Perception-Based Study on the Value of Nature to People and Land Sparing for Nature in Brazil and Poland
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Survey
- How much nature that is left should be spared?Answer options (single response): Everything (100%); Majority (75%); Half (50%); One-quarter (25%); One-tenth (10%); Nothing (0%) or I don’t know.
- What is the urgency to solve the following environmental problems: air pollution, sea pollution, river pollution, deforestation, climate change, water scarcity, lack of sanitation, species extinction, the use of pesticides, soil erosion?Answer options (single response for each environmental problem): Low; medium; high.
- Please indicate to what extent you agree with the following statements:(a) Nature, its plants and animals have a value on their own, independent of their usefulness for us.(b) Nature has value only because it brings benefits to humankind.Answer options (single response for each sub-question): Completely agree; Partially agree; Partially disagree; Completely disagree; I don’t know.
- Background questions: age, gender, level of education, and place of residence (for Poland: city >100,000 inhabitants; city <100,000 inhabitants; village/ For Brazil: Rural; Urban)
2.2. Statistical Analyses
3. Results
3.1. Respondents’ Background
3.2. How Much Nature That Is Left Should Be Spared?
3.3. The Urgency to Solve Environmental Problems
3.4. The Value of Nature to People
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Funding
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Saunders, C.D. The emerging field of conservation psychology. Hum. Ecol. Rev. 2003, 10, 137–149. Available online: http://ajph.humanecologyreview.org/pastissues/her102/102saunders.pdf (accessed on 15 March 2020).
- Clayton, S.; Myers, G. Conservation Psicology: Understanding and Promoting Human Care for Nature, 1st ed.; Wiley-Blackwell: Chichester, UK, 2009; p. 264. [Google Scholar]
- Dietz, T.; Fitzgerald, A.; Shwon, R. Environmental values. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2005, 30, 335–372. Available online: http://www.atmosp.physics.utoronto.ca/people/lev/ESSgc2/18920673.pdf (accessed on 15 March 2020). [CrossRef]
- Garrido, L.S.; Meirelles, R.M.S. Percepção sobre meio ambiente por alunos das séries iniciais do Ensino Fundamental: Considerações à luz de Marx e de Paulo Freire. Ciência Educação 2014, 20, 671–685. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bratman, G.N.; Hamilton, J.P.; Daily, G.C. The impacts of nature experience on human cognitive function and mental health. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2012, 1249, 118–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Crespo, S.; Leitão, P. O Que o Brasileiro Pensa da Ecologia; Editora Brasil America: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Dunlap, E.R.; Gallup, G.H.; Gallup, A.M. The Health of the Planet Survey, a Preliminary Report on At-Titudes Toward the Environment and Economic Growth Measured by Surveys of Citizens in 24 Nations to Date; The George H. Gallup International Institute: Princeton, NJ, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- Dunlap, E.R.; Gallup, G.H.; Gallup, A. Global Environmental Concern-Results from an International Public Opinion Survey. Environment 1995, 35, 7–15. [Google Scholar]
- Simões, S.; Hogan, D. Beyond the Rain Forest: Environmental attitudes and behavior among Brazilians. In Culture and Sustainability: A Cross-National Study of Cultural Diversity and Environmental Priorities among Mass Publics and Decision Makers; Ester, P., Vinken, H., Aoyagi-Usui, M., Eds.; Amsterdam University Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2003. [Google Scholar]
- Research Memorandums. Brazilians Pessimistic About Environment and Brazilians Choose Environmental Protection Over Economic Growth; United States Information Agency: Washington, DC, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
- Kümpel, N. Global Public Opinion Survey on Space for Nature. Zoological Society of London (ZSL) Presentation at the IUCN World Parks Congress 2014. At: Sydney, Australia Volume: Stream 1 Session on ‘Beyond Aichi: Space for Nature’. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295908866_Global_public_opinion_survey_on_space_for_nature (accessed on 5 January 2020).
