snh commissioned report 243: review of research into links

Scottish Natural HeritageCommissioned Report No. 243

Review of Research into Links between Enjoyment and Understanding of the Natural Heritage

i

COMM ISS IONED REPORT

Commissioned Report No. 243

Review of Research into Links between Enjoyment and Understanding of the

Natural Heritage

For further information on this report please contact:

Alan Cameron Scottish Natural Heritage Great Glen House Leachkin Road Inverness IV3 8NW Telephone: 01463 725000 Email: [email protected]

This report should be cited as: Land Use Consultants (2010), Review of Research into Links between Enjoyment and Understanding of the Natural Heritage. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report No. 243.

This report, or any part of it, should not be reproduced without the permission of Scottish Natural Heritage. This

permission will not be withheld unreasonably. The views expressed by the author(s) of this report should not be

taken as the views and policies of Scottish Natural Heritage.

© Scottish Natural Heritage 2010.

iii

Review of Research into Links between Enjoyment and Understanding of the Natural Heritage

Commissioned Report No. 243 (ROAME No. F06NC06) Contractor: Land Use Consultants Published: 2010 Background The research reviewed evidence of links between enjoying and understanding the natural heritage, reported on the quality of that evidence, and recommended future research to fill the gaps in our understanding. The research comprised two phases: phase 1, a desk-based search for published reports; and phase 2, a survey of key stakeholders. Main findings

• There is no specific research directly supporting the hypothesis that ‘enjoyment of the natural heritage leads to understanding of the natural heritage’. However, there is research that provides a ‘proxy’ or ‘best fit’.

• There is a connection between informal recreation and understanding of the natural heritage. Experience of the natural heritage through informal recreation can lead to increased understanding of the natural heritage. Moreover, the relationship appears to be cyclical or ‘virtuous’, with participation in recreational activities leading to increased understanding, which in turn can lead to further participation in recreational activities.

• There are many variables involved in the relationship, including factors relating to the ‘individual’ (such as socio-economic factors and the age of the participant), recreation activity type (such as the techniques involved and how close the activity takes the participant to nature) and environmental setting (such as the characteristics of the natural heritage and the provision of information and interpretation).

• Further research is required on the significance and influence of different cultural and socio-economic factors on people’s involvement in natural heritage-based recreation (including the choice of activity and the importance of factors such as cost of equipment and transport). Further research is also required on whether specific recreation activities are connected to increased understanding; this could possibly be achieved through amending current survey methods.

• The report provides a number of operational recommendations focusing on the ‘individual’, the ‘recreation type’ and the ‘environmental setting’.

For further information on this report contact:

Alan Cameron, Scottish Natural Heritage, Great Glen House, Inverness, IV3 8NW

Tel: 01463 725 371

For further information on the SNH Research & Technical Support Programme contact:

DSU (Policy & Advice Directorate), Scottish Natural Heritage, Great Glen House, Inverness, IV3 8NW.

Tel: 01463 725000 or [email protected]

COMMISSIONED REPORT

Summary

iv

Table of Contents Page

1 Introduction................................................................................................................. 1

1.1 Scottish Natural Heritage and enjoyment and understanding .......................... 1

1.2 Research aims and methodology .................................................................... 2 1.2.1 Phase 1........................................................................................................... 3 1.2.2 Phase 2........................................................................................................... 3

1.3 Report structure .............................................................................................. 5

2 Phase 1: THE LITERATURE REVIEW......................................................................... 6

2.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 6 2.1.1 Research overview.......................................................................................... 6 2.1.2 A note on the definition of understanding ........................................................ 6

2.2 Outdoor recreation, awareness, environmental concern and pro-environmental behaviour ................................................................................. 7

2.2.1 Conclusions of literature review on general links between enjoyment and understanding ............................................................................................... 11

2.3 Emotional attachment, place and environmental protection........................... 11 2.3.1 Conclusions of literature review on emotional attachment to place and

environmentally responsible behaviour.......................................................... 12

2.4 Significant life experience (SLE).................................................................... 12 2.4.1 Conclusions of literature review on significant life experience ....................... 13

2.5 Free choice learning...................................................................................... 14 2.5.1 Conclusions of literature review on free choice learning ................................ 14

2.6 Outdoor learning ........................................................................................... 15 2.6.1 Conclusions of literature review on outdoor learning ..................................... 16

2.7 The value of direct experience of nature in outdoor and environmental education ...................................................................................................... 16

2.8 Activity-specific evidence............................................................................... 17 2.8.1 Biking and minimal environmental impact...................................................... 17 2.8.2 Rock climbing and links to environmental awareness.................................... 17 2.8.3 Diving and enjoyment and understanding...................................................... 18 2.8.4 Local marine environmental awareness ........................................................ 18 2.8.5 Walking and outdoor access legislation awareness....................................... 18 2.8.6 Whale watching in Scotland .......................................................................... 18 2.8.7 Conclusions of literature review on activity research ..................................... 19

2.9 Scottish recreation and public attitudes surveys ............................................ 19 2.9.1 Overview of phase 1 findings ........................................................................ 20

3 Phase 2: THE STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION .................................................... 22

3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 22 3.1.1 The methodology .......................................................................................... 22 3.1.2 The subhypotheses....................................................................................... 23

3.2 Subhypothesis 1: Different recreation activities are associated with different levels of environmental awareness or pro-environmental behaviour.............. 24

3.2.1 Literature review findings............................................................................... 24 3.2.2 Consultation findings ..................................................................................... 24 3.2.3 Subhypothesis 1 conclusion .......................................................................... 28

3.3 Subhypothesis 2: There is a ‘virtuous cycle’ between participation in outdoor recreation and awareness of the natural heritage.......................................... 28

3.3.1 Literature review findings............................................................................... 28 3.3.2 Consultation findings ..................................................................................... 29

v

3.3.3 Subhypothesis 2 conclusion .......................................................................... 30

3.4 Subhypothesis 3: Environmental awareness can lead to environmentally responsible behaviour ................................................................................... 30


3.5 Subhypothesis 4: Familiarity with a particular location leads to greater levels of awareness of the natural heritage ............................................................. 33


3.6 Subhypothesis 5: Recreation in certain environments is more likely to result in greater awareness of the natural heritage ..................................................... 34


3.7 Subhypothesis 6: Early-years involvement in outdoor recreation is important in creating environmental concern..................................................................... 35


3.8 Overview of phase 2 findings ........................................................................ 36 3.8.1 General links ................................................................................................. 36 3.8.2 Awareness and behaviour ............................................................................. 36 3.8.3 Recreation type ............................................................................................. 37 3.8.4 A virtuous cycle ............................................................................................. 37 3.8.5 Environmental setting.................................................................................... 37 3.8.6 Early years .................................................................................................... 38 3.8.7 The key variables .......................................................................................... 38

4 Conclusions and Recommendations ...................................................................... 39

4.1 Overall findings ............................................................................................. 39

4.2 Research gaps.............................................................................................. 40

4.3 Overall recommendations.............................................................................. 41 4.3.1 Conclusions and recommendations relating to ‘the individual’ ....................... 41 4.3.2 Recommendations for SNH relating to ‘the individual’ ................................... 42 4.3.3 Conclusions and recommendations relating to ‘recreation type’ .................... 42 4.3.4 Recommendations for SNH relating to ‘recreation type’ ................................ 42 4.3.5 Conclusions and recommendations relating to ‘environmental setting’ .......... 43 4.3.6 Recommendations for SNH relating to ‘environmental setting’ ...................... 43

APPENDIX 1: References .................................................................................................. 44

APPENDIX 2: Additional sources...................................................................................... 47

APPENDIX 3: Consultees .................................................................................................. 48

APPENDIX 4: Questionnaires............................................................................................ 49

APPENDIX 5: List of Organisation Acronyms.................................................................. 55

1

1 INTRODUCTION

In September 2006 Land Use Consultants (LUC) was commissioned by Scottish Natural

Heritage (SNH) to undertake a review of published research into the links between

enjoyment and understanding of the natural heritage1. The purpose of the research was to

conduct a review of existing documented evidence of the links between enjoyment and

understanding, to report on the quality of this evidence and to advise on future research to fill

gaps in the understanding of these links.

The study comprised two parts:

• phase 1 – a review of existing documented evidence and research into the links between the concepts of enjoyment and understanding; and

• phase 2 – contact with key stakeholders to discuss and verify the findings of the research review and supplement these with any additional information volunteered in response to a written questionnaire and follow-up telephone interviews with selected bodies.

1.1 Scottish Natural Heritage and enjoyment and understanding

SNH was set up under the Natural Heritage (Scotland) Act 1991 with the purposes of

conserving and improving Scotland’s natural heritage; promoting understanding and making

it easier for people to enjoy Scotland’s natural heritage; and helping to make sure that its use

and management are sustainable (SNH, 2003).

SNH works to address its remit to promote enjoyment of the natural heritage through

improving and promoting access to the outdoors and encouraging participation in recreation

that involves direct personal experience of the natural heritage.

The draft SNH Policy Framework on ‘Enjoying the Outdoors’ (SNH, 2006) sets out the future

aims and objectives for the work of SNH in this area. The focus is on informal recreation,

activities such as walking, cycling, climbing, pastimes such as wildlife watching and family

and social activities such as picnics, playing, paddling and dog walking.

1 The Natural Heritage Scotland Act 1991 defines the natural heritage of Scotland as the flora and fauna of Scotland, its geological and physiogeographical features, its natural beauty and amenity.

2

SNH’s Vision (SNH, 2006)

By 2020 people in Scotland will be more active and enjoy the natural heritage through

improved opportunities for participation in informal outdoor recreation and the benefits of

this will be better health and quality of life, greater care and understanding of the

environment, and harnessing of economic benefits locally.

Allied to this is the Land Reform (Scotland) Act 2003, which has placed a new emphasis on

outdoor recreation in Scotland. The role of SNH within this is to ‘promote use of the new

general right of responsible access to improve informal recreational access and enjoyment

for all’ (SNH, 2005, p. 21).

The SNH Corporate Strategy (SNH, 2003) sets out a number of key aims relating to

enjoyment and understanding. The aim of ‘promoting open-air recreation’ includes a

proposal to ‘encourage, through an enjoyment of the outdoors, a better understanding of the

natural heritage and help to raise people’s commitment to care for it (SNH, 2003 p. 11). In

addition, under the aim of ‘understanding, involvement and commitment’ it is acknowledged

that ‘a better understanding of how the natural environment works helps people to enjoy and

value it, and builds commitment to caring for it and protecting it’ (SNH, 2003, p. 13).

For the purposes of this study, the term ‘enjoyment’ relates to undertaking informal

recreation activities, as emphasised in the SNH Policy Framework on ‘Enjoying the

Outdoors’ (SNH, 2006). This includes the following activities:

• active recreational pursuits2

• family and social activities3

• pastimes.4

In line with the project brief, the term ‘understanding the natural heritage’ has been defined

as ‘the acquisition of knowledge and its context, the adoption of personal values, and the

motivation and knowledge required to take action for the natural heritage’.

1.2 Research aims and methodology

The overall aim of the research was to conduct a review of existing documented evidence of

the links between enjoyment and understanding. The aims of phase 1 of the research were

to conduct a review of existing documented evidence of the links between enjoyment and

understanding and to report on the quality of this evidence. The aims of phase 2 were to

make contact with key stakeholders involved in recreation provision, management and

research in order to supplement existing findings with both published and unpublished

information relating to informal recreation and the links to understanding of the natural

heritage.

2Active recreational pursuits include walking, cycling, running, climbing, hill walking, orienteering, ski-touring and ski-mountaineering, horse riding and carriage driving, canoeing, swimming, rowing, windsurfing, sailing, diving, air sports, wild camping and kayaking. 3Picnics, dog walking, camping, playing, participating in organised health walks, paddling. 4Watching wildlife, biological recording, fossil hunting, sightseeing, painting, photography, natural history study.

3

In order to test the overall relationship between the concepts of enjoyment and

understanding the following hypothesis was used:

That enjoyment of the natural heritage leads to understanding of the natural heritage.

1.2.1 Phase 1

A literature review was undertaken to establish the validity of the hypothesis. This included a

review of relevant literature, published in English, from the 1970s to the present. The

following methods were used to establish relevant literature sources:

• The identification of significant published work and tracing of references cited in the text. Important sources included Tarrant and Green (1999), Place (2004) and Rickinson et al. (2004).

• A search of academic journals using the following key words: enjoyment, understanding, recreation and environmental awareness. The following databases were used: Ingenta5 and the Educational Resources Information Center (Eric)6.

• A hard copy search of contents pages of periodicals, including the following:

• Leisure Sciences

• Journal of Environmental Education

• Environmental Education Research

• Environment and Behavior

• Internet search for significant sources.

• Search of titles of Commissioned Reports published by SNH and the Countryside Agency.

• Search of Scottish recreation and public attitude to the environment surveys published by SNH and VisitScotland.

A review of all literature sources was undertaken following a set proforma to identify

information such as content, applicability to enjoyment and understanding, techniques used,

and robustness and reliability of the evidence. References are given in Appendix 1 and a

bibliography of additional sources is included in Appendix 2.

1.2.2 Phase 2

A consultation exercise was undertaken in order to locate any unpublished information and

provide verification of the findings from phase 1. The consultees were chosen in consultation

with SNH and reflect the need to include a range of relevant viewpoints. It is acknowledged,

however, that this does not include the whole spectrum of organisations involved in informal

recreation such as youth organisations involved in the outdoors and community education

bodies. The organisations consulted include government agencies with a responsibility for

natural heritage and recreation and non-governmental organisations involved in

5Ingenta is an online multidisciplinary database which contains journal article summaries from over 20,000 publications linked to the full text of over 4500 titles 6The online ERIC database contains more than 950,000 abstracts of international documents and journal articles on education research and practice.

4

environmental management and/or recreation provision. In addition, a sample of

membership organisations (recreation associations) which represent recreation participants

was included. Two research organisations were included as a check for any remaining

published literature that might not have been identified during the first phase of the study. A

full list of the organisations contacted and those that responded is provided in Appendix 3.

The organisations which provided a response during phase 2 are listed below.

• recreation providers and environmental managers

• Cairngorms National Park Authority (CNPA)

• Countryside Council for Wales (CCW)

• Forestry Commission England – Forest Districts (FCE)

• Forestry Commission Scotland (FCS)

• Glenmore Lodge

• John Muir Trust and John Muir Award (JMT)

• Lake District National Park (LDNP)

• Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority (LLTNPA)

• National Trust for Scotland (NTS)

• Natural England (NE)

• Paths for All

• Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB)

• Scottish Countryside Rangers Association (SCRA)

• Scottish Wildlife Trust (SWT)

• SportScotland

• Yorkshire Dales National Park (YDNP)

• recreation associations

• Activities Scotland

• Royal Yachting Association Scotland (RYAS)

• Scottish Canoe Association (SCA)

• Scottish Orienteering Association (SOA)

• Scottish Ramblers

• research organisations

• Forest Research

• Moray House School of Education Outdoor Education Department.

