Value Generating Practices: an investigation with ethnoconservation in Protected Areas in Northeastern Brazil

Práticas de Geração de Valor: uma investigação com etnoconservação em Áreas Protegidas no nordeste brasileiro

Abstract

Value Generation Practices (VGPs) in Protected Areas (PAs) represent socio-environmental uses carried out by different people, which may benefit local residents or the natural areas themselves. This study aims to understand the profile of tropical PAs by identifying VGPs and producing information of public interest. The methodology was based on the Protected Area Asset Framework proposed by Jepson et al. (2017), which supported the development of a questionnaire applied to eight Environmental Protection Areas in the state of Alagoas, Brazil. The respondents identified activities carried out within their areas. A total of 72 VGPs were recorded, varying according to ecosystem-specific characteristics. The highest number of practices (44) was observed in the Costa dos Corais, followed by Marituba do Peixe (40), Pratagy (37), Serra da Caiçara (34), Catolé and Fernão Velho (32), Piaçabuçu (31), Murici (29), and Santa Rita (25). Similarity analysis indicated that Santa Rita differed from the other areas, whereas Murici, Serra da Caiçara, Costa dos Corais, and Piaçabuçu showed a similarity of practices of ≥70%. The development of a questionnaire that integrates different types of practices conducted in natural areas contributes to a diversified methodological approach to understanding people–nature relationships, fostering environmental valuation and conservation.

Keywords:
conservation units; environmental management; socio-environmental uses; tropical areas; natural resources

Resumo

As Práticas de Geração de Valor (PGVs) em Áreas Protegidas (APs) representam usos socioambientais realizados por diferentes atores, podendo beneficiar tanto as populações locais quanto a própria natureza. Este estudo tem como objetivo compreender o perfil de Áreas Protegidas tropicais por meio da identificação das PGVs e da produção de informações de interesse público. A Estruturação de ativos em Áreas Protegidas proposto por Jepson et al. (2017), subsidiou o desenvolvimento do questionário aplicado a oito Áreas de Proteção Ambiental no estado de Alagoas, Brasil. Foram registradas 72 PGVs de acordo com as características específicas de cada ecossistema. O maior número de práticas (44) foi observado na Costa dos Corais, seguida por Marituba do Peixe (40), Pratagy (37), Serra da Caiçara (34), Catolé e Fernão Velho (32), Piaçabuçu (31), Murici (29) e Santa Rita (25). A análise de similaridade indicou que Santa Rita apresentou maior diferenciação em relação às demais áreas, enquanto Murici, Serra da Caiçara, Costa dos Corais e Piaçabuçu apresentaram similaridade de práticas ≥70%. O desenvolvimento de um questionário que integra diferentes tipos de práticas realizadas em áreas naturais contribui para uma abordagem metodológica diversificada na compreensão das relações entre sociedade e natureza, promovendo a valorização ambiental e a conservação.

Palavras-chave:
unidades de conservação; gestão ambiental; usos socioambientais; áreas tropicais; recursos naturais

1. Introduction

The establishment of Protected Areas is one of the main strategies for conserving ecosystem services (Symes et al., 2016; Petersson and Stoett, 2022). In recent decades, the extent of terrestrial and marine protected areas has increased due to international conservation agreements, making biodiversity protection an increasingly prominent issue in environmental policies (Watson et al., 2014; Bibi et al., 2024). Each country has its own legislation for the establishment and protection of Protected Areas. In Brazil, according to the National System of Nature Conservation Units (Brasil, 2000), Protected Areas are classified into two groups: Full Protection Areas, in which the direct use of natural resources is prohibited; and Sustainable Use Areas, where direct use of resources is permitted, provided it is carried out in a sustainable manner, considering present and future generations.

One way to justify the existence and maintenance of Protected Areas is through the identification and valuation of their characteristics, forms of use, and tangible and intangible values (Caldecott and Jepson, 2014; Resende et al., 2017; Periotto and Tundisi 2018; Hendarto and Yuniwati, 2024). By reassessing the attributes present in Protected Areas using the Protected Area Asset Framework, it is possible to classify the goods and resources found in natural spaces into five spatial natural assets: biophysical, infrastructure, human, institutional, and cultural. In addition, this framework allows for the identification of Value Generation Practices and the Values associated with these assets (Jepson et al., 2017; Gamarra et al., 2019).

By linking the three pillars of the Asset Framework proposed by Jepson et al. (2017), Value Generation Practices consist of different forms of use of natural spaces. These practices are carried out by social actors using the natural assets of Protected Areas. Such assets, which include natural, cultural, and social resources, are managed through these practices and generate multiple benefits. The ‘value’ resulting from these practices can be captured in different ways by various beneficiary groups: through improved income generation for entrepreneurs, leisure opportunities for tourists, enhanced well-being and quality of life for residents communities, or benefits to the Protected Area itself, which gains ecological advantages, such as improved air quality and increased species richness and abundance, through the of conservation practices, including the restoration of degraded areas (Gamarra et al., 2019; Lessa et al., 2021).

The values framework developed by Paul Jepson et al. (2017) results from a convergence between environmentalism, ecological economics, and relational value theory, formulated within the historical context of conservation policies. This framework offers a comprehensive approach that can help ensure political and social legitimacy, demonstrating the capacity of Protected Areas to generate a wide range of benefits (tangible and intangible) over the long term (Bragagnolo et al., 2021). Regarding Relational Value Theory, it is grounded in environmental ethics and socio-environmental sciences, proposing that the value of nature lies not only in ‘nature itself’ (intrinsic value) nor solely in ‘what it provides to humans’ (instrumental value), but also in the relationships that people build with the environment to which they belong (Chan et al., 2016).

Based on these considerations, this study aimed to present a questionnaire to analyze and understand the profile of tropical Protected Areas by identifying the Value Generation Practices currently in place and producing information of public interest that may contribute to planning and decision-making processes. In addition, the study sought to test the hypothesis that ecosystem characteristics are determining factors for the similarity of Value Generation Practices among the Environmental Protection Areas in the state of Alagoas, Brazil.

2 Methodology

2.1. Study area

This study adopts a qualitative and quantitative approach, with a descriptive and analytical nature in Protection Areas in the state of Alagoas, Brazil. Protection Areas in the state of Alagoas, Brazil. This category of Protected Area is established under Brazilian legislation through the National System of Nature Conservation Units (Brasil, 2000) and is characterized by tropical natural areas with different forms of socio-environmental use. The studied areas included the Environmental Protected Areas (in portuguese “Área de Proteção Ambiental - APA”). The areas are: APA Murici, APA Santa Rita, APA Catolé and Fernão Velho, APA Serra da Caiçara, APA Pratagy, APA Marituba do Peixe, APA Costa dos Corais, and APA Piaçabuçu. The ecosystem characteristics of each Protected Area were described based on the book “Alagoas: Unidades de Conservação” by Oliveira et al. (2020) (Table 1). Furthermore, the study areas are located within an important region of the Pernambuco Endemism Center.

Table 1
Summary of the sampled Environmental Protection Areas in the state of Alagoas.

