NAT OI NAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRAT OI N

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Marine Protected Areas Center

MPA Science Institute

Santa Cruz, California

Social Science

 Research Strategy

For Marine

Protected

Areas
National Marine Protected Areas Center

The National Marine Protected Areas Center, housed within NOAA, 

was established in partnership with the Department of the Interior.

NAT OI NAL OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRAT OI N

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Social Science

 Research Strategy

For Marine

Protected

Areas

National Marine Protected Areas Center

MPA Science Institute

Santa Cruz, California

August 2003

A U T H O R S

Elizabeth Nicholson

Michael Orbach, Ph.D.

Caroline Pomeroy, Ph.D.

Heidi Recksiek

Joseph Uravitch, A.I.C.P.

Charles Wahle, Ph.D.

Sarah Lyons

Kate Barba

Leah Bunce, Ph.D.

Peter Fricke, Ph.D.

2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS i

Table of Contents

Preface ........................................................................................................................iii

Executive Summary ...................................................................................................... v

Introduction..................................................................................................................1

MPAs as an Ecosystem Management Tool.........................................................................................................2

MPA Policy Processes........................................................................................................................................2

Social Science Overview....................................................................................................................................4

Current National Investment and Capacity for Social Science ..........................................................................4

The Social Science Strategy ...............................................................................................................................4

Role of MPA Center ...........................................................................................................................................5

Priority Social Science Research Themes and Topics....................................................7

Governance, Institutions and Processes .............................................................................................................8

Use Patterns........................................................................................................................................................8

Attitudes, Perceptions and Beliefs......................................................................................................................9

Economics of MPAs...........................................................................................................................................9

Communities.....................................................................................................................................................10

Cultural Heritage and Resources......................................................................................................................10

Cross-Cutting Information Needs and Issues ............................................................13

Baseline Data....................................................................................................................................................14

Monitoring........................................................................................................................................................14

Evaluation.........................................................................................................................................................15

Data Management: Architecture and Access...................................................................................................15

Tools and Methods ...........................................................................................................................................16

Building the National Capacity ..................................................................................17

Building the National MPA Social Science Program.......................................................................................18

Building Agency Expertise and Commitment..................................................................................................18

Integrating the Social and Natural Science of MPAs.......................................................................................19

References ..................................................................................................................21

Appendix A. Existing Social Science Strategic Plans ..................................................23

Appendix B. Social Science Tools for MPAs ................................................................25

Appendix C. Examples of Federal Statutes and Regulations .....................................29

Appendix D. Detail of the Process to Develop the Strategy.......................................35

Preface
iv 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS

PREFACE

Marine protected areas (MPAs) are becoming widely used tools for conserving the nation’s natural and cultural 

heritage and for sustaining the production of economically important harvested resources. MPAs of all types are 

currently being planned, managed and evaluated by dozens of federal, state and tribal agencies in every region 

of the U.S. In spite of this trend, however, MPAs are not without controversy and challenges.

MPA design has traditionally relied heavily on natural science information about the ecology and oceanography 

of specific marine resources or ecosystems; however, it is now inescapably clear that the successful design, 

establishment and stewardship of any MPA do not rest solely on biological data. Instead, it is also an intensely 

human endeavor that is profoundly influenced by how society values the oceans and how we perceive our role in 

marine ecosystems, now and in future generations. To ignore or marginalize the human dimension of MPAs risks 

prolonged and counterproductive user conflicts, legal challenges, procedural delays, and ineffective outcomes 

for both the protected ecosystems and the human users they support. Recognizing this, our challenge as a nation 

is now to actively develop the social science foundation needed to ensure that MPA decisions are sound, sciencebased, equitable and effective at meeting their conservation objectives.

In late 2000, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration established, in partnership with the Department of the Interior, the National MPA Center whose mission is to facilitate the effective use of science, technology, training, and information in the planning, management and evaluation of the nation’s system of marine 

protected areas. To that end, the MPA Center’s Science Institute in California is developing parallel national 

strategies for natural and social science research on MPAs. This publicly reviewed document, the Social Science 

Research Strategy for Marine Protected Areas, reflects the thoughtful, generous and sustained input of hundreds 

of scientists, fishermen, managers, boaters, divers, conservationists and educators. The resulting strategy is intended to improve the incorporation of social science research, in all of its disciplines, into the planning, management and evaluation of marine protected areas, and to enhance and target the allocation of scarce resources 

toward high priority information needs by managing agencies, funders and researchers.

We very much appreciate the creative input we have received in crafting this strategy and look forward to its 

collaborative implementation.

Charles M. Wahle, Ph.D.

Director

MPA Science Institute

National Marine Protected Areas Center

Santa Cruz and Monterey, California

September 2003
Executive Summary
vi 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 

Introduction

As concern over the health of the oceans grows, many 

nations, including the United States, are considering 

marine protected areas (MPAs) as ways to conserve 

their most vital marine habitats and resources. MPAs 

can be effective tools in balancing sustainable use 

with long-term conservation of the ocean, especially 

when they are planned, managed and evaluated using 

sound natural and social science.

Because MPAs often involve some restriction of specific human uses within designated areas, they often 

generate considerable debate and concern among affected stakeholders. In many cases, this debate stems 

from the relative costs (often measured in socioeconomic terms) and benefits (often measured in ecological terms) of specific site-based proposals for MPAs. 

Although we are beginning to understand the natural 

ecology of these systems more fully, federal and state 

management agencies often lack information on the 

social, cultural and economic aspects of MPAs. This 

critical information gap severely complicates consideration of MPAs as effective management tools.

To fill this need, the National Marine Protected Areas 

Center, working with several agency and nongovernmental partners, has developed a national strategy for 

social science research. This document identifies high 

priority needs for social science information that are 

fundamental to the planning, management and evaluation of MPAs. It also recommends practical ways to 

meet these needs through research, assessment, capacity building and leveraged funding. The issues identified 

here are national in scope and apply to MPAs designed 

for many purposes under many jurisdictions. A series 

of regional workshops is planned to develop detailed 

research priorities based on the specific needs of particular areas around the U.S. This national social science research strategy, along with the resulting regional 

research action plans, will form the foundation for a 

research program that will provide crucial information 

about MPAs to agencies, funders and Congress. 

Priority Social Science Research 

Themes and Topics

The national social science strategy identifies the following six priority themes: 

• Governance, Institutions and Processes;

• Use Patterns;

• Attitudes, Perceptions and Beliefs;

• Economics of MPAs;

• Communities;

• Cultural Heritage and Resources.

These themes encompass a broad range of disciplines 

and address pressing social science needs in the design, 

management and evaluation of MPAs across the U.S. 

Within each theme, specific topics are outlined with 

more detailed examples or projects.

Cross-Cutting Information Needs 

and Issues

The Social Science Research Strategy oulines several 

cross-cutting issues and related information needs that 

emerged from the list of priority themes and topics. 

Among these is the growing need to collect, analyze, 

synthesize, store and manage social science data of all 

types. Additionally, the needs for baseline data, monitoring programs and evaluation methods are described. 

Finally, we discuss the need for the refinement and innovative application of existing tools and methods.

Building the National Capacity

The nation is currently ill-equipped to make significant progress in filling these crucial information gaps. 

This section of the strategy discusses actions neccessary to create the ability to actually conduct this 

research and act on its findings in the pursuit of our 

long-term stewardship of the nation’s most treasured 

marine ecosystems. To that end, a series of recommendations in three critical arenas is presented: 

• Building the national social science research program;

• Developing agency expertise and commitment; and

• Integrating social science and natural science endeavors.

Members of the Marine Protected 

Areas Social Science Research 

Strategy Planning Team

This strategy was developed by a dedicated team of 

social scientists, ecologists, and marine conservation 

practitioners drawn from within NOAA and academia. The team included:
2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS vii

Ms. Kate Barba

Education Coordinator

National Estuarine Research Reserve System

NOAA/National Ocean Service

Dr. Leah Bunce

International Programs Office

NOAA/National Ocean Service

Dr. Peter Fricke

Social Anthropologist

NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service

Ms. Sarah Lyons * 

Marine Policy Analyst

MPA Science Institute

National Marine Protected Areas Center

Sarah.Lyons@noaa.gov

Ms. Elizabeth Nicholson

Program Analyst

National Center for Ocean and Coastal Science

NOAA/National Ocean Service 

Dr. Michael Orbach

Director

Duke University Marine Laboratory

Nicholas School of the Environment

Duke University

Dr. Caroline Pomeroy

Associate Research Scientist

University of California, Santa Cruz

Ms. Heidi Recksiek

Coordinator

MPA Training & Technical Assistance Institute

National Marine Protected Areas Center

Mr. Joseph Uravitch, A.I.C.P.