Building on the findings of phase 1, a questionnaire survey was used to alert consultees to

the research and gain their views on the links between informal recreation activity and

understanding of the natural heritage. Telephone interviews were also held with key

consultees to gain more detailed feedback or to follow up queries arising from the

questionnaire response.

5

A total of 35 organisations were contacted regarding the study and 24 organisations

responded. There were two organisations where multiple responses were received these

were the John Muir Trust (4 responses) and English Forest Districts (3 responses). The

response rate was very good overall and included a sample from each of the organisation

types; although these were predominantly from the recreation provider and environmental

management group.

1.3 Report structure

The remainder of the report is set out as follows:

• Section 2 – phase 1: the literature review

• Section 3 – phase 2: the stakeholder consultation

• Section 4 – conclusions and recommendations

6

2 PHASE 1: THE LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This section of the report sets out a synthesis of the findings of the literature review. It

explores the various spheres of academic literature and survey material which provide an

insight into the relationship between people’s enjoyment and understanding of the natural

heritage. This is based on the hypothesis that enjoyment of the natural heritage leads to

understanding of the natural heritage.

2.1.1 Research overview

A number of avenues of literature have been explored within this research, notably:

• research which analyses the factors that influence environmental concern and the relationship with outdoor experience;

• research which analyses the factors that influence pro-environmental behaviour;

• research which analyses the variables and barriers involved in experiencing and learning about the natural environment;

• research which highlights the links between specific recreational activities and environmental awareness and concern.

The spheres of academic literature included within this research have comprised:

• recreation and leisure;

• environmental and behavioural psychology; and

• environmental education.

Other published material which has informed the review has included:

• surveys of recreation participants.

2.1.2 A note on the definition of understanding

The avenues of literature explored within this research, as outlined above, include studies

which have examined the relationship between ‘recreation and outdoor activities’ and

‘environmental awareness, concern and pro-environmental or environmentally responsible

behaviour’. These are all used as indicators of ‘understanding of the natural heritage’ and

have been selected as the best fit available within the literature relating to the project

definition of understanding as ‘the acquisition of knowledge and its context, the adoption of

personal values, and the motivation and knowledge required to take action for the natural

heritage’. It is acknowledged that some of the definitions within this ‘best fit’ literature do

extend beyond the remit of SNH, encompassing not only understanding of the natural

heritage but understanding of wider environmental issues.

As noted above, most of the research examines the relationship between recreation and

personal values and behaviour, rather than the relationship between recreation and factual

knowledge. The acquisition of specific knowledge is examined within the literature on

outdoor learning (see section 2.6), but was not treated as central to the research question

7

because of the formal nature of the learning process and absence of a robust link to informal

recreation.

2.2 Outdoor recreation, awareness, environmental concern and pro-environmental behaviour

There is a substantial body of recreation research which examines the relationship between

outdoor recreation and both environmental attitudes and pro-environmental behaviour.

Published research in this area has been undertaken since the 1970s, and evolved following

the emergence of environmental concern and ‘environmentalism’ in the 1960s. This research

illustrates further benefits deriving from recreation activity, particularly in relation to

environmental protection and the possibility of harnessing greater support for environmental

organisations and causes.

The published research relates well to the general concepts of enjoyment and understanding

as they are defined in the project brief. In relation to enjoyment, the research focuses on

specific but non-technical activities such as walking, hiking, camping and wildlife watching

(all characterised as ‘appreciative’ activities in the research). In relation to understanding of

the natural environment the research concentrates on the acquisition of environmental

concern and the development of environmentally responsible behaviour.

The field of study was pioneered by Dunlap and Heffernan in 1975 (cited in Jackson, 1986),

who examined the relationship between recreation and environmental concern in a US

context. They highlighted several reasons why recreation participation may result in a

greater commitment to the environment, namely exposing people to environmental

degradation, fostering affinity with a particular site and nurturing appreciation for the

environment in an unspoilt and natural state.

Dunlap and Heffernan (1975, cited in Teisl and O’Brien, 2003) were the first to hypothesise

that the association between recreation and environmental concern is stronger for activities

labelled as ‘appreciative’, which involve enjoyment of the natural environment without

altering it (such as hiking, camping and photography), than for ‘consumptive’ activities, which

involve taking something from the environment (such as hunting and fishing). The

categorisation of recreation activity in this way has been explored in subsequent research

since the 1970s in both studies that support and studies that refute the hypothesis that there

is a link between recreation and environmental concern.

A further study undertaken in 1977 (Geisler et al., cited in Nord et al., 1998) noted that socio-

economic factors such as age, gender and place of residence were more strongly related

than outdoor recreation behaviour to environmental concern. This and other similar studies

have resulted in the view that a relationship between outdoor recreation and environmental

concern may exist, but the number of variables and the way they interact makes this

relationship highly complex.

Jackson (1986) carried out a study in Canada to test the Dunlap and Heffernan hypothesis.

The appreciative activities chosen were hiking, canoeing, biking and skiing. Other activities

were categorised into ‘consumptive’ (hunting, fishing) and ‘motorised’ (snowmobiling and

trail biking). The respondents were grouped into four categories – ecocentrists, moderate

ecocentrists, moderate technocentrists and technocentrists – according to their attitudes to

8

the environment as assessed by their responses on two Likert-type scales.7 Jackson found

that in some cases the responses of recreational activity groups deviated strongly from those

of non-recreationists. For example, the proportion of ecocentrists was higher and

technocentrists lower among cross-country skiers than among non-skiers. Overall, data from

this study provide support for the assumption that there is a positive correlation between

outdoor recreation and environmental concern and that this is particularly true amongst

‘appreciative’ recreationists. Further, the results showed that those who participate in an

outdoor activity show more concern for the specific elements of the environment necessary

for that activity than towards the environment in general.

The Jackson (1986) study was unique in that it took outdoor recreation to be a dependent

variable reliant on other factors. From this a model of how recreation is related to the

development of pro-environmental concern was proposed (Figure 2.1).

Figure 2.1 Model of recreation and environmental attitude relationship. From Jackson (1986)

The model illustrates that people choose recreational activities which are in line with their

own outlook on the environment and that pursuit of these activities contributes to the

development of stronger and more specific attitudes, such as concern for environmental

degradation. This has a cyclical effect in which the general environmental attitude

(worldview) changes, and consequently influences future preferences. Although it appears

that this model has not been tested in any further research, it is useful in highlighting the

dependency of outdoor recreation on other factors and the cyclical nature of enjoyment and

understanding.

There was little further research on the association of outdoor recreation with

environmentalism during the 1980s and early 1990s. However, further US research

undertaken in the late 1990s by Nord et al. (1998) made a useful contribution to the debate.

This research replicated much of the earlier work and tested the hypothesis that generalised

environmental concern8 is associated with participation in general forest recreation activities.

Levels of forest recreation activity were measured by frequency of visits and participation in

activities such as camping, hiking, sightseeing, picnicking, birdwatching, fishing, and hunting.

The research by Nord et al. (1998) also sought to analyse the links between specific forest

recreation activities and pro-environmental behaviour9. It was found that pro-environmental

behaviour is positively associated with appreciative forms of forest recreation and that this

relationship is not suppressed when socio-demographic characteristics are controlled. The

7 Likert scales measure attitudes, in this case the attitudes measured were those relating to nature, technology and quality of life. 8 Environmental concern was measured by asking respondents questions about how seriously they considered various problems including crime, unemployment and quality of the environment. 9 Pro-environmental behaviour was measured by asking respondents whether they had engaged in various activities over the past year, including giving money to environmental/conservation organisations, reading conservation material, attending public meetings about environmental issues and buying green products.

Environmental Attitude (general worldview)

Recreation preferences

Attitude to recreation and the environment

9

results of this study are significant in highlighting the other factors involved in the relationship

between enjoyment and understanding, while supporting the existence of a link between

recreation and pro-environmental behaviour.

Tarrant and Green (1999) furthered this in their study, which attempted to address the fact

that there is little evidence for the influence of outdoor recreation on environmental concern

and environmentally responsible behaviour. They emphasised the attitude–behaviour link,

which is discussed within social-psychological research. This states that direct involvement

with the object of the attitude has been found to be an influential external factor in improving

attitude–behaviour links as it increases a person’s motivation to process information. In

addition, attitudes that are based on direct experience are more deeply held. This research

contended that outdoor recreation participants are more likely than non-participants to hold

strong beliefs about environmental issues.

However, taking this further, the study found that people’s attitudes towards the environment

do not correspond directly to their behaviour. But involvement with appreciative recreation

activities (day hiking, backpacking, nature viewing) appears to act as a requisite in the

attitude–behaviour relationship, improving the likelihood of responsible environmental

behaviour. This is likely to be because these activities involve direct experience with the

natural environment, but also because they reflect a more preservationist ethic in the first

place. Direct involvement is therefore crucial in influencing behaviour: indirect/passive

involvement may influence attitude but not necessarily behaviour.

Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002) explored the gap between possession of environmental

knowledge and awareness and displaying pro-environmental behaviour in their US-based

research. They analysed a number of current models describing what encourages pro-

environmental behaviour. They found that pro-environmental behaviour is influenced by a

large number of factors (see Figure 2.2). This illustrates that sociological, psychological and

educational factors, and their interactions, play a large role in contributing to pro-

environmental behaviour along with environmental knowledge and environmental

awareness. This research is linked to a large number of studies focusing on the

phenomenon of a ‘value–action gap’ whereby knowledge and attitudes do not always result

in specific behaviours (Centre for Sustainable Development, 2006). The Kollmuss and

Agyeman (2002) research suggests that the gap between values (environmental awareness)

and action (pro-environmental behaviour) is influenced by particular social, psychological

and educational factors.

10

Figure 2.2 Model of pro-environmental behaviour. Reproduced from Kollmuss and Agyeman (2002)

Teisl and O’Brien (2003) carried out research on a national (US) scale in order to test the

proposal that participation in outdoor recreation is positively associated with environmental

concern and behaviour. They came up with a series of useful results which focused on

specific recreation activities, rather than on the traditional groupings of ‘appreciative’ and

‘consumptive’ activities used in previous research. They found that, although there is a

correlation between outdoor recreation and both the level of environmental concern and the

level of environmental behaviour, there were differences between the activities within the

standard groupings (e.g. between fishing and hunting and between camping and wildlife

watching), which questions earlier research that grouped these activities together.

Within this research environmental concern and pro-environmental behaviour were

assessed by participation in the activities of an environmental organisation, interest in forest

management and likelihood of purchasing an environmental product. Wildlife watching was

the activity found to have the strongest association with increasing an individual’s likelihood

to donate money or to belong to an environmental organisation. It was found that activities

which have traditionally been classified as appreciative (wildlife watching and nature

photography) had a strong positive effect on environmental behaviour and concern.

Snowmobiling, nature photography, wildlife watching and hunting were the activities which

had the strongest association with increasing an individual’s interest in how forests are

managed, and wildlife watching was found to be the activity which had the strongest

association with increasing the individual’s likelihood to purchase an environmentally

labelled wood product.

Old behaviour patterns

Pro-environmental behaviour

Lack of internal incentives

Lack of environmental consciousness

Lack of external possibilities and incentives

barriers

Internal Factors – personality traits, value system etc. Environmental consciousness (Knowledge, feelings, fear, emotional involvement and values and attitudes)

Negative or insufficient feedback about behaviour

External Factors Infrastructure, political, social and cultural factors, economic situation etc.

11

2.2.1 Conclusions of literature review on general links between enjoyment and understanding

Overall, the literature suggests that there is a positive link between involvement in outdoor

recreation and environmental understanding as manifested through concern and behaviour.

It suggests that environmental concern is generally lowest amongst those who do not

participate in any outdoor recreation, and highest amongst those who participate in

‘appreciative’ forms of outdoor recreation, such as wildlife watching or nature photography.

Those who participate in ‘consumptive’ activities such hunting or fishing generally have

intermediate levels of environmental understanding.

The literature suggests the existence of a ‘virtuous cycle’, with participation in outdoor

recreation leading to greater environmental concern, in turn leading to greater involvement in

outdoor recreation.

However, it also suggests that there is not always a direct link between environmental

awareness and pro-environmental behaviour, with a range of ‘barriers’ (such as established

patterns of behaviour, a lack of incentives and positive feedback) inhibiting such a

relationship.

The literature also suggests that the relationship between enjoyment and understanding is

significantly influenced by socio-economic and cultural factors. It suggests, for example, that

socio-economic factors exert a stronger influence on understanding of the natural heritage

than does participation in outdoor recreation. It is likely that socio-economic and cultural

factors also have a significant influence on the types, if any, of recreation activity an

individual undertakes and thus the extent to which recreation may lead to environmental

awareness and pro-environmental behaviour.

2.3 Emotional attachment, place and environmental protection

There is a large body of research within environmental psychology which examines ‘place

attachment’ or affinity to a particular location. This has shown that frequently visiting an area

for a particular activity increases physical dependence on that place and ultimately leads to

an emotional attachment. This has been shown to be particularly true in the case of local

natural resources and open spaces. Certain researchers have taken this body of evidence

and extended it to examine the influence of ‘place attachment’ on pro-environmental

behaviour. This has particular links to the current study of enjoyment and understanding,

because much of the attachment is gained through undertaking informal recreation activities.

Vaske and Kobrin (2001) carried out a study in the US into the relationship between place

attachment and environmentally responsible behaviour. They carried out surveys of young

people who were participating in a local natural resource-based work programme. The

young people’s relationships with the natural environment were assessed through responses

to statements such as ‘I identify strongly with this park’. It was found that place attachment to

a local resource does have a link to environmentally responsible behaviour, both in that

particular natural resource setting and in everyday life.

Taking this concept further, Kals et al. (1999) carried out an in-depth study into the

motivations for ‘nature-protective’ behaviour in Germany. They analysed the concept of

‘emotional affinity towards nature’ as an explanation for nature-protective behaviour.

Emotional affinity is taken to mean a ‘positive feeling of inclination’ or a ‘love of nature’. They

found that experiencing nature results in an ‘interest in nature’ that predisposes a person to

nature protective behaviours. It was also found that the level of nature protective behaviour

12

is enhanced when the experience takes place with ‘significant others’ (such as family or

friends). They conclude that ‘direct experiences with nature with all five senses should be

offered to promote emotional affinity toward and interest in nature’ (Kals et al., 1999, p. 198).

2.3.1 Conclusions of literature review on emotional attachment to place and environmentally responsible behaviour

The literature suggests that familiarity with particular places (for example a local nature

reserve) leads to higher levels of affinity and environmentally responsible behaviour and that

direct experience, especially with friends and family, engenders affinity, care and

commitment to the natural heritage.

