Social Structure, Identities, and Values: A Network Approach to - - PDF document

Social Structure, Identities, and Values: A Network Approach to Understanding People’s Relationships to Forests.

Groups Analyzed.

• 1. Artists/Writers
• 2. Community Representatives
• 3. Educators
• 4. Environment and Parks (Govt.)
• 5. First Nations
• 6. Forest Industry
• 7. MOF Managers, Employees
• 8. Environmental Organizations
• 9. Recreation Groups
• 10. Scientists
• 11. Tourism/Recreation Operators.
• 12. Trappers/Ranchers
• 13. Unions

Groups Identified for Sampling Purposes: Relationship to Forests Quota Matrix

MAIN GROUPS SUBGROUPS Artists/Writers Artists (General) Painters Photographers Writers Sculptors Community Groups Local Politicians Community Forestry Organizations Chamber of Commerce Local Environmental Groups Regional Environmental Groups National/International Environmental Groups Educators Primary Educators Secondary Educators Post Secondary Educators Outdoor Educators Environment/Parks Managers and Employees Federal Parks Managers/Employees Provincial Parks Managers/Employees Local/Municipal Parks Managers/Employees Parks Canada Administration -- Managers/Employees (Dept. of Canadian Heritage) B.C. MELP Parks Division Managers/Employees First Nations (Cultural Background) Representatives of First Nations from a cross-section of Different Language Families in the Six Forest Regions. Forest Industry Managers and Employees (Private Sector): Including: Harvesting, Saw Mills, Pulp Mills, Fine Paper Making, Value Added/Remanufacturing, Forestation/Silviculture, Non-Traditional. Small Business Owners/Operators Managers/Supervisors Workers Private Forestry Consultants Forest Managers and Related Government Employees (Public Sector) Forest Managers — MOF Regional Forest Managers — MOF District Forest Managers — MOF Operations Forest Managers/Employees Other

(Continued) Relationship to Forests Quota Matrix. MAIN GROUPS SUBGROUPS Recreation Groups Mountain Climbing Outdoor Recreation Naturalists Hunters Anglers Birders Local Hiking Groups Other Recreation Groups Scientists Scientists — Ecologists Scientists — Trees Scientists — Plants Scientists — Animals Scientists — Soil Scientists — Water Scientists — Other Tourism/Recreation Operators Tourism Workers Recreation Operators — Owners (General) Guides Outfitters Trappers and Ranchers Trappers Ranchers Unions Cross-section of unions involved in the Forestry Sector.

5 SECTION 2. CULTURE AND IDENTITY VALUES This section examines cultural values. Please indicate with a checkmark () whether, in your view, the items listed down the left side of the page are important for (1) Canadian culture and identity, (2) your own identity. If you feel that an item is not relevant, leave the column blank. You can check one, both or neither column. ITEMS CANADIAN CULTURE & IDENTITY YOUR OWN IDENTITY EXAMPLE: Ice hockey

• 1. W ilderness
• 2. Forests
• 3. W ildlife
• 4. Salmon
• 5. Mountains
• 6. Scenic beauty
• 7. W orking in the woods
• 8. Outdoor recreation
• 9. The Forest Industry
• 10. Logging
• 12. Hunting
• 13. Fishing
• 14. Ranching
• 15. Mining
• 16. Forest Management
• 17. Environmentalism
• 18. Visual art of wilderness landscapes and of wildlife

(e.g., paintings of the Group of Seven; W ildlife photography)

• 19. First Nations’ art (e.g. totem poles, masks, baskets, paintings)
• 20. First Nations traditional beliefs and way of life

(e.g., use of traditional medicines, reliance on hunting & fishing for food)

• 21. Urban lifestyle (e.g., living in a large city)
• 22. Rural lifestyle (e.g., living in small communities)
• 23. Traditional logging lifestyle (e.g., living in a forestry community)
• 24. Living in balance with nature

6 SECTION 10. DEMOGRAPHICS

• 1. Personal Network: The next question asks about your personal networks. W e’re interested in the characteristics of

your “personal community” and whether you know people in certain kinds of occupations and industries, and people with affiliation in certain types of organizations. If you know anyone in a certain area who is an acquaintance (rather than a close friend or relative) check under "acquaintance"; if you know someone in area who is a close friend, check under "close friend"; if you know someone in an area who is a relative, check under "relative". If the category describes your own work

• r organizational affiliation check under “myself”. As in the example below, you may check off more than one box per line.

