4 The case study areas 4.1Introduction In this study the focus is especially on the relationship between protected nature and residential activities. The former chapters showed strong indications of the role that the presence of protected nature plays in attracting residents to rural areas and their satisfaction with their living environment. It is expected that the luring ability of protected nature will be related to the general appreciation of natural amenities, and the positive way that these amenities may influence the quality of life; which is of importance for an increasing number of people when deciding where to live, work, and take their leisure. In the empirical part of this research the aim is to create a better understanding of the relationship between the presence of nature and the development of residential activities in rural areas, by focussing on the situation in five different case study areas in Europe. In Section 4.2 the selection of these areas is further clarified. In Section 4.3 an understanding is created of the specific regional context of the study areas, within which the relationship between protected nature and residential activities is investigated. In Section 4.4 a description is given of the characteristics of the protected natural areas that part of the case study areas, in relation to their genesis, planning, conservation and management regimes, aesthetic, cultural and natural values, and recreational use. 4.2 Selection of the case study areas When investigating the relationship between the presence of protected nature and residential activities in rural areas, two aspects have to be considered. Firstly, residential choice is a complicated process in which several pull and push factors are involved; the selection of a new house is therefore based on a number of considerations, of which the presence of natural amenities may only be one of many. Secondly, it also became clear from the former that the impact of protected natural areas on other activities depends on the specific characteristics of the natural area itself, and on the particular local and national circumstances of such an area. Given these two aspects, it is plausible to assume that one can only get a good understanding of the general impact of protected natural areas on residential activities, if this is empirically tested in several appropriate locations, with dissimilar characteristics, which are situated in different rural regions. Comparison of the research results derived in different study areas will then make it possible to identify how specific the function of nature is for the country and region within which it is situated; and also whether and which specific characteristics of a protected natural area lead to differences in the relationship with residential activities. Selection of the case study areas was in three stages and was driven by both theoretical and practical considerations. The first step was to select the countries to be studied. For practical reasons, it was decided that only three countries could be covered, given the time and money available. These countries had to represent the European diversity in natural and physical environment, landscapes, socio-economic development, cultural characteristics, and rural development and policies. These features have already been discussed extensively in Chapters 2 and 3. The second step was to decide on the number of case studies that could be covered, and the distribution of these over the three countries. This decision was driven by practical considerations, but it was also regarded as important that secondary research results, between different study areas in at least one country, should be compared, so that more general conclusions about the function of nature could be drawn, in relation to the specific situation within that country. Three research areas were therefore selected in the Netherlands, while the UK and Spain each had only one. The third step was the selection of the study areas within the three countries. There were five selection criteria applied, of which there was general discussion in Chapter 1: 1. As was expected, there is a relationship between the size of a protected natural area and the impact that it can impose on the surrounding region, therefore the first criterion was that the protected territories in the study 100 101 The case study areas 4 areas needed to meet a minimum size. It was decided to adopt the minimum of 1000 hectares, which the IUCN applies for inclusion in the United Nations List of Protected Areas. In addition, as the average size of Dutch protected areas is considerably smaller than those of the UK and Spain (see Chapter 3), only such areas above the national average size were considered for the Netherlands. 2. One of the aims of this research was to investigate whether a protected natural area may positively contribute to the development of a remote rural region. For the determination of remote and rural the geographical principle of peripherality was followed; which refers to rural areas which are located outside national and international concentration areas. Land use intensity and population density decreases with distance from these concentration areas. Compared to rural areas that are more centrally located, remote rural areas are characterised by a low population density; often in combination with a more dispersed settlement form; lower intensity of land-use and relatively limited accessibility (see Van Bemmel, 1984; King, 1991 and Hoggart et al., 1995). This means that the second selection criterion was that the study sites needed to be located away from areas of greater national and regional, urban and economic concentration, and the population density in the study areas had to be below the national and regional average. 3. The third selection criterion was the type of protection regime. It was necessary for this regime to have been arranged through legislation and planning arrangements, and to be aimed at the conservation of natural resources. It was therefore decided that all protected territories chosen had to be included in the United Nations List of Protected Areas, so that they met the IUCN definition. According to this definition, protected areas ‘must be dedicated to the protection and maintenance of biological diversity, and of natural and associated cultural resources, and managed through legal or other effective means’ (IUCN, 2000). In addition, the UN list of protected areas provides a common ground, on which basis their management can be compared (the IUCN protected area classification, see Section 3.3.1). 4. The fourth criterion is the period of existence of the protected area. The protected territories in the study areas needed to have existed for at least ten years. This requirement was applied, because it was expected that effects of the presence of protected areas on residential choice and population composition could only be measured after some years. 5. The final choice of the study areas aimed at selecting protected territories with dissimilar characteristics in relation to landscape types, natural and physical environment, cultural features, and types of management; they also needed to be located in regions with different socio-economic characteristics. This variation was especially important for the definite selection of the three Dutch study areas. The result of the selection has already been discussed in Chapter 1. In the next section the specific features of the regional context and of the protected territory in the five study areas are described. 4.3 Location and regional characteristics of the case study areas In this Section some basic characteristics of the study areas will receive attention, following criteria for their selection and their specific regional context. The national context of the case study areas have already been discussed extensively in Chapters 2 and 3. 4.3.1 Location The national perspective All five study areas are located in a relatively rural and decentralised location within their national territories. The three Dutch study areas are all situated in the four most northern provinces. These are located furthest away from the urban and economic centre of the country; the Randstad (see Figure 4.1). In the provinces where the three Dutch study areas are located there are few big urban centres; the only cities of more than 100,000 inhabitants are Groningen, Zwolle and Enschede, and population density is far below the national average. The Northumberland National Park is the most remote in England and Wales, situated on the border with Scotland, entirely within the county of Northumberland (see Figure 4.5). This county has the lowest population density in England and the proportion of people employed in agriculture is relatively high. The final study site, the 4 The case study areas protected area of Doñana, is situated in the south west of the most southern Spanish autonomous region, Andalucía, on the border with Portugal (see Figure 4.6). It is located far away from the main economic and political centres of the country, which are the Madrid and Barcelona conurbations and the industrial nuclei in the Basque country. The region of Andalucía, is one of the most depressed autonomies in Spain in terms of per capita income and unemployment rate. The proportion of the active population still working in agriculture is also relatively high. Figure 4.1 Location of the three case study areas in the Netherlands LAUWERSMEER Leeuwarden Groningen Assen DWINGELDERVELD WEERRIBBEN Hoogeveen Alkmaar Zwolle Amsterdam Randstad Enschede Apeldoorn Den Haag Utrecht Arnhem Rotterdam Nijmegen ‘s-Hertogenbosch Breda Tilburg Eindhoven Sittard Heerlen Maastricht 25 km 102 103 The case study areas 4 The regional perspective The first Dutch case study area of the Dwingelderveld is situated in the south west of the province of Drenthe, in the triangle of the smaller towns of Beilen, Meppel and Hoogeveen, within the municipalities of Dwingeloo, Beilen and Ruinen (see Figure 4.1 and 4.2).