey was conducted with 15 respondents who
reside or work in Suzu City, mainly in the Iida Bay area. The sample size is limited, andoutcomes are not a statistical representation of the overall population of Suzu City
(15,134 as of October 1, 2013).
Despite these limitations, views expressed here provide valuable insights fromvarious backgrounds, including those of fishermen and nonfishermen (this will be
explained later). Face-to-face in-depth interviews, each an average of 30 min, wereconducted to capture the views of local residents. Interviewees were included on thebasis of snowball sampling, mainly through the introduction of initial contact persons or
through the introduction of researchers. Fifteen respondents were included becausesome of them were easily available, whereas others were more familiar with the marine
environment. A researcher individually met them and had them complete thequestionnaire-type interviews. The researcher visited respondents’ homes or workplaces
and conversed with them either individually or with their families.
The site of the interview survey was around the Iida Bay coastal area where the
Takojima fishing port is located. The bay is particularly important to residents in termsof fishery. The Suzu branch of the Ishikawa fishery cooperative has the largest numberof members of registered power-driven fishing boats(3). Furthermore, the cooperative’s
location at the Iida port (i.e., the center of the fishery of Suzu City) makes it particularly
relevant to the study because of its important role in the economy and employment in-3-

Ryo KOHSAKA, Sakiko KAWABE, Yoshinori FUJIHIRA and Kumi OYAMADA

the entire Noto Peninsula. However, the degree to which local residents appreciate thebay or ocean is not clear.
The Iida Bay coastal area forms the core, which houses the city’s offices, shopping
streets, and large grocery stores (Figure 1). In contrast, there are fishing villages with asmall population surrounded by sea and mountains, such as the Takaya area. In bothareas, the fishing industry has continued for many years, and many families there
practice both farming and fishing. Moreover, both areas provide sightseeing
opportunities. The Iida Bay coastal area offers several tourist spots, such as
Mitsukejima (a desert island) and Michi-no-eki (a roadside rest area). In addition, there
are facilities such as Suzunari (a restaurant), Suzu Beach Hotel, and Suzu Ware
Museum. The Noroshi fishing port coastal village offers Misaki Nature Trail, whichlinks Rokkouzaki Lighthouse and Kinoura Marine Park, and a driving tour popular as a
viewing point. Therefore, many tourists from outside the city visit during the summer,
although these numbers dwindle during winter. In addition, on the coastline facing the
Sea of Japan, which includes places such as Noroshi fishing port, the raging sea during
winter limits the number of possible fishing days.

Figure 1. Location of Iida town, Suzu city

Interviewee profiles
Tables 1 to 5 provide a few demographic details about the 15 resident interviewees.

Table 1 GenderMale

9Female6-4-Satoumi Conservation and Sustainability: An Empirical Exploration through a Face-to-faceInterview Survey in a Local Fishery Community in Noto Peninsula

Table 2 Number of family members

Table 3 Age (years)

Alone

4

20–29

2

2 members

2

30–39

6

3 members

4

40–49

0

4 members

3

50–59

4

5 members

1

60–69

2

6 members

1

70 or older

1

Table 4 Occupation

Table 5 Annual income

Company employee

3Less than 2,000,000 yen

8

Self-employed

42,000,000–2,999,999 yen

2

Public servant

1

3,000,000–3,999,999 yen

3Part-time worker

24,000,000–4,999,999 yen

1

Housewife

05,000,000–5,999,999 yen

0Student

06,000,000 yen or more

1

Living on a pension

1

Others4With regard to occupation, no full-time housewives and students were included in thesample; however, interviewees’ jobs were not limited to the fishing industry. Whereas
five of the 15 interviewees were fishermen by occupation, others came from various
backgrounds, ranging from a store manager, teacher, a traditional artisan of Suzu
wares, to a businessman.

