There has been considerable debate within the literature over the degree to which environmental conflict in the Western United States stems from tensions between urban and rural areas. A number of scholars have suggested that such conflict exists throughout the West; others have argued either that this urban-rural conflict does not exist or that conflict over environmental preferences stems from factors other than place of residence. This study uses voting on statewide environmental ballot measures, with counties as the unit of analysis, to investigate whether voters in urban and rural areas express different levels of support for environmental protection. When such differences are found, the study offers explanations. Findings suggest that urban counties do vote in support of environmental protection at significantly higher levels than rural counties but that demographic variables and economic conditions are more influential in determining those levels of support than is the urban or rural nature of the county.

There is considerable debate in the literature regarding the variables that produce differing levels of countywide support for environmental protection. Competing explanations include differences stemming from individual attributes of residents, economic conditions, and urban‐rural differences. The present study examines why some counties express higher levels of support for environmental protection when voting on environmental ballot measures. Using voting data aggregated at the county level on state‐wide environmental ballot measures in five states, OLS regression is employed to examine the utility of each explanation. The results suggest that while all three hypotheses are accurate in a number of cases and urban counties tend to be more supportive of environmental protection than rural counties, individual attributes and economic conditions appear to be the most influential.

After a long history as a bureaucratic success story, the United States Forest Service (USFS) found itself embroiled in crisis beginning in the late 1980s. This study examines the factors that led up to the crisis, arguing that the agency had become captured by its own core technologies. Historically, the USFS was successful in adapting to changes in its environment by employing its traditional management procedures. However, attempting to incorporate the northern spotted owl issue with its traditional core technologies threw the subsystem into crisis, during which the agency lost control over its management activities. Today, the USFS is attempting to adapt to the changes brought about by the political conflict of the era. Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd. 2004..

In the fall of 2006, seven states passed constitutional amendments banning gay marriage. This study examines the determinants of support for those measures, as expressed by the countywide vote in favor of each gay marriage ban. A number of hypotheses are explored that examine the urban/rural nature of each county, as well as the political and demographic characteristics of county residents. The findings indicate that countywide support for the Republican Party, and lower income and education levels, are associated with support for gay marriage bans.

Between 1998 and2006, twenty-seven states amended their constitutions to prohibit same sex marriage. The 2008 elections again saw three states with ballot measures aimed at banning gay marriage. This study examines the determinants of support for those measures in California and Florida, and includes a similar measure placed on the primary election ballot in California in 2000. Support is measured as the county-wide vote in favor of each gay marriage ban. A number of hypotheses are explored that examine the urban/rural nature of each county, as well as the political and demographic characteristics of county residents. It is suggested that states may be best viewed as relatively independent groupings of diverse subcultures, rather than as homogenous populations with a single political culture. The findings reported here indicate that a host of demographic, political and religious differences within each state influence residents' votes on gay marriage bans.