PAs (APAs)	Area (ha)	Year of establishment	Year of management plan approval	Biomes	IUCN typology	Ecosystem characteristics
Catolé e Fernão Velho	3,817	1992	2021	Atlantic Forest	T1.1	Forest remnants on coastal plateaus (tabuleiros), water bodies, and lagoon areas with mangroves.
Costa dos Corais	405,629.99	1997	2013	Coastal marine	M1.1	The largest extent of coastal coral reefs in the country, mangrove areas, and beaches with restinga vegetation.
Marituba do Peixe	18,600	1988	2006	Atlantic Forest	TF1.2	Riparian forests associated with water bodies and floodplains, with a shallow water table, forming the Marituba floodplain.
Murici	132,833	1997	–	Atlantic Forest	T1.1	Forest remnants on plateaus and mountain ranges, with water bodies and waterfall formations.
Piaçabuçu	9,107.01	1983	2010	Coastal marine	MT2.1	Mobile dunes with natural lagoons formed by rainfall and groundwater level rise, as well as estuarine areas and beaches with restinga vegetation.
Pratagy	2,.417.51	1998	–	Atlantic Forest and Coastal marine	T1.1	Forest remnants with water bodies, forest patches along plateau edges, and a small mangrove area near the mouth of the Pratagy River.
Santa Rita	10,230	1984	2022	Atlantic Forest and Coastal marine	MFT1.2	Forest remnants with water bodies, islands, estuaries, mangroves, and reef platforms forming along the shoreline.
Serra da Caiçara	103,290.77	2022	–	Caatinga and Atlantic Forest	T1.3	Includes mountainous areas of the Alagoas hinterland, representing an ecotone between the Caatinga and Atlantic Forest biomes, with features of wet environments, water bodies, and waterfall formations.

The selection of these areas (Figure 1) was based on environmental diversity and multiple forms of use, encompassing different biomes and ecosystems such as the Atlantic Forest, marine and lagoon environments, restinga, mangroves, and Caatinga (semi-arid region). Additional information was collected to further characterize these Protected Areas. Referred to as ‘Informative Characteristics of the PAs’, complementary information including geographic area, year of establishment, presence or absence of management plans, biomes, and ecosystem characteristics was also collected.

Figure 1
Geographic distribution of the Environmental Protection Areas of Alagoas. Legend: Six Environmental Protection Areas at the state level: (1) APA Serra da Caiçara; (2) APA Marituba do Peixe; (3) APA Catolé and Fernão Velho; (4) APA Santa Rita; (5) APA Murici; and (6) APA Pratagy. Two Environmental Protection Areas at the federal level: (1) APA Costa dos Corais; and (2) APA Piaçabuçu. Source: Authors, 2025.

2.2. Identification of value generation practices

To identify Value Generating Practices, a questionnaire was developed using the Asset Framework methodology (Figure 2) proposed by Jepson et al. (2017). This questionnaire was applied to managers of Environmental Protection Areas in the state of Alagoas, Brazil.

Figure 2
Schematic representation of the Asset Framework for Protected Areas based on Jepson et al. (2017). Source: Adapted from Jepson et al. (2017).

The list of Value Generating Practices included in the questionnaire was developed based on a literature review of articles related to public use in tropical Protected Areas, consultations of digital environmental platforms (Management Analysis and Monitoring System – SAMGe; Instituto Socioambiental – ISA), and the management plans of those PAs for which this management instrument was available.

The search for scientific articles was conducted using the Scopus and Web of Science databases through the CAPES Periodicals Portal, applying a filter for articles in the field of Environmental Science and using the following keywords: ‘Uses’, ‘Natural Resources’, ‘Public Use’, ‘Protected Area’, ‘Conservation Units’, ‘Land Use’, ‘Environmental Activities’, ‘Environmental Practices’, and ‘Ecosystem Services’. Searches on the SAMGe and ISA platforms were carried out by selecting Protected Areas through the search tools available on the respective websites. Based on the available material, a preliminary list of socio-environmental activities practiced by different stakeholders of Protected Areas was developed, including residents, entrepreneurs, researchers, students, tourists, and the managers themselves. The list comprises activities to be assessed as either value-generating or not. The questionnaire also collected information on managers’ professional experience, academic background, length of time managing the current Protected Area, their perceptions of what is necessary to prevent or reduce high-impact activities, and factors that could improve their working conditions.

The list of practices was organized in a manner similar to the forms of use described in the analyzed management plans, into categories such as commercial activities, educational activities, management activities, leisure, sports and recreational activities, and activities related to the use of natural resources. A total of 72 activities were identified, for which managers were asked to indicate whether they perceived each practice as:

1. The practice does not occur in the Protected Area;

2. The occurrence of the practice is not recognized;

3. The occurrence of the practice is recognized, but not its potential to generate value;

4. The practice is recognized as a Value Generating Prectices.

Further explanation of what each category means: (1): The practice simply does not occur within the boundaries of that Protected Area. (2): Refers to an information gap—the practice may be occurring, but managers have no evidence or knowledge of its existence. (3): In these cases, the practice exists but is often interpreted by management as a socio-environmental pressure rather than a benefit. (4): Full recognition that the activity generates tangible or intangible benefits. These may include income generation, recreation, community well-being, or ecological advantages for the Protected Area itself.

Regarding the authorizations required to conduct the research, prior to initiating interviews with managers of Environmental Protection Areas, the project was submitted to the Plataforma Brasil system for review by the Ethics Committee of the Federal University of Alagoas. Following submission, the study was approved under the no. 76261223.9.0000.5013. This study was also authorized by the Biodiversity Authorization and Information System (SISBIO no. 93877-1). Participants were provided with a Free and Informed Consent Form, and managers were informed that they could withdraw from the study at any time without any consequences.

The interviews were conducted between May 27 and July 10, 2024. Interviews with managers of state-level Environmental Protection Areas were conducted in person at the Alagoas Environment Institute (IMA), located in the city of Maceió. The manager of the APA Piaçabuçu was interviewed in person at the ICMBio headquarters in the municipality of Piaçabuçu, while the manager of the APA Costa dos Corais was interviewed remotely via the Google Meet platform due to scheduling constraints.

2.3. Data analysis

Based on the questionnaire responses, a graph was generated ranking, in descending order, the Protected Areas (PAs) with the highest number of Value Generating Practices recognized by management. A presence–absence matrix was constructed to compare PAs according to shared practices. Similarity was assessed using the Dice–Sørensen index, and a dendrogram was generated using UPGMA (Unweighted Pair Group Method with Arithmetic Mean) to group PAs based on similarity. Analyses were performed in PAST version 4.17 (Hammer et al., 2001). The Dice–Sørensen index ranges from 0 to 1 and considers the number of practices shared between two sets:

0 = no shared items;

1 = completely identical sets.

To assess the effect of managerial and historical informational characteristics of each Protected Area on the number of perceived Value Generating Practices, a generalized linear model (GLM) with a Poisson distribution was fitted (Crawley, 2012). In this model, the number of Value Generation Practices of each environmental protection area was used as the response variable, while the presence of a management plan, the presence of an active management council, the year of establishment of the Protected Area, and the frequency of monitoring in the PAs were included as predictor variables.

To evaluate the effect of managers’ characteristics on the number of Value Generating Practices identified in each PA, a second generalized linear model with a Poisson distribution was also constructed (Crawley, 2012). In this case, the number of Value Generating Practices of each environmental protection area was included as the response variable, and managers’ education level, tenure in the current management position, months of experience in environmental management, and previous experience as managers of Protected Areas were used as predictor variables.

