Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Personal Wilderness Relationships: Building on a Transactional Approach

  • Published:
Environmental Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Wilderness managers are charged with the challenging goal of balancing resource protection and experience quality across a broad, value-laden landscape. While research has provided insight into visitors’ motivations and their meanings for wilderness, a struggle exists to implement experiential concepts within current management frameworks. This research posits the human experience of wilderness to be an evolving, enduring relationship, and that research needs can be addressed by conceptualizing and investigating an individuals’ personal wilderness relationship. The purpose of this study was to explore wilderness relationships of visitors to the Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. A predictive model was proposed to investigate the internal dimensions of a visitor’s wilderness relationship. A mail-back questionnaire was distributed during the summer of 2007, resulting in a sample of 564 respondents. Data were analyzed using confirmatory factor analysis and structural equation modeling. Results from testing several relationship models provided support for a multidimensional structure consisting of five factors with a single overarching relationship factor. The preferred relationship model indicated the importance of identities and attachment in place relationships. Trust and commitment toward management were also important considerations. This research provided the preliminary evidence for a multidimensional wilderness relationship model and complements a perspective of wilderness experiences as wilderness. Findings may help to reframe decision-making and public-input processes that guide management actions to increased wilderness character protection and facilitate quality wilderness experiences.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Arnould EJ, Price LL (1993) River magic: extraordinary experience and the extended service encounter. J Consum Res 20(1):24–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barnes JG (1994) Close to the customer: but is it really a relationship? J Mark Manag 10:561–570

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler PM (1990) Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychol Bull 107(2):238–246

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler PM (2006) EQS 6 structural equations program manual. Multivariate Software Inc, Encino

    Google Scholar 

  • Berry LL (1995) Relationship marketing of services: growing interest, emerging perspectives. J Acad Mark Sci 23(4):236–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berscheid E, Peplau LA (1983) The emerging science of relationships. In: Harold HK et al (eds) Close relationships. W. H. Freeman, New York, pp 1–19

  • Borrie WT, Birzell RM (2001) Approaches to measuring quality of the wilderness experience. In: Freimund WA, Cole DN (eds) Visitor use density and wilderness experience: Proceedings 2000, 1–3 June, Missoula, MT. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden, pp 29–38

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrie WT, Roggenbuck JW (1998) Describing the wilderness experience at Juniper Prairie Wilderness using experience sampling methods. In: Kulhavy DL, Legg MH (eds) Wilderness and natural areas in the eastern North America: research, management, and planning. Stephen F. Austin State University, Arthur Temple College of Forestry, Center for Applied Studies, Nacogdoches, pp 165–172

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrie WT, Roggenbuck JW (2001) The dynamic, emergent, and multi-phasic nature of on-site wilderness experiences. J Leisure Res 33(2):202–228

    Google Scholar 

  • Borrie WT, Christensen N, Watson AE, Miller TA, McCollum DW (2002) Public purpose recreation marketing: a focus on the relationships between the public and public lands. J Park Recreat Adm 20(2):49–68

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowker JM, Murphy D, Cordell HK, English DBK, Bergstrom JC, Starbuck CM, Betz CJ, Green GT (2006) Wilderness and primitive area recreation participation and consumption: an examination of demographic and spatial factors. J Agric Appl Econ 38(2):317–326

    Google Scholar 

  • Brooks JJ, Williams DR (2012). Continued wilderness participation: experience and identity as long-term relational phenomena. In: Cole DN (comp) Wilderness visitor experiences: progress in research and management. Proceedings of RMRS-P-66. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, pp 21–36

  • Brooks JJ, Wallace GN, Williams DR (2006) Place as relationship partner: an alternative metaphor for understanding the quality of visitor experience in a backcountry setting. Leisure Sci 28:331–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks JJ, Wallace GN, Williams DR (2007) Is this a one-night stand or the start of something meaningful? Developing relationships to place in national park backcountry. In: Watson AE, Sproull J, Dean L (comps) Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: eighth World Wilderness Congress symposium. Proceedings of RMRS-P-49. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, pp 451–459

