Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An exploration of intergenerational differences in wilderness values

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

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. A rural area is defined by the US Census as a place with fewer than 2500 residents.

  2. This film United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service 2016 is a project of the United States Forest Service, the Back Country Horsemen of Montana, local outfitters, the Arthur Carhart National Wilderness Training Center, the Wilderness Institute University of Montana, Montana Wilderness Association, Missoula Public Schools, Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribal Education Department, and others.

References

  • Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Instite (ALWRI). 2017. The Beginnings of the National Wilderness Preservation System. Wilderness.net http://www.wilderness.net/index.cfm?fuse=NWPS&sec=fastFacts (accessed 2 December, 2017).

  • Bergstrom, J. C., Bowker, J. M., & Cordell, H. K. (2005). An organizing framework for wilderness values. In H. K. Cordell, J. C. Bergstrom, & J. M. Bowker (Eds.), The multiple values of wilderness (pp. 47–56). State College: Venture Publishing, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Blumer, H. (1986). Symbolic interactionism: perspective and method. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowker, J. M., Murphy, D., Cordell, H. K., English, D. B. K., Bergstrom, J. C., Starbuck, C. M., Betz, C. J., & Green, G. T. (2006). Wilderness and primitive area recreation participation and consumption: an examination of demographic and spatial factors. J Agric Appl Econ, 38(2), 317–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, Jeffrey J., and Daniel R. Williams. 2012. Continued wilderness participation: experience and identity as long-term relational phenomena. http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/40906 (accessed 2 August, 2016).

  • Brown, G. (2002). Alaska exceptionality hypothesis: Is Alaska wilderness really different? In A. E. Watson, L. Alessa, & J. Sproull (Eds.), Wilderness in the Circumpolar North: searching for compatibility in ecological, traditional, and ecotourism values (pp. 105–120). Ogden: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brown, Timothy A. 2006. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research, Second Edition. New York: Guilford Press.

  • Cole, D. N. (2005). Symbolic values: the overlooked values that make wilderness unique. International Journal of Wilderness, 11(2), 23–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cordell, H. K., Tarrant, M. A., & Green, G. T. (2003). Is the public viewpoint of wilderness shifting? International Journal of Wilderness, 9(2), 27–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cordell, H. K., Bergstrom, J. C., & Bowker, J. M. (Eds.). (2005). The multiple values of wilderness. State College: Venture Publishing, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Cortese, A. D. (2003). The critical role of higher education in creating a sustainable future. Planning for Higher Education, 1, 15–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutter, S. L., Boruff, B. J., & Lynn Shirley, W. (2003). Social vulnerability to environmental hazards. Soc Sci Q, 84(2), 242–261.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dickinson, E. (2013). The misdiagnosis: rethinking “nature-deficit disorder.”. Environmental Communication, 7(3), 315–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Russell Neuman, W., & Robinson, J. P. (2001). Social implications of the internet. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 307–336.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durkheim, Emile. 1895. The rules of sociological method, 1964. Edited by George E.G. Catlin, Translated by Sarah A. Solovay & John H. Mueller. New York: The Free Press of Glenco.

  • Eide, E., & Showalter, M. H. (1998). The effect of school quality on student performance: a quantile regression approach. Economics Letters, 58(3), 345–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granovetter, M. (1985). Economics action and social structure: the problem of embeddedness. The American Journal of Sociology, 91(3), 481–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Green, G. (2006). Wilderness and primitive area recreation participation and consumption: an examination of demographic and spatial factors. Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, 38(2), 317–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, C. Y., Bowker, J. M., Bergstrom, J. C., & Ken Cordell, H. (2004). Wilderness values in America: does immigrant status or ethnicity matter? Society and Natural Resources, 17(7), 611–628.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, H. F. (1960). The application of electronic computers to factor analysis. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 141–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316446002000116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, G. N., Hughey, K. F. D., & Cullen, R. (2016). Ethnic and Immigrant Differences in Environmental Values and Behaviors. Society & Natural Resources, 29(11), 1280–1295. https://doi.org/10.1080/08941920.2016.1195029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knox, Paul and Steven Pinch. 2014. Urban social geography. New York, NY: Routledge.