- Joly, C.A.; Scarano, F.R.; Bustamante, M.; Gadda, T.M.C.; Metzer, J.P.W.; Seixas, C.S.; Ometto, J.P.H.B.; Pires, A.P.F.; Boesing, A.L.; Sousa, F.D.R.; et al. Brazilian assessment on biodiversity and ecosystem services: Summary for policy makers. Biota Neotropica 2019, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Latawiec, A.E.; Strassburg, B.B.N.; Valentim, J.F.; Ramos, F.; Alves-Pinto, H.N. Intensification of cattle ranching production systems: Socioeconomic and environmental synergies and risks in Brazil. Animal 2014, 8, 1255–1263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Latawiec, A.E.; Strassburg, B.B.N.; Brancalion, P.H.S.; Rodrigues, R.R.; Gardner, T. Creating space for large-scale restoration in tropical agricultural landscapes. Front. Ecol. Environ. 2015, 13, 211–218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strassburg, B.B.N.; Latawiec, A.E.; Barioni, L.G.; Nobre, C.A.; da Silva Vanderley, P.; Valentim, J.F.; Vianna, M.; Assad, E.D. When enough should be enough: Improving the use of current agricultural lands could meet production demands and spare natural habitats in Brazil. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2014, 28, 84–97. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Instituto Brasileira de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE). National Household Sample Survey-PNAD. Available online: https://www.ibge.gov.br/en/statistics/social/justice-and-security/20293-supplements-pnad4.html?=&t=o-que-e (accessed on 16 August 2020).
- Szatanowska, A.; Kotlewska, K.; Licznerska, M.; Samociuk, K.; Trackingowe Badanie świadomości i zachowań Ekologicznych mieszkańców Polski (Research report. Tracking Study of Ecological Awareness and Behavior of Polish Citizens). 2018. Available online: https://www.gov.pl/attachment/a93a177c-6eb5-4631-98a5-335b746c12f0 (accessed on 20 August 2020).
- Kuchlar, M.; Bridge, G. Down the black hole: Sustaining national socio-technical imaginaries of coal in Poland. Energy Res. Soc. Sci. 2018, 41, 136–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frankowski, J. Attention: Smog alert! Citizen engagement for clean air and its consequences for fuel poverty in Poland. Energy Build. 2020, 207, 109525. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Burchard-Dziubińska, M. Air Pollution and Health in Poland: Anti-Smog Movement in the Most Polluted Polish Cities. Econ. Environ. 2019, 2, 76–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mikusiński, G.; Bubnicki, J.W.; Churski, M.; Czeszczewik, D.; Walankiewicz, W.; Kuijper, D.P. Is the impact of loggings in the last primeval lowland forest in Europe underestimated? The conservation issues of Białowieża Forest. Biol. Conserv. 2018, 227, 266–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kuboń, M.; Latawiec, A.E.; Scarano, F.R.; Drosik, A.; Strassburg, B.B.N.; Grzebieniowski, W.; Bastos, J.G. Searching for solutions to the conflict over Europe’s oldest forest. Conserv. Biol. 2018, 33, 476–479. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Niedziałkowski, K.; Blicharska, M.; Mikusiński, G.; Jędrzejewska, B. Why is it difficult to enlarge a protected area? Ecosystem services perspective on the conflict around the extension of the Białowieża National Park in Poland. Land Use Policy 2014, 38, 314–329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2017; Available online: https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 5 October 2020).
- Holmes, G.; Sandbrook, C.; Fisher, J.A. Understanding conservationists’ perspectives on the new-conservation debate. Conserv. Biol. 2017, 31, 353–363. [Google Scholar]
- Sandbrook, C.; Fisher, J.A.; Holmes, G.; Luque-Lora, R.; Keane, A. The global conservation movement is diverse but not divided. Nat. Sustain. 2019, 2, 316–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Silva, E.A.; Guterman, R. “Há Males Que Vêm Para o Bem.” Viomundo 2014. Available online: http://www.viomundo.com.br/voceescreve/edson-aparecido-e-ricardo-guterman-ha-males-que-vem-para-o-bem.html (accessed on 16 August 2020).
