Sustainable Land Use: A Public Opinion Survey of British Columbians

Transcription

1 Sustainable Land Use: A Public Opinion Survey of British Columbians Results of a public opinion survey conducted June 29 July 6, 2018 McAllister is an accredited member of ESOMAR, the international professional body for public opinion research and market intelligence.

2 Table of Contents Acknowledgements 3 Foreword 4 Executive Summary 6 Introduction: Toward Sustainable Land Use in British Columbia 10 Survey Methodology Quality of Life Land Use Priorities Governance First Nations Land Use Planning Processes Policy and Programs Language Insights Strategic Insights Regional Audiences Media Behaviour Key Conclusions and Insights Opportunities for Future Research, Next Steps 48 Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 2

3 Acknowledgements Prepared by McAllister Opinion Research and with the Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia. Authored by Angus McAllister and Paul Noble. Acknowledgements: Thanks to David Hendrickson for report editing and input into the questionnaire design, and to Carolyn Whittaker from the Firelight Group for input into the questionnaire design. About the Real Estate Foundation of BC The Real Estate Foundation of BC (REFBC) is a philanthropic organization that helps advance sustainable land use in British Columbia. We give grants to non-profit organizations working to improve BC communities and natural environments through responsible land use, conservation, and real estate practices. Our grants can support research, education, and policy analysis. Since 1988, REFBC has approved more than $85 million in grants. Learn more at Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 3

4 Foreword Land use decisions impact housing affordability, transportation, biodiversity, fresh water, Indigenous communities, and local economies. As a funder supporting sustainable land use, the Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia is interested in public perceptions on these topics. Land use is one of five interest areas that REFBC supports. We commissioned McAllister Opinion Research to conduct a public opinion poll about sustainable land use. The research consisted of asking British Columbians questions about land use. We surveyed people from across the province in the summer of The poll results help clarify our understandings about what British Columbians value and prioritize about land use decisions. Noteworthy insights from this research outline how British Columbians identify with the land, how residents view their current quality of life, residents top priorities for sustainable land use, and what language resonates most with people when talking about the land. This public opinion survey is our first phase of research on land use. In a subsequent phase, we have partnered with the Firelight Group to reach out to thought leaders, grantees, and other land use groups to ask for their views about sustainable land use practices in BC. We would like to thank all those who have contributed to this report, and we invite you to delve into the key insights and nine central findings from the research. Ultimately, our goal is to seek ways to strengthen land use decisions and practices that promote thriving, resilient communities and natural environments for current and future generations. Sincerely, Jack Wong Chief Executive Officer Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 4

5 LAND USE Land use is the human use of land the management, conservation, and change of natural environments, built environments, and semi-natural areas to support human settlement and communities. SUSTAINABLE LAND USE Sustainable land use enables people and ecosystems to thrive within nature s limits, while minimizing harmful impacts on the land, air, and watershed caused by human activities. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 5

6 Executive Summary This research highlights the needs and opportunities for those working on land issues to devote more attention to how we communicate about land use. The most important consideration from the survey results for taking care of the land in BC is to protect nature and the environment. Sustainability is a core concept informing the public s wants and needs in land use planning. What s more, British Columbians demonstrate a clear understanding of the concept of sustainability, in the broadest sense of the term, as a value that informs their priorities for land use. Besides these highlights, this report outlines numerous insights and findings about land use. The Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia (REFBC) commissioned this study to better understand the BC public s views on the policy and practice of sustainable land use. McAllister Opinion Research completed 1,658 online interviews with a representative sample of British Columbia residents in the summer of Key Conclusions and Insights 1. British Columbians feel ambivalent about the future. British Columbians are very positive about quality of life in the past, but are split on the present, and extremely ambivalent about the future. Asked to rate quality of life in their region of the province 25 years ago, the vast majority of British Columbians view it in positive terms. However, perspectives on the present and the future skew sharply negative, with the emergence of regional, generational, and demographic divides linked to housing values. Fears for the future appear linked to threats to material security, expressed as concerns about threats to the environment; access to necessities like food, water, and energy; mismanagement of natural resources; and loss of control to corporate interests and distant decision-makers. 2. Identity is embedded in region and landscape. British Columbians see the beauty of the landscape and the life it sustains as fundamental to their quality of life. When the public speaks of their quality of life in this province, the language first references landscape and landscape features that sustain both life and lifestyle (e.g. natural beauty, nature, natural resources followed by cultural and political factors like tolerance, democracy, and freedom). 3. British Columbians view needs of local communities as the priority in land use planning decisions. British Columbians view land use governance as a domain that must first serve local and regional needs before those of the province, nation, and other outsiders. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 6

7 The top land use planning priorities in each region are threats to food, water, energy, and health. The focus on local and regional identities means that the framing of who is and is not an outsider becomes a powerful subtext to all land use conversations. Outsiders be they framed as governments, experts, scientists, Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations (ENGO), or industry organizations are seen as lacking in legitimacy. BC residents express a clear preference for local citizens to play a lead role in land use governance, and an expectation of provincial, regional, and local government involvement over that of federal and commercial interests. 4. Sustainability is the core principle informing public wants and needs in all aspects of land use planning and decision-making. British Columbians demonstrate a clear understanding of the concept of sustainability, in the broadest sense of the term, as a value that informs their priorities for land use. Citizens overwhelmingly point to a sustainable economy as the most appealing future economy for the province, preferring it over a green economy and a renewable economy. They point to an extraction economy and an industrial economy as the future economies they deem to be the least appealing. The top priority uses for land in British Columbia include habitat for nature, large-scale renewable energy projects, and agriculture. There is a distinct preference for communityscale renewable resource development over industrial development. The principles of the public interest, future generations, cumulative long-term impacts, and transparent, inclusive, democratic decision-making processes are top of the list of criteria the public wants to see informing land use planning and management. 5. Non-Indigenous communities support First Nations inclusion, consultation, and land use governance. Poll participants are most receptive when Indigenous governance is framed in alignment with local or community rights and widely held Canadian values related to neighbourly cooperation, unity, and getting along. 6. Residents of the North see things as everyone vs. the North. More so than in any other region, residents of the North see First Nations communities, industrial resource development, and hunting and fishing as core aspects of their relationship with the land. This mix of competing interests translates into a significantly different set of land use priorities from other regions. A number of concerns loom large, particularly about how small communities will deal with environmental threats, resource mismanagement, and corporate influence in the face of continued development and population change. The expectation that local needs should take precedence over those of outsiders and the Province is especially true in the North, where communities have less confidence in Victoria s ability to understand their needs and priorities. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 7

