Agency mission statements provide insight into the purpose and practice of conservation

Abstract

ABSTRACT Debates among scholars reveal rifts in the conservation community concerning the purposes of conservation that might be explained by shifting public values. We examined mission statements of 50-state fish and wildlife agencies in the U.S. to determine how agencies articulate conservation goals. Agency mission statements often expressed multiple goals, both human (e.g., development) and wildlife (e.g., preservation) focused. Results indicated that as the proportion of mutualists within a state’s citizenry increased, mission statements were less likely to cite economic use, and the provisioning of recreational opportunities as goals, and more likely to express the idea that nature/wildlife is a beneficiary. A separate analysis of agency decision-making bodies indicated these bodies were predominately occupied by men and sportspersons. Given the tendency of men and sportspersons to align with domination value orientations, the composition of agency decision-making bodies may prevent adoption of goals that reflect broader changes in societal values.