Human preferences for species conservation: Animal charisma trumps endangered status

Abstract

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 10 066 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 charismatic 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.

Subspecies description rates are higher in morphologically complex land snails

“…The larger, more colourful insects (e.g., butterflies) are more “popular” among taxonomists than the tiny, “unattractive” ones (e.g., most flies). The bias towards “charismatic” species is well known in conservational biology as well (Colléony, Clayton, Couvet, Saint Jalme, & Prévot, ; Monsarrat & Kerley, ). Whether subspecies are named in a group or not is largely influenced by the taxonomic history of a given large taxon, and the influence of single specialist can affect the taxonomic practice of later generations.…”

Guiding the prioritization of the most endangered and evolutionary distinct birds for new zoo conservation programs

“…Despite clear calls to increase the number of threatened species in ex situ collections (Colléony, Clayton, Couvet, Saint Jalme, & Prévota, ; Pritchard, Fa, Oldfield, & Harrop, ), many TAGs do not assess species with fewer than two viable pairs already held in North American collections for management under Species Survival Plans (e.g. Avian Scientific Advisory Group, a, b, c, ).…”

Forêts tropicales, changements d’usage des sols et risques infectieux émergents

“…Beaucoup plus récemment ces services écosystémiques ont été conceptualisés [90], et devenus parties intégrantes des approches liant écologie, préservation de la biodiversité et sociétés. Bien au-delà de la vision classique des services d'approvisionnement, de régulation, culturels et de « support », la capacité d'un écosystème forestier, en équilibre, à prévenir la survenue d'une émergence doit être comprise comme un réel service écosystémique [91,92] et entrer vraiment en jeu dans des décisions politiques de préservation de la biodiversité, au-delà de réponses apportées aux très médiatiques mais légitimes aspirations à protéger les espèces animales les plus charismatiques [93,94].…”