- Nobre, C.N.; Marengo, J.A.; Seluchi, M.E.; Cuartas, L.A.; Alves, L.M. Some characteristics and impacts of the drought and water crisis in southeastern Brazil during 2014 and 2015. J. Water Resour. Prot. 2016, 8, 252–262. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Marengo, J.A.; Alves, L.M. Crise Hídrica em São Paulo em 2014: Seca e Desmatamento [Water Crisis in Sao Paulo in 2014: Drought and Deforestation]. GEOUSP 2015, 19, 485–494. Available online: http://dx.doi.%20org/10.11606/issn.2179-0892.geousp.2015.100879 (accessed on 9 October 2020).
- Lopes, N.P.; de Freitas, R.P.; Rocha Filho, R.C. How Many More Brumadinhos and Marianas Will We be Faced with Yet? J. Braz. Chem. Soc. 2019, 30, 681–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- SOS Mata Atlântica. Observando os Rios 2019: O Retrato da Qualidade da Água nas Bacias da Mata Atlântica. Available online: https://www.sosma.org.br/sobre/relatorios-e-balancos/ (accessed on 16 August 2020).
- Latawiec, A.E.; Strassburg, B.B.N.; Silva, D.; Alves-Pinto, H.N.; Feltran-Barbieri, R.; Castro, A.; Iribarrem, A.; Rangel, M.C.; Kalif, K.A.B.; Gardner, T.; et al. Improving land management in Brazil: A perspective from producers. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2017, 240, 276–286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sistema Nacional de Informações sobre Saneamento-SNIS 2019. 24° Diagnóstico dos Serviços de Água e Esgoto; Secretaria Nacional de Saneamento/Ministério do Desenvolvimento Regional: Brasília, Brazil, 2019; 186p. Available online: http://www.snis.gov.br/diagnostico-anual-agua-e-esgotos/diagnostico-dos-servicos-de-agua-e-esgotos-2018 (accessed on 16 August 2020).
- Fundação Nacional de Saúde-FUNASA. Saneamento em Áreas Indígenas do Brasil: Histórico de Atuação da Funasa e Perspectivas; Ministério da Saúde: Brasília, Brazil, 2009. Available online: http://www.funasa.gov.br/documents/20182/38564/Saneamento+em+%C3%A1reas+%C3%ADndigenas+do+Brasil.+Hist%C3%B3rico+da+atua%C3%A7%C3%A3o+da+Funasa+e+perspectivas+2009.pdf/4c251df2-fad6-4dc1-9497-09c2a8108c07 (accessed on 16 August 2020).
- Associação Brasileira de Engenharia Sanitária e Ambiental (ABES). Suplemento Saneamento e Convid-19 1° Trimestre/2020. Available online: http://abes-dn.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/ABES_Suplemento-saneamento-e-covid-19.pdf (accessed on 16 August 2020).
- Central Statistical Office (CSO). Concise Statistical Yearbook of Poland; Statistical Publishing Establishment: Warsaw, Poland, 2013. (In Polish) [Google Scholar]
- Czerwińska, J.; Wielgosiński, G.; Szymańska, O. Is the Polish Smog a New Type of Smog? Ecol. Chem. Eng. S 2019, 26, 465–474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Bridges, E.M.; van Baren, J.H.V. Soil: An overlooked undervalued and vital part of the human environment. Environmentalist 1997, 17, 15–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aparin, B.; Suhacheva, E. Methodology of uninterrupted ecological education and soil science. In World Congress of Soil Science; Abstracts; IUSS: Bangkok, Thailand, 2002; p. 1685. [Google Scholar]
- Muggler, C.C.; Sobrinho, F.A.P.; Machado, V.A. Educação em solos: Princípios, teoria e métodos. Revis. Bras. Ciênc. Solo 2006, 30, 733–740. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Latawiec, A.E.; Reid, B.; Rodrigues, A.F.; Pena, I.A.B.; Gomes, F.; Pacheco, V.; Strassburg, B.B.N. More effort needed to implement and disseminate soil protection measures for tropical soils. Environ. Res. Lett. 2009, 4, 034009. [Google Scholar]
