Using Key Informant Interviews to Better Understand Open Space Conservation in a Developing Watershed

LITERATURE CITED

1. ↵
   1. Averbach, C., and
   2. L. Silverstein

   . 2003. Qualitative Data: An Introduction to Coding and Analysis. New York University Press, New York, NY.
2. ↵
   1. Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay

   . 1997. The 1996 International Countryside Stewardship Exchange in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. Baltimore, MD.
3. ↵
   1. Appleyard, D.

   1979. The environment as a social symbol within a theory of environmental action and perception. American Planning Association Journal (April): 143–153.
4. ↵
   1. Arendt, R.

   1994. Rural by Design. American Planning Association, Chicago, IL.
5. ↵
   1. Austin, F., and
   2. H. Potter

   . 2003. Resident involvement in natural resource management: Open space conservation design in practice. Local Environment 8(2): 141–153.

   OpenUrl
6. ↵
   1. Bailey, K.

   1994. Methods of Social Research. Free Press, New York, NY.
7. ↵
   1. Benedict, M.

   2000. Green Infrastructure: A Strategic Approach to Land Conservation. Planning Advisory Services, American Planning Association, Chicago, IL.
8. ↵
   1. Bengston, C.

   2002. Personal conversation. Social Scientist and Ecological Economist, USDA Forest Service North Central Research Station, St. Paul, MN.
9. ↵
   1. Brody, S.,
   2. D. Godschalk, and
   3. R. Burby

   . 2003. Mandating citizen participation in plan making: Six strategic planning choices. Journal of the American Planning Association 69(3): 245–264.

   OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
10. ↵
    1. Center for the Study of Law and Politics

    . 1991. Open Space: Preservation and Acquisition. San Francisco, CA.
11. ↵
    1. Centre County Planning Commission

    . 1977. Directions for the Future, Guidelines for Decision Making: A Comprehensive Plan for Centre County. 1977. Bellefonte, PA.
12. ↵
    1. City of Boulder

    . 1995. City of Boulder Open Space Department: Long Range Management Policies. Boulder, CO.
13. ↵
    1. City of Davis

    . 1996. City of Davis General Plan Update. Davis, CA.
14. 1. City of Thousand Oaks

    . 1996. City of Thousand Oaks Revised Comprehensive Plan: Conservation Element and Open Space Element. Thousand Oaks, CA.
15. ↵
    1. Clawson, M.

    1962. A positive approach to open space preservation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 28(2): 124–129.

    OpenUrl
16. ↵
    1. Cline, M.J.,
    2. C. Feiss, and
    3. K. Lynch

    . 1964. Open Space for Human Needs. Marcou, O’Leary and Associates, Planners, Washington, D.C.
17. ↵
    1. Creswell, J.

    1998. Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing Among Five Traditions. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
18. ↵
    1. Dey, I.

    1993. Qualitative Data Analysis: A User-Friendly Guide for Social Scientists. Rontledge, NY.
19. ↵
    1. Dwyer, J.,
    2. H. Schroeder, and
    3. P. Gobster

    . 1991. The significance of urban trees and forests: Toward a deeper understanding of values. Journal of Arboriculture 17(10): 276–284.

    OpenUrl
20. ↵
    1. Dwyer, J.,
    2. G. McPherson,
    3. H. Schroeder, and
    4. R. Rowntree

    . 1992. Assessing the benefits and costs of the urban forest. Journal of Arboriculture 18(5): 227–233.

    OpenUrl
21. ↵
    1. Dwyer, J.,
    2. D. Nowak,
    3. M. Noble, and
    4. S. Sisinni

    . 2000. Connecting People With Ecosystems in the 21st Century: An Assessment of our Nation’s Urban Forests. U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, Washington, D.C.
22. ↵
    1. Dwyer, J.,
    2. D. Nowak, and
    3. M. Noble

    . 2003. Sustaining urban forests. Journal of Arboriculture 29(1): 49–50.

    OpenUrl
23. ↵
    1. Ehlers, L.,
    2. J. Pfeffer, and
    3. C. O’Melia

    . 2000. Making watershed management work. Environmental Science & Technology 34(21): 453–464.

    OpenUrl
24. ↵
    1. Elmendorf, W., and
    2. A.E. Luloff

    . 2001. Using qualitative data collection methods when planning for community forests. Journal of Arboriculture 25(5): 264–273.