  • LaHuis, D. M., Hartman, M. J., Hakoyama, S., & Clark, P. C. (2014). Explained variance measures for multilevel models. Organizational Research Methods, 17(4), 433–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenhart, Amanda, Aaron Smith, Monica Anderson, Maeve Duggan and Andrew Perrin. 2015. Teens, technology & friendships. http://www.pewinternet.org/files/2015/08/Teens-and-Friendships-FINAL2.pdf (accessed 26 August 2016).

  • Louv, R. (2005). Last child in the woods: saving our children from nature-deficit disorder. Chapel Hill: Algonquin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luke, D. (2004). Multilevel modeling. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mc Cright, A. M. (2010). The effects of gender on climate change knowledge and concern in the American public. Population and Environment, 32(1), 66–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-010-0113-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mc Cright, A. M., & Xiao, C. (2014). Gender and environmental concern: insights from recent work and for future research. Society and Natural Resources, 27(10), 1109–1113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Metz, Anne Loyer. 2014. Back to nature: the impact of nature relatedness on empathy and narcissism in the millennial generation. Educational Specialist. Paper 65. http://commons.lib.jmu.edu/edspec201019/65/ (accessed 1 August, 2016).

  • Mountford, H., & Kepler, J. H. (1999). Financing incentives for the protection of diversity. The Science of the Total Environment, 240, 133–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Education Association (NEA). 2008. Rankings and estimates 2008—Table 5. Current expenditures ($) per student in public K-12 schools, 2007–08. http://www.nea.org/home/29402.htm (accessed 1 August 2016).

  • National Institutes of Health (NIH). 2016. TOXMAP. Environmental Health Maps. https://toxmap-classic.nlm.nih.gov/toxmap/superfund/mapControls.do (accessed 16 November 2017).

  • National Survey on Recreation and the Environment (NSRE). 2000-2008. The Interagency National Survey Consortium, coordinated by the USDA Forest Service, Recreation, Wilderness, and Demographics Trends Research Group, Athens, GA and the Human Dimensions Research Laboratory, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN.

  • National Visitor Use Monitoring Survey (NVUM). 2016. Gender—wilderness. USDA Forest Service. http://apps.fs.fed.us/nfs/nrm/nvum/results/R01-R02-R03-R04-R05-R06-R08-R09-R10.aspx/Round3/D01/ALL?filename=Gender&format=PortableDocFormat (accessed 10 July 2016).

  • North American Association of Environmental Education (NAAEE). 2014. State Environmental Literacy Plans. 2014 Status Report. http://resources.spaces3.com/6da06a34-371b-4a70-a14b-4662fcf9a202.pdf (accessed 5 August 2016).

  • Pampel, F. C., & Hunter, L. M. (2012). Cohort change, diffusion, and support for environmental spending in the United States. Am J Sociol, 118(2), 420–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peng, Gang, Ying Wang and Rammohan Kasuganti. 2009. The impact of technological embeddedness on household computer adoption. Midwest United States Association for Information Systems Conference (MWAIS) 2009 Proceedings. Paper 21.

  • Rasch, Rebecca and Beth Hahn. A spatial demographic approach to wilderness management. International Journal of Wilderness. Forthcoming 2018.

  • Ratcliffe, Michael. 2016. A century of delineating a changing landscape: the Census Bureau’s Urban and Rural Classification, 1910 To 2010. U.S. Census Bureau, Geography Division. Washington, D.C. http://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/reference/ua/Century_of_Defining_Urban.pdf (accessed 24 February 2017).

  • Ryder, N. B. (1965). The cohort as a concept in the study of social change. Am Sociol Rev, 30(6), 843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sassen, S. (2002). Towards a sociology of information technology. Curr Sociol, 50(3), 365–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, H. W. (2007). Symbolism, experience, and the value of wilderness. International Journal of Wilderness, 13(1), 13–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schuster, R. M., Tarrant, M., & Watson, A. (2005). The social values of wilderness. In H. K. Cordell, J. C. Bergstrom, & J. M. Bowker (Eds.), The multiple values of wilderness (pp. 113–142). State College: Venture Publishing, Inc..

