Abstract
People generally possess certain basic ideas and values towards biodiversity, influencing their personal evaluation of a conservation situation or action and their attitude towards nature and its conservation. Here, we apply knowledge on human attitudes to an interesting socio-ecological system, the case of mitigating the devastating infectious amphibian disease chytridiomycosis in the Pyrenean Mountains, a touristic region. We conducted a questionnaire survey directly in mountain areas (n = 418) and on the internet (n = 868) to investigate whether attitudes towards amphibians influenced support of five possible conservation actions. We further analyzed whether attitudes were influenced by peoples’ use of the mountains, their socio-economic backgrounds, and their general knowledge of amphibians. Our study shows that all but one conservation measure were well accepted by the public. Importantly, the restrictions people would accept were linked to the attitudes the respondents had towards amphibians and how informed they were regarding the current status of amphibians. Our study highlights the importance of ensuring sufficient education and information for the public and suggests that it is necessary to explore and discuss several conservation options with the public before implementing conservation measures that may not be perceived equally.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.





References
Aanensen D, Huntley D, Feil E, Al-Own F, Spratt B, Hay S (2009) EpiCollect: linking smartphones to web applications for epidemiology, ecology and community data collection. PLoS One 4:e6968
Ajzen I, Fishbein M (1977) Attitude-behavior relations: a theoretical analysis and review of empirical research. Psychol Bull 84:888
Alvard MS (1998) Evolutionary ecology and resource conservation. Evol Anthropol Issues News Rev 7:62–74
Ballouard J-M, Brischoux FO, Bonnet X (2011) Children prioritize virtual exotic biodiversity over local biodiversity. PLoS One 6:e23152
Ballouard J-M, Provost G, Barré D, Bonnet X (2012) Influence of a field trip on the attitude of schoolchildren toward unpopular organisms: an experience with snakes. J Herpetol 46:423–428
Ballouard J-M, Ajtic R, Balint H, Brito JC, Crnobrnja-Isailovic J, Desmonts D, ElMouden EH, Erdogan M, Feriche MN, Pleguezuelos JM (2013) Schoolchildren and one of the most unpopular animals: Are they ready to protect snakes? Anthrozos 26:93–109
Berger L, Speare R, Hyatt A (1999) Chytrid fungi and amphibian declines: overview, implications and future directions. In: Campbell A (ed) Declines and disappearances of australian frogs. Environment Australia, Canberra, pp 23–33
Blocker TJ, Eckberg DL (1997) Gender and environmentalism: results from the 1993 general social survey. Soc Sci Q 78(4):841–858
Bosch J, Fernández-Beaskoetxea F, MartÃn-Beyer B (2010) Time for chytridiomycosis mitigation in Spain. Aliens Invas Species Bull 54–58. (IUCN/SSC invasive species specialist group)
Buijs AE (2009a) Lay people’s images of nature: comprehensive frameworks of values, beliefs, and value orientations. Soc Nat Resour 22:417–432
Buijs AE (2009b) Public support for river restoration. A mixed-method study into local residents’ support for and framing of river management and ecological restoration in the Dutch floodplains. J Environ Manage 90:2680–2689
Buijs AE, Pedroli B, Luginbühl Y (2006) From hiking through farmland to farming in a leisure landscape: changing social perceptions of the European landscape. Landsc Ecol 21:375–389
Buijs AE, Fischer A, Rink D, Young JC (2008) Looking beyond superficial knowledge gaps: understanding public representations of biodiversity. Int J Biodivers Sci Manag 4:65–80
Buijs AE, Arts BJ, Elands BH, Lengkeek J (2011) Beyond environmental frames: the social representation and cultural resonance of nature in conflicts over a Dutch woodland. Geoforum 42:329–341
Cadiou N, Luginbühl Y (1995) Modéles paysagers et représentations du paysage en Normandie-Maine. In: Voisenat LC(ed), Paysage au pluriel. Pour une approche ethnologique des paysages, pp 19–34. Èditions de la Maison de Sciences de l’Homme, Paris
Czech B, Krausman PR (2001) The endangered species act: history, conservation biology, and public policy. JHU Press, Baltimore
Czech B, Krausman PR, Borkhataria R (1998) Social construction, political power, and the allocation of benefits to endangered species. Conserv Biol 12:1103–1112
DeKay ML, McClelland GH (1996) Probability and utility of endangered species preservation programs. J Exp Psychol Appl 2:60
Denny SJ, Milfont TL, Utter J, Robinson EM, Ameratunga SN, Merry SN, Fleming TM, Watson PD (2008) Hand-held internet tablets for school-based data collection. BMC Res Notes 1:52
Dietz T, Kalof L, Stern PC (2002) Gender, values, and environmentalism. Soc Sci Q 83:353–364
Douglas LR, VerÃssimo D (2013) Flagships or battleships: deconstructing the relationship between social conflict and conservation flagship species. Environ Soc Adv Res 4:98–116
Eder K, Ritter MT (1996) The social construction of nature: A sociology of ecological enlightenment. Sage