Director

National Marine Protected Areas Center

Dr. Charles Wahle *

Director

MPA Science Institute

National Marine Protected Areas Center 

Charles.Wahle@noaa.gov

* For more information, contact Ms. Sarah Lyons or Dr. Charles Wahle

Introduction
2 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 

MPAs as an Ecosystem 

Management Tool

MPA Trends 

As concern over the health of the oceans grows, many 

nations, including the United States, are considering 

marine protected areas (MPAs) as ways to conserve 

their most important and valued marine habitats and 

resources. MPAs can be effective tools in balancing 

sustainable use with long-term conservation of the 

ocean, especially when they are planned, managed and 

evaluated using sound natural and social science and 

when existing resource management frameworks are 

taken into consideration. While MPAs may have many 

sizes, shapes and purposes, they all share a fundamental characteristic and challenge: providing a higher 

level of protection to specific places in the ocean (See 

Box 1 for a brief primer on MPAs in the U.S.).

The growing national interest in MPAs has led to a 

number of calls from expert panels for the broader 

application of science-based MPAs throughout U.S. 

waters (e.g., National Academy of Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science). 

Consequently, over the past few years, many federal, 

state and local agencies have embarked on major initiatives to design MPAs for a variety of purposes, including conservation of biodiversity, management of 

fisheries, protection of endangered species, establishment of marine parks for tourists and local residents, 

and protection of cultural resources. On the West 

Coast alone, more than eight governmental planning 

processes are currently evaluating existing sites and 

considering new ones. These include: the MurrayMetcalf Northwest Straits Commission, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, the Washington 

Department of Natural Resources, the Oregon Ocean 

Policy Advisory Council, the Channel Islands Marine 

Reserve Process, the California Marine Life Protection Act, the Central California National Marine 

Sanctuaries Joint Management Plan Review, and the 

Pacific Fishery Management Council. 

Understanding the Human Dimensions 

of MPAs 

Marine protected areas are not, however, without 

complexity and controversy. Because MPAs often involve some restriction of human uses, they can generate considerable debate and concern among affected 

stakeholders. In many cases, this debate stems from, 

and hinges upon, the relative costs (often measured in 

socioeconomic terms) and benefits (often measured 

in ecological terms) of specific site-based proposals 

for MPAs. Although we are beginning to understand 

the ecology of these systems more fully, federal and 

state management agencies often lack key information on the social, cultural and economic aspects of 

MPAs. This critical information gap jeopardizes the 

nation’s ability to make science-based decisions that 

include the human environment as well as the natural 

environment. The inability to adequately address the 

human dimension of MPAs is perhaps the greatest 

single impediment to their broader and effective use 

in marine conservation today.

To fill this need, the National Marine Protected Areas 

Center is working with several agency and academic 

partners to develop a national strategy for social science research to inform and evaluate MPA processes. 

This document identifies high priority information 

needs in the social sciences as they relate to the 

planning, management and evaluation of MPAs. The 

issues identified here are national, and even international, in scope and apply to most MPAs. A series of 

regional workshops will develop detailed research 

priorities based on the specific, and often unique, 

needs of particular areas around the U.S. This social 

science research strategy along with the regional research priority documents will form the foundation 

for the national MPA social science research program 

that will provide information about MPAs to agencies, funders, and Congress.

MPA Planning and Policy Processes

Policy processes associated with MPAs are dynamic 

and complicated. It is important to understand the processes in order to direct research efforts and coordinate them within a wider context. The diagram below 

illustrates schematically the ‘life cycle’ of a typical 

MPA. It applies equally to both large-scale (planning 

an entire MPA) and small-scale (addressing a single 

issue within an MPA) planning and policy processes. 

While a given site may tend to evolve sequentially 

through phases, as indicated in the diagram, these 

phases also may overlap and repeat through cycles 

of evaluation and adaptive management. The primary 

stages in the MPA life cycle include: 
2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 3

BOX 1. A Brief Primer On Marine Protected Areas 

As interest in MPAs has grown, so too has the lexicon of terms used to describe their many purposes 

and types. Throughout this document, we use a number of terms relating to MPAs as a resource 

management tool. The following definitions represent our operational use of each concept; they are 

generally consistent with, but may differ slightly from, commonly used interpretations.

Marine Protected Areas 

Working Definition: An MPA is any specific area of the marine or estuarine environment that 

has been reserved by federal, state, territorial, tribal, or local laws or regulations to provide lasting 

protection for part or all of the natural and cultural resources therein [derived from Executive Order 

13158 on MPAs]. Familiar examples of MPAs in the U.S. include: national marine sanctuaries, national parks, national wildlife refuges, fisheries reserves, critical habitat for marine mammals, and 

state parks and conservation areas.

Three Primary Purposes: MPAs come in many varieties, but most are established to serve one of 

three primary, overarching conservation goals:

• Natural heritage

• Cultural heritage

• Sustainable production

Types and Levels of Protection: Levels of protection and allowable uses often vary widely among 

different types of MPAs. In practice, MPAs have two general levels of protection:

• No take areas in which extractive uses, and sometimes access, are restricted (rare in the U.S.)

• Multiple use areas in which competing uses are often balanced through marine zoning. 

Scales of Organization: Any given MPA may exist as: (a) a single site; (b) an integral part of a 

functional “network” of ecologically linked sites in the same local or regional ecosystem; or (c) part 

of a broader “system” of MPA sites or networks of sites of various types that collectively protect 

representative habitats, areas of high biodiversity, and special use areas. Both networks and systems 

of MPAs may include sites from multiple jurisdictions and management authorities (e.g., a marine 

sanctuary, a national wildlife refuge and a state park in the same ecosystem). Single sites may fall 

under multiple jurisdictions as well.

• Planning: During this stage, conservation and 

management issues and needs are identified, and 

the MPA’s goals, objectives and management strategies are developed. 

• Implementation: During the implementation stage, 

the site is established and its legal authorities go into 

effect. 

• Management: This stage, which may extend 

in perpetuity or be limited in duration to a fixed 

number of years, involves routine stewardship of 

the site and its resources. Typical activities include: 

monitoring, research, restoration, education, enforcement, coordination and consultation. 

• Evaluation: During this stage, which should recur 

regularly, the site’s management and resources are 

evaluated against its goals and objectives, and its 

management strategies or regulations may be modified to improve their effectiveness. 
4 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 

• Baseline and Monitoring: In an ideal world, a 

baseline would be determined before a policy is 

set, and monitoring activities would be consistently 

carried out using the baseline as a reference point. 

However, while the figure below depicts the ideal 

conceptual approach, establishing the baseline and 

conducting monitoring may start at any point in the 

process.

Social Science Overview

Virtually all of the federal mandates relevant to MPAs 

refer to the integral role of social and economic factors in MPA policy development and management 

decisions (e.g., Sustainable Fisheries Act, National 

Marine Sanctuaries Act, Coastal Zone Management Act, Presidential Proclamations and Executive 

Orders). Similar requirements to address the social 

sciences of MPAs exist in national environmental 

legislation, such as the National Environmental 

Policy Act (NEPA) and Executive Order 12044 on 

improving government regulations. In general, all 

of these mandates refer to the need for interdisciplinary assessment in support of policy and management 

decisions, including both formal social scientific data 

and the inclusion of public and stakeholder input. In 

this document, the term “social science” encompasses 

the full set of social science disciplines (anthropology, sociology, economics, geography, psychology, 

political science, public policy, archaeology) as well 

as humanities, law and ethics.

The need to consider the human dimension is particularly acute when planning or managing MPAs. To 

date, the vast majority of research and literature on 

MPAs has focused on natural science, with largely anecdotal references to social science and few rigorous 

projects or programs evaluating the complexities of 

the human dimension of MPAs. As with any policy or 

management decision, those regarding MPAs always 

involve tradeoffs between the natural and human 

environments. Both must be adequately described, 

analyzed and integrated for sound decision-making 

processes to occur (National Research Council 1995, 

2001).

In this social science research strategy, a “Human Ecology” perspective is used in MPA policy and management. In this context, MPAs must be viewed holistically as they fit into the biophysical environment, as 

they reflect and affect past and present human users, 

as they relate to the prevailing policy and management 

framework, and as they are informed and influenced by 

science and stakeholder perspectives. 

