This indicator measures the number of conservation easements and number of acres protected under conservation easement. It shows the presence and trend of open space or other undeveloped or minimally developed land areas. It is an amenity availability measure and speaks to the desirability, adaptability, and resilience of communities, and to the community perception of the importance and value of that land use or asset.

This indicator describes the level of satisfaction a community or county has with socioeconomic infrastructures, employment opportunities, and social support networks. Places with low satisfaction risk significant out-migration and having low capacity for adapting to opportunities and threats. The indicator measures how the local community feels about sustaining local resources and the potential of that community to take action toward sustainability.

This indicator addresses economic distribution and speaks to social equity. It indicates the general welfare of the community by looking at the distribution of people across a range of incomes and measuring the income disparity in the community. It is a direct measure of economic and social stratification that complements poverty statistics. Lower levels of income inequality are associated with higher cohesion or integration of the community, leading to a more stable and resilient community.

The quality of social structure might include such things as access to and quality of medical care (e.g., per-capita hospital beds, numbers of physicians and nurses), the presence and extent of cultural and community services, the extent and availability of public recreational facilities (expenditures per capita on parks, etc.), and crime rates, among other things. An alternative to the Index of Social Structure Quality discussed above might be a measure of community resilience. A resilient community actively develops and utilizes all of its capitals, includes all segments of the community in community endeavors, engages groups to work together, works strategically toward development of the community, and works to ensure equity across community members.

This indicator describes governmental agencies, educational institutions, and other for-profit and not-for-profit organizations that exist to promote the conservation and sustainable management of rangelands. This indicator is extremely broad in scope. In the United States, the list of institutions and organizations with an interest in rangelands and rangeland stewardship is exceedingly long. Included in this list are federal, state, and local governmental agencies (broadly defined), as well as educational institutions and non-governmental organizations (NGOs).

This indicator describes the extent to which laws, regulations, and guidelines clarify property rights and land tenure arrangements on rangelands. It also evaluates how these laws recognize customary and traditional rights of indigenous people on rangelands, and whether these laws provide means of resolving property disputes by due process. The “police power” of the government to regulate private property is exercised in a manner consistent with the Constitution and applicable laws. Environmental and zoning regulations are two examples of police powers that limit the rights of landowners. Property owners also are not able to utilize property in a manner that endangers or damages the lives or property of others. As society’s values and norms slowly change over time, the balance of government power and private property rights is repeatedly subject to changing legal interpretation.

This indicator measures individuals’ longevity of residence in a particular community and relates to social cohesion and integration, as well as a willingness to interact with others for a common good. It is also a measure of community stability. A large proportion of new residents could point toward social dysfunction or low community cohesion that might have implications for rangeland sustainability.

This is a measure of the quantity of recreation use on rangelands and where it occurs. It has relevance to sustainability as a measure of benefits derived from recreation on rangelands and intensity of use. Different types of recreation affect land differently in relation to rangeland health and sustainability. Classifying recreational land as primitive areas, roadless areas, open public lands, private lands, or other types provides a basis to compare the intensities of recreation use across rangelands and how use changes through time.

Population pyramids are commonly used to describe a population’s basic structure. They require data on gender and age. Data are organized into 5-year age cohorts; male and female. Each population pyramid provides a snapshot of the distribution of age groups and gender. This measure provides evidence of community sustainability by indicating key characteristics of social organization as they relate to providing social and economic services within a community. A population pyramid that varies little from the youngest to the oldest cohorts is considered to be sustainable.

This indicator measures the proportion of children (age 17 or younger) who live in households determined to be at or below the poverty threshold. Children in poverty can be a more specific indicator of community resilience because it may portend future capacity. Communities with high rates of poverty appear to have a legacy of poverty over time.