Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T22:06:18.113Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Preservation amenity, research laboratory, or mineral reserve? International perspectives on the values of Antarctica

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 June 2019

Tina Tin ,
John Peden ,
Jessica O’Reilly ,
Kees Bastmeijer  and
Patrick T. Maher
Tina Tin*
Affiliation:
Independent Consultant, 85 Rue du St Michel, 73190 Challes les Eaux, France
John Peden
Affiliation:
School of Human Ecology, Georgia Southern University, P.O. Box 8034, Statesboro, Georgia 30460, USA
Jessica O’Reilly
Affiliation:
Department of International Studies, Indiana University Bloomington, 355 North Jordan Avenue, Bloomington, Indiana 47405-1105, USA
Kees Bastmeijer
Affiliation:
Tilburg Law School, Tilburg University, The Netherlands Visiting professor, The University of Gothenburg, Sweden
Patrick T. Maher
Affiliation:
School of Arts and Social Science, Cape Breton University, 1250 Grand Lake Road, Sydney, Nova Scotia, Canada, B1P 6L2
*
*Author for correspondence: Tina Tin, E-mail: tinatintk@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Inspired by notions of interest of humankind and intergenerational equity, we explored Antarctic perceptions of a subset of future generations—university students. Students at three universities in Canada, the Netherlands, and the USA were surveyed to determine the relationships between nationality, academic major, opinions on values of Antarctica, and support for a range of human activities in Antarctica (n = 618). Logistic regression was used to model the relationship of these variables with support for designation of Antarctica as a wilderness reserve, construction of new research stations, and mining. Compared with business and economics majors, biological sciences and natural resources/conservation majors were more likely to support wilderness designation and less likely to support mineral resource development. Nationality was not significantly associated with support for construction of new research stations and mineral resource development. Opinions on the value of Antarctica and support for activities also exhibited significant influences on dependent variables. Consistent with earlier studies of Antarctic scientists, personnel, tourists, and other members of the general public, university students valued Antarctica as one of the world’s last great wildernesses (66%), an important component of the Earth’s climate system (66%), and a science laboratory for the benefit of mankind (62%).

Keywords

Antarctic Treatypublic perceptionenvironmental managementtourismwilderness
Type
Research Article
Information
Polar Record , Volume 55 , Issue 2 , March 2019 , pp. 61 - 71
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Antarctic Treaty. (1959). Washington DC: United Nations Treaty Series 402(5778). Came into force on 4 August 1961.Google Scholar
Antarctic Treaty Parties. (1991). Declaration by Contracting Parties on the 30th anniversary of the coming into force of the Antarctic Treaty. In Final Report of the Sixteenth Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting, Bonn, 7–18 October 1991, 136.Google Scholar
Arnocky, S., & Stroink, M. L. (2011). Variation in environmentalism among university students: Majoring in outdoor recreation, parks and tourism predicts environmental concerns and behaviours. The Journal of Environmental Education 42(3), 137–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bastmeijer, K. (2011). Intergenerational equity and the Antarctic Treaty System: Continued efforts to prevent ‘Mastery’. In Alfredsson, G., Koivurova, T. (Editors-in-chief), & Hossain, K. (Special editor). The Yearbook of Polar Law 3 (pp. 635–682). Leiden: Brill/Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Bastmeijer, K. (Ed.). (2016). Wilderness protection in Europe. The role of international European and national law. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bastmeijer, K., & Tin, T. (2015). Antarctica—A wilderness continent for science: The ‘public’s dream’ as a mission impossible? In Alfredsson, G., Koivurova, T. (Editors-in-chief), & Ágútsson, H. Ó. (Special editor). The Yearbook of Polar Law 6 (pp. 559–597). Leiden: Brill/Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Bauer, T. G. (2001). Tourism in the Antarctic: Opportunities, Constraints and Future Prospects. Binghamton, New York: The Haworth Hospitality Press.Google Scholar