To evaluate the effect of the informative characteristics of the EPAs on the composition of Value Generation Practices, a distance-based linear model (DistLM) was applied (Legendre and Anderson, 1999; McArdle and Anderson, 2001). For this model, a similarity matrix of Value Generating Practices among PAs was constructed based on the Jaccard distance (Legendre, 2012), and the presence of a management plan, the presence of an active management council, the year of establishment of the Environmental Protection Area, and monitoring frequency were included as predictor variables.

The distance-based linear model (DistLM) was used to assess the composition of Value Generating Practices in each PA; however, in this case, managers’ education level, tenure in the current management position, months of experience in environmental management, and previous experience as managers of Protected Areas were used as predictor variables. For the distance-based linear models, the adonis2 function from the vegan package was used (Oksanen et al., 2024). All analyses were conducted in the R environment (R Core Team, 2023).

Finally, managers’ perceptions regarding measures to reduce negative activities and factors that could improve their working conditions were organized into a word cloud, allowing the identification of the most frequently mentioned terms by managers. This analysis resulted in a hierarchical list of the most recurrent words for both questions, using WordClouds.com.

3. Results

A marked contrast was observed among the Protection Areas regarding the proportion of identified Value Generating Practices. Costa dos Corais presented the highest percentage (61%), followed by Marituba do Peixe (56%) and Pratagy (51%). In contrast, Santa Rita showed substantially lower recognition, with only 34% of practices identified (Figure 3), indicating considerable variation among the areas.

Figure 3
Number of identified Value Generating Practices (VGPs). Legend: Number of Value Generating Practices (VGPs) and corresponding codes for the Environmental Protection Areas of Alagoas. CC - Costa dos Corais; MP - Marituba do Peixe; PTG - Pratagy; SC - Serra da Caiçara; CFV - Catolé e Fernão Velho; PÇÇ - Piaçabuçu; MC - Murici; SR - Santa Rita.

The practices commonly recognized by managers are presented in Tables 2 and 3. Considering all eight PAs analyzed, seven Value Generating Practices were identified as shared among them. The six state-level PAs (administered by IMA) presented nine practices in common. In contrast, the two marine PAs (administered by ICMBio) shared 26 Value Generating Practices (Table 3).

Table 2
Value Generating Practices common to all PAs and to the state-level PAs.

Practices common to all eight PAs	Practices common to the state-level PAs
Academic research on biotic and abiotic factors Law enforcement activities Monitoring	Academic research on biotic and abiotic factors
	Field classes (field-based teaching activities)
	Environmental education activities
	Law enforcement activities
Conducting environmental studies for companies/industries	Monitoring
	Conducting environmental studies for companies/industries
	Staff and/or management council meetings
	Landscape appreciation
Staff and/or management council meetings	Enjoying sunny days
Landscape appreciation
Enjoying sunny day

Table 3
Value Generating Practices common to the two marine federal PAs.

Value Generating Practices shared by the federal PAs
Academic research on biotic and abiotic factors;	Meetings with local politicians;
Ecotourism activities;	Outsourcing services to third parties;
Lectures and presentations related to the PA;	Staff training activities;
Surfing classes;	Surfing activities;
Wildlife observation and photography;	Outdoor running;
Data collection for research purposes;	Landscape appreciation;
Law enforcement activities;	Sea, waterfall, river, and lagoon bathing;
Monitoring;	Religious practices;
Conducting environmental studies for companies/industries;	Walking/leisure strolling;
Staff and/or management council meetings;	Hiking;
Trail construction or maintenance;	Visiting natural or historical monuments and/or infrastructure facilities;
Construction or repair of headquarters facilities or lodging;	Enjoying sunny days;
Meetings with leaders of community associations.	Shellfish harvesting.

Based on managers’ perceptions, the primary practices responsible for most of the financial value generation in each PA were identified. In addition, other secondary economic value generating practices occurring within these natural areas were described (Table 4).

Table 4
Primary and secondary economic value generating practices as perceived by management.

PAs (APAs).	Primary	Secondary
Santa Rita	Tourism	Fishing;
		Agriculture.
Pratagy	Agriculture	Fishing;
		Tourism.
Murici	Agriculture	Agriculture.
Marituba do Peixe	Fishing	Non-timber forest products extraction;
		Real estate speculation.
Catolé e Fernão Velho	Water abstraction	Agriculture;
		Fishing;
		Tourism;
		Livestock farming;
		Commerce in the urban area.
Serra da Caiçara	Agriculture	Livestock farming;
		Produção de carvão (ilegal).
Costa dos Corais	Tourism	Fishing;
		Agriculture.
Piaçabuçu	Tourism	Fishing

Other practices included in the questionnaire received different interpretations regarding their occurrence in the Protected Areas. For example, ‘Diving’ was identified as a Value Generation Practice only in the Costa dos Corais PA. In contrast, in the state-level EPAs and in the Piaçabuçu PA, diving either does not occur or is not recognized as a value-generating practice. ‘Beach bonfire gatherings (luau)’ were another practice not recognized as value-generating in five state-level PAs, but perceived as important for value generation in the Serra da Caiçara PA. Among the federal marine PAs, the only practice for which managers reported no knowledge of occurrence was aquaculture.

Practices identified as occurring within the PAs but not recognized as value-generating were interpreted by managers as socio-environmental pressures, thereby becoming targets for law enforcement and/or monitoring. Practices with this characteristic in common among the areas were ‘Barbecuing and drinking’ and ‘Livestock farming’, both interpreted as pressures in five state-level PAs. In the federal PAs, the number of practices perceived as pressures was higher, including the sale of handicrafts, the sale of food and beverages, the sale of products to tourists, the rental of recreational equipment, sport hunting, and barbecuing and drinking.

The dendrogram constructed according to the similarity analysis of Value Generating Practices among the Protected Areas revealed different groups (Figure 4). Group A includes only the Santa Rita PA. Group B is subdivided into several subgroups. Subgroup B1 is composed exclusively of the Marituba do Peixe PA. Subgroup B2 presents additional subdivisions. Subgroup B2.1 is divided into two parts: the first includes the Pratagy PA (B2.1.1), while the second corresponds to subgroup B2.1.2, which includes two additional PAs. Within this subdivision, B2.1.2.1 comprises the Murici PA and the Serra da Caiçara PA, whereas B2.1.2.2 corresponds to the Catolé and Fernão Velho PA, which forms an individual cluster. Subgroup B2.2 is composed exclusively of the Costa dos Corais and Piaçabuçu Protection Areas, presenting a similarity of 70%. However, the subgroup with the highest similarity was formed by the Murici and Serra da Caiçara PAs, with a similarity greater than 80%.

Figure 4
Dendrogram of similarity of Value Generating Practices among Environmental Protection Areas. Legend: Number of Value Generation Practices (VGPs) and corresponding codes for the Environmental Protection Areas of Alagoas. CC - Costa dos Corais; MP - Marituba do Peixe; PTG - Pratagy; SC - Serra da Caiçara; CFV - Catolé e Fernão Velho; PÇÇ - Piaçabuçu; MC - Murici; SR - Santa Rita.

The data encompass different aspects related to the professional profile of the managers and the management of the studied Protection Areas (Table 5). In addition, the dataset includes the frequency with which monitoring of conflicting activities occurs within these natural areas. The results indicate that, in certain PAs, the observed monitoring frequency shows similarities, revealing common patterns of inspection and monitoring.