Current National Investment and 

Capacity for Social Science

The current national capacity for MPA social science 

research, funding and application is rudimentary at 

best. In fiscal year 2001, for example, the NOAA 

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), a federal agency with the mandate to include MPAs for 

fisheries purposes, employed 46 social scientists 

nationwide, including 39 economists and seven 

sociologists/anthropologists. The agency goal for 

fiscal year 2007 is to increase that number of social 

scientists to 140 federal employees. 

Because of the historic lack of funding for social science research in coastal and marine affairs, the network 

of social scientists outside of the government, working 

on issues related to MPAs is similarly underdeveloped 

(NRC, 2001). Recent initiatives have been taken within 

NMFS to further develop a network of social science 

capabilities, which may serve as a model for portions 

of the MPA social science research strategy. Related 

social science capabilities exist in other federal agencies, primarily in the U.S. Department of Interior (Fish 

and Wildlife Service, Park Service, Minerals Management Service) and the Environmental Protection 

Agency. With a few notable exceptions, the individual 

state marine resource agencies have little or no social 

scientific capabilities. 

The Social Science Strategy

Scope and Purpose. This national strategy is intended to provide a practical and compelling framework 

Evaluation

Baseline Monitoring

Planning

Management

Implementation

Figure 1. MPA Process
2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 5

for incorporating social science in the planning, management and evaluation of the nation’s MPAs. The 

strategy’s target audiences includes agency decisionmakers, MPA managers, researchers, stakeholders, 

and public and private funders. 

To this end, the Social Science Research Strategy for 

MPAs:

• Identifies and prioritizes key social science research 

areas and information needs;

• Recommends practical ways to meet these needs 

through research, assessment, capacity building 

and leveraged funding; and

• Identifies potential areas of collaboration among 

scientists, MPA practitioners and other stakeholders.

Process of Strategy Development. The social science research strategy development process was participatory, involving policy makers, academics, MPA 

practitioners and stakeholders. Through workshops, 

meetings and reviews, multiple constituents provided 

valuable input and ideas. In developing this strategy, 

several existing social science plans were used as 

models, including: Usable Knowledge: A Plan for 

Furthering Social Science and the National Parks; A 

Social Science Plan for South Florida National Park 

Service Units; Report on the Socioeconomic Roundtable Convened by the Chequamegon and Nicolet National Forests; and the South Florida Action Plan for 

Applied Behavioral Sciences. The major milestones 

of the strategy development process are outlined in 

Figure 2, and are described in detail in Appendix D. 

Role of the National MPA Center

In recognition of the need to improve the scientific basis and stakeholder input into MPA planning and management, Executive Order 13158 directs NOAA and 

the Department of the Interior to work collaboratively 

and with many partners and stakeholders to create a 

framework for a national system of MPAs. Important 

components of this challenging endeavor include: 

• Creating a Federal Advisory Committee on MPAs;

• Creating a publicly accessible web site (mpa.gov) 

with important and timely information on MPAs 

throughout the U.S.;

• Creating a national inventory of U.S. MPAs;

• Using sound natural and social science to assess 

the effectiveness, costs and benefits of MPAs and 

the potential for new MPAs to fill important gaps in 

ecosystem protection; and

• Creating the National Marine Protected Areas Center.

The mission of the National MPA Center is to develop 

and disseminate the information, tools and strategies 

needed to effectively design, manage and evaluate the 

nation’s system of MPAs. In an effort to strengthen 

our understanding of the human context for MPAs, 

Figure 2. Social Science Research Strategy 

Development Process

Human Dimension Breakout Group

Pacific Coast Science and 

Coordination Workshop

August 2001

Social Science Planning Team Created

October 2001

MPA Social Science Workshop

April 8 and 9, 2002

Monterey, CA

Draft Strategy

Developed

August 2002

Review of Draft by NOAA Staff and 

External Experts

Fall/Winter 2002

Feedback Incorporated

Winter/Spring 2002/2003

Final Strategy 

Posted

October 2003
6 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS

the National MPA Center has developed this national 

strategy for MPA social science research and will support and coordinate its dissemination, implementation 

and incorporation into the broader science and management frameworks of other partners. 

The National MPA Center will provide information 

about MPAs to agencies, funders and Congress. In 

time, the MPA Center will serve as a catalyst for the 

incorporation of solid social science research into the 

planning, management and evaluation of MPAs. The 

National MPA Center Science Institute may facilitate 

this process in a variety of ways including: hosting a 

website to link MPA practitioners with social scientists working on MPAs; providing syntheses of major 

studies and issues; managing relevant data and metadata sets; creating a database of MPA social science 

experts; identifying and highlighting relevant funding 

opportunities; and developing budget initiatives.
Priority Social Science Research Themes and Topics
8 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 

PRIORITY SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH 

THEMES AND TOPICS

In the table below are six priority themes for social 

science research needed to strengthen the planning, 

management and evaluation of MPAs. These themes 

span the spectrum of MPA information needs, and 

often correspond to specific disciplines within the 

social sciences. The table illustrates how the themes 

generally cut across MPA processes. The circular 

symbols indicate, in a very general sense, the relative 

applicability of each theme to specific stages in the generalized MPA 

life cycle (solid = high; half shaded = 

medium; open = low).

Within each theme, we present a number of specific research topics that identify, in greater detail, 

the nature of the information needed and potential 

research approaches to fill those gaps. In addition, 

the tables presented under each theme illustrate, 

in a general sense, two aspects of each research 

topic: 

• The relative role, utility and/or importance of the 

results of such a study during different phases in 

typical MPA processes – from planning to management to evaluation (and back); and

• The relative complexity, cost and duration of a 

typical project or initiative designed to address this 

topic in a generalized MPA context.

This assessment is intended simply to highlight the 

potential importance, complexity and applicability 

of different social science research topics in order 

to help MPA practitioners and researchers prioritize 

efforts when resources are limited. Clearly, specific 

applications may differ depending on local needs and 

conditions. 

Governance, Institutions 

and Processes

This theme covers the formal and informal institutions (federal, tribal, state, local, and NGOs) responsible for managing the resources in marine protected 

areas. Component topics include the capacity of these 

institutions, their funding sources, jurisdiction, management strategies and implementation approaches, 

as well as the role of social capital in their interactions 

with the public and with other institutions. 

• Topic: Jurisdictional Structure. Examination of 

the nature of intra-agency, interagency, and intergovernmental interactions and their relationships 

to MPA planning, management and evaluation in 

order to design optimal structures and avoid interjurisdictional incompatibilities and conflict. This 

may include regulatory analysis.

• Topic: Public Participation and Stewardship. 

Examination of models for the meaningful integration of the public into MPA decision-making.

• Topic: MPA Processes. Evaluation of information, 

resources, legal authorities, processes, and structures that are needed to plan, manage and evaluate 

a site or network of MPAs and effectiveness of past 

designation processes.

• Topic: Institutional Analysis. Analysis and understanding of governmental and non-governmental institutional cultures and how they influence and 

constrain decision-making.

Use Patterns

This theme addresses the ways stakeholders use resources in and around marine protected areas. It includes 

 High

Medium

 Low

PlanningManagementEvaluationComplexityCostDuration

PlanningManagementEvaluation

Theme:

Governance, 

Institutions and 

Processes

Topic MPA Processes Characteristics

Jurisdictional Structure  

Public Participation   and Stewardship

The MPA Process   

Institutional Analysis    

Theme:

 MPA Processes

Governance, Institutions and Processes  

Use Patterns  

Attitudes, Perceptions and Beliefs 

Economics of MPAs  

Communities 

Cultural Heritage and Resources  
2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 9

people and MPAs, current environmental status, 

and the effects of MPAs on quality of life.

• Topic: Traditional and Local Ecological Knowledge. Collection of traditional and local ecological 

knowledge regarding habitats, species, spaces, ecological processes; development of validation frameworks and incorporation of traditional and local 

ecological knowledge; and assessment of the value 

managers place on this knowledge.

• Topic: Uncertainty and Attribution. Studies regarding the extent to which people take responsibility 

for their actions and how they perceive the causes and 

effects of these actions, and their primary, secondary 

and cumulative impacts, particularly as they relate to 

protected marine ecosystems and their uses. 

• Topic: Aesthetics. Examination of aesthetic ideals 

as they derive from or drive human-environment interactions and assessment of the relationship between 

aesthetics and the development and maintenance of a 

sense of place. 