Benckendorff, P., Moscardo, G., & Murphy, L. (2012). Environmental attitudes of Generation Y students: Foundations for sustainability education in tourism. Journal of Teaching in Travel and Tourism, 12(1), 44–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buijs, A. E., Elands, B. H. M., & Langers, F. (2009). No wilderness for immigrants: cultural differences in images of nature and landscape preferences. Landscape and Urban Planning, 91, 113–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Callicott, J. B., & Nelson, M. P. (Eds.) (1998). The great new wilderness debate. Athens, GA: The University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
Chuvieco, E., Burgui, M. B., Da Silva, E. V., Hussein, K., &Alkaabi, K. (2018). Factors affecting environmental sustainability habits of university students: Intercomparison analysis in three countries (Spain, Brazil, and UAE). Journal of Cleaner Production, 198, 1372–1380.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collis, C. (2017). Territories beyond possession? Antarctica and outer space. The Polar Journal, 7(2), 287–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colmar Brunton. (2011). Public opinion of Antarctica. Wellington: New Zealand. Retrieved December 1, 2018, from www.parliament.nz/resource/mi-nz/50SCFDT_EVI_00DBSCH_FIN_10919_1_A227504/e94263e14ce8f546f8ffe2fd342912562df4979b.Google Scholar
Crocetti, E., Cieciuch, J., Gao, C. H., Klimstra, T., Lin, C. L., Matos, P. M., …Meeus, W. (2015). National and gender measurement invariance of the Utrecht-Management of Identity Commitments Scale (U-MICS): A ten-nation study. Assessment, 22(6), 753–768.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Groot, M., Drenthen, M., & de Groot, W. T. 2011. Public visions of the Human/Nature relationship and their implications for environmental ethics. Environmental Ethics, 33(1), 25–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Del Acebo Ibáñez, E., & Costa, M. (2010). Antarctic environmental problems: attitudes and behaviours of young inhabitants of two Argentine cities (Buenos Aires and San Carlos de Bariloche). Polar Record, 46(238), 257–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dodds, K., & Collis, C. (2017). Post-colonial Antarctica. In Dodds, K., Hemmings, A. D., & Roberts, P., P. (Eds.), Handbook on the Politics of Antarctica (pp. 50–68). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eagle, L., Low, D., Case, P., & Vandomele, L. (2015) Attitudes of undergraduate business students toward sustainability issues. International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 16 (5), 650–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ewert, A., & Baker, D. (2001). Standing for where you sit: An exploratory analysis of the relationship between academic major and environment beliefs. Environment and Behavior, 33(5), 687–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Farreny, R., Oliver-Solà, J., Lamers, M., & Amelung, B. (2011). Carbon dioxide emissions of Antarctic tourism. Antarctic Science, 23(6), 556–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferrada, L. V. (2018). Five factors that will decide the future of Antarctica. The Polar Journal, 8(1), 84–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ferraz, S. B., Romero, C. B. A., da Costa Nogami, V. K., & Veloso, A. R. (2015). Personal values and green purchase behaviour: a cross-cultural study between Brazil and Canada. Latin American Journal of Management for Sustainable Development, 2(3-4), 296–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franzen, A., & Vogl, D. (2012). Acquiescence and the willingness to pay for environmental protection: A comparison of the ISSP, WVS, and EVS. Social Science Quarterly, 94 (3), 637–659.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frederick, G., & Rock, J. (2018). The influence of “place”: a case study of Antarctic scientists. The Polar Journal, 8(1), 126–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
French, D. (1999). Sustainable development and the 1991 Madrid Protocol to the 1959 Antarctic Treaty: The primacy of protection in a particularly sensitive environment. Journal of International Wildlife Law and Policy, 2:3, 291–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gardiner, S. M. (2011). A perfect moral storm. The ethical tragedy of climate change. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Germain, R. H., &Floyd, D. H. (1999). Developing resource-based social conflict models for assessing the utility of negotiation in conflict resolution. Forest Science, 45(3), 394–406.Google Scholar
Hallowell, A. I. (1960). Ojibwa ontology, behavior and world view. In Diamond, S., (Ed.), Culture in History: Essays in Honor of Paul Radin. New York: Columbia Press.Google Scholar
