What Do People Think about Wilderness and Antarctic Wilderness?
Faculty Mentor
Dr. John Peden
Location
Russell Union Room 2054
Type of Research
Completed
Session Format
Oral Presentation
College
College of Behavioral & Social Sciences
Department
School of Human Ecology
Abstract
Consultative parties to the Antarctic Treaty have agreed to set Antarctica aside for peace, science, and environmental protection. However, they have yet to take concrete actions to protect Antarctica’s wilderness values as agreed under the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. Neither the Treaty nor the Protocol define wilderness or dictate management. Research on human dimensions of Antarctica is limited, with existing studies focusing on subjective perspectives of individuals from countries represented by the consultative parties. This study sought to determine how people from around the world define wilderness, what wilderness means in a place like Antarctica, and what should be allowed there. Content analysis was used to analyze findings from two previously published papers that reported on open-ended responses about the nature of wilderness and Antarctic wilderness. A list of a priori codes was used to analyze responses (e.g. beauty, uninhabited). When analyzing text, additional codes such as awe and bequest were added. Textual information was grouped according to the coding scheme and themes were extracted from the data. Wilderness was perceived as a large, uninhabited, pristine area with minimal human impact necessary for education, science, and ecosystem services. Antarctic wilderness was conceptualized similarly, with emphasis on existence value. Some felt it had no wilderness value due to its desolate nature. Antarctica was important for non-extractive purposes and was to be protected by limiting human activity. Findings were consistent with objectives of the Treaty and the Protocol and can be used to inform a definition of Antarctic Wilderness.
Program Description
.
Start Date
4-23-2026 3:15 PM
End Date
4-23-2026 3:30 PM
Recommended Citation
Mayes, Annabelle G., "What Do People Think about Wilderness and Antarctic Wilderness?" (2026). GS4 Student Scholars Symposium. 252.
https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/research_symposium/2026/2026/252
What Do People Think about Wilderness and Antarctic Wilderness?
Russell Union Room 2054
Consultative parties to the Antarctic Treaty have agreed to set Antarctica aside for peace, science, and environmental protection. However, they have yet to take concrete actions to protect Antarctica’s wilderness values as agreed under the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty. Neither the Treaty nor the Protocol define wilderness or dictate management. Research on human dimensions of Antarctica is limited, with existing studies focusing on subjective perspectives of individuals from countries represented by the consultative parties. This study sought to determine how people from around the world define wilderness, what wilderness means in a place like Antarctica, and what should be allowed there. Content analysis was used to analyze findings from two previously published papers that reported on open-ended responses about the nature of wilderness and Antarctic wilderness. A list of a priori codes was used to analyze responses (e.g. beauty, uninhabited). When analyzing text, additional codes such as awe and bequest were added. Textual information was grouped according to the coding scheme and themes were extracted from the data. Wilderness was perceived as a large, uninhabited, pristine area with minimal human impact necessary for education, science, and ecosystem services. Antarctic wilderness was conceptualized similarly, with emphasis on existence value. Some felt it had no wilderness value due to its desolate nature. Antarctica was important for non-extractive purposes and was to be protected by limiting human activity. Findings were consistent with objectives of the Treaty and the Protocol and can be used to inform a definition of Antarctic Wilderness.
