Development and validation of scales measuring natural resources and local development perceptions in the Danube Delta, a climate-vulnerable ecosystem

Background: The Danube Delta, a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve and one of Europe's most important wetland ecosystems, faces increasing environmental pressures from climate change, including altered hydrological regimes, flooding patterns, and ecosystem degradation. Effective climate adaptation and nature-based solutions in such regions require not only hazard modeling but also robust tools for assessing how local communities perceive their environment and the governance structures meant to protect it. Understanding these perceptions helps designing risk communication strategies and fostering behavioral preparedness.

Methods: This study presents the development and psychometric validation of two scales measuring (1) perceptions of natural resources and (2) perceptions of local development and quality of life among Danube Delta inhabitants. A cross-sectional survey was conducted with 503 residents (76.3% female; M age = 24.8 years). Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses were employed to establish the factorial structure and validity of both instruments.

Results: Descriptive findings revealed that residents perceive estate-level government engagement in ecosystem conservation as notably low (M = 46/100), significantly lower than local government engagement—a finding with direct implications for implementing top-down nature-based adaptation strategies. The Natural Resources Perception Scale yielded a 6-item, two-factor structure with excellent fit indices (CFI = .97, TLI = .96, RMSEA = .08): Factor 1 captures environmental quality (air, water, soil), while Factor 2 captures biodiversity (fish, birds, animals). The Local Development and Quality of Life Scale retained 12 items across two factors (CFI = .95, TLI = .94, RMSEA = .07): Factor 1 addresses tourism and infrastructure development, while Factor 2 encompasses governance engagement, ecosystem conservation mechanisms, and inhabitants' quality of life. Both scales demonstrated good internal consistency (α = .83 and α = .92, respectively).

Conclusion: These instruments offer researchers and practitioners standardized tools for assessing community perceptions in climate-vulnerable regions. Such assessments can inform the design of locally-relevant risk communication and identify gaps in perceived governance effectiveness. Future applications may include longitudinal tracking of perception changes following climate events or conservation interventions.