Effect and difference between the threatened and endemic status on the general public support towards wildlife species in a biodiversity hotspot

Abstract

General public inclusion in nature conservation is crucial to accomplish wildlife species recovery. Mammal and bird species usually receive most of the research and general public attention, leaving aside other taxa species. It is necessary to obtain general public support towards other taxa species by emphasizing ecological attributes. Here we test if the disclosure of the threatened and endemic status of amphibians, fish, and invertebrates, could increase general public support. Additionally, we wanted to identify if the threatened and endemic status could implicate a difference in support. Interviews (N: 359) were conducted among the general public in Valdivia, Chile, to elicit the support, allocation of a fictional fixed amount of conservation funds (WTS), towards native wildlife species. The species were two mammals, and four bird species, none threatened nor endemic, and two amphibians, one fish, and three invertebrates, all threatened and endemic. The WTS was derived on two occasions for each participant. Firstly presenting colorful pictures with the name of the species and, secondly, adding the threatened and endemic status in two separate treatments. Results indicated mammal and bird species with significantly higher WTS when pictures and names were provided. The main driver was a misperception of the threatened status of these species. When the threatened and endemic status was disclosed, the WTS significantly shift towards the amphibians, fish, and invertebrates. No difference in the WTS was spotted between the threatened or endemic status. As our results indicate participants associate charismatic species (mammal and birds) with threatened status. We encourage nature conservation entities to promote a broader spectrum of wildlife species by emphasizing conservation needs.

Contrasting two methods, attitudinal and monetary, to assess support changes toward wildlife species by urban dwellers

“…The control group was also statistically significantly different. Still, based on the positive and negative ties (Table 3, taxonomic group table), these differences were less than the threatened or endemic treatment (for statistically significant results, please refer to Espinosa-Molina et al, 2021). Few studies have assessed the general public's effect of information disclosure toward wildlife species, even less comparing different methods to elicit support.…”

“…The research presented here is part of a broader investigation. Other investigation results have already been published (Espinosa-Molina et al, 2021). References to this preceding publication will be given whenever appropriate.…”

“…The support toward wildlife species by the general public can change due to multiple factors. For example, providing additional knowledge of the wildlife species, as ecological traits, can increase the support (Arbieu et al, 2019; Espinosa‐Molina et al, 2021). Conversely, HWC mass media coverage, casual encounters, and wildlife species impacting livestock are factors that could decrease the support (Arbieu et al, 2019; Ballejo et al, 2021; Houston et al, 2010; Majić et al, 2011; Treves et al, 2013).…”

“…For example, in the contingent valuation methods, the participants are required to indicate how much they would be willing to pay (WTP) or willing to accept to protect a specific wildlife population in an area and time (Martín-Lopez et al, 2008;Richardson & Loomis, 2009;Sorg & Loomis, 1985). Alternatively, some authors have used the "Allocation of a fixed amount of money" or money allocation (MA) to value several wildlife species through one question (Figure 1, dotted method A) (DeKay & McClelland, 1996;Espinosa-Molina et al, 2021;Gunnthorsdottir, 2001;Meuser et al, 2009;Samples et al, 1986;Tisdell & Wilson, 2004, 2006. In this method, the participants are asked to allocate, for example, USD 1000, to a specific number of wildlife species.…”