3. Results
3-1．Relationship between the interviewees and the sea
We designed a questionnaire to examine interviewees’ concerns with regard to local
sea conditions and relevant ecosystem services. As a starting point, we asked about
their conservation preferences. When asked about the natural sea environment, all 15
interviewees responded that they want the sea to be conserved. For a question asking
how frequently they visit the sea, interviewees whose jobs were not marine- or
fishery-related could not immediately respond, and four of them responded “neither,”indicating their uncertainties. There is a possibility that their confusion was caused by-5-

Ryo KOHSAKA, Sakiko KAWABE, Yoshinori FUJIHIRA and Kumi OYAMADA

ambiguity over the term “frequently.” The results indicated that nine responded
positively and two responded negatively to whether they frequently visit the ocean. Fora question asking whether their jobs are marine- or fishery-related, six interviewees,
including five fishermen, responded positively. One respondent was not a fisherman byoccupation but was engaged in Satoumi conservation activities. For a question asking
whether they like observing sea life, ten interviewees responded positively, three
responded “neither,” and two responded negatively. For a question asking whether they
like seascapes or marine leisure activities, 13 responded positively and two responded
that they like neither. Although not all of the interviewees were involved with marine
activities on a daily basis, most of them enjoyed the marine and coastal environment.
On the basis of these results, it is estimated that local residents of the Iida Bay
coastal area have relatively strong ties and interests in the marine and coastal
environment.
3-2．Awareness and perception of conservation and environmental improvement
Interviewees were asked to respond to questions pertaining to how much humanintervention they think is required to conserve fertile sea environments on a scale from
1 to 5. Respondents choosing option 1 think the area should be left in its natural state
free from human intervention, whereas those choosing option 2 feel the same way but
less intensely. Respondents choosing option 5 think that artificial means should be used
to conserve the area, whereas those choosing option 4 think the same but less intensely.
Finally, those choosing option 3 think that the options of leaving the area in its naturalstate and using artificial means are equally important. Interviewees were asked toanswer these questions by referring to cases of coastal fishing grounds (Figure 3),
offshore fishing grounds (Figure 4), long-distance fishing grounds (Figure 5), and all
three combined (Figure 2). Coastal fishing grounds refer to the sea area near shore
where shellfishes and algae gathering and line-and-pole fishery, set net fishery, andsmall-scale trawl net fishery are conducted. Offshore fishing grounds refer to an
offshore area where mid- to large-scale trawl net fishery and purse seine fishery are
conducted and where squid, mackerel, and Pacific saury are mostly caught.
Long-distance fishing grounds refer to the deep-sea area where fishing is conductedfrom a month to a year and where mostly tuna species are caught.
Although many interviewees responded that sea areas should remain as they are,those in the fishing sector thought that all fishing grounds should be maintained
through artificial means to increase productivity (Figure 2). Respondents were
-6-

Satoumi Conservation and Sustainability: An Empirical Exploration through a Face-to-faceInterview Survey in a Local Fishery Community in Noto Peninsula

relatively tolerant about using artificial means on coastal and offshore fishing grounds
located nearer to inhabited areas (Figures 3 to 5).

Figure 2 What type of conservation do you think is better for fishing grounds?

Figure 3 What type of conservation do you think is better in the case of fishing grounds incoastal areas?

Figure 4 What type of conservation do you think is better in the case of fishing grounds inoffshore areas?

-7-

Ryo KOHSAKA, Sakiko KAWABE, Yoshinori FUJIHIRA and Kumi OYAMADA

Figure 5 What type of conservation do you think is better in the case of long-distance fishinggrounds?

Figure 6 Is environmental improvement more important for coastal waters or for
long-distance areas?
Notes:
Respondents chose from five options graded as follows:(1) the coastal environments need to be improved the most ;(2) similar to option 1 but with less intensity;(3) improving coastal and open sea environments of equal importance;(4) similarly to option 5 but with less intensity;(5) improving the long-distance marine environment most important.

Next, interviewees were asked to respond on a scale from 1 to 5 to questions
pertaining to natural environments they think require the most human intervention(Figures 6 to 8).
More than half of the interviewees thought it is more important to focus improvementon the coastal environment (Figure 6). In this case, interviewees felt that humanintervention is mostly needed because shores are close to inhabited areas and garbage isfound in shores and nearby coastal waters, according to their experience.
-8-

Satoumi Conservation and Sustainability: An Empirical Exploration through a Face-to-faceInterview Survey in a Local Fishery Community in Noto Peninsula

Figure 7 Is environmental improvement more important for forests or sea areas?
Notes:
Respondents chose from five options graded as follows:(1) Forest environments are most in need of improvement;(2) similar to option 1 but with less intensity;(3) improving forests and seas are equally important;(4) similar to option 5 but with less intensity. ;(5) sea areas are most in need of improvement.

