Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Shifting environmental concern in rural eastern Oregon: the role of demographic and place-based factors

  • Research Brief
  • Published:
Population and Environment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Public opinion can impact the success of natural resource management policies and programs. In this case study, we assess the degree to which demographic and place-based factors are associated with changing public opinions on climate change, wolves, renewable energy, and land development regulations in rural northeast Oregon. Based on cross-sectional telephone survey data collected in 2011 and 2014, our observations suggest declining support for eliminating wolves, increased support for renewable energy, and increasingly favorable views of regulations that limit development in rural landscapes. We find that while demographic change and local events contribute to some of the observed shifts in opinion on wolves, exogenous factors acting at state and national levels likely contribute to shifting opinions on climate change, renewable energy, and land use regulations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Abrams, J., & Bliss, J. C. (2013). Amenity landownership, land use change, and the re-creation of “working landscapes”. Society & Natural Resources, 26(7), 845–859. doi:10.1080/08941920.2012.719587.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR). (2006). Standard definitions: Final disposition of case codes and outcome rates (4th ed.). Lenexa, KS: American Association for Public Opinion Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boag, A. E., Hartter, J., Hamilton, L. C., Stevens, F. R., Ducey, M. J., Palace, M. W., Christoffersen, N., & Oester, P. T. (2015). Forest views: Shifting attitudes toward the environment in Northeast Oregon. Durham, NH: Carsey School of Public Policy. http://scholars.unh.edu/carsey/238/.

  • Brulle, R. J., Carmichael, J., & Jenkins, J. C. (2012). Shifting public opinion on climate change: An empirical assessment of factors influencing concern over climate change in the US, 2002–2010. Climatic Change, 114(2), 169–188. doi:10.1007/s10584-012-0403-y.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cash, D. W., & Moser, S. C. (2000). Linking global and local scales: designing dynamic assessment and management processes. Global Environmental Change, 10(2), 109–120. doi:10.1016/S0959-3780(00)00017-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chavez, A. S., Gese, E. M., & Krannich, R. S. (2005). Attitudes of rural landowners toward wolves in northwestern Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 33(2), 517–527. doi:10.2193/0091-7648(2005)33[517:AORLTW]2.0.CO;2.

  • Christoffersen, N. (2005). Wallowa resources: Gaining access and adding value to natural resources on public lands. In Natural resources as community assets: Lessons from two continents (pp. 147–180). http://sandcounty.net/assets.

  • Dietz, T., Kalof, L., & Stern, P. C. (2002). Gender, values, and environmentalism. Social Science Quarterly, 83(1), 353–364. doi:10.1111/1540-6237.00088.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emmet Jones, R., Mark Fly, J., Talley, J., & Ken Cordell, H. (2003). Green migration into rural America: The new frontier of environmentalism? Society & Natural Resources, 16, 221–238. doi:10.1080/08941920309159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feuer, A. (2016).The ideological roots of the oregon standoff. http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/opinion/sunday/the-ideological-roots-of-the-oregon-standoff.html?_r=0.

  • Fransson, N., & Garling, T. (1999). Environmental concern: Conceptual definitions, measurement methods, and research findings. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 19(4), 369–382. doi:10.1006/jevp.1999.0141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gosnell, H., & Abrams, J. (2011). Amenity migration: Diverse conceptualizations of drivers, socioeconomic dimensions, and emerging challenges. GeoJournal, 76(4), 303–322. doi:10.1007/s10708-009-9295-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gruber, J. S. (2010). Key principles of community-based natural resource management : A synthesis and interpretation of identified effective approaches for managing the commons. doi:10.1007/s00267-008-9235-y.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, L. C., Colocousis, C. R., & Duncan, C. M. (2010). Place effects on environmental views. Rural Sociology, 75, 326–347. doi:10.1111/j.1549-0831.2010.00013.x.

  • Hamilton, L. C., Hamilton, L. R., Duncan, C. M., & Colocousis, C. R. (2008). Place matters: Challenges and opportunities in four rural Americas. Durham, NH: Carsey Institute. http://scholars.unh.edu/carsey/41/.

  • Hamilton, L. C., Hartter, J., Keim, B. D. Boag, A. E., Palace, M. W., Stevens, F. R., & Ducey, M. J. (2016). Wildfire, climate, and perceptions in Northeast Oregon. Regional Environmental Change, 16, 1819–1832. doi:10.1007/s10113-015-0914-y.

  • Hamilton, L. C., Hartter, J., Lemcke-Stampone, M., Moore, D. W., & Safford, T. G. (2015). Tracking public beliefs about anthropogenic climate change. PLOS ONE, 10(9), e0138208. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138208.

  • Hamilton, L. C., Hartter, J., Safford, T. G., & Stevens, F. R. (2014). Rural environmental concern: Effects of position, partisanship and place. Rural Sociology, 79(2), 257–281. doi:10.1111/ruso.12023.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton, L. C., Hartter, J., Stevens, F., Congalton, R. G., Ducey, M., Campbell, M., Maynard, D., & Staunton, M. (2012). Forest views: Shifting attitudes toward the environment in northeast Oregon. Durham, NH: Carsey Institute. http://scholars.unh.edu/carsey/162/.

