Abstract
Worldwide ecosystem decline is a pressing issue that has led governments to sign up to biodiversity-related targets, but little is known about what drives individuals’ conservation behaviour. This study uses a qualitative methodology (grounded theory) to understand what leads to pro-nature attitudes and behaviours. Twenty participants (10 men; 10 women) underwent semi-structured interviews and audio files were transcribed and coded to form the basis of theory. The authors propose a model based on interview material in which species with intrinsic value (i.e., deemed valuable in their own right, not for their usefulness to humans) are within the bounds of moral consideration. Individuals with generalised beliefs about the intrinsic value of non-human species expressed moral concern for human-caused impacts on nature. External prompts, including social messages, were associated with sporadic pro-nature behaviours. Individuals engaging in sustained behaviour showed evidence of having internalised moral standard of pro-nature actions and also appeared to fashion a social environment that would sustain and enhance their moral views. We discuss the implications of our findings with respect to conservation campaign messaging and government policy.
Highlights
Human activity harms the ecosystem through diverse and intricate pathways
The model we have presented in the current paper could be seen as an extension to the value-belief-norm theory (VBN) of Stern, Dietz, Abel, Guagnano and Kalof [53]
The VBN theory does not distinguish between sporadic and sustained behaviour, whereas our model proposed that sporadic pro-nature behaviour can be triggered by external prompts, such as social messages
Summary
Human activity harms the ecosystem through diverse and intricate pathways. Much of the media focus has been dedicated to climate change and its impact on specific world events, whereas another human-caused existential threat—biodiversity loss—has received less coverage [1]. In 2020, the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) reported a 68% decrease, on average, in animal populations between 1970 and 2016 [2]. Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) published a report detailing the various serious ramifications of biodiversity loss for human health [3]. The report noted that healthy ecosystems are required for good air quality, food availability and access to natural medicines on which approximately 4 billion people rely. There are socioeconomic implications, such as social conflicts that will likely intensify if food and water security are threatened [3]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
