IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0174376.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Contrasting effects of visiting urban green-space and the countryside on biodiversity knowledge and conservation support

Author

Listed:
  • Deborah F Coldwell
  • Karl L Evans

Abstract

Conservation policy frequently assumes that increasing people’s exposure to green-space enhances their knowledge of the natural world and desire to protect it. Urban development is, however, considered to be driving declining connectedness to nature. Despite this the evidence base supporting the assumption that visiting green-spaces promotes biodiversity knowledge and conservation support, and the impacts of urbanization on these relationships, is surprisingly limited. Using data from door-to-door surveys of nearly 300 residents in three pairs of small and large urban areas in England we demonstrate that people who visit green-space more regularly have higher biodiversity knowledge and support for conservation (measured using scales of pro-environmental behavior). Crucially these relationships only arise when considering visits to the countryside and not the frequency of visits to urban green-space. These patterns are robust to a suite of confounding variables including nature orientated motivations for visiting green-space, socio-economic and demographic factors, garden-use and engagement with natural history programs. Despite this the correlations that we uncover cannot unambiguously demonstrate that visiting the countryside improves biodiversity knowledge and conservation support. We consider it likely, however, that two mechanisms operate through a positive feedback loop i.e. increased visits to green-space promote an interest in and knowledge of biodiversity and support for conservation, which in turn further increase the desire to visit green-space and experience nature. The intensity of urbanization around peoples’ homes, but not city size, is negatively associated with their frequency of countryside visits and biodiversity knowledge. Designing less intensely urbanized cities with good access to the countryside, combined with conservation policies that promote access to the countryside thus seems likely to maximize urban residents’ biodiversity knowledge and support for conservation.

