14 research outputs found
Household Factors Influencing Participation in Bird Feeding Activity: A National Scale Analysis
Ameliorating pressures on the ecological condition of the wider landscape outside of protected areas is a key focus of conservation initiatives in the developed world. In highly urbanized nations, domestic gardens can play a significant role in maintaining biodiversity and facilitating human-wildlife interactions, which benefit personal and societal health and well-being. The extent to which sociodemographic and socioeconomic factors are associated with engagement in wildlife gardening activities remain largely unresolved. Using two household-level survey datasets gathered from across Britain, we determine whether and how the socioeconomic background of a household influences participation in food provision for wild birds, the most popular and widespread form of human-wildlife interaction. A majority of households feed birds (64% across rural and urban areas in England, and 53% within five British study cities). House type, household size and the age of the head of the household were all important predictors of bird feeding, whereas gross annual household income, the occupation of the head of the household, and whether the house is owned or rented were not. In both surveys, the prevalence of bird feeding rose as house type became more detached and as the age of the head of the household increased. A clear, consistent pattern between households of varying size was less evident. When regularity of food provision was examined in the study cities, just 29% of households provided food at least once a week. The proportion of households regularly feeding birds was positively related to the age of the head of the household, but declined with gross annual income. As concerns grow about the lack of engagement between people and the natural environment, such findings are important if conservation organizations are successfully to promote public participation in wildlife gardening specifically and environmentally beneficial behaviour in society more generally
Biodiversity and Health: Implications for Conservation
The human health and well-being benefits of contact with nature are becoming increasingly recognised and well understood, yet the implications of
nature experiences for biodiversity conservation are far less clear. Theoretically, there are two plausible pathways that could lead to positive conservation outcomes. The first is a direct win-win scenario where biodiverse areas of high conservation value are also disproportionately beneficial to human health and well-being, meaning that the two sets of objectives can be simultaneously and directly achieved, as long as such green spaces are safeguarded appropriately. The second is that experiencing nature can stimulate people’s interest in biodiversity, concern for its fate, and willingness to take action to protect it, therefore generating conservation gains indirectly. To date, the two pathways have rarely been distinguished and scarcely studied. Here we consider how they may potentially operate in practice, while acknowledging that the mechanisms by which biodiversity might underpin human
health and well-being benefits are still being determined
Interpreting ‘favourable conservation status’ for large carnivores in Europe: how many are needed and how many are wanted?
Carrots and Sticks: New Brunswick and Maine Forest Landowner Perceptions Toward Incentives and Regulations
From the hydrosocial to the hydrocitizen: Water, place and subjectivity within emergent urban wetlands
Exploring nationality and social identity to explain attitudes toward conservation actions in the United States and Australia
Towards sustainable property? Exploring the entanglement of ownership and sustainability
Can social property survive under neoliberalism?: A view from Australia
This chapter addresses the practicalities and possibilities of Leon Duguit’s social function norm under neo-liberalism. Addressing Duguit’s articulation of the social function norm through a contemporary lens, this chapter argues that the steady shift towards individualistic property relations limits the social function norm’s application. Drawing from key thinkers on neoliberalism, this chapter balances contemporary issues in property, with Duguit’s own evolutionary assumptions on property rights. We conclude by acknowledging the difficulties in finding common ground between the social function norm and contemporary, neoliberal approaches to property, before identifying one major exception. Through BonnieHonig’s idea of ‘public things’, we argue that within the public space there is a potential to utilise the social function norm to aid ideas of community and property. This nuanced application of Duguit locates a nexus where social obligations can function under neoliberalism.Peter D. Burdon and James G. Stewar