For example: TYPE OF OCCUPATION OR ORGANIZATION TYPE OF RELATIONSHIP Do you know anyone in the following areas? Would you classify yourself in any of the following areas? ACQUAINTANCE CLOSE FRIEND RELATIVE MYSELF Example 1: secretary ...

• Example 2: commercial salmon fisher
• Example 1, would indicate that you know at least one acquaintance and one close friend who are secretaries, but you do

not know any relatives are secretaries, and you are not a secretary. Example 2, would indicate that you know an acquaintance who is a commercial salmon fisher, a close friend who is a commercial salmon fisher, and that you are a commercial salmon fisher. Now please complete for the following: TYPE OF OCCUPATION OR ORGANIZATION TYPE OF RELATIONSHIP Do you know anyone in the following areas? Would you classify yourself in any of the following areas? ACQUAINTANCE CLOSE FRIEND RELATIVE MYSELF Professional Artist (visual arts such as painting and photography) Professional W riter Sculptor or W eaver Local Politician Member of a Community Forestry Organization Member of the Chamber of Commerce Member of a Forest Industry Organizations Member of a Local Environmental Group Member of a Regional, National, or International Environmental Group School teacher (Primary or Secondary) Outdoor Educator College or University Teacher Elected Chief of a First Nation Band or a Hereditary First Nation Chief Member of a First Nation Band Council or a Tribal Council First Nation Elder Administrative or Business Representative for a First Nation Band or Tribal Council

7 TYPE OF OCCUPATION OR ORGANIZATION TYPE OF RELATIONSHIP Do you know anyone in the following areas? Would you classify yourself in the following areas. ACQUAINTANCE CLOSE FRIEND RELATIVE MYSELF B.C. Ministry of Forests Manager or Employee Private Sector Forestry Consultant Forestry Sector manager or worker involved in Harvesting (e.g. logger) Saw Mill Manager or W orker Pulp Mill or Fine Paper Mill Manager or W orker Managers or W orkers involved in Value Added/Remanufacturing W ood Products (e.g., building wood furniture) Reforestation/Silviculture Manager or W orker Non-Traditional Forestry (e.g., Horse Loggers) Manager or W orker Manager or employee of a Federal Park/ Manager or employee of Parks Canada (Dept. Of Canadian Heritage) Manager or employee of a Local Park B.C. Ministry of Environment Manager or Employee Scientist specializing in plants and trees Scientists specializing in animals (e.g., wildlife) Scientist specializing in water or soil Scientist specializing in ecology Member of a Mountain Climbing Club Member of an Outdoor Recreation Organization Member of a Hunting Organization Member of an Angling Organization Member of a Birding or Naturalist Organization Member of a Local Hiking Group Tourism W orker Recreation Operator Guide (Tourism/Recreation) Outfitter (Tourism/Recreation) Union Representative (Forest Industry Sector) Union Member (Forest Sector) Trapper Rancher

8

Items Used to Construct Abstract Value Indices. Section 1 of the Forest Values Questionnaire required respondents to rate the importance of 79 value indicators. The categories, and codes for these items were: 1 = Not Important, 2 = Somewhat Important, 3 = Very Important, 4 = Extremely Important. These value indicators were treated as interval-ratio level variables in the analyses. Based on theoretical, and substantive considerations, and upon results from factor analysis and reliability analysis, a set

• f abstract value indexes were created. These indexes, and the items that comprise them, are

listed below. To construct each index, responses for the indicators comprising the value index were summed and the aggregate value was then divided by the number of indicators included in the index. The value of Cronbach’s alpha coefficient of reliability is provided for each index below. Ecological Values = .84 Healthy populations of wildlife and fish species Maintaining biodiversity Clean water Clean air Healthy soils Recreation and Outdoor Experiences = .83 Outdoor recreation in wilderness (e.g., large unlogged natural areas) Outdoor recreation in large natural but non-wilderness settings (e.g., areas that have logging actvity) Outdoor recreation in developed natural environments (e.g., provincial car campgrounds, lakes or beaches with facilities) Gaining survival knowledge and skills Having a sense of competence in the woods Having a sense of competence in recreation activities Knowing and identifying natural phenomena (e.g., birds, plants) Gaining an understanding of natural systems and processes Having a sense of connection to nature Sharing time spent outdoors with friends and family Having a sense of place (getting to know and feel at home in a particular natural environment)