Table 5
Informational characteristics of the questionnaire related to the management of Environmental Protection Areas in Alagoas.

Management Characteristics / PAs of Alagoas	Education Level	Field of Study	Years of Experience in Environmental Management	Time as a Manager in the Current PA?	Previous Experience in Protected Area Management	Frequency of Monitoring of Conflicting Activities
Apa Santa Rita	Master’s degree	Geography	12 years	2 months	yes	Every 15 days
Apa Pratagy	Bachelor’s degree	Geography	7 months	7 months	no	Every 15 days
Apa Murici	Bachelor’s degree	Biological Sciences	4 months	4 months	no	Once a week
Apa Marituba do Peixe	Bachelor’s degree	Forestry Engineering	1.5 years	1.5 years	no	Once a week
Apa Catolé e Fernão Velho	PhD	Geosciences	7 years	4 months	no	Every 15 days
Apa Serra da Caiçara	Master’s degree	Geography	1 year and 4 months	1 year and 4 months	no	Every 15 days
Apa Costa dos Corais	Master’s degree	Oceanography	22 years	14 years	yes	Every 15 days
Apa Piaçabuçu	Bachelor’s degree	Law	40 years	1 year	yes	Almost every day

Regarding monitoring frequency, the questionnaire included questions about how regularly managers are present in the PAs under their administration and whether the local community perceives this presence as accessible or not. The managers reported that, in four PAs (APA Murici, APA Catolé and APA Fernão Velho, APA Serra da Caiçara, and APA Costa dos Corais), the local community is partially satisfied with the presence of management in the area. In contrast, managers from the other four PAs (APA Santa Rita, APA Pratagy, APA Marituba do Peixe, and APA Piaçabuçu) reported that the local community is not satisfied with their presence in the protected areas.

Regarding the effects of the informative characteristics of the Protected Areas and the managers’ characteristics on Value Generating Practices, the linear models showed that neither the informative characteristics of the natural areas (d.f. = 3; p = 0,78) nor the managers’ characteristics (d.f. = 2; p = 0,27) influenced the number of Value Generating Practices identified in each studied Protection Area. Similarly, the informative characteristics of the PAs (d.f. = 3; F = 1,0193; p = 0,4385) and the managers’ characteristics (d.f. = 5, F = 1,8218; p = 0,074) were also not good predictors of the composition of the Value Generating Practices identified in each PA.

Managers’ responses related to the need to avoid or reduce activities identified as negative, as well as possible ways to improve their working conditions, were represented in the word cloud shown in Figure 5. The responses were similar both across the questions and among the managers, highlighting the need for greater inspection, monitoring, transportation, and resources, in addition to other demands.

Figure 5
Word cloud representing the perceptions of managers of Environmental Protection Areas in Alagoas regarding management needs and improvements. Source: Prepared by the author, 2024.

4. Discussion

The similarity analysis indicated that areas sharing biophysical characteristics tended to have a greater number of common practices, regardless of geographic location or administrative level. For example, APA Murici and APA Serra da Caiçara showed more than 80% similarity in their VGPs. Although they belong to different biomes (Atlantic Forest and Caatinga, respectively), they share environmental characteristics such as mountainous relief and water bodies, which may be associated with common practices related to ecotourism and environmental education. The marine APA Costa dos Corais and APA Piaçabuçu also show high similarity (70%) due to their coastal environment, highlighting tourism and fishing as shared practices. The hypothesis is further supported by the isolation of the APA Santa Rita in the similarity dendrogram, due to its unique lagoon characteristics (the Mundaú–Manguaba complex), and by the APA Marituba do Peixe, which stands out due to its extensive floodplain areas and specific agribusiness dynamics (Oliveira et al., 2020). The Value Generating Practices shared by the eight Protection Areas are mostly related to management activities, such as inspection and monitoring; educational practices, including the development of environmental studies; meetings with staff members or the management council; as well as activities associated with leisure and recreation, such as landscape appreciation and enjoying sunny days. Recreational and sports leisure includes practices such as walking, hiking, soccer, volleyball, swimming, among other outdoor physical and playful activities aimed at relaxation and the use of free time (Román-Pintos et al., 2016). During their implementation, these practices do not involve the direct use of natural resources, as established by the Brazilian National System of Conservation Units (Brasil, 2000). Investing in such practices contributes to more effective and targeted management, as they add value both to the management itself and to the Protected Areas (Ardoin et al., 2020).

The PAs protected at the state level recognized two additional Value Generating Practices in common: the organization of field classes and the development of environmental education activities. The presence of these two additional practices among state-level PAs highlights an emphasis on the promotion of educational actions. Moreover, this pattern may indicate a strengthened commitment to environmental education and the dissemination of conservation knowledge, promoting greater community engagement and contributing to long-term sustainability (Carvalho et al., 2021).The number of Value Generating Practices identified as common to the two PAs protected at the federal level was considerable, totaling 26 practices. This result indicates a greater convergence of practices carried out in these two PAs, reflecting the ecosystem similarity between them, particularly because both areas are located within marine–coastal environments. The APA Costa dos Corais and APA Piaçabuçu present 70% similarity, forming the second largest group of Protected Areas with shared practices, especially those related to tourism, fishing, and environmental management.

The studied Protected Areas of Alagoas exhibit a diversity of primary and secondary economic practices that contribute to local income generation, including tourism, agriculture, and fishing. In the case of tourism, this activity stands out as a primary practice in several PAs, including APA Santa Rita, APA Costa dos Corais, and APA Piaçabuçu. Furthermore, according to the Brazilian Navy (Marinha do Brasil, 2022), prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, coastal Protected Areas reached record numbers of visitors. However, the practice of “barbecuing and drinking” associated with tourism activities, was widely perceived by managers as a socio-environmental pressure. Some of the main negative impacts include excessive solid waste generation, soil and vegetation degradation, noise pollution and disturbance to wildlife (Santana et al., 2025).

All areas with management plans mention ‘disordered tourism’; however, only the APA Costa dos Corais and APA Piaçabuçu explicitly characterize the practice of ‘barbecuing and drinking’ as prohibited. According to the management plan of the APA Costa dos Corais, it is stated that ‘the consumption of food and beverages in the natural pools of the reef environment, as well as the disposal of waste in this environment, is prohibited.’ Similarly, the management plan of the APA Piaçabuçu establishes, under its general regulations, the ‘prohibition of the use of barbecues within the unit’ (ICMBio, 2010, 2021). The act of traveling to a tourist destination and failing to respect the rules of that environment may be characterized as disordered tourism (Araújo, 2008). Studies indicate that the adoption of sustainable tourism practices, such as establishing visitation limits and implementing environmental education programs for tourists, plays a fundamental role in mitigating environmental impacts (Scheyvens and Hughes, 2019). Furthermore, the development of sustainable tourism models, such as ecotourism, has proven to be an effective strategy for reconciling environmental conservation with local socioeconomic development (Baloch et al., 2023). In APA Pratagy and APA Catolé and Fernão Velho, tourism is considered a secondary practice, even though APA Pratagy includes a coastal portion within its geographical area. The predominance of remaining Atlantic Forest in these areas shapes a type of visitation that differs from the “mass tourism” typically associated with coastal zones. Therefore, water provision and agricultural practices play a central role in the local socioeconomic dynamics of these areas (Oliveira et al., 2020).