Hanel, P. H. P., & Vione, K. C. (2016). Do student samples provide an accurate estimate of the general public? PLoS ONE 11(12), e0168354. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0168354CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hansen, J., Pusher, K., Makiko, S., Masson-Delmotte, V., Ackerman, F., Beerling, D. J., … Zachos, J. C. (2013). Assessing “dangerous climate change”: required reduction of carbon emissions to protect young people, future generations and nature. PLoS ONE 8(12), e81648. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0081648CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harraway, J., Broughton-Ansin, F., Deaker, L., Jowett, T., & Shephard, K. (2012). Exploring the use of the revised New Ecological Paradigm scale (NEP) to monitor the development of students’ ecological worldviews. The Journal of Environmental Education, 43(3), 177–191.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herber, B. P. (1991). The Common Heritage Principle: Antarctica and the developing nations. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 50(4), 391–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heberlein, T. A. (2012). Navigating environmental attitudes. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hodgkinson, S. P., & Innes, J. M. (2001). The attitudinal influence of career orientation in 1st-year university students: Environmental attitudes as a function of degree choice. The Journal of Environmental Education, 32(3), 37–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hosmer, D. W. Jr., Lemeshow, S., & Sturdivant, R. X. (2013). Applied Logistic Regression. Third Edition. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
IPCC. (2013). Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jansen, P., van der Stoep, J., Keulartz, J., & Jochemsen, H. (2017). Wistful wilderness: communication about ‘new’ nature in the Netherlands. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 19(2), 197–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jarvis, R. M., Gilbert, N., Orams, M., Pointing, S. B., Selvaraj, S., & Breen, B. B. (2018). Understanding the values and perceptions of base personnel to improve conservation management and policy in Antarctica. Environmental Science and Policy, 85, 116–122.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, M. E., Dawson, J. P., Childs, J., & Maher, P. T. (2014). Exploring post-course outcomes of an undergraduate tourism field trip to the Antarctic Peninsula. Polar Record, 50(2), 147–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joshanloo, M., Lepshokova, Z. Kh., Panyusheva, T., Natalia, A., Poon, W. C., Yeung, V. W., …Jiang, D. (2014). Cross-cultural validation of the fear of happiness scale across 14 national groups. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 45(2), 246–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juvan, E., & Dolnicar, S. (2014). The attitude-behaviour gap in sustainable tourism. Annals of tourism research, 48, 76–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katz-Gerro, T., Greenspan, I., Handy, F., Lee, H.-Y., & Frey, A. (2015). Environmental philanthropy and environmental behaviour in five countries: Is there convergence among youth? VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 26(4), 1485–1509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, J. J. (Director). (2017). Continent 7: Antarctica. [Documentary]. Washington, DC: National Geographic Studios.Google Scholar
Kennicutt, M. C., Chown, S. L., Cassano, J. J., Liggett, D. L., Massom, R., Peck, L. S., … Vaughan, D. G. (2014). Polar research: Six priorities for Antarctic science. Nature, 512 (7512), 23–25.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kennicutt, M. C., Chown, S. L., Cassano, J. J., Liggett, D., Peck, L. S., Massom, R., … Sutherland, W. J. (2015). A roadmap for Antarctic and Southern Ocean science for the next two decades and beyond. Antarctic Science, 27(1), 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennicutt, M. C., Kim, Y. D., Rogan-Finnemore, M., Anandakrishnan, S., Chown, S. L., Colwell, S., … Yang, H. (2016). Delivering 21st century Antarctic and Southern Ocean science. Antarctic Science, 28(6), 407–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kilbourne, W. E., Beckmann, S. C., Lewis, A., & van Dam, Y. (2001). A multinational examination of the role of the dominant social paradigm in environmental attitudes of university students. Environment and Behavior, 33(2), 209–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kormos, C. F. (editor) (2008). A handbook on international wilderness law and policy. Golden, CO: Fulcrum.Google Scholar
