OOS 28-8
The intersection of socio-cultural values with biodiversity on private lands located within Southeast Queensland
Peri-urban landscapes are often referred to as transition zones between urban growth and rural decline (Ford. 2001; Bunker 2002; Burnley 2005; Houston 2005; Buxton, Tieman et al. 2006). These landscapes encompass activities that reflect both urban and rural values and interests. The competing pressures of agriculture and urbanisation put further pressure on biodiversity. A landscape value typology (Brown et al 2002) is used to compare symbolic values representing sense of place to material values that can be identified and allocated within a landscape context. These values connect people to the places and landscapes in which they live and are the rationale for environmental care and stewardship (Wardell-Johnson 2005). In addition the values are assessed in their importance to social, work or spiritual life. This research conducted extensive on-ground (123 long surveys returned) and telephone surveys (1009 20 minute interviews) to establish the values allocated within the landscapes of peri-urban SEQ beyond the traditional definition of resources.
Results/Conclusions
Participants ranked recreation, aesthetics and biodiversity as the most important landscape values. Allocation of values according to the life needs of social, work and spiritual life, showed that recreation is significant to social life needs, while biodiversity and aesthetics also score relatively well for the spiritual values of people’s lives. Results provide consistent evidence of the difference in values allocated in landscapes, both amongst different groups of people, and in relation to social, work and spiritual life. Placing an emphasis on amenity values rather than biodiversity values will emphasise a European concept of nature while biodiversity conservation emphasis in a local context that uses national and even state legislation has an inadequate or patchy success in achieving set aims. With a change of emphasis from biodiversity as a threatened value to biodiversity as a sense of place and landscape value, the intervention and policy strategies could focus instead on partnerships and stewardship. This focus on biodiversity allows an emphasis on the potential for restoration and not just sustainability paradigms.