What Does Minnesota's Environmental Literacy Report Card Tell Us?

News Topic(s): What's New*   Research + Reports*   MPCA   

09/29/09 - Minnesota now has three environmental literacy report cards that tell us much about how citizens think and feel about our natural resources. Completed in 2002, 2004 and 2008, the reports are a snapshot of public opinion, issue knowledge and self-reported conservation action.

Findings in the third report card:

•    93% of Minnesotans support environmental education in schools.
•    85% participate in recycling programs.
•    67% believe that renewable energy is the best means to meet America's energy needs.
•    41% of Minnesotans reported that they frequently purchase locally grown food.
•    Time spent outdoors (and not as part of a job) ranged from 12% reporting five or fewer hours per week outdoors to 7.4% reporting more than 40 hours per week outdoors.



The news wasn’t all good. 62% of Minnesota adults have at least an average or basic knowledge about the environment (a grade of C or better), but only 8% of the state’s adults have excellent knowledge about the environment. And 38% of the state’s adults have below average knowledge about the environment (worse than a C grade).
The results and analysis are based on 1,000 phone interviews completed with adults throughout Minnesota. The sampling error is plus or minus 3.1 %age points.

Conservation Minnesota asked one of the principal authors of the 2008 report, Dr. Tony Murphy, to provide insight. Murphy, Associate Dean, Education Department, St. Catherine University, St. Paul, is also the principal author of the previous two Minnesota Reports Cards on Environmental Literacy. Involved in various science education programs at the state and national levels for many years, Dr. Murphy has published articles in various journals and presented at state and national conferences.

To view the 2008 report card, click here.

Dr. Murphy, how does Minnesotans' environmental literacy compare to other states in the region and all 49 other states?

This is a difficult question to answer in that it’s difficult to compare overall to the other 49 states.  In addition, less than 10 states have completed these types of report cards.  In the Minnesota report cards, we compare Minnesota residents against residents in these other states and at the national level only on specific questions.  In these specific knowledge and attitude questions, for the most part, Minnesotans score the same as or higher than the residents in the other states and nationally.  Where Minnesota residents have consistently and significantly scored higher than other people is on the knowledge question about the source of non-point pollution. We blew the rest out of the water! See the Figure 4 on page 11 of the third report card.

What has been the most surprising finding, in your judgment?

In this report card and the others, I think the consistency of the finding around the non-point source pollution mentioned above.  In addition, the final section in the report which deals with bringing together all the concepts (knowledge, attitudes and behaviors) is interesting.  It shows that while knowledge is important, attitudes seem to have more impact on behaviors.  The Minnesota report cards are the only ones to do this type of analysis and it is quite interesting as it backs up a lot of other research. ??

Does the report implicitly provide advice to nonprofit organizations and government agencies about how to communicate better with the public?

No, there are no strategies for communicating specifically to any particular audience or advice on how to communicate better. However, two of the report cards did ask residents where they receive their environmental knowledge from.  In addition, it seems that some messages are getting through to people, for example, the message about non-point pollution and while it could be improved, it seems to be working. In presentations I point out that perhaps a lesson could be learned from how this message is communicated and applied to other environmental messages. ?

Do the findings lead you to any judgments about the formation of government environmental policy based on citizen knowledge and concern?

Yes, personally and this is not in the reports, but I think for policy to be created, people do need more understanding of environmental problems.  Part of that understanding is the knowledge of the environment and positive attitudes about the environment. The reports show that some of this has been increasing over the past 3 reports in relation to some attitudes.  I think that many people in the state perceive our environment as clean and healthy and while we do have this, it is not to the extent of the perception. ?

Were you able to draw any inferences about what were the most and least  credible sources of information on environmental problems and issues and why do you think these sources are or aren't trusted?

The report card didn’t directly address the issue of source credibility. And while most people said they get their information from TV, followed by newspapers, I don’t know if it’s because they considered these venues credible or if it’s simply because they are easy, accessible information sources.  (The results are on pages 43-44.)  What was interesting was where people went for information from different sources.  From a list supplied in the survey, conservation groups were selected as the highest source (33% of the total) and government agencies (18%) were the lowest. This is very interesting considering the amount of outreach performed by both these groups.  I think government agencies does just as much, if not more in outreach, but their methods may often be in partnership with other groups, such as conservation groups, or they do not have their name front and center. Non-profits rely on their name being highly visible and government because of the trust issue may not have it as prominent. Also, people may not realize how much information they get from government agencies. It’s all in their perception.

?Do you think passage of last November's Clean Water, Land and Legacy Amendment says anything about public environmental literacy?

Yes, I think it shows that people have an interest and concern about conservation and preserving areas and are willing to pay for that.  Although I believe the passage of this amendment also had to do with the tradition in the state of using the outdoors for recreation and hunting. I also worry about people becoming complacent by thinking that this legislation will take care of all the state’s environmental needs. ?

Be the first to comment on this page. Post a Comment