Efficacy-based and normative interventions for facilitating the diffusion of conservation behavior through social networks

Research suggests that encouraging motivated residents to reach out to others in their social network is an effective strategy for increasing the scale and speed of conservation action adoption. However, little is known about how to effectively encourage large numbers of residents to reach out to others about conservation causes. We examined the influence of normative and efficacy-based messaging at motivating residents to engage in and to encourage others to participate in native plant gardening in their community. To do so, we conducted a field experiment with messages on mailings and tracked native plant vouchers used. Efficacy messages tended to be more effective than normative messages at increasing residents' willingness to reach out to others to encourage conservation action, as indicated by a several percentage point increase in native plant voucher use by residents' friends and neighbors. Messages sometimes had different impacts on residents based on past behaviors and perceptions related to native plant gardening. Among these subgroups, efficacy and combined efficacy and norm messages most effectively encouraged individual and collective actions, as indicated by increased voucher usage. Our findings suggest that interventions that build residents' efficacy for engaging in a conservation behavior and for reaching out to others may be a promising path forward for outreach. However, given our results were significant at a false discovery rate cutoff of 0.25 but not 0.05, more experimental trials are needed to determine the robustness of these trends.

The effectiveness of COVID-related message framing on public beliefs and behaviors related to plant-based diets

Shifting the public towards plant-based diets is critical for achieving environmental and public health outcomes. Increasingly news articles and organizations have begun using the saliency of the COVID-19 crisis to highlight the link between animal agriculture, pandemic risks, and other widespread public health threats. Yet, little is known about the effectiveness of this messaging strategy for motivating dietary change. We conducted a randomized trial with an online sample to examine the impact of: (1) a message that uses the saliency of the COVID-19 pandemic to highlight the risk of disease transmission from factory farms, and (2) a message that uses the saliency of the COVID-19 pandemic to highlight the threat to worker's health created by factory farms. We examine whether these messages are more effective at changing beliefs about and behavioral intentions towards plant-based eating, as compared to more traditional messages that highlight the environmental, personal health, or animal welfare implications of factory farmed meat consumption. We find that all messages differentially influenced beliefs about the various negative consequences of meat consumption. However, these altered beliefs did not differentially motivate changes in respondents' intentions to reduce meat consumption and choose plant-based alternatives. This was possibly due to the numerous other barriers to behavior change identified in qualitative survey responses, such as cost, taste, and social factors. We did find that messages that highlight the personal health benefits of reduced meat consumption were more effective at increasing public trust in the message deliverer. Our results suggest that highlighting personal health benefits in messaging and addressing the additional identified barriers to behavior change may be critical for building trust and shifting the public towards plant-based diets.

Public perspectives and media reporting of wolf reintroduction in Colorado

In the state of Colorado, a citizen ballot initiative to reintroduce gray wolves (Canis lupus) is eliciting polarization and conflict among multiple stakeholder and interest groups. Given this complex social landscape, we examined the social context surrounding wolf reintroduction in Colorado as of 2019. We used an online survey of 734 Coloradans representative in terms of age and gender, and we sampled from different regions across the state, to examine public beliefs and attitudes related to wolf reintroduction and various wolf management options. We also conducted a content analysis of media coverage on potential wolf reintroduction in 10 major daily Colorado newspapers from January 2019, when the signature-gathering effort for the wolf reintroduction initiative began, through the end of January 2020, when the initiative was officially added to the ballot. Our findings suggest a high degree of social tolerance or desire for wolf reintroduction in Colorado across geographies, stakeholder groups, and demographics. However, we also find that a portion of the public believes that wolves would negatively impact their livelihoods, primarily because of concerns over the safety of people and pets, loss of hunting opportunities, and potential wolf predation on livestock. These concerns-particularly those related to livestock losses-are strongly reflected in the media. We find that media coverage has focused only on a few of the many perceived positive and negative impacts of wolf reintroduction identified among the public. Our findings highlight the need to account for this diversity of perspectives in future decisions and to conduct public outreach regarding likely impacts of wolf reintroduction.

Opportunities for better use of collective action theory in research and governance for invasive species management

Controlling invasive species presents a public-good dilemma. Although environmental, social, and economic benefits of control accrue to society, costs are borne by only a few individuals and organizations. For decades, policy makers have used incentives and sanctions to encourage or coerce individual actors to contribute to the public good, with limited success. Diverse, subnational efforts to collectively manage invasive plants, insects, and animals provide effective alternatives to traditional command-and-control approaches. Despite this work, there has been little systematic evaluation of collective efforts to determine whether there are consistent principles underpinning success. We reviewed 32 studies to identify the extent to which collective-action theories from related agricultural and environmental fields explain collaborative invasive species management approaches; describe and differentiate emergent invasive species collective-action efforts; and provide guidance on how to enable more collaborative approaches to invasive species management. We identified 4 types of collective action aimed at invasive species-externally led, community led, comanaged, and organizational coalitions-that provide blueprints for future invasive species management. Existing collective-action theories could explain the importance attributed to developing shared knowledge of the social-ecological system and the need for social capital. Yet, collection action on invasive species requires different types of monitoring, sanctions, and boundary definitions. We argue that future government policies can benefit from establishing flexible boundaries that encourage social learning and enable colocated individuals and organizations to identify common goals, pool resources, and coordinate efforts.