• Topic: Environmental Ethics. Assessment of 

individuals’ and interested communities’ principles 

and morals regarding the environment, and examination of how these ways of thinking influence decision-making and behavior regarding MPAs.

Economics of MPAs

This theme deals with economic conditions and trends 

associated with MPAs. Subjects of interest include, 

but are not limited to, market and non-market values, 

costs and benefits, and positive and negative impacts 

associated with marine protected areas. 

• Topic: Baseline Information. Development of a national inventory of socioeconomic data and analyses Planning Management Evaluation Complexity Cost Duration

extractive uses such as harvesting fish or invertebrates, 

and non-extractive uses such as boating and diving.

• Topic: Baseline Data on Human Ecology of Use. 

Studies should be at a variety of spatial and temporal 

scales. This baseline data will provide the context 

for understanding interactions and trade-offs among 

uses and users. It could also be used to evaluate MPA 

outcomes.

• Topic: Political Ecology of MPA-Related Use Patterns. Studies of the legislative institutional, social, 

environmental and economic dimensions of decision 

making, as well as of legal and historic frameworks that 

depict the “rights and responsibilities” of resource use.

• Topic: Historical Ecology of MPA-Related Use and 

Management Patterns. Studies that combine biophysical and social data describing patterns of human use 

and resource management from prehistoric to present 

time to assess and understand the current issues in order to make sensible and acceptable policy choices. 

Attitudes, Perceptions 

and Beliefs

This theme covers the underlying motivations that 

may influence human preferences, choices and actions. It examines the factors that shape human behavior and how these behaviors affect and are affected by marine protected areas. The following priority 

topics pertain to constituents’ and stakeholders’ social 

and cultural attitudes, values, beliefs, perceptions and 

preferences related to MPA issues.

• Topic: Baseline Data. Collection of baseline data 

on constituents’ and stakeholders’ attitudes, perceptions and beliefs regarding habitats, species, spaces 

and ecological processes, relationships between Planning Management Evaluation Complexity Cost Duration

Theme:

Attitudes, Perceptions

and Beliefs

Topic MPA Processes Characteristics

Baseline Data    

Traditional and Local     Ecological Knowledge

Uncertainty and Attribution 

Aesthetics   

Environmental Ethics   

Theme:

Use Patterns

Topic MPA Processes Characteristics

Baseline Data on Human     Ecology of Use

Political Ecology of MPA-  Related Use Patterns

Historical Ecology of MPARelated Use and  

Management Patterns
10 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 

on groups and measures pertinent to MPAs including: commercial and recreational fisheries, shoreside support industries and coastal communities 

and associated infrastructure; coastal development; 

MPA-associated tourism and recreation; and nonconsumptive use and existence value. Identification 

of the gaps and core data needs.

• Topic: Cost Benefit Analysis. Adaptation and application of cost benefit analysis to marine protected 

areas. Adaptations and applications may include the 

definition of costs and benefits, the consideration 

of basic groups (recreational, business and tourism, 

etc.), the consideration of different kinds of MPAs 

and specific scenarios, the recognition of cultural 

values, and the determination of net costs and benefits to current and future generations.

• Topic: Environmental Variability. Increased understanding of the incorporation of ecological variability (space and time) into economic theory and tools. 

Use of this expanded framework to look at spatially 

heterogeneous patterns of resource use and enjoyment in MPAs. 

• Topic: Non-Market Values (Use And Non-Use). 

Development methods for estimating non-market 

values, in order to compute total economic value. 

This may encompass the social and cultural dimensions of MPAs, including bequest, existence, option, 

and use values, as well as ecosystem services.

Communities

This theme examines the characteristics of geographic and stakeholder communities associated with 

marine protected areas and the way these communities function, particularly as they relate to the use and 

conservation of marine resources. Planning Management

EvaluationComplexityCostDuration

• Topic: Socioeconomic Conditions. Collection of 

descriptive and explanatory information regarding the social, cultural and economic aspects of 

communities and stakeholder groups of particular 

regions and sub-regions.

• Topic: Capacity and Skills. Development of community capacity and skills related to MPA issues, 

such as determining the best ways to empower 

communities to articulate and develop their own 

visions and tools, and the assessment of existing 

capacity and skills.

• Topic: Information Flow and Use Among Communities. Analysis of community decision-making 

patterns and processes, determination of indicators of community resiliency and identification of 

sources of power as they influence political and 

social change.

• Topic: Management Structures and Processes. 

Studies on how to reach marginalized groups, determining incentives for community compliance 

with MPAs, determining which management structures and processes allow for flexibility and adaptation, and impacts of various management practices 

on communities.

• Topic: Lessons Learned. Studies of the historic 

social construction of MPAs and interdisciplinary 

studies of MPA “successes and failures.”

Cultural Heritage and Resources

This theme covers the historical and traditional artifacts within marine protected areas. This may include, 

but is not limited to, nautical history (wrecks, repliTheme:

Economics of MPAs

Topic MPA Processes Characteristics

Baseline Information    

Cost Benefit Analysis   

Environmental Variability    

Non-Market Values   

PlanningManagementEvaluationComplexityCostDuration

Theme:

Communities

Topic MPA Processes Characteristics

Socioeconomic Conditions   

Capacity and Skills 

Information Flow and Use     Among Communities

Management Structures     and Processes

Lessons Learned    
2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 11

cas, etc.), maritime infrastructure (piers, lighthouses, 

locks, ports, forts, etc.), and historical documents 

(books, photographs, music, recipes, etc.) of MPAs. 

This theme addresses primarily the physical manifestation of historical and traditional uses of marine 

resources; their social and cultural underpinnings are 

addressed mainly by other themes. 

• Topic: Characterization. Science-based inventories, documentation, and evaluations of cultural 

resources associated with MPAs.

• Topic: Protection. Development and testing means 

of protecting cultural resources including archeological, historical and ethnographic resources. This 

PlanningManagementEvaluationComplexityCostDuration

also includes the creation of databases for these 

resources.

• Topic: Information Resources. Compilation, analysis and synthesis of historical and archival records, 

databases, books, folklore and correspondence.

Theme:

Cultural Heritage 

and Resources

Topic MPA Processes Characteristics

Characterization  

Protection    

Information Resources     

Cross-Cutting Information Needs and Issues
14 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 

CROSS-CUTTING INFORMATION 

NEEDS AND ISSUES 

Throughout the social science research strategy, several cross-cutting information needs and issues have 

emerged from across the research themes that apply 

to integrating solid social science into the planning, 

management and evaluation of MPAs. Most stem 

from the growing need for a national capacity to 

collect, analyze, synthesize, store and manage social 

science data of all types. The current lack of easily accessible social science information hinders effective 

study of general MPA issues as well as the development of practical and equitable MPAs. The following 

cross-cutting efforts will be fundamental to overcoming these challenges. 

Baseline Data

Baseline socioeconomic data are essential for sound 

and useful social science research related to MPAs. 

Currently, these data are scarce. Baseline information includes quantitative and qualitative data that 

describe and explain “the existing conditions and past 

trends that are relevant to the human environment” associated with a particular MPA process (ICGP 1994). 

Baseline data can be used to provide historical context 

and current conditions, to predict the potential effects 

of MPAs and attendant ecological, regulatory, social 

and economic change, and as a standard against which 

such effects can be measured. 

Baseline information includes both quantitative and 

qualitative data, collected and analyzed using a broad 

range of approaches and methods (see Appendix B). 

Baseline analysis of fishery use patterns, for example, 

would entail the integrated analysis of quantitative 

landings data together with ethnographic data on the 

qualitative dynamics and variability in the observed 

landings patterns over time. The integration of quantitative and qualitative data is essential to providing a 

grounded, useful and accurate understanding of baseline conditions on all MPA themes.

Issues of scale, both temporal and spatial, apply to 

the collection and analysis of baseline data. In the 

social sciences, human ecology and cultural ecology 

provide an apt framework for guiding baseline and 

subsequent research related to MPAs. Netting (1986) 

characterized cultural ecology as “an effort to understand human behavior in an ever wider and more 

inclusive frame of reference” in temporal, spatial and 

social terms. As an example, baseline analyses of use 

patterns should encompass the social and economic 

linkages between on-the-water resource users and the 

shore-based communities and businesses that support 

and depend upon them (Pomeroy 2002). Baseline 

assessments of these linkages will most likely find 

that they are not confined locally, but extend to other 

communities not readily or intuitively associated with 

a particular marine use or value. 

