Advertisement

Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences

, Volume 2, Issue 3, pp 257–262 | Cite as

Twitter as a tool for conservation education and outreach: what scientific conferences can do to promote live-tweeting

  • D. S. Shiffman
Article

Abstract

If more conservation-minded citizens were aware of certain environmental threats and how to resolve them, these issues could be resolved more effectively. Scientific conferences focusing on conservation bring together countless experts on environmental problems and solutions, but are not an effective means of reaching the interested public on a large scale. This paper discusses the use of twitter to share important conservation information from scientific conferences with the interested public. The basic usage of twitter is explained, and strategies to promote live-tweeting of scientific conferences are introduced. A case study (the 2011 International Congress for Conservation Biology) is discussed. If used properly, twitter and other social media technology can be a powerful tool for conservation education and outreach from scientific conferences.

Keywords

Conference outreach Twitter Social media Conservation outreach 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The author would like to thank the leadership of the Marine Section of the Society for Conservation Biology, particularly Dr. Chris Parsons and Dr. Carolyn Lundquist, for engaging his services as a conference tweeter. The author would also like to thank Mr. Andrew DeChellis of the University of Miami for his helpful suggestions regarding this manuscript, and Dr. Neil Hammerschlag of the University of Miami for all of the assistance he has provided as the author’s Ph.D. adviser. Aaron Muszalski of Upwell provided the detailed analysis of #ICCB tweets, Mary Canady of Comprendia provided comparative statistics for other scientific conference, and Tiffany Lohwater of the American Association for the Advancement of Science answered questions about the methods AAAS uses to promote tweeting at their annual meeting. Funding was provided by the Guy Harvey Ocean Foundation, the RJ Dunlap Marine Conservation Program, and the Leonard and Jayne Abess Center for Ecosystem Science and Policy.

References

  1. Brockington D, Igoe J, Schmidt-Soltau K (2006) Conservation, human rights, and poverty reduction. Conserv Biol 20:250–252CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Furlong SR (2004) Interest group participation in rule making: a decade of change. J Public Adm Res Theory 15:353–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ghimire KB, Pimbert MP (1997) Social change and conservation: environmental politics and impacts of national parks and protected areas. Earthscan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Golden MM (1998) Interest groups in the rule-making process: who participates? Whose voices get heard? J Public Adm Res Theory 8:245–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Thaler AD, Zelnio KA, Freitag A, MacPherson R, Shiffman D, Bik H, Goldstein M, McClain C (2012) Digital environmentalism: tools and strategies for the evolving online ecosystem. In: Gallagher D (ed) SAGE Reference–Environmental leadership: a reference handbook. SAGE Publications, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© AESS 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Leonard and Jayne Abess Center for Ecosystem Science and PolicyUniversity of MiamiCoral GablesUSA
  2. 2.RJ Dunlap Marine Conservation ProgramUniversity of MiamiMiamiUSA

Personalised recommendations