Researchers surveyed residents along the U.S. Eastern Seaboard about their knowledge of coastal ecosystems. They found that most of them had one of these two lines of thinking. People who were linear thinkers saw relationships between different aspects in their environment as only going one way, while systems thinkers often see two-way relationships.
Credit:
B. Hayes/NIST
A new study by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and its collaborators reveals a stark contrast between urban and suburban approaches to coastal ecosystems.
The study’s authors used cognitive science and statistical techniques to analyze data from a survey that included 1,400 residents of the U.S. East Coast. Their findings were published in the journal npj Urban Sustainability,The results of the survey showed that residents in urban centers had a more simplified and less realistic understanding of coastal ecosystems compared to those in suburban areas. Urban populations also have a lower willingness to take proenvironmental actions, according to the research. The study reveals evidence of what the authors call urbanized knowledge syndrome. This may be detrimental for natural ecosystems and hinder community resilience to natural hazards.
We believe that urbanization has a negative impact on both the ecological and social dimensions of the system. This could lead to people becoming less environmentally conscious. It’s a snowball effect, according to Payam Aminpour (NIST postdoctoral researcher fellow and lead author).
As part NISTs Community Resilience ProgramAminpour and his co-authors were particularly interested in understanding the factors that drive decisions regarding resilience and adaptation measures for urban areas. A survey developed by Northeastern University co-authors was distributed to them. This has allowed them to make significant progress.
The survey was conducted in eight states and targeted coastal counties within metropolitan areas. Each state had shorelines with different densities of roads, ditches, and other gray infrastructure. On the six-level National Center for Health Statistics urban-rural classification schemeThe majority of surveyed residents resided at the three highest urban levels, which range from city centers to the suburbs.
The questions were used to gather information about demographics, understanding of eco-systems, and whether respondents had participated in a list containing pro-environmental activities. This included voting for candidates based upon environmental stances, complaining to government agencies and contributing to conservation organizations.
NIST colleagues used fuzzy cognitive mapping to create visual representations of each respondent’s environmental perceptions using survey data. The maps displayed the nature of perceived relations between environmental elements such that recreational areas have an impact on marshes, and vice versa.
Two distinct types emerged from the crowd of maps as the researchers searched for patterns.
According to some respondents, the relationships in their maps tended to be in one direction. This is known as linear thinking. A person might see sea walls as shoreline fortifications that protect erosion at no cost. This is called linear thinking. Another example of linear thinking might be the perception that overfishing affects only fish.
The maps of other residents showed more complex, two way relationships. This suggested that respondents thought of the environment as an entire system. This type of thinking, also known as systems thinking, might lead someone to recognize that sea walls can provide structural integrity to shorelines, but they also alter the flow of water along the shore and could accelerate erosion. This type of thinking may also include the recognition that overfishing can lead to greater restrictions on future fishing activities.
The latter model is more likely to help people think about nuanced aspects human-nature interactions such as the give and take dynamics between different elements.
Next, the team attempted to identify factors that could possibly explain why people choose one model over another.
Aminpour explained that we investigated the relationship between these two distinct mental models. This included many aspects such as education, age and homeownership. We found that among these factors, urbanization, and the percentage of gray infrastructure on shorelines, had strong positive associations to the mental models of residents who showed more linear thinking.
Aminpour explained that suburban residents who lived nearer to artificial structures than urban dwellers were more aligned towards systems thinking.
The self-reporting behavior that favors the environment was a key behavioral difference between them. Linear thinking, a trait that is often exhibited by urbanites was closely linked with less pro-environmental action.
Aminpour explained that further analysis included comparing every pair of maps within both the systems thinking and linear clusters to understand how diverse each model was. While greater diversity in thinking has been linked to greater resilience and adaptability in communities, the team discovered more evidence for urbanized knowledge syndrome. The group that displayed more urbanization and linear thinking had a greater degree of uniformity. The systems thinking group had much more diversity.
These findings strongly tie environmental factors and lines of thought and behavior within coastal communities. However there are still many things to be learned before we can draw any concrete conclusions.
We are not yet able to say which comes first. Do you have systems thinking and prefer to live in areas with more natural environments? Or does living in less urbanized areas help you develop systems thinking. Aminpour said that more rigorous experiments are needed to discover the truth.
Researchers argue that answering these questions is crucial. If urbanization is indeed driving behavior, then gray infrastructure and urban development may be fueling a selfless feedback loop that could cause damage to ecosystems and community resilience.
The ability to obtain more data and provide concrete answers could help support the demand for green infrastructure (also known as green infrastructure) that includes nature. It would also help NIST continue to study the benefits that different types of infrastructure have on communities.
This approach could possibly turn the loop, allowing for greater systems thinking and greater sustainability.
Evidence shows that infrastructure is not the only thing going on. Jennifer Helgeson, NIST research economist and study coauthor, believes that it may have a ripple effect through aspects within communities, such as the diversity of thinking about environment. This is only a small part of the many lessons we can learn.
Paper: P. Aminpour, S.A. Gray, M.W. Beck, K.L. Furman, I. Tsakiri, R.K. Gittman, J.H. Grabowski, J. Helgeson L. Josephs M. Ruth and S.B. Scyphers. Urbanized knowledge syndrome: Loss of diversity and systems thinking in urbanites mental model. npj Urban Sustainability.Published online May 4, 20,22. DOI: 10.1038/s42949-022-00054-0