In conducting baseline research, care must be taken 

to limit and control potential biases in the information 

collected, which may occur as individuals, groups and 

institutions become aware of and begin to respond to 

MPA discussions and processes. Baseline data can 

include information collected and analyzed through 

directed study associated with the MPA process, as 

well as secondary data and analyses. 

Monitoring 

Monitoring entails the short- and long-term measurement of the human dimensions as they interact with: 

(a) MPAs and the larger biophysical environment, and 

(b) MPA processes. An essential foundation for monitoring is baseline information on the key features of 

the human environment and how it interacts with the 

biophysical environment prior to MPA establishment. 

Periodic or ongoing measurement of these features 

over time is necessary to identify and assess MPA 

processes and outcomes. In this way, monitoring is 

essential to adaptive management, as it provides critical information to enable the adjustment of management to insure that conservation and socioeconomic 

goals are not compromised (Charles 2001). 

Although monitoring is essential, it also poses critical 

challenges. Information needs, and the social science 

and public capacity (i.e., funding, qualified research 

personnel, collaborating research participants, time) 

to fulfill those needs vary by location, context and 

stage in the MPA process. Moreover, these information needs vary in their immediacy, and as perceived 

by managers, scientists and other stakeholders. In general, however, monitoring needs include: 1) qualitative 

and quantitative baseline human dimensions data and 

analyses; 2) sustained monitoring using indirect (e.g., 

landings data) and direct measures (e.g., through sur-
2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 15

veys, focus groups, panels); and 3) sustained human, 

financial and social resources to support monitoring. 

In addition, it is critical that MPA monitoring be coordinated between the natural and social sciences, and 

with other coastal and marine management processes.

Evaluation

In the context of MPAs, evaluation entails the assessment of MPA processes, outcomes and effectiveness 

in achieving goals and objectives, and the identification of unintended consequences. Evaluation, together 

with monitoring, is part of adaptive management, an 

institutionalized process for continuous learning and 

adjustment of management to improve its effectiveness (Charles 2001). Most evaluation of the human 

dimensions of MPAs has, to date, focused on participants’ satisfaction with the process (e.g., Suman et al. 

1999) or whether or not MPAs have been established 

pursuant to the process (e.g., Fiske 1992). MPAs are 

theorized to generate substantial social and economic 

benefits (Hannesson 1998, Sanchirico and Wilen 

1999), and are driven in part by social and economic 

goals and objectives. However, limited attention has 

been directed toward systematic, empirical evaluation to test these assertions (Badalamenti 2000, Alder 

2002) or comparable assumptions about potential 

costs to users. Evaluation requires the establishment 

of criteria based on goals and objectives related to 

both MPA processes and outcomes. Evaluation must 

also explicitly examine the interactions between the 

human and the “natural” environment, as these influence MPA processes and outcomes in ecological as 

well as socio-economic terms (Pomeroy 1999). Alder 

et al. (2002) recommend these criteria (or measures 

of effectiveness) be simple, measurable, cost-effective and reflective of MPA goals and objectives; they 

also need to be clearly defined and understood by all 

participants in the MPA process (Pomeroy 2002).

Data Management: Architecture and 

Access 

The collection, use and access to data on the human 

dimensions of MPAs raises ethical issues that must be 

recognized and addressed in the MPA research and 

management processes. In particular, data on use patterns, economics, attitudes, perceptions and beliefs are 

proprietary and sensitive. For example, an individual’s use patterns reflect proprietary knowledge gained 

from experience. That knowledge is valuable and is 

not generally shared with others outside well defined 

social networks. Social science research to document 

such use patterns to inform and assess the potential 

and actual impacts of MPAs is potentially problematic because it brings this proprietary information 

into a more public arena (even if it is aggregated with 

other such information), and makes it available to a 

process that may in turn negatively affect those who 

have provided it. Human subjects and institutional 

review board procedures that require social science 

researchers to uphold three principles pertaining to 

study participants—voluntary participation (through 

informed consent), anonymity of participants, and 

confidentiality of individual data—mitigate this 

problem somewhat in the immediate research context. Access to and use of this information beyond 

the initial, directed research, and reporting process, 

however, raises social and ethical issues that have yet 

to be addressed, despite the potential for significant 

economic harm from its misuse. 

Similarly, the availability of data concerning the nature and location of cultural heritage and resources 

(e.g., shipwreck or Paleolithic sites) has long been 

of concern for resource managers and archeologists. 

Such cultural resource sites, particularly where 

enforcement is insufficient, are subject to looting, 

which results in loss of artifacts as well as damage to 

the historical context in which they were found. 

A combined physical and institutional architecture 

is needed to manage social science data and govern 

its use to uphold research ethics and standards. The 

physical architecture should contain and manage information consistent with those standards, ensuring 

that individuals’ data remain anonymous and confidential. The institutional architecture would also entail clear rules about how and by whom the meta-data 

is to be managed, and how and for what purpose it is 

to be used, consistent with concerns for the well being of study participants, the other stakeholders they 

represent, and their communities.

Given the diverse nature and sources of social science 

data on MPAs, it is likely that a portal for relevant 

information, rather than a centralized database with 

complex data transfer and management requirements, 

would best serve the national need. Specific partners 

would assume the responsibility to develop and maintain specific aspects of the broader data set, which 
16 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS

would be overseen and coordinated at the national level, perhaps by the National MPA Center, with access 

through the national MPA website, www.mpa.gov. 

With the exception of confidential information, all 

data and information in the national database should 

be fully accessible to all interested parties. 

Tools and Methods 

As seen in the results of several workshops and studies, 

including the April 2002 National MPA Center Science Institute’s MPA Social Science Workshop held in 

Monterey, California, the February 2002 California Sea 

Grant Socioeconomic Workshop held in Watsonville, 

California, and the National MPA Center’s MPA Needs 

Assessment, methods and tools for analyzing, monitoring and evaluating MPAs need to be explored. Current 

social science tools and methods do not always account 

for ecological variability and need to be refined and/or 

applied in innovative ways for developing, analyzing, 

defining and assessing qualitative and quantitative data. 

See Appendix B for a table describing social science 

research approaches potentially useful to MPA social 

science research.
Building the National Capacity
18 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 

BUILDING THE NATIONAL CAPACITY

This strategy is intended to enhance the use of social 

science in the planning, management and evaluation of 

the nation’s MPAs. The previous sections present key 

information needs that constitute a national research 

agenda. This information alone, however, is not sufficient to meet the national need for social science. The 

section below presents specific actions we must undertake collectively if the nation is to create the ability to 

conduct this research and act on its findings in our longterm stewardship of the nation’s most valued marine 

ecosystems. We present a series of recommendations 

in three critical arenas: (a) building the national MPA 

social science research program; (b) developing agency 

expertise and commitment; and (c) integrating social 

science and natural science endeavors.

Building the National MPA Social 

Science Research Program

Regional Research Agendas. This document creates 

the foundation for a national research program in the 

social science of marine protected areas. By focusing 

on general issues with broad applicability across the 

U.S., it highlights major information needs, research 

priorities, and funding targets. The national strategy 

also provides a framework for the development of 

regional research programs based on expert input in 

a series of workshops in coastal areas throughout the 

U.S. These focused research programs will in turn 

drive initiatives and stimulate partnerships among 

agencies and researchers in areas of shared interests. 

They will be used by agencies to help guide new 

budget initiatives on MPA social science, and will be 

presented to other public and private funders for their 

consideration.

Coordination. The National Marine Protected Areas 

Center Science Institute, working collaboratively with 

other agency and nongovernmental organizations, 

will coordinate the development of these multi-tiered 

research agendas through workshops, information sharing and developing specific partnerships to address key 

scientific questions. In addition, the MPA Center will 

work closely with the relevant federal, state, tribal and 

local agencies as well as public and private funding 

organizations, such as the National Science Foundation, Sea Grant and others, to incorporate MPA social 

science questions into their funding priorities

Academic Training. The success of this strategy (as 

measured by increased social science capacity in the 

U.S.) requires a substantial influx of new, well-trained 

professional social scientists whose graduate education prepares them for the unique challenges posed 

by MPAs. To this end, the National MPA Center and 

its partners will work to develop a number of training 

opportunities for graduate students and postdoctoral 

fellows, including: dedicated fellowships at partner 

universities with relevant social science programs; 

student research assistance grants; fellowships and 

internships with MPA agencies (e.g., Sea Grant Fellows and the National Estuarine Research Reserve 

System’s Graduate Research Fellows); and specialized courses in MPA social science.