8 7. Metro Van is unique. Metro Vancouver is the most educated and affluent of all regions in the province, but it is also home to the newest residents with the weakest attachment to place and the greatest concerns about future quality of life. As a result, public discourse in this region is characterized by major disparities in level of engagement. The perception is that a small group of highly vocal types dominate land use planning decisions. Public anxieties about the cost of housing and population growth are heightened and keenly felt by all. However, deeply embedded concerns about pending climate impacts and food security prevent this from automatically translating into acceptance of expansion at the expense of the environment. People want homes, but are deeply troubled by any possible loss of green space and agricultural land. 8. Land use opinions fall along a generational divide. The fabric of land use conversations in this province is defined by generation and gender as much as by geography. Asked to rate quality of life in their region of the province 25 years ago, young adults express the most concern about the way things are, while older adults, men in particular, and homeowners are the most positive. Views of the future are marked by similar divisions, except that instead of a generational divide, the split is along gender lines. Older adults, while generally more affluent than their younger peers, are far more focused on land use issues related to immediate material security: agriculture and food production, fresh water, and natural disasters like fires and floods. They are also far more likely than younger adults to speak of the economy in terms of sustainability and impacts on health. Younger adults are more focused on longer-term issues and lifestyle values that are a step removed or a level down from survival in Maslow s hierarchy of needs. They emphasize the impacts of climate change, threats to wildlife and forest ecosystems, and recreational values, and are more likely to speak of a green economy, clean energy, and a smart economy. Older adults are also far more invested in the political process than young adults, valuing not only voting, but also fair, transparent, and democratic process as top considerations in land use. While younger adults have opinions on sustainability and land use planning issues, they are far less likely to indicate an interest in voting and are more likely to score poorly on tests of science knowledge (e.g. evolution, biological science). Young men in particular show a tendency for low engagement and lack of science knowledge. The most striking gap between the worldviews of older and younger British Columbians is on Indigenous issues. Younger adults in this province are nearly twice as likely as older adults to support Indigenous rights, with the gap greatest between older men and younger women. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 8

9 9. Language matters. The phrases sustainable land use and sustainable land use management communicate well with the general public, especially when compared against terms such as natural capital, land stewardship, and ecosystem-based management. While the word sustainable may be going out of vogue among policy experts, it appears to be coming into its own among the public. Our testing suggests that combined with the notion of land use, it elicits accurate comprehension and conveys a positive association of interconnectedness to agriculture, food, forests, nature, responsibility, future generations, and renewable resources. In contrast, our testing of natural capital and land stewardship found these terms understood by far fewer British Columbians. Moreover, the range of ideas the public associated with these terms was much more limited. The ideas skewed toward abstract and bureaucratic-sounding concepts like management, responsibility, and resources. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 9

10 Introduction: Toward Sustainable Land Use in BC The land is the only thing in the world worth working for, worth fighting for, worth dying for, because it s the only thing that lasts. Gerald O Hara, Gone With the Wind This research highlights the needs and opportunities for those working on land issues to devote more attention to how we communicate about land use. The most important consideration for taking care of the land in BC is to protect nature and the environment. Sustainability is a core concept informing the public s wants and needs in land use planning. This study was commissioned by the Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia to understand the BC public s views on the policy and practice of sustainable land use in British Columbia. McAllister Opinion Research completed 1,658 online interviews with a representative sample of British Columbia residents in the summer of This report presents the results of an in-depth analysis of survey data in 12 sections: 1. Quality of Life 2. Land Use Priorities 3. Governance 4. First Nations 5. Land Use Planning Processes 6. Policy and Programs 7. Language Insights 8. Strategic Insights 9. Regional Audiences 10. Media Behaviour 11. Key Conclusions and Insights 12. Opportunities for Future Research and Next Steps Each section provides an overview of public opinion on the topic and includes discussion about how different factors (e.g. demographic, sociocultural, regional) impact opinion. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 10

11 Survey Methodology Survey results are based on an online survey of 1,658 English-speaking BC residents aged 18 years or older, conducted June 29 to July 6, 2018, inclusive. The online survey platform was programmed for both mobile and desktop response. Respondents for this survey were recruited from an MRIA Gold Seal accredited panel designed to replicate a cross-section of the BC population. Weighting is applied to the data according to Statistics Canada figures on province, region, age, and gender. The following table describes the weighted and unweighted sample size in each region, as well as the associated margin of error* for a single parameter in a random sample of the same size. Unweighted sample n Weighted sample n Margin of error at 95% confidence Margin of error at 90% confidence Lower Mainland ±3.50% ±2.94 Vancouver Island / Coast ±4.94% ±4.14 Southern Interior ±5.41% ±4.54 Northern Interior ±6.00% ±7.15 Total sample ±2.41% ±2.02% *Online panels are not strictly a probability sample, and therefore Bayesian inference is used here as an analogue of margin of error. Margin of error estimate for the total sample accounts for a design effect of n1500 using the Lohr formula, which is more conservative than Kish. NOTES: All numbers in the tables that follow are percentages, unless otherwise stated. The notation * in the following report indicates a percentage greater than zero but less than 0.5%. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 11

12 1. Quality of Life British Columbians tend to view the future with caution, while seeing the past in a far more positive light than the present. Three in four (75%) BC residents say quality of life in their region 25 years ago was excellent or good, while just over one in two (54%) say this of the present, and fewer than half (42%) expect quality of life in the future to be excellent or good. Quality of Life in Your Region of BC (%) 25 years from now Today years ago Excellent Good OK Poor Terrible Responses to the question: Based on what you know, how would you rate quality of life in your region of BC? Residents view of quality of life 25 years ago is similarly positive across all regions and demographics, although those aged 65+ take a slightly rosier view. The perception of present and future quality of life, however, appears to vary significantly by region, generation, gender, and wealth. Residents of Vancouver Island and the Southern Interior, homeowners, retirees aged 65+ (especially men), those in the trades, and university graduates are far more likely than average to view present quality of life in their region in positive terms. Residents of Metro Vancouver, the North, younger adults aged 18-49, renters, and those with high school or non-trades college education are more likely than average to view present quality of life in negative terms. Residents of Vancouver Island and the Southern Interior are significantly more likely than those in the Lower Mainland and the North to view future quality of life in their regions in positive terms. Home ownership and post-secondary education are also likely to be associated with a positive view of the future, while the impact of age is indistinct. On the other hand, women of all ages are significantly more ambivalent about the future than men. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 12

13 Top-of-Mind Contributors to Quality of Life in Region What are the things that contribute the MOST to the quality of life enjoyed by people you know in your region of British Columbia? [unaided] 1 Asked to identify what factors most contribute to quality of life in their region, without prompting, British Columbians overwhelmingly point to natural beauty and the environment (41%) and climate (22%). Also mentioned are friendly people and tolerance (6%), safety and peace (6%), lifestyle (4%), cleanliness (3%), freedom (3%), and the economy (3%). Younger adults under the age of 50, public sector union members, and people living outside the Southern Interior are the most likely to name natural beauty and the environment as key contributors to quality of life in their region. In contrast, retirees and those who have moved to BC from other parts of Canada are the most likely to mention climate. Young adults under age 35 are the most likely to mention friendly people and diversity, whereas retirees are the most likely to single out safety and peacefulness as important factors for their quality of life. Top-of-Mind Threats to Quality of Life in Region And in your opinion, what are the biggest THREATs to long-term quality of life in your region? [unaided]. British Columbians unequivocally view affordability framed as cost of living (18%) or cost of housing (11%) as the top threat to quality of life in their region. depleted natural resources (1%). Growth and development issues are also top-of-mind. These are expressed as population increase (11%) and overdevelopment (3%), but could also include global warming (9%), pollution (6%), more traffic (2%), and 1 Unaided means that the question included no suggestions or prompts. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 13

