Modest levels of interpretability of the term ‘biodiversity’, mediated by educational level, among the Australian public
Heather M. Kiley A B , Gillian B. Ainsworth C and Michael A. Weston
A D
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Centre for Integrative Ecology, School of Life and Environmental Sciences, Deakin University, Burwood Campus, Vic. 3125, Australia.
B Present address: 94 Cole Street, Brighton, Vic. 3186, Australia.
C Research Institute for the Environment and Livelihoods, Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT 0800, Australia.
D Corresponding author. Email: mweston@deakin.edu.au
Pacific Conservation Biology 25(2) 208-210 https://doi.org/10.1071/PC18056
Submitted: 16 June 2018 Accepted: 1 October 2018 Published: 18 October 2018
Abstract
Effective worldwide efforts to conserve flora and fauna rely on engaging the public, and thus on public appreciation of the object of conservation activities (most commonly, ‘biodiversity’). We examined alignment of interpretation of the term ‘biodiversity’ with generally accepted definitions in a representative sample (n = 499) of the public from the State of Victoria in Australia, a country with an explicit biodiversity conservation strategy (which defines the term) and the capacity to invest heavily in conservation. However, almost half of respondents did not know what ‘biodiversity’ meant, 32% and 18% expressed an ecological and conceptual interpretation, respectively. The probability of having at least some interpretation of the term was higher among university-educated respondents, but otherwise did not vary with sex or income. Broadening the base of conservation efforts would likely be facilitated by better aligning interpretations of the term ‘biodiversity’ among the public or by adopting more intuitive language when engaging with the public.
Additional keywords: awareness, biological diversity, conservation, income, interpretation, sex, survey
References
Ainsworth, G. B., Aslin, H. J., Weston, M. A., and Garnett, S. T. (2016). Do social values influence levels of conservation effort in threatened species? The case of two Australian chats. Oryx 50, 636–645.| Do social values influence levels of conservation effort in threatened species? The case of two Australian chats.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2018). Household use of information technology, Australia, 2016–17. Catalogue 1846.0. Available at: http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8146.0
Berry, P. M., Fabók, V., Blicharska, M., Bredin, Y. K., Llorente, M. G., Kovács, E., and Harrison, P. A. (2018). Why conserve biodiversity? A multi-national exploration of stakeholders’ views on the arguments for biodiversity conservation. Biodiversity and Conservation 27, 1741–1762.
| Why conserve biodiversity? A multi-national exploration of stakeholders’ views on the arguments for biodiversity conservation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bradshaw, C. J., Giam, X., and Sodhi, N. S. (2010). Evaluating the relative environmental impact of countries. PLoS One 5, e10440.
| Evaluating the relative environmental impact of countries.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Bright, A.D., and Stinchfield, H. (2005). An assessment of public knowledge, values and attitudes toward biodiversity and sustainable forestry. Final Report to the National Commission on Science for Sustainable Forestry. NCSSF Research Project C5. (Colorado State University, Department of Natural Resources Recreation and Tourism: Fort Collins, CO.)
Bugter, R., Harrison, P., Haslett, J., and Tinch, R. (2018). Making a better case for biodiversity conservation: the BESAFE project. Biodiversity and Conservation 27, 1549–1560.
| Making a better case for biodiversity conservation: the BESAFE project.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Buijs, A. E., Fischer, A., Rink, D., and Young, J. C. (2008). Looking beyond superficial knowledge gaps: understanding public representations of biodiversity. International Journal of Biodiversity Science & Management 4, 65–80.
| Looking beyond superficial knowledge gaps: understanding public representations of biodiversity.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Common, M. S., and Norton, T. W. (1992). Biodiversity: its conservation in Australia. Ambio 21, 258–265.
Dallimer, M., Irvine, K. N., Skinner, A. M., Davies, Z. G., Rouquette, J. R., Maltby, L. L., Warren, P. H., Armsworth, P. R., and Gaston, K. J. (2012). Biodiversity and the feel-good factor: understanding associations between self-reported human well-being and species richness. Bioscience 62, 47–55.
| Biodiversity and the feel-good factor: understanding associations between self-reported human well-being and species richness.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
DeLong, D. C. (1996). Defining biodiversity. Wildlife Society Bulletin 24, 738–749.
Fischer, A., and Young, J. C. (2007). Understanding mental constructs of biodiversity: implications for biodiversity management and conservation. Biological Conservation 136, 271–282.
| Understanding mental constructs of biodiversity: implications for biodiversity management and conservation.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Franklin, A. (2007). Human–nonhuman animal relationships in Australia: an overview of results from the first national survey and follow-up case studies 2000–2004. Society & Animals 15, 7–27.
| Human–nonhuman animal relationships in Australia: an overview of results from the first national survey and follow-up case studies 2000–2004.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Habib, A. (2015). Biodiversity and values in science. Ethics, Policy & Environment 18, 30–33.
| Biodiversity and values in science.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Hamilton, A. J. (2005). Species diversity or biodiversity? Journal of Environmental Management 75, 89–92.
| Species diversity or biodiversity?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Kiley, H. M., Ainsworth, G. B., van Dongen, W. F., and Weston, M. A. (2017). Variation in public perceptions and attitudes towards terrestrial ecosystems. The Science of the Total Environment 590–591, 440–451.
| Variation in public perceptions and attitudes towards terrestrial ecosystems.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Lindemann‐Matthies, P., Constantinou, C., Junge, X., Köhler, K., Mayer, J., Nagel, U., Raper, G., Schüle, D., and Kadji‐Beltran, C. (2009). The integration of biodiversity education in the initial education of primary school teachers: four comparative case studies from Europe. Environmental Education Research 15, 17–37.
| The integration of biodiversity education in the initial education of primary school teachers: four comparative case studies from Europe.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Meinard, Y., and Quétier, F. (2014). Experiencing biodiversity as a bridge over the science–society communication gap. Conservation Biology 28, 705–712.
| Experiencing biodiversity as a bridge over the science–society communication gap.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Miller, K. K. (2000). Public and stakeholder values and knowledge of wildlife in Victoria, Australia. PhD Thesis, Deakin University, Melbourne.
Moss, A., Jensen, E., and Gusset, M. (2017). Impact of a global biodiversity education campaign on zoo and aquarium visitors. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 15, 243–247.
| Impact of a global biodiversity education campaign on zoo and aquarium visitors.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
NRMMC (2010). Australia’s Biodiversity Conservation Strategy 2010–2030. Natural Resource Management Ministerial Council, Canberra. Available at: http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/strategy/index.html
Pérez, A. V., Gámez, M. R., Briones, V. F. V., Viteri, C. G. V., and Molina, L. A. V. (2018). Sustainable development seen from environmental training in university. International Journal of Life Sciences (Kathmandu) 2, 12–20.
PermissionCorp (2015). PermissionCorp: a proven leader in online research. Available at: http://www.permissioncorp.com/services/research.aspx [accessed 16 June 2015].
Wilson, K. A., Carwardine, J., and Possingham, H. P. (2009). Setting conservation priorities. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1162, 237–264.
| Setting conservation priorities.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
Zelezny, C., Chua, P., and Aldrich, C. (2000). New ways of thinking about environmentalism: elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism. The Journal of Social Issues 56, 443–457.
| New ways of thinking about environmentalism: elaborating on gender differences in environmentalism.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |
