Authors
Daniel, K. S., Inyang, E. B., Gideon, I. K.
Abstract
This study estimated the sensitivity index of the early-stage undergraduate students of Agriculture, to ascertain their variations in sensitivity to urban forestry (SUF) based on socio-economic and academic background characteristics. Using Expo-facto design and purposive sampling procedure, 209 students that offered FOR 211 – Principles of Forestry, were studied. A 4-point Likert structured questionnaire was used to collect a multi-item data on perceived value, environmental consciousness and levels of patronage. Cronbach values (≥ 0.714 ≤ 0.823) were obtained for measured variables. Composite index (CI), T–test and analysis of variance (ANOVA), were employed to spring the proportional levels of a measurable attribute of the environmental sensitivity index. Index level of SUF showed four categories: virtually insensitive (1%), low (4.8%), high (30.1%) and excellent (64.1%). Female students had greater sensitivity mean index (0.7926) than male (0.7796). On academic background, post-remedial students exhibited more sensitivity (0.7917) than others. There existed no significant differences in the students’ SUF based on gender, residency, age, department of study and mode of admission. Study concluded that students were more robust in their SUF on exposure to FOR 211. It recommended introduction of environment-based course as one of the obligatory courses across all faculties in the University.
Keywords
Sensitivity, Urban Forestry, Principles, Forestry, Early-stage undergraduate
Introduction
Sensitivity defines the ability to perceive and process information about one's environment. It is comprised of two main parts: the first is the ability to perceive sensory input from the environment, such as taste, smell, sound, and touch; the second is the cognitive processing of the perceived information about the environment, such as reflecting on and thinking deeply about experiences (Lionetti et al., 2018).It focuses on the change in model output values that come from changes in model input values (Sattelliet al., 2008). Although everyone is sensitive to an extent, it is often observed that some people are more sensitive than others due to the influence of their physical environment, knowledge acquired, social relationships, work conditions and upbringing (Lionetti et al., 2018).
Content
According to Pluess et al. (2017), for example, unfavourable early experiences may play a role in the development of increased sensitivity in adolescence and adulthood, especially in individuals with a higher genetic susceptibility to sensitivity. This infers in part that differences in sensitivity are genetic but also is shaped by the type and quality of our upbringing and environment. This corroborates Belsky and Pluess (2009) position that people’s environment and experiences across their lives can equally shape their environmental sensitivity. Pluess (2015) had posited that individuals may not only be more sensitive to the negative effects of unfavorable experiences, but also more sensitive to the beneficial effects of positive environmental exposures. The phrase "environmental sensitivity" incorporates other concepts like Highly Sensitive Person (HSP), orchids and dandelions, and differential susceptibility (Belsky and Pluess, 2009, Lionetti et al., 2018). The highly delicate population has been labelled "Orchids" because, although they need the best care possible, they are especially lovely when they flourish. People in the low sensitivity group have been likened to "Dandelions," which are resilient and can sprout in any place. Since they are not as strong as dandelions but less delicate than orchids, the midway category has been referred to as "tulips" (Lionetti et al., 2018). Individuals who belong to the low sensitivity category exhibit environmental sensitivity, albeit to a lesser extent than those in the other groups. Pluess et al (2017) has shown that individuals typically fall into three different categories on sensitivity spectrum with 30% classed as low, 40% as medium and 30% as high in sensitivity. This also means that most people are relatively sensitive given that the medium and highly sensitive groups together account for 70% of the population. According to Sensitivityresearch.com (2020), sensitive persons have heightened perception, inclined to have a particularly well-developed understanding of relationships, more aware of subtleties in their environment and therefore perceive details more easily, process information more deeply and may get more easily overwhelmed in highly stimulating or chaotic environments.
Conclusion
The students were more robust in their sensitivity to urban forestry by reason of their exposure to Principles of Forestry (FOR 211) judging from the over 90% of the students that fell into the two composite index categories that depicts level of sensitivity to urban forestry found by the composite index outcome as sensitively forward. This leaves no doubt that individuals become more sensitive to beneficial effect of positive environmental exposures. The outcome variations and non-significance in the socioeconomic and academic background characteristic verifies that sensitivity is influenced by a variety of factors. Given the role of urban forestry practices in mitigating the climate change challenges the world is facing, the study therefore recommends introduction of urban forestry and other environment-based courses to education curriculum developers, in order to expose young undergraduates across all the Faculties in the University system to climate change mitigation programs and raise graduates who are environmentally sensitive.
References
Akpan-Ebe, I. N., Okon, K. E. and Ihemadu, E. C. (2013). Environmental Forestry Practices in the Urban Renewal of Uyo Metropolis, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. In: Popoola, L., Ogunsanwo, O. Y., Adekunle, V. A. J., Azeez, I, O. and Adewole, N. O. (eds.) The Green Economy: Balancing Environmental Sustainability and Livelihood in an Emerging Economy. Proceedings of the 36thAnnual Conference of the Forestry Association of Nigeria held in Uyo, Akwa Ibom State, Nigeria. November 4 – 9. Vol. 1:454 - 463 Akwa Ibom State Ministry of Economic Development (AKMoED) (2014). Statistical Year Book (8th Edition). A publication of the Directorate of Statistics, Ministry of Economic Development, Akwa Ibom State. Babalola, F. D. and Raji, I. A. (2016). Perception of Urban Trees at Main Campus of University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Kwara State, Nigeria. Applied Tropical Agriculture 21(1), 60-67. Badiu, D. L., Iojă, C. I., Pătroescu, M., Breuste, J., Artmann, M., Niță, M. R., and Onose, D. A. (2016). Is Urban Green Space Per Capita a Valuable Target to Achieve Cities’ Sustainability Goals? Romania as a Case Study. Ecological Indicators. 70: 53-66. Belsky, J. and Pluess, M. (2009). Beyond Diathesis Stress: Differential Susceptibility to Environmental Influences. Psychol. Bull. 135, 885–908. Bertram, C. and Rehdanz, K. (2015). The Role of Urban Green Space for Human WellBeing. Ecological Economics, 120, 139-152. Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is Coefficient Alpha? An Examination of Theory and Applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98. Daniel, K. S. (2022). Evaluation of Factors Influencing Utilization of Urban Green Parks in Uyo Capital City, Akwa Ibom State. Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis submitted to the Department of Forestry and Wildlife, University of Uyo. 180pages