Same but different: sources of natural resource management advice for lifestyle oriented rural landholders

Abstract

Amenity migration to attractive and accessible non-metropolitan areas changes social and environmental relations with consequences for natural resource management and landscape composition and trajectories. Lifestyler oriented rural landholders are often cast as a problem for land management and extension. Managers and some researchers see them as a cause of landscape and social fragmentation and report difficulties in engaging such landowners on natural resource management issues and responsibilities. In contrast, limited existing research indicates that lifestylers do join and form networks of personal and other contacts for advice and support in land management. We contribute to this research with a survey of rural landholders in southeastern New South Wales (NSW). We explicitly compare the sources of advice for land management for lifestylers with those of farmers. We focus on the types of sources available to rural landholders in Australian regions and their relative importance to these two landholder groups. We find that lifestylers and farmers are different in their sources of advice but that both prefer personal sources rather than sources such as agencies. We reflect on the significance of the differences for engagement with lifestyle oriented rural landowners and for understanding landscape change. AbstractAmenity migration to attractive and accessible non-metropolitan areas changes social and environmental relations with consequences for natural resource management and landscape composition and trajectories. Lifestyler-oriented rural landholders are often cast as a problem for land management and extension. Manager and some researchers see them as a cause of landscape and social fragmentation and report difficulties in engaging such landowners on natural resource management issues and responsibilities. In contrast, limited existing research indicates that lifestylers do join and form networks of personal and other contacts for advice and support in land management. We contribute to this research with a survey of rural landholders in south-eastern NSW. We explicitly compare the sources of advice for land management for lifestylers with those of farmers. We focus on the types of sources available to rural landholders in Australian regions and their relative importance to these two landholder groups. We find that lifestylers and farmers are different in their sources of advice but that both prefer personal sources rather than sources such as agencies. We reflect on the significance of the differences for engagement with lifestyle-oriented rural landowners and for understanding landscape change.

Examining the agricultural producer identity: utilising the collective occupational identity construct to create a typology and profile of rural landholders in Victoria, Australia

“…As Ikutegbe, Gill, and Klepeis (2014) illustrated, most existing landholder classifications are based on proxy measures rather that direct measures of occupational identity. Those proxy measures typically include economic (property profit or income), social (group affiliation) and/or environmental attributes (land management practices such as fencing waterways) (Jongeneel, Polman, and Slangen 2008;Sorice et al 2012).…”

The Paradox of Engagement: Land Stewardship and Invasive Weeds in Amenity Landscapes

“…As reported in Ikutegbe et al (2014) networks of communication and interaction seem to differ depending on whether the landowner emphasizes amenity-oriented land-use or seeks significant income from the land. Due to high turnover rates among property owners and high rates of absenteeism -both…”

“…Opportunities exist for enhanced cooperation among them (Larsen, Foulkes, Sorenson, & Thompson, 2011). Both rely on similar sources of information and advice, and both groups are worried about invasive weeds (Ikutegbe et al, 2014). Also, the desire for knowledge building and access to advice seems to be strong in both cases.…”

“…The third case study builds on the interview data to construct a survey of both ranchers and exurbanites in the Kiama LGA (Ikutegbe et al, 2014). Following standard methodology (see Dillman, Smyht, & Christian, 2009), surveys were mailed to 1,000 households in the Kiama…”

“…The research explores qualitatively the land management activities and perceptions rural landowners have of nature, invasives, and land-use. A third case study focuses on the Kiama Local Government area (LGA), and explores similar themes quantitatively using a mail survey (Gill & Klepeis, 2011;Ikutegbe, Gill, & Klepeis, 2014). Collectively, the three cases show the degree to which there is cross-fertilization between exurbanite and rancher ideologies concerning land-use management and measures to control invasives.…”