Figure 8 Is environmental improvement more important for fishing grounds or fishingharbors?
Notes:
Respondents chose from five options graded as follows:(1)Fishing harbor environments are most in need of improvement;(2) similar to option 1 but less strongly;(3) improving both fishing harbor and fishing ground is equally important;(4) similar to option 5 but less strongly;(5) fishing ground environments are most in need of improvement.

However, four interviewees responded that both the coastal environment and open
sea are equally in need of improvement. This is because they think of the whole sea as-9-Ryo KOHSAKA, Sakiko KAWABE, Yoshinori FUJIHIRA and Kumi OYAMADA

one interrelated entity. As one interviewee said, “we understand the linkage between
different zones and its importance as a total to fish catchments.”
For the question posed in Figure 7, more than half the interviewees responded thatenvironmental improvement is needed in both forest and sea areas. This is because they
were aware of the interrelationship between forests and sea areas. The term “sea areas”
in the question here did not differentiate coastal, offshore, or long-distance but is used
as one entity comparing to forests. The interviewees rather tend to think theirsurroundings are not isolated but are interconnected. However, more interviewees
responded that forest environments needed improvement than sea areas. This isbecause they felt that mountain devastation has been advancing further than seas andwere aware of the dangers this situation poses.
For the question posed in Figure 8, more than half the interviewees responded thatfishing ground environmental improvement is more important. Some said that fishingharbor environments have already been improved enough, and there was an opinion
that fishing harbors have been over enhanced with buildings and concrete-covered
grounds. Moreover, some argued that it is more important to let fishing grounds
regenerate independently than to improve them through human intervention. The
results suggest that respondents tend to believe that more the environments are
improved through human intervention, the less natural and fertile they will be.

Figure 9 What means do you think should be used to improve fishing grounds? (Multiple
answers allowed).

- 10 -

Satoumi Conservation and Sustainability: An Empirical Exploration through a Face-to-faceInterview Survey in a Local Fishery Community in Noto Peninsula

Figure 10 What should be prioritized to promote the local fishing industry?
3-3．Means to improve fishing grounds and promotion of fishing sector
We asked respondents to share their thoughts as to the most appropriate means toimprove fishing grounds. Although many interviewees hesitated to respond because
they felt that only a professional could answer the question, most responded that fishinggrounds should be improved by installing natural sea walls (option 2 in Figure 9). Thosein the fishing sector tended to agree with the installation of blocks in the seabed (option
3 in Figure 9).
We then asked interviewees to suggest ways of promoting the local fishing sector;
they responded that fostering personnel to become leaders in the fishing industry wasmost needed (option 6 in Figure 10). Many responded that the maintenance of forests
was needed; they considered it important to maintain economic development by
increasing the productivity of seas.

4．Other issues raised during interviews
During the interview, the survey revealed challenges for the fishing industry. Here
we present the repeated common points that were expressed in the unstructured
interview sessions, after the formal interview session ended.
4-1．A decrease in marine products consequent to excessive fishing
Instead of citing sea pollution due to domestic sewage or industrial effluent to explain
the reduction in marine catch, interviewees argued that the more serious issue was that- 11 -

Ryo KOHSAKA, Sakiko KAWABE, Yoshinori FUJIHIRA and Kumi OYAMADA

of overfishing, although rising seawater temperatures were changing the types andamounts of products that could be caught in a given sea area. It was also noted thatwith net fishing, it is difficult to avoid nonmarketable catches, such as juvenile fish.
Fishermen also tend to catch more sea products than they need, in an attempt to buffer
unstable market prices. An implication of this finding would be the need to assure thatfishermen

understandregulations

governingillegalfishingandecosystem

consequences of catching some of the nonmarketable fish and to then introduce targetededucation programs or grants to aid in adapting their fishing equipments accordingly.
4-2．The low price of fish
Many interviewees complained about the low and unstable prices of fish offered at themarket. Moreover, some noted the problem that adding value to sea products wasdifficult to implement because all catches are shipped to the fishery cooperative. In
contrast, some were of the opinion that the market price of fish decreased as aconsequence of fewer people eating fish.
4-3．Obstacles to newcomers
A young fisherman claimed that restrictions on new entrants into the fishery, such as
barriers to acquiring fishing rights, made entry into the fishing sector difficult for bothyouth and formal organizations, including private entities.
4-4．Succession
Although many residents mentioned the critical problems of the lack of young leaders,aging population, and depopulation of workers in the fishing sector, some interviewees
were also of the opinion that no solution is possible because of the unprofitability offishing. Although companies using net fishing and line fishing can earn a relatively
high income, many newcomers and those fishing under private management cannot do
so because they cannot fish as much. Entering the fishing industry as a side business isalso difficult because fishing permits are needed to fish turban shells or abalones andfishing is permitted only in limited sea areas.
4-5．Maintenance of forests
We found that many people felt a sense of crisis regarding the lack of maintaining
forests in mountainous areas. One interviewee stated that he felt that more water
flowed down the mountains than before, particularly during a rainstorm, and he was- 12 -

