Evaluating the benefits and risks of social media for wildlife conservation

Abstract

Given its extensive volume and reach, social media has the potential to widely spread conservation messaging and be a powerful tool to mobilize social change for conserving biodiversity. We synthesized gray and primary academic literature to investigate the effects of social media on wildlife conservation, revealing several overarching benefits and risks. We found that social media can increase pro-conservation behaviours among the public, increase conservation funding, and incite policy changes. Conversely, social media can contribute to species exploitation and illegal trade, cause unprecedented increases in tourism in protected areas, and perpetuate anti-conservation behaviours via misinformation. In most cases, we found that content sharing on social media did not result in a detectable impact on conservation; in this paper, however, we focus on providing examples where conservation impact was achieved. We relate these positive and negative outcomes of social media to psychological phenomena that may influence conservation efforts and discuss limitations of our findings. We conclude with recommendations of best practices to social media administrators, public social media users, nongovernmental organizations, and governing agencies to minimize conservation risks while maximizing beneficial outcomes. By improving messaging, policing online misconduct, and providing guidance for action, social media can help achieve wildlife conservation goals.

Examining attention given to threats to elephant conservation on social media

“…Similarly social media companies can facilitate the dissemination of this information through the use of auto-generated messages. For example, Instagram provides auto-generated messages to educate users on the negative impacts of selfies with wild animals (Bergman et al, 2022). Similar auto-generated messages could be provided to remind the public of the realities of coexisting with elephants and the impact of dehumanizing narratives around poaching.…”

“…Although much of this article focused on the challenges associated with social media for elephant conservation, social media can be instrumental in generating support for conservation initiatives (Bergman et al, 2022). Our data highlighted that a large number of social media users are motivated and willing to advocate for the protection of elephants; however, suitably harnessing this potential requires shifting the focus on social media towards the major threats to elephant conservation.…”

“…An analysis of news content on social media found that exposure to even one fake news post increases perceptions of the truthfulness of subsequent misleading posts (Pennycook et al, 2018). This is concerning given the growing concerns around the negative impacts of misinformation in conservation (Bergman et al, 2022; Ford et al, 2021; Hart et al, 2020). If there are repeated false claims on social media about the most pressing threats to a species, this may severely impact conservation efforts.…”

‘A human values issue’: Actors, arguments, and regulatory change in the Florida land‐based shark fishery

“…There was no consensus in this discourse on whether the increased visibility of land‐based fishing practices on social media was positive or negative for sharks or shark fishing, but commenters acknowledged that the practice of land‐based shark fishing was no longer confined to the beaches and piers of Florida, but was being promoted, evaluated, appreciated, or condemned in a completely new arena (see also Shiffman et al, 2017). Social media is increasingly cited as playing important roles in wildlife interactions, management, regulation, and communication (Bergman et al, 2022). It is difficult to imagine the present case study occurring in a world without social media, where contextless images were repeatedly cited as magnifying existing conflicts, leading managers to feel that they needed to take action on a ‘values’ rather than a ‘resource’ issue.…”

“…Recreational fishing exists as a multifaceted practice in a complex and ever‐changing socio‐cultural environment, with overlapping and sometimes competing normative foundations and goals (Granek et al, 2008). The changing means of sharing and consuming information online is one important shift, as social media platforms have dramatically altered communication methods around conservation, how managers, conservationists, and scientists interact with the public, and how the public views environmental issues (Anderson‐Wilk, 2009; Shakeela & Becken, 2015; Shiffman, 2018b; Bergman et al, 2022). The effects of this shift have been both positive (e.g.…”