14 Mentions of economy/jobs (6%), drugs and crime (5%), and natural disasters, such as fires and earthquakes (4%) are further down the list. Just 2% mention lack of health care services (2%) as a threat to quality of life in their region. Top Issues in Region (%) Top 2 Extremely concerned Quite concerned Somewhat concerned Not very concerned Not at all concerned Cost of living and affordability Taxes Climate change Degradation of land and wildlife habitat Mismanagement of natural resources Influence and power of large corporations Corruption in government and politics Environmental pollution Overdevelopment Jobs and economic development Adequacy of public services (e.g., health care and education) Natural disasters like floods, fires, and extreme weather Conflict over land, water, or resources Influence of environmental activists Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 14

15 Population growth Food security Social alienation and loss of community Thinking of your region of BC, how CONCERNED are you about the following, if at all? When British Columbians are asked how concerned they are about various regional issues, cost of living and taxes come out on top, with respectively 77% and 63% saying that they are extremely or quite concerned about these issues. Next are a bundle of issues related to environmental sustainability. Climate change heads up the list with 59% extremely or quite concerned, followed by degradation of land and wildlife habitat (53%), mismanagement of natural resources (53%), environmental pollution (51%), and overdevelopment (50%). Another major theme that is high on the list relates to governance, with 53% saying they are extremely or quite concerned about each of mismanagement of natural resources and corruption in government and politics. Slightly fewer than one in two are extremely or quite concerned about jobs and economic development (49%), adequacy of public services like healthcare and education (48%), and natural disasters like floods, fires, and extreme weather (45%). Approximately four in ten are extremely or quite concerned about conflict over land, water, or resources (43%), influence of environmental activists (40%), and population growth (39%). At the bottom of the list, with just over one in three expressing a high level of concern, are food security (35%) and social alienation and loss of community (34%). Looking at regional differences in issue focus, residents of Metro Vancouver and Vancouver Island are more likely than other regions to be concerned about affordability, overdevelopment, and population growth, as well as climate change. Metro Vancouver residents are among the least concerned about influence of environmental activists. On Vancouver Island, residents are somewhat less likely than average to be concerned about taxes. Residents of the Southern Interior are more concerned than other regions about conflict over land, water, and resources and influence of environmental activists, while they are notably less likely to be concerned about environmental pollution and mismanagement of natural resources. Residents of the North are significantly more concerned than other regions about the influence of large corporations, mismanagement of natural resources, and environmental pollution, while being less concerned about overdevelopment and degradation of land and natural habitat. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 15

16 The concerns of Indigenous respondents differ significantly from non-indigenous respondents, with upwards of eight in ten (80% plus) expressing high levels of concern about corruption in government, conflict over land, water, and resources, degradation of land and natural habitat, climate change, and the need to address First Nations rights and title. Young women under age 35 and hunters are the only other groups that are significantly more likely than average to say that they are concerned about the need to address First Nations rights and title; however, whether all groups view the issue through the same lens is unclear. On key issues related to sustainability, older adults are significantly more concerned about mismanagement of natural resources, while younger adults are far more likely than older adults to say that they are extremely concerned. Young men under the age of 35 are far more likely than women in their age cohort and twice as likely as men aged 65 plus to say they are concerned about social alienation and loss of community. Preferred Economic Future (%) Sustainable economy Clean energy economy Green economy Locally-based economy Smart economy Resource economy Value-added economy Information economy Export economy Low carbon economy Sharing economy Service economy Industrial economy Extraction economy Other None of the above Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 16

17 Different people describe BC s ideal future economy in different ways. Which types of economy are MOST APPEALING to you? PICK UP TO THREE. Presented with a list and asked to identify which types of future economy most appealed to them, British Columbians are most likely to pick environmental themes such as sustainable economy (53%), clean energy economy (34%), and green economy (25%). Locally based (21%) and smart economies round out the top five preferences. Standard terms like resource (16%), value-added (16%), information (13%), and export (11%) economy are in the middle and low end of the pack. Low carbon (11%) and sharing (9%) economy, while frequently mentioned in the media, merit little favour. Service (9%), industrial (9%), and extraction (3%) are the least popular types of future economy. The term sustainable economy is most likely to be picked by older adults aged 65 plus and residents of the Southern Interior, while younger adults show a slight preference for green, clean energy, and smart economy. Resource and industrial economy fare poorly on average. While these future economies are a top pick in the North and among those with trades education and men 65+, they are still ranked far down the list from sustainable. Asked directly to select the future economy that is least appealing, British Columbians are by far the most likely to point to extraction (33%) and industrial (15%) economies. Asked to explain why they find these types of economy unappealing, British Columbians speak of environmental impacts/pollution (30%) and lack of sustainability (18%). Another 16% point to items such as green (7%), low-carbon (5%), clean energy (2%), and sustainable (2%) economy as not appealing. Among these respondents, mostly older men aged 65+ and resource sector workers, the main objections are taxes and too expensive. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 17

18 2. Land Use Priorities To obtain a big-picture sense of British Columbians land use preferences, respondents were presented with a forced choice trade-off question on whether the health of natural ecosystems should be a priority at the cost of economic growth, or whether economic growth should be the priority, even if natural systems suffer to some extent. Respondents were also permitted an open-ended other response category in case they really felt they could not pick one as a priority over the other. Which of these statements do you most AGREE with? % Protecting the health of BC s land, water and natural ecosystems should be a priority, even at the risk of slowing down economic growth Economic growth should be a priority in BC, even if the health of our land, water and natural ecosystems suffer to some extent Other (specify) balance, both, equal, unsure 8 BC residents say that protecting natural ecosystems should be a priority over economic growth by a ratio of 69% to 24%, a ratio of nearly 3:1. Fewer than one in ten (8%) select other and the majority of these respondents indicate that they want to see a balance, or both economy and natural ecosystems treated as a priority. Region, education, gender, and age appear to have no significant impact on preferences in this question. However, ethnicity appears to be a factor with respondents of Chinese ancestry evenly split over their preference and First Nations respondents picking natural ecosystems over economic growth nearly 8:1. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 18