  • Hartter, J., Stevens, F. R., Hamilton, L. C.,  Oester, P. T., Congalton, R. G., Ducey, M. J., & Crowley, M. (2014). Forest management and wildfire risks in inland Northwest. Durham, NH: Carsey Institute. http://scholars.unh.edu/carsey/211/.

  • Jones, R. E., & Dunlap, R. E. (1992). The social bases of environmental concern: Have they changed over time? Rural Sociology, 57(1), 28–47. doi:10.1111/j.1549-0831.1992.tb00455.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Measham, T. G., & Lumbasi, J. A. (2013). Success factors for community-based natural resource management (CBNRM): Lessons from Kenya and Australia. Environmental Management, 52(3), 649–659. doi:10.1007/s00267-013-0114-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nisbet, E. K., Zelenski, J. M., & Murphy, S. (2008). The nature relatedness scale: Linking individuals’ connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior, 27(1), 1–26. doi:10.1177/0013916506295574.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife (ODFW). (2014). 2014 Depradation Investigations. http://www.dfw.state.or.us/Wolves/depredation_investigations_2014.asp.

  • Rao, J. N. K., & Scott, A. J. (1984). On Chi squared tests for multiway contingency tables with cell proportions estimated from survey data. The Annals of Statistics, 12(1), 46–60. doi:10.1214/aos/1176346391.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schanning, K. (2009). Human dimensions: Public opinion research concerning wolves in the Great Lakes States of Michigan, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. In Recovery of gray wolves in the Great Lakes Region of the United States (pp. 251–265). doi:10.1007/978-0-387-85952-1.

  • Schultz, P. W. (2005). Values and their relationship to environmental concern and conservation behavior. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36(4), 457–475. doi:10.1177/0022022105275962.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scruggs, L., & Benegal, S. (2012). Declining public concern about climate change: Can we blame the great recession? Global Environmental Change, 22(2), 505–515. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2012.01.002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sponarski, C. C., Semeniuk, C., Glikman, J. A., Bath, A. J., & Musiani, M. (2013). Heterogeneity among rural resident attitudes toward wolves. Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 18(4), 239–248. doi:10.1080/10871209.2013.792022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • StataCorp. (2013). Stata statistical software: Release 13. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.

    Google Scholar 

  • State of Oregon. (2015). Election statistics: Voter registrations and election participation. http://sos.oregon.gov/elections/Pages/electionsstatistics.aspx.

  • Thomas, A. R., Lowe, B., Fulkerson, G., & Smith, P. (2011). critical rural theory: Structure, space, culture. New York: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Upham, P. (2009). Applying environmental-behaviour concepts to renewable energy siting controversy: Reflections on a longitudinal bioenergy case study. Energy Policy, 37(11), 4273–4283. doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2009.05.027.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • US Census Bureau (2010–2014). American community survey 5-year estimates.

  • Vorkinn, M., & Riese, H. (2001). Environmental concern in a local context: The significance of place attachment. Environment and Behavior, 33(2), 249–263. doi:10.1177/00139160121972972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallowa County Chieftain. (2014). Area ranchers’ wolf woes continue Ranchers in Northeast Oregon. http://www.wallowa.com/wolves/20141231/area-ranchers-wolf-woes-continue.

  • Walker, P. A., & Hurley, P. T. (2011). Planning paradise: Politics and visioning of land use in Oregon. University of Arizona Press.

  • Wang, T., & Chen, C. (2012). Attitudes, mode switching behavior, and the built environment: A longitudinal study in the Puget Sound Region. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 46(10), 1594–1607. doi:10.1016/j.tra.2012.08.001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xiao, S., & Dunlap, R. (2007). Validating a comprehensive model of environmental concern cross-nationally. Social Science Quarterly, 88(2), 471–493.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA) (2014-68002-21782). Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of NIFA or USDA. We appreciate continued collaboration with Oregon State University College of Forestry Extension, the USDA Forest Service, and the Oregon Department of Forestry. Special thanks to Paul Oester at Oregon State University Extension Service and Nils Christoffersen, Executive Director of Wallowa Resources, for their support and involvement in the CAFOR project. This study complies with US law and is approved by the Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects in Research at the University of Colorado Boulder and the University of New Hampshire.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Environmental Studies Program, University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, 80309, USA

    Angela E. Boag & Joel Hartter

  2. Sociology Department, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, 03824, USA

    Lawrence C. Hamilton

  3. Carsey School of Public Policy, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, 03824, USA

    Lawrence C. Hamilton, Joel Hartter & Mark J. Ducey

  4. Department of Geography and Geosciences, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, 40292, USA

    Forrest R. Stevens

  5. Institute for the Study of Earth, Oceans and Space, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, 03824, USA

    Michael W. Palace

  6. Department of Earth Sciences, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, 03824, USA

    Michael W. Palace

  7. Department of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, 03824, USA

    Mark J. Ducey

  8. MacAllister Building Suite S101, 4001 Discovery Drive, Boulder, CO, 80303, USA

    Angela E. Boag

Authors
  1. Angela E. Boag
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lawrence C. Hamilton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joel Hartter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Forrest R. Stevens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael W. Palace
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mark J. Ducey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angela E. Boag.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 22 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Boag, A.E., Hamilton, L.C., Hartter, J. et al. Shifting environmental concern in rural eastern Oregon: the role of demographic and place-based factors. Popul Environ 38, 207–216 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-016-0261-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-016-0261-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation