Landscape values and tourism development preferences in the Archipelago Sea Biosphere Reserve in Finland

Liliana Solé, Department of Geography and Geology, University of Turku

The researchers Liliana Solé and Nora Fagerholm from the Sustainable Landscape Systems Research Group have been working together with international colleagues, Kyle Hearn, Alex Lechner and Witra Tahjudil, to write a scientific article on landscape values and tourism development preferences in the Archipelago Sea Biosphere Reserve (ASBR).

The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) emphasises the significance of understanding stakeholder values in landscape management. Accordingly, IPBES has introduced a value typology that categorises nature’s significance to people into intrinsic, instrumental, and relational values, representing nature’s inherent worth, utilitarian benefits, and human-nature connections, respectively. Our research focuses on the operationalisation of the IPBES value typology and on tourism development preferences to assess synergies and conflicts among stakeholder groups in the context of the Biosphere Reserve using Public Participation Geographic Information Systems (PPGIS).

The operationalisation of the IPBES values into our specific context, the ASBR, resulted in some peculiarities. Respondents frequently identified intrinsic values, which relate to area’s distinct natural features, biodiversity, and its scenic beauty. Relational values focused on the personal connections people form with nature and the experiences gained through nature. Meanwhile, remaining values encompassed both practical benefits (instrumental values) and social or cultural significance (relational values), such as of recreational fishing. To better capture these distinctions, we refined the IPBES values framework to include three categories: intrinsic, relational, and relational/instrumental.

During the summer of 2022, a PPGIS survey was conducted, in strong collaboration with Metsähallitus (Finnish state-owned forestry enterprise) and the management team of the ASBR, to gather location-specific data on landscape values and tourism preferences from locals, recreationists, and tourists in the area. This survey, also include qualitative open-ended questions, which unveiled interesting findings. With 690 respondents, the survey exposed the prevalence of intrinsic values, consistently prioritized across all groups. Additionally, it highlighted variations in the distribution of IPBES specific values across the stakeholder groups. 

Among the findings, both locals and tourists emphasized intrinsic and relational values, whereas recreationists tended to focus more on relational/instrumental values. These distinctions suggest different motivations for engaging with the natural environment. Furthermore, our results demonstrate that the same places can be valued differently by different respondents. For instance, respondents attributed various values, such as instrumental/relational and relational values, to the same locations. These spatial overlaps highlight the interconnectedness of values and reveal the nuanced appreciation of landscapes. 

The results also reveal differences between mapping and open responses within the groups. For instance, while locals may not prioritize place-based relational values in mapping exercises, they often emphasize them in their own descriptions. These discrepancies underscore the importance of employing qualitative methods to capture the complexities of value pluralism accurately. Such methods are vital for making well-informed decisions. 

 Through evaluating the diverse landscape values of various groups and pinpointing potential conflicts or synergies with tourism development, this study addresses the challenge of reconciling differing perspectives among stakeholders, especially at the intersection of tourism and environmental conservation. It sheds light on the intricate interplay between humans and nature, providing valuable insights for effective policymaking and management strategies that embrace the array of landscape values, especially within protected areas like Biosphere Reserves. 

Read the published open access article Solé, L., Hearn, K.P., Witra, T. et al. 2025. Balancing landscape values and tourism choices: Integrating participatory mapping and the IPBES Values Typology. Ambio.