19 Top-of-Mind Land Use Priorities In your opinion, what ought to be the priority uses for land in your region? [unaided] When British Columbians are asked, without prompting, to name the priority uses for land in their region, they are most likely to come up with synonyms for nature and conservation (27%), farming and food production, and housing as answers. Farming and food production are far more likely to be top-of-mind among seniors aged 65+, while women under age 50 are far more likely than others to mention nature and conservation. Housing is more likely to be mentioned by residents of Metro Vancouver than any other group. However, even among urban and suburban residents, it is still overshadowed by nature and conservation, and by farming and food production. The Southern Interior is distinct from other regions in that farming and food production have greater topof-mind salience than nature and conservation, and the North differs in that resource development and economic development follow second and third to nature and conservation instead of farming, food production and housing. How Much Land Should Be Completely Off-Limits to Industrial Development? Respondents were also asked an open-ended question on what proportion of public lands in their region should be designated as completely off-limits to industrial development. In your opinion, what proportion of public lands in your region of the province should be completely OFF-LIMITS to resource extraction and industrial development activities like logging, mining, and oil & gas drilling? Please provide a target percentage between 0 and 100 %. [unaided] The majority of British Columbians (59%) say that half or more of public lands should be off-limits. Another one in five (20%) respond that 25-49% of lands should be off-limits, and an equal proportion (21%) feel that less than one quarter should be off-limits. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 19

20 Ranked Land Use Priorities When British Columbians are asked to indicate the top or highest priorities for land use in the province, three of the top or highest priority items are related to the protection of natural systems; these are habitat for birds, fish, and animals (66%), parks and protected areas (60%), and natural watersheds (54%). Local food security (62%) and large-scale wind, solar, and geothermal power are also in the top five, ranked second and third. New housing (52%) and local economic development (50%) are sixth and seventh and rated as top or high priorities by half or more of the population. Top or High Priority Uses for Land Habitat for birds, fish, and animals Local food security Large-scale wind, solar, and geothermal power Parks and protected areas Natural watersheds New housing Local economic development Hiking, camping, and outdoor recreation Ecotourism Beauty and spiritual values First Nations rights, title and land claims Hunting and fishing for food Oil and gas development Industrial logging Mining Commercial recreation develpmt (e.g. ski resorts) Top High Medium Low Not a priority As population increases, land becomes more valuable. What would you say are the PRIORITY uses for LAND in British Columbia? Low-impact recreational and tourism like hiking, camping, and outdoor recreation (48%) and ecotourism (42%) occupy the middle tier of priorities, followed by beauty and spiritual values (35%), First Nations rights, title, and land claims (32%), and hunting and fishing for food (30%). At the bottom of the list of priorities are commercial recreational development and industrial resource extraction: oil and gas development (27%), industrial logging (21%), mining (20%), and commercial recreational development (e.g. golf, ski resorts) (18%). Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 20

21 While all regions of the province are just as likely to rate habitat for birds, fish, and animals and local food security as top or high priorities, there are some significant regional differences in other areas. Metro Vancouver residents are significantly less likely than average to see natural watersheds as a priority, while they are similar to Vancouver Island residents in being significantly more likely to say that new housing and large-scale wind, solar, and geothermal power are top- or high-priority uses for land. Vancouver Island and Southern Interior residents are significantly more likely than residents of other regions to rate parks and protected areas, hiking, camping, and outdoor recreation, ecotourism, and natural watersheds as top or high priorities. Residents of the North are distinct in that they are far more likely than any other region to point to large industrial uses of land as top or high priorities, including industrial logging, oil and gas development, and mining. At the same time, they are somewhat less likely than others to see local economic development as a priority. The North is also the only region where significant numbers of respondents identify hunting and fishing for food and First Nations rights, title, and land claims as top priorities for land use. Predictably, education has an impact on views of industrial resource extraction as a land use priority. People in the trades far more likely than most to view industrial logging and mining as a top or high priority, and to assess parks and protected areas and natural watersheds as a low priority for land use. There appear to be major generational differences related to water and food security, with older adults aged 65+ nearly twice as likely as those in the age cohort to rate natural watersheds as a top or high priority. Older adults 65+ are also much more likely than younger generations to rate food security as a priority. On the other hand, men aged 18 to 49 are 10% to 25% more likely than other age cohorts, male or female, to view hunting and fishing for food as a top or high priority. Perhaps due to economic insecurity, young men aged are also significantly more likely than any other group to rate local economic development, large-scale wind, solar and geothermal power projects, and industrial logging as top or high priorities. They are not significantly different in their views from others with regard to mining and oil and gas, the latter perhaps due to their elevated concern about climate change. Both young men and young women in the age cohort are far more likely than other British Columbians, and twice as likely as retirees aged 65+, to see First Nations rights, title, and land claims as a top or high land use priority. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 21

22 How Much Does Sustainable Land Use Matter? Some 18% A little 11% A lot 65% Not at all 2% Unsure 4% Sustainable land use is about taking care of and using the land in a way that DOES NOT harm the ability of the next generation of people living in your community to meet their needs. Based on what you know, would you say that sustainable land use MATTERS... When British Columbians are provided with the above definition of sustainable land use, and asked how much it matters, a strong majority of two in three (65%) agree that sustainable land use matters a lot. This exceeds the positive response in an earlier question where one in two BC residents (53%) rate a sustainable economy as the most appealing economy of the future. Another 18% say that sustainable land use matters some, while just 13% say it matters just a little or not at all. Just 4% of British Columbians are unsure. The notion of sustainable land use is most likely to matter on Vancouver Island, in the Southern Interior, and in the North, where residents are on average about 10 percentage points more likely than those in Metro Vancouver to say it matters a lot. While the majority of people in all age groups say that sustainable land use matters a lot, older men aged 65+ and women aged 50+ are 10 to 20 percentage points more likely to say it matters. Education appears to have little impact on how much the term matters. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 22

23 3. Governance British Columbians were asked how much of a role various players should have in land use governance (i.e. in making decisions and managing land use) in their region of British Columbia. Survey responses suggest that members of the BC public view land use management in their region as a local, regional, or provincial matter. A clear majority say the provincial government (66%), local citizens (65%), and municipal or regional government (63%) should take a lead or major role in such governance. Fewer than half (42%) want the federal government to take a lead or major role, which is preferred slightly ahead of conservation groups (38%) and slightly after scientists and experts (45%). Most BC residents prefer a moderate role for these groups. One in three (33%) would like local First Nations communities to take a lead or major role in land use decisions or management in their region. Just one in four (24%) say this of local business leaders and one in five (19%) say this of recreational land users. Most residents also prefer a moderate role for these players. Preferred Role in Land Use Decisions % saying Lead/Major Role Provincial government authorities Local citizens Your municipal or regional authorities Scientists & experts Federal government authorities Conservation groups Local First Nations communities Local business leaders Recreational users Large resource companies Realtors & developers Out-of-town landowners In your opinion, how much of a ROLE should each of the following have in making decisions & managing land use in your region of British Columbia? (Lead, Major, Moderate, Minor, None) Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 23

