Willingness to accept mobility opportunities: Destination makes a difference

Previous research on employee willingness to accept mobility opportunities involving geographic relocation has generally not specified characteristics of potential destination communities. However, studies of employee adjustment following relocation suggest that community characteristics are critical to employee satisfaction. In order to better understand the factors that influence employees' acceptance of mobility opportunities, we investigated differences in both levels and antecedents of willingness to accept mobility opportunities involving relocation between similar communities and relocation between dissimilar communities. Results suggest that employees were particularly reluctant to accept moves between dissimilar communities, and that the role of career factors, community attachment, and location preferences as antecedents varied depending on the specific nature of the mobility opportunity. Implications for research and practice are discussed.     

The Relationship Between Environmental Concern and Acceptability of Environmental Impacts among Visitors to Two U.S. National Park Settings

This study examined the relationship between environmental concern and ratings of acceptability of environmental impacts among visitors at two national park settings. Based on the concept of a social ecological paradigm shift, it was hypothesized that individuals with greater levels of environmental concern are less accepting of environmental impacts in national parks than individuals with lesser degrees of concern. Sample data came from Cape Lookout National Seashore (N=392) and Moores Creek National Battlefield (N=236), two national park units in the south-eastern U.S.A. Environmental concern was measured by the New Ecological Paradigm scale. Acceptability was measured by visitor responses to 25 items covering different types of environmental park impacts. Analysis of variance and Tukey's means comparison procedure were used to test for differences between groups defined by levels of environmental concern on impact acceptability. Significant relationships were found 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 environmental 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 impacts, while individuals with lesser degrees of environmental concern were more accepting of certain park impacts. Differences across the study settings were attributed to the different orientations of park visitors between the two national park units and recency effects. While the data reported are preliminary, they should be informative for park management purposes, particularly in the determination of standards for park impacts.     

Wildlife management: Managing the hunt versus the hunting experience

Deer hunter satisfaction is investigated from two perspectives, (1) satisfaction with the hunt/harvest and (2) satisfaction with the overall hunting trip experience. Regression analysis is used to determine what variables best predict satisfaction with the hunt and the hunting experience. Results indicate that animal population variables (number of deer seen, shot at, bagged) are the best determinants of a quality deer hunt, while environmental (outdoors) and social (crowding and hunter behavior) are the best predictors of a quality hunting trip experience. Wildlife managers and researchers need to realize that deer hunters view the hunt/harvest as different from the hunting trip experience and need to manage for both aspects of hunter satisfaction.     

Nature and Nature Values in Organic Agriculture. An Analysis of Contested Concepts and Values Among Different Actors in Organic Farming

The relationship between agriculture and nature is a central issue in the current agricultural debate. Organic Farming has ambitions and a special potential in relation to nature. Consideration for nature is part of the guiding principals of organic farming and many organic farmers are committed to protecting natural qualities. However, the issue of nature, landscape, and land use is not straightforward. Nature is an ambiguous concept that involves multiple interests and actors reaching far beyond farmers. The Danish research project Nature Quality in Organic Farming has investigated the relationship between nature and organic farming. This article will focus on an expert workshop held in connection with the project that investigates the way different actors conceptualize nature. Farmers, scientists, and non-governmental organizations came together to discuss their experiences of nature and expectations of organic agriculture. From this interaction, it was clear that nature is a contested notion. Different understandings of nature exist within the three groups and there is disagreement as to whether emphasis should be given to biological qualities, production values, or experiential and aesthetic perspectives. This complexity provides a challenge to organic farming as well as to the implementation of nature considerations in general. It illustrates an underlying battle for the right to define nature and nature quality and essentially decide what organic farmers should work towards. We argue that successful implementation requires organic farmers to carefully consider what expectations they wish to meet. Optimally it is dependent on a dialog between stakeholder interest groups that allows for multivocality and pluralism.     

Indicators of Biodiversity and Conservational Wildlife Quality on Danish Organic Farms for Use in Farm Management: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Indicator Development and Testing

Organic farming is expected to contribute to conserving national biodiversity on farms, especially remnant, old, and undisturbed small biotopes, forests, and permanent grassland. This objective cannot rely on the legislation of organic farming solely, and to succeed, farmers need to understand the goals behind it. A set of indicators with the purpose of facilitating dialogues between expert and farmer on wildlife quality has been developed and tested on eight organic farms. “Weed cover in cereal fields,” was used as an indicator of floral and faunal biodiversity in the cultivated land, and “uncultivated biotope area” on the farm was used as a general measure of wildlife habitats. Functional grouping of herbaceous plants (discriminating between “high conservation value” plant species and “competitive”/“ruderal” species) and low mobility butterflies were used as indicators of conservation value, especially focusing on the few sites left with considerable remnant conservation value. The dialog processes revealed that the organic farmers’ ideas and goals of conservation of wildlife quality were not necessarily the same as for biologists; the farmers expressed very different opinions on the biological rooted idea, that wildlife quality is related to the absence of agricultural impact. However, farmers also stated that the information given by the indicators and especially the dialogue with the biologist had influenced their perception and awareness of wildlife. We conclude that, combined with a dialogue process, using these indicators when mapping wildlife quality could be an important key component of a farm wildlife management advisory tool at farm level.