Suggested Citation

  • Deborah F Coldwell & Karl L Evans, 2017. "Contrasting effects of visiting urban green-space and the countryside on biodiversity knowledge and conservation support," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(3), pages 1-18, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0174376
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174376
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0174376
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0174376&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0174376?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frederiks, Elisha R. & Stenner, Karen & Hobman, Elizabeth V., 2015. "Household energy use: Applying behavioural economics to understand consumer decision-making and behaviour," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1385-1394.
    2. Patricia A Zaradic & Oliver R W Pergams & Peter Kareiva, 2009. "The Impact of Nature Experience on Willingness to Support Conservation," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 4(10), pages 1-5, October.
    3. Sandifer, Paul A. & Sutton-Grier, Ariana E. & Ward, Bethney P., 2015. "Exploring connections among nature, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human health and well-being: Opportunities to enhance health and biodiversity conservation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 1-15.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Tian Gao & Ling Zhu & Tian Zhang & Rui Song & Yuanqun Zhang & Ling Qiu, 2019. "Is an Environment with High Biodiversity the Most Attractive for Human Recreation? A Case Study in Baoji, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-20, July.
    2. Tian Gao & Rui Song & Ling Zhu & Ling Qiu, 2019. "What Characteristics of Urban Green Spaces and Recreational Activities Do Self-Reported Stressed Individuals Like? A Case Study of Baoji, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-16, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kaowen Grace Chang & William C. Sullivan & Ying-Hsuan Lin & Weichia Su & Chun-Yen Chang, 2016. "The Effect of Biodiversity on Green Space Users’ Wellbeing—An Empirical Investigation Using Physiological Evidence," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(10), pages 1-15, October.
    2. Matthew Dennis & David Barlow & Gina Cavan & Penny A. Cook & Anna Gilchrist & John Handley & Philip James & Jessica Thompson & Konstantinos Tzoulas & C. Philip Wheater & Sarah Lindley, 2018. "Mapping Urban Green Infrastructure: A Novel Landscape-Based Approach to Incorporating Land Use and Land Cover in the Mapping of Human-Dominated Systems," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(1), pages 1-25, January.
    3. Anna Borawska & Mariusz Borawski & Małgorzata Łatuszyńska, 2022. "Effectiveness of Electricity-Saving Communication Campaigns: Neurophysiological Approach," Energies, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-19, February.
    4. Manoj Sharma & Erin Largo-Wight & Amar Kanekar & Hana Kusumoto & Stephanie Hooper & Vinayak K. Nahar, 2020. "Using the Multi-Theory Model (MTM) of Health Behavior Change to Explain Intentional Outdoor Nature Contact Behavior among College Students," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(17), pages 1-12, August.
    5. Halkos, George & Managi, Shunsuke, 2023. "New developments in the disciplines of environmental and resource economics," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 513-522.
    6. Carroll, James & Denny, Eleanor & Lyons, Ronan C. & Petrov, Ivan, 2024. "Better energy cost information changes household property investment decisions: Evidence from a nationwide experiment," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    7. Luciano Cavalcante Siebert & Alexandre Rasi Aoki & Germano Lambert-Torres & Nelson Lambert-de-Andrade & Nikolaos G. Paterakis, 2020. "An Agent-Based Approach for the Planning of Distribution Grids as a Socio-Technical System," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-13, September.
    8. Peta Brom & Kristine Engemann & Christina Breed & Maya Pasgaard & Titilope Onaolapo & Jens-Christian Svenning, 2023. "A Decision Support Tool for Green Infrastructure Planning in the Face of Rapid Urbanization," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-19, February.
    9. Goggins, Gary & Rau, Henrike & Moran, Paul & Fahy, Frances & Goggins, Jamie, 2022. "The role of culture in advancing sustainable energy policy and practice," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).
    10. Daminato, Claudio & Diaz-Farina, Eugenio & Filippini, Massimo & Padrón-Fumero, Noemi, 2021. "The impact of smart meters on residential water consumption: Evidence from a natural experiment in the Canary Islands," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(C).
    11. Luis Felipe Giraldo & Kevin M Passino, 2017. "Dynamics of Cooperation in a Task Completion Social Dilemma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-25, January.
    12. Tian Gao & Rui Song & Ling Zhu & Ling Qiu, 2019. "What Characteristics of Urban Green Spaces and Recreational Activities Do Self-Reported Stressed Individuals Like? A Case Study of Baoji, China," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(8), pages 1-16, April.
    13. Johansen, Katinka & Johra, Hicham, 2022. "A niche technique overlooked in the Danish district heating sector? Exploring socio-technical perspectives of short-term thermal energy storage for building energy flexibility," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 256(C).
    14. Karen T. Lourdes & Chris N. Gibbins & Perrine Hamel & Ruzana Sanusi & Badrul Azhar & Alex M. Lechner, 2021. "A Review of Urban Ecosystem Services Research in Southeast Asia," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-21, January.
    15. Fang, Ximeng & Goette, Lorenz & Rockenbach, Bettina & Sutter, Matthias & Tiefenbeck, Verena & Schoeb, Samuel & Staake, Thorsten, 2023. "Complementarities in behavioral interventions: Evidence from a field experiment on resource conservation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    16. María Julieta Arias & Pablo Andrés Vaschetto & Mercedes Marchese & Luciana Regaldo & Ana María Gagneten, 2022. "Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Zooplankton Communities as Ecological Indicators in Urban Wetlands of Argentina," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-21, March.
    17. Walzberg, Julien & Dandres, Thomas & Merveille, Nicolas & Cheriet, Mohamed & Samson, Réjean, 2020. "Should we fear the rebound effect in smart homes?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    18. Wandicleia Lopes Sousa & Thiago Almeida Vieira, 2022. "An Amazonian lake and the quality of life of its women: the case of Maicá, Santarém, Brazil (2018)," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 1428-1444, January.
    19. Lee Roberts & Monomita Nandy & Abeer Hassan & Suman Lodh & Ahmed A. Elamer, 2022. "Corporate Accountability Towards Species Extinction Protection: Insights from Ecologically Forward-Thinking Companies," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 178(3), pages 571-595, July.
    20. Kendel, Adnane & Lazaric, Nathalie & Maréchal, Kevin, 2017. "What do people ‘learn by looking’ at direct feedback on their energy consumption? Results of a field study in Southern France," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 593-605.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0174376. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.