24 Fewer than one in five would like to see large resource companies, realtors and developers, or out-oftown landowners have a lead or major role in land use decisions in their region; most of BC residents say that these players should have just a minor role. Residents of Northern BC differ from residents of other regions in that they are significantly more likely to say they prefer that local citizens take a lead or major role in land use governance, over the Province or municipal or regional authorities. Northerners are also significantly more likely than others to say local businesses or recreational land users should play a lead or major role. The strongest support for a lead or major role by local and provincial governments originates with seniors aged 65+, exceeding that from younger adults by up to 25 percentage points. Residents of Vancouver Island are about 10 to 15 points more likely than others to want local First Nations to play a lead or major role. Women of all age groups are the most likely to want to see conservation groups to play a lead or major role, while young men age are twice as likely as any other group to want large resource companies to play a lead or major role. Most Important Criteria for Land Use Governance [unaided] In your view, what should be the most important consideration in taking care of public lands in BC? Asked an open-ended question on the most important consideration for taking care of land in BC, British Columbians are most likely to say protecting nature and the environment (25%) followed by long-term sustainability (15%) and local citizens/public interest (11%). There are no significant differences in response patterns between regional and demographic groups. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 24

25 Most Important Considerations for Land Use Decisions % saying extremely or quite important Local needs for food, energy, & water Needs of future generations Protecting land&water from pollution/degradation Combined, long-term impacts Fair, transparent, & democratic process Doing what s right, not necessarily popular Public safety & disaster avoidance Science, facts & expert knowledge Jobs & economic development Canada's national interest Respecting First Nations rights & title Promoting/protecting recreational use Minimizing rules & regulations In your opinion, how IMPORTANT are the following in making decisions about land use in your region of the province? (Extremely, Quite, Somewhat, A little, Not) When British Columbians consider decision-making criteria for land use planning, core themes are local needs, sustainability, cumulative impacts, and transparent process. Local needs for food, energy, and water (84%), the needs of future generations (83%), and protecting land and water from pollution or degradation are rated as the three most important criteria for making decisions about land use in their region. Rounding out the top five considerations are combined long-term impacts (78%), and fair, transparent and democratic process (78%). Doing what s right, not necessarily popular (76%), public safety and disaster avoidance (76%), science, facts and expert knowledge (73%), and jobs and economic development are mid-tier, but also considered important by a majority of citizens. Lower on the list of considerations, but again embraced by over one in two are Canada s national interest (60%), respecting First Nations rights and title (53%), and promoting/protecting recreational use (50%). Minimizing rules and regulations is the least likely to be valued as criteria for land use decisions with just one in three (35%) rating it as important. The main differences in patterns of response are again regional and generational. Residents of the North are more likely than any other region to rate local needs for food, energy, and water as a top Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 25

26 consideration, while perhaps somewhat paradoxically, also being significantly more likely than any other region to rate minimizing rules and regulations as important. It s worth noting that men under age 50 are also much more likely than average to view minimizing rules and regulations as a top consideration, which may factor into the pattern of response in the North. Older adults aged 65+ are significantly more likely than younger adults to rate public safety and disaster avoidance, needs of future generations, protecting land and water from pollution and degradation, local needs for food, energy, and water, and fair, transparent, and democratic process, as top considerations. Education was a factor in one item: BC residents with high school or trades education are significantly less likely to rate science, facts, and expert knowledge as important criteria. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 26

27 4. First Nations The rationale for ensuring First Nations are consulted on land use decisions in BC was expressed by different people in a number of different ways in the survey results. Reasons to Ensure First Nations Have a Say in Land Use Decisions (%) We are neighbours and friends, and we need to live together Working together is the Canadian way Strongly agree Somewhat agree Neither Somewhat disagree Strongly disagree Please say how much you AGREE or DISAGREE with the following as reasons to ensure First Nations are included in decisions about land use in BC. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 27

28 The statements that are most likely to start a conversation in a positive zone appeal to widely held Canadian values related to cooperation and getting along. We are neighbours and friends, and we need to live together elicits the strongest positive reaction, with 53% strong agreement, and nearly nine in ten (86%) indicate they agree at least somewhat. Working to together is the Canadian way also does well with 42% strong agreement, and eight in ten (81%) saying they least somewhat agree. No significant regional differences are evident in the responses, and First Nations respondents agree strongly with all the statements. However, older non-indigenous men and people with high school and trades education are significantly less likely to respond well to the appeal to law and the Constitution and the notion that First Nations people were here first and white people are settlers. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 28

29 5. Land Use Planning Processes BC residents tend to view land use planning processes in their region as in need of improvement. A majority of 57% say the decisions in their region tend to be driven by politics and narrowly defined interests, while just 24% say that it is generally informed by facts, community values, and the public good. Unsure / No opinion 19% Land use planning in my region is generally informed by facts, community values, and the public good. 24% Land use planning decisions in my region tend to be driven by politics and narrowly defined interests. 57% Some 43% of respondents feel that a small, highly vocal group of citizens tends to dominate land use planning decisions in their community, while just 29% say that such decisions attract interest and participation from a diverse range of people and groups. Unsure / No opinion 28% Land use planning decisions in my community seem to attract interest and participation from a diverse range of people and groups. 29% A small highly vocal group of citizens tends dominate land use planning decisions in my community. 43% There are no significant differences in satisfaction across regions and demographics. When it comes to expectations of land use planning processes, British Columbians expect all community members to be treated equally. Six in ten (57%) feel that all members of their community should have a meaningful opportunity to influence land use planning. Just 30% say that the views and input of longtime community residents should count for more than that of new residents. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 29

30 The views and input of long-time community residents should count for more than that of new residents who have just arrived. 30% Unsure / No opinion 13% All members of my community should have a meaningful opportunity to influence land use planning. 57% There is also a clear expectation that local needs should take precedence over that of outsiders and the province. Nearly one in two (48%) say that land use management decisions should place the most emphasis on providing for the wants and needs of local communities. Half as many (26%) say that the interests of all BC residents should come before the wants and needs of local communities. Unsure / No opinion 26% Land use management decisions should place the most emphasis on providing for the wants and needs of local communities. 48% The interests of all BC residents should come before the wants and needs of local communities. 26% BC residents view the land use planning and land use management in their community as an institution worth investing in. Citizens are twice as likely to say the province needs to invest MORE in land use decisions and management in their region (52%) than to say the Province interferes too much (20%). Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 30

31 Unsure / No opinion 28% BC provincial agencies need to invest more resources and effort into land use decisions and management in my region. 52% BC provincial agencies already interfere too much in land use decisions and management in my region. 20% The strongest support for involvement by the Province is expressed by residents of the Lower Mainland and Vancouver Island. While residents of the Southern Interior and the North are more likely to support than oppose Provincial involvement in land use planning in their region, there are also more people in these regions who express ambivalence. Ambivalence about Provincial involvement is also higher among First Nations, although there is still more support than opposition for Provincial involvement. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 31

