Conservation and human behaviour: Lessons from social psychology (original) (raw)
Related papers
This chapter reports on and analyses experimental evidence on the stated willingness of individuals to allocate funds for the conservation of individual wildlife species as a function of their likeability and their endangerment. Particular attention is given to the comparative importance of the independent variables: likeability and level of endangerment. Consideration is given to how information provision alters the relative importance of the likeability of wildlife species as an influence on individuals' stated WTP for their conservation. Furthermore, it investigates how knowledge about their endangerment alters the proposed amounts individuals are willing to allocate for the conservation of the focal wildlife species. This chapter demonstrates that when people are better informed, decision-making in allocating resources for conserving wildlife is geared more towards minimizing the loss of biological resources (subject to a budget constraint) than to supporting the conservation of the more-liked species. Therefore, minimizing biodiversity loss can be a rational objective (see, for example, Newburn et al., 2005, p. 1413). This chapter is developed by first outlining the experimental procedures adopted. Then the results are reported, discussed and analysed before concluding.
Conflicting social norms and community conservation compliance
Journal for Nature Conservation, 2014
Though the success of conservation initiatives relies on changing behaviour, little social psychological research has examined factors such as attitudes and social norms in the context of actual conservation campaigns. In the context of reducing light pollution around sea turtle nesting habitats, researching technological solutions has clear merit. Problems such as light glow are, however, fundamentally about human behaviour, and so finding ways to effect behavioural change is critical. Social norms, or perceptions about what other people think and do, have been widely used in behaviour change campaigns across various domains, including campaigns to promote conservation behaviour. Here, we investigate how the norms of different groups may influence our behaviour in the context of a campaign to alter behavioural norms about light glow pollution in a community. We examine attitudes, social norms, and the degree of conflict (versus congruence) between the behaviours of different groups, and their relationship with intentions to engage in conservation behaviours relevant to sea turtle conservation. We show that attitudes and norms are related to behavioural intentions, and conflicts between social norms influence intentions, over and above the norms themselves. This highlights an important consideration for conservation campaigns utilising social norms-based behaviour change appeals.
The non-economic motives behind the willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation
Biological Conservation, 2007
We explored the relationships among human attitudes towards biodiversity, its economic value and the public awareness for biodiversity conservation. Behavioural items and specific human attitudes to species were studied in the framework of a contingent valuation survey conducted in the Doñana National and Natural Park (SW Spain). Our analyses revealed a strong correlation between individuals’ attitudes towards particular species and their stated willingness to allocate funds for their conservation. Factors influencing individuals’ attitudes and willingness to pay are suggested. Overall, we found that the role of affective factors is much greater than the role of ecological-scientific considerations. Familiarity and biophilia factors had a marked effect on the attitude towards paying for biodiversity conservation. Since contingent valuation does not reveal the economic benefits of conserving certain key species; we propose that it should be combined with other non-monetary criteria derived from social-psychology and human ecology disciplines.
Community behaviours towards nature conservation: A theoretical analysis for practical approaches
Changing human behaviour and preserving natural resources are ones among the greatest challenges to the perspective of sustainable development for the world today. Human existence is inevitably engaged with the utilisation and consumption of natural resources for their survival and reproduction. However, under the pressure of population growth and poverty, these resources have been over-exploited at a high rate. The way humans behave through their livelihoods exceeds the carrying-capacity of the ecosystem, and that ecosystem will die , and could directly lead to a human crisis .
Human preferences for species conservation: Animal charisma trumps endangered status
A good deal of research has recently focused on people's commitment to biodiversity conservation by investigating their " willingness-to-pay " (WTP). Because of the public's self-reported preferences for species that are more charismatic or similar to humans, conservation programs are often biased toward these species. Our study aimed to explore the determinants of WTP among 10066 participants in a zoo conservation program. The program aims to raise money to support conservation programs and involves donating a sum of money to " adopt " an animal in the zoo. We explored whether participants were influenced by particular scientific characteristics of the animal (IUCN conservation status and phylogenetic distance from humans) or by more affect-related characteristics, such as the charisma of the animal. We found that participants did not choose an animal to adopt because of the endangered status of the species, and did not donate more to endangered species than to other species. Instead , they were more likely to choose a charismatic species. However, surprisingly, those who chose a less char-ismatic species gave more money on average to the program than those who adopted more charismatic species, suggesting a higher level of commitment among the former. These results therefore suggest that this type of conservation program may not be an effective way of reconnecting people with conservation issues related to endangered species. We therefore advise zoos to communicate more strongly on the level of threat to species and to increase the ratio of endangered over charismatic species in their animal adoption programs.
Advancing Conservation by Understanding and Influencing Human Behavior
Behavioral sciences can advance conservation by systematically identifying be-havioral barriers to conservation and how to best overcome them. Behav-ioral sciences have informed policy in many other realms (e.g., health, savings), but they are a largely untapped resource for conservation. We propose a set of guiding questions for applying behavioral insights to conservation policy. These questions help define the conservation problem as a behavior change problem, understand behavioral mechanisms and identify appropriate approaches for behavior change (awareness, incentives, nudges), and evaluate and adapt approaches based on new behavioral insights. We provide a foundation for the questions by synthesizing a wide range of behavior change models and evidence related to littering, water and energy conservation, and land management. We also discuss the methodology and data needed to answer these questions. We illustrate how these questions have been answered in practice to inform efforts to promote conservation for climate risk reduction. Although more comprehensive research programs to answer these questions are needed, some insights are emerging. Integrating two or more behavior change approaches that target multiple, context-dependent factors may be most successful; however, caution must be taken to avoid approaches that could undermine one another (e.g., economic incentives crowding out intrinsic incentives).
LINKING POLICIES FOR BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION WITH ADVANCES IN BEHAVIORAL ECONOMICS
Global biodiversity loss and its consequences for human welfare and sustainable development have become major concerns. Economists have, therefore, given increasing attention to the policy issues involved in the management of genetic resources. To do so, they often apply empirical methods developed in behavioral and experimental economics to estimate economic values placed on genetic resources. This trend away from almost exclusive dependence on axiomatic methods is welcomed. However, major valuation methods used in behavioral economics raise new scientific challenges. Possibly the most important of these include deficiencies in the knowledge of the public (and researchers) about genetic resources, implications for the formation of values of supplying information to focal individuals, and limits to rationality. These issues are explored for stated-preference techniques of valuation (e.g., contingent valuation) as well as revealed preference techniques, especially the travel cost method. They are illustrated by Australian and Asian examples. Taking into account behavioral and psychological models and empirical evidence, particular attention is given to how elicitation of preferences, and supply of information to individuals, influences their preferences about biodiversity. Policy consequences are outlined.
Environmental Conservation, 2016
Despite increasing support for conservation efforts, humans exert strong negative forces on nature and disagree over the management of these effects. Conflicts over conservation policy may reflect evolving opinions about how people ought to conserve species and whether to intervene in various processes. To understand public preferences for conservation in the USA, we measured support for various strategies in five case studies, where we pitted one species against another in simplified but realistic scenarios. Among our online convenience sample of 1040 participants, we found the majority of participants favoured habitat protection in all but one case, and there was little acceptance of lethal control across all cases. The results reveal that habitat protection preferences positively relate to considerations of moral principles and ecosystems and negatively relate to economic and practical considerations. Older, conservative and male participants were less likely to support habitat protection and more likely to support no action. The results suggest broad support for holistic nature conservation that benefits both people and nature and highlight areas where current wildlife management may not align with public preferences. Controversy may continue until wildlife management policies are consistent with societal values and address moral and ecosystem considerations at multiple levels.