Urban-Rural Conflict Over Environmental Policy in the Western United States

• Author: William M. Salka
• DOI: 10.1177/02750740122064820
• Published date: 01 March 2001
• Date: 01 March 2001
• Subject Matter: Articles

ARPA/March2001Salka/URBAN-RURALCONFLICT

URBAN-RURAL CONFLICT OVER

ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY IN

THE WESTERN UNITED STATES

WILLIAM M. SALKA

Eastern Connecticut State University

Therehas been considerable debate within the literature over the degreeto which environmental conflict

in the WesternUnited States stems from tensions between urban and rural areas. A number of scholars

have suggested that such conflict exists throughout the West; others have argued either that this

urban-rural conflict does not exist or that conflict over environmentalpreferences stems from factors

other than place of residence. This study uses voting on statewideenvironmental ballot measures, with

counties as the unit of analysis, to investigate whether voters in urban and ruralareas express different

levels of support for environmentalprotection. When such differences are found, the study offersexpla-

nations. Findings suggestthat urban counties do vote in support of environmental protection at signifi-

cantly higher levels than rural counties but that demographic variables and economic conditions are

moreinfluential in determining those levels of support than is the urban or rural nature of the county.

Both the continuous flow of popular press reporting on the environment and the

results of some of the work reported in our scholarly literature make it clear that

there is substantial disagreement among Americans with regard to environmental

policy.Whether it be a statewide initiative on animal leg-trapping, federal attempts

to reduce air pollution, or local efforts at land use control, there is significant politi-

cal conflict over the appropriate ways to protect the environment. This conflict is

somewhat puzzling in light of numerous public opinion polls suggesting wide-

spread support for environmental protection (Dunlap, 1991).

Although citizen opinion on the environmentmay divide in any number of ways,

differences in policy preferences between residents of urban and rural areas have

been reported with some frequency in our scholarly literature. For example, Clive

S. Thomas (1991) has predicted that future political conflict in the Western United

States will stem primarily from disagreement between urban and rural residents

over environmentalissues. Other scholars have found that rural Westerners possess

a distinct political culture that is less receptiveof environmentalist values and ethics

and more accepting of resource use (Bartlett, 1993; Dunlap, 1993). Tremblay and

Dunlap (1978) have suggested two explanations for differences between urban

and rural residents on environmental issues. At least one of these explanations,

Initial Submission: October 22, 1999

Accepted: June 5, 2000

AMERICAN REVIEW OF PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION,Vol. 31 No. 1, March 2001 33-48

© 2001 Sage Publications, Inc.

33

however,has been called into question by other scholars who have found evidence

suggesting that residents of urban and rural communities may not necessarily be on

opposing ends of the environmental spectrum (Alm & Witt, 1997; Bennett &

McBeth, 1998; Fortmann & Kusel, 1990; McBeth, 1992; McBeth & Bennett,

1998).

Although there exists literature addressing this urban-rural question, scholars

have also offered other explanations as to why some areas expresshigher levels of

support for environmental protection than others. Generally, these scholars have

suggested that differences may stem more from the demographic traits of the peo-

ple residing in those areas than from simple place of residence (Jones & Dunlap,

1992; Van Liere & Dunlap, 1980).

Given disagreement in the literature, this study will examine whether urban

counties express higher levels of support for environmental protection than rural

counties. If evidence is found to support this hypothesis, the study will attempt to

provide some possible explanations for those differences, explanations beyond

simple place of residence. To investigate these questions, the study will examine

differences in preferences on environmental issues between urban and rural coun-

ties during the 1990s in California, Oregon, and Colorado. This assessment is made

by examining votes on statewide initiatives and referenda pertaining to environ-

mental issues.

The county is an important unit of analysis because of its position between state

and local governments. Although much environmental policy is made at the state

level, many of those policies are implemented by counties. Counties also have

important policy-making authority of their own, primarily with regard to land use

planning and waste management. Previous studies examining urban-rural differ-

ences havealso typically focused on counties as their units of analysis (Alm & Witt,

1997; Bennett & McBeth, 1998).

EXPLANATIONS FOR DIFFERENCES

IN SUPPORT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY

In his analysis of contemporary politics in the American West, Thomas (1991)

suggests that the most significant factor drivingpolicy making is the increased con-

flict between urban and rural areas. More important, Thomas suggests that this ten-

sion has centered around environmental issues, arguing that issues of environmen-

tal protection and quality of life are going to be the most significant decisions facing

policy makers as the Westcontinues to urbanize and pressure is increasingly placed

on traditional resource uses. One implication of this urban-rural conflict involves

the perception of a distinctive Westernenvironmental ethic. This ethic is thought to

encourage development and exploitationof resources rather than their preservation

while promoting Western individualism and local control over resources that are

found primarily in rural areas (Feldman, 1993).

34 ARPA / March 2001