Explaining car drivers' intention to prevent road-traffic noise: An application of the Norm Activation Model

Strengthening car drivers’ intention to prevent road-traffic noise is a first step toward noise abatement through voluntary change of behavior. We analyzed predictors of this intention based on the norm activation model (i.e., personal norm, problem awareness, awareness of consequences, social norm, and value orientations). Moreover, we studied the effects of noise exposure, noise sensitivity, and noise annoyance on problem awareness. Data came from 1,002 car drivers who participated in a two-wave longitudinal survey over 4 months. Personal norm had a large prospective effect on intention, even when the previous level of intention was controlled for, and mediated the effect of all other variables on intention. Almost 60% of variance in personal norm was explained by problem awareness, social norm, and biospheric value orientation. The effects of noise sensitivity and noise exposure on problem awareness were small and mediated by noise annoyance. We propose four communication strategies for strengthening the intention to prevent road-traffic noise in car drivers.

The long-term development of avalanche risk in settlements considering the temporal variability of damage potential

Recent studies on the avalanche risk in alpine settlements suggested a strong dependency of the development of risk on variations in damage potential. Based on these findings, analyses on probable maximum losses in avalanche-prone areas of the municipality of Davos (CH) were used as an indicator for the long-term development of values at risk. Even if the results were subject to significant uncertainties, they underlined the dependency of today's risk on the historical development of land-use: Small changes in the lateral extent of endangered areas had a considerable impact on the exposure of values. In a second step, temporal variations in damage potential between 1950 and 2000 were compared in two different study areas representing typical alpine socio-economic development patterns: Davos (CH) and Galtür (A). The resulting trends were found to be similar; the damage potential increased significantly in number and value. Thus, the development of natural risk in settlements can for a major part be attributed to long-term shifts in damage potential.

A proposed framework to operationalize ESS for the mitigation of soil threats

Despite various research activities in the last decades across the world, many challenges remain to integrate the concept of ecosystem services (ESS) in decision-making, and a coherent approach to assess and value ESS is still lacking. There are a lot of different – often context-specific – ESS frameworks with their own definitions and understanding of terms. Based on a thorough review, the EU FP7 project RECARE (www.recare-project.eu) suggests an adapted framework for ecosystem services related to soils that can be used for practical application in preventing and remediating degradation of soils in Europe. This lays the foundation for the development and selection of appropriate methods to measure, evaluate, communicate and negotiate the services we obtain from soils with stakeholders in order to improve land management. Similar to many ESS frameworks, the RECARE framework distinguishes between an ecosystem and human well-being part. As the RECARE project is focused on soil threats, this is the starting point on the ecosystem part of the framework. Soil threats affect natural capital, such as soil, water, vegetation, air and animals, and are in turn influenced by those. Within the natural capital, the RECARE framework focuses especially on soil and its properties, classified in inherent and manageable properties. The natural capital then enables and underpins soil processes, while at the same time being affected by those. Soil processes, finally, are the ecosystem’s capacity to provide services, thus they support the provision of soil functions and ESS. ESS may be utilized to produce benefits for individuals and human society. Those benefits are explicitly or implicitly valued by individuals and human society. The values placed on those benefits influence policy and decision-making and thus lead to a societal response. Individual (e.g. farmers’) and societal decision making and policy determine land management and other (human) driving forces, which in turn affect soil threats and natural capital. In order to improve ESS with Sustainable Land Management (SLM) – i.e. measures aimed to prevent or remediate soil threats, the services identified in the framework need to be “manageable” (modifiable) for the stakeholders. To this end, effects of soil threats and prevention / remediation measures are captured by key soil properties as well as through bio-physical (e.g. reduced soil loss), socio-economic (e.g. reduced workload) and socio-cultural (e.g. aesthetics) impact indicators. In order to use such indicators in RECARE, it should be possible to associate the changes in soil processes to impacts of prevention / remediation measures (SLM). This requires the indicators to be sensitive enough to small changes, but still sufficiently robust to provide evidence of the change and attribute it to SLM.

Sharing evidence of sustainable land management impacts

Ensuring sustainable use of natural resources is crucial for maintaining the basis for our livelihoods. With threats from climate change, disputes over water, biodiversity loss, competing claims on land, and migration increasing worldwide, the demands for sustainable land management (SLM) practices will only increase in the future. For years already, various national and international organizations (GOs, NGOs, donors, research institutes, etc.) have been working on alternative forms of land management. And numerous land users worldwide – especially small farmers – have been testing, adapting, and refining new and better ways of managing land. All too often, however, the resulting SLM knowledge has not been sufficiently evaluated, documented and shared. Among other things, this has often prevented valuable SLM knowledge from being channelled into evidence-based decision-making processes. Indeed, proper knowledge management is crucial for SLM to reach its full potential. Since more than 20 years, the international WOCAT network documents and promotes SLM through its global platform. As a whole, the WOCAT methodology comprises tools for documenting, evaluating, and assessing the impact of SLM practices, as well as for knowledge sharing, analysis and use for decision support in the field, at the planning level, and in scaling up identified good practices. In early 2014, WOCAT’s growth and ongoing improvement culminated in its being officially recognized by the UNCCD as the primary recommended database for SLM best practices. Over the years, the WOCAT network confirmed that SLM helps to prevent desertification, to increase biodiversity, enhance food security and to make people less vulnerable to the effects of climate variability and change. In addi- tion, it plays an important role in mitigating climate change through improving soil organic matter and increasing vegetation cover. In-depth assessments of SLM practices from desertification sites enabled an evaluation of how SLM addresses prevalent dryland threats. The impacts mentioned most were diversified and enhanced production and better management of water and soil degradation, whether through water harvesting, improving soil moisture, or reducing runoff. Among others, favourable local-scale cost-benefit relationships of SLM practices play a crucial role in their adoption. An economic analysis from the WOCAT database showed that land users perceive a large majority of the technologies as having benefits that outweigh costs in the long term. The high investment costs associated with some practices may constitute a barrier to adoption, however, where appropriate, short-term support for land users can help to promote these practices. The increased global concerns on climate change, disaster risks and food security redirect attention to, and trigger more funds for SLM. To provide the necessary evidence-based rationale for investing in SLM and to reinforce expert and land users assessments of SLM impacts, more field research using inter- and transdisciplinary approaches is needed. This includes developing methods to quantify and value ecosystem services, both on-site and off-site, and assess the resilience of SLM practices, as currently aimed at within the EU FP7 projects CASCADE and RECARE.