- Mendes, M.S.; Latawiec, A.E.; Sansevero, J.B.B.; Crouzeilles, R.; Moraes, L.F.D.; Castro, A.; Alves-Pinto, H.N.; Brancalion, P.H.S.; Rodrigues, R.R.; Chazdon, R.L.; et al. Look down—There is a gap—The need to include soil data in Atlantic Forest restoration. Restor. Ecol. 2018, 27, 361–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Poland | Brazil | |
---|---|---|
Age (Years) | % | |
<30 | 73.2 | 45.4 |
30–55 | 2.2 | 29.0 |
>55 | 24.6 | 6.8 |
Did not answer | 18.7 | |
Gender | % | |
Male | 56.7 | 32.0 |
Female | 43.3 | 51.1 |
Place of living | % | |
City > 100,000 habitants | 63.2 | N/A |
City < 100,000 habitants | 17.8 | N/A |
Village | 19 | N/A |
Rural | N/A | 2.3 |
Urban | N/A | 77.7 |
Missing | N/A | 20 |
Level of education | % | |
Primary | 0.9 | 3.0 |
Secondary | 84.1 | 37.1 |
Technical | 10.3 | 1.1 |
Higher | 4.7 | 41.6 |
None or did not answer | 0 | 17.3 |
Poland | Brazil | |||
---|---|---|---|---|
Percentage of nature that is left that should be spared | N | % | N | % |
Everything (100%) | 41 | 12.80 | 525 | 51.0 |
Majority (75%) | 95 | 29.40 | 326 | 31.7 |
Half (50%) | 146 | 45.60 | 26 | 2.5 |
One-quarter (25%) | 28 | 8.80 | 10 | 1.0 |
One-tenth (10%) | 6 | 1.90 | 2 | 0.2 |
Nothing or I don’t know or missing | 5 | 1.50 | 141 | 13.7 |
Total | 321 | 100.00 | 1030 | 100 |
Age of Respondent | How Much Nature Should Be Spared (Poland)? | Total | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Everything (100%) | Majority (75%) | Half (50%) | One-Quarter (25%) | One- Tenth (10%) | I Don’t Know or Nothing | |||
<30 | n | 39 | 88 | 86 | 11 | 6 | 4 | 234 |
% | 16.70% | 37.60% | 36.80% | 4.70% | 2.60% | 1.70% | 100% | |
30–55 | n | 1 | 4 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 7 |
% | 14.30% | 57.10% | 14.30% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 14.30% | 100% | |
>55 | n | 1 | 2 | 59 | 17 | 0 | 0 | 79 |
% | 1.30% | 2.50% | 74.70% | 21.50% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 100% | |
Total | n | 41 | 94 | 146 | 28 | 6 | 5 | 320 |
% | 12.80% | 29.40% | 45.60% | 8.80% | 1.90% | 1.50% | 100% |
Age of Respondent | How Much Nature That Is Left Should Be Spared (Brazil)? | Total | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Everything (100%) | Majority (75%) | Half (50%) | One-Quarter (25%) | One-Tenth (10%) | I Don’t Know (0%) | Missing | |||
<30 | n | 265 | 181 | 14 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 468 |
% | 56.62% | 38.68% | 2.99% | 1.28% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.43% | 100% | |
30–55 | n | 193 | 93 | 8 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 2 | 299 |
% | 64.55% | 31.10% | 2.68% | 0.67% | 0.33% | 0.00% | 0.67% | 100% | |
>55 | n | 34 | 33 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 70 |
% | 48.57% | 47.14% | 1.43% | 0.00% | 1.43% | 0.00% | 1.43% | 100% | |
Missing | n | 33 | 19 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 136 | 193 |
% | 17.10% | 9.84% | 1.55% | 1.04% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 70.47% | 100,0% | |
Total | n | 525 | 326 | 26 | 10 | 2 | 0 | 141 | 1030 |
% | 50.97% | 31.65% | 2.52% | 0.97% | 0.19% | 0.00% | 13.69% | 100% |