Stakeholder Engagement. Stakeholder engagement 

is an important aspect of the planning, management 

and evaluation of MPAs. Stakeholders may often 

have significant contributions to make in identifying critical research priorities, providing access to 

needed information, and highlighting the potential 

consequences of various actions. As such, research 

should be undertaken to examine the design, implementation and evaluation of effective and meaningful 

stakeholder involvement. The regional social science 

research workshops will provide a venue for interaction between social scientists and other stakeholders 

in the same community and will provide the opportunity to create innovative partnerships for future 

research. Federal grants should encourage research 

working collaboratively with stakeholders.

Building Agency Expertise and 

Commitment

Staffing. If agencies are to incorporate social science and the human dimension into MPA planning 

and management, they must increase their internal 

expertise in several disciplines. MPA planning will 

require social scientists prepared to work on both the 

policy and practice of MPAs. MPA programs should 

strive to develop and train a core team of social 

scientists working at the national level on issues of 

broad national importance, and to ensure that social 

scientists work alongside natural scientists at every 

field site. Clearly, such an effort will require substantial resources and time; this document is designed to 

provide the impetus, framework and justification for 

undertaking this initiative.
2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 19

Training. The National MPA Center’s Training 

and Technical Assistance Institute will work with 

a variety of federal, state, tribal and local agencies 

that plan, manage or evaluate MPAs to develop and, 

where appropriate, provide training opportunities in 

MPA social science for two distinct audiences:

• Existing and new agency social scientists who may 

lack direct experience in MPA-specific issues; and

• MPA managers and practitioners, including natural 

scientists, in the field who may lack social science 

background but need to understand its context in 

order to set funding or action priorities.

Budget Initiatives. The National MPA Center will 

work with agencies and organizations to identify and 

leverage the resources necessary to support social science research based on the priorities identified here 

and in the subsequent regional workshops.

Integrating the Social and Natural 

Science of MPAs

This strategy identifies and highlights information 

gaps in our collective understanding of the human

dimension of MPAs and suggests practical ways 

to fill them. Its ultimate success, however, will 

depend in part on filling another need that is currently lacking: the integration of the social and 

natural sciences in the planning, management 

and evaluation of MPAs. While a detailed action 

plan is beyond the scope of this document, the 

following ideas will be pursued in concert with 

the efforts laid out here:

• Identify areas of overlap and synergy between 

research priorities identified in the social science and natural science strategies (e.g., use 

patterns and their impacts, traditional ecological knowledge);

• Develop pilot studies on a regional scale that 

integrate both disciplines to illustrate the power 

of an integrated approach to complex ecological and socioeconomic problems;

• Recommend ways to better integrate and leverage the technical information from both disciplines into MPA processes; and

• Promote cross-discipline training for natural 

and social scientists.

References
22 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS

References

Alder, J., D. Zeller, T. Pitcher, and R. Sumaila. 2002. 

A method for evaluating marine protected areas 

management. Coastal Management 30: 121-131.

Badalamenti, F., A.A. Ramos, E. Voultsiadou, 

J.L. Sanchez Lizaso, G. D’Anna, C. Pipitone, 

J. Mas, J.A. Ruiz Fernandez, D. Whitmarsh, and 

S. Riggio. 2000. Environmental Conservation 

27(2): 110-125.

Charles, A.T. 2001. Sustainable Fishery Systems. 

Malden, MA: Blackwell Science.

Fiske, S.J. 1992. Sociocultural aspects of establishing marine protected areas. Ocean and 

Coastal Management 17(1): 25-46.

CA Sea Grant College Program and UC Cooperative Extension. 2002. A Workshop to Identify 

Needed Socioeconomic Studies Associated with 

Marine Activities in Central California.

Hannesson, R. 1998. Marine reserves: What 

would they accomplish? Marine Resource Economics 13: 159-170.

Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines 

and Principles for Social Impact Assessment 

(ICGP). 1994. Guidelines and Principles for 

Social Impact Assessment. Washington, DC: US 

Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and 

Atmospheric Administration, National Marine 

Fisheries Service. 

Jakes, P. and J. Harms. 1995. Report on the 

Socioeconomic Roundtable Convened by the 

Chequamegon and Nicolet National Forests. St. 

Paul, MN: US Department of Agriculture, Forest 

Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station. General Technical Report NC-177.

Machlis, G.E., J.E. McKendry, National Park 

Service and M.E. Correia, FAU/FIU Joint Center 

for Environmental and Urban Problems. 1996. A 

Social Science Plan for South Florida National 

Park Service Units. Retrieved 6/26/02. http:// 

www.nps.gov/socialscience/tech/plans.htm

National Park Service. 1996. Usable Knowledge: 

A Plan for Furthering Social Science and the National Parks Summary. Retrieved 6/26/02. http:// 

www.nps.gov/socialscience/waso/socscipl.htm

National Research Council (NRC). 1995. Understanding Marine Biodiversity. National Academy 

Press, Washington, DC.

National Research Council (NRC). 2001. Marine 

Protected Areas: Tools for Sustaining Ocean Ecosystems. National Academy Press, Washington, DC.

Netting, 1986. Cultural Ecology. 2nd ed. Prospect Heights, IL: Waveland Press.

Pomeroy, C. 1999. Social considerations for marine resource management: Evidence from Big 

Creek Ecological Reserve. California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations Reports 40:

118-125.

Pomeroy, C. 2002. Effectiveness of marine reserves: Socio-economic considerations. Pp.73-88 

in Effectiveness of Marine Reserves in California’s 

National Marine Sanctuaries, R. Starr, ed. Report 

to the Monterey Bay National Marine Sanctuary.

Recksiek, H., G. Hinchcliff. 2002. Marine Protected Areas Needs Assessment Final Report. 

Prepared by the NOAA Coastal Services Center 

in cooperation with the National Marine Protected Areas Center. Retrieved 2/05/2003 http:// 

www.csc.noaa.gov/cms/cls/MPANAFINAL.pdf.

Sanchirico, J.N., and J.E. Wilen. 1999. Bioeconmics of spatial exploitation in a patchy environment. Journal of Environmental Economics and 

Management. 37: 129-150.

South Florida Ecosystem Restoration Working 

Group. 1999. South Florida Action Plan for Applied Behavioral Sciences. Miami, Florida.

Suman, D., M. Shivlani, and J.W. Milon. 1999. 

Perceptions and attitudes regarding marine reserves: A comparison of stakeholder groups in the 

Florida Keys National Marine Sanctuary. Ocean 

and Coastal Management 42(12): 1019-1040.
Appendix A.

Existing Social Science Strategic Plans
24 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS

Appendix A. Existing Social 

Science Strategic Plans 

Forest Service. 2001. Collect and Manage Social 

Science Information. Retrieved 6/26/02. http:

//www.fs.fed.us/institute/bus_mod/hd080101/

model4.htm

Forest Service. 2001. Build FS Organizational 

Capacity for Conducting and Using Social Science. Retrieved 6/26/02. http://www.fs.fed.us/

institute/bus_mod/hd080101/model4.htm

Luton, H. and R. Cluck, Minerals Management 

Service. Applied Social Science in MMS: A 

Framework for Decisionmaking. Published 2/3/

2000. Retrieved 7/1/02. http://www.mms.gov/

eppd/socecon/files/luton-cluck.pdf

Machlis, G.E., J.E. McKendry, National Park 

Service and M.E. Correia, FAU/FIU Joint Center 

for Environmental and Urban Problems. A Social 

Science Plan for South Florida National Park 

Service Units. 1996. Retrieved 6/26/02. http:// 

www.nps.gov/socialscience/tech/plans.htm 

Machlis, G.E., National Park Service and L.H. 

Silverman, Indiana University, with the assistance of E.R. Barrie, C.A. Schulte, and P.E. 

Smith. A Social Science Plan for the Harpers 

Ferry Center. 1997. Retrieved 6/26/02. http:// 

www.nps.gov/socialscience/tech/plans.htm 

Machlis, G.E., A.B. Kaplan, S.P. Tuler, K.A. 

Bagby and J.E. McKendry. 2002. Burning Questions: A Social Science Research Plan for Federal 

Wildland Fire Management. Contribution 943: 

Idaho Forest, Wildlife and Range Experiment Station, College of Natural Resources, University of 

Idaho, Moscow.

