Support For Conservation Policies Research Articles

Modelling stakeholder satisfaction for conflict resolution in wildlife management: a case of wolf population in Sweden

The Swedish wolf population has rebounded from near extinction in the 1960s to around 365 individuals in 2020, after the implementation of the Hunting Act (jaktlagen) in 1966. This recent increase in the wolf population has evoked a serious divide between “pro-wolf” and “anti-wolf” Swedish citizens. Despite the continuous efforts by the Swedish government to reconcile this antagonism, the conflicts are persistent with a sign of impasse. In this paper, we present a modelling tool, which can bring transparent and “structured dialogue to the opposing positions.” This approach includes a stylized framework for quantitative modelling of stakeholders’ satisfaction levels regarding their preferred size of the wildlife population in question, based on the concept of satisfaction functions. We argue that this framework may contribute to conflict resolution by bringing a common understanding among stakeholders, facilitate a societal discourse, and potentially help to assess likely support for conservation policies. We present a showcase application of this modeling tool in the context of the conflict over the Swedish wolf conservation policies. The model is informed using a thorough literature review as well as interviews, which identified relevant stakeholder groups and respective drivers of their attitudes towards wolves.

The perceived threat of demographic shifts depends on how you think the economy works

Research shows that people exhibit a conservative shift in their politics when their majority group status is threatened. We reasoned that perceptions of threat posed by shifting demographics might depend on individuals’ folk economic beliefs. Across three experiments, White Americans read about projected demographic changes (“threat”) or changes in online dating (“control”) before expressing support for political policies. They also indicated whether they viewed the U.S. economy as a zero- or non-zero-sum system. Relative to controls, participants in the threat condition expressed more support for conservative policies, but only if they conceptualized the economy in zero-sum terms; those who conceptualized the economy in non-zero-sum terms actually endorsed slightly more liberal positions under “threat.” However, these effects obtained only when participants expressed their economic views before their political attitudes. This suggests folk economic beliefs shape how people respond to threats to their majority status, provided those beliefs are first made explicit.

Bias in Perceptions of Public Opinion among Political Elites

The conservative asymmetry of elite polarization represents a significant puzzle. We argue that politicians can maintain systematic misperceptions of constituency opinion that may contribute to breakdowns in dyadic representation. We demonstrate this argument with original surveys of 3,765 politicians’ perceptions of constituency opinion on nine issues. In 2012 and 2014, state legislative politicians from both parties dramatically overestimated their constituents’ support for conservative policies on these issues, a pattern consistent across methods, districts, and states. Republicans drive much of this overestimation. Exploiting responses from politicians in the same district, we confirm these partisan differences within individual districts. Further evidence suggests that this overestimation may arise due to biases in who contacts politicians, as in recent years Republican citizens have been especially likely to contact legislators, especially fellow Republicans. Our findings suggest that a novel force can operate in elections and in legislatures: Politicians can systematically misperceive what their constituents want.

Conservative Bias in Perceptions of Public Opinion Among American Political Elites

The conservative asymmetry of elite polarization represents a significant puzzle. We argue that politicians can maintain systematic misperceptions of constituency opinion that may contribute to breakdowns in dyadic representation. We demonstrate this argument with original surveys of 3,765 politicians' perceptions of constituency opinion on nine issues. In 2012 and 2014, state legislative politicians from both parties dramatically overestimated their constituents' support for conservative policies on these issues, a pattern consistent across methods, districts, and states. Republicans drive much of this overestimation. Exploiting responses from politicians in the same district, we confirm these partisan differences within individual districts. Further evidence suggests that this overestimation may arise due to biases in who contacts politicians, as in recent years Republican citizens have been especially likely to contact legislators, especially fellow Republicans. Our findings suggest a novel force can operate in elections and in legislatures: politicians can systematically misperceive what their constituents want.

Emotion Regulation as the Foundation of Political Attitudes: Does Reappraisal Decrease Support for Conservative Policies?

Cognitive scientists, behavior geneticists, and political scientists have identified several ways in which emotions influence political attitudes, and psychologists have shown that emotion regulation can have an important causal effect on physiology, cognition, and subjective experience. However, no work to date explores the possibility that emotion regulation may shape political ideology and attitudes toward policies. Here, we conduct four studies that investigate the role of a particular emotion regulation strategy – reappraisal in particular. Two observational studies show that individual differences in emotion regulation styles predict variation in political orientations and support for conservative policies. In the third study, we experimentally induce disgust as the target emotion to be regulated and show that use of reappraisal reduces the experience of disgust, thereby decreasing moral concerns associated with conservatism. In the final experimental study, we show that use of reappraisal successfully attenuates the relationship between trait-level disgust sensitivity and support for conservative policies. Our findings provide the first evidence of a critical link between emotion regulation and political attitudes.

Conservatism as motivated avoidance of affect: Need for affect scales predict conservatism measures

We propose that individual differences in the motivation to avoid emotions are related to political conservatism. We argue that because conservatism is concerned with managing uncertainty and emphasizes ego-control, conservative ideologies match with the motivational concerns of those individuals who find emotions to be uncertainty-enhancing and dysfunctional. In a group of 267 participants, positive associations were found between emotion avoidance and right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and support for conservative policies. Negative associations were found between emotion approach and conservatism measures.