The survey of more than 1,000 residents showed that while most respondents considered cropping, dairying and rural residential development to be positive for the region, views on plantations were more diverse and more likely to be negative.

Dr Kathryn Williams, senior lecturer from the University of Melbourne and lead researcher on the project, says the report helps explain the sharp contrast in views on plantations and other land uses.

"Compared with other land uses, more people overall thought that increased blue gum plantations led to population loss, fewer jobs, lower levels of community involvement, more road damage and wildfire risk," she says.

The report also shows a trend that may be surprising to government and industry - that most participants consider the overall impact of rural residential development to be positive.

Dr Williams says the study found that people's perceptions about the social benefits of land uses are a key factor influencing their overall beliefs about each land use.

"While many respondents expressed concern about the impacts of increased rural residential development on water availability and road conditions, most also saw benefits for the rural population, employment and business - this may be why they believe rural residential development was positive overall for the region."

Dr Williams says the diversity of views on all land uses, but especially plantations, is striking.

"People expressed wide-ranging views on the social impacts of all land uses, which is not surprising since there is very little independent information about what these impacts actually might be.," she says

Glenelg Shire Councillor and Project Chair Karen Stephens says the findings provide a more representative picture of community views than those which have been available in the past.

"Having a better understanding about why residents hold these views will help with government and industry policy and communication."