32 6. Policy and Programs The survey used experimental design to test the impact of different question wording on support for a set of policy ideas. To accomplish this task, survey respondents were randomly assigned slightly different versions of the policy idea below. The impact of the wording is summarized in the table for each pair of statements below. There are various ways in which BC could update its approach to sustainable land use. Please say if you would FAVOUR or OPPOSE each of the following IDEAS...? (%) Table 1: Statement Pair 1 Statements Require large resource users to pay into a fund for FULL restoration of degraded areas in the province including forests, mines, and aquatic habitat. Offer large resource users tax breaks for FULL restoration of areas they have degraded, including forests, mines, and aquatic habitat. TOTAL Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Unsure FAVOUR favour favour oppose oppose Table 1 above shows that BC residents are far more likely to favour making industry pay for restoration of degraded lands when they are forced to pay into a fund (81%) than offering them tax breaks in return for restoration (65%). Table 2: Statement Pair 2 Statements TOTAL FAVOUR Strongly favour Somewhat favour Unsure Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose Ensure that any industry that pollutes or damages natural habitat faces strict penalties, including potential jail time for serious or repeat offences. Ensure that anyone who pollutes or damages natural habitat faces strict penalties, including potential jail time for serious or repeat offences Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 32

33 Table 2 above shows strong support for penalizing polluters regardless of whether said polluters are described as industry or just as anyone. The two groups in which the term industry appears to induce a bump in support is older males over 65 and those who work in trades. Table 3: Statement Pair 3 Statements TOTAL FAVOUR Strongly favour Somewhat favour Unsure Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose Establish local decision-making bodies to ensure that all local citizens have meaningful input into land use decisions. Fund local governments, community organizations, and First Nations so they can play a bigger role in managing and protecting the land Table 3 shows that there is support for both creating local land use decision-making bodies and for funding existing local governments, community organizations, and First Nations to play a bigger in governance. However, mention of funding for existing organizations as opposed to the creation of a new body does not increase support, but rather appears to weaken it. This dampening effect may be generated by the mention of funding, it may be due to negative impressions of existing organizations, or both. Table 4: Statement Pair 4 Statements TOTAL FAVOUR Strongly favour Somewhat favour Unsure Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose Hire and train more frontline staff in all regions of the province to monitor and enforce laws related to land use and conservation. Hire and train more frontline staff in all regions of the province to monitor and manage land use and conservation Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 33

34 Table 4 above suggests that there is majority support for hiring and training more frontline land use planning and management staff in the province regardless of whether the additional resources are associated with efforts to enforce or manage. The strongest support for this measure is expressed by First Nations, residents of the North, and older adults aged 65+ of both genders, as well as hunters and those who spend time camping in wilderness areas. Table 5: Statement Pair 5 Wording TOTAL FAVOUR Strongly favour Somewhat favour Unsure Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose Charge recreational users a modest annual access fee to help pay for the restoration of degraded lands and watersheds. Charge recreational users a modest annual access fee to help cover the cost of sustainable land use management Table 5 above shows that six in ten (61%) British Columbians favour a modest annual access fee for recreational users to help cover the cost of sustainable land use management; however, the number who favour such a fee (69%) increases somewhat when they are told it helps pay for the restoration of degraded lands and watersheds. The increase in support is greatest among those who report that they fish, hunt, forage, mountain-bike, trail-ride, or camp in wilderness areas. Table 6: Statement Pair 6 Wording TOTAL FAVOUR Strongly favour Somewhat favour Unsure Somewhat oppose Strongly oppose Recognize Indigenous communities right to manage land within their legally designated territories. Recognize Indigenous communities right to manage land within limits of our existing laws Nearly nine in ten First Nations respondents agree with both statements in Table 6, as do six in ten non- Indigenous BC residents. These results suggest that most British Columbians implicitly accept the fact of Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 34

35 Indigenous community territorial jurisdiction and support Indigenous community land management within these territories. Admittedly, respondents interpretation of the phrases legally designated territories and limits of existing laws is completely unclear. However, it is worth noting that specifying that these rights are to be exercised within legally designated territories boosts support significantly among BC residents who hunt and fish. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 35

36 7. Language Insights To assess the utility of various terms used to describe approaches to land use, respondents were asked 2 about what thoughts or images came to mind when they heard the terms: Natural capital Land stewardship Ecosystem-based management Sustainable land use Sustainable land use management Cumulative impacts The responses suggest that at best, fewer than four in ten British Columbians have any familiarity with the terms natural capital (34%), land stewardship (36%), ecosystem-based management (36%), and cumulative impacts (39%). The terms sustainable land use (49%) and sustainable land use management (53%) fared best with approximately one in two claiming some manner of familiarity. % claiming to be familiar with term Sustainable land use management 53 Sustainable land use 49 Cumulative impacts 39 Ecosystem-based management Land stewardship Natural capital Split samples were used to reduce respondent burden. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 36

37 Natural capital (familiarity = 34%) The term natural capital tends to be most often associated with resources, and not much else. The narrow, somewhat spare frame of reference is reflected in the simplicity of the world cloud on the left. Some also associated the term with capital cities, such as Ottawa and Victoria. Land stewardship (familiarity = 36%) Land stewardship elicits a somewhat bureaucratic cloud of terms, with parks, ownership, control, care, responsibility, management, and planning mentioned most frequently. Land stewardship is also associated with First Nations in many peoples minds. Ecosystembased management (familiarity = 36%) Ecosystem-based management is widely associated with the environment, parks, and the somewhat abstract benefits of ecosystems such as balance, interconnectedness, and nature. One in ten people report negative associations with government and bureaucracy. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 37

38 Cumulative impacts (familiarity = 39%) The term cumulative impacts tends to be associated with environmental problems like climate change, resource extraction, and industrial development. It is unclear as to how many people really understand the term beyond the notion that it represents an undesirable outcome related to the environment or pollution. Sustainable land use (familiarity = 49%) Sustainable land use appears to be widely understood to represent an ethic of restoring what we use for future generations. The term also elicits the richest and most positive set of associations. Respondents associate it with agriculture and farming, nature, renewable resources, forestry, balance, responsibility, interconnectedness, and First Nations. Sustainable land management (familiarity = 53%) Sustainable land management swaps out use for management, and becomes somewhat more familiar. At the same time, it becomes slightly more bureaucratic-sounding to the public ear. It is nonetheless still associated with agriculture, nature, renewable resources, and forestry. It is also somewhat more likely to be associated with development and control. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 38