Environmental Problem | Urgency % (n) | ||
---|---|---|---|
Low | Medium | High | |
POLAND | |||
Air pollution | 9.3 (30) | 38.8 (125) | 51.9 (167) |
Sea pollution | 20.8 (67) | 48.8 (156) | 30.7 (99) |
River pollution | 16.1 (52) | 32.6 (105) | 51.2 (185) |
Deforestation | 24.5 (79) | 49.1 (158) | 26.4 (85) |
Climate change | 25.0 (80) | 42.2 (135) | 32.8 (105) |
Water scarcity | 10.2 (33) | 35.4 (114) | 54.3 (175) |
Lack of sanitation | 9.3 (30) | 49.1 (158) | 41.6 (134) |
Species extinction | 25.2 (81) | 36.4 (117) | 38.3 (123) |
The use of pesticides | 25.8 (83) | 43.3 (139) | 30.8 (99) |
Soil erosion | 33.9 (109) | 56.2 (181) | 9.9 (32) |
BRAZIL | Low | Medium | High |
Air pollution | 1.76% (18) | 21.46% (220) | 76.78% (787) |
Sea pollution | 0.78% (8) | 12.29% (126) | 86.93% (891) |
River pollution | 0.59% (6) | 5.37% (55) | 94.05% (964) |
Deforestation | 0.68% (7) | 9.16% (94) | 90.16% (925) |
Climate change | 7.02% (72) | 25.34% (260) | 67.64% (694) |
Water scarcity | 1.85% (19) | 14.72% (151) | 83.43% (856) |
Lack of sanitation | 1.36% (14) | 11.01% (113) | 87.62% (899) |
Species extinction | 3.61% (37) | 21.95% (225) | 74.44% (763) |
The use of pesticides | 4.78% (49) | 19.71% (202) | 75.51% (774) |
Soil erosion | 5.37% (55) | 33.85% (347) | 60.78% (623) |
Poland | Completely Agree | Partially Agree | Partially Disagree | Completely Disagree | I Don’t Know | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Nature, its plants and animals have a value on their own, independent of their usefulness for us. | 24.9% (80) | 39.6% (127) | 30.2% (97) | 4.4% (14) | 0.9% (3) | |
Nature has a value only because it brings benefits to humankind. | 5% (16) | 22.1% (71) | 42.4% (136) | 28.3% (91) | 2.2% (7) | |
Brazil | Completely agree | Partially agree | Partially disagree | Completely disagree | I don’t know | Missing |
Nature, its plants and animals have a value on their own, independent of their usefulness for us. | 75.9% (782) | 7.6% (78) | 1.1% (11) | 1.4% (14) | 0.6% (6) | 13.5% (139) |
Nature has a value only because it brings benefits to humankind. | 6.7% (69) | 6.0% (62) | 12.1% (125) | 60.5% (623) | 1.4% (14) | 13.3% (137) |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Latawiec, A.E.; Penna-Firme, R.; Pena, I.A.B.; Strassburg, B.B.N.; Drosik, A.; Kubon, M.; Latala, H.; Grotkiewicz, K.; Kubon, K.; Teixeira, P.; et al. Perception-Based Study on the Value of Nature to People and Land Sparing for Nature in Brazil and Poland. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8860. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218860
Latawiec AE, Penna-Firme R, Pena IAB, Strassburg BBN, Drosik A, Kubon M, Latala H, Grotkiewicz K, Kubon K, Teixeira P, et al. Perception-Based Study on the Value of Nature to People and Land Sparing for Nature in Brazil and Poland. Sustainability. 2020; 12(21):8860. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218860
Chicago/Turabian StyleLatawiec, Agnieszka E., Rodrigo Penna-Firme, Ingrid A.B. Pena, Bernardo B.N. Strassburg, Adam Drosik, Maciej Kubon, Hubert Latala, Katarzyna Grotkiewicz, Krzysztof Kubon, Pedro Teixeira, and et al. 2020. "Perception-Based Study on the Value of Nature to People and Land Sparing for Nature in Brazil and Poland" Sustainability 12, no. 21: 8860. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12218860