THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN AND ACCEPTABILITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AMONG VISITORS TO TO US NATIONAL-PARK SETTINGS

Citation
Mf. Floyd et al., THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN AND ACCEPTABILITY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AMONG VISITORS TO TO US NATIONAL-PARK SETTINGS, Journal of environmental management, 51(4), 1997, pp. 391-412
Citations number
56
ISSN journal
03014797
Volume
51
Issue
4
Year of publication
1997
Pages
391 - 412
Database
ISI
SICI code
0301-4797(1997)51:4<391:TRBECA>2.0.ZU;2-J
Abstract
This study examined the relationship between environmental concern and ratings of acceptability of environmental impacts among visitors at t wo national park settings. Based on the concept of a social ecological paradigm shift, it was hypothesized that individuals with greater lev els of environmental concern are less accepting of environmental impac ts in national parks than individuals with lesser degrees of concern. Sample data came from Cape Lookout National Seashore (N=392) and Moore s Creek National Battlefield (N=236), two national park units in the s outh-eastern U.S.A. Environmental concern was measured by the New Ecol ogical Paradigm scale. Acceptability was measured by visitor responses to 25 items covering different types of environmental park impacts. A nalysis of variance and Tukey's means comparison procedure were used t o test for differences between groups defined by levels of environment al concern on impact acceptability. Significant relationships were fou nd between environmental concern and 15 of the 25 specific impacts in the Cape Lookout sample and 13 significant relationships were found in the Moores Creek sample. However, the relationships between environme ntal concern and acceptability varied somewhat across the two samples. These findings suggested that individuals with greater environmental concern were less accepting (or tolerant) of certain types of park imp acts, while individuals with lesser degrees of environmental concern w ere more accepting of certain park impacts. Differences across the stu dy settings were attributed to the different orientations of park visi tors between the two national park units and recency effects. While th e data reported are preliminary, they should be informative for park m anagement purposes, particularly in the determination of standards for park impacts. (C) 1997 Academic Press Limited.