National Park Service. Usable Knowledge: A 

Plan for Furthering Social Science and the National Parks Summary. Published 1996. Retrieved 

6/26/02. http://www.nps.gov/socialscience/waso/

socscipl.htm 
Appendix B.

Social Science Tools for MPAs
26 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 

Appendix B. Social Science 

Tools for MPAs

The best social science tools and methods for a project 

depend on information need, time, resources (money 

and people), and context. In the matrix below, several 

common research approaches are described. The matrix shows which common research methods and approaches may be pertinent to each phase of the MPA 

cycle. Depending on the location of the MPA and the 

managing agency, some methods, such as socio-economic impact assessment, may be required at certain 

stages. In addition, we include a list of references 

where more information can be found about social 

science research approaches, methods, and tools.

It is essential to note that this matrix is not meant to 

prescribe certain methods for certain stages of the 

MPA cycle, but rather to provide a sampling of commonly used research methods and approaches and to 

give MPA managers an idea of when certain methods 

may be helpful. The Further Reading suggestions below can help better explain the relationships between 

methods and their relative strengths and weaknesses.

Further Reading

Babbie, E.R. 1992. The practice of social research. 

6th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co. 

Beebe, J. 2001. Rapid assessment process: An introduction. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. 

Bunce, L., P. Townsley, R. Pomeroy, and R. Pollnac. 

2000. Socioeconomic Manual for Coral Reef Management. Townsville, Queensland, Australia: Australia 

Institute of Marine Science.

Jakes, P. and J. Harms. 1995. Report on the Socioeconomic Roundtable Convened by the Chequamegon and 

Nicolet National Forests. St. Paul, MN: US Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Forest Experiment Station. General Technical Report NC-177.

Tashakkori, A., and C. Teddlie, eds. 2003. Handbook 

of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. 

Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

U.S. EPA (EPA 842-B-01-003). 2002. Community Culture and the Environment: A Guide to Understanding a 

Sense of Place. Office of Water, Washington, DC.

1 Johnson, B., and L.A. Turner. 2003. Data collection strategies in mixed methods research. Pp. 297-319 in A. Tashakkori and C. Teddlie, eds., Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, p. 308.

2 Babbie, E.R. 1992. The practice of social research. 6th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Co., pp. 8-9.

3 Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Principles (ICGP). 1994. Guidelines and principles for social impact assessment. US 

Dept of Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-F/SPO-16. Also note: Social variables examined include population characteristics, 

community and institutional structures, political and social resources, individual and family changes, and community resources (ICGP

1994, p. 8).

PlanningManagementEvaluation

Common Research Methods and Approaches MPA Processes

Focus Groups. An interactive interview, managed by a moderator, in which a small 

number (e.g., 6-12) of usually homogeneous respondents engage in discussion of a 

set of questions on a particular topic.1 P P P

Survey Research. The administration of a standardized questionnaire in person, by 

phone or via mail, e-mail or other “self-administered” formats, to a sample of respondents.2 P P

Socio-Economic Impact Assessment. The systematic evaluation, in advance, of the 

social and economic consequences likely to follow from specific policy actions.3 P P
2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 27

4 Beebe, J. 2001. Rapid assessment process: An introduction. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press, p. 171.

5 Tashakkori, A., and C. Teddlie, eds. 2003. Handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. Thousand Oaks: Sage 

Publications, p. 708.

6 Edwards, S.F. 1987. Introduction to Coastal zone Economics: Concepts, methods and case studies. New York: Taylor and 

Francis, p.45.

7 http://searchcrm.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,sid11_gci809473,00.html. Accessed 2/1/03.

8 Handbook of mixed methods, p.705. 

9 Edwards, p.46.

10 Ragin, Charles. 1994. Constructing Social Research: The Unity and Diversity of Method. Pine Forge Press (Sage), p. 105.

11 Ragin, Charles. 1987. The Comparative Method: Moving Beyond Qualitative and Quantitative Strategies. University of 

California Press, p. 1.

PlanningManagementEvaluation

Common Research Methods and Approaches (Continued) MPA Processes

Rapid Assessment. Intensive, team-based qualitative inquiry using triangulation, iterative 

data analysis and additional data collection to quickly develop a preliminary understanding 

of a situation from an insider’s perspective.4 P P

Ethnography. The social scientific study of people and culture using participant 

observation, interviews and examination of artifacts and records.5 P P

Contingent Valuation. A survey technique that assesses respondents’ willingness to pay 

to prevent a decline in environmental resources or to support an improvement in them, as 

an indication of economic value of large changes in environmental quality, as hypothetically presented.6 P P

Predictive Modeling. Research in which data is collected, a statistical model is formulated, predictions are made and the model is validated (or revised) as additional data 

becomes available. The model can be a simple linear equation or it can be a complex 

network mapped out by sophisticated software.7 P

Content Analysis. A method of data analysis for narrative data (e.g., texts, transcriptions) 

in which the segments of text are systematically categorized as similar to or different from 

segments in other categories. Categories may be derived from the underlying theory and P P

conceptual framework of the research, or identified through the analysis.8

Cost Benefit Analysis. The systematic identification, organization and evaluation of costs 

and benefits that are expected to result from proposed policy alternatives, including the 

“no action” (status quo) alternative.9 P P

Comparative Research. An approach oriented toward identifying and unraveling 

complex patterns of similarities and differences across moderate number of cases.10

Comparison provides a basis for making statements about empirical regularities and P P

for evaluating cases relative to substantive and theoretical criteria.11
28 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS

Planning

Management

Evaluation

12 Babbie, p.G7.

13 Robson, Colin. 1999. Real World Research: A Resource for Social Scientists and Practitioner-Researchers. Malden, MA: 

Blackwell Publishers, Inc., p. 146

Common Research Methods and Approaches (Continued) MPA Processes

Historical Research. A qualitative research approach that entails the use of historical 

records including existing documents, artifacts and oral histories. P

Secondary Data Analysis. A form of research in which data collected and processed 

by one researcher are reanalyzed, often for a different purpose, by another researcher.

12 P P

Case Study Research. A strategy for doing research that involves the empirical 

investigation of a particular contemporary phenomenon within a real life context using 

multiple sources of evidence.13 P P
Appendix C.

Examples of Federal Statutes and Regulations
30 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 

Appendix C. Examples of Federal Statutes and Regulations 

The federal statutes and regulations in the table below mandate or contain provisions for the conduct of Social 

Impact Assessment.

Year Law Provisions

1960 Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act Requires consideration of the social, economic 

[16 USC 528] and ecological benefits and costs of non-timber 

 harvest use and services of national forests.

1964 Civil Rights Act (Title VI) [42 USC 2000(d)] Requires that any program or activity receiving 

 federal financial assistance be free of discrimi-

 natory effect on the ground of race, color or 

 national origin.

1970 National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 Calls for the integrated use of the social sci-

[42 USC 4321 et seq.] ences in assessing impacts “on the human 

 environment.” Also requires the identification 

 of methods and procedures that ensure that 

 presently unquantified environmental and 

 cultural amenities and values are given 

 appropriate consideration.

1970 Federal-Aid Highway Act [23 USC 109(h)] Requires full consideration of any adverse 

 economic, social and environmental effects 

 of any proposed project on any federal aid 

 highway system.

1970 Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Requires analysis and demonstration by 

Acquisition Policies Act [42 USC 4601] agencies to show that all groups are treated 

 uniformly and fairly in residential relocations 

 resulting from eminent domain.

1972 Coastal Zone Management Act [46 USC 31] Requires that the nation’s coastal zones be 

(amended by the Coastal Zone Protection Act protected from environmentally harmful 

of 1994 [P.L. 104-150]) development.

1972 Marine Protection, Research and Sanctuaries Provides for assessment of impacts of human 

Act [43 USC 1301 activities in environmentally sensitive areas, 

 and consideration of social and economic 

 effects of regulation or other federal action.

1974 Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resource Required social and economic assessments 

Planning Act [P.L.100-446] of use alternatives for federal forests and 

 rangelands and their incorporation in planning 

 decisions as part of the forest inventory analyses. 

1976 Fishery Conservation and Management Act Calls for assessment and consideration of 

[16 USC 1801 et seq.] (in 1996 renamed the ecological, economic and social impacts 

Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and of fishing regulations on fishery participants 

Management Act) and fishing communities in marine fishery 

 management plans.
2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 31

1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act Requires protection of the scenic, scientific, 

[43 USC 1701] historic and ecological values of federal 

 lands and calls for public involvement in 

 their management.

