Testing the Affect of Modified Sense of Place, Conservation Ethic, and Good Farmer Identity Measures on Predicting the Adoption of Cover Crops in Working Landscapes in Iowa

IF 2.2 3区社会学 Q2 DEVELOPMENT STUDIES

Society & Natural Resources Pub Date : 2023-03-08 DOI:10.1080/08941920.2023.2177917

Elizabeth A. Bennett, M. Burnham, J. Ulrich-Schad, J. Arbuckle, Weston M. Eaton, Sarah P. Church, F. Eanes, J. Cross, M. Williamson

{"title":"Testing the Affect of Modified Sense of Place, Conservation Ethic, and Good Farmer Identity Measures on Predicting the Adoption of Cover Crops in Working Landscapes in Iowa","authors":"Elizabeth A. Bennett, M. Burnham, J. Ulrich-Schad, J. Arbuckle, Weston M. Eaton, Sarah P. Church, F. Eanes, J. Cross, M. Williamson","doi":"10.1080/08941920.2023.2177917","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract While sense of place (SOP) has been used in amenity landscapes to understand pro-environmental behavior, in working landscapes, SOP has not been a valid or reliable predictor for explaining conservation behavior. In this paper, we advance theory on SOP in working landscapes by assessing the relationship between several new and modified sense of place measures and farmer adoption of cover crops in Iowa. We used data from a 2018 survey of Iowa farmers and a Bayesian logistic regression, finding that physical dependence and economic dependence are distinct dimensions of SOP in working landscapes and the addition of a measure beyond SOP of who farmers feel responsible to when making land management decisions provides insights on how social groups are influential in farmers’ decision-making. Our results suggest the SOP conceptual framework has the potential to help explain conservation behavior in working landscapes, and identifies opportunities for further reconceptualization and testing.","PeriodicalId":48223,"journal":{"name":"Society & Natural Resources","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Society & Natural Resources","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2023.2177917","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: 1

Abstract

Abstract While sense of place (SOP) has been used in amenity landscapes to understand pro-environmental behavior, in working landscapes, SOP has not been a valid or reliable predictor for explaining conservation behavior. In this paper, we advance theory on SOP in working landscapes by assessing the relationship between several new and modified sense of place measures and farmer adoption of cover crops in Iowa. We used data from a 2018 survey of Iowa farmers and a Bayesian logistic regression, finding that physical dependence and economic dependence are distinct dimensions of SOP in working landscapes and the addition of a measure beyond SOP of who farmers feel responsible to when making land management decisions provides insights on how social groups are influential in farmers’ decision-making. Our results suggest the SOP conceptual framework has the potential to help explain conservation behavior in working landscapes, and identifies opportunities for further reconceptualization and testing.

查看原文本刊更多论文

改良的地方意识、保护伦理和好农民身份对爱荷华州工作景观覆盖作物种植预测的影响检验

摘要虽然地方感（SOP）已被用于舒适景观以理解环保行为，但在工作景观中，SOP并不是解释保护行为的有效或可靠的预测因素。在本文中，我们通过评估几种新的和改良的地方感措施与爱荷华州农民采用覆盖作物之间的关系，提出了景观作业中SOP的理论。我们使用了2018年对爱荷华州农民的调查数据和贝叶斯逻辑回归，发现在工作环境中，身体依赖和经济依赖是SOP的不同维度，在SOP之外增加一项衡量农民在做出土地管理决策时对谁负责的指标，可以深入了解社会群体对农民决策的影响。我们的研究结果表明，SOP概念框架有可能帮助解释工作景观中的保护行为，并确定进一步重新概念化和测试的机会。

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