    OpenUrl
25. ↵
    1. Fausold, C., and
    2. R. Lilieholm

    . 1996. The economic value of open space. Land Lines (September): 32–43.
26. ↵
    1. Fortmann, L.

    1999. Personal conversation. Rudy Grah Chair in Forestry and Sustainable Development. Department of Environmental Science, Policy, and Management, University of California, Berkeley, Berkeley, CA.
27. ↵
    1. Fortmann, L., and
    2. D. Kusel

    . 1990. New voices, old beliefs: Forest environmentalism among new and long-standing residents. Rural Sociology 55(2): 214–232.

    OpenUrl
28. ↵
    1. Godbey, G.,
    2. A. Craefe, and
    3. S. James

    . 1992. The Benefits of Local Recreation and Park Services: A Nationwide Study of the Perceptions of the American Public. National Recreation and Park Association, Baltimore, MD.
29. ↵
    1. Kelsey, T.

    1997. Fiscal Impacts of Different Land Uses: The Pennsylvania Experience. College of Agricultural Sciences, Cooperative Extension, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
30. ↵
    1. Kelsey, T.

    1998. Tax Fairness: What’s Fair for Our Community? College of Agricultural Sciences, Cooperative Extension, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
31. ↵
    1. Kripperndorff, K.

    1980. Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
32. ↵
    1. Levine, L.

    1980. Land conservation in metropolitan areas. American Planning Association Journal (July): 330–338.
33. ↵
    1. Luloff, A.

    1999. The doing of rural community development research. Rural Sociology 9(1): 313–327.

    OpenUrl
34. ↵
    1. Marion, C.

    1960. A positive approach to open space preservation. Journal of the American Institute of Planners (26): 124–129.
35. ↵
    1. McCracken, G.

    1988. The Long Interview. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
36. ↵
    1. McHarg, I.

    1969. Design With Nature. John Wiley, NY.
37. ↵
    1. McMahon, E.

    2000. Green infrastructure. Planning Commissioners Journal (37): 4–7.
38. ↵
    1. McPherson, E.,
    2. D. Nowak, and
    3. R. Rowntree

    . 1994. Chicago’s Urban Forest Ecosystem: Results of the Chicago Forest Climate Project. USDA Forest Service Northeastern Experiment Station, Radnor, PA.
39. ↵
    1. Nowak, D.,
    2. M. Noble,
    3. S. Sisinni, and
    4. J. Dwyer

    . 2001. People and trees: Assessing the United States urban forest. Journal of Forestry 99(3): 37–42.

    OpenUrl
40. ↵
    1. Park, P.,
    2. M. Brydon-Miller,
    3. B. Hall, and
    4. T. Jackson

    . 1993. Voices of Change: Participatory Research in the United States and Canada. Bergin and Garvey, NY.
41. ↵
    1. Brymen, S., and
    2. R. Burgess

    1. Ritchie, J., and
    2. L. Spencer

    . 1994. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. In Brymen, S., and R. Burgess (Eds.). Analyzing Qualitative Data. Routledge, London, UK.
42. ↵
    1. Rubins, H., and
    2. I. Rubins

    . 1995. Qualitative Interviewing. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.
43. ↵
    1. State of Pennsylvania

    . 1998. Report of the 21st Century Environmental Commission. Harrisburg, PA.
44. ↵
    1. Towne, M.

    1998. Open space conservation in urban environments: Lessons from Thousand Oaks, California. Urban Ecosystems 2(2/3): 85–101.

    OpenUrl
45. ↵
    1. Ulrich, R.

    1988. Psychological benefits of trees: New research findings. Shade Tree. 61(3): 13–16.

    OpenUrl
46. ↵
    1. Wilkinson, K.

    1991. The Community in Rural America. Greenwood Press, NY.
47. ↵
    1. Wilkinson, K.,
    2. J. Thompson,
    3. R. Reynolds, and
    4. L. Ostesh

    . 1982. Local disruption and western energy development. Pacific Sociological Review 25(3): 275–297.

    OpenUrlCrossRefWeb of Science
48. ↵
    1. Wolf, K.

    1998. Human Dimensions of the Urban Forest. Center for Urban Horticulture, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.