Language selection

Search

2024 survey of British Columbia coastal residents’ perspectives on ocean contributions to well-being - Public opinion research summary

On this page

Project objectives

Research specifications

*A full report on the methodology is available on Library and Archives Canada. Survey of British Columbia coastal residents and their values of ocean resources methodological report

Survey instrument design

infographic of survey instrument design
Long text version

Survey instrument design

The instrument design was developed based on the human wellbeing framework proposed by Kaplan-Hallan and Bennett in 2018 which incorporates the cultural, social, health, governance, and economic domains of human wellbeing.

The survey included questions about B.C. coastal residents ocean and costal interactions, about ocean values, ocean dependency, environmental concerns, support for MPAs, what sources of information people use, and demographic characteristics.

The survey was conducted in Spring 2024. The sample included 1,700 surveys with representation from all the coastal districts of B.C.

Engagement in marine and ocean activities

B.C. coastal residents interact in different ways with the ocean and coastal areas.

bar graph showing B.C. coastal residents relationship with the ocean
Long text version

B.C. coastal residents relationship with the ocean

Sector/Activity Percentage
Non-renewable energy 0.2%
Renewable energy 0.6%
Aquaculture 0.8%
Coastal forestry 1%
Commercial fishing 1.1%
Marine research/education 1.5%
Marine coastal management 2%
Marine transportation 2.1%
Marine recreation tourism 3.2%
Other activities 3.2%
Recreational fishing 3.5%
FSC 4.1%
Stewardship 9.1%
Leisure activities 67.2%

B.C. coastal residents’ values of ocean resources

Social, cultural, and environmental values are identified as important more often than economic or instrumental ones.

pie graph showing importance of ocean values for B.C. coastal residents
Long text version

Importance of ocean values for B.C. coastal residents

The main values selected by participants are presented in the table below.

Ocean values Percentage
Scenery/sensory enjoyment 84%
Healthy marine ecosystems 78%
Outdoor recreation 62%
Natural and human history 55%
A place to learn/teach 52%
Food/products to sustain life 42%
Socialization opportunities 39%
Ocean-based transportation 34%
Sacred areas 22%
Income/Employment 16%
Passing down knowledge/traditions 10%

B.C. coastal residents ocean dependence

pie graph showing percentages of B.C. coastal residents' dependence on the ocean
Long text version

B.C. coastal residents high ocean dependence

Survey respondents indicated the level of dependance on the ocean for the following: employment, seafood harvesting, buying seafood, recreation, social purposes, cultural purposes, and health.

Ocean dependence Percentage
Employment/livelihood/family business 9%
Directly harvesting Seafood 7%
Seafood bought locally/other retail 41%
Recreation 44%
Social purposes 41%
cultural purposes 10%
Health 52%

B.C. coastal residents ocean dependence by districts

bar graph showing high dependence on the ocean by coastal district in percentages
Long text version

"High" dependence on the ocean by coastal district (%)

Survey participants in each coastal districts provided responses about their level of dependance on the ocean.

Coastal district Employment/
livelihoods/
family business
Directly harvesting seafood Seafood bought locally/
other retail
Recreation Mental/
physical health
Social purposes Cultural purposes
Alberni- Clayoquot 17% 36% 48% 51% 52% 46% 18%
Capital 8% 8% 34% 50% 67% 45% 8%
Central/North Coast/Mount Waddington 36% 39% 40% 62% 65% 51% 32%
Comox Valley 15% 16% 53% 53% 63% 46% 11%
Cowichan Valley 17% 22% 50% 55% 55% 47% 23%
Fraser Valley/Squamish Lillooet 7% 6% 23% 29% 33% 26% 5%
Greater Vancouver 6% 4% 44% 42% 49% 40% 10%
Kitimat- Stikine 10% 17% 31% 34% 43% 27% 23%
Nanaimo 14% 17% 37% 56% 62% 42% 13%
Powell River (qathet) 19% 29% 43% 70% 75% 55% 22%
Strathcona 40% 37% 43% 56% 69% 41% 21%
Sunshine Coast 16% 13% 38% 64% 73% 55% 13%