Within the context of primary practices, agriculture and fishing are the predominant economic activities in PAs such as APA Pratagy, APA Murici, APA Marituba do Peixe, and APA Serra da Caiçara. Although these practices are closely related to the subsistence of local communities, they coexist with large-scale industries in the region, such as sugarcane, coconut, and corn production (Oliveira et al., 2020). Despite their importance to the local economy, these activities may compromise the sustainability of natural resources when practiced intensively or inappropriately, and may be recognized by managers either as primary and secondary value-generating practices or as environmental pressures (Almaliki et al., 2023; Rocha et al., 2025). Identifying the intensity of these activities reinforces the need for greater investment in management practices to ensure that inspection and monitoring actions are effective in preventing the overexploitation of natural resources. In this context, participatory management can play a key role, particularly where the presence of protected area managers is not fully accepted by local communities. The active involvement of local producers in management processes can strengthen their sense of belonging, foster collaboration, and promote greater community engagement with conservation efforts. A successful example is the community-based management of pirarucu (Arapaima gigas), in which local participation is well established (Gonçalves and Santos 2024). Artisanal fishing is spatially associated with marine protected areas; information on fishing activities can contribute to planning, regulation, and participatory management (Amorim and Monteiro-Neto, 2016).

The involvement of local communities in the management of Protected Areas has proven to be an effective strategy for aligning economic interests with conservation goals, promoting participatory and inclusive governance (Kremen and Merenlender, 2018; Naidoo et al., 2019). Santos et al. (2021) emphasize the importance of continuous environmental education, proposing a permanent and collective model aimed at fostering environmentally aware citizens capable of addressing environmental challenges. This model integrates educational practices into daily school routines, including waste management, community gardens, and interaction between students and nature, thereby promoting continuous learning networks that support ecological problem-solving.

Practices perceived as socio-environmental pressures were common across the studied areas. One example is sport-related activities involving wildlife. According to Article 2 of the Wildlife Protection Law (Law No. 5,197/67), professional hunting is prohibited; however, hunting remains a culturally widespread activity in the country, even when viewed negatively (Bragagnolo et al., 2019). Nevertheless, despite being considered a socio-environmental pressure, hunting practices are still common in Protected Areas, such as Brazilian National Parks, due to traditional cultural practices, even though they have been illegal since 1967 under the Wildlife Protection Law (Almeida, 2021; Rocha et al., 2025). Illegal practices are common and require constant inspection and monitoring. Hunting occurs illegally in most PAs in Alagoas, in addition to the presence of illegal charcoal trade in the APA Serra da Caiçara. The use of technologies such as remote sensing, monitoring cameras, drones, and geoprocessing systems enables more accurate and efficient monitoring of protected areas, (Buchman et al., 2023). However, the lack of investment for implementing these resources has been pointed out by managers of these natural areas.

APA Santa Rita was the most isolated group in the similarity dendrogram, reflecting its lower number of shared Value Generating Practices with the other Protected Areas. This distinctiveness is closely related to its unique biophysical asset, the Mundaú–Manguaba lagoon complex and its islands, which supports local tourism, particularly boat tours such as the “Route of Lagoons and Islands,” considered unique in the region (Wanderley et al., 2020). Therefore, APA Santa Rita illustrates how a specific biophysical asset can shape a Protected Area’s identity and be transformed into a distinctive tourism attraction.On the other hand, despite this characteristic representing a positive potential, APA Santa Rita exhibited the lowest level of recognition of Value Generating Practices (only 34%) among all the studied areas. This suggests that, although tourism is strong in the region, other dimensions (such as educational, scientific, or sustainable management practices capable of generating value) may be underutilized or not properly recognized by management. Other areas, showing more than 70% similarity, includes APA Catolé and Fernão Velho and the APA Pratagy, with over 65% similarity. Common ecosystem characteristics among these Protected Areas include forest remnants with water bodies, tablelands, and mountain ranges, which favor educational tourism and adventure tourism activities, such as ecological trail visits (Oliveira et al., 2020).

The Marituba do Peixe PA stands out as the second Protection Area with the highest number of identified Value Generating Practices. However, the area appears as an isolated group in the similarity dendrogram. This pattern may be related to its unique ecosystem characteristics, such as the presence of extensive floodplains (Oliveira el al., 2020). Agriculture and livestock are predominantly perceived as environmental pressures in other PAs, in the Marituba do Peixe PA these practices are recognized as Value Generating Practices. Marituba do Peixe is the second Protected Area with the highest number of identified Value Generating Practices (40 practices), ranking just behind the Costa dos Corais Protected Area. However, it appears as an isolated group in the similarity dendrogram (Subgroup B1), indicating that the composition of its activities is markedly distinct from the other studied Protected Areas. This may suggest that management recognizes a diverse range of practices that coexist with the conservation objectives of the area. The recognition of these activities as Value Generating Practices in Marituba do Peixe is consistent with the fact that they are deeply rooted in the local socioeconomic dynamics (agribusiness) and are facilitated by the natural conditions of the floodplains, making them integral components of the region’s socio-environmental reality.

Regarding the professional profile, managers of the APAs in Alagoas present a wide range of multidisciplinary academic backgrounds and experience. Although managers’ informational characteristics did not have a significant effect, VGPs varied among protected areas with different ecosystem characteristics, regardless of who the manager was. Although managerial experience is essential for conflict resolution, it alone has not been sufficient to alter the structural configuration of resource use in the studied Protected Areas. Nevertheless, this does not diminish the importance of these factors, as accumulated professional experience and technical knowledge are essential to address challenges such as conflict resolution, implementation of conservation practices, and sustainable management of Protected Areas (Bennett and Dearden2014).

Environmental Protection Areas are widespread and important in Brazil, but they are rarely fully implemented (Santos et al., 2026). The presence of management staff in Protected Areas, for monitoring conflicting activities and conducting administrative tasks, is a fundamental aspect; however, many managers report difficulties in gaining acceptance from local communities. Managers’ perceptions of community acceptance were predominantly negative, with half reporting dissatisfaction and the others indicating only partial acceptance. Local ecological knowledge can contribute to understanding the relationships between communities and natural resources and complement scientific approaches to management (Santos et al., 2025). The inclusion of educational practices in natural areas is widely recognized as essential for conservation success, especially when combined with strengthened inspection and community participation, particularly in sustainable-use areas where interactions between managers and local communities are frequent (Ardoin et al., 2020).

However, local community perceptions of the services provided by Protected Areas are not always immediate or positive. These perceptions vary widely and are influenced by factors such as the level of local participation in decision-making, perceived economic impacts, and the effectiveness of communication between managers and residents (Bennett and Dearden, 2014). Protected Areas that provide tangible benefits to local communities, such as ecotourism opportunities or managed access to natural resources, tend to receive greater support (Petriello et al., 2025). Conversely, the mere existence of a Protected Area, without perceived benefits, may be viewed as an external imposition, creating barriers between local communities and conservation objectives (Petriello et al., 2025). In this context, educational activities are an effective tool to enhance understanding of the importance of Protected Areas and their long-term benefits (Ardoin et al., 2020).

