Beliefs about Human-Nature Relationships and Implications for Investment and Stewardship Surrounding Land-Water System Conservation

John D. Coley, Nicole Betz, Brian Helmuth, Keith Ellenbogen, Steven B. Scyphers and Daniel Adams
Additional contact information
John D. Coley: Cognitive Laboratory of Environmental and Arts Research (CLEAR), Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
Nicole Betz: Cognitive Laboratory of Environmental and Arts Research (CLEAR), Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
Brian Helmuth: Cognitive Laboratory of Environmental and Arts Research (CLEAR), Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
Keith Ellenbogen: Cognitive Laboratory of Environmental and Arts Research (CLEAR), Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
Steven B. Scyphers: Cognitive Laboratory of Environmental and Arts Research (CLEAR), Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA
Daniel Adams: Cognitive Laboratory of Environmental and Arts Research (CLEAR), Northeastern University, Boston, MA 02115, USA

Land, 2021, vol. 10, issue 12, 1-16

Abstract: When engaging stakeholders in environmental conservation, it is critical to understand not only their group-level needs, but also the individually held beliefs that contribute to each person’s decisions to endorse or reject policies. To this end, we examined the extent to which people conceptualize the interconnected relationship between humans and nature in the context of a hypothetical urban waterway, and the implications thereof for environmental investment and stewardship. We also explored how these beliefs varied based on describing the waterway as having either local or global impacts, and as originating either naturally or through artificial processes. Three hundred and seventy-nine adults from the United States read vignettes about a polluted urban waterway and thereafter reported their investment in river clean-up, their stewardship of the river, and their beliefs surrounding human-nature relationships. Results revealed a common belief pattern whereby humans were believed to impact the urban river disproportionately more than the river impacts humans, suggesting that lay adults often weigh the impacts of humans on the natural world disproportionally. Critically, this disproportionate pattern of thinking inversely predicted investment of time and money in river clean-up. Results also revealed a potential solution to this psychological bias: highlighting local benefits of the waterway decreased the asymmetry of the human-nature relationship. We discuss the psychological factors contributing to this cognitive bias, and the implications of these findings on stakeholder engagement.

Keywords: stakeholder engagement; pro-environmentalism; human exceptionalism; ecological connectedness; psychological distance (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q15 Q2 Q24 Q28 Q5 R14 R52 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2021
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/12/1293/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/12/1293/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:12:p:1293-:d:687578

Access Statistics for this article

Land is currently edited by Ms. Carol Ma

More articles in Land from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().