{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015366430260047281, 'fraction_numerical': 0.004728132387706856, 'mean_word_length': 5.6171875, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Growth Management Concern

This article extends research reported by Van Liere and Dunlap (1981) by analyzing the degree to which support for controlling local population growth is affected by how growth controls are defined. Specifically, growth management concern is distinguished by general and specific definitions, with the latter including support for specific growth policies and support for growth controls in the face of explicit costs. The article examines how these definitions of growth management concern relate to each other, to a measure of support for environmental protection, and to various respondent characteristics, including social status and political ideology. Results show that how growth management is measured does make a difference, in some cases, when individual responses are classified by social status or ideology.