This study highlights the importance of adopting a diversified approach to the study and management of Protected Areas, continuously involving different socio-environmental actors, such as managers, residents, entrepreneurs, and tourists. The development of a questionnaire focused on practices carried out in natural areas provides a diversified methodological approach, enhancing understanding of the relationship between people and natural environments, and promoting their appreciation and conservation. Management strategies should not follow a single standardized model but rather adopt flexible approaches tailored to the ecological, social, and economic specificities of each Protected Area. We recognize that some practices are common across all areas; however, what requires the ‘flexible management’ mentioned in the previous paragraph are the unique practices. All eight Protected Areas share activities such as enforcement, monitoring, and academic research, which could follow a more standardized administrative model. Nevertheless, specific practices require distinct management approaches. For example, the federal Protected Areas (APA Costa dos Corais and APA Piaçabuçu) share 26 Value Generating Practices, with a strong focus on tourism and fishing. In this case, management could be oriented toward public use management and regulation, strengthening environmental education and enforcement. Moreover, due to the greater flow of people, marine natural areas require enhanced protection, particularly through strengthened monitoring and enforcement efforts (Mohammad et al., 2026).

In contrast, in the Atlantic Forest Protected Areas (APA Pratagy and APACatolé and Fernão Velho), management could focus on water security and sustainable rural practices, which differ substantially from marine management. These aspects indicate that standardized management models may fail in Protected Areas with specific characteristics. In APA Marituba do Peixe, agriculture and livestock (agribusiness) are recognized as Value Generating Practices rather than solely as pressures. A flexible management approach should integrate this economic dynamic, and continuous dialogue with farmers may contribute to improved outcomes for the Protected Areas.

This approach can also be applied to APA Santa Rita, which has a unique natural asset that forms part of its cultural identity (the Mundaú–Manguaba lagoon complex) where boat-based tourism (the Route of Lagoons and Islands) is the central practice. In Protected Areas with unique natural assets, strengthening participatory governance and transforming these assets into tangible benefits can enhance local perceptions and support for nature. However, the lack of dialogue between local communities and Protected Area managers remains a common challenge affecting the effectiveness of environmental protection in Brazil. Continuous educational dialogue aimed at environmental awareness is an effective way to overcome these barriers (Silva and Anunciação, 2023).

5. Conclusion

This study demonstrated that Value Generating Practices (VGPs) in Protected Areas in Alagoas are strongly associated with the ecological and socioeconomic characteristics of each area. These findings reinforce the importance of considering the ecological context and the ways in which local communities interact with natural environments when planning and implementing management strategies. In this context, our findings contribute by providing support for the development of management strategies that strengthen the implementation of Value Generating Practices (VGPs) in PAs in Alagoas, reconciling environmental conservation with sustainable development and aligning with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) of the 2030 Agenda. On the other hand, here is a clear need for greater institutional, financial, and technical support to enable management bodies to better perform their administrative functions and ensure that such practices are properly monitored.

The studied Protected Areas encounter practices with economic, ecological, and social value, which hold potential to guide investments. Practices perceived as positive can enhance the capacity to generate value through financial resources, visibility, and environmental awareness. At the same time, similarities and differences among natural areas indicate that there is no single management model, reinforcing the need for context-specific strategies. This also underscores the importance of characterizing natural areas as a means of improving knowledge about biodiversity. In this context, identifying and strengthening VGPs can support management strategies that reconcile biodiversity conservation with sustainable socioeconomic development, while increasing the recognition of the benefits provided by Protected Areas to society.

Understanding socio-environmental dynamics through the Asset Framework enables the identification of integrated opportunities, revealing, through practices, social interest in natural areas. The questionnaire developed in this study is a useful and adaptable tool that can be applied to other tropical Protected Areas, involving managers, local communities, entrepreneurs, and tourists, to identify Value Generating Practices and support local planning. With rapid and structured responses, the questionnaire provides efficiency and practicality in data collection and analysis. Furthermore, it complements existing Asset Structuring models in Protected Areas, enriching studies on environmental management and the role of Protected Areas.

Acknowledgements

This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) - Finance Code 001. We thank the Universidade Federal de Alagoas (UFAL), the Programa de Pós-graduação Diversidade Biológica e Conservação nos Trópicos, the Laboratory of Botany and Conservation for support of project 420518/2025-8, and the Plant Ecology Laboratory for their support in conducting this research.

Data Availability Statement

Research data is available in a repository. https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.34046724.

