Nature–Human Relational Models in a Riverine Social–Ecological System: San Marcos River, TX, USA

Abstract

A social–ecological system is a highly connected organization of biophysical and social actors that interact across multiple scales, share resources, and adapt to the actors’ changes. The ways in which humans and nature interact have traditionally been characterized and influenced by competing intrinsic and utilitarian values. However, recently, relational values and relational models have been used to unpack the myriad of values society assigns to nature and create general typologies of nature–human relationships. Here, we investigate the spectrum of environmental values that exist in the San Marcos River (SMR)—a social–ecological system (SES) in which a spring-fed river flows through an urban environment in central Texas (USA) including a university campus that attracts regional and international tourists. Recognizing that scholars have struggled to identify a nuanced understanding of environmental values and how these values shape nature–human relationships in SES, we use the SMR case study to capture the nature–human relational models that exist among social and user groups of the blue space. Analyzing different groups of visitors and stakeholders of the SMR (n = 3145), this study serves as a pilot to apply relational models using a variety of metrics to build a framework for understanding models of nature–human relationships, beyond ecosystem services and dualistic valuations. In our sample, most respondents were classified under the stewardship model (59%). The utilization model (34%) was the second most common, followed by wardship (6%). We found that patterns of place identity emerged to support the development of relational models beyond utilization. Despite the differences among perceptions, values, and some variation in relational models, one commonality was the innate, ubiquitous preference to protect natural habitat, water quality, and the river’s aquifer water source. Our study contributes to the growing literature around relational values and is a pathway to integrate ecosystem services, environmental values, and human–environment interactions into a more holistic approach to environmental valuation.

A Participatory Approach to Assess Social Demand and Value of Urban Waterscapes: A Case Study in San Marcos, Texas, USA

“…This degradation of aquatic ecosystem health along with the ecosystem services they provide has negative consequences (direct and indirect) on human health [4,5]. Commonly cited negative consequences include wildlife habitat destruction, impaired water quality, flooding, reduced recreation, and loss of tourism; however, the health and appearance of aquatic ecosystems can also impact mental health and overall human wellbeing [6][7][8]. The focus of this article is on this less-studied, psychological aspect of aquatic ecosystems.…”

“…The benefits of blue spaces and waterscapes are particularly needed in cities with heightened stresses from urban heat islands, poor air quality, traffic, noises, and technological worries. Urban waterscapes can also promote community health and ensure equitable access to ecosystem services within a city [5,7,9]. While several studies have documented the mental and physical benefits of waterscapes [6,12], cultural and emotional aspects of human interaction with water are rarely quantified and even less frequently incorporated into meaningful action or policy [13][14][15][16].…”

“…Understanding relationships between people and nature is essential to the sustainable management of social-ecological systems (SESs) [7,13,18,19]. SESs refer to the systems formed through complex and dynamic interactions and interrelations between people and nature [19,20].…”

“…Ecosystem values do a better job of uncovering social-ecological dynamics of waterscapes [7]. Because values usually rely on interaction with others, we use the term "SES values" to capture how values for waterscapes are based both on nature-human and social relationships.…”

Redefining Absentee: Towards Understanding Place Attachment and Stewardship in Non-Residential Landowners in Texas, USA

“…The Place portion focuses on the social, natural, or built environment that a place produces. To understand the Process, there are three pathways: affect (e.g., love and happiness), behavior (e.g., reconstruction of place and proximity-maintaining behavior), and cognition (e.g., knowledge and memory) [61,72].…”