Systematic map of conservation psychology

Abstract

Conservation science and practice commonly draw on the theories and methods of social psychology to explain human cognition, emotion, and behavior germane to biodiversity conservation. We created a systematic map of the cross-disciplinary conservation science literature, which draws on social psychology concepts and methods in their application broadly described as conservation psychology. Established protocols were used to systematically collect and collate peer-reviewed research published in an explicit selection of multidisciplinary conservation journals. We sought to catalog the literature, elucidate trends and gaps, and critically reflect on the state of conservation psychology and its research practices that aim to influence conservation outcomes. The volume of publications per year and per decade increased from 1974 to 2016. Although a diversity of research designs and methods was applied, studies disproportionately focused on specific concepts (attitudes and beliefs), locations (North America and Europe), and contexts (terrestrial, rural). Studies also tended to be descriptive, quantitative, and atheoretical in nature. Our findings demonstrate that although conservation psychology has generally become more visible and prominent, it has done so within a limited space and suggest that disciplinary research principles and reporting standards must be more universally adopted by traditional and multidisciplinary conservation journals to raise the floor of empirical research.

Systematic Map of Human–Raptor Interaction and Coexistence Research

“…We found this focus to be logical, since a focus on residents in an area with prevalent raptor persecution is important to understanding that persecution, and agriculture is the most common threat identified for global raptor populations [ 35 , 36 ]. However, we note an overfocus on general and broadly defined behavioral or sociocultural concepts such as attitudes and values—which is also a trend among general human dimensions of conservation research [ 37 ]—as opposed to other concepts that may be closer antecedents to behavior, such as experience, intentions, mortality, risk perception, and emotions. As the human dimensions of raptor conservation grow and presumably increase its focus on human–raptor interactions, we would urge researchers and practitioners to consider the spectrum of internal and external influences on human behavior [ 38 ].…”

Reexamining the Measurement of Pro-Environmental Attitudes and Behaviors to Promote Sustainable Development: A Systematic Review

“…Although the focus of the present article is not on the exclusive discussion of the determinants of PEA and PEB, a detailed discussion on influential factors can be independently assessed (e.g., Bamberg & Möser, 2007;Gifford, 2011;Hines, Hungerford, & Tomera, 1987;Zmami & Ben-Salha, 2020). This said, understanding human-induced actions with which environmental deteriorations are determined is of useful consideration because "individuals and societies cause and bear the consequences of conservation challenges and are fundamental to solutions" (Wallen & Landon, 2020, p. 1340.…”

The psychological impacts of community‐based protected areas

“…A review (Davis et al, 2015) of 276 theory‐based articles on behavioural change found only 6% of the articles focused on populations outside of WEIRD regions (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic (Henrich, Heine & Norenzayan, 2010)) and only 4% related to environmental conservation (of which none were outside of WEIRD regions). Conducting conservation psychology research in only WEIRD populations not only leads to biased results (Rad, Martingano & Ginges, 2018; Wallen & Landon, 2020), but may also fail to inform conservation within some biodiversity hotspots (Myers et al, 2000; Roberts et al, 2002) and regions with fewer social safety‐nets, where there may be greater conflicts between conservation and livelihoods (Brockington, 2004; Brockington & Wilkie, 2015). The few theory‐driven conservation studies outside WEIRD regions are on the psychological impacts of payment programmes (Rode, Gomez‐Baggethun & Krause, 2015; Akers & Yasué, 2019; Chervier, Le Velly & Ezzine‐de‐Blas, 2019), rather than the much broader suite of community‐based conservation interventions such as education, alternative livelihoods or marine protected areas (MPAs).…”

“…Few studies have used theories in motivational psychology and behavioural change to better understand environmental conservation (Davis et al, 2015; Cetas & Yasué, 2016). Furthermore, whilst there is a growing body of research on psychological change within people engaging in conservation, much of this research has been conducted in Europe, North America and Australia (Gooden & Grenyer, 2019; Selinske et al, 2019; Wallen & Landon, 2020). A review (Davis et al, 2015) of 276 theory‐based articles on behavioural change found only 6% of the articles focused on populations outside of WEIRD regions (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich and Democratic (Henrich, Heine & Norenzayan, 2010)) and only 4% related to environmental conservation (of which none were outside of WEIRD regions).…”

“…Several studies have documented attitudes, experiences and perceptions related to MPAs (Yasué, Kaufman & Vincent, 2010; Cinner & McClanahan, 2015; Beyerl, Putz & Breckwoldt, 2016), but these studies take an exploratory approach of collecting the data and then relating the result to a wide range of different psychological theories rather than identifying a theory a priori to guide the research. One review suggests that two‐thirds of conservation psychology articles lack a theoretical framework to inform methods and inquiry (Wallen & Landon, 2020).…”