2.4 Significant life experience (SLE)

Significant life experience (SLE) research is a branch of environmental education research

which emerged in the 1990s. It evaluates the formative influences which have shaped the

environmental awareness and concern of environmental educators. Overall it seeks to

assess what kinds of experiences are shared by people who care for and look after the

environment. It is a contentious area of research which is highlighted as having several

methodological concerns but nevertheless has connections to the current study. SLE

research is related to enjoyment of the natural heritage because one of the formative

influences studied is ‘experiences of nature’ (or outdoor recreation) either in childhood or in

adult life. In relation to understanding of the natural heritage, respondents chosen in the SLE

studies are those who have concern for the environment or who show pro-environmental

behaviour (notably environmental educators).

Palmer et al. (1998) undertook an international study of the effect of SLE and formative

influences on the thinking and pro-environmental behaviour of adults. Although the study did

not ensure consistency in the sample size or age groupings between the sample countries, it

found that direct experience of the natural world was the most influential factor in

determining pro-environmental behaviour. This factor was cited by over half of respondents,

and the most important single factor was found to be childhood experiences of nature.10

Further research by Palmer et al. (1999) analysed autobiographical statements from

environmental educators in Australia, Canada and the UK to identify significant life

experiences which led to their concern for the environment. Across all three countries

‘experiences of nature’ was clearly ranked first as the main type of influence. The research

also illustrated the importance of childhood experiences of nature and the outdoors, thus

highlighting the benefits from providing young people with opportunities for positive

experiences of nature and the countryside.

Palmer and Neal (1994) carried out earlier research examining the influences on

environmental educators and what motivated them to care for the environment in their

everyday lives. The findings again supported the importance of experience of the outdoors

as influencing environmental concern: ‘a large number make explicit and detailed reference

to memorable experiences outdoors as a child, perhaps as a result of being brought up in

the countryside, going on holidays, or being encouraged to play in the open air’ (Palmer and

10Similarly to the outdoor recreation research above, pro-environmental behaviour was gauged through the

following activities: reading, outdoor activities, buying ‘green’, practical conservation, recycling, curriculum

development, membership of organisations and attending public meetings.

13

Neal, 1994, p. 4). Analysis undertaken by Corcoran (1999), also on the influences on

environmental educators, found that access to natural places, the influences of family

experiences, the media and education all influenced the lives of environmental educators.

A study by Ewert et al. (2005) investigated the effects of early-life experiences on an

individual’s environmental beliefs. The main finding of the study was that, by using the Likert

scale for a series of questions relating to the participants’ ‘eco-centric’ and ‘anthropocentric’

beliefs, people who had reported ‘early childhood’ experiences of ‘outdoor appreciative

experiences’ tended to have a more eco-centric perspective than did other groups. The

margin of difference between groups was found not to be statistically significant, but there

was a tendency towards eco-centricity. This study adds support to the idea that early

childhood outdoor experiences (many of which are recreational) are related to pro-

environmental views. More specifically, this study suggests that participation in early-life

appreciative outdoor activities, participation in early-life consumptive outdoor activities,

exposure to media events focusing on environmental issues and witnessing negative

environmental events influence an adult’s current beliefs concerning the environment.

Some of the challenges to SLE research include work by Gough (1999), who argues that, if

SLE research is going to be used at all to create environmentally aware young people, then

the experiences significant to young people (defined as those under the age of 30) at the

end of the twentieth century need to be investigated. The basis of this argument is that the

lives of young people are very different from those of their parents and grandparents, and

that findings from these generations cannot be translated as directly relevant for the youth of

today. Chalwa (2001) also notes the importance of considering the diversity of the population

in SLE research.

Related to the SLE sphere, the importance of natural areas for children’s play is supported

by a large body of research. Lester and Maudsley (2006) carried out a review of children’s

play for the Children’s Play Council, which comprised a literature review of relevant findings.

It was found that playful, experiential and interactive contact with nature in childhood is

directly correlated with positive environmental sensibility and behaviour in later life. A series

of authors were cited as confirming this view. Bixler et al. (2002, cited in Lester and

Maudsley, 2006) studied children’s play in wilderness areas and found that those who took

part in this play had more positive perceptions of natural environments and outdoor

recreation activities. Wells and Lekies (2006, cited in Lester and Maudsley, 2006) highlight

the importance of playful, unmediated contact with nature before the age of 11 as a

’particularly potent pathway towards shaping both environmental attitudes and behaviours in

adulthood’ (Wells and Lekies, 2006. p. 13). Lohr and Pearson-Mims (2005, cited in Lester

and Maudsley, 2006) state that a child’s contact with nature, through tending gardens,

playing in parks and being in spaces with trees, is a significant predictor of positive adult

beliefs about the benefits of nature.

2.4.1 Conclusions of literature review on significant life experience

The literature suggests that there is a strong and positive relationship between experience of

the natural environment, particularly during childhood, and people’s attitudes towards the

environment. This is based on surveys of adults, and some suggest that surveys of the

current generation of young people are necessary to determine whether this relationship still

holds. It is possible, for example, that environmental awareness is increasingly prompted by

media coverage and by the significance of global issues such as climate change.

14

2.5 Free choice learning

‘Free choice learning’ relates to informal learning or that which takes place outside the

classroom. The importance of free choice learning is illustrated by Falk (2005, p. 266), who

states that ’worldwide, most learning, and in particular most environmental learning, is

acquired outside of school‘. Falk (2005) stresses the importance of experiencing nature

through personal interaction. The research also recognises the complexity of the learning

process, which requires both formal and informal activities.

In relation to the current study, the ‘informal learning sector’ to which free choice learning

relates includes visiting natural areas, parks and nature centres, all of which are informal

recreation activities encompassed within the definition of ‘enjoyment’. ‘Understanding’ is

encompassed through the concept of ‘free choice learning’ itself.

Kola-Olusanya (2005) identifies the settings for free choice environmental learning as

including nature centres, parks and wilderness. This research highlights the importance of

early-life experiences: ‘the home (and family) as a free choice learning context is arguably

still where the foundation and development of interest and sensitivity towards the

environment is first formed during the early stages of a child’s development’ (Kola-Olusanya,

2005 p. 299). Closely related to nature experiences at home and with the family is the role of

play. Play is a key means by which children learn. Play in neighbourhood places and play

environments such as wild places and gardens ‘enables children to discover, explore and

develop a personal understanding of the environment around them’ (Kola Olusanya 2005,

p. 299).

Research by Ballantyne and Packer (2005) on the value of free choice learning identifies

that research in zoos and aquariums indicates that being in such settings contributes to

basic knowledge, beliefs and understanding in relation to sustainability issues. Their

research notes that measuring the impacts and outcomes of free choice learning

experiences is, however, quite difficult, as individuals differ greatly in their pre-visit

experiences, knowledge and attitudes. In addition, much of the research on the value of free

choice learning relies heavily on qualitative data, as many influences relate particularly to

childhood experiences.

In relation to factors with particular impact on the development of environmental attitudes

and behaviours, Ballantyne and Packer (2005) highlight that studies show that emotional

engagement with nature or a particular species may impact positively upon the development

of environmental attitudes and behaviour. There are, however, uncertainties as to how long

this impact might last. Factors that have been most consistently identified are those that

‘arouse learners’ emotions, challenge their beliefs and enhance their environmental

conceptions’ (Ballantyne and Packer, 2005, p. 287).

2.5.1 Conclusions of literature review on free choice learning

The literature suggests that informal educational environments provide important

opportunities for the promotion of environmentally sustainable attitudes and behaviour

through facilitating the development of environmental knowledge, skills, attitudes, beliefs and

behaviours. However, it is unclear how long this impact lasts without further reinforcing

experiences. The literature suggests that informal education may be used in combination

with formal activities. Some of these conclusions are tentative, and there is a need for

additional research in this area; however it does highlight the contribution that experiencing

nature in an informal way can make to understanding the natural heritage.

15

2.6 Outdoor learning

The relationship between learning undertaken in the more formal context of environmental

education or outdoor education covers a body of literature which is also useful to consider.

Activities undertaken within a formal environmental education setting often include informal

recreation, such as walking and wildlife watching. Published research provides a useful base

of evidence as to whether these activities result in greater understanding of the natural

heritage and helps to outline other variables involved.

Rickinson et al. (2004) assessed the impact of outdoor learning on young people and the

factors that can affect their learning in the outdoors. This was undertaken through a review

of existing research on outdoor learning. Outdoor learning can fall within a number of

categories, which include:

• fieldwork and outdoor visits to field study centres, nature centres, farms, parks or gardens;

• outdoor adventure education;

• school grounds/community projects.

The findings of Rickinson et al. (2004) appear to refute the study hypothesis, suggesting that

there is little evidence to link outdoor adventure education with environmental understanding.

However, the reasons for this finding may relate to the short time period over which

participants are exposed to the natural environment through outdoor adventure experiences,

which may be insufficient to bring about greater environmental understanding. However,

Rickinson et al. (2004) do suggest that there is significant evidence to indicate that good-

quality fieldwork allows learners to develop their knowledge and skills better than in a

classroom situation.

Work undertaken by Dillon et al. (2005) responds to the growing concern about declining

opportunities for outdoor learning and low levels of understanding about food, farming and

sustainability issues amongst young people in the UK. The study evaluated the learning

outcomes of students and teachers participating in outdoor education. This validated the

value of outdoor education in raising environmental awareness and also found that there

were wider benefits including the development of personal skills.

Further evidence supporting the study hypothesis is provided by Peacock (2006), who

reviewed the long-term impact of sustained relationships between schools and the National

Trust Guardianship scheme. The Guardianship Scheme focuses on multiple visits to a single

National Trust site, which develops an ongoing partnership between the school and the

National Trust site. The review supports the study hypothesis, and teachers’ perceptions of

pupils’ learning within the Guardianship Scheme show strong links between knowledge and

understanding, skills, attitudes and values, enjoyment, inspiration and creativity and changes

of behaviour. This reinforces the emerging evidence that a sustained level of exposure over

a longer period of time results in a link between enjoyment and understanding, whereas one-

off or short-term experiences may not result in this change.

Research was undertaken in Minnesota by Kelly et al. (2001) using surveys to evaluate

residents’ awareness and attitudes to environmental issues prior to and following a

programme of watershed management. The watershed management was carried out

through the Wells Creek Watershed Partnership, which brought together watershed

residents, local government and state agency representatives to develop a plan outlining

how the land and water resources of the watershed should be managed to maintain

ecological integrity. A sample of residents was surveyed at the start of the work programme

16

in 1994, and again in 1999 to evaluate any change in perceptions or behaviour in the

following five areas:

1. local environmental and land use concerns;

2. knowledge of sources of information about land use and the environment;

3. actions people take to affect environmental quality and land use;

4. attitudes about the environment and environmental management; and

5. future environmental conditions people desire.

This research found little overall change in people’s opinions and behaviours from 1994 to

1999. Those residents who were aware and ‘in tune’ with environmental and land use issues

before the initiation of the comprehensive watershed planning efforts remained so. The

research concluded that those who were not will need an overwhelming number of new

experiences or exposures to new information before they will be ready to change.

2.6.1 Conclusions of literature review on outdoor learning

The literature suggests that there is some uncertainty about the existence of an automatic

link between outdoor education and environmental attitudes, possibly reflecting the duration

of such activities, the different types of recreation activity and perhaps wider socio-economic

or cultural influences. There is evidence that repeated visits to particular heritage resources

as part of formal education can significantly increase environmental awareness and

responsible behaviour. This provides some support for the notion that the informal recreation

activities undertaken within this formal setting can lead to greater understanding of the

natural heritage. There is also some evidence that such involvement produces wider benefits

in terms of attitudes and educational achievement.

2.7 The value of direct experience of nature in outdoor and environmental education

There are a number of journal articles which question the value of nature experience within

environmental and outdoor education. The findings of these provide some insight into why

informal recreation may not lead to understanding of the natural heritage and that there are

other variables involved.

Research carried out by Russell (1999) in Canada resulted in the finding that there are

different types of ‘nature’ to be considered in ‘nature experience’. Russell notes that many

environmental educators focus on ‘pristine’ nature in wild areas which is detached from

everyday reality. Experience of wilderness may not necessarily translate into useful

environmental learning for those who live in urban areas, as it is difficult to translate the

lessons learnt between the two types of environment. Concerns about whether awareness

developed through a wilderness experience will transfer to a person’s home environment

have been raised in other research including that by Hanna (1995).

Russell additionally notes the different ways in which individuals respond to nature

experiences depending on various personal situations and social contexts, and that nature

experience also brings about varied responses from different individuals.

17

Research by Haluza DeLay (1999) brings into question the amount of exposure required to

instigate behavioural change. This study investigated behavioural change resulting from a

12-day wilderness adventure experience and found that the amount of experience of the

outdoors required to bring about understanding is greater than a single, even if extended,

experience.

The literature implies that experience of the natural environment may be most effective in

influencing understanding and behaviour when the experience can be easily related to a

person’s home environment. Pristine and wilderness environments may, therefore, have a

lesser influence than more everyday environments. Again, the literature suggests that

prolonged experience of the environment is crucial in securing long-term changes in

attitudes and behaviour.

2.8 Activity-specific evidence

The research described in sections 2.2–2.7 provides some indication of the contribution of

general informal recreation activities to enjoyment and understanding. However, a further

search was carried out to assess the availability of research relating to specific informal

recreation activities, and for recreation survey data. A small number of publications were

found and the results are outlined below as an illustration of the types of recreation activities

which have been studied in relation to awareness of the environment and understanding of

the natural heritage.

2.8.1 Biking and minimal environmental impact

The growing popularity of mountain biking in natural areas has been the subject of some

research in both Australia and New Zealand (Cessford, 1995; Goeffe and Alder, 2001).

These studies have focused on profiling the participants in these activities in order to

determine appropriate trail design and to ensure that this popular nature-based activity has

minimal environmental impact. There are numerous issues associated within mountain

biking, including soil erosion and compaction and changes in vegetation cover. Most

respondents felt that the perception of damage to the environment caused by biking was

overemphasised. They also believed that damage could be controlled through good riding

technique. It was evident that many riders did have a good understanding and awareness of

the damage that biking can cause and the need for solutions to remedy environmental

impact. This study shows that biking activity does have a close relationship with the natural

environment owing to the dependence of the sport on natural elements, and it appears that

greater environmental awareness is gained through this relationship.

2.8.2 Rock climbing and links to environmental awareness

The UK Adventure and Environmental Awareness Group (Adventure and Environmental

Awareness Group, no date) addresses the balance needed between outdoor recreation and

conservation. As such it has held several conferences relating to the environment and

outdoor adventure activities, which involve both conservation and recreation representative

bodies. A conference in 1988 on Rock Climbing and Environmental Awareness highlighted

that many climbers have a good understanding of the environment and are sensitive to

issues such as bird nesting, lambing and grouse shooting. It was also noted that awareness

of nature can add to the adventure experience of rock climbing.

18

2.8.3 Diving and enjoyment and understanding

The UK Seasearch Training Programme (Seasearch, no date) is a project for volunteer

sports divers who have an interest in the marine environment. The programme trains divers

to gather information on seabed habitats and other marine life. It also aims to raise

awareness of the diversity of UK marine life amongst scuba divers through the dissemination

of information.