Lambrechts, W., Ghijsen, P. W. Th., Jacques, A., Walravens, H., Van Liedekerke, L., & Van Petegem, P. (2018). Sustainability segmentation of business students: toward self-regulated development of critical and interpretational competences in a post-truth era. Journal of Cleaner Production, 202, 561–570.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lang, K. B. 2011. The relationship between academic major and environmentalism among college students: Is it mediated by the effects of gender, political ideology and financial security? The Journal of Environmental Education, 42(4), 203–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leane, E. (2018). Antarctica in literature and the popular imagination. In Nuttall, M., Christensen, T. R., &Siegert, M. (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of the Polar Regions. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Leihy, R. I., Coetzee, B. W. T., Morgan, F., Raymond, B., Shaw, J. D., Terauds, A., & Chown, S. L. (2019). Antarctica’s wilderness has declined to the exclusion of biodiversity. bioRxiv doi: 10.1101/527010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liggett, D., Frame, B., Gilbert, N., & Morgan, F. (2017). Is it all going south? Four future scenarios for Antarctica. Polar Record, 53(5), 459–478.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liu, J. H., & Sibley, C. G. (2012). Hope for the future? Understanding self-sacrifice in the face of global warming among young citizens of the world. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 12(1), 190–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maher, P. T. (2010). Footsteps on the Ice: Visitor Experiences in the Ross Sea Region, Antarctica. Unpublished PhD dissertation. Lincoln University, Canterbury New Zealand. Available online through Lincoln University Library Archives.Google Scholar
Marsching, J. D., & Polli, A. (Editors) (2011). Far field: digital culture, climate change and the Poles. Bristol: Intellect Press.Google Scholar
Mayerl, J. (2016). Environmental concern in cross-national comparison—Methodological threats and measurement equivalence. In Telesiene, A. & Gross, M., (Eds.), Green European: Environmental behaviour and attitudes in Europe in a historical and cross-cultural comparative perspective (pp. 182–204). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
McKercher, B., Pang, S. F. H., & Prideaux, B. (2011). Do gender and nationality affect attitudes towards tourism and the environment? International Journal of Tourism Research, 13, 266–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLean, L., & Rock, J. (2016). The importance of Antarctica: assessing the values ascribed to Antarctica by its researchers to aid effective climate change communication. The Polar Journal, 6(2), 291–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meltzer, N. W., Bobilya, A. J., Faircloth, W. B., Mitten, D., & Chandler, R. M. (2018). The effect of an outdoor orientation program on participants’ biophilic expressions. Journal of Outdoor and Environmental Education, 21(2), 187–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meyer, A. (2016). Heterogeneity in the preferences and pro-environmental behavior of college students: the effects of years on campus, demographics, and external factors. Journal of Cleaner Production, 112(4), 3451–3463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milfont, T. L., Bain, P. G., Kashima, Y., Corral-Verdugo, V., Pasquali, C., Johnasson, L.-O., … Einarsdóttir, G. (2018). On the relation between social dominance orientation and environmentalism. A 25-nation study. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 8, 194–199.Google Scholar
National Center for Education Statistics. (2010). Classification of Instructional Programs: IP-2010 Edition. (CIP-2010). Washington, DC: US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, NCES-2002-165.Google Scholar
Nezlek, J. B. (2010). Multilevel modeling and cross-cultural research. In Matsumoto, D. & van de Vijver, A.JR. (Eds.), Cross-cultural research methods in psychology (pp. 299–345). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
