Understanding Environmentalism: The Interplay between Politics and Religion on Environmental Attitudes from Rural Utah

IF 2.2 3区社会学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES

Society & Natural Resources Pub Date : 2023-01-25 DOI:10.1080/08941920.2023.2169423

M. R. Cope, Kayci A Muirbrook, Paige N. Park, S. Sanders, Carol Ward, Rachel M. Sumsion

{"title":"Understanding Environmentalism: The Interplay between Politics and Religion on Environmental Attitudes from Rural Utah","authors":"M. R. Cope, Kayci A Muirbrook, Paige N. Park, S. Sanders, Carol Ward, Rachel M. Sumsion","doi":"10.1080/08941920.2023.2169423","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Previous research found that socio-demographic characteristics are significant predictors of environmental behaviors and attitudes, including political affiliation and religious identity. However, the consistency of religious identity and political affiliation as predictors of environmental attitudes and behaviors is still contested. This study investigates whether religious affiliation is a significant determinant of environmental attitudes (EA) or whether political affiliation is a better predictor. Sampling 25 rural towns in Utah, USA. with homogenous religious identities and political affiliations, we replicate past regression analyses from similar studies. We conclude that although our results are generally consistent with the literature, unlike what the replicated studies suggest, religious identity is not a consistent predictor of EA. Rather, political affiliation is a stronger predictor. Our research, therefore, clarifies socio-demographic characteristics that serve as predictors of EA and provides a nuanced understanding of rural EA.","PeriodicalId":48223,"journal":{"name":"Society & Natural Resources","volume":"36 1","pages":"405 - 424"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Society & Natural Resources","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2023.2169423","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DEVELOPMENT STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Previous research found that socio-demographic characteristics are significant predictors of environmental behaviors and attitudes, including political affiliation and religious identity. However, the consistency of religious identity and political affiliation as predictors of environmental attitudes and behaviors is still contested. This study investigates whether religious affiliation is a significant determinant of environmental attitudes (EA) or whether political affiliation is a better predictor. Sampling 25 rural towns in Utah, USA. with homogenous religious identities and political affiliations, we replicate past regression analyses from similar studies. We conclude that although our results are generally consistent with the literature, unlike what the replicated studies suggest, religious identity is not a consistent predictor of EA. Rather, political affiliation is a stronger predictor. Our research, therefore, clarifies socio-demographic characteristics that serve as predictors of EA and provides a nuanced understanding of rural EA.

查看原文本刊更多论文

理解环境主义：政治与宗教对犹他州农村环境态度的互动

以往的研究发现，社会人口特征是环境行为和态度的重要预测因素，包括政治派别和宗教认同。然而，宗教身份和政治派别作为环境态度和行为的预测因素的一致性仍然存在争议。本研究探讨宗教信仰是否对环境态度(EA)有重要的决定作用，或者政治信仰是否能更好地预测环境态度。在美国犹他州的25个乡镇进行抽样调查。对于同质的宗教身份和政治派别，我们复制了过去类似研究的回归分析。我们得出的结论是，尽管我们的结果大体上与文献一致，但与重复研究的结果不同，宗教身份并不是EA的一致预测因素。相反，政治派别是一个更强的预测因素。因此，我们的研究澄清了作为EA预测因子的社会人口特征，并提供了对农村EA的细致理解。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Society & Natural Resources Multiple-

CiteScore

4.60

自引率

8.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Society and Natural Resources publishes cutting edge social science research that advances understanding of the interaction between society and natural resources.Social science research is extensive and comes from a number of disciplines, including sociology, psychology, political science, communications, planning, education, and anthropology. We welcome research from all of these disciplines and interdisciplinary social science research that transcends the boundaries of any single social science discipline. We define natural resources broadly to include water, air, wildlife, fisheries, forests, natural lands, urban ecosystems, and intensively managed lands. While we welcome all papers that fit within this broad scope, we especially welcome papers in the following four important and broad areas in the field: 1. Protected area management and governance 2. Stakeholder analysis, consultation and engagement; deliberation processes; governance; conflict resolution; social learning; social impact assessment 3. Theoretical frameworks, epistemological issues, and methodological perspectives 4. Multiscalar character of social implications of natural resource management