What Matters When Explaining Environmentalism at the Watershed Level

Abstract

This research was conducted in the southeastern United States, one of the most rapidly developing regions in the country. The study included two sets of predictor variables: environmental experiences and perceptions (i.e., observation of pollution and assessment of pollution’s impact) and residential factors (i.e., rural vs. urban residence and upstream vs. downstream watershed location); sociodemographic characteristics served as control variables. Sequential regression was performed on survey data of watershed residents to isolate the predictors of environmentalism. Observation of pollution and assessment of pollution’s impact on water quality were most important for explaining environmental concern, self-reported household-based behaviors, and self-reported likelihood of engaging in water quality improvement efforts. The sociodemographic variables were also significant predictors; the residential variables had limited influence on the dependent variables. These results indicate that stormwater educators should account for experiential factors and perceptions of pollution when designing strategies for encouraging environmentalism.

Problem Framing Influences Linkages Among Networks of Collective Action Situations for Water Provision, Wastewater, and Water Conservation in a Metropolitan Region

“…Processes have been hypothesized for how problem frames influence the evolution of institutions and contribute to governance arrangements that better reflect social-ecological system (SES) component interdependencies. (Dewulf, Craps, Bouwen, Taillieu, & Pahl-Wostl, 2005;Isendahl et al, 2009;Mankad & Tapsuwan, 2011;Mobley, 2016;Pahl-Wostl et al, 2007;Steyaert & Ollivier, 2007).…”

Overlooked Benefits of Nutrient Reductions in the Mississippi River Basin

“…However, many policy makers and interest groups are particularly concerned about the net impact of agricultural-environmental policies on rural residents (Gibbs 2016;Farber 2018), although evidence regarding preference heterogeneity between rural and urban areas is mixed. Some research shows that urban residents give more support for environmental policies than people in rural areas of the United States (Salka 2001), and other research finds little difference between rural and urban residents in their interests for environmental quality (Arcury and Christianson 1993;Mobley 2016). Racevski and Lupi (2006) find rural residents in Michigan are less likely to support forest management efforts involving conservation, but conclude this is likely because those rural communities rely on forests products for production or exports.…”