References

• ALMALIKI, A.H., ZEROUALI, B., SANTOS, C.A.G., ALMALIKI, A.A., SILVA, R.M.D., GHONEIM, S.S.M. and ALI, E., 2023. Assessing coastal vulnerability and land use to sea level rise in Jeddah province, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Heliyon, vol. 9, no. 8, pp. e18508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18508 PMid:37576270.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e18508
• ALMEIDA, L. L., 2021. A conversão do controle de fauna em caça de conservação: o perigo representado pelo surgimento de empresas de safaris de caça a Javalis no Brasil. Revista Multidisciplinar de Educação e Meio Ambiente, vol. 2, no. 3, pp. 44.
• AMORIM, R.B. and MONTEIRO-NETO, C., 2016. Marine protected area and the spatial distribution of the gill net fishery in Copacabana, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Biology, vol. 76, no. 1, pp. 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.06614 PMid:26909618.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.06614
• ARAÚJO, R.F.D., 2008. O Modelo de gestão participativa do Plano Nacional do Turismo (PNT-2003/2007): a atuação do CONETUR/RN Natal: Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte. Dissertação (Mestrado em Administração).
• ARDOIN, N.M., BOWERS, A.W. and GAILLARD, E., 2020. Environmental education outcomes for conservation: a systematic review. Biological Conservation, vol. 241, pp. 108224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108224
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108224
• BALOCH, Q.B., SHAH, S.N., IQBAL, N., SHEERAZ, M., ASADULLAH, M., MAHAR, S. and KHAN, A.U., 2023. Impact of tourism development upon environmental sustainability: a suggested framework for sustainable ecotourism. Environmental Science and Pollution Research International, vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 5917-5930. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-22496-w PMid:35984561.
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-022-22496-w
• BENNETT, N.J. and DEARDEN, P., 2014. Why local people do not support conservation: community perceptions of marine protected area livelihood impacts, governance and management in Thailand. Marine Policy, vol. 44, pp. 107-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2013.08.017
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpol.2013.08.017
• BIBI, C., TABASSUM, S. and ROUSSEL, Y., 2024. International environmental law: challenges and opportunities for biodiversity conservation. Journal of Energy and Environmental Policy Options, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 28-35.
• BRAGAGNOLO, C., CORREIA, R.A., GAMARRA, N.C., LESSA, T., JEPSON, P., MALHADO, A.C.M. and LADLE, R.J., 2021. Uncovering assets in Brazilian national parks. Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 287, pp. 112289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112289 PMid:33740748.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112289
• BRAGAGNOLO, C., GAMA, G.M., VIEIRA, F.A.S., CAMPOS-SILVA, J.V., BERNARD, E., MALHADO, A.C.M., CORREIA, R.A., JEPSON, P., DE CARVALHO, S.H.C., EFE, M.A. and LADLE, R.J., 2019. Hunting in Brazil: what are the options? Perspectives in Ecology and Conservation, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 71-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2019.03.001
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecon.2019.03.001
• BRASIL. Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza – SNUC, 2000 [viewed 15 August 2024]. Lei n° 9.985, de 18 de julho de 2000. Regulamenta o art. 225, § 1o, incisos I, II, III e VII da Constituição Federal, institui o Sistema Nacional de Unidades de Conservação da Natureza e dá outras providências [online]. Diário Oficial da República Federativa do Brasil, Brasília. Available from: www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/l9985.htm
• BUCHMAN, D., KRILAVIČIUS, T. and MASKELIŪNAS, R., 2023. enhancing forest security through advanced surveillance applications. Forests, vol. 14, no. 12, pp. 2335. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14122335
  » https://doi.org/10.3390/f14122335
• CALDECOTT, B. and JEPSON, P., 2014. Towards a framework for protected area asset management Oxford: [s.n.].
• CARVALHO, J.V., ALVES, L. and SANTOS, A.K.A., 2021. Educação Ambiental e popularização do conhecimento: percepção de estudantes sobre uma Unidade de Conservação na Bahia. Revista Brasileira de Educação Ambiental, vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 356-376. https://doi.org/10.34024/revbea.2021.v16.11557
  » https://doi.org/10.34024/revbea.2021.v16.11557
• CHAN, K. M. A., BALVANERA, P., BENESSAIAH, K., CHAPMAN, M., DÍAZ, S., GÓMEZ-BAGGETHUN, E., GOULD, R., HANNAHS, N., JAX, K., KLAIN, S., LUCK, G. W., MARTÍN-LÓPEZ, B., MURACA, B., NORTON, B., OTT, K., PASCUAL, U., SATTERFIELD, T., TADAKI, M., TAGGART, J. and TURNER, N., 2016. Why protect nature? Rethinking values and the environment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, vol. 113, no. 6, pp. 1462-1465. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1525002113
  » https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1525002113
• CRAWLEY, M.J., 2012. Generalized linear models. In: M.J. CRAWLEY, ed. The R Book 2nd ed. Chichester: Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118448908.ch13
  » https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118448908.ch13
• GAMARRA, N.C., CORREIA, R.A., BRAGAGNOLO, C., CAMPOS-SILVA, J.V., JEPSON, P.R., LADLE, R.J. and MENDES MALHADO, A.C., 2019. Are Protected Areas undervalued? An asset-based analysis of Brazilian Protected Area Management Plans. Journal of Environmental Management, vol. 249, pp. 109347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109347 PMid:31419672.
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.109347
• GONÇALVES, A.C.T. and SANTOS, L.C.R.D., 2024. Bioeconomia na Amazônia Central: manejo participativo de pirarucu (Arapaima gigas). Revista de Administração Contemporânea, vol. 28, pp. e240195. https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2024240195.en
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1982-7849rac2024240195.en
• HAMMER, Ø., HARPER, D.A.T. and RYAN, P.D., 2001. PAST: paleontological statistics software package for education and data analysis. Palaeontologia Electronica, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1-9.
• HENDARTO, T. and YUNIWATI, E.D., 2024. Ecosystem services-based mangrove forest with management model strategies, sustainability of coastal natural resources. Brazilian Journal of Biology, vol. 84, pp. e280083. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.280083 PMid:38922191.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.280083
• INSTITUTO CHICO MENDES DE CONSERVAÇÃO DA BIODIVERSIDADE – ICMBio, 2010 [viewed 25 March 2025]. Plano de Manejo da APA de Piaçabuçu [online]. Brasília. Available from: https://www.gov.br/icmbio/pt-br/assuntos/biodiversidade/unidade-de-conservacao/unidades-de-biomas/marinho/lista-de-ucs/apa-de-piacabucu/arquivos/apa_piacabucu.pdf
  » https://www.gov.br/icmbio/pt-br/assuntos/biodiversidade/unidade-de-conservacao/unidades-de-biomas/marinho/lista-de-ucs/apa-de-piacabucu/arquivos/apa_piacabucu.pdf
• INSTITUTO CHICO MENDES DE CONSERVAÇÃO DA BIODIVERSIDADE – ICMBio, 2021 [viewed 25 March 2025]. Plano de Manejo da APA Costa dos Corais [online]. Brasília. Available from: https://www.icmbio.gov.br/apacostadoscorais/images/stories/plano_de_manejo/PM_APACC_2021.pdf
  » https://www.icmbio.gov.br/apacostadoscorais/images/stories/plano_de_manejo/PM_APACC_2021.pdf
• JEPSON, P.R., CALDECOTT, B., SCHMITT, S.F., CARVALHO, S.H.C., CORREIA, R.A., GAMARRA, N., BRAGAGNOLO, C., MALHADO, A.C.M. and LADLE, R.J., 2017. Protected area asset stewardship. Biological Conservation, vol. 212, pp. 183-190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.03.032
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.03.032
• KREMEN, C. and MERENLENDER, A.M., 2018. Landscapes that work for biodiversity and people. Science, vol. 362, no. 6412, pp. eaau6020. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau6020
  » https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau6020
• LEGENDRE, P. and ANDERSON, M.J., 1999. Distance-based redundancy analysis: testing multispecies responses in multifactorial ecological experiments. Ecological Monographs, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9615(1999)069[0001:DBRATM]2.0.CO;2
  » https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9615(1999)069[0001:DBRATM]2.0.CO;2
• LEGENDRE, P., 2012. Numerical ecology 3rd ed. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
• LESSA, T., JEPSON, P., BRAGAGNOLO, C., CAMPOS-SILVA, J.V., BARROS, E., GOMES, F., PINHEIRO, B.R., FÉ, T.P.M., MALHADO, A.C.M. and LADLE, R.J., 2021. Revealing the hidden value of protected areas. Land Use Policy, vol. 111, pp. 105733. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105733