2.8.4 Local marine environmental awareness

The Hebridean Whale and Dolphin Trust commissioned a study into the awareness of the

marine environment within Argyll communities (Scott and Parsons, 2001). The study focused

on whales, dolphins and porpoises, including conservation priority species. Techniques

including photo-identification were used to assess knowledge of the respondents. In general,

younger people, residents of Argyll, participants who take part in various different marine-

related activities and participants who felt that issues of marine conservation were important

to them were found to be most aware of the presence or absence of threatened marine

species in Scottish waters. It was not found that the group containing the categories of

education professional, worker in the tourist industry, fisherman, salmon farmer and other

user of the marine environment achieved better results.

2.8.5 Walking and outdoor access legislation awareness

The Progressive Partnership (2005) was commissioned by Scottish Natural Heritage,

Scottish Enterprise, VisitScotland and Forestry Commission Scotland to undertake research

to improve understanding of the quality of experience that Scotland offers to walking

holidaymakers. The aim was to gather the views of walkers, and to highlight areas of

strength and weakness, in order to guide the agencies’ marketing and development activities

and provide advice to tourism and walking businesses.

The research also aimed to assess the awareness and understanding amongst walkers of

the access legislation and the Scottish Outdoor Access Code (SOAC). Awareness of the

access legislation was high amongst many of the Scottish walkers but lower amongst

walkers from the rest of the UK and abroad. Three-quarters of Scots said they were aware of

the legislation, compared with 36% of walkers from the rest of the UK and 15% of walkers

from overseas. In terms of the types of walkers, awareness was relatively higher amongst

the ‘committed’ and ‘part-time explorers’. Awareness that the access legislation was different

in England, or that it allowed different activities, was similarly higher amongst Scots. Sources

of information on the Code included the SOAC leaflet produced by SNH, word of mouth,

magazines and newspapers, and guides. The research found that walkers generally felt that

they understood enough about the access legislation and the Code’s requirements of them.

2.8.6 Whale watching in Scotland

An MSc thesis by Woods-Ballard (2000), ‘Whalewatching in Scotland with a case study on

the Isle of Skye’, surveyed both visitors and tour operators. Reasons for going whale

watching seem to be highly varied; however, enjoyment of boat trips (20%), enjoyment of

wildlife trips (20%) and the possibility of seeing whales and dolphins (19%) appear to be the

most popular reasons. Three per cent of tourists stated that it was because they wanted to

learn about conservation.

19

The thesis also reviewed the operators’ awareness of the environment they work in. This

revealed that over one-third of the operators surveyed did not know whether numbers of

species of marine mammal were increasing or decreasing, despite the fact that almost two-

thirds of operators kept a sightings record. This illustrates the need for the link to be made

between awareness of issues and understanding of these issues.

2.8.7 Conclusions of literature review on activity research

The activity-specific research illustrates that the link between awareness and understanding

of the natural heritage and recreation activities has been implicitly made in several cases.

However, examples such as the SeaSearch Training Programme and the work of the

Adventure and Environmental Awareness Group seem to be the exception rather than the

rule. Other links between recreation activities and environmental awareness appear to

extend only as far as maintaining those elements of the natural heritage upon which the

activity depends, such as is the case with mountain biking.

2.9 Scottish recreation and public attitudes surveys

The literature review included the analysis of a number of Scottish recreation and public

attitudes surveys in order to test whether there is evidence of a link between informal

recreation activity and understanding of the natural heritage within survey data. The

following surveys were examined:

• Scottish Walking Survey 2000 (NFO System Three for SNH, 2001);

• Survey of Cycling in Scotland (NFO System Three for Scottish Executive Social Research, 2002);

• Public Attitudes to Access to the Countryside Survey (NFO System Three, 2003);

• Biking in Scotland (Scott Porter Research & Marketing Ltd for Visit Scotland, 2005);

• The Scottish Recreation Survey (TNS, 2006);

• Marine and Coastal Recreation Survey (Land Use Consultants for SNH, 2006).

It was found that there are no questions within these surveys that relate to undertaking a

recreation activity and heightened awareness and understanding of the natural heritage. The

surveys gather information on the numbers and types of people carrying out various

activities and their awareness of codes of conduct, but make no inferences to awareness of

the natural heritage.

George Street Research (2005) undertook research for SNH which aimed to clarify the key

natural heritage messages that SNH should be promoting, to identify the audiences for these

messages, and to recommend potential communication approaches to effectively engage

with and influence these audiences. The project also sought to establish baseline

information on public awareness of the natural heritage and the key topics of biodiversity,

landscapes, the marine environment, protected sites and sustainability. Of particular

relevance to evidence supporting the link between enjoyment and understanding, the survey

asked respondents whether they agreed or disagreed with the statement ‘the way land is

used in Scotland affects my quality of life’. Around three-quarters of the respondents did

agree (strongly or slightly) that land use affected their quality of life. It was found that groups

of people who most strongly believe that land use in Scotland affects their quality of life are

those who already participate in climbing and walking, garden for wildlife, or buy ‘green’

products. This suggests that awareness and understanding of wider environmental issues

20

makes people more discerning about the quality of the environment and their enjoyment of it.

It also supports the suggestion that understanding of the natural heritage is highest amongst

those who are already environmentally ‘aware’. Those already engaged in outdoor

recreation, or who show other forms of environmentally aware behaviour, are most likely to

agree that the management of the natural heritage has an influence on their quality of life.

2.9.1 Overview of phase 1 findings

This section of the report sets out the key findings of phase 1 – the literature review. It also

sets out a series of key questions derived from the findings to be addressed in phase 2 – the

stakeholder consultation.

Overall, the literature suggests that there is a relationship between involvement in outdoor

recreation and environmental understanding and awareness. It suggests that such

awareness is highest amongst those who participate in ‘appreciative’ forms of outdoor

recreation, such as wildlife watching, nature photography, walking and hiking. Although

research for this is robust, it is important that this is verified, particularly at a Scottish level,

and that the inherent environmental awareness required for the more ‘appreciative’ activities

is taken into account. For other activities, the activity-specific research highlighted that

environmental awareness extends only to those elements of the natural heritage that are

required for the activity.

Key question for phase 2

• Is there any evidence that participants in different types of recreation activity have different levels of environmental awareness of pro-environmental behaviour?


recreation leading to greater environmental concern, in turn leading to greater involvement in

outdoor recreation. However, it also suggests that there is not always a direct link between

environmental awareness and pro-environmental behaviour, with a range of ‘barriers’ (such

as established patterns of behaviour, lack of incentives and of positive feedback) inhibiting

such a relationship.

Key questions for phase 2

• Is there evidence of a virtuous cycle between participation in, and awareness of, the natural heritage?

• Is there evidence that environmental awareness can lead to environmentally responsible behaviour?

The literature suggests that familiarity with particular places (for example a local nature

reserve) leads to higher levels of affinity and environmentally responsible behaviour. It also

suggests that there is a strong and positive relationship between experience of the natural

environment, particularly during childhood, and people’s attitudes towards the environment.

This is based on surveys of adults, and some observers suggest that surveys of the current

generation of young people are necessary to determine whether this relationship still holds.


• Does familiarity with a particular location lead to greater levels of awareness of the natural heritage?

21

The literature suggests that informal educational environments provide important

opportunities for the promotion of environmentally sustainable attitudes and behaviour by

allowing the development of environmental knowledge, skills, attitudes, beliefs and

behaviours. However, it is unclear how long this impact lasts without further reinforcing

experiences. The literature suggests that informal education may be used in combination

with formal activities.

The literature also suggests there is some uncertainty about the existence of an automatic

link between outdoor education and environmental attitudes, possibly reflecting the duration

of such activities, the differences between appreciative and consumptive activities and

perhaps wider socio-economic or cultural influences. There is evidence that repeated visits

to particular natural places as part of formal education can significantly increase

environmental awareness and responsible behaviour.

The literature implies that experience of the natural environment may be most effective in

influencing understanding and behaviour where the experience can be easily related to a

person’s home environment. An emphasis on pristine and wilderness environments may,

therefore, have a lesser influence than more everyday environments. Again, the literature

suggests that prolonged experience of the environment is crucial in securing long-term

changes in attitudes and behaviour.


• Is recreation in certain environments more likely to result in greater awareness of the natural heritage?

The literature suggests that the relationship between enjoyment and understanding is

significantly influenced by socio-economic and cultural characteristics. It suggests, for

example, that socio-economic factors represent a stronger influence than does participation

in outdoor recreation or environmental awareness. It is likely that socio-economic and

cultural factors also have a significant influence on the choice of recreation activity and thus

the extent to which such activity may lead to environmental awareness and pro-

environmental behaviour. In addition, the literature also highlighted the strong role that early-

years participation in outdoor learning and outdoor recreation plays in the development of

environmental awareness and environmentally responsible behaviour in later life.


• How important is early-years involvement in outdoor recreation in generating environmental awareness and concern?

22

3 PHASE 2: THE STAKEHOLDER CONSULTATION

3.1 Introduction

This section of the report sets out the findings from the consultation exercise. Overall, the

consultation confirmed that there has been little, if any, direct empirical research in the UK

investigating the links between informal recreation and understanding and awareness of the

natural heritage. The consultee feedback largely comprised unpublished evidence which

formed the basis of the verification of the research findings from phase 1. The consultation

did not uncover the further documented evidence that was originally envisaged in the project

brief owing to the lack of relevant further published work and the comprehensiveness of

phase 1 of the research.

Phase 2 of the research is a supplement to published evidence and is not intended as a

discrete piece of work. The feedback gathered includes personal views from those with first-

hand experience of informal recreation. The findings are intended to contribute to building a

generalised picture, and as such it is acknowledged that there will always be exceptions to

its findings. The findings are, however, a useful first start in exploring the links between

informal recreation and understanding of the natural heritage in the absence of published

evidence related to the UK.

3.1.1 The methodology

As outlined in section 1, contact was made with a range of organisations relevant to the

enjoyment and understanding debate. The organisations included the following:

• government organisations with a remit for recreation and promotion of understanding of the natural heritage and non-governmental organisations with a remit for environmental protection and/or recreation (collectively termed recreation providers and environmental managers);

• recreation associations (clubs, societies, organisations); and

• research bodies.

Tailored questionnaires were sent to the first two organisation types outlined above. The

research bodies were contacted separately. Copies of the questionnaires are set out in

Appendix 4. Owing to the nature of the research, some of the questions generated more

extensive responses than others, and this is reflected in the findings. A list of acronyms is

included in Appendix 5.

There was a notably enthusiastic response to the consultation from many of the

organisations involved. Many recognised the relevance of the research questions to their

own situation. It is often the case that a link between recreation activity and awareness and

understanding of the natural heritage is taken as a ‘given’ while acknowledging that the lack

of empirical research is an issue. Many bodies are keen to work with others to remedy this

and wish to take the findings of this initial research forward. The recommendations on future

research set out within the final section of this report are included to guide this.

In particular, contact was made with the key SNH-equivalent agencies Natural England (NE)

and the Countryside Council for Wales (CCW). In the case of Natural England, contact was

made with a senior specialist in Health and Recreation Policy, who noted that NE has not, so

far, carried out any research in the area of enjoyment and understanding. Recent research

23

by the Henley Centre (2006) to inform the new NE Outdoor Recreation Strategy assessed

the remit, role and function of NE in relation to outdoor recreation. It also assessed how and

why people participate in outdoor recreation, and how to encourage participation; however, it

did not explore the added value which can be attained from informal recreation through

enhanced awareness of the natural heritage. It was noted that this is likely to become a

focus of research as funding becomes available in the future.

In the case of CCW, contact was made with a recreation policy officer, who noted that,

although CCW does commission public attitude surveys to gauge awareness of access

rights and the Countryside Code, no specific research is undertaken with regards to the role

of informal recreation in enhancing awareness and understanding of the natural heritage. It

was noted, however, that the Recreation Section within CCW is currently exploring how to

undertake validated research on this question, noting that research which has been

undertaken relates mostly to the US context.

Contact was also made with the Health and Recreation Policy Advisor of Forestry

Commission Scotland, who noted that Forest Research has a programme of research

evaluating the social benefits of forestry. This includes how forestry contributes to education

and learning through specific activities such as Forest Schools, environmental education and

guided walks. There is also a programme of forest recreation monitoring, which includes

recording visitor demographics and visitor experience and satisfaction. However, there is no

specific research relating to the role of informal recreation within forests and its links to

understanding of the natural heritage. This was verified through contact with Forest

Research.

3.1.2 The subhypotheses

A number of key questions followed from the literature review conducted within phase 1 of

the research. These key questions have been used to formulate a number of subhypotheses

which have been used to illustrate the stakeholder consultation findings. These are as

follows:

• Different recreation activities are associated with different levels of environmental awareness or pro-environmental behaviour.

• There is a ‘virtuous’ cycle between participation in and awareness of the natural heritage.

• Environmental awareness can lead to environmentally responsible behaviour.

• Familiarity with a particular location leads to greater levels of awareness of the natural heritage.

• Recreation in certain environments is more likely to result in greater awareness of the natural heritage.

• Early-years involvement in outdoor recreation is important in generating environmental concern.

The following text sets out the findings of the stakeholder consultation based on the above

subhypotheses.

24

3.2 Subhypothesis 1: Different recreation activities are associated with different levels of environmental awareness or pro-environmental behaviour

3.2.1 Literature review findings

Literature reviewed in phase 1 of this study suggests that levels of environmental

concern/behaviour vary depending on recreation activity. In general, the literature suggested

that ‘appreciative’ activities such as wildlife watching, nature photography, walking and

hiking are consistently associated with higher levels of environmental concern and

behaviour, whereas it was found that those taking part in so called ‘consumptive’ activities,

such as hunting and fishing, had lower levels of environmental concern. It was thought that

this because the motivations for undertaking particular activities are based on an initial

environmental appreciation, which can be enhanced by the recreation activity.

It is useful to disaggregate recreation activity type as it may be the case that certain activities

have a stronger association with understanding of the natural heritage than others. It is

possible that there may be a direct link between recreation activity and behaviour; however,

it is likely that there are more complex variables involved. The evidence outlined below

provides a starting point for the exploration of this.

3.2.2 Consultation findings

Many responses were gathered in relation to whether there are different levels of

environmental awareness and appreciation of the natural heritage associated with different

types of recreation activity. Responses came from the recreation provider and environmental

management organisations that have experience of different types of recreation group.

Almost all of the respondents in this category provided a response, with some organisations

such as the John Muir Trust providing multiple responses. Specific evidence from the five

recreation associations that responded supplemented these findings.

