Plant blindness and the implications for plant conservation

Abstract

Plant conservation initiatives lag behind and receive considerably less funding than animal conservation projects. We explored a potential reason for this bias: a tendency among humans to neither notice nor value plants in the environment. Experimental research and surveys have demonstrated higher preference for, superior recall of, and better visual detection of animals compared with plants. This bias has been attributed to perceptual factors such as lack of motion by plants and the tendency of plants to visually blend together but also to cultural factors such as a greater focus on animals in formal biological education. In contrast, ethnographic research reveals that many social groups have strong bonds with plants, including nonhierarchical kinship relationships. We argue that plant blindness is common, but not inevitable. If immersed in a plant-affiliated culture, the individual will experience language and practices that enhance capacity to detect, recall, and value plants, something less likely to occur in zoocentric societies. Therefore, conservation programs can contribute to reducing this bias. We considered strategies that might reduce this bias and encourage plant conservation behavior. Psychological research demonstrates that people are more likely to support conservation of species that have human-like characteristics and that support for conservation can be increased by encouraging people to practice empathy and anthropomorphism of nonhuman species. We argue that support for plant conservation may be garnered through strategies that promote identification and empathy with plants.

Plants to the fore: Noticing plants in designed environments

“…The categorization of mentions into the three main categories was considered to be unproblematic as they are distinctly different. However, the coding of mentions into the subcategories was subjected to repeated readings of the answers given and negotiated between the coders and the theoretically grounded aspects of mentions relating to plants and animals (e.g., Knight, ; Balding & Williams, ) and from studies regarding humans and plants (e.g., Sanders, ; Balding & Williams, ). This process is similar to the one presented in Andersson and Wallin (); “[the] categories emerge by a process of hypothesizing them and checking them against actual answers”.…”

The benefits of trees for livable and sustainable communities

“…Schwarz et al () found that when analyzing seven major cities, the authors found a strong relationship between urban tree cover and income: the lower the income, the fewer the trees. Decision‐makers may underestimate the importance of trees and plants in humanitarian work due to bias of plant blindness (Balding & Williams, ), but this paper illustrates the benefits.…”

Analysis of Children's Drawings to Gain Insight into Plant Blindness

“…In other words, students represented grass as either a “stem,” indicated as a single drawn line or series of lines; or a leaf, indicated by a triangular shape or series of triangular shapes. These common mental models found within the children's drawings for plant, tree, flower, and grass represent what are likely cultural and location influenced archetypes to create a mental model based on what is available and emotionally relevant to the student (Balding and Williams, 2016; Bartoszeck et al, 2015; Tunnicliffe and Reiss, 2000).…”