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2021.105733
• MARINHA DO BRASIL, 2022 [viewed 24 May 2022]. Áreas de conservação litorâneas batem recorde de visitação em 2021. Economia Azul [online]. Available from: https://www.marinha.mil.br/economia-azul/noticias/areas-de-conservacao-litoraneas-batem-recorde-de-visitacao-em-2021
  » https://www.marinha.mil.br/economia-azul/noticias/areas-de-conservacao-litoraneas-batem-recorde-de-visitacao-em-2021
• MCARDLE, B.H. and ANDERSON, M.J., 2001. Fitting multivariate models to community data: a comment on distance-based redundancy analysis. Ecology, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 290-297. https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[0290:FMMTCD]2.0.CO;2
  » https://doi.org/10.1890/0012-9658(2001)082[0290:FMMTCD]2.0.CO;2
• MOHAMMAD, S.I., VASUDEVAN, A., AL-HOURANI, A.M., KHAYDAROVA, S., ALIYEVA, G., OCHILOV, Y., BOLTAEVA, K., AVEZOV, M., IBRAGIMOVA, M. and UMAROV, S., 2026. Economic valuation of mangrove ecosystem services: a management framework for sustainable coastal biodiversity conservation. Brazilian Journal of Biology, vol. 86, pp. e307326. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.307326
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.307326
• NAIDOO, R., GERKEY, D., HOLE, D., PFAFF, A., ELLIS, A. M., GOLDEN, C. D., HERRERA, D., JOHNSON, K., MULLIGAN, M., RICKETTS, T. H. and FISHER, B., 2019. Evaluating the impacts of protected areas on human well-being across the developing world. Science Advances, vol. 5, no. 4, pp. eaav3006. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aav3006
  » https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aav3006
• OKSANEN, J., SIMPSON, G.L., BLANCHET, F.G., KINDT, R., LEGENDRE, P., MINCHIN, P.R., O'HARA, R.B., SOLYMOS, P., STEVENS, M.H.H., SZOECS, E., WAGNER, H., BARBOUR, M., BEDWARD, M., BENGTSSON, H., BOLKER, B., BORCARD, D., BORMAN, T., CARVALHO, G., CHIRICO, M., DE CACERES, M., DURAND, S., EVANGELISTA, H.B.A., FITZJOHN, R., FRIENDLY, M., FURNEAUX, B., HANNIGAN, G., HEIDA, I., HILL, M.O., LAHTI, L., MARTINO, C., MCGLINN, D., OUELLETTE, M.-H., CUNHA, E.R., SMITH, T., STIER, A., TER BRAAK, C.J.F. and WEEDON, J., 2024 [viewed 22 January 2025]. vegan: Community Ecology Package. R package version 2.6-6.1 [online]. Available from: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan
  » https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=vegan
• OLIVEIRA, A.N.S., AMORIM, C.M.F. and LEMOS, R.P.L., 2020. Unidades de conservação: as riquezas das áreas protegidas no território alagoano (2. ed.). Instituto do Meio Ambiente do Estado de Alagoas.
• PERIOTTO, N.A. and TUNDISI, J.G., 2018. A characterization of ecosystem services, drivers and values of two watersheds in São Paulo State, Brazil. Brazilian Journal of Biology, vol. 78, no. 3, pp. 397-407. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.166333 PMid:29166428.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.166333
• PETERSSON, M. and STOETT, P., 2022. Lessons learnt in global biodiversity governance. International Environmental Agreement: Politics, Law and Economics, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 333-352. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-022-09565-8
  » https://doi.org/10.1007/s10784-022-09565-8
• PETRIELLO, M.A., REDMORE, L., SÈNE, A.L., KATJU, D., BARRACLOUGH, L., BOYD, S., MADGE, C., PAPADOPOULOS, A. and YALAMALA, R.S., 2025. The scope of empowerment for conservation and communities. Conservation Biology : The Journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. e14249. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14249 PMid:38488313.
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14249
• R CORE TEAM, 2023 [viewed 22 January 2025]. R: A language and environment for statistical computing [online]. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available from: https://www.R-project.org/
  » https://www.R-project.org/
• RESENDE, F.M., FERNANDES, G.W., ANDRADE, D.C. and NÉDER, H.D., 2017. Economic valuation of the ecosystem services provided by a protected area in the Brazilian Cerrado: application of the contingent valuation method. Brazilian Journal of Biology = Revista Brasileira de Biologia, vol. 77, no. 4, pp. 762-773. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.21215 PMid:28562788.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.21215
• ROCHA, A.H.T., GUEDES-SANTOS, J., VIEIRA, F.A.S., MALHADO, A.C.M., LADLE, R.J., SCHMITT, J.L. and BRAGAGNOLO, C., 2025. What threats do Brazilian National parks face? Journal for Nature Conservation, vol. 84, pp. 126813. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2024.126813
  » https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2024.126813
• ROMÁN-PINTOS, L.M., VILLEGAS-RIVERA, G., RODRÍGUEZ-CARRIZALEZ, A.D., MIRANDA-DÍAZ, A.G. and CARDONA-MUÑOZ, E.G., 2016. Diabetic polyneuropathy in type 2 diabetes mellitus: Inflammation, oxidative stress, and mitochondrial function. Journal of Diabetes Research, vol. 2016, no. 1, pp. 1, pp. 3425617. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/3425617
  » https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/3425617
• SANTANA, J., PORTO, M., MORÁN-ORDÓÑEZ, A., BROTONS, L., JUNKER, J., KISSLING, W. D., LUMBIERRES, M., MOE, S. J., SOLHEIM, A. L., VILLERO, D., BREEZE, T. D., CARVALHO, L., FERNÁNDEZ, N., HERRANDO, S., LÓPEZ-BAUCELLS, A., SHAMOUN-BARANES, J., SILLERO, N., PEREIRA, H. M., MOREIRA, F. and BEJA, P., 2025. Large biodiversity monitoring gaps remain across Europe. Conservation Letters, vol. 18, no. 5, pp. e13134. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.13134
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.13134
• SANTOS, A.L.P., ÂNDRADE, M., CARNEIRO, C.C., NAZARÉ, F.C., JURUNA, G., JURUNA, A. and PEZZUTI, J.C.B., 2025. Integrated study of indigenous people’s local ecological knowledge and diet analysis to understand the feeding ecology of the herbivorous serrasalmids in a dammed Amazonian River. Brazilian Journal of Biology = Revista Brasileira de Biologia, vol. 85, pp. e282304. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.282304 PMid:41036873.
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.282304
• SANTOS, L.S.B., FAVALESSA, C.M.C., CUNHA, T.Q., PERIN, B.L., AGOSTINI, G.B., RODRIGUES, L.D.O., SANTOS, G.A. and MILANI, J.E.F., 2026. Alpha and beta diversity reveal the conservation value of a protected riparian forest in the Northern Pantanal. Brazilian Journal of Biology = Revista Brasileira de Biologia, vol. 86, pp. e305836. https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.305836
  » https://doi.org/10.1590/1519-6984.305836
• SANTOS, V.S., GRABOWSKI, G. and SCHMITT, J.L., 2021. Análise da realização de educação ambiental em uma rede pública de ensino: contribuições de um modelo permanente e coletivo. Historia Ambiental Latinoamericana y Caribeña, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 432-468. https://doi.org/10.32991/2237-2717.2021v11i2.p432-468
  » https://doi.org/10.32991/2237-2717.2021v11i2.p432-468
• SCHEYVENS, R. and HUGHES, E., 2019. Can tourism help to “end poverty in all its forms everywhere”? The challenge of tourism addressing SDG1. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, vol. 27, no. 7, pp. 1061-1079. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1551404
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/09669582.2018.1551404
• SILVA, M.S.F. and ANUNCIAÇÃO, V.S., 2023. Estratégias de educação ambiental para a gestão participativa: experiências em Unidades de Conservação, Brasil. Geo UERJ, no. 43, pp. 2023. https://doi.org/10.12957/geouerj.2023.42443
  » https://doi.org/10.12957/geouerj.2023.42443
• SYMES, W.S., RAO, M., MASCIA, M.B. and CARRASCO, L.R., 2016. Why do we lose protected areas? Factors influencing protected area downgrading, downsizing and degazettement in the tropics and subtropics. Global Change Biology, vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 656-665. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13089 PMid:26367139.
  » https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13089
• WANDERLEY, A.D.P., MENDONÇA, A.G.R., OLIVEIRA, L.C.D., FIGUEIREDO, I.M., FERNANDES, A.P., BATALHA, L.T. and BOTERO, W.G., 2020. Complexo estuarino lagunar mundaú-manguaba: caracterização da matéria orgânica natural e interação com íons Hg2+. Química Nova, vol. 43, no. 2, pp. 206-211.
• WATSON, J.E.M., DUDLEY, N., SEGAN, D.B. and HOCKINGS, M., 2014. The performance and potential of protected areas. Nature, vol. 515, no. 7525, pp. 67-73. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13947 PMid:25373676.
  » https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13947

*

e-mail: [e-mail]

Editor:

Takako Matsumura Tundisi

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  26 Oct 2026
• Date of issue
  2026

History

• Received
  13 Apr 2026
• Accepted
  09 Sept 2026