Decision biases and environmental attitudes among conservation professionals

Abstract The importance of human behavior in biodiversity conservation is widely recognized, but there is little published evidence about how conservation professionals make decisions when conservation values are at stake. We take a behavioral economics approach, administering simplified decision pr...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Conservation Science and Practice
Main Authors: Filewod, Ben, Kant, Shashi, MacDonald, Heather, McKenney, Daniel
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2023
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/csp2.12921
id crwiley:10.1111/csp2.12921
record_format openpolar
spelling crwiley:10.1111/csp2.12921 2024-04-28T08:36:53+00:00 Decision biases and environmental attitudes among conservation professionals Filewod, Ben Kant, Shashi MacDonald, Heather McKenney, Daniel 2023 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/csp2.12921 en eng Wiley http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Conservation Science and Practice volume 5, issue 6 ISSN 2578-4854 2578-4854 Nature and Landscape Conservation Environmental Science (miscellaneous) Ecology Global and Planetary Change journal-article 2023 crwiley https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.12921 2024-04-08T06:57:04Z Abstract The importance of human behavior in biodiversity conservation is widely recognized, but there is little published evidence about how conservation professionals make decisions when conservation values are at stake. We take a behavioral economics approach, administering simplified decision problems (“choice experiments”), questions about choice‐relevant preferences and views (“elicitation questions”), and a psychometric scale (the New Ecological Paradigm scale) to a difficult‐to‐recruit sample ( n = 100) of Canadian professionals involved in managing Rangifer tarandus caribou (Woodland Caribou). Our choice experiments reveal the importance of several decision biases (risk aversion, commission bias, and a bias towards fairness) in this influential group of conservation stakeholders. We then examine in‐sample differences between categories of professional affiliation (e.g., resource industry, environmental nongovernmental organization, or federal/provincial government), finding significant variation in responses to one elicitation question (reference points) and in psychometric scores. We discuss the implications of our findings for choice in conservation practice and for multistakeholder conservation policy. Comparing our findings to prior work on choice under uncertainty in nonconservation contexts suggests a possible replication problem in applying behavioral science insights to conservation problems, pointing to the need for a systematic research program. Results from development testing with a convenience sample of university students are presented for comparison throughout the study. Article in Journal/Newspaper Rangifer tarandus Wiley Online Library Conservation Science and Practice 5 6
institution Open Polar
collection Wiley Online Library
op_collection_id crwiley
language English
topic Nature and Landscape Conservation
Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
Ecology
Global and Planetary Change
spellingShingle Nature and Landscape Conservation
Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
Ecology
Global and Planetary Change
Filewod, Ben
Kant, Shashi
MacDonald, Heather
McKenney, Daniel
Decision biases and environmental attitudes among conservation professionals
topic_facet Nature and Landscape Conservation
Environmental Science (miscellaneous)
Ecology
Global and Planetary Change
description Abstract The importance of human behavior in biodiversity conservation is widely recognized, but there is little published evidence about how conservation professionals make decisions when conservation values are at stake. We take a behavioral economics approach, administering simplified decision problems (“choice experiments”), questions about choice‐relevant preferences and views (“elicitation questions”), and a psychometric scale (the New Ecological Paradigm scale) to a difficult‐to‐recruit sample ( n = 100) of Canadian professionals involved in managing Rangifer tarandus caribou (Woodland Caribou). Our choice experiments reveal the importance of several decision biases (risk aversion, commission bias, and a bias towards fairness) in this influential group of conservation stakeholders. We then examine in‐sample differences between categories of professional affiliation (e.g., resource industry, environmental nongovernmental organization, or federal/provincial government), finding significant variation in responses to one elicitation question (reference points) and in psychometric scores. We discuss the implications of our findings for choice in conservation practice and for multistakeholder conservation policy. Comparing our findings to prior work on choice under uncertainty in nonconservation contexts suggests a possible replication problem in applying behavioral science insights to conservation problems, pointing to the need for a systematic research program. Results from development testing with a convenience sample of university students are presented for comparison throughout the study.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Filewod, Ben
Kant, Shashi
MacDonald, Heather
McKenney, Daniel
author_facet Filewod, Ben
Kant, Shashi
MacDonald, Heather
McKenney, Daniel
author_sort Filewod, Ben
title Decision biases and environmental attitudes among conservation professionals
title_short Decision biases and environmental attitudes among conservation professionals
title_full Decision biases and environmental attitudes among conservation professionals
title_fullStr Decision biases and environmental attitudes among conservation professionals
title_full_unstemmed Decision biases and environmental attitudes among conservation professionals
title_sort decision biases and environmental attitudes among conservation professionals
publisher Wiley
publishDate 2023
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/csp2.12921
genre Rangifer tarandus
genre_facet Rangifer tarandus
op_source Conservation Science and Practice
volume 5, issue 6
ISSN 2578-4854 2578-4854
op_rights http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.12921
container_title Conservation Science and Practice
container_volume 5
container_issue 6
_version_ 1797568467668303872