O’Brien, R. M. (2007). A caution regarding rules of thumb for Variance Inflation Factors. Quality and Quantity, 41, 673–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peden, J., Tin, T., Pertierra, L. R., Tejedo, P., & Benayas, J. (2016). Perceptions of the Antarctic wilderness: Views from emerging adults in Spain and the United States. Polar Record, 52(5), 541–552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peduzzi, P., Concato, J., Kemper, E., Holford, T. R., & Feinstein, A. R. (1996). A simulation study of the number of events per variable in logistic regression analysis. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 49(12), 1373–1379.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pertierra, L. R., Hughes, K. A., Benayas, J., Justel, A., & Quesada, A. (2013). Environmental management of a scientific field camp in maritime Antarctica: Reconciling research impacts with conservation goals in remote ice-free areas. Antarctic Science, 25(2), 307–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piasentin, F. B., & Roberts, L. (2018). What elements in a sustainability course contribute to paradigm change and action competence? A study at Lincoln University, New Zealand. Environmental Education Research, 24(5), 694–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Powell, R. B., Kellert, S. R., & Ham, S. H. (2008). Antarctic tourists: ambassadors or consumers? Polar Record, 44(3), 233–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prévot, A.-C., Clayton, S., & Mathevet, R. (2018). The relationship of childhood upbringing and university degree program to environmental identity: experience in nature matters. Environmental Education Research, 24(2), 263–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. (1991). 30 ILM 1461. Entered into force 14 January 1998.Google Scholar
Rasch, R. (2018). An exploration of intergenerational differences in wilderness values. Population and Environment. doi: 10.1007/s11111-018-0293-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rideout, B. E. (2014). The liberal arts and environmental awareness: Exploring endorsement of an environmental worldview in college students. International Journal of Environmental and Science Education, 9, 59–76.Google Scholar
Rintoul, S. R., Chown, S. L., DeConto, R. M., England, M. H., Fricker, H. A., Masson-Delmotte, V., … Xavier, J. C. (2018). Choosing the future of Antarctica. Nature, 558(7709), 233–241.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rolston, H. III. (2002). Environmental ethics in Antarctica. Environmental Ethics, 24, 115–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salazar, J. F. (2013). Perceptions and opinions of Antarctic values in Chile. In Liggett, D. & Hemmings, A. D. (Eds.) Exploring Antarctic Values. Gateway Antarctica Special Publication Series Number 1301 (pp. 48–69). Christchurch: University of Canterbury.Google Scholar
Saucier, G., Kenner, J., Iurino, K., Malham, P. B., Chen, Z., Thalmayer, A. G., … Altschul, C. (2014). Cross-Cultural Differences in a Global “Survey of World Views”. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 46(1), 53–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Secretariat of the Antarctic Treaty. (2009). Antarctic Treaty Consultative Meeting XXXII Washington ministerial declaration on the fiftieth anniversary of the Antarctic Treaty. In Final report of the thirtieth Antarctic Treaty Consultative meeting. Baltimore, USA, 6–17 April 2009. Vol 1. Buenos Aires: Secretariat of the Antarctic Treaty, Appendix 1.Google Scholar
Secretariat of the Antarctic Treaty. (2011). Resolution 1 (2011) Strengthening support for the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. In Final report of the thirty-fourth Antarctic Treaty Consultative meeting. Buenos Aires, Argentina, 20 June–1 July 2011. Vol 1. Buenos Aires: Secretariat of the Antarctic Treaty, 273–274.Google Scholar
Secretariat of the Antarctic Treaty. (2013). Resolution 6 (2013) Biological prospecting in Antarctica. In Final report of the thirty-sixth Antarctic Treaty Consultative meeting. Brussels, Belgium, 20–29 May 2013. Vol 1. Buenos Aires: Secretariat of the Antarctic Treaty, 307–308.Google Scholar
Secretariat of the Antarctic Treaty. (2016). Santiago declaration on the twenty fifth anniversary of the signing of the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. In Final report of the thirty ninth Antarctic Treaty Consultative meeting. Santiago, Chile, 23 May–1 June 2016. Vol 1. Buenos Aires: Secretariat of the Antarctic Treaty, Appendix 1.Google Scholar