Several respondents noted that the type of sport or recreation activity does have a direct

relationship to awareness and understanding of the natural heritage. For example, the

National Trust for Scotland noted that downhill skiers tend to be less sensitive to

environmental concerns than are walkers. Other respondents linked this to the pace,

competitiveness or technical nature of an activity; for example, downhill mountain biking and

skiing require the participant to be focused on the activity rather than the surroundings and

therefore understanding, awareness and appreciation of the natural environment are less of

a consideration. The Cairngorms National Park noted that participants in open (Canadian)

canoeing tend to also participate in ski touring and are more aware of the environmental

context than kayakers and downhill skiers. It was thought that this is to do with the

techniques required for each activity. As a result, some activities, such as walking and

leisure cycling, are more likely to include an awareness of surroundings as an integral part of

the recreation experience. One respondent noted that ‘as a generalisation I think that slower

activities enable participants to be more “in tune” with nature and have more time to make

observations that may lead to greater environmental awareness’. Another noted that

‘participation in an activity that involves camping, especially wild camping, tends to develop a

higher level of environmental awareness and I believe this is because it provides time to

pause and contemplate’.

The RSPB noted that for specific recreational activities, such as bird watching, an

understanding, and willingness to learn about, the natural heritage, its species and habitats

is an intrinsic element in the recreation pursuit. Another respondent stated that ‘activities that

25

by their nature enable you to see wildlife tend to raise environmental awareness more than

other activities where you don’t see so much wildlife’.

Particular recreation activities were also linked by some respondents to awareness of

environmental impact and problems. For example, those taking part in water sports may

have a heightened awareness of pollution issues because water pollution may be directly

affecting their enjoyment of the activity. The Scottish Canoe Association noted that ‘the

branch of canoeing that an individual is interested in will to some extent determine their type

of interest in environmental issues. For example, a number of sea kayakers are involved in

Beach Watch litter picks each year.’

These findings were supplemented by further observations that it is not necessarily the

activity itself that is important, but the frequency with which the activity is carried out,

particularly in relation to ‘appreciative’ pursuits such as walking, cycling and horse riding. For

example, those who participate in these activities on a regular basis are more likely to have

a greater awareness of the natural environment than those who are ‘casual’ (less frequent)

visitors to the outdoors, as a result of the familiarity and understanding which is gained over

time. The JMT noted that ‘the greater time and a longer period that is spent undertaking an

activity then the greater the opportunity to observe features (birds, mammals, plants, insects,

impacts, etc.) and to repeatedly observe (or not observe) these features. Changes or the

lack of changes may be seen through time, especially when the same sites/areas are

repeatedly visited.’ Evidence gained from the consultation illustrates that this is the case:

26

On-the ground-evidence: Do you find that repeated visits by recreation users to a

natural heritage area increases awareness and changes behaviour?

JMT: Repeated visits to an area or similar areas enable people to observe environmental

change, or the lack of environmental change when they might expect or desire change.

This will increase awareness and there is a likelihood that in time behaviour will be

influenced.

If this includes visits as children in their most formative years and subsequent visits then

changes/lack of change, improvements/lack of improvements, deterioration, etc. may well

be obvious and stimulate thought, awareness and actions.

JMT: Educational models suggest that repeat and random experiences, especially at key

ages (e.g. 10–12), are more effective at achieving this. It does not have to be one specific

natural heritage area.

JMT: Participants visiting the same wild place develop a connection with the area and often

notice changes in the area, both positive and negative, over time. Continued engagement

with an area aids depth of understanding, leaps in awareness and concurrent shifts in

behaviour.

NTS: Not unless there is some deliberate educational work going on. Most repeat visits are

to walk the dog. Whilst greater understanding, e.g. of local wildlife, may come over time I

am not convinced this will actually change attitudes or behaviour.

RSPB: Yes, in many cases it is the frequency of the activity rather than the activity itself

which is key in raising awareness of the natural heritage, especially in relation to activities

such as walking and cycling.

SCRA: I would say yes, but more so if there is advice, interpretation and guidance for their

behaviour. Not in every case, many people will be quite capable of enjoying the outdoors

on their own. But the more accurate the information that casual users can get, the better

their experience and the more informed their decisions affecting the site.

SWT: I think, yes, this is generally the case. I have seen people who know little about

wildlife grow in knowledge the more they visit and thus generally come to care about it

more.

Several other respondents noted that not just the activity itself but the governing or lead

body in charge of that activity has a significant role to play in the understanding of the natural

heritage exhibited by its members. It was noted that the British Mountaineering Council

works with organisations on wildlife conservation issues, and for example places restriction

on climbing sites during the bird breeding season. On the whole, it is thought that the

mountaineering community is environmentally aware, partly as a result of this type of

management and the publicising of environmental issues in mountaineering journals.

Further, it was noted that ‘the BMC’s access agreements and seasonal climbing bans on

sensitive sites provide a model for enabling recreation and conservation interests to co-exist

through environmental awareness’ (CCW). Evidence gained from the consultation illustrates

that this is the case:

On-the-ground evidence: Does your organisation/group promote understanding of

27

the natural heritage, environmental awareness and positive actions, for example

through codes of conduct?

Activities Scotland: Yes, awareness, enjoyment, understanding are an integral part of our

ethos.

SRA: We take efforts to ensure that our members are aware of potential impacts, mainly

through promoting the Scottish Outdoor Access Code, Ramblers newsletters and

magazines, and volunteer training days. Many of our groups have presentations at their

AGMs from people working in local nature reserves, or from other environmental groups,

and there is a wealth of knowledge within each members group which has come from

experience of walking plus ’educational‘ input.

SCA: The SCA has produced Sea Kayaking – Guide to Good Environmental Practice and a

Paddlers’ Access Code, as well as providing additional information in our quarterly

magazine, Scottish Paddler, and on our website.

SOA: Yes, we currently have funding from SNH for an access officer (until April 2007). Part

of the remit of the access officer is to promote responsible use of the countryside for

orienteering, which includes understanding the natural heritage and environmental

awareness. We use the British Orienteering Environmental Good Practice Guidelines (with

one of two caveats regarding access under the Scottish access legislation).

RYAS: The RYAS and the British Marine Federation have their own environmental

awareness initiative, known as ‘Green Blue’, which promotes the sustainable use of coastal

and inland waters by boating and watersports participants, and the sustainable operation

and development of the recreational boating industry. It aims to educate and inform the

recreational boating community about their environmental impacts.

There was little empirical UK evidence highlighted to support the suggestion that different

types of recreation activity are linked to different levels of environmental awareness and

understanding. However, forest visitor surveys carried out by the Forestry Commission as

part of their Forest and Society research programme do illustrate that the natural heritage is

of varied consideration in different recreation activities. It was noted by ramblers that the

outdoors in an integral part of the experience, including the variety of scenery and

landscape, forested and open areas, streams and wildlife. In the case of mountain bikers, all

recognised that the forest environment, comprising terrain, surroundings, scenery, peace

and quiet, and nature interest, is an essential part of the activity. Several also combined their

cycling trips with other hobbies appropriate to the surroundings, such as photography. Horse

riders were attracted to the forests for similar reasons to the mountain bikers: peace and

quiet and attractive surroundings. However, mountain bikers and horse riders did not

emphasise the importance of the environment as an ‘integral’ part of the experience, as was

the case for ramblers.

Some respondents, however, maintained that the variable was not the type of recreation

activity but the individuals themselves. The Scottish Countryside Rangers Association noted

that understanding of the natural heritage can be analysed only at individual or club level, as

there are groups that undertake the same recreation activity but that differ in their attitude

towards the environment, with some behaving irresponsibly and others keenly volunteering

for conservation work. One respondent noted that it is not the activity but the socio-economic

background and educational background of the participant and the existence or otherwise of

peer pressure that are important.

28

One respondent from the JMT noted that ‘it is hard to generalise about the impact of different

activities, as our annual feedback from trips reveals, relative to an individual’s experience.

The most significant change in awareness and behaviour is for many of our participants who

are experiencing a new activity or environment. Regardless of activity, when they are

exploring outside their regular comfort zones, the wild place need not be the most remote or

extreme for their awareness to increase.’

3.2.3 Subhypothesis 1 conclusion

The above findings suggest that there are strong links between the type of informal

recreation activity and understanding and awareness of the natural heritage; however, there

are a number of important variables involved. These can be split into two categories as

follows:

1. Variables in relation to the recreation activity:

• the requisite environmental knowledge needed for, and acquired through, the activity (e.g. bird watching);

• the role of the lead or membership body in upholding and promoting concern for the environment;

• the competitiveness or otherwise of the activity;

• the ‘pace’ of the activity;

• the ‘technique’ required for the activity, for example extreme concentration on the activity itself;

• the frequency with which the activity is carried out with ‘frequent’ participants more likely to gain enhanced understanding of the natural environment than ‘infrequent’ participants.

2. Variables in relation to the individual:

• the environmental awareness of the individual in the first instance;

• the motivation for carrying out the activity, for example competitive sporting or appreciation of the outdoors;

• in some instances whether the individual is experiencing the activity for the first time – the relative ‘newness’ of the environment to the person;

• social, peer group, educational and economic factors.

3.3 Subhypothesis 2: There is a ‘virtuous cycle’ between participation in outdoor recreation and awareness of the natural heritage



recreation leading to environmental concern and understanding of the natural heritage, and

that in turn leading to greater involvement in outdoor recreation and thus reinforcing

understanding.

A cyclical rather than linear link between enjoyment and understanding of the natural

heritage is an important possibility to consider. This reinforces the value of the connection

29

and highlights that support for one element will also strengthen the other. This also indicates

that recreation provider organisations can play a role in facilitating greater enjoyment and

understanding through information provision and offering high-quality recreation

experiences.


A good response rate was achieved in relation to this subhypothesis, with most consultees

pointing to the fact that there is evidence of a ‘virtuous’ cycle of some sort. For some this

was related to the obvious notion that the more regularly people experience a place, the

more they become aware of the issues involved with that location. Others noted the

importance of participation in inspiring awareness and action – ‘taking part means to

discover, learn, share, enjoy; it inspires the curiosity of all regardless of age and regardless

of location’ (Activities Scotland). The concepts underlying the John Muir Award, based on a

number of philosophies, including the ‘heart, head, hand’ model pioneered by Patrick

Geddes (Bushby, 2003), emphasise the importance of participation. This model is a virtuous

cycle of sorts based on the relationship between ‘caring’, ‘understanding’ and ‘doing’. In

essence, experiencing the outdoors can lead to caring for the outdoors, understanding about

it and taking action to protect it, which can lead to further caring and understanding.

Some respondents highlighted the link between a virtuous cycle and certain recreation

activities. The JMT noted that there is often a link between more recreation and greater

awareness and that this is most evident for mountain activities such as hill walking and

climbing and water-based activities such as sea kayaking. SportScotland reinforced this by

stating that there is the ‘impression that walkers, mountaineers and canoeists are most

concerned about the environment’. One English Forest District noted evidence of the

virtuous cycle taking place in the case of children becoming interested in the environment

through a recreational activity such as bird watching.

The Cairngorms National Park noted that there is some evidence for more participation

leading to more awareness (and a virtuous cycle) but that there are further variables to be

considered. It seems that for some people recreation will result in more environmental

awareness, but for others it will not. For those who do not easily engage with the

environment through informal recreation, activity schemes such as the John Muir Award

were highlighted as key tools in encouraging engagement with the natural world.

That recreation reinforces environmental awareness was highlighted by the Scottish Canoe

Association: ‘involvement in outdoor activities usually leads to participants discussing and

considering a wide range of issues including energy use, wildlife protection, agriculture, litter

and our own impact on the environment. That connection with the outdoors tends to give

participants in outdoor activities an extra dimension when considering their response to such

issues. It doesn’t automatically make people experts or provide them with the right answers,

but it does tend to raise their awareness of the issues and provide them with insights they

wouldn’t have had without their interest in the outdoors.’

Two respondents highlighted that recreationists and conservationists are not distinct groups

and that many people belong to both groups. This perhaps indicates that in some cases a

virtuous cycle is therefore inevitable. Evidence gained from the consultation illustrates that

this is the case:

On-the-ground evidence: Do you know if any of your members/those who take part in

your recreation activity are also involved in environmental groups such as a ‘Friends

of’ group for a nature reserve or national organisations such as the RSPB or John

30

Muir Trust?

Activities Scotland: Yes, a fair majority are involved with environmental organisations in a

passive and/or active capacity.

Ramblers Association: Yes. We have over 7600 members. A survey (at GB level) found that

our members were also members of the National Trust for Scotland, Scottish Youth Hostels

Association, Scottish Wildlife Trust and also the RSPB.

SCA: The SCA has not carried out a survey of which other organisations our members are

also members of, so I can only give anecdotal evidence. A number of our members have

spoken to me about their membership of other recreation bodies (Mountaineering Council of

Scotland, Ramblers, etc), nature conservation bodies (RSPB, WWF, etc) and landscape

protection bodies (JMT, NTS, etc).

RYAS: It is not uncommon for RYAS members to also be members of conservation

organisations such as RSPB, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and the John Muir Trust.

It is worth noting that several organisations indicated that they had no evidence of a virtuous

cycle but would welcome research in this area.


There is some evidence of a virtuous cycle between participation in a recreation activity and

awareness of the natural heritage. The strength of the relationship appears to depend on a

number of factors including the type of recreation activity and the ability of an individual to

engage with the environment through this activity.

3.4 Subhypothesis 3: Environmental awareness can lead to environmentally responsible behaviour


The literature reveals that, although there is evidence of a virtuous cycle between recreation

and environmental concern, the relationship between environmental concern and

environmentally responsible behaviour is more complex. It has been found that a number of

variables are involved, and a person who is ‘environmentally aware’ will not necessarily

exhibit environmentally responsible behaviour, particularly when considered within the

context of specific types of outdoor recreation. This subhypothesis was tested as an

important element in the enjoyment and understanding debate, with ‘understanding’ defined

as not just knowledge but ‘knowledge to take action for the natural heritage’ (see section

1.1). It is important to examine whether awareness and understanding of the natural heritage

gained through recreation activity leads to environmentally responsible behaviour and action

to protect the natural heritage.


Responses to this subhypothesis were provided by nine recreation provision and

environmental management organisations. These mainly comprised the national park bodies

31

and forest districts, whose staff have a good appreciation of how recreation users interact

with the natural heritage and may have first-hand experience of incidents of irresponsible

behaviour.

The majority of respondents identified that there will always be instances when

environmentally aware individuals act in an irresponsible manner, but that this is largely the

exception to the rule. The relationship between awareness and behavioural change is

applicable to all aspects of life, and this was noted by the respondents. Whilst recognising

this aspect of behaviour, the JMT raised the issue that it is the frequency of such insensitive

behaviour which is particularly important.

The responses in the box below set out some support for the link between environmental

awareness and environmentally responsible behaviour; however, they also illustrate that the

relationship depends strongly on the individual.

On the ground evidence: Do you find that outdoor recreation leads recreation users

to volunteer for environmental projects?

JMT: Yes, a large majority of people participating in the John Muir Trust’s programme of

conservation activities are firstly hill walkers, cyclists, climbers, canoeists, etc.

