A critical assessment of a protected area conflict analysis based on secondary data in the age of datafication.

Recently, a global trend towards a broader use of secondary data in social sciences has been reinforced by the COVID-19 pandemic. This evoked doubts about the validity of the results unless restrictive assessment procedures are implemented. To address this need in the field of protected area (PA) conflict analysis, we propose a three-fold approach (theory-, method-, and cross-scale simulation-driven) to assess the usefulness of the utilized state register dataset and the indicator analysis methodology for the multi-level recognition of PA conflict determinants. With the ultimate aim to inform case study selection, we processed 187 relevant indicators from the official Statistics Poland register for a Lesser Poland region. We distinguished five types of PA conflict determinants in Lesser Poland ('urbanity', 'agriculture', 'tourism', 'small-scale entrepreneurship', and 'sprawl') and respective groups of 15 clusters comprising local-level units. For one cluster, we juxtaposed the obtained results with secondary data from another source (Internet content) and for a specific PA (Tatra National Park). Although the reported conflict issues corresponded to the indicator-derived descriptors of the cluster, in the theory-driven phase of the assessment, the state register failed to address the key prerequisites of PA conflicts. We have demonstrated that, in crisis conditions such as COVID-19, the proposed method can serve as a proxy for a multi-level recognition of PA conflict potentials, provided that it synthesises the results of different methodological approaches, followed by in-person interviews in the selected case studies.

Environmental: choices vs. COVID-19 pandemic fear - plastic governance re-assesment

Alarming plastic production growth worldwide reinforces the public debate about the prevailing environmental crisis, whereby single-use-plastic (SUP) items are considered as by far the most harmful to the environment and public health. Accordingly, European environmental policy aims at eliminating SUP. Recently, we presented a model of plastic governance that derives from a circular economy approach identifying and taking into consideration perspectives of different actors in the plastic governance, such as producers, wholesalers, shop keepers, consumers, citizen scientists, and academia. Our results illustrate that the vast majority of stakeholders cared for the natural environment and understood the need to phase out SUP from the global economy. We proposed that a knowledge brokerage, undertaken by scientists via means of citizen science, as the most effective method to implement elimination policy, as it provides stakeholders with knowledge on why and how to handle SUP issues. However, at the time of the global COVID-19 pandemic, a plastic governance model required a re-assessment. The perceived role of SUP has changed, as it reflects the health emergency. Namely, due to the health safety reasons stakeholders and consumers are requesting even more SUP than previously. Following up on our data gathered prior to the pandemic, we suggest that under the new circumstances health concerns outweigh the environmental concerns being determined by a shift in the value hierarchization. The paper discusses preliminary results.