IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v10y2018i9p3178-d167971.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

University Students’ Social Demand of a Blue Space and the Influence of Life Experiences

Author

Listed:
  • Jason P. Julian

    (Department of Geography, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX 78666-4684, USA)

  • Graham S. Daly

    (Department of Geography, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX 78666-4684, USA)

  • Russell C. Weaver

    (Department of Geography, Texas State University, San Marcos, TX 78666-4684, USA)

Abstract

Blue spaces such as rivers provide many ecosystem services (ES), including freshwater for consumption, habitat, water quality regulation, and multiple cultural amenities. While many studies have quantified the biophysical supply of ES provided by rivers, fewer have explored the social demand for ES due to the considerable effort involved in collecting these data. The San Marcos River (SMR) and the Texas State University (TXST) students that use this blue space represent a dynamic social-ecological system (SES) where nature experiences shape student values of the system. In this study, we survey the TXST student population about their use, value, and perception of the SMR, a highly used river of which headwaters originate on and flow through campus. From our extensive survey of these students, we find that educational and life experiences matter. Overall, we find that student exposure to the SMR in space, time, and experience does have measurable effects on their use, value, and perception of ES. This SES study demonstrates the importance of life experiences, place-based knowledge, and experiential learning in influencing one’s well-being and value of natural environments.

