Comment On Eaton Et Al.'S Reconceptualization Of Economic Dependence In "Trouble With Sense Of Place In Working Landscapes"

This commentary expands upon Eaton et al.'s research note about the challenges of measuring sense of place (SOP). Our body of work includes qualitative and quantitative research that supports their finding that landowners have a strong SOP and conservation ethic about their working lands. However, we deliberate on the importance of considering a broader interpretation of "economic dependence" in the context of SOP, which may include financial and non-financial benefits to the landowner. Eaton et al. report mixed results in its predictive power for conservation decisions on working lands. Yet, several issues negatively impacting economic dependence may override conservation management decisions and explain the "mixed" results reported by the authors. We posit that the definition of economic dependence should include both income and wealth generation as well as landowner amenity rents (defined as the landowner's internally derived benefits or satisfaction from the amenities on their working lands).