{"title":"Eco-Types: Five Ways of Caring about the Environment","authors":"Michael D. Briscoe","doi":"10.1080/08941920.2022.2146822","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":": Across dozens of countries, civil society is increasingly explanations point to the politics and economics of particularly to conservatives. Drawing on two years of interview data collection with a politically and socio-economically diverse sample (n=63) of Washington state residents, and a survey of US households (n=2619), polarized over environmental protection, particularly over efforts to reduce greenhouse gasses to mitigate climate change. Study after study shows us that liberals tend to be more committed to and supportive of efforts to protect the environment and that a growing proportion of conservatives is opposed to such efforts. Existing environmental protection: organizations funded by the oil & gas industry lobby governments to delay and reject proposals for climate action and foment uncertainty and distrust among the public through messaging targeted I enrich our existing understanding of political polarization over environmental protection by drawing attention to the cultural dynamics between liberals’ and conservatives’ relationships with the environment. By asking people who they see as caring about the environment and about their own environmental concerns and commitments, I identified a cultural archetype of the ideal environmentalist and five distinct ways of caring about the environment (“eco-types”). These include the Eco-Engaged, the Self-Effacing, the Optimists, the Fatalists, and the Indifferent. This talk introduces","PeriodicalId":48223,"journal":{"name":"Society & Natural Resources","volume":"36 1","pages":"209 - 210"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-11-17","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/10.1080/08941920.2022.2146822","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
: Across dozens of countries, civil society is increasingly explanations point to the politics and economics of particularly to conservatives. Drawing on two years of interview data collection with a politically and socio-economically diverse sample (n=63) of Washington state residents, and a survey of US households (n=2619), polarized over environmental protection, particularly over efforts to reduce greenhouse gasses to mitigate climate change. Study after study shows us that liberals tend to be more committed to and supportive of efforts to protect the environment and that a growing proportion of conservatives is opposed to such efforts. Existing environmental protection: organizations funded by the oil & gas industry lobby governments to delay and reject proposals for climate action and foment uncertainty and distrust among the public through messaging targeted I enrich our existing understanding of political polarization over environmental protection by drawing attention to the cultural dynamics between liberals’ and conservatives’ relationships with the environment. By asking people who they see as caring about the environment and about their own environmental concerns and commitments, I identified a cultural archetype of the ideal environmentalist and five distinct ways of caring about the environment (“eco-types”). These include the Eco-Engaged, the Self-Effacing, the Optimists, the Fatalists, and the Indifferent. This talk introduces
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