Suggested Citation

  • Jason P. Julian & Graham S. Daly & Russell C. Weaver, 2018. "University Students’ Social Demand of a Blue Space and the Influence of Life Experiences," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-30, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:3178-:d:167971
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/3178/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/10/9/3178/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bertram, Christine & Rehdanz, Katrin, 2015. "Preferences for cultural urban ecosystem services: Comparing attitudes, perception, and use," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 12(C), pages 187-199.
    2. de Groot, Rudolf S. & Wilson, Matthew A. & Boumans, Roelof M. J., 2002. "A typology for the classification, description and valuation of ecosystem functions, goods and services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(3), pages 393-408, June.
    3. Crossman, Neville D. & Burkhard, Benjamin & Nedkov, Stoyan & Willemen, Louise & Petz, Katalin & Palomo, Ignacio & Drakou, Evangelia G. & Martín-Lopez, Berta & McPhearson, Timon & Boyanova, Kremena & , 2013. "A blueprint for mapping and modelling ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 4-14.
    4. Chan, Kai M.A. & Satterfield, Terre & Goldstein, Joshua, 2012. "Rethinking ecosystem services to better address and navigate cultural values," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 8-18.
    5. Fulford, Richard & Yoskowitz, David & Russell, Marc & Dantin, Darrin & Rogers, John, 2016. "Habitat and recreational fishing opportunity in Tampa Bay: Linking ecological and ecosystem services to human beneficiaries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 64-74.
    6. Hein, Lars & van Koppen, Kris & de Groot, Rudolf S. & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2006. "Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(2), pages 209-228, May.
    7. Larson, Lincoln R. & Keith, Samuel J. & Fernandez, Mariela & Hallo, Jeffrey C. & Shafer, C. Scott & Jennings, Viniece, 2016. "Ecosystem services and urban greenways: What's the public's perspective?," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PA), pages 111-116.
    8. Cebrián-Piqueras, M.A. & Karrasch, L. & Kleyer, M., 2017. "Coupling stakeholder assessments of ecosystem services with biophysical ecosystem properties reveals importance of social contexts," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 108-115.
    9. Kenter, Jasper O. & O'Brien, Liz & Hockley, Neal & Ravenscroft, Neil & Fazey, Ioan & Irvine, Katherine N. & Reed, Mark S. & Christie, Michael & Brady, Emily & Bryce, Rosalind & Church, Andrew & Cooper, 2015. "What are shared and social values of ecosystems?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 86-99.
    10. Wei, Hejie & Fan, Weiguo & Wang, Xuechao & Lu, Nachuan & Dong, Xiaobin & Zhao, Yanan & Ya, Xijia & Zhao, Yifei, 2017. "Integrating supply and social demand in ecosystem services assessment: A review," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 15-27.
    11. Fish, Robert & Church, Andrew & Winter, Michael, 2016. "Conceptualising cultural ecosystem services: A novel framework for research and critical engagement," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 208-217.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Erik D. Slawsky & Joel C. Hoffman & Kristen N. Cowan & Kristen M. Rappazzo, 2022. "Beneficial Use Impairments, Degradation of Aesthetics, and Human Health: A Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(10), pages 1-17, May.
    2. Matthew L. Richardson & Ashley D. Milton & Elgloria Harrison, 2020. "People with Different Educational Attainment in Washington, DC, USA have Differential Knowledge and Perceptions about Environmental Issues," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-19, March.
    3. Christina W. Lopez & Madeline T. Wade & Jason P. Julian, 2023. "Nature–Human Relational Models in a Riverine Social–Ecological System: San Marcos River, TX, USA," Geographies, MDPI, vol. 3(2), pages 1-49, March.
    4. Liangjian Yang & Kaijun Cao, 2022. "Cultural Ecosystem Services Research Progress and Future Prospects: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, September.
    5. Argyro Anna Kanelli & Margarita Kokkinaki & Marios-Dimitrios Sinvare & Chrisovalantis Malesios & Panayiotis G. Dimitrakopoulos & Olga-Ioanna Kalantzi, 2023. "Keep Calm and Go Out: Urban Nature Exposure, Mental Health, and Perceived Value during the COVID-19 Lockdown," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, May.
    6. Madeline T. Wade & Jason P. Julian & Kevin S. Jeffery & Sarah M. Davidson, 2023. "A Participatory Approach to Assess Social Demand and Value of Urban Waterscapes: A Case Study in San Marcos, Texas, USA," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-39, May.
    7. Pablo Rodríguez-Lozano & Cleo Woelfle-Erskine & Michael T. Bogan & Stephanie M. Carlson, 2020. "Are Non-Perennial Rivers Considered as Valuable and Worthy of Conservation as Perennial Rivers?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(14), pages 1-13, July.
    8. Chien, Herlin & Saito, Osamu, 2021. "Evaluating social–ecological fit in urban stream management: The role of governing institutions in sustainable urban ecosystem service provision," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    9. Aude Zingraff-Hamed & Mathieu Bonnefond & Sebastien Bonthoux & Nicolas Legay & Sabine Greulich & Amélie Robert & Vincent Rotgé & José Serrano & Yixin Cao & Raita Bala & Alvin Vazha & Rebecca E. Tharme, 2021. "Human–River Encounter Sites: Looking for Harmony between Humans and Nature in Cities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(5), pages 1-20, March.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Valencia Torres, Angélica & Tiwari, Chetan & Atkinson, Samuel F., 2021. "Progress in ecosystem services research: A guide for scholars and practitioners," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    2. Dickinson, Dawn C. & Hobbs, Richard J., 2017. "Cultural ecosystem services: Characteristics, challenges and lessons for urban green space research," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 179-194.
    3. Kubiszewski, Ida & Concollato, Luke & Costanza, Robert & Stern, David I., 2023. "Changes in authorship, networks, and research topics in ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    4. Cooper, Nigel & Brady, Emily & Steen, Helen & Bryce, Rosalind, 2016. "Aesthetic and spiritual values of ecosystems: Recognising the ontological and axiological plurality of cultural ecosystem ‘services’," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 218-229.
    5. Schröter, Matthias & Kraemer, Roland & Mantel, Martin & Kabisch, Nadja & Hecker, Susanne & Richter, Anett & Neumeier, Veronika & Bonn, Aletta, 2017. "Citizen science for assessing ecosystem services: Status, challenges and opportunities," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 28(PA), pages 80-94.
    6. Marie Hubatova & James McGinlay & David J. Parsons & Joe Morris & Anil R. Graves, 2023. "Assessing Preferences for Cultural Ecosystem Services in the English Countryside Using Q Methodology," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-25, January.
    7. Pandeya, B. & Buytaert, W. & Zulkafli, Z. & Karpouzoglou, T. & Mao, F. & Hannah, D.M., 2016. "A comparative analysis of ecosystem services valuation approaches for application at the local scale and in data scarce regions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 250-259.
    8. Dong, Xiaobin & Wang, Xiaowan & Wei, Hejie & Fu, Bojie & Wang, Jijun & Uriarte-Ruiz, Michelle, 2021. "Trade-offs between local farmers' demand for ecosystem services and ecological restoration of the Loess Plateau, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    9. Kenter, Jasper O. & Bryce, Rosalind & Christie, Michael & Cooper, Nigel & Hockley, Neal & Irvine, Katherine N. & Fazey, Ioan & O’Brien, Liz & Orchard-Webb, Johanne & Ravenscroft, Neil & Raymond, Chr, 2016. "Shared values and deliberative valuation: Future directions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 358-371.
    10. Schmidt, Katja & Walz, Ariane & Martín-López, Berta & Sachse, René, 2017. "Testing socio-cultural valuation methods of ecosystem services to explain land use preferences," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 26(PA), pages 270-288.
    11. Peck, Megan & Khirfan, Luna, 2021. "Improving the validity and credibility of the sociocultural valuation of ecosystem services in Amman, Jordan," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 189(C).
    12. Bryce, Rosalind & Irvine, Katherine N. & Church, Andrew & Fish, Robert & Ranger, Sue & Kenter, Jasper O., 2016. "Subjective well-being indicators for large-scale assessment of cultural ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 258-269.
    13. Katayama, Naoki & Baba, Yuki G., 2020. "Measuring artistic inspiration drawn from ecosystems and biodiversity: A case study of old children’s songs in Japan," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 43(C).
    14. Stoeckl, Natalie & Hicks, Christina & Farr, Marina & Grainger, Daniel & Esparon, Michelle & Thomas, Joseph & Larson, Silva, 2018. "The Crowding Out of Complex Social Goods," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 144(C), pages 65-72.
    15. Häyhä, Tiina & Franzese, Pier Paolo & Paletto, Alessandro & Fath, Brian D., 2015. "Assessing, valuing, and mapping ecosystem services in Alpine forests," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 14(C), pages 12-23.
    16. Sarkki, Simo & Karjalainen, Timo P., 2015. "Ecosystem service valuation in a governance debate: Practitioners' strategic argumentation on forestry in northern Finland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 16(C), pages 13-22.
    17. Ramos, Alya & Jujnovsky, Julieta & Almeida-Leñero, Lucía, 2018. "The relevance of stakeholders’ perceptions of ecosystem services in a rural-urban watershed in Mexico City," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 85-95.
    18. Gould, Rachelle K. & Lincoln, Noa Kekuewa, 2017. "Expanding the suite of Cultural Ecosystem Services to include ingenuity, perspective, and life teaching," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 117-127.
    19. Richard Smardon, 2021. "Ecosystem Services for Scenic Quality Landscape Management: A Review," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-10, October.
    20. Jacobs, Sander & Martín-López, Berta & Barton, David N. & Dunford, Robert & Harrison, Paula A. & Kelemen, Eszter & Saarikoski, Heli & Termansen, Mette & García-Llorente, Marina & Gómez-Baggethun, , 2018. "The means determine the end – Pursuing integrated valuation in practice," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PC), pages 515-528.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:10:y:2018:i:9:p:3178-:d:167971. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.