JMT: Not sure that it’s a direct correlation Worth considering ‘environmental

responsibility’/putting something back as a broader definition than specifically volunteering

for environmental projects, which suggests a formal and structured activity.

JMT: Yes – many of our volunteers have experience of outdoor recreation activities rather

than conservation. Their main reason for volunteering with the Trust is to engage in the

environmental side of outdoor activities, and many of our leaders see this as ‘putting

something back’.

NTS: No, most volunteers work for their own reasons, e.g. to help get them started on the

career ladder or to socialise with like-minded and -aged individuals. There are some cases

of recreationists putting something back, but this is the exception. For instance, most horse

riders spend their available time caring for and exercising their horse rather than

volunteering.

RSPB: Anecdotally most RSPB volunteers will have had some previous contact with the

RSPB; in some cases this may have been a visit to a reserve or in others it might have

been an event where there was an RSPB stand.

SCRA: Yes, but on quite a limited level. A few do, but most don’t, and it can depend on the

type of group and whether they have any existing commitment to the environment. Often

this relies on an individual in a club. Long-term commitment can be a problem too.

SWT: This is sometimes the case although, as with most things in life, some people just

prefer to moan and do nothing. Sometimes because someone is participating in a certain

recreation, for example walking, they would be more likely to see environmental projects

happening and become interested, or because they are out surfing may like to do

something about the sewage.

The responses also identified that environmentally responsible behaviour does not

necessarily transfer between different spheres of life. The response from LLTNP highlighted

32

that ‘in terms of water recreation, there are many high speed boat owners who will be

environmentally responsible in terms of recycling etc at home but when they are out on the

loch they are not acting responsibly towards the water environment at all.’ This was further

illustrated by NTS, ‘the most obvious example is the way most environmentalists still take

regular plane trips across the world in pursuit of ever more challenging or rewarding

experiences’.

There are also particular circumstances in which the impact of irresponsible behaviour is

incremental and cumulative, such as path erosion or climate change, while the actual

contributing impact of an individual’s behaviour is not evident. However, the relationship

between this type of behaviour and other actions which have an immediate and obvious

impact on the environment is a subject for further research.

One respondent made reference to the ABC model of behavioural change (antecedents–

behaviour–consequences). This highlights that if you are interested in changing behaviour

you have to address both the antecedents (the context) and the consequences. For the

consequences the feedback has to be relevant to the individual concerned and immediate.

This is particularly relevant to environmental impacts, which do not have immediate or

obvious effects.

The respondents identified a number of key factors influencing ‘irresponsible’ behaviour,

which include:

• being able to get away with it, or lack of challenge from authority figure or from peer group;

• lack of immediate consequences that are relevant to the individual;

• thinking that ’someone else‘ will address the consequences (e.g. pick up the litter);

• not realising that their actions are part of a bigger picture – one tent beside the road for one night probably will not be a problem but there is a cumulative effect of many tents for many nights with no sewage provision;

• single-minded pursuit of a goal (e.g. bird watchers and photographers approaching their subjects too closely, dog walkers allowing their dogs to disturb wildlife);

• laziness/don’t care attitudes;

• level of commitment to behaving responsibly;

• lack of awareness of, or adherence to, codes of conduct.

Some responses identified the following issues that may influence environmentally

responsible behaviour on a more global level:

• societal norms (expectation to fly abroad on holiday, growth of domestic flights and cultural acceptance of pollution from air travel);

• consumerist culture (packaging);

• political expediency (is ‘green’ a vote winner?; limited encouragement of responsible lifestyles and measures to reduce energy consumption).

SportScotland also highlighted the fact that people are aware of their impacts, but that in

some cases the impacts are seen as acceptable. For example, mountain biking and horse

riding cause erosion, but these activities usually take place on routes suitable for these

activities; the problem arises when these activities take place in more sensitive

environments. Another issue raised by JMT is that perceptions of the environment,

33

awareness and responsibility do not always transfer between locations, citing the example of

‘kids might not drop litter in greenspace whilst on activity, but may do so in their own

neighbourhood as they perceive it differently (‘it’s already grotty here …’).


There are no firm conclusions on the relationship between environmental awareness and

environmentally responsible behaviour with the exception that the relationship is complex.

None of the respondents expressed strong views about the irresponsible behaviour of any

particular recreation group or type; however, it seems that there are other variables involved.

These include:

• awareness of impact of the recreation activity on the natural heritage in the first instance – some impacts may be evident, others may be cumulative or hidden;

• the context in which the activity or irresponsible behaviour is taking place – presence of authority, consequences.

It is also clear that in some cases, even where the impacts of a recreation activity are clear

to those involved, irresponsible behaviour still takes place.

3.5 Subhypothesis 4: Familiarity with a particular location leads to greater levels of awareness of the natural heritage


The literature notes the importance of familiarity with a particular location or ‘place

attachment’ and ‘affinity’ in terms of generating environmental awareness and understanding

of the natural heritage.

It is important to consider the concept of familiarity in order to identify whether locations such

as local greenspace or nature reserves play an important role in raising understanding of the

natural heritage.


Three respondents specifically addressed the point of familiarity with a location, but almost

all of the consultees did not support the suggestion that familiarity is a key element in raising

understanding of the natural heritage, suggesting instead that visiting a familiar place

influences the awareness and understanding of some and not others. More important factors

were said to be the age at which you visit the location and who you are with. One

respondent noted that ‘age can be a factor, but even this can work in different directions.

Some young people absorb environmental issues and concerns very quickly, whereas

others only see the outdoors as a location for their sport and don’t recognise the beauty and

fragility of what is around them.’ Another stated that important factors were ‘who introduces

you to the countryside and the activities that you take part in there. This may be a parent, a

grandparent, a teacher, an outdoor centre instructor, a scout or BB leader, a Duke of

Edinburgh’s Award leader, a fellow student in a university club, a club coach, or any one of a

number of other possibilities. The environmental awareness of that person will have a

significant impact on the environmental skills and knowledge that you pick up.’

34

Another respondent noted that it was not familiarity but often the number of different

locations that a person visited which contributed most to understanding of the natural

heritage: ‘someone who takes part in several activities in a range of locations is perhaps

more likely to gain a higher level of environmental awareness than someone who only visits

one type of place for one activity, but there are exceptions to this principle’.


The findings of the consultation suggest that familiarity with a location is not a major factor in

the relationship between recreation and awareness and understanding of the natural

heritage; it appears that factors relating to the individual are of more significance, including

existing environmental awareness, receptiveness to the environment and age. These factors

are investigated further under subhypothesis 5 below.

3.6 Subhypothesis 5: Recreation in certain environments is more likely to result in greater awareness of the natural heritage


It is important to assess whether environmental setting is a contributory factor in achieving

understanding and awareness of the natural heritage through informal recreation. This

subhypothesis is based on the literature, which indicates that experience of the natural

environment may be most effective in influencing understanding and behaviour when the

experience is related to a person’s home environment. It explores the relative importance of

pristine wilderness environments compared with more everyday environments in raising

awareness and understanding of the natural heritage.


Four respondents mentioned the importance of the type of environmental setting as a factor

that leads to understanding and awareness of the natural heritage. However, as with

subhypothesis 4, the majority of consultees reiterated the importance of other factors.

One respondent from the JMT noted that ‘those activities that take participants to more

remote and fragile environments (e.g. sea kayaking/alpine trekking) certainly have a

generally higher impact on both awareness and behaviour, as the impact and significance of

climate change and human behaviour is more evident’. In addition, it was mentioned that the

more wildlife there is on the site and the better the wildlife viewing opportunities. the higher

the potential for raising understanding and awareness. The SWT noted that because nature

reserves ‘are generally richer in wildlife there is generally something which will attract

attention; more so than a park.’ It was also noted that ‘the more natural (i.e. with less

obvious human impact) an area appears the greater the environmental experience of

people’.

The issue of environmental degradation was also linked to awareness and understanding.

For example, ‘surfers who actually immerse themselves in the environment appear to be

acutely aware of pollution issues. Same could be said for canoeists. Anglers aware of need

for good environment for fish to live in. Skiers more aware of global warming issues?’

(SportScotland).

35

One respondent refuted the possibility that environmental setting is related to awareness

and understanding by stating that ‘things like litter, damage to farm land and worrying of

livestock can occur across all types of environment’ (LDNP).

Similarly to the response to subhypothesis 4, the majority of consultees stated that there are

more important variables involved in the relationship between recreation and understanding

of the natural heritage than the characteristics of the recreational setting. These include

many variables relating to the individual: ‘what your life experience and attitudes are before

you go’ (CNPA). In addition, many respondents emphasised the importance of factors such

as age and who you are with.

Another factor related to the variation between the individual includes the impression that

people who visit more remote environments already have environmental awareness and

understanding which can be enhanced through the experience. The CNP stated that ‘people

who have very little outdoor experience can be stimulated by a place very close to the road

or by a dark starry sky’. This suggests that the potential value of local natural heritage

resources for raising environmental awareness and understanding should not be

underestimated.

Two respondents highlighted the importance of information and interpretation in raising

awareness and understanding – ‘a message which is added to their visit in some shape or

form’ (Sherwood Forest District). This suggests that it is not only the environmental setting

that is important but whether or not there are signs and notices on site or other forms of

information off site: these can add to the experience for some people.


The responses to the consultation suggest that environmental setting is of secondary

consideration in the relationship between recreation activity and awareness and

understanding. However, they suggest that some critical elements relating to environmental

setting may include:

• the evidence of environmental problems and issues such as climate change (more evident in remote, fragile environments);

• the existence of wildlife and opportunities to view wildlife;

• the value of ‘close to home’ nature experience for some people, depending on previous contact with nature.

Other variables noted as being of greater significance than environmental setting were:

• the individual – environmental awareness/receptiveness, age, companions in the activity;

• the provision of information and interpretation within the environmental setting.

3.7 Subhypothesis 6: Early-years involvement in outdoor recreation is important in creating environmental concern


Significant life experiences (SLE) research, as outlined in the literature review, shows the

importance of early-years experience of the natural environment in providing a basis for

environmental awareness and concern in later life. This is an important concept, which, if

36

true, has implications for the introduction of recreation activities to children and young

people.


All of the consultees with a primary remit for environmental management and conservation

agreed with the importance of early-years involvement in outdoor activity. One respondent

from the JMT stated that ‘many participants in our activities have chosen to engage with the

John Muir Trust because their environmental sensitivities have already been raised by

outdoor experiences and environmental awareness in their early years’.

The outdoors is seen as a particularly good vehicle for engaging children in learning in

general. Schemes such as Forest Schools were mentioned as useful tools for enabling

children to become accustomed to being outdoors and valuing their surroundings.

Several consultees emphasised that repeat visits are seen as an indicator of the

effectiveness of engaging young people – ‘when you ask kids if they’ve been to a site before,

many have come there with parents or grandparents.’ (SCRA). Often children who have

visited a site with their school will come back with their family.


The consultation responses strongly supported the subhypothesis, with early-years

involvement in outdoor recreation activity felt to provide a potentially powerful gateway to the

virtuous cycle, and thus in turn leading to increased levels of understanding of the natural

heritage.

3.8 Overview of phase 2 findings

3.8.1 General links

There was some support for the view that environmental awareness varies between different

types of recreation activity, though this is based on respondents’ opinions and experience

rather than empirical evidence. There was general support for the view that those activities

undertaken at a slower pace and in a more natural environment tend to be associated with

higher levels of understanding than those which are faster or more competitive in nature.

It was noted that some forms of recreation activity require a degree of environmental

awareness at the outset, but that they are also likely to lead to increased levels of

awareness. This is most evident in relation to wildlife watching. There was less support

overall for the suggestion that environmental awareness and understanding will

automatically lead to an involvement in outdoor recreation, since this interest in the natural

heritage may be expressed in other ways.

3.8.2 Awareness and behaviour

It was found that environmental awareness and understanding do not lead automatically to

environmentally responsible behaviour. Although there is evidence of some groups of people

volunteering to ‘put something back’ into the environment, there are other examples of

apparently responsible individuals undertaking recreation activity in a way that is

37

environmentally damaging, at local and global levels. In some cases this was attributed to a

lack of specific awareness, for example the perception that small and incremental impacts

make a small contribution to a problem (e.g. footpath erosion or global warming), a

determination to achieve a recreational goal, a lack of accountability or simple laziness.

Some types of activity would be judged as being responsible in some locations and

irresponsible in others. Equally, people might behave with a higher degree of environmental

awareness in some locations than in others.

3.8.3 Recreation type

It was suggested that some forms of recreation activity lead to awareness of specific

environmental issues. Examples include sea kayakers’ awareness of rubbish in the marine

environment and surfers’ awareness of water pollution.

Frequent recreation activities are considered more likely to be associated with higher levels

of environmental awareness than infrequent or one-off activities.

The work of governing bodies was highlighted as playing an important role in raising the

environmental awareness of participants in particular forms of recreation activity. However, it

could also be the case that the individuals within the member organisation are already aware

of environmental issues.

It was suggested that the impact of a recreational activity on an individual may reflect his or

her previous experience. Those with relatively little outdoor experience may be stimulated by

less ‘extreme’ activities and environments, whereas those with more extensive experience

(and awareness) may need to be in a more remote, ‘natural’ or fragile environment to

generate a comparable response.

3.8.4 A virtuous cycle

A number of stakeholders supported the view that there is a virtuous cycle of involvement in

recreation activities and environmental awareness and understanding. The strength of this

cycle was considered to be greater for some types of activity than others, with key variables

including any prerequisite for environmental awareness (e.g. birdwatching), the frequency of

the activity and the richness, naturalness and fragility of the environment within which the

activity takes place. This suggests that the virtuous cycle is most powerful in relation to more

appreciative types of recreation, particularly those which depend on a degree of

environmental knowledge, and less powerful for more ‘consumptive’ or competitive activities.

3.8.5 Environmental setting

There was a low level of support for the suggestion that undertaking recreation in a familiar

setting makes an important contribution to environmental awareness; factors such as age

and the way you are introduced to the environment were judged to be more important. It was

found that setting is important, but that its effect is dependent on the individual response to a

setting, in particular to the experience of nature or naturalness, in combination with sufficient

familiarity to recognise the experience as relevant to ‘normal’ experience. The provision of

information through interpretation can make a significant contribution, for some people, to

understanding of the natural heritage in a particular setting.

38

3.8.6 Early years

There was support for the suggestion that early-years involvement was a key factor in

supporting later involvement in outdoor recreation and in encouraging environmental

awareness. The involvement of children can also be a way of encouraging the involvement

of the wider family.

3.8.7 The key variables

All these conclusions were considered to vary between individuals. Key influences were

described as including people’s initial level of environmental awareness (including their life

experiences), their motivation for carrying out the activity, the novelty and frequency of the

recreational experience, and a range of social, peer group, educational and economic

influences. It was noted that there is an overlap between involvement in particular activities

and membership of ‘environmental’ organisations. It was also suggested that it is important

to consider the barriers to involvement in outdoor recreation as well as those factors

influencing the choice of activity. The nature of these variables is discussed more fully in the

next section.

