Cited by 64Coastal and Marine ManagementCoastal and Marine DynamicsRecreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management

Users’ Perception as a Tool to Improve Urban Beach Planning and Management

Open access
Cervantes, Omar, Espejel, Ileana, Arellano, Evarista, Delhumeau, Sheila·2008·Environmental Management

Abstract

Four beaches that share physiographic characteristics (sandy, wide, and long) but differ in socioeconomic and cultural terms (three are located in northwestern Mexico and one in California, USA) were evaluated by beach users. Surveys (565) composed of 36 questions were handed out to beach users on weekends and holidays in 2005. The 25 questions that revealed the most information were selected by factor analysis and classified by cluster analysis. Beach users' preferences were assigned a value by comparing the present survey results with the characteristics of an "ideal" recreational urban beach. Cluster analysis separated three groups of questions: (a) services and infrastructure, (b) recreational activities, and (c) beach conditions. Cluster linkage distance (r=0.82, r=0.78, r=0.67) was used as a weight and multiplied by the value of beach descriptive factors. Mazatlán and Oceanside obtained the highest values because there are enough infrastructure and services; on the contrary, Ensenada and Rosarito were rated medium and low because infrastructure and services are lacking. The presently proposed method can contribute to improving current beach evaluations because the final score represents the beach users' evaluation of the quality of the beach. The weight considered in the present study marks the beach users' preferences among the studied beaches. Adding this weight to beach evaluation will contribute to more specific beach planning in which users' perception is considered.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00267-008-9104-8

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Authors
Cervantes, O., Espejel, I., Arellano, E., & Delhumeau, S.
Affiliations
Universidad Autónoma de Baja California (MX)
Corresponding author
Espejel, Ileana
Venue
Environmental Management
Published
2008-04-15
Volume
42
Issue
2
Pages
249-264
ISSN
  • 0364-152X (ISSN-L)
  • 1432-1009
OpenAlex
W2021633936
Cited by
64
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 4 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
FWCI
9.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Environmental Management (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • SSRN Electronic Journal (submittedVersion)
Funders
Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Coastal and Marine Management
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Earth-Surface Processes › Coastal and Marine Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Recreation, Leisure, Wilderness Management
Keywords
urban beaches, beach management, recreational infrastructure, recreational activities, user preferences, Mazatlán, Ensenada
MeSH terms
Bathing Beaches, California, City Planning, Conservation of Natural Resources, Data Collection, Environmental Monitoring, Humans, Mexico, Surveys and Questionnaires, Water

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review