Dunlap and Van Liere's New Environmental Paradigm (NEP) Scale, published in 1978, has become a widely used measure of proenvironmental orientation. This article develops a revised NEP Scale designed to improve upon the original one in several respects: (1) It taps a wider range of facets of an ecological worldview, (2) It offers a balanced set of pro-and anti-NEP items, and (3) It avoids outmoded terminology. The new scale, termed the New Ecological Paradigm Scale, consists of 15 items. Results of a 1990 Washington State survey suggest that the items can be treated as an internally consistent summated rating scale and also indicate a modest growth in pro-NEP responses among Washington residents over the 14 years since the original study.

The personal assessments of the current and expected future state of the environment by 3232 community respondents in 18 nations were investigated at the local, national, and global spatial levels. These assessments were compared to a ranking of each country’s environmental quality by an expert panel. Temporal pessimism (“things will get worse”) was found in the assessments at all three spatial levels. Spatial optimism bias (“things are better here than there”) was found in the assessments of current environmental conditions in 15 of 18 countries, but not in the assessments of the future. All countries except one exhibited temporal pessimism, but significant differences between them were common. Evaluations of current environmental conditions also differed by country. Citizens’ assessments of current conditions, and the degree of comparative optimism, were strongly correlated with the expert panel’s assessments of national environmental quality. Aside from the value of understanding global trends in environmental assessments, the results have important implications for environmental policy and risk management strategies

No abstract

It is widely assumed that public concern for environmental quality is dependent on affluence, and is therefore stronger in wealthy nations than in poor nations. This assumption is tested via results from a 1992 international survey conducted by the George H. Gallup International Institute that obtained data on a wide range of environmental perceptions and opinions from citizens in 24 economically and geographically diverse nations. Aggregate, national‐level scores for a variety of measures of public concern for environmental quality were created and correlated with per capita gross national product. Although the results vary considerably depending upon the measure, overall national affluence is more often negatively rather than positively related to citizen concern for environmental quality—contradicting conventional wisdom.

Fluctuations of bird abundances in the Midwest region of the United States have been attributed to such factors as landscape change, habitat fragmentation, depredation, and supplemental feeding. However, no attempt has been made to estimate the collective role of landowner activities that may influence birds across a landscape. To investigate how landowners might influence birds when the majority (> 90%) of land is privately owned, we surveyed all 1694 private domestic landowners living on three breeding bird survey routes (approximately 120 km) that represent a continuum of rural-to-urban landscapes in Southeastern Michigan from October through December 2000. Our survey was designed to investigate (1) the proportion of landowners involved in bird feeding, providing bird houses, planting or maintaining vegetation for birds, gardening, landscaping, applying fertilizer, and applying pesticides or herbicides; (2) whether differences existed between urban, suburban, and rural landowner activities; and (3) whether landowners that carried out a given activity were sociodemographically different from those who did not. Of the 968 respondents (58.5% response rate), 912 (94%) carried out at least one of the activities on their land and the average landowner carried out 3.7 activities. A total of 65.6% fed birds, 45.7% provided bird houses, 54.6% planted or maintained vegetation for birds, 72.7% gardened, 72.3% landscaped, 49.3% applied fertilizer, and 25.2% applied pesticides or herbicides. Significant differences existed between the landscapes, with rural landowners having more bird houses and applying pesticides or herbicides in greater frequency. Similarly, urban landowners had a greater density of bird feeders and houses, but planted or maintained vegetation in the lowest frequency. Participation in activities varied by demographic factors, such as age, gender, and occupation. Scaling each activity to all landowners, including nonrespondents, across all landscapes indicates that between 14% and 82% of landowners may be engaged in a particular activity, with application of pesticides or herbicides having the least potential involvement (13.9%-55.4%) and gardening having the greatest potential involvement (40.1%-81.6%). Taken collectively, our results indicate that landowners are both intentionally and unintentionally engaged in a wide range of activities that are likely to influence bird populations.