Satoumi Conservation and Sustainability: An Empirical Exploration through a Face-to-faceInterview Survey in a Local Fishery Community in Noto Peninsula

concerned that muddy water flowing into estuaries would impact the coastal seaweed.
Similarly, another interviewee was concerned about landslides for security reasons.
4-6．Declining interest in seas
A decrease in fishery population and number of people visiting the seashore wasnoted. One reason for the increasing accumulation of litter at coastal areas seems to be
the decreasing cultural and provisional value of the coast as a children’s play area orplace to collect resources. As such, fewer people visit the coast; thus, opportunities forpeople to clean the shoreline have also decreased. In many areas, residents weregathering once a year to clean the shores, but such actions were ineffective because theyoccurred too infrequently.
Table 6 compares issues raised by fishermen and nonfishermen, showing that thelatter group generally tended to view the state of fishery similarly to the fishermen,
rather than viewing the situation from a consumer’s perspective. For example,
nonfishermen are also concerned about the low market price of fish because the current
recession within the fishery sector can potentially affect the economy of the whole city.
As for succession in the fishery, nonfishermen were even more concerned thanfishermen themselves. A possible reason for this difference could be that fishermenbetter understand that fishery is not profitable; thus, is unpopular for the younger
generation.

Table 6 Classification of respondents who raised the issues
Fisherman

Non-fisherman○○

The low price of fish○○

Obstacles to newcomers○

×

Succession

×○

Maintenance of forests○○

Declining interest in the seas×○

A decrease in marine products
consequent to excessive fishingNotes:
Table 6 shows which fisherman or non-fisherman raised the each issue. For
example, some fishermen but no non-fisherman raised “obstacles to newcomers” as
an issue; this is showed at the row of “Obstacles to newcomers”: ○ at the column of“Fisherman,” and × at the column of “Non-fisherman.”- 13 -

Ryo KOHSAKA, Sakiko KAWABE, Yoshinori FUJIHIRA and Kumi OYAMADA

5．Conclusion
We raised two questions in the Introduction: one on perception of human intervention
and other on community fishery. As for the first point, we examined the perceptions ofresidents with regard to their acceptance of human intervention on the coast for an
objective of Satoumi or marine conservation. There was strong preference among theresidents for natural-state or close-to-nature measures for all sea areas, coastal,
offshore, and long distance. Natural materials were preferred over artificial measures.
A balance between “hard” intervention and more natural restoration is a central issue
highlighted in the existing literature (Breque (2013), Henocque (2013)). The present
study provides initial empirical data attesting to the divided views of residents on this
topic. Although both views were expressed (i.e., preserving nature in its pristine state vs.
the necessity to intervene, including the use of artificial blocks), most local residents
were critical of any human intervention in natural elements in coastal areas of theseascape, particularly when it involved installation of artifacts.
According to residents, the worst problem faced in protecting the abundant sea
environment is the reduction in marine products due to excessive fishing, rather thansea pollution or loss of seaweed beds (which directly relates to environmental
conditions).
The actual Satoumi is a landscape where human intervention is a prerequisite, given
the hybrid human–nature system that has developed over centuries. To endorse such
recognitions, same residents also felt it necessary to use artificial means to improve
coasts and coastal waters to ensure the safety of inhabited areas, for example bykeeping coastal areas clean by picking up litter.
Careful further research will be necessary to determine what type of intervention ispreferred at what point by local communities for Satoumi conservation.
Our second question was related to the social aspects of communities involved infishery. It was clear that for most residents, broader issues involved sustainability of thecommunity, particularly related to the rural fishery. Most residents mentioned fishery
management itself, such as the lack of young leaders in the fishery industry, excessive
fishing, and changing relationship between human beings and seas.
According to survey responses, local residents, including those not working in thefishery sector, understand and appreciate terrestrial conservation activities, including
those related to forests. We confirm that local residents understand the linkage between
forests and oceans and indicated a willingness to conserve forests.
- 14 -

