Through outdoor water consumption, residential landscaping behavior affects public policy and the environment in the American Southwest. We propose a decision framework based on cost, ecological constraints, laws, and individual preferences. Controlling for cost, ecological constraints, and laws, we surveyed residents in metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona, using computer-generated landscape images to examine the effects of environmental attitudes (measured using Dunlap's New Ecological Paradigm), socialization, aesthetic affect, and demographic variables on landscape preferences. Landscape images varied from low-water xeriscapes to lush designs. Residents preferred high-water-use landscapes over dry landscapes for their own yards, even though they considered desert landscapes to be aesthetically pleasing. Women and long-term residents of the area were significantly more averse to dry landscapes. Stronger environmental attitudes did not lead to preference for xeriscapes but did lead to compromises on the amount of turf grass preferred in lush landscapes. This may contribute to the “oasis” mentality commonly found among area residents.
Bixler, R., Floyd, M., & Hammitt, W. (2002). Environmental socialization: Quantitative tests of the childhood play hypothesis. Environment and Behavior , 34, 795-818.
2.
Casagrande, D.G., Hope, D., Farley-Metzger, E., Cook, W., Yabiku, S.T., & Redman, C. (2007). Problem and opportunity: Integrating anthropology, ecology, and policy through adaptive experimentation in the urban American Southwest. Human Organization , 66, 125-139.
3.
Corral-Verdugo, V. (2002). A structural model of proenvironmental competency . Environment and Behavior, 34, 531-549.
4.
Corral-Verdugo, V., Bechtel, R., & Fraijo-Sing, B. (2003). Environmental beliefs and water conservation: An empirical study. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 247-257.
5.
Corral-Verdugo, V., & Frías-Armenta, M. (2006). Personal normative beliefs, antisocial behavior, and residential water conservation. Environment and Behavior, 38, 406-421.
6.
Demerath, L. (1993). Knowledge-based affect: Cognitive origins of "good" and "bad." Social Psychology Quarterly, 56, 136-147.
7.
Dunlap, R., Van Liere, K., Mertig, A., & Jones, R. (2000). New trends in measuring endorsement of the new ecological paradigm: A revised NEP scale. Journal of Social Issues, 56, 425-442.
8.
Greater Phoenix 2100. (2003). Greater Phoenix regional atlas: A preview of the region's 50 year future. Tempe, AZ: Greater Phoenix 2100 Project.
9.
Greenstein, T. (1996). Husbands' participation in domestic work: Interactive effects of wives' and husbands' gender ideologies. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 58, 585-595.
10.
Gregory, G., & Di Leo, M. (2003). Repeated behavior and environmental psychology: The role of personal involvement and habit formation in explaining water consumption. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33, 1261-1296.
11.
Hope, D., Gries, C., Casagrande, D., Redman, C., Grimm, N., & Martin, C. (2006). Drivers of spatial variation in plant diversity across the Central Arizona-Phoenix ecosystem. Society and Natural Resources, 19, 101-116.
12.
Hunter, L., Hatch, A., & Johnson, A. (2004). Cross-national gender variation in environmental behaviors. Social Science Quarterly, 85, 677-694.
13.
Jacobs, K., & Holway, J. (2004). Managing for sustainability in an arid climate: Lessons learned from 20 years of groundwater management in Arizona. Hydrogeology Journal, 12, 52-65.
14.
Johnson, C., Bowker, J., & Cordell, H. (2004). Ethnic variation in environmental belief and behavior: An examination of the new ecological paradigm in a social psychological context . Environment and Behavior, 36,157-186.
15.
Kahana, E., Lovegreen, L., Kahana, B., & Kahana, M. (2003). Person, environment, and person- environment fit as influences on residential satisfaction of elders. Environment and Behavior, 35, 434-453.
16.
Kaltenborn, B., & Bjerke, T. (2002). Associations between environmental value orientations and landscape preferences. Landscape and Urban Planning, 59, 1-11.
17.
Kennedy, C., & Zube, E. (1991). Attitudes towards vegetation in a desert urban forest: Creating a sense of place. Journal of Arboriculture , 17, 159-166.
18.
