Planning recreational access beyond official trails: Signposting gaps and environmental exposure of field-mapped route instances in Fuerteventura, Canary Islands

Published: 3 August 2026| Version 1 | DOI: 10.17632/jcnktr4psb.1
Contributor:
Alan Gabriel Saucedo Benitez

Description

This dataset contains derived, non-sensitive tabular outputs supporting the article “Planning recreational access beyond official trails: Signposting gaps and environmental exposure of field-mapped route instances in Fuerteventura, Canary Islands”. The data summarise 89 field-mapped GPX route instances across four case-study areas in Fuerteventura, Canary Islands: Corralejo–Lobos/Corralejo Dunes, Vallebrón Protected Landscape, Betancuria Rural Park and Montaña del Cardón Natural Monument. The dataset includes route-level signposting classification, zone-level official signposting gap indicators and environmental exposure indicators for non-signposted route sections. Spatial processing was conducted in QGIS 3.44 using REGCAN95 / UTM zone 28N, EPSG:4083. GPX route sections were classified as signposted or non-signposted according to whether they overlapped the official GR/PR/SL signposted network using a 15 m spatial tolerance. Non-signposted sections were then overlaid with Protected Natural Areas, Special Protection Areas for Birds, Special Areas of Conservation, Habitats of Community Interest and Priority Bird Areas. The dataset supports the tabular results reported in the article: 89 route instances; 1,973.895 km of cumulative route-instance length; 410.623 km overlapping the official signposted network; 1,563.268 km outside the official signposted network; and environmental exposure indicators for non-signposted sections. Raw GPX files and full-precision route geometries are not included because disclosure could facilitate access to environmentally sensitive locations. The dataset therefore provides reproducible derived tables and methodological metadata while avoiding unnecessary exposure of sensitive route information. Environmental exposure values should be interpreted as spatial coincidence indicators, not as evidence of direct ecological impact.

Files

Steps to reproduce

1. Open the dataset files. Use 01_route_instance_classification.csv for route-level indicators, 02_signposting_gap_by_zone.csv for zone-level signposting results, 03_environmental_exposure_non_signposted_by_zone.csv for environmental exposure, and 05_data_dictionary.csv for variable definitions. 2. Reproduce route-level checks by verifying that, for each route instance, total route-instance length is approximately equal to signposted length plus non-signposted length. Minor differences up to 0.001 km reflect rounding. 3. Reproduce the signposting gap by aggregating 01_route_instance_classification.csv by case-study code (COR, VAL, BET, CAR). Sum total length, signposted length and non-signposted length. Then calculate signposted percentage = signposted length / total length * 100, and non-signposted percentage = non-signposted length / total length * 100. 4. Reproduce environmental exposure percentages using 03_environmental_exposure_non_signposted_by_zone.csv. For each environmental category, divide the non-signposted length overlapping the category by total non-signposted length in the same case-study area and multiply by 100. 5. The GIS workflow was conducted in QGIS 3.44 using REGCAN95 / UTM zone 28N (EPSG:4083). GPX route instances were imported as line geometries, checked, assigned to four case-study areas and measured in kilometres. The official GR/PR/SL network was kept as a separate reference layer. 6. A 15 m buffer around the official network was used to classify GPX sections. Sections inside the buffer were classified as signposted; sections outside it were classified as non-signposted. Non-signposted sections were then overlaid with Protected Natural Areas, SPAs/ZEPA, SACs/ZEC, HIC and Priority Bird Areas. 7. Expected totals are: 89 route instances; 1,973.895 km total route-instance length; 410.623 km signposted; 1,563.268 km non-signposted; 20.80% signposted; 79.20% non-signposted. 8. Environmental exposure values are non-additive because the same route section may intersect multiple designations. Raw GPX files and full-precision route geometries are not included to avoid facilitating access to environmentally sensitive locations.

Institutions

Categories

Geography, Environmental Analysis, City Planning, Environmental Planning, GIS Database, Territoriality, Territory

Licence