39 8. Strategic Insights Messaging Split sample language testing reveals that small adjustments to language have a major impact on public perception. New housing (56%) is far more likely to be viewed as a priority for land use than new housing developments (40%), expansion of cities (26%), and expansion of towns (22%). New housing developments Expansion of towns % saying top priority Support for small-scale sustainable forestry and community-managed forestry as land use priorities (44% each) is nearly twice that of industrial-scale forestry (24%) and industrial logging (21%). Small-scale sustainable forestry Community-managed forestry Industrial-scale forestry Industrial logging % saying top priority Small farmers, ranchers, and local food production (63%) and local food security (62%) are far viewed far more favourably than large-scale agricultural production (38%) and industrial-scale agricultural production (30%). Small farmers, ranchers, & local food Local food security Large-scale agricultural production Industrial-scale agricultural production % saying top priority Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 39

40 While just a minority of British Columbians view beauty and spiritual values (35%) and preservation of culture and heritage (39%) as top priorities for land use, numbers increase by double digits after shifting focus to freedom and solitude (58%) and peace and quiet (62%). Peace and quiet Freedom and solitude Preservation of culture and heritage Beauty and spiritual values % saying top priority Nearly three in four (74%) of BC residents view natural lakes, rivers, and streams as a priority for land use, and two in three (66%) say this of habitat for birds, fish, and animals. However, if we speak of natural watersheds (54%) or undeveloped watersheds and wilderness (42%), numbers drop dramatically. % saying top priority Natural lakes, rivers, and streams Habitat for birds, fish, and animals Natural watersheds Undeveloped watersheds and wilderness Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 40

41 9. Regional Audiences The Lower Mainland In the BC Lower Mainland, the top land use issues are population growth and housing, climate change, and local food security, agriculture, and water. Respondents tend to be more educated and affluent, especially closer in to the City of Vancouver. Respondents also tend to be younger than in other regions and far more are attending post-secondary institutions. BC Lower Mainland residents are the most pessimistic about quality of life in their region both today and in the future. They are also the most likely of all regional respondents to support First Nations involvement in land use decisions and to say that BC provincial agencies need to invest more resources and effort into land use decisions and management in their region. Paradoxically, BC Lower Mainland residents are the least likely to say that sustainable land use matters a lot. Vancouver Island/South Coast The top land use issues for residents of Vancouver Island are local food security and water, climate change, and protection of wildlife habitat and old growth forest. Vancouver Island residents are among the most supportive of First Nations involvement in land use planning, and they are the most likely of all regions to rate fair, transparent, and democratic process as a top consideration in making decisions about land use planning. They are also the most likely to favour increasing the royalties industries pay for resource extraction and paying the money into a fund to restore degraded lands and habitat. The Southern Interior Residents of the Southern Interior tend to view local food security and water, climate change, and the protection of wildlife habitat, parks, and protected areas as top land use issues. They are the most likely to favour strict penalties and a command-and-control approach to land use management. At the same time, they are more likely than any other region to insist that all members of their community should have a meaningful opportunity to influence land use planning, regardless of length of tenure. Southern Interior residents are the least likely of all British Columbians to believe that respecting First Nations rights and title is an important consideration in land use decisions. The North The top land use planning concerns in the North are mismanagement of resources, environmental pollution, and influence of large corporations. Paradoxically, residents of the North are by far the most likely to say that minimizing rules and regulations should be a priority consideration in land use planning. They are the least likely to trust the Province or local and regional governments to play a role in land use planning, and the most likely to believe that local citizens need to lead or play a major role. Residents of Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 41

42 the North are also the most likely to say that industrial logging, oil and gas development, hunting and fishing for food, and resolving First Nations rights, title, and land claims all need to be a priority in land use planning. 10. Media Behaviour Some practical insights on how to reach BC audiences can be obtained by reviewing self-reported media behaviour. Nearly eight in ten (78%) British Columbians regularly or often use a digital mobile device, but this drops to just 60% among those aged 65+, and the drop is most prevalent in the North. Seven in ten (69%) regularly or often watch TV, but among adults aged and among First Nations, just one in two do this. One in two British Columbians use Facebook regularly or often; however, this number rises to two in three among 18- to 34-year-olds and to 72% among First Nations. Among older men aged 65+, the number who regularly or often use Facebook falls to one in three. Vancouver Islanders, university grads, and retirees read a lot of books, while young men under age 35 do not. Magazine and newspaper readership follows an identical pattern. Northerners, BC Lower Mainland residents, university grads, and young adults watch YouTube; older adults, especially retirees, and Southern BC residents do not. About how often do you do the following...? % saying regularly / often Use a digital mobile device like a cellphone or tablet 78 Watch TV 69 Use Facebook 53 Read books 49 Watch YouTube 42 Read a magazine or newspaper 37 Listen to CBC Radio 20 Listen to podcasts or audio books 14 Use LinkedIn 10 Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 42

43 Older adults, university grads, and homeowners are far more likely than average to listen to CBC Radio, as are Vancouver Island residents. First Nations are among the least likely to report listening to the CBC. Podcasts are the exclusive domain of post-secondary students, with one in four reporting regularly or often doing so. The only demographic paying attention to LinkedIn appears to be young men under age 35. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 43

44 11. Key Conclusions and Insights 1. British Columbians feel ambivalent about the future. British Columbians are very positive about quality of life in the past, but are split on the present, and extremely ambivalent about the future. Asked to rate quality of life in their region of the province 25 years ago, the vast majority of British Columbians view it in positive terms. However, perspectives on the present and the future skew sharply negative, with the emergence of regional, generational, and demographic divides linked to housing values. Fears for the future appear linked to threats to material security, expressed as concerns about threats to the environment; access to necessities like food, water, and energy; mismanagement of natural resources; and loss of control to corporate interests and distant decision-makers. 2. Identity is embedded in region and landscape. British Columbians see the beauty of the landscape and the life it sustains as fundamental to their quality of life. When the public speaks of their quality of life in this province, the language first references landscape and landscape features that sustain both life and lifestyle (e.g. natural beauty, nature, natural resources followed by cultural and political factors like tolerance, democracy, and freedom). 3. British Columbians view needs of local communities as the priority in land use planning decisions. British Columbians view land use governance as a domain that must first serve local and regional needs before those of the province, nation, and other outsiders. The top land use planning priorities in each region are threats to food, water, energy, and health. The focus on local and regional identities means that the framing of who is and is not an outsider becomes a powerful subtext to all land use conversations. Outsiders be they framed as governments, experts, scientists, Environmental Non-Governmental Organizations (ENGO), or industry organizations are seen as lacking in legitimacy. BC residents express a clear preference for local citizens to play a lead role in land use governance, and an expectation of provincial, regional, and local government involvement over that of federal and commercial interests. 4. Sustainability is the core principle informing public wants and needs in all aspects of land use planning and decision-making. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 44