1978 Regulations for Implementing the Procedural Requires federal agencies to interpret “human 

Provisions of the National Environmental environment” comprehensively to “include 

Policy Act [40 CFR 1500-1508] (Council on the natural and physical environment and the 

Environmental Quality) relationship of people with that environment.”

1978 Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act States that “The term ‘human environment’ 

[43 USC 1331 et seq.] means the physical, social, and economic 

 components, conditions and factors which 

 interactively determine the state, condition, 

 and quality of living conditions, employment,

 and health of those affected directly or 

 indirectly” by resource development and 

 extraction activities on the U.S. outer 

 continental shelf.

1980 Comprehensive Environmental Response, Calls for working with affected 

Compensation and Liability Act publics through community relations 

[26 USC and 43 USC] programs and assessment of community 

 and state impacts of Superfund plans.

1982 Regulatory Flexibility Act [5 USC 601] Calls for assessment of impacts of federal 

 actions on small entities—businesses, local 

 governments and non-governmental 

 organizations—to ensure that the proposed 

 actions do not discriminate or impose an 

 undue burden on small entities. 

1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act [P.L. 97-425] Calls for preparation of a social impact 

 assessment and places specific demographic 

 limits on siting nuclear repositories. Affected 

 Indian tribes must be included in the siting 

 process, impact assessment and mitigation.

1982 Guidelines for Economic and Social Analysis Requires the incorporation of social impact 

of Programs, Resource Plans, and Projects assessments in forest management plan 

[Federal Register 47(80): 17940-17954] development.

(USDA Forest Service)

1983 Economic and Environmental Guidelines and Outlines six planning steps for integrating 

Principles for Water and Related Land Resources economic, ecological and social assessments 

Implementation Studies (U.S. Water Resources into water resource studies and actions to 

Council) ensure compliance with NEPA.

1984 National Social Sciences Manual (USDA Soil Describes best practices for USDA actions 

Conservation Service) requiring social and economic impact 

 assessments under NEPA.
32 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 

1986 [Revised] Regulations Implementing the Clarifies the treatment of incomplete or 

Procedural Provisions of the National unavailable information in assessments.

Environmental Policy Act [40 CFR 1501-1508] 

(Council on Environmental Quality)

1987 Environmental Impact and Related Procedures Provides administrative guidance for 

[23 CFR 771] (Federal Highway Administration) assessments required by NEPA and federal 

 highway mandates.

1987 Civil Rights Restoration Act Clarifies Title VI of the Civil Rights Act to 

 cover all programs and activities of federal-aid 

 recipients, sub-recipients, and contractors, 

 whether or not the programs and activities 

 are federally funded.

1990 Americans with Disabilities Act Recognizes and protects the civil rights of 

 people with disabilities and is modeled after 

 earlier landmark laws prohibiting discrimina-

 tion on the basis of race and gender.

1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act: Provides conditions and authorization for flow 

Federal Compliance with Right to Know Laws of federal highway revenue to states for roads, 

and Pollution Prevention Requirements transit, ferries, and other transportation purposes.

[Executive Order 12856]

1994 Farmland Protection Policy Act (1981), as Minimizes the extent to which Federal 

amended [7 CFR 658] activities contribute to the converstion of 

 agricultural land to non-agricultural uses, and 

 seeks to ensure the federal policies are 

 administered in a way that will be compatible 

 with state, local, and private policies that 

 protect farmland.

1994 Federal Actions to Address Environmental Required assessments of actions to ensure 

Justice in Minority Populations and Low- equity in the treatment of minority populations 

Income Populations [Executive Order 12898] and low-income populations relative to the 

 treatment of the population as a whole.

1995 Small Business Regulatory Fairness Act Amended the Regulatory Flexibility Act to 

 permit judicial review of agency assessments 

 and actions.

1997 Protection of Children from Environmental Health Necessitates EPA evaluation of any rule which 

Risks and Safety Risks [Executive Order 13045] is 1) deemed to be “economically significant” 

 (as per EO 12866) and 2) concerns an environ-

 mental health or safety risk that the EPA has 

 reason to believe may have a disproportionate 

 effect on children.
2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS 33

1997 Considering Cumulative Effects Under the Provides guidance on the assessment of the 

National Environmental Policy Act (Council cumulative effects of related actions on a 

on Environmental Quality) community or population over time.

2000 Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Establishes consultation and collaboration with 

Governments [Executive Order 13175] tribal officials in the development of Federal 

 policies that have tribal implications and to 

 reduces the imposition of unfunded mandates 

 upon Native American tribes.

2000 Treasury and General Government Requires federal agencies to publish guidelines 

Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2001, for ensuring and maximizing the quality, 

Section 515 [Public Law 106-554] objectivity, utility, and integrity of information

 (including statistical information) disseminated 

 by them. These guidelines also include 

 procedures allowing affected persons to seek 

 and obtain correction of information main-

 tained and disseminated by federal agencies. 

2000 Marine Protected Areas (Executive Strengthens the management, protection, and 

Order 13158] conservation of existing marine protected 

 areas, establishes new or expanded MPAs, 

 and develops a scientifically based, 

 comprehensive national system of MPAs 

 representing diverse U.S. marine ecosystems 

 and the Nation’s natural and cultural resources.

2001 Actions Concerning Regulations that Significantly Requires the preparation of a Statement of 

Affect Energy Supply, Distribution, or Use Energy Effects by agencies whose actions 

[Executive Order 13211] have adverse effects on energy supply, 

 distribution, or use, including reasonable 

 alternatives.

2002 Proper Consideration of Small Entities in Requires that the potential impacts of federal 

Agency Rulemaking [Executive Order 13272] agencies’ draft rules upon small businesses, 

 small governmental jurisdictions, and small 

 organizations be properly considered during 

 the rulemaking process. 

Appendix D.

Strategy Development Process Details
36 2003 SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH STRATEGY FOR MARINE PROTECTED AREAS

Appendix D. Strategy 

Development Process Details

Pacific Coast MPA Science and Coordination Workshop. The National MPA Center hosted the Pacific Coast 

MPA Science and Coordination Workshop on July 31 and 

August 1, 2001, in Monterey, California. One of the four 

breakout groups focused on identifying priority needs 

and information gaps regarding the human dimensions 

of MPAs on the Pacific Coast of the United States. This 

group called for the development of a national social science research strategy for MPAs.

Social Science Research Planning Team. In October 

2001, the MPA Social Science Planning Team was 

created. This team, consisting of representatives from 

across NOAA, Duke University and the University of 

California, Santa Cruz, worked together to plan, design 

and write the strategy.

MPA Social Science Workshop. The National MPA 

Center, in partnership with Duke University, the University of California, Santa Cruz, and the Canadian 

Department of Fisheries and Oceans, hosted the MPA 

Social Science Workshop from April 8 to 9, 2002 in 

Monterey, California. Approximately 75 invited social 

scientists, as well as MPA practitioners, policy-makers 

and stakeholders from across the United States and 

Canada, were convened for this two-day facilitated 

workshop. The goal of the workshop was to identify 

and prioritize economic, social and cultural aspects 

of MPA information needs as the foundation of the 

national strategy. The participants were divided into 

six groups to concentrate on six themes: economics 

of MPAs; use patterns; attitudes, perceptions and beliefs; governance and institutional structures; community organization; and cultural heritage and resources. 

Participants identified priority research topics in MPA 

design and management, identified and scoped out key 

projects to address these research topics, and identified 

tools and mechanisms for completing projects. The 

workshop ended with a large group session in which 

all of the participants worked to identify issues and 

needs that cut across all of the themes. The workshop 

notes, which include the list of workshop participants, 

are published on www.mpa.gov.

Draft Strategy. Using the results of the MPA Workshop 

as a starting point, the MPA Social Science Planning 

team met at Duke University Marine Lab in Beaufort, 

North Carolina from June 10 to 11, 2002, to develop a 

detailed outline of the Social Science Research Strategy.

Review of Draft Strategy by NOAA Staff and External Experts. The draft Social Science Research Strategy was made available for public review from March 

to April 2003. The document was also shared with all 

MPA Social Science Workshop participants as well as 

other key individuals. After the review period closed, the 

feedback was considered and incorporated into the final 

Social Science Research Strategy by the planning team. 

The final strategy is available on www.mpa.gov.

Next Steps. The final MPA Social Science Research 

Strategy is being used to guide a series of focused regional workshops to identify more specific regional priorities, develop necessary capacity, and fully integrate 

the social sciences in MPA planning and management 

on a relevant scale.
Notes
Notes

mpa.gov