  • Bryan H (1977) Leisure value systems and recreation specialization: the case of trout fishermen. J Leisure Res 9:174–187

    Google Scholar 

  • Byrne BM (1994) Structural equation modeling with EQS and EQS/Windows: basic concepts, applications, and programming. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks

    Google Scholar 

  • Chaudhuri A, Holbrook MB (2001) The chain of effects from brand trust and brand affect to brand performance: the role of brand loyalty. J Mark 65(April):81–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clawson M, Knetsch JL (1966) Economics of outdoor recreation. Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole DN, Williams DR (2012). Wilderness visitor experiences: a review of 50 years of research. In: Cole DN (comp) Wilderness visitor experiences: progress in research and management. Proceedings of RMRS-P-66. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, pp 3–20

  • Cvetkovich G, Winter PL (2003) Trust and social representations of the management of threatened and endangered species. Environ Behav 35(2):286–307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dvorak RG, Watson AE, Christensen N, Borrie WT, Schwaller A (2012). The boundary waters canoe area wilderness: examining changes in use, users, and management challenges. Research paper RMRS-RP-91. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, p 46

  • Dwyer FR, Schurr PH, Oh SS (1987) Developing buyer–seller relationships. J Mark 51(2):11–27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fournier S (1998) Consumer and their brands: developing relationship theory in consumer research. J Consum Res 24(4):343–373

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greider T, Garkovich L (1994) Landscapes: the social construction of nature and the environment. Rural Sociol 59(1):1–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gustafson P (2001) Meanings of place: everyday experiences and theoretical conceptualizations. J Environ Psychol 21:5–16

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haggard LM, Williams DR (1992) Identify affirmation through leisure activities: leisure symbols of the self. J Leisure Res 24:1–18

    Google Scholar 

  • Havitz ME, Dimanche F (1997) Leisure involvement revisited: conceptual conundrums and measurement advances. J Leisure Res 29:245–278

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazan C, Shaver PR (1994) Attachment as an organizational framework for research on close relationships. Psychol Inq 5(1):1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hinde RA (1995) A suggested structure for a science of relationships. Pers Relationsh 2:1–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschman EC, Holbrook MB (1982) Hedonic consumption: emerging concepts, methods, and propositions. J Mark 46(3):92–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hull RB, Stewart WP, Yi YK (1992) Experience patterns: capturing the dynamic nature of a recreation experience. J Leisure Res 24(3):240–252

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacob GR, Schreyer R (1980) Conflict in outdoor recreation: a theoretical perspective. J Leisure Res 12:368–380

    Google Scholar 

  • Jorgensen BS, Stedman RC (2001) Sense of place as an attitude: lakeshore owner’s attitudes toward their properties. J Environ Psychol 21:233–248

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kline RB (2005) Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, 2nd edn. The Guilford Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Kyle G, Graefe A, Manning R, Bacon J (2003) An examination of the relationship between leisure activity involvement and place attachment among hikers along the Appalachian Trail. J Leisure Res 35(3):249–273

    Google Scholar 

  • Kyle G, Graefe A, Manning R, Bacon J (2004) Effect of activity involvement and place attachment on recreationists’ perceptions of setting density. J Leisure Res 36(2):209–231

    Google Scholar 

  • Laursen B, Bukowski WM (1997) A developmental guide to the organisation of close relationships. Int J Behav Dev 21(4):747–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liljeblad A, Watson AE, Borrie WT (2007) A look inside the dynamics of trust: a guide for managers. In: Watson A et al (eds) Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: eighth World Wilderness Congress symposium, 30 September– 6 October, 2005, Anchorage, AK. Proceedings RMRS-P-49. USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins

