Cargando…

Environmental volunteer well-being: Managers’ perception and actual well-being of volunteers

Background: Environmental volunteering can increase well-being, but environmental volunteer well-being has rarely been compared to participant well-being associated with other types of volunteering or nature-based activities. This paper aims to use a multidimensional approach to well-being to explor...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kragh, Gitte, Stafford, Rick, Curtin, Susanna, Diaz, Anita
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: F1000Research 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5288684/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28184285
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.10016.1
_version_ 1782504374655778816
author Kragh, Gitte
Stafford, Rick
Curtin, Susanna
Diaz, Anita
author_facet Kragh, Gitte
Stafford, Rick
Curtin, Susanna
Diaz, Anita
author_sort Kragh, Gitte
collection PubMed
description Background: Environmental volunteering can increase well-being, but environmental volunteer well-being has rarely been compared to participant well-being associated with other types of volunteering or nature-based activities. This paper aims to use a multidimensional approach to well-being to explore the immediately experienced and later remembered well-being of environmental volunteers and to compare this to the increased well-being of participants in other types of nature-based activities and volunteering. Furthermore, it aims to compare volunteer managers’ perceptions of their volunteers’ well-being with the self-reported well-being of the volunteers. Methods: Onsite surveys were conducted of practical conservation and biodiversity monitoring volunteers, as well as their control groups (walkers and fieldwork students, respectively), to measure general well-being before their nature-based activity and activity-related well-being immediately after their activity. Online surveys of current, former and potential volunteers and volunteer managers measured remembered volunteering-related well-being and managers’ perceptions of their volunteers’ well-being. Data were analysed based on Seligman’s multidimensional PERMA (‘positive emotion’, ‘engagement’, ‘positive relationship’, ‘meaning’, ‘achievement’) model of well-being. Factor analysis recovered three of the five PERMA elements, ‘engagement’, ‘relationship’ and ‘meaning’, as well as ‘negative emotion’ and ‘health’ as factors. Results: Environmental volunteering significantly improved positive elements and significantly decreased negative elements of participants’ immediate well-being, and it did so more than walking or student fieldwork. Even remembering their volunteering up to six months later, volunteers rated their volunteering-related well-being higher than volunteers rated their well-being generally in life. However, volunteering was not found to have an effect on overall mean well-being generally in life. Volunteer managers did not perceive the significant increase in well-being that volunteers reported. Conclusions: This study showed how environmental volunteering immediately improved participants’ well-being, even more than other nature-based activities. It highlights the benefit of regarding well-being as a multidimensional construct to more systematically understand, support and enhance volunteer well-being.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5288684
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher F1000Research
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-52886842017-02-08 Environmental volunteer well-being: Managers’ perception and actual well-being of volunteers Kragh, Gitte Stafford, Rick Curtin, Susanna Diaz, Anita F1000Res Research Article Background: Environmental volunteering can increase well-being, but environmental volunteer well-being has rarely been compared to participant well-being associated with other types of volunteering or nature-based activities. This paper aims to use a multidimensional approach to well-being to explore the immediately experienced and later remembered well-being of environmental volunteers and to compare this to the increased well-being of participants in other types of nature-based activities and volunteering. Furthermore, it aims to compare volunteer managers’ perceptions of their volunteers’ well-being with the self-reported well-being of the volunteers. Methods: Onsite surveys were conducted of practical conservation and biodiversity monitoring volunteers, as well as their control groups (walkers and fieldwork students, respectively), to measure general well-being before their nature-based activity and activity-related well-being immediately after their activity. Online surveys of current, former and potential volunteers and volunteer managers measured remembered volunteering-related well-being and managers’ perceptions of their volunteers’ well-being. Data were analysed based on Seligman’s multidimensional PERMA (‘positive emotion’, ‘engagement’, ‘positive relationship’, ‘meaning’, ‘achievement’) model of well-being. Factor analysis recovered three of the five PERMA elements, ‘engagement’, ‘relationship’ and ‘meaning’, as well as ‘negative emotion’ and ‘health’ as factors. Results: Environmental volunteering significantly improved positive elements and significantly decreased negative elements of participants’ immediate well-being, and it did so more than walking or student fieldwork. Even remembering their volunteering up to six months later, volunteers rated their volunteering-related well-being higher than volunteers rated their well-being generally in life. However, volunteering was not found to have an effect on overall mean well-being generally in life. Volunteer managers did not perceive the significant increase in well-being that volunteers reported. Conclusions: This study showed how environmental volunteering immediately improved participants’ well-being, even more than other nature-based activities. It highlights the benefit of regarding well-being as a multidimensional construct to more systematically understand, support and enhance volunteer well-being. F1000Research 2016-11-16 /pmc/articles/PMC5288684/ /pubmed/28184285 http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.10016.1 Text en Copyright: © 2016 Kragh G et al. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licence, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Kragh, Gitte
Stafford, Rick
Curtin, Susanna
Diaz, Anita
Environmental volunteer well-being: Managers’ perception and actual well-being of volunteers
title Environmental volunteer well-being: Managers’ perception and actual well-being of volunteers
title_full Environmental volunteer well-being: Managers’ perception and actual well-being of volunteers
title_fullStr Environmental volunteer well-being: Managers’ perception and actual well-being of volunteers
title_full_unstemmed Environmental volunteer well-being: Managers’ perception and actual well-being of volunteers
title_short Environmental volunteer well-being: Managers’ perception and actual well-being of volunteers
title_sort environmental volunteer well-being: managers’ perception and actual well-being of volunteers
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5288684/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28184285
http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.10016.1
work_keys_str_mv AT kraghgitte environmentalvolunteerwellbeingmanagersperceptionandactualwellbeingofvolunteers
AT staffordrick environmentalvolunteerwellbeingmanagersperceptionandactualwellbeingofvolunteers
AT curtinsusanna environmentalvolunteerwellbeingmanagersperceptionandactualwellbeingofvolunteers
AT diazanita environmentalvolunteerwellbeingmanagersperceptionandactualwellbeingofvolunteers