Search

Your search keyword '"Peterson, Markus Nils"' showing total 6 results
Start Over Author "Peterson, Markus Nils"
6 results on '"Peterson, Markus Nils"'

1. How Combinations of Recreational Activities Predict Connection to Nature among Youth

Author

Szczytko, Rachel, Stevenson, Kathryn Tate, Peterson, Markus Nils, and Bondell, Howard

Abstract

Connection to nature (CTN) can help promote environmental engagement requisite for addressing extreme environmental challenges. Current generations, however, may be less connected to nature than previous ones. Spending time in nature can counter this disconnect, particularly among children. In relation to CTN, this study evaluates the relative predictive power of solitary and social time in nature, specific recreation activities (e.g., camping), and diverse backgrounds (e.g., ethnicity) through a classification tree analysis with 9-to-12-year olds in the southeastern USA (n = 1,285). Solitary time in nature was the most important predictor of high CTN, and social time in nature was a secondary component of high CTN. In addition, in the context of this study, hunting and fishing were the most important activities predicting high CTN. Based on these results, we suggest providing solitary outdoor activities reinforced by environmental socialization to promote CTN for all.

Published
2020
Full Text
View/download PDF

3. The future of wildlife conservation funding: What options do U.S. college students support?

Author

Larson, Lincoln R., primary, Peterson, Markus Nils, additional, Furstenberg, Richard Von, additional, Vayer, Victoria R., additional, Lee, Kangjae Jerry, additional, Choi, Daniel Y., additional, Stevenson, Kathryn, additional, Ahlers, Adam A., additional, Anhalt‐Depies, Christine, additional, Bethke, Taniya, additional, T. Bruskotter, Jeremy, additional, Chizinski, Christopher J., additional, Clark, Brian, additional, Dayer, Ashley A., additional, Dunning, Kelly Heber, additional, Ghasemi, Benjamin, additional, Gigliotti, Larry, additional, Graefe, Alan, additional, Irwin, Kris, additional, Keith, Samuel J., additional, Kelly, Matt, additional, Kyle, Gerard, additional, Metcalf, Elizabeth, additional, Morse, Wayde, additional, Needham, Mark D., additional, Poudyal, Neelam C., additional, Quartuch, Michael, additional, Rodriguez, Shari, additional, Romulo, Chelsie, additional, Sharp, Ryan L., additional, Siemer, William, additional, Springer, Matthew T., additional, Stayton, Brett, additional, Stedman, Richard, additional, Stein, Taylor, additional, Van Deelen, Timothy R., additional, Whiting, Jason, additional, Winkler, Richelle L., additional, and Woosnam, Kyle Maurice, additional

Published
2021
Full Text
View/download PDF

4. The future of wildlife conservation funding: What options do U.S. college students support?

Author

Larson, Lincoln R, Peterson, Markus Nils, Furstenberg, Richard von, Vayer, Victoria R, Lee, Kangjae Jerry, Choi, Daniel Y, Stevenson, Kathryn, Ahlers, Adam A, Anhalt-Depies, Christine, Bethke, Taniya, Bruskotter, Jeremy T, Chizinski, Christopher J, Clark, Brian, Dayer, Ashley A, Dunning, Kelly Heber, Ghasemi, Benjamin, Gigliotti, Larry, Graefe, Alan, Irwin, Kris, Keith, Samuel J, Kelly, Matt, Kyle, Gerard, Metcalf, Elizabeth, Morse, Wayde, Needham, Mark D, Poudyal, Neelam C, Quartuch, Michael, Rodriguez, Shari, Romulo, Chelsie, Sharp, Ryan L, Siemer, William, Springer, Matthew T, Stayton, Brett, Stedman, Richard, Stein, Taylor, Van Deelen, Timothy R, Whiting, Jason, Winkler, Richelle L, Woosnam, Kyle Maurice, Larson, Lincoln R, Peterson, Markus Nils, Furstenberg, Richard von, Vayer, Victoria R, Lee, Kangjae Jerry, Choi, Daniel Y, Stevenson, Kathryn, Ahlers, Adam A, Anhalt-Depies, Christine, Bethke, Taniya, Bruskotter, Jeremy T, Chizinski, Christopher J, Clark, Brian, Dayer, Ashley A, Dunning, Kelly Heber, Ghasemi, Benjamin, Gigliotti, Larry, Graefe, Alan, Irwin, Kris, Keith, Samuel J, Kelly, Matt, Kyle, Gerard, Metcalf, Elizabeth, Morse, Wayde, Needham, Mark D, Poudyal, Neelam C, Quartuch, Michael, Rodriguez, Shari, Romulo, Chelsie, Sharp, Ryan L, Siemer, William, Springer, Matthew T, Stayton, Brett, Stedman, Richard, Stein, Taylor, Van Deelen, Timothy R, Whiting, Jason, Winkler, Richelle L, and Woosnam, Kyle Maurice

Abstract

Insufficient funding is a major impediment to conservation efforts around the world. In the United States, a decline in hunting participation threatens sustainability of the “user-pay, public benefit” model that has supported wildlife conservation for nearly 100 years, forcing wildlife management agencies to contemplate alternative funding strategies. We investigated support for potential funding options among diverse college students, a rapidly expanding and politically active voting bloc with a potentially powerful influence on the future of conservation. From 2018 to 2020, we surveyed 17,203 undergraduate students at public universities across 22 states. Students preferred innovative approaches to conservation funding, with 72% supporting funding derived from industry sources (e.g., natural resource extraction companies), 63% supporting state sources (e.g., general sales tax), and 43% supporting conventional user-based sources such as license fees and excise taxes associated with outdoor recreation activities (e.g., hunting). Findings emphasize the need to broaden the base of support for conservation funding and highlight the importance of considering the preferences and perspectives of young adults and other diverse beneficiaries of wildlife conservation.

Published
2021

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results