  • Liljeblad A, Borrie WT, Watson AE (2009) Determinants of trust for public lands: fire and fuels management on the Bitterroot National Forest. Environ Manag 43:571–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manzo LC (2003) Beyond house and haven: toward a revisioning of emotional relationships with places. J Environ Psychol 23:47–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manzo LC (2005) For better or worse: exploring multiple dimensions of place meaning. J Environ Psychol 25:67–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manzo LC (2008) Understanding human relationships to place and their significance for outdoor recreation and tourism. In: Kruger LE, Hall TE, Stiefel MC (eds) Understanding concepts of place in recreation research and management. General technical report PNW-GTR-744. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, pp 83–108

  • McIntyre N, Pigram JJ (1992) Recreation specialization reexamined: the case of vehicle-based campers. Leisure Sci 14:3–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mick DG, Buhl C (1992) A meaning–based model of advertising experiences. J Consum Res 19(3):317–338

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moorman C, Zaltman G, Deshpande R (1992) Relationships between providers and users of market research: the dynamics of trust within and between organizations. J Mark Res 29(3):314–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morgan RM, Hunt SD (1994) The commitment–trust theory of relationship marketing. J Mark 58(3):20–38

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patterson ME, Watson AE, Williams DR, Roggenbuck JR (1998) A hermeneutic approach to studying the nature of wilderness experiences. J Leisure Res 30(4):423–452

    Google Scholar 

  • Peden J, Schuster R (2008) Assessing the transactional nature of wilderness experiences: construct validation of the wilderness-hassles appraisal scale. Environ Manag 42:497–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proshansky HM (1978) The city and self-identity. Environ Behav 10:147–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roggenbuck JW, Watson AE (1989) Wilderness recreation use: the current situation. In: Outdoor recreation benchmark 1988: proceedings of the National Outdoor Recreation Forum, 13–14 January, Tampa, Florida. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Asheville, pp 394–398

  • Sarbin TR (1983) Place identity as a component of self; an addendum. J Environ Psychol 3:337–342

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherl LM (1989) Self in wilderness: understanding the psychological benefits of individual–wilderness interaction through self control. Leisure Sci 11:123–135

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schreyer R, Lime DW, Williams DR (1984) Characterizing the influence of past experience on recreation behavior. J Leisure Res 16:34–50

    Google Scholar 

  • Schreyer R, Knopf RC, Williams DR (1985) Reconceptualizing the motive/environment link in recreation choice behavior. In: Stankey G, McCool SF (comps) Proceedings: symposium on recreation choice behavior. General technical report INT-184. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden, pp 9–18

  • Smaldone D, Harris C, Sanyal N (2008) The role of time in developing place meanings. J Leisure Res 40(4):479–504

    Google Scholar 

  • Stedman RC (2002) Toward a social psychology of place: predicting behavior from place-based cognitions, attitude, and identity. Environ Behav 34(5):561–581

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stedman RC (2003a) Is it really just a social construction? The contribution of the physical environment to sense of place. Soc Nat Res 16:671–685

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stedman RC (2003b) Sense of place and forest science: toward a program of quantitative research. Forest Sci 49(6):822–829

    Google Scholar 

  • Stewart WP (2008) Place meanings in stories of lived experience. In: Kruger LE, Hall TE, Stiefel MC (eds) Understanding concepts of place in recreation research and management. General technical report PNW-GTR-744. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station, Portland, pp 83–108

  • Watson AE (2004) Human relationships with wilderness: the fundamental definition of wilderness character. Int J Wilderness 10(3):4–7

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson AE (2011). The role of wilderness protection and societal engagement as indicators of well-being: an examination of change at the boundary waters canoe, area wilderness. Soc Indic Res. doi:10.1007/s11205-011-9947-x