Schwartz, S. J. (2016). Turning point for a turning point: Advancing emerging adulthood theory and research. Emerging Adulthood, 4(5), 307–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shabudin, A. F. A., Rahim, R. A., Nor, N. M., & Ibrahim, K. (2016). Antarctic values and Malaysia’s involvement in Antarctica: perceptions among young citizens of Malaysia. Polar Record, 52(3), 305–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sherburn, M., & Devlin, A. S. (2004). Academic major, environmental concern, and arboretum use. The Journal of Environmental Education, 35(2), 23–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Summerson, R., & Bishop, I. D. (2012). The impact of human activities on wilderness and aesthetic values in Antarctica. Polar Research, 31(1), doi: 10.3402/polar.v31i0.10858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suter, K. (1991). Antarctica. Private property or public heritage? London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
Tikka, P., Kuitunen, M., & Tynys, S. (2000). Effects of educational background on students’ attitudes, activity levels, and knowledge concerning the environment. Journal of Environmental Education, 31, 12–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tin, T., Bastmeijer, C. J., O’Reilly, J., & Maher, P. (2011). Public perception of the Antarctic wilderness: surveys from an educated, environmentally knowledgeable European community. In Watson, A., Murrieta-Saldviar, J., & McBride, B. (compilers). Science and stewardship to protect and sustain wilderness values: Ninth World Wilderness Congress symposium. 6–13 November 2009, Mérida, Mexico. Proceedings RMRS-P-64 (pp. 109–117). Fort Collins, Colorado: US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research Station.Google Scholar
Tin, T., O’Reilly, J., Peden, J., Pinkalla, S., Kelly, M., Larrea, K., … Janssen, G. (2018). Perceptions of wilderness and the Antarctic: Case studies from the United States. The Polar Journal, 8(2).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tin, T., Summerson, R., & Yang, H. R. (2016). Wilderness or pure land: Tourists’ perceptions of Antarctica. The Polar Journal 6(2), 307–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turner, J., Barrand, N. E., Bracegridle, T. J., Convey, P., Hodgson, D. A., Jarvis, M., … Klepikov, A. (2014). Antarctic climate change and the environment: An update. Polar Record, 50(3), 237–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Windt, H. J. (2012). Parks without wilderness, wilderness without parks? Assigning national park status to Dutch man-made landscapes and colonial game reserves. In Gissibl, B., Höhler, S., &Kupper, P. (Eds.), Civilizing Nature, National Parks in Global Historical Perspective (pp. 206–223). New York: Berghahn.Google Scholar
Verbitsky, J. (2013). Antarctic tourism management and regulation: The need for change. Polar Record, 49(3), 278–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verduijn, S., Ploegmakers, H., Meijerink, S., & Leroy, P. (2015). Pushing the radical nature development policy concept in the Netherlands: An agency perspective. Environmental Values 24(1), 55–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vila, M., Costa, G., Angulo-Preckler, C., Sarda, R., & Avila, C. (2016). Contrasting views on Antarctic tourism: “last chance tourism” or “ambassadorship” in the last of the wild. Journal of Cleaner Production, 111(B), 451–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vittinghoff, E., & McCulloch, C. E. (2007). Relaxing the rule of ten events per variable in logistic and cox regression. American Journal of Epidemiology, 165(6), 710–718.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Watson, J. E. M., Shanahan, D. F., Di Marco, M., Allan, J., Laurance, W. F., Sanderson, E. W., Mackey, B., & Venter, O. (2016). Catastrophic declines in wilderness areas undermine global environment targets. Current Biology, 26(21), 2929–2934.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wolfrum, R. (2017). Common interest and common heritage in Antarctica. In Dodds, K., Hemmings, A. D., & Roberts, P. (Eds.), Handbook on the Politics of Antarctica (pp. 142–151). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wray-Lake, L., Flanagan, C. A., & Osgood, D. W. (2010). Examining trends in adolescent environmental attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors across three decades. Environment and Behavior, 42(1), 61–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wynes, S., & Nicholas, K. A. (2018). Reply to comment on “the climate mitigation gap: education and government recommendations miss the most effective individual actions”. Environmental Research Letters, 13, 048002. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/aab210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, B., Zhang, Y., & Chen, J. (2011). Preference to home landscape: Wildness or neatness? Landscape and Urban Planning, 99(1), 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar