Private land conservation decision-making: An integrative social science model

被引:31
作者
Epanchin-Niell, Rebecca S. [1 ,8 ]
Jackson-Smith, Douglas B. [2 ]
Wilson, Robyn S. [3 ]
Ashenfarb, Matthew [1 ]
Dayer, Ashley A. [4 ]
Hillis, Vicken [5 ]
Iacona, Gwenllian D. [1 ]
Markowitz, Ezra M. [6 ]
Marquart-Pyatt, Sandra T. [7 ]
Treakle, Tyler [1 ]
机构
[1] Resources Future Inc, 1616 P St NW, Washington, DC 20036 USA
[2] Ohio State Univ, Sch Environm & Nat Resources, Wooster, OH 44691 USA
[3] Ohio State Univ, Sch Environm & Nat Resources, Columbus, OH 43210 USA
[4] Virginia Tech, Dept Fish & Wildlife Conservat, Blacksburg, VA 24061 USA
[5] Boise State Univ, Human Environm Syst, Boise, ID 83725 USA
[6] Univ Massachusetts, Dept Environm Conservat, Amherst, MA 01003 USA
[7] Michigan State Univ, Dept Sociol, E Lansing, MI 48824 USA
[8] Univ Maryland, Dept Agr & Resource Econ, College Pk, MD 20742 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
Conservation behavior; Best management practices; Integrated conceptual model; Private land decisions; Agriculture; Forest management; CLIMATE-CHANGE; BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION; ECOSYSTEM SERVICES; ALGAL BLOOM; LANDOWNERS PARTICIPATION; FOREST LANDOWNERS; PRACTICE ADOPTION; FARMER; MANAGEMENT; BEHAVIOR;
D O I
10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113961
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Owners and managers of private lands make decisions that have implications well beyond the boundaries of their land, influencing species conservation, water quality, wildfire risk, and other environmental outcomes with important societal and ecological consequences. Understanding how these decisions are made is key for informing interventions to support better outcomes. However, explanations of the drivers of decision making are often siloed in social science disciplines that differ in focus, theory, methodology, and terminology, hindering holistic understanding. To address these challenges, we propose a conceptual model of private land conservation decision-making that integrates theoretical perspectives from three dominant disciplines: economics, sociology, and psychology. The model highlights how heterogeneity in behavior across decision-makers is driven by in-teractions between the decision context, attributes of potential conservation behaviors, and attributes of the decision-maker. These differences in both individual attributes and context shape decision-makers' constraints and the potential and perceived consequences of a behavior. The model also captures how perceived conse-quences are evaluated and weighted through a decision-making process that may range from systematic to heuristic, ultimately resulting in selection of a behavior. Outcomes of private land behaviors across the landscape feed back to alter the socio-environmental conditions that shape future decisions. The conceptual model is designed to facilitate better communication, collaboration, and integration across disciplines and points to methodological innovations that can expand understanding of private land decision-making. The model also can be used to illuminate how behavior change interventions (e.g., policies, regulations, technical assistance) could be designed to target different drivers to encourage environmentally and socially beneficial behaviors on private lands.
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
[41]   Dissecting social decision-making: A spotlight on oxytocinergic transmission [J].
Coccia, Giulia ;
La Greca, Filippo ;
Di Luca, Monica ;
Scheggia, Diego .
FRONTIERS IN MOLECULAR NEUROSCIENCE, 2022, 15
[42]   Neural mechanisms of social decision-making in the primate amygdala [J].
Chang, Steve W. C. ;
Fagan, Nicholas A. ;
Toda, Koji ;
Utevsky, Amanda V. ;
Pearson, John M. ;
Platt, Michael L. .
PROCEEDINGS OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 2015, 112 (52) :16012-16017
[43]   Advancing Evidence-Based Decision-Making in Large Landscape Conservation Through the Social Sciences: A Research Agenda for the Yellowstone to Yukon Region [J].
Holterman, Devin ;
Wright, Pamela ;
Jacob, Aerin .
MOUNTAIN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, 2023, 43 (04) :A1-A10
[44]   A Cognitive Computational Approach to Social and Collective Decision-Making [J].
Tump, Alan N. ;
Deffner, Dominik ;
Pleskac, Timothy J. ;
Romanczuk, Pawel ;
Kurvers, Ralf H. J. M. .
PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2024, 19 (02) :538-551
[45]   Prefrontal-amygdala circuits in social decision-making [J].
Gangopadhyay, Prabaha ;
Chawla, Megha ;
Dal Monte, Olga ;
Chang, Steve W. C. .
NATURE NEUROSCIENCE, 2021, 24 (01) :5-18
[46]   Social Preferences as an Individual Difference in Offender Decision-making [J].
Jaynes, Chae M. ;
Loughran, Thomas A. .
JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN CRIME AND DELINQUENCY, 2019, 56 (01) :129-169
[47]   Leadership and decision-making practices in public versus private universities in Pakistan [J].
Zulfqar, A. ;
Valcke, M. ;
Devos, G. ;
Tuytens, M. ;
Shahzad, A. .
ASIA PACIFIC EDUCATION REVIEW, 2016, 17 (01) :147-159
[48]   Wildlife Conservation on Private Land: A Social-Ecological Systems Study [J].
Taylor, Matthew ;
Brook, Barry ;
Johnson, Christopher ;
de Little, Siobhan .
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2024, 73 (05) :1049-1071
[49]   Understanding trade-offs and synergies among soil functions to support decision-making for sustainable cultivated land use [J].
Zhao, Rui ;
Gabriel, Jose Luis ;
Martin, Jose Antonio Rodriguez ;
Feng, Zhe ;
Wu, Kening .
FRONTIERS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE, 2022, 10
[50]   The effects of social comparison and depressive mood on adolescent social decision-making [J].
Hu, Yixin ;
Zhou, Mengmeng ;
Shao, Yunru ;
Wei, Jing ;
Li, Zhenying ;
Xu, Shike ;
Maguire, Phil ;
Wang, Dawei .
BMC PSYCHIATRY, 2021, 21 (01)