How the ocean supports B.C. coastal residents and their communities

*This survey sampled B.C. coastal residents, which includes Indigenous individuals. This information is not the same as communities' input or Consultations.

bar graphs showing how the ocean supports communities
Long text version

Ocean sectors/activities supporting coastal communities (%)

Ocean sectors Indigenous Non-indigenous
Infrastructure 73% 63%
FSC 72% 43%
Coastal forestry 68% 46%
Recreational fishing 67% 46%
Ocean transportation 66% 66%
Services for recreation activities 63% 53%
Services for commercial fisheries 61% 43%
Services for recreational fisheries 59% 42%
Commercial fishing 55% 46%
Seafood processing 48% 41%
Aquaculture 47% 36%

Knowledge on MPAs and on coastal/marine issues in general

bar graph showing knowledge of marine protected areas
Long text version

Knowledge about Marine Protected Areas (MPAs)

Survey respondents indicated their knowledge about MPAs. Results are broken down in three categories: average, male, female, and Indigenous respondents.

Average Male Female Indigenous
Not at all informed 10% 11% 9% 12%
Not very informed 29% 29% 30% 32%
Somewhat informed 40% 39% 42% 16%
Informed 15% 16% 12% 20%
Very informed 6% 5% 7% 17%
bar graph showing knowledge about coastal and marine issues
Long text version

Knowledge about coastal and marine issues

Survey respondents indicated their knowledge about coastal and marine issues in general. Results are broken down in three categories: average, male, female, and Indigenous respondents.

Average Male Female Indigenous
Not at all informed 3% 4% 2% 1%
Not very informed 16% 17% 14% 11%
Somewhat informed 47% 42% 54% 46%
Informed 25% 28% 21% 17%
Very informed 10% 9% 10% 25%

Support for MPAs in B.C.

bar graph showing support for MPAs in B.C. by coastal districts
Long text version

Support for MPAs in B.C. by coastal district

Survey participants provided responses about their level of support for Marine Protected Areas in B.C. by coastal district.

Coastal district Low Somewhat High
Alberni-Clayoquot 8% 26% 65%
Capital 5% 13% 82%
Central/North coast/Mt. Waddington 5% 25% 70%
Comox Valley 5% 14% 81%
Cowichan Valley 4% 29% 68%
Fraser Valley, Squamish Lillooet 12% 14% 73%
Greater Vancouver 4% 10% 85%
Kitimat-Stikine 4% 25% 52%
Nanaimo 6% 12% 80%
Powell River (qathet) 1% 16% 83%
Strathcona 14% 18% 68%
Sunshine Coast 5% 11% 82%
Greater Vancouver/Victoria 4% 11% 83%

B.C. coastal residents views on how MPAs support ocean values

bar graph representing perceptions of how MPAs support ocean values
Long text version

Perceptions on how MPAs support ocean values

Respondents’ perceptions about how MPAs support ocean values.

Ocean values supported by MPAs Average
Healthy ecosystems 77%
Preservation of scenery 75%
Future generations 72%
To learn, teach, research 66%
Outdoor recreation 57%
Jobs - income tourism/rec 51%
To get together with family and friends 44%
Food and other products 40%
Jobs - income recreational fishing 35%
Keep sacred/spiritual places 34%
Jobs - income commercial fishing 30%

Perceived MPA support for ocean values

bar graph representing perceptions of ocean values and how MPAs support ocean values
Long text version

Perceptions on how MPAs support ocean values

This table compares responses about perceptions on ocean values that are of high importance for respondents, and perceptions on how MPAs support those values.

Ocean values High importance ocean values Ocean values supported by MPAs
Scenery/sensory enjoyment 84% 75%
Healthy marine ecosystems 78% 77%
Outdoor recreation 62% 57%
Natural and human history 55% -
A place to learn/teach 52% 66%
Food/products to sustain life 42% 40%
Socialization opportunities 39% 44%
*Ocean-based transportation 34% -
Sacred areas 22% 34%
Income/employment 16% 35%
*Passing down knowledge/traditions 10% -
*Future generations - 72%

*Some values or MPA contributions to those values did not appear in both survey questions and so are not paired. This is not indicative of zero responses.

Linkages to network monitoring

Page details

Date modified: