Abstract
As landscapes change, it is important to understand how attachments and meanings attributed to place may affect environmental quality and social well-being. To understand and apply sociological insights to policy and management efforts it is not sufficient to simply demonstrate that individuals or groups have strong emotional connections with a particular geographical locale. Rather, it is imperative to understand the implications of attachments, and meanings related to them. We focus our attention in this area on watershed management. Quantitative data are used to conduct an analysis of the interactions between place attachment, place meanings, and environmental concerns in a high-natural-amenity watershed in New Hampshire. Results from quantitative analyses important for understanding the dynamics between place attachment, place meanings, and various dimensions environmental concerns are presented. We find a strong role for place meanings, rather than place attachment, in predicting environmental concern, as well as an independent effect of place-transcendent fundamental values.
Notes
a Place meanings were measured using a 5-point Likert scale measuring agreement with statements made: 1 = “strongly disagree”; 5 = “strongly agree.”
a Environmental concerns were measured using a 5-point Likert type scale measuring respondents level of concern with each issue identified: 1 = “not at all concerned”; 5 = “very concerned.”
Note. *p < .05. **p < .01. ***p < .001.
a 0 = Yes; 1 = no.
b 0 = Year round; 1 = not year round.
c 0 = Less than $20,000; 1 = $20,000–$39,999; 2 = $40,000–$59,999; 3 = $60,000–$79,999; 4 = $80,000–$99,999; 5 = $100,000–$119,999; 6 = $120,000–$139,999; 7 = $140,000+.
d 0 = Liberal; 1 = moderately liberal; 2 = moderate; 3 = moderately conservative; 4 = conservative.
e 0 = Female; 1 = male.
f 0 = Less than 12 years, no high school diploma; 1 = high school/GED; 2 = some college; 3 = vocational/trade certificate; 4 = bachelor's degree; 5 = master's degree or higher.