The landscape of North American Rangeland Social Science: A Systematic Map

Abstract

Rangeland scientists have made substantial progress in understanding ecological dynamics of rangelands, but the social factors have received less attention in North America. A body of North American rangeland social science has developed over the past 4 decades, with the number of studies increasing each decade. However, these works have not been systematically reviewed to assess the state of rangeland social science in North America or to identify research gaps. We developed a systematic map to characterize this literature by 1) the research objectives and questions; 2) who was studied; 3) where research was conducted; 4) which theories, methodologies, and methods were applied; and 5) how these research characteristics have changed from 1970 to 2017. We found that most (81%) North American rangeland social science has studied ranchers, farmers, and/or landowners, with limited consideration of other stakeholders (e.g., ranch workers, youth). Although age (43% of the studies) and education (40%) are often considered, other attributes/identities, such as gender (28%) and race or ethnicity (18%), are less frequently included. The most commonly used research method is surveys (52%), and much of rangeland social science does not make explicit connections to either specific methodological or theoretical frameworks. The limited application of theories, methodologies, and a lack of diverse methods has potentially constrained who and what have been studied in North America. The limited consideration of gender and race in rangeland social science is echoed in the limited number of studies that have accounted for the effects of social identities and power relationships on people’s connection to and management of rangelands. This review highlights the need for more North American research that 1) is informed by social theory, 2) applies a diversity of methods, 3) considers a broader diversity of stakeholders, and 4) draws from multiple social science disciplinary traditions.