Balancing public access and privacy in developed coastal zones: Factors influencing attitudes towards potential management options

Abstract

The coastline of south eastern Norway is mostly privately owned and largely developed with homes and cabins. Public rights of access are permitted in what are defined as ‘outfield’ areas. However, public access may be difficult due to the location of developments, the blurred legal distinctions between outfield and infield areas and a lack of adequate recreational management. This project examined the social interactions between waterfront dwellers and local day visitors and the potential for improving recreational management in the study area of Saltnes on the Oslo Fjord in Norway. All households in Saltnes were surveyed (259 responses) to explore how local inhabitants (i.e. shoreline visitors, potential visitors and waterfront dwellers) perceived different potential management measures for improving private–public co-existence along the waterfront area. The study also investigated the extent to which the dichotomy between the need for access and the need for privacy influences attitudes towards different management measures. The multivariate structural equation model (SEM) contained two sets of manifest exogenous variables for respondent characteristics and four latent endogenous variables identifying four possible management options. The two options most favoured by respondents were Onsite information and Physical preparation, both of which were significantly more popular than Guiding boundaries and Access restrictions. The provision of Onsite information was regarded positively by both visitors and waterfront dwellers, and thus probably has the best potential for improving co-existence and co-operation between the two groups. Management implicationsWhen attempting to improve cooperation and co-existence in a potential conflict situation between local visitors and waterfront dwellers in shoreline areas, the following management recommendations should be considered:–A management solution should be based on local contextual knowledge.–Onsite information, identifying accessible and in-accessible areas along the shoreline are most preferred and accepted by visitors, potential visitors and dwellers alike.–Physical preparations, such as boardwalks, are well accepted by the visitors and potential visitors, but perceived more negatively by waterfront dwellers.–Guiding physical boundaries, like fences, and access restrictions cannot be recommended.–Planning processes should explicitly consider the requirements of potential visitors who are less acquainted with local conditions.–Private landowners should be integrated in the planning process at an early stage if planning measures are likely to affect their properties.