  • Watson AE, Borrie WT (2004) Monitoring the relationship between the public and public lands: applications to wilderness stewardship in the U.S. In: Aguirre-Bravo C et al (ed) Monitoring science and technology symposium: unifying knowledge for sustainability in the western hemisphere, proceedings RMRS-P-37-CD, September 20–24, 2004, Denver, CO. USDA, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden

  • Watson AE, Williams DR, Roggenbuck JW, Daigle JJ (1992) Visitor characteristics and preferences for three national forest wildernesses in the south (no. INT-RP-455). USDA Forest Service, Intermountain Research Station, Ogden

  • Watson AE, Matt R, Knotek K, Williams DR, Yung L (2011) Traditional wisdom: protecting relationships with wilderness as a cultural landscape. Ecol Soc 16(1):36

    Google Scholar 

  • Wieselquist J, Rusbult CE, Foster CA, Agnew CR (1999) Commitment, pro-relationship behavior, and trust in close relationships. J Personal Soc Psychol 77(5):942–966

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Williams DR (1989) Great expectations and the limits to satisfaction: a review of recreation and consumer satisfaction research. In: Watson AE (ed) Outdoor recreation benchmark 1988: Proceedings of the National Outdoor Recreation Forum. USDA Forest Service general technical report SE-52. USDA Forest Service, Ogden, pp 422–438

  • Williams DR (2000) Personal and social meanings of wilderness: constructing and contesting place in a global village. In: Watson AE, Aplet G, Hendee JC (eds) Personal, societal, and ecological values of wilderness: Sixth World Wilderness Congress proceedings on research, management, and allocations, vol II. USDA Forest Service Proceedings RMRS-P-14. Rocky Mountain Research Station, Ogden, pp 77–82

  • Williams DR, Patterson ME (1999) Environmental psychology: mapping landscape meanings for ecosystem management. In: Cordell HK, Bergstrom JC (eds) Integrating social sciences and ecosystem management: human dimensions in assessment, policy and management. Sagamore, Champaign, pp 141–160

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams DR, Patterson ME (2007) Snapshots of what, exactly? A comment on methodological experimentation and conceptual foundations in place research. Soc Nat Res 20(10):931–937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams DR, Vaske JJ (2003) The measurement of place attachment: validity and generalizability of a psychometric approach. Forest Sci 49(6):830–840

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams DR, Haggard L, Schreyer R (1989). The role of wilderness in human development. In: Freilich H (comp) Wilderness benchmark 1988: proceedings of the National Wilderness Colloquium, General technical report SE-51. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Southeastern Forest Experiment Station, Asheville, pp 169–180

  • Williams DR, Patterson ME, Roggenbuck JW, Watson AE (1992) Beyond the commodity metaphor: examining emotional and symbolic attachment to place. Leisure Sci 14:29–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winter PL, Palucki LJ, Burkhardt RL (1999) Anticipated responses to a fee program: the key is trust. J Leisure Res 31(3):207–226

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by a Research Joint Venture Agreement (06-JV-11221644-177) between the USDA Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station and The University of Montana, College of Forestry and Conservation. The authors would like to thank Ann Schwaller of the Superior National Forest, and Dr. Ingrid Schneider of the University of Minnesota for their support and many contributions to this project.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Recreation, Parks, and Leisure Services Administration, Central Michigan University, Finch Fieldhouse 108, Mount Pleasant, MI, 48859, USA

    Robert G. Dvorak

  2. Department of Society and Conservation, The University of Montana, 32 Campus Drive, Missoula, MT, 59812-0576, USA

    William T. Borrie

  3. Leopold Institute, 790 E. Beckwith Ave., Missoula, MT, 59801, USA

    Alan E. Watson

Authors
  1. Robert G. Dvorak
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. William T. Borrie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alan E. Watson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Robert G. Dvorak.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dvorak, R.G., Borrie, W.T. & Watson, A.E. Personal Wilderness Relationships: Building on a Transactional Approach. Environmental Management 52, 1518–1532 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-013-0185-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00267-013-0185-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation