Literature DB >> 20964714

Value plurality among conservation professionals.

Chris Sandbrook1, Ivan R Scales, Bhaskar Vira, William M Adams.   

Abstract

Debate on the values that underpin conservation science is rarely based on empirical analysis of the values conservation professionals actually hold. We used Q methodology to investigate the values held by international conservation professionals who attended the annual Student Conference in Conservation Science at the University of Cambridge (U.K.) in 2008 and 2009. The methodology offers a quantitative means of examining human subjectivity. It differs from standard opinion surveys in that individual respondents record the way they feel about statements relative to other statements, which forces them to focus their attention on the issues they believe are most important. The analysis extracts the diverse viewpoints of the respondents, and factor analysis is used to reduce the viewpoints to a smaller set of factors that reflect shared ways of thinking. The junior conservation professionals attending the conference did not share a unifying set of core values; rather, they held a complex series of ideas and a plurality of opinions about conservation and how it should be pursued. This diversity of values empirically challenges recent proposals for conservation professionals to unite behind a single philosophy. Attempts to forge an artificial consensus may be counterproductive to the overall goals conservation professionals are pursuing. ©2010 Society for Conservation Biology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20964714     DOI: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01592.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Conserv Biol        ISSN: 0888-8892            Impact factor:   6.560


  12 in total

1.  Integrating ecological knowledge, public perception and urgency of action into invasive species management.

Authors:  Paul Caplat; Shaun R Coutts
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2011-09-24       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Confronting and resolving competing values behind conservation objectives.

Authors:  Daniel S Karp; Chase D Mendenhall; Elizabeth Callaway; Luke O Frishkoff; Peter M Kareiva; Paul R Ehrlich; Gretchen C Daily
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2015-08-17       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Exploring conservation discourses in the Galapagos Islands: A case study of the Galapagos giant tortoises.

Authors:  Francisco Benitez-Capistros; Jean Hugé; Farid Dahdouh-Guebas; Nico Koedam
Journal:  Ambio       Date:  2016-03-24       Impact factor: 5.129

4.  Researchers must be aware of their roles at the interface of ecosystem services science and policy.

Authors:  Emilie Crouzat; Isabelle Arpin; Lucas Brunet; Matthew J Colloff; Francis Turkelboom; Sandra Lavorel
Journal:  Ambio       Date:  2017-09-14       Impact factor: 5.129

5.  Understanding conservation conflicts associated with rodent outbreaks in farmland areas.

Authors:  Valentin Lauret; Miguel Delibes-Mateos; François Mougeot; Beatriz Arroyo-Lopez
Journal:  Ambio       Date:  2019-09-21       Impact factor: 5.129

6.  Stakeholders' perceptions of protected area management following a nationwide community-based conservation reform.

Authors:  Sigrid Engen; Per Fauchald; Vera Hausner
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-04-24       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Emergent conservation conflicts in the Galapagos Islands: Human-giant tortoise interactions in the rural area of Santa Cruz Island.

Authors:  Francisco Benitez-Capistros; Giorgia Camperio; Jean Hugé; Farid Dahdouh-Guebas; Nico Koedam
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-09-12       Impact factor: 3.752

8.  Digital technology and the conservation of nature.

Authors:  Koen Arts; René van der Wal; William M Adams
Journal:  Ambio       Date:  2015-11       Impact factor: 5.129

9.  Bootstrapping Q Methodology to Improve the Understanding of Human Perspectives.

Authors:  Aiora Zabala; Unai Pascual
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-02-04       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Practitioner and scientist perceptions of successful amphibian conservation.

Authors:  Helen M R Meredith; Freya A V St John; Ben Collen; Simon A Black; Richard A Griffiths
Journal:  Conserv Biol       Date:  2018-01-10       Impact factor: 6.560

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.