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Tom W, Peter Marsden, Michael Hout, and Jibum Kim. 2015. General Social Survey. 2010. [machine-readable data file] /principal investigator, tom W. Smith; co-principal investigator, Peter V. Marsden; co-principal investigator, Michael Hout; sponsored by National Science Foundation. --NORC ed.-- Chicago: NORC at the University of Chicago; Storrs, CT: The roper Center for Public Opinion Research, University of Connecticut.

  • Steed, B. C., Yonk, R. M., & Simmons, R. (2011). The economic costs of wilderness. Environmental Trends, 1, 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strapko, N., Hempel, L., MacIlroy, K., & Smith, K. (2016). Gender differences in environmental concern: reevaluating gender socialization. Soc Nat Resour, 29(9), 1015–1031.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Teel, T. L., Dayer, A. A., Manfredo, M. J., & Bright, A. D. 2005. Regional results from the research project entitled: “Wildlife Values in the West.” (Project Report No. 58). Project Report for the Western Assoc. of Fish and Wildlife Agencies. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University, Department of Human Dimensions of Natural Resources.

  • Twenge, J. M., Keith Campbell, W., & Freeman, E. C. (2012). Generational differences in young adults’ life goals, concern for others, and civic orientation, 1966–2009. J Pers Soc Psychol, 102(5), 1045–1062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Department of the Interior (USDI), U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau. 2011 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation.

  • United States Census Bureau. 2015. TIGER/Line Zip Code Tabulation area [shapefile]. http://www.census.gov/geo/maps-data/data/tiger-line.html (accessed 8 July 2016).

  • United States Census Bureau. 2016. Table 4: Population: 1790 to 1990.

  • United States Census Bureau. 2016a. FAQ: What percentage of the U.S. population is urban or rural? https://ask.census.gov/faq.php?id=5000&faqId=5971 (accessed 26 August 2016).

  • United States Census Bureau. 2016b. Table A-2: Percent of people 25 years and over who have completed high school or college, by race, Hispanic origin and sex: selected years 1940 to 2015 http://www.census.gov/hhes/socdemo/education/data/cps/historical/index.html (accessed 26 August 2016).

  • United States Census Bureau. 2018. American Community Survey, 2008 3-year estimates. https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtml?refresh=t (accessed 16 February 2018).

  • United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. 2015. National Wilderness Preservation System [shapefile]. http://www.wilderness.net/NWPS/geography (accessed 10 July 2016).

  • United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Forest Service. 2016. “Untrammeled.” online video clip. YouTube YouTube, 21 April 2016 Web 24 August 2016. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=krtp5gFvixc&feature=youtu.be

  • Volkoff, O., Strong, D. M., & Elmes, M. B. (2007). Technological embeddedness and organizational change. Organ Sci, 18(5), 832–848.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vyas, S., & Kumaranayake, L. (2006). Constructing socioeconomic status indices: how to use principal components analysis. Health Policy and Planning, 21(6), 459–468.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, D. R., & Watson, A. E. (2007). Wilderness values: perspectives from non-economic social science. In A. Watson, J. Sproull, & L. Dean (Eds.), Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: eighth World Wilderness Congress symposium (pp. 123–133). Fort Collins: Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, D. R., Patterson, M. E., Roggenbuck, J. W., & Watson, A. E. (1992). Beyond the commodity metaphor: examining emotional and symbolic attachment to place. Leisure Sciences, 14, 29–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yung, L., Yetter, B., Freimund, W. A., & Brown, P. J. (1998). Wilderness and civilization: two decades of wilderness higher education at the University of Montana. The International Journal of Wilderness, 4, 21–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zelenski, J. M., & Nisbet, E. K. (2014). Happiness and feeling connected: the distinct role of nature relatedness. Environment and Behavior, 46(1), 3–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The author expresses great appreciation to the members of the Wilderness Economics Working Group at the Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute for their valuable and constructive suggestions during the planning and development of this research work. The thoughtful feedback from the anonymous reviewers greatly improved the quality of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Aldo Leopold Wilderness Research Institute, 800 East Beckwith Ave, Missoula, MT, 59801, USA

    Rebecca Rasch

Authors
  1. Rebecca Rasch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rebecca Rasch.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rasch, R. An exploration of intergenerational differences in wilderness values. Popul Environ 40, 72–91 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-018-0293-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11111-018-0293-7

Search

Navigation