45 British Columbians demonstrate a clear understanding of the concept of sustainability, in the broadest sense of the term, as a value that informs their priorities for land use. Citizens overwhelmingly point to a sustainable economy as the most appealing future economy for the province, preferring it over a green economy and a renewable economy. They point to an extraction economy and an industrial economy as the future economies they deem to be the least appealing. The top priority uses for land in British Columbia include habitat for nature, large-scale renewable energy projects, and agriculture. There is a distinct preference for communityscale renewable resource development over industrial development. The principles of the public interest, future generations, cumulative long-term impacts, and transparent, inclusive, democratic decision-making processes are top of the list of criteria the public wants to see informing land use planning and management. 5. Non-Indigenous communities support First Nations inclusion, consultation, and land use governance. Poll participants are most receptive when Indigenous governance is framed in alignment with local or community rights and widely held Canadian values related to neighbourly cooperation, unity, and getting along. 6. Residents of the North see things as everyone vs. the North. More so than in any other region, residents of the North see First Nations communities, industrial resource development, and hunting and fishing as core aspects of their relationship with the land. This mix of competing interests translates into a significantly different set of land use priorities from other regions. A number of concerns loom large, particularly about how small communities will deal with environmental threats, resource mismanagement, and corporate influence in the face of continued development and population change. The expectation that local needs should take precedence over those of outsiders and the Province is especially true in the North, where communities have less confidence in Victoria s ability to understand their needs and priorities. 7. Metro Van is unique. Metro Vancouver is the most educated and affluent of all regions in the province, but it is also home to the newest residents with the weakest attachment to place and the greatest concerns about future quality of life. As a result, public discourse in this region is characterized by major disparities in level of engagement. The perception is that a small group of highly vocal types dominate land use planning decisions. Public anxieties about the cost of housing and population growth are heightened and keenly felt by all. However, deeply embedded concerns about pending climate impacts Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 45

46 and food security prevent this from automatically translating into acceptance of expansion at the expense of the environment. People want homes, but are deeply troubled by any possible loss of green space and agricultural land. 8. Land use opinions fall along a generational divide. The fabric of land use conversations in this province is defined by generation and gender as much as by geography. Asked to rate quality of life in their region of the province 25 years ago, young adults express the most concern about the way things are, while older adults, men in particular, and homeowners are the most positive. Views of the future are marked by similar divisions, except that instead of a generational divide, the split is along gender lines. Older adults, while generally more affluent than their younger peers, are far more focused on land use issues related to immediate material security: agriculture and food production, fresh water, and natural disasters like fires and floods. They are also far more likely than younger adults to speak of the economy in terms of sustainability and impacts on health. Younger adults are more focused on longer-term issues and lifestyle values that are a step removed or a level down from survival in Maslow s hierarchy of needs. They emphasize the impacts of climate change, threats to wildlife and forest ecosystems, and recreational values, and are more likely to speak of a green economy, clean energy, and a smart economy. Older adults are also far more invested in the political process than young adults, valuing not only voting, but also fair, transparent, and democratic process as top considerations in land use. While younger adults have opinions on sustainability and land use planning issues, they are far less likely to indicate an interest in voting and are more likely to score poorly on tests of science knowledge (e.g. evolution, biological science). Young men in particular show a tendency for low engagement and lack of science knowledge. The most striking gap between the worldviews of older and younger British Columbians is on Indigenous issues. Younger adults in this province are nearly twice as likely as older adults to support Indigenous rights, with the gap greatest between older men and younger women. 9. Language matters. The phrases sustainable land use and sustainable land use management communicate well with the general public, especially when compared against terms such as natural capital, land stewardship, and ecosystem-based management. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 46

47 While the word sustainable may be going out of vogue among policy experts, it appears to be coming into its own among the public. Our testing suggests that combined with the notion of land use, it elicits accurate comprehension and conveys a positive association of interconnectedness to agriculture, food, forests, nature, responsibility, future generations, and renewable resources. In contrast, our testing of natural capital and land stewardship found these terms understood by far fewer British Columbians. Moreover, the range of ideas the public associated with these terms was much more limited. The ideas skewed toward abstract and bureaucratic-sounding concepts like management, responsibility, and resources. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 47

48 12. Opportunities for Future Research, Next Steps The sustainable land use survey research provides a powerful foundation and starting point for understanding the state of public opinion in British Columbia. However, the initial foray into this area of investigation suggests several opportunities for advancing the longer-term public good in this area. 1. Further data analysis and reporting The database from the current survey included over 375 unique question items, and the current report just scratches the surface of what could be gained by digging deeper. Further budget resources for more analysis of this rich resource could yield additional and more nuanced insights about audience segments, communications tools, and attitudinal drivers within these segments. An advanced analysis would potentially provide benefits to organizations working in this space that have specific audiences or communications needs. The analysis may also help REFBC by providing a more rigorous set of metrics or benchmarks for progress and engagement on this issue. 2. Focus group sessions to develop and test communications and engagement materials Focus groups provide a rich and powerful means to validate and translate quantitative survey research into actionable messaging and communications tools. The insights from the quantitative survey could be translated into communications materials on specific subjects such as Indigenous governance, local decision-making, sustainability, education, and awareness messaging. Focus groups are critical to refining and making communications work by testing the nuances of hows and whys in the appropriate regions with real people. 3. Communications workshop and toolkit for NGOs, journalists, and institutions If the goal is to help organizations become more effective at engaging communities in the real world, reporting on survey findings can only go so far. Translating the survey and focus group insights into an actual toolkit and then developing a turnkey workshop to apply these insights to local, on-the-ground experience is often essential for translating survey findings into practice. Workshops are valuable because they often result in a two-way transfer of insight, where the final evolving whole becomes greater than the sum of the parts. 4. Development of social media properties for audience engagement Land use planning is a dynamic and evolving area of public policy engagement that reaches audiences dispersed across a vast geographical space. Too often, communications and education around these issues manifests as one-way, static, and fragmented broadcasts that do not adapt to diverse locations or evolving issues on the ground. Social media properties are a cost-effective opportunity to address these issues Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 48

49 and to further test communications and engagement gaps and solutions in a dynamic real-time online environment. Building, branding, and running a Facebook outreach page on land use planning issues could be a powerful asset in creating and convening an informed, factually engaged audience for this issue over time. The page would broadcast and promote quality news stories, facts, solutions, data visuals, events, and expertise from public intellectuals using micro-targeting data from the quantitative study just completed. 5. Quantitative trends tracking research The long-term tracking of public domain opinion research benefits public policy dialogue by inoculating public dialogue against the distortions of one-off surveys and media polls promoted by corporate lobbyists. The current in-depth poll includes a set of questions that would work well as a simple but informative tracking poll that could be followed up on once or twice yearly. Tracking polls do not need to be expensive, lengthy, or detailed. They just need to be consistent and regularly timed enough to help interested publics discern context and trends within the relevant regions and audiences over time. This research highlights the needs and opportunities for those working on land use issues to devote more attention to how we communicate about the land. Quality of life and personal identity are deeply influenced by the land we call home. British Columbians view local and regional land use governance as their primary point of reference, before province or nation. These are preliminary findings and there remain abundant opportunities to deepen our understanding about sustainable land use in BC. Real Estate Foundation of BC Page 49

50 Burrard St. Vancouver, BC V6C 2G