Search

This paper analyzes the end uses—food, feed, fiber, fuel, and exports—of biomass production in the U.S. in 1997, 2002, 2007, and 2012. They are also analyzed at the state level in 2012. Biomass production is measured as human appropriation of net primary production (HANPP), an ecological footprint measured as carbon fixed through photosynthesis, derived from data on crop, timber and grazing yields. HANPP was allocated to end uses using publicly available sources from the U.S. Department of Agriculture and internet-based sources publishing data on agricultural trade. HANPP was 717–834 megatons (MT) of carbon per year, which comprised 515–615 MT of crop-based, 105–149 MT timber-based, and 64–76 MT of grazed HANPP. Livestock feed commanded the largest proportion, but decreased from 395 (50%) to 305 MT (42%) of all HANPP and 320 to 240 MT (58–44%) of crop-based HANPP. The proportion allocated to exports was stable at 118–141 MT (17–18%) of total HANPP and 112–133 MT (21–23%) of crop-based HANPP. Biofiber decreased from 141 MT (18%) to 97 MT (13%) of all HANPP. Biofuel increased strongly from 11 MT to 98 MT, from 1% to 14% of all HANPP and 2% to 18% of crop-based HANPP, surpassing food and biofiber by 2012. Direct food commanded 89–105 MT, the lowest proportion at 12–13% of all HANPP, and 17–18% of crop-based HANPP. The highly fertile Midwest and the drought-prone Intermountain West stand out as regions where a very small percentage of biomass is allocated to direct human food. The high proportions of biomass production allocated to nonfood uses is consistent with the tragedy of ecosystem services and commodification of nature frameworks. Reducing these proportions presents opportunities for improving ecosystem services, food security, and human well-being.

These data are part of the dissertation research of Michael D. Briscoe. This research analyzed the association between modernization and farmer alienation from their work and their cows, as well as their overall life satisfaction. The results show that modernization has mixed effects on farmer alienation. This statistical finding was supported by interviews with farmers, who expressed that large farms can make it hard to maintain a relationship with their cows, but that technology actually replaces negative aspects of this relationship and allows for new forms of interaction.

Daily life in the United States and Utah has changed considerably since the global outbreak of the COVID-19 novel coronavirus. On March 6th, 2020, Gary R. Herbert, Governor of the State of Utah, declared a “State of Emergency” in response to pandemic. On March 27th the Governor then issued the “Stay Safe, Stay Home” Directive, which was much less strict than the shelter in place orders seen in other states as it simply urged residents to leave home infrequently, stay 6 feet away from others outside the home, and banned private gatherings larger than 20. At the end of April, the Utah COVID-19 Public Health Risk Status was moved from Red (High Risk) to Orange (Moderate Risk), meaning the Governor’s recent directive was no longer in place as of May 1st.

Burns and Caniglia’s book is an excellent new addition to the growing catalog of resources for teaching environmental sociology and related disciplines to both undergraduate and graduate students. Developing from the authors’ own experience teaching such classes, this book highlights how environmental sociology is uniquely positioned to improve our ability to understand and address our “wicked” (p. 15) environmental problems. By providing an accessible introduction to the origins of sociology and the sociological perspective, this book will be useful for students familiar with sociology and especially useful for those coming to the class with an interest in the environment but less familiarity with the sociological approach.

The study of environmental values is focused on explaining environmentalism with either the postmaterialist values hypothesis or the objective problems subjective values hypothesis. The first explains environmentalism as the result of affluence, mainly in the Global North, and the second focuses on exposure to degradation, mainly in the Global South. In this study I engage theories of ecological modernization, ecologically unequal exchange, and treadmill of production to examine the effects of national levels of affluence, economic growth, and degradation on the likelihood that individuals in different nations will consider environmental protection highly important. Results of multilevel analysis indicate that high levels of national affluence are associated with less individual environmentalism, contrary to affluence and ecological modernization theories. I also find that higher rates of economic growth are associated with higher levels of environmentalism, although as ecologically unequal exchange and treadmill of production theories suggest, this may have less to do with improving economic circumstances and more to do with the degradation that accompanies development.