Satoumi Conservation and Sustainability: An Empirical Exploration through a Face-to-faceInterview Survey in a Local Fishery Community in Noto Peninsula

As a general fishery issue in Suzu City, the most frequently mentioned aspect was thelack of young leaders to perpetuate the fishery industry. The consequent dearth of
newcomers was thought to be due to unstable fish prices and strict regulations.
Moreover, a systemic problem of fishery is the difficulty in implementation ofcontrivance, such as adding value to sea products, as all catches are shipped to thefishery cooperative.
In this research, we obtained various opinions from rural residents regarding theconservation and restoration of the Satoumi landscape in relation to the local economy
and ecosystems, including fishery activities. These opinions were sorted as basic data.
Further investigation is needed to determine what intervention should be developed
and what companies or other organizations can do to promote the rural fishing industry.
Awareness-raising activities to clarify the catchment and ecosystem functions can be
helpful in the future. Residents recognize the importance of conserving terrestrial areas
along with the fishery area. However, they do not fully understand conservation andrestoration actions and methods, particularly when this implies the need for humanintervention. A future task is to identify a set of relevant educational instruments,
financial incentives, or legal measures needed to stimulate local residents to engage in
effective conservation and restoration actions that are compatible with their everyday
lives’ constraints in their Satoumi landscapes.

Notes(1) Ministry of Environment, Sato-Umi Net, MoE Tokyo, 2008 (http://www.env.go.jp/water/
heisa/satoumi/en/index_e.html (accessed 2014/6/2)).
(2) Globally Important Agricultural Heritage Systems (GIAHS) are defined by the Food andAgriculture Organization (FAO) as “remarkable land use systems and landscapes which
are rich in globally significant biological diversity evolving from the co-adaptation of acommunity with its environment and its needs and aspirations for sustainable
development” (http://www.fao.org/giahs/giahs/en/).
(3) Source of the information is a booklet of fishery cooperative and fishery of Ishikawa
reported by J.F. Ishikawa in 2013.

Reference[1] Berque J. and Matsuda O. (2013) “Coastal biodiversity management in Japanesesatoumi,” Marine Policy, 39, 191-200.
[2] Berkes F. (2012) Sacred ecology: traditional ecological knowledge and resource- 15 -

Ryo KOHSAKA, Sakiko KAWABE, Yoshinori FUJIHIRA and Kumi OYAMADA

management, Taylor & Francis, London.
[3] Henocque Y. (2013) “Enhancing social capital for sustainable coastal development: Is
satoumi the answer?,” Estuarine Coastal and Shelf Science, 116, 66-73.
[4] Japan Satoyama Satoumi Assessment (2010) Satoyama-Satoumi Ecosystems andHuman Well-being: Socio-Ecological Production Landscapes of Japan (Summary for
Decision Makers), United Nations University, Tokyo, Japan.
[5] JF Ishikawa (2013) Guide to Fishery in Ishikawa, JF Ishikawa, Kanazawa (inJapanese).
[6] Maffi L. and Woodley E. (2012) Biocultural diversity conservation: a global sourcebook.
Routledge, London.
[7] Petersen J.K., Hasler B., Timmermann K., Nielsen P., Tørring D.B., Larsen M.M. andHolmer M. (2014) “Mussels as a tool for mitigation of nutrients in the marine
environment,” Marine Pollution Bulletin, 82, 137-143.
[8] Shoji Y., Kuriyama K., and Mitani Y. (2005) Empirical analysis of Taisetsu-zan National
Park In Kuriyama & Shoji (eds) Economic Evaluation of Environment andTourism:179-230, Keiso Shobo, Tokyo (in Jpanaese).
[9] Shuntov V.P. and Temnykh O.S. (2013) “Illusions and Realities of the Ecosystem
Approach to the Study and Management of Marine and Oceanic Biological Resource,”

Russian Journal of Marine Biology, 39, 455-473.
[Acknowledgements]

The authors would like to thank the residents for their collaboration

with the surveys. We would also like to thank the sponsor who enabled this research. This
work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers 26360062 15H01597 26304033
25257416). A part of this project was also conducted as a part of the research project, “Trade
off Analysis and Local Governance Model of Satoyama Ecosystem Services” (ES-Tradeoff,
FY2013-FY2015; 1-1303), which is supported by the Ministry of the Environment (MoE),
Japan through its Environment Research and Technology Development Fund.

- 16 -