Kyle, G., Mowen, A., & Tarrant, M. (2004). Linking place preferences with place meaning: An examination of the relationship between place motivation and place attachment . Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 213-225.
19.
Luymes, D. (1997). The fortification of suburbia: Investigating the rise of enclave communities. Landscape and Urban Planning , 39, 187-203.
20.
Lyons, E. (1983). Demographic correlates of landscape preference . Environment and Behavior, 15, 487-511.
21.
Maricopa Association of Governments. (2004 ). View of the valley in 2040: What are we leaving our grandchildren . Retrieved November 29, 2004, from http://www.mag.maricopa.gov/detail.cms?item=905
22.
Martin, C. (2001). Landscape water use in Phoenix, Arizona. Desert Plants, 17, 26-31.
23.
Martin, C., Peterson, K., & Stabler, L. (2002). Residential landscaping in Phoenix, Arizona, U.S.: Practices and preferences relative to covenants, codes, and restrictions. Journal of Arboriculture, 29, 9-17.
24.
Martin C., Warren, P., & Kinzig, A. (2004). Neighborhood socioeconomic status is a useful predictor of perennial landscape vegetation in small parks and surrounding residential neighborhoods in Phoenix, Arizona. Landscape and Urban Planning, 69, 355-368.
25.
Mayer, P.W., DeOreo, W.B., Nelson, J.O., Opitz, E., & Allen, R. (1997). North American residential end use study: Progress report. 1997 Annual Conference Proceedings. Volume B: Water Resources, 11 . American Water Works Association, Atlanta, GA.
26.
McFarlane, B., & Boxall, P. (2003). The role of social psychological and social structural variables in environmental activism: An example of the forest sector. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 79-87.
27.
McPherson, E., Simpson, J., & Livingston, M. (1989). Effects of three landscape treatments on residential energy and water use in Tucson, Arizona. Energy and Buildings, 13, 127-138.
28.
Meinhold, J., & Malkus, A. (2005). Adolescent environmental behaviors: Can knowledge, attitudes, and self-efficacy make a difference?Environment and Behavior, 37, 511-532.
29.
Nordlund, A., & Garvill, J. (2003). Effects of values, problem awareness, and personal norm on willingness to reduce personal car use. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 23, 339-347.
30.
Nunnaly, J. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York : McGraw-Hill.
31.
Parsons, R., & Daniel, T. (2002). Good looking: In defense of scenic landscape aesthetics . Landscape and Urban Planning, 60, 43-56.
32.
Richard, G. (1993). Pima county's buffers. Planning , 59, 15-17.
33.
Spinti, J., St. Hilaire, R., & VanLeeuwen, D. (2004). Balancing landscape preferences and water conservation in a desert community. HortTechnology , 14, 72-77.
34.
Stabler, L., Martin, C., & Brazel, A. (2005). Microclimates in a desert city were related to land use and vegetation index. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening , 3, 137-147.
35.
Stern, P. (2000). Toward a coherent theory of environmentally significant behavior. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 407-424.
36.
Sutton, P., & Day, F. (2004). Types of rapidly growing counties of the U.S., 1970-1990.The Social Science Journal, 41, 251-265.
37.
Tips, W., & Savasdisara, T. (1986). The influence of the socio-economic background of subjects on their landscape preference evaluation. Landscape and Urban Planning, 13, 225-230.
38.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2006). Annual estimates of the population for incorporated places over 100,000, ranked by July 1, 2005 population: April 1, 2000 to July 1, 2005. Retrieved January 15, 2007, from http://www.census.gov/popest/cities/tables/SUB-EST2005-01.xls
39.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2007). Statistical abstract of the United States. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office.
40.
Van Liere, K., & Dunlap, R. (1980). The social bases of environmental concern: A review of hypotheses, explanations and empirical evidence. Public Opinion Quarterly, 44, 181-197.
41.
Wilson, M. (1996). The socialization of architectural preference . Journal of Environmental Psychology, 16, 33-44.
42.
Zinn, H., & Pierce, C. (2002). Values, gender, and concern about potentially dangerous wildlife. Environment and Behavior, 34, 239-256.