39

4 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

This section of the report draws together the findings from phases 1 and 2 of the research to

provide consolidated conclusions, a series of recommendations for future research to fill

gaps in the literature, and a number of options for the application of the study results within

SNH.

4.1 Overall findings

Phase 1, the literature review, found no research which could be used directly to test the

study hypothesis that ‘enjoyment of the natural heritage leads to understanding of the natural

heritage’. However, various strands of UK and international research were found which

provided evidence of links between enjoyment and understanding, given the proviso that

some care was required to achieve a ‘best fit’ with the definition set out in the project brief.11

This evidence included:

1. studies examining attitudes towards the environment of participants in particular

types of recreation;

2. studies which illustrated that experience of nature is key in developing an emotional

attachment, or affinity with, nature and a desire to protect it;

3. significant life experience (SLE) research illustrating that outdoor experience,

especially during the early years, is clearly linked to environmental concern and pro-

environmental behaviour;

4. free choice learning research which highlights that informal learning in a natural

setting can lead to an understanding of issues relating to the environment;

5. studies examining the value of outdoor learning (with informal recreation activities

taking place within this) in creating environmental awareness;

6. some activity-specific research analysing participant awareness of the environment in

which the activity takes place and awareness of the environmental impact of the

activity.

All of the above provided support for the hypothesis that there is a relationship between

informal recreation and understanding of the natural heritage. In particular, the experience of

the natural heritage provided by informal recreation does, in some cases, lead to

understanding of the natural heritage. In addition, it was found that the relationship can be a

cyclical or ‘virtuous’ one, with participation in recreation activity leading to increased

understanding, which in turn can lead to more participation in recreation activity.

The research, however, illustrated that a number of variables are involved in the relationship

between involvement in recreational activities and understanding of the natural heritage.

These variables include the type of recreation activity, socio-economic factors, familiarity

with the environmental setting, the age of the participant and the frequency of participation.

11Although the study brief focused on the term ‘understanding,’ the study necessarily also considered

research and opinions relating to a range of indicators of understanding, including environmental awareness, environmental concern and responsible or pro-environmental behaviour.

40

Phase 2 of the research, the stakeholder consultation, sought to explore further the nature of

the relationship between enjoying and understanding the natural heritage through validating

the findings from the literature review and exploring the variables that had been highlighted

in the research. Responses from the stakeholders consulted provided:

• support for the suggestion that there is a positive relationship between enjoyment and understanding of the natural heritage;

• support for the suggestion that this can be a cyclical or self-reinforcing relationship;

• some support for the view that the relationship varies in strength between different types of recreation activity;

• some support for the view that the strength of the positive feedback varies between different types of recreation activity;

• some support for suggestions that early-years participation in outdoor recreation makes a positive contribution to understanding, and that the nature of one’s introduction to the outdoors can also have an influence;

• weak support for the suggestion that the type and familiarity of the environment has a key influence on understanding.

• these conclusions need to be set in the context of influences acting at the level of the individual participant, including:

• education;

• socio-economic factors;

• cultural factors and peer group influences.

4.2 Research gaps

The study uncovered a number of overall gaps in terms of published research. These

include:

No specific research which directly addresses the research hypothesis, as defined in

the brief, that ‘enjoyment of the natural heritage leads to understanding of the natural

heritage’. Rather there are a number of avenues of research which provide a ‘proxy’ or ‘best

fit’ to this. These examine concepts such as attitudes towards the environment of

participants in particular types of recreation and the role of outdoor experience in generating

environmental concern, environmental awareness and responsible or pro-environmental

behaviour. There is a requirement for specific and quantified research which examines the

relationship between informal recreation activity and the role of this activity in enhancing

understanding of the natural heritage features and characteristics of the environment in

which the activity takes place.

No Scottish and UK research to supplement the international studies that were

reviewed in phase 1. In particular, Significant life experience, free choice learning and

research which links recreation activity type to environmental awareness are predominantly

North American. This gap compounds the finding that there is no research which directly

addresses the research hypothesis, as defined in the project brief.

A lack of information on the significance and influence of different cultural and socio-

economic factors on people’s involvement in natural heritage-based recreation (including

the choice of activity type and significance of factors such as cost of equipment and

transport). This is a significant gap given (a) the apparent significance of socio-economic

41

factors on levels of environmental concern and (b) the apparent virtuous cycle between

environmental concern and involvement in appreciative forms of outdoor recreation.

Necessarily, the research has focused on information relating to those who already

participate in outdoor recreation and the impact of this on their understanding of the natural

heritage or environmental awareness. Given the study’s conclusions regarding a virtuous

cycle between involvement and understanding, it is important to understand the factors

influencing decisions not to take part in outdoor recreation.

A lack of activity-specific information on enjoyment and understanding. Academic

research into recreation tends to group activities together. No concrete evidence could be

found for the contribution of specific recreation activities to environmental awareness and

concern. This could be addressed in part through recreation surveys, such as the Scottish

Recreation Survey, by exploring the link between undertaking a recreation activity and

awareness and understanding of the natural heritage.

4.3 Overall recommendations

The above findings illustrate the complexity of the relationship between enjoyment of the

natural heritage and understanding of the natural heritage. The following section sets out the

overall findings in terms of three groups of variables, reflecting the characteristics of (1) the

individual, (2) the recreation type and (3) the environmental setting within which the

recreation activity takes place. Within each, an outline of future recommendations for SNH is

included, which takes into account the variables involved and the highlevel research gaps

that have been highlighted.

4.3.1 Conclusions and recommendations relating to ‘the individual’

At the individual level, it was found that there are a number of factors that influence the

choice of recreation activity and therefore have some effect on heightening awareness and

understanding of the natural heritage. Important influences are thought to include:

• existing understanding of the natural heritage;

• life experience;

• with whom you visit the outdoors, and who introduced you to the outdoors;

• what age you are when introduced to the outdoors;

• whether you are a member of an environmental organisation;

• socio-economic background;

• how frequently you visit the outdoors for a particular recreation activity.

It therefore follows that in trying to enhance the opportunities for enjoyment (informal

recreation) to result in greater understanding and awareness there is a need to focus on

‘people’ – preparing them for the experience of the environment, and ensuring that their

experience has a positive feedback in terms of raising awareness.

Some of these factors may be relevant to those who do not currently take part in outdoor

recreation and have comparatively low levels of environmental awareness and

understanding, presenting a challenge in terms of overcoming barriers and placing people

on the hypothesised ‘virtuous cycle’.

42

4.3.2 Recommendations for SNH relating to ‘the individual’

1. Develop a better understanding of the ‘individual’ factors that influence participation

and choice of activity. This could include new survey work or the refinement of

existing recreation surveys to generate new data and evidence.

2. Explore the ‘barriers’ to involvement in outdoor recreation and to participating in more

‘appreciative’ activities. Different approaches for different segments of the population

(e.g. participants, those contemplating involvement, those who are not contemplating

involvement and those who will not become involved no matter what encouragement

is provided).

3. Gather information on the significance and influence of different cultural and socio-

economic factors on people’s involvement in natural heritage-based recreation

(including the choice of activity type and factors such as cost of equipment and

transport), and the influence of these factors on their understanding and awareness

of the outdoors and natural heritage.

4.3.3 Conclusions and recommendations relating to ‘recreation type’

Turning to the influence of different recreation type, there is some evidence that different

types of informal recreation are more likely than others to contribute to understanding of the

natural environment, although this varies between individuals. Key factors influencing the

extent to which particular activities are associated with environmental awareness and

understanding include:

• the level of environmental knowledge required for the activity;

• how competitive the activity is, the techniques involved and pace at which it takes place;

• how close the activity takes you to nature – wild camping etc.;

• how integral ‘appreciation’ of the environment is in carrying out the activity (e.g. rambling) or the extent to which the activity makes you aware of environmental issues (e.g. pollution);

• role of the leading body/organisation in promoting awareness, understanding and pro-environmental behaviour (e.g. through codes of practice).

4.3.4 Recommendations for SNH relating to ‘recreation type’

4. Gather additional activity-specific information via surveys and the involvement of

governing bodies and representative organisations in order to understand more fully

the relationship between informal recreation and understanding. Such information

might include the extent of understanding of the natural heritage, involvement in other

outdoor activities, membership of environmental and recreation organisations,

motivation for involvement in the activity in question, aspirations to take part in other

activities and specific barriers preventing such participation.

5. Develop ways to encourage people onto the virtuous cycle of participation in outdoor

recreation and understanding of the natural heritage. Identify gateways to, and

pathways through, involvement – for example schools, families, local greenspaces,

social inclusion measures and direct outreach activities.

43

6. Encourage people to move ‘up’ the cycle, to become more involved in appreciative

activities and to gain more knowledge and understanding. Identify interpretation and

promotional activities, possibly involving work with governing bodies and other

agencies.

4.3.5 Conclusions and recommendations relating to ‘environmental setting’

The final group of variables that appear to have a bearing on the relationship between

enjoyment and understanding of the natural heritage relate to the environmental setting

within which the recreation activity takes place. The discussions with consultees suggest that

this can be a key influence on awareness, attitudes and understanding. The following factors

appeared to be important:

• A more ‘natural’ environment may engender greater awareness and understanding of natural heritage issues, though this varies between individuals, with those less familiar with the natural environment also being influenced by more familiar settings.

• For many people an increase in understanding will be strengthened through access to information and interpretation relating to the natural heritage.

• A lack of understanding of differing levels of environmental sensitivity means that people may undertake outdoor recreation activity which is suitable in one location, but damaging in another.

4.3.6 Recommendations for SNH relating to ‘environmental setting’

7. Continue to emphasise interpretation of the natural heritage, particularly where this

can inform and enhance a recreational activity.

8. Continue to emphasise work with governing and representative bodies to influence

the natural heritage content of codes of conduct.

9. Continue to emphasise encouraging responsible access and recreation across a

broad range of natural heritage settings. Given the significance of encouraging

people onto the virtuous cycle, this underlines the importance of SNH’s current

settlement and greenspace work.

44

APPENDIX 1: REFERENCES

Adventure and Environmental Awareness Group (no date) Report on Rock Climbing and

Environmental Awareness, available at www.aea-uk.org.

Ballantyne, R. & Packer, J. 2005. Promoting environmentally sustainable attitudes and

behaviour through free choice learning experiences: what is the state of the game?

Environmental Education Research, 11, 281–295.

Bushby, R. 2003. An investigation into the John Muir Award and its relationship with outdoor

education and environmental education. MSc thesis, University of Edinburgh.

Centre for Sustainable Development, University of Westminster. 2006. Promoting Pro-

Environmental Behaviour: Existing Evidence to Inform Better Policy Making. London: Defra.

Cessford, G. 1995. Off-road Mountain Biking: A Profile of Participants and Their Recreation

Setting and Experience Preferences. Department of Conservation, New Zealand.

Chawla, L. 2001. Significant life experiences revisited once again: response to Vol. 5 (4)

‘Five critical commentaries on significant life experience research in environmental

education’. Environmental Education Research 7, 451–461.

Corcoran, P. B. 1999. Formative influences in the lives of environmental educators in the

United States. Environmental Education Research 5, 207–220.

Dillon, J., Morris, M., O’Donnell, L., Reid, A., Rickinson, M. & Scott, W. 2005. Engaging and

learning with the outdoors – the final report of the outdoor classroom in a rural context action

research project. National Foundation for Education Research.

Ewert, A., Place, G. & Sibthorp, J. 2005. Early-Life outdoor experiences and an individual’s

environmental attitudes. Leisure Sciences 27, 225–239.

Falk, J. H. 2005. Free choice environmental Learning: framing the discussion. Environmental

Education Research 11, 265–280.

George Street Research. 2005. Promoting Key Messages about the Natural Heritage:

National Baseline Survey of Public Attitudes. Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned

Report No. 110 (ROAME No. F04AB09). .

Goeffe, U. & Alder, J. 2001. Sustainable mountain biking: a case study from the southwest of

Western Australia. Journal of Sustainable Tourism, 9, 193–211.

Gough, S. 1999. Significant Life Experiences (SLE) research: a view from somewhere.

Environmental Education Research Journal, 5, 353–363.

Haluza Delay, R. 1999. The culture that constrains experience of nature as part of a

wilderness adventure program. Journal of Experiential Education, 22, 129–127.

Hanna, G. 1995. Wilderness-related environmental outcomes of adventure and ecology

education programming. Journal of Environmental Education, 27, 21–32.

Henley Centre. 2006. Paper 2: Demand for Outdoor Recreation. A Report for Natural

England’s Outdoor Recreation Strategy. Commissioned by Natural England.

45

Jackson, E. L. 1986. Outdoor recreation participation and attitudes to the environment.

Leisure Studies, 5, 1–23.

Kals, E., Schumacher, D. & Montada, L. 1999. Emotional Affinity toward Nature as a

Motivational Basis to Protect Nature. Environment and Behavior 31, 178–202.

Kelly, T., Sushak, R. & Jakes, P. 2001. Changing people’s perceptions and behavior through

partnerships and education: follow up on a case study from Minnesota. Gen. Tech. Rep. NC-

220. St. Paul, MN: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, North Central Research

Station.

Kola-Olusanya. 2005. Free Choice Environmental Education: understanding where children

learn outside of school. Environmental Education Research 11, 297–307.

Kollmuss, A. & Agyeman, J. 2002. Mind the Gap: why do people act environmentally and

what are the barriers to pro-environmental behaviour? Environmental Education Research 8,

239–260.

Land Use Consultants. 2006. Review of Marine and Coastal Recreation. Scottish Natural

Heritage Commissioned Report F05AA608.

Lester, S., & Maudsley, M. 2006. Play, Naturally: A Review of Children’s Natural Play.

Commission for Playday. London: Children’s Play Council.

NFO System Three. 2001. Scottish Walking Survey 2000. Inverness: Scottish Natural

Heritage.

NFO System Three. 2002. Survey of Cycling in Scotland. Scottish Executive Social

Research.

NFO System Three. 2003. Public Attitudes to Access to the Countryside. Edinburgh:

Scottish Executive Social Research and Scottish Natural Heritage.

Nord, M., Luloff, A. E. & Bridger, J. C. 1998. The association of forest recreation with

environmentalism. Environment and Behavior 30, 235–246.

Palmer, J. & Neal, P. 1994. The Handbook of Environmental Education. London: Routledge.

Palmer, J., Suggate, J., Robottom, I. & Hart, P. 1999. Significant life experiences and

formative influences on the development of adults’ environmental awareness in the UK,

Australia and Canada. Environmental Education Research 5, 181–200.

Palmer, J., Suggate, J., Bajd, B., Hart, P., Ho, R., Ofwono-orecho, J., Peries, M., Robottom,

I., Tsaliki, E. & Christie, V. 1998. An overview of significant influences and formative

experiences on the development of adults’ awareness in nine countries. Environmental

Education Research 4, 445–464.