9

Items Used to Construct Abstract Value Indices (Continued). Aesthetic Values = .84 The beauty of your community The beauty of natural areas surrounding your community The beauty along major transportation corridors The beauty of natural areas in which people recreate Community Sustainability = .75 Continued existence of smaller cities/towns around the province Low unemployment in communities and the province Community social stability (absence of large population fluctuations) Community economic diversity Community economic stability Community economic growth Cultural Values = .83 First Nations traditional beliefs and way of life First Nations sacred sites and artifacts Sites and artifacts of Canada’s history Economic Values = .81 Provincial economic growth Provincial economic diversity Provincial economic stability High paying work Companies or industries that are profitable

10

Items Used Construct Abstract Value Indices Continued. Work Values = .71 Physically challenging work Work that provides a variety of job experiences and required a range of skills Work where there is a sense of community Meaningful work (work that give you a sense of purpose or meaning) Intellectually challenging work Working outdoors Science and Education Values = .77 Scientific information and education about the functioning of natural ecosytems Scientific information and education about the habitat needs of wildlife Scientific information and education about growing trees and tending plantations Scientific information and education about forest pests and diseases Scientific information and education about the effects of different timber harvesting methods Scientific information and education about First Nations’ traidtional knowledge and use of natural products and areas Scientific information and education about British Columbians’ values associated with forests Equity Values = .66 Rights of future generations (inter-generational equity). Rights of non-human plant and animal species to exists in their natural habitat (regardless of their use to humans) Rights of First Nations to resources on their traditional territories Equity between resource communities and large cities in the province Equity among different resource communities of the province

11

Forest Value Index Indicators

• 1. Ecological/Environmental
• 2. Science and Education
• 3. Community Sustainability
• 4. Aesthetic Values
• 5. Work Values
• 6. Outdoor Recreation Experiences
• 7. Economic Values
• 8. Equity Values
• 9. Cultural Values

12

Figure 1. Theoretical model explaining the relationship between diversity of identities and diversity of forest values.

13

Hypotheses: H1. The more diverse people’s personal networks are, in terms of their ties to people from different occupations/organizations, the more diverse their identities will be. H2. The more diverse people’s personal networks are, in terms of their ties to people from different occupations/organizations, the more diverse their values will be. H3 The more diverse people’s identities are, the more diverse their values will be.

14

Table 1. Zero Order Correlations Amongst Key Variables. Range of Weak Ties Range of Strong Ties Identity Diversity Diversity

• f Forest

Values Range of Weak Ties

• .43***

.17*

• .02

Range of Strong Ties .43***

• .25***

.14* Identity Diversity .17* .25***

• .28***

Diversity of Forest Values

• .02

.14* .28***

• * p .05

** p .01 *** p .005

15

Table 2. Standardized Regression Coefficients for Multiple Regression Analysis Predicting Identity Diversity (Indicators

• f Identities Related to Outdoors and Natural Resources.)

Gender .00 Education (Years of Education)

• .15

Income .01 Metropolitan Residence (Yes = 1)

• .19*

Forestry (Employment in Forestry Sector, Yes = 1) .05 Range of Weak Ties .04 Range of Strong Ties .21* R2 .12** N 157 * p .05 ** p .01 *** p .005

16

Table 3. Standardized Regression Coefficients for Multiple Regression Analysis Predicting Diversity of Forest Values Index. Gender

• .07

Education (Years of Education)

• .01

Income

• .16

Metropolitan Residence (Yes = 1) .26*** Forestry (Employment in Forestry Sector, Yes = 1)

• .19*

Range of Weak Ties .00 Range of Strong Ties

• .07

Identity Diversity .36*** R2 .28*** N 124 * p .05 ** p .01 *** p .005

17 D:\01 2004F FRST 470\Lectures\Values, Attitudes, and Opinions\Networks, Identities, Values.wpd

Table 4 Mean differences of key regression model variables. Measure n Mean SD t df Range of weak ties 0.03 172 Forestry sector 44 10.07 3.50 Non-forestry sector 130 10.08 2.87 Range of strong ties 2.73** 172 Forestry sector 44 5.30 2.52 Non-forestry sector 130 6.65 2.93 Identity diversity

• 0.90

166 Forestry sector 44 13.25 4.10 Non-forestry sector 124 12.62 3.92 Value diversity 3.36** 138 Forestry sector 35 24.71 2.74 Non-forestry sector 105 26.67 3.07 ** p 0.01

18 D:\01 2004F FRST 470\Lectures\Values, Attitudes, and Opinions\Networks, Identities, Values.wpd

Figure 4. Resultant model explaining the relationship between diversity of identities and diversity of forest values.