Place, G. 2004. Outdoor recreation leads to adult conservation. Parks and Recreation,

February, pp. 29–38.

Rickinson M., Dillon, J., Teamey, K., Morris, M., Young Choi, M., Sanders, D. & Benefield, P.

2004. A Review of Research on Outdoor Learning. National Foundation for Educational

Research.

46

Russell, C. L. 1999. Problematising nature experience in environmental education: the

interrelationship of experience and story Journal of Experiential Education 22, 123–128.

Scott Porter Research & Marketing Ltd. 2005. Biking in Scotland. Edinburgh: Visit Scotland.

Scott, N.J. & Parsons, E.C.M. 2001. Marine Environmental Awareness in Argyll, West

Scotland. Mull: Hebridean Whale and Dolphin Trust.

SNH. 2003. ‘A Natural Perspective’: SNH Corporate Strategy. Inverness: Scottish Natural

Heritage.

SNH. 2005. SNH Corporate Plan 2005–2008. Inverness: Scottish Natural Heritage.

SNH. 2006. Enjoying the Outdoors – An SNH Policy Framework. Draft November.

Inverness: Scottish Natural Heritage.

SeaSearch Training Programme, available at http://www.seasearch.org.uk/.

Tarrant, M. A. & Green, G. T. 1999. Outdoor recreation and the predictive validity of

environmental attitudes. Leisure Sciences 21, 17–30.

The Progressive Partnership. 2005. The Walker’s View of Walking in Scotland: Summary of

Research into the Scottish Holiday Experience for Walkers. Report commissioned by

Scottish Natural Heritage, Scottish Enterprise, VisitScotland and Forestry Commission

Scotland.

Teisl, M. F. & O’Brien, K. 2003. Who cares and who acts? Outdoor recreationists exhibit

different levels of environmental concern and behavior. Environment and Behavior 35, 506–

522.

TNS. 2006. Scottish Recreation Survey: Annual Summary Report 2004/05. Scottish Natural

Heritage Commissioned Report No. 183 (ROAME No. F02AA614/3).

Vaske, J. J. & Kobrin, K. C. 2001. Place attachment and environmentally responsible

behavior. Journal of Environmental Education 32, 16–21.

Woods-Ballard, A. 2000. Whalewatching in Scotland with a case study on the Isle of Skye.

MSc Thesis, Edinburgh University.

47

APPENDIX 2: ADDITIONAL SOURCES

Adventure and Environmental Awareness Group. Report on Mountain Biking and the

Environment, available at www.aea-uk.org.

Adventure and Environmental Awareness Group. Wild Camping Workshop Report, available

at www.aea-uk.org.

Bogeholz, S. 2006. Nature experience and its importance for environmental knowledge,

values and action: recent German empirical contributions. Environmental Education

Research 12, 65–84.

Bourne, B. & Bourne, C. Presentation from Conservation Principles for Equestrian Trail

Users, available at www.americantrails.org/resources/wildlife/CompetitionEq.html.

Countryside Agency. 2005. Commissioned Report CRN 93 – Demand for Outdoor

Recreation in the English National Parks.

Ewert, A. & Baker, D. 2001. Standing for where you sit: an exploratory analysis of the

relationship between academic major and environmental beliefs. Environment and Behavior

33, 687–707.

Gough, A. 1999. Kids don’t like wearing the same jeans as their mums and dads: so whose

life should be in significant life experiences research? Environmental Education Research 5,

383–394.

Harris Interactive. 2005. Tourism Attitudes Survey 2005. Edinburgh: VisitScotland.

Needham, M. D., Wood, C. J. & Rollins, R. B. 2004. Understanding summer visitors and

their experiences at the Whistler Mountain Ski Area, Canada. Mountain Research and

Development 24, 234–242.

NFO System Three. 2002. Tourism Attitudes Survey, 2001. Scottish Natural Heritage

Commissioned Report. Inverness: Scottish Natural Heritage.

Palmberg, I. & Kuru, J. 2000. Outdoor activities as a basis for environmental responsibility.

Journal of Environmental Education 31(4), 32–36.

Parsons, E. C. M., Lewandowski, J. & Lück, M. 2006. Recent advances in whalewatching

research 2004–2005. Tourism in Marine Environments 2, 119–132.

Peacock, A. 2006. The lasting impact of school trips. A study of the long-term impact of

sustained relationships between schools and the National Trust via the Guardianship

scheme. The National Trust.

Ramsey, C. E. & Rickson, R. E. 1976. Environmental knowledge and attitudes. Journal of

Environmental Education 8, 10–18.

Simpson. 1999. A simple lesson in experiencing nature, Journal of Experiential Education,

22, 118–22.

Thomas, G. 2005. Traditional adventure activities in outdoor environmental education.

Australian Journal of Outdoor Education 9, 31–39.

48

APPENDIX 3: CONSULTEES

Organisation contacted Questionnaire

response/s

Email

follow-up

Telephone

follow-up

Recreation providers and environmental managers

Cairngorms National Park Authority �

Countryside Council for Wales �

Countryside Recreation Network

Field Studies Council

Forestry Commission England – Forest

Districts

��

Forestry Commission Scotland �

Glenmore Lodge �

Greenspace Scotland

John Muir Trust and John Muir Award ��

Lake District National Park Authority �

Loch Lomond and the Trossachs

National Park Authority

� �

Losehill Hall, Peak District National

Park Centre for Environmental

Learning

�

Paths for All �

SportScotland �

Royal Highland Education Trust

National Trust for Scotland �

Natural England �

Yorkshire Dales National Park

Authority

�

Royal Society Protection Birds �

Scottish Countryside Rangers

Association

�

Scottish Wildlife Trust �

Woodland Trust Scotland

Recreation associations

Activities Scotland ��

British Horse Society

Cyclists’ Touring Club (Scotland)

International Mountain Bicycling

Association UK

Mountaineering Council of Scotland

Ramblers Association Scotland ��

Royal Yachting Association ��

Scottish Canoe Association ��

Scottish Hill Runners Association

Scottish Orienteers’ Association ��

Scottish Ornithologists Club

Scottish Sports Association

Research organisations

Forest Research �

Moray House, Outdoor Education

Department

�

49

APPENDIX 4: QUESTIONNAIRES

Government organisations

Does participation in informal recreation activity result in greater understanding about the natural heritage?

People enjoy the outdoors in many ways, but one of the most popular is informal recreation

– this includes a wide spectrum of activity ranging from short walks or bike rides on local

paths or in the parks and green spaces of the Central Belt through to mountain biking in the

forests of Scottish Borders, ice-climbing on the northern corries of the Cairngorms or diving

in the waters of Scapa Flow. Many of these informal activities also provide opportunities for

more formal participation in competitive sports and events. But enjoyment of the outdoors is

not just restricted to physical forms of recreation and includes family and social activities

such as picnics, playing, paddling and dog walking as well as some motorised activities such

as boating and scenic drives.12.

Land Use Consultants is currently carrying out a project on behalf of Scottish Natural

Heritage which examines the link between enjoyment of the natural heritage and

understanding of the natural heritage. The study considers enjoyment in the context of

informal recreation activities, such as walking, cycling, camping, canoeing, horse riding and

wildlife watching.13

We have undertaken a review of existing literature which illustrated that there is a

relationship between outdoor recreation and environmental awareness in certain situations.

The key findings of this were:

• Correlation between recreation and awareness. Those who undertake informal recreation activities, such as wildlife watching, camping, hiking and visiting nature areas, tend to have greater environmental awareness than those taking part in other recreation activities.

• Positive feedback between recreation and awareness. Participation in outdoor recreation results in greater environmental concern and awareness leading to greater participation in outdoor recreation – a so-called ‘virtuous’ cycle.

• Affinity with place leads to positive attitudes and actions. Affinity to a particular natural area, often gained through informal recreation, leads to more environmentally responsible behaviour.

• Early-days experiences build positive values. Experience of the natural environment in childhood is a key factor in leading to environmental awareness and attitude to the environment in later life.

• Socio-economic factors influence activities and hence understanding. Socio-economic and cultural factors have a significant influence on choice of recreation activity and therefore also have a relationship with understanding and awareness.

12Enjoying the Outdoors – An SNH Policy Framework, Draft November 2006.

13Note that the study does not include formal environmental education programmes within its remit.

50

We would now like to test these findings by contacting organisations with an interest in

recreation, the natural heritage, and visitor experience such as yourselves.

We would be most grateful if you could consider the following questions and provide any

relevant feedback where possible. If you have any further queries do not hesitate to contact

us.

1. Is raising environmental awareness an objective of your recreation policy and

practice (if applicable)? Can you provide examples of this?

2. Are you aware of any documented evidence that participation in recreation can lead

to environmental awareness?

3. Do you find that participants in different types of recreation activity have different

levels of environmental awareness?

4. Do you see evidence of a virtuous cycle between participation and awareness (more

recreation leading to more awareness and vice versa)? Is this more evident for some

kinds of recreation than others?

5. Research suggests that even where people have environmental awareness this does

not always lead to them taking positive action for the environment. Are there on the

ground examples of supposedly environmentally aware people behaving in

environmentally insensitive ways (noise, damage, rubbish etc)? If so, are there any

obvious causes for this (ignorance, lack of enforcement, peer group behaviour etc)?

6. Is there evidence that recreation in certain types of environment (e.g. wild areas or

local nature reserves) result in greater environmental awareness?

7. What are the common barriers to people taking part in outdoor recreation and how

large a component do you think environmental awareness is in this?

8. Do you promote any particular recreation activities with the principal objective of

increasing understanding of the natural heritage?

Any other comments.

51

Non-governmental organisations

Does participation in informal recreation result in greater understanding about the natural heritage?











Heritage which examines the link between enjoyment of the natural heritage and



wildlife watching15.

We have undertaken a review of existing literature which illustrated that there is a

relationship between outdoor recreation and environmental awareness in certain situations.

The key findings of this were:

• Correlation between recreation and awareness. Those who undertake informal recreation activities, such as wildlife watching, camping, hiking and visiting nature areas tend to have greater environmental awareness than those taking part in other recreation activities;

• Positive feedback between recreation and awareness. Participation in outdoor recreation results in greater environmental concern and awareness leading to greater participation in outdoor recreation – a so-called ‘virtuous’ cycle.

• Affinity with place leads to positive attitudes and actions. Affinity to a particular natural area, often gained through informal recreation, leads to more environmentally responsible behaviour.

• Early days experiences build positive values. Experience of the natural environment in childhood is a key factor in leading to environmental awareness and attitude to the environment in later life.

• Socio-economic factors influence activities and hence understanding. Socio-economic and cultural factors have a significant influence on choice of recreation activity and therefore also have a relationship with understanding and awareness.

We would like test these findings by contacting organisations with an interest in recreation,

the natural heritage, and visitor experience such as yourselves.

14Enjoying the Outdoors – An SNH Policy Framework. Draft November 2006.


52

We would be most grateful if you could consider the following questions and provide any

relevant feedback where possible. If you have any further queries do not hesitate to contact

us.

1. Are you aware of any occurrences where participants in different types of recreation

activity have different levels of environmental awareness or pro-environmental

behaviour?

2. Are you aware of a virtuous cycle between participation and awareness (more

recreation leading to more awareness and vice versa)? Is this more evident for some

kinds of recreation than others?

3. Research suggests that although people have environmental awareness this does

not always lead to ‘environmentally responsible behaviour’. Are there examples of

supposedly environmentally aware people behaving in environmentally insensitive

ways (noise, damage, rubbish, etc.)? If so, are there any obvious causes for this

(ignorance, lack of enforcement, peer group behaviour, etc.)?

4. Are you aware whether recreation in certain types of environment (e.g. wild areas or

local nature reserves) results in greater environmental awareness?

5. Do you find that repeated visits by recreation users to a natural heritage area

increases awareness and changes behaviour?

6. Do you find that outdoor recreation leads recreation users to volunteer for

environmental projects?

7. Do you see any evidence of the importance of early years outdoor recreation in

environmental awareness? For example pupils who have visited in a school groups

who have returned to the site independently?

8. Many nature reserves carry out formal environmental education programmes. Do you

feel that these are more useful in enhancing environmental awareness than personal

enjoyment outdoors through informal recreation (e.g. taking a walk, cycling)?

Any other comments.

53

Recreation associations

Does participation in your recreation activity result in greater understanding about the natural heritage?











Heritage (SNH) which examines the link between enjoyment of the natural heritage and



wildlife watching.17

We would like to find out how your sport/recreation activity helps to foster environmental

awareness and understanding of the natural heritage. For example, do you think that many

of your members/clients have a good understanding of the natural environment – is this just

as a result of being outdoors or are there other factors? Does environmental awareness/a

desire to deepen understanding prompt people’s involvement in the activity or is it more of a

result of the activity (a ’side-effect’)?

We would be most grateful if you could spare some time to fill in the following questions. If

you have any queries please contact us.

1. Do you know if any of your members/those who take part in your recreation activity

are also involved in environmental groups such as a Friends of group for a nature

reserve or national organisations such as RSPB or John Muir Trust (for example,

information from members surveys or just general knowledge)?

2. Does your organisation/group promote understanding of the natural heritage,

environmental awareness, and positive actions, for example through codes of

conduct?

3. Are your members/those who take part in your recreation activity generally aware of

any potential for conflict between their actions and the natural heritage and are you

aware of any examples of where behaviour is modified accordingly (e.g. to avoid

sensitive natural heritage areas)?

16Enjoying the Outdoors – An SNH Policy Framework. Draft November 2006.


54

4. Do you think people become more attached to the natural places in which the activity

regularly takes place and does this lead to a greater understanding about that

environment and a wish to protect its natural heritage value?

5. Do you ever see any evidence of a cyclical relationship between recreation and

environmental awareness with recreation resulting in more environmental awareness

and vice versa?

Any other comments.

55

APPENDIX 5: LIST OF ORGANISATION ACRONYMS

BMC British Mountaineering Council

CNPA Cairngorms National Park Authority

CCW Countryside Council for Wales

FCE Forestry Commission England – Forest Districts

FCS Forestry Commission Scotland

JMT John Muir Trust

LDNP Lake District National Park

LLTNPA Loch Lomond and the Trossachs National Park Authority

NE Natural England

NTS National Trust for Scotland

RSPB Royal Society for the Protection of Birds

RYAS Royal Yachting Association Scotland

SCRA Scottish Countryside Rangers Association

SCA Scottish Canoe Association

SOA Scottish Orienteering Association

SWT Scottish Wildlife Trust

YDNP Yorkshire Dales National Park

www.snh.gov.uk© Scottish Natural Heritage 2010ISBN: 978-1-85397-678-0

Policy and Advice Directorate, Great Glen House,Leachkin Road, Inverness IV3 8NWT: 01463 725000

You can download a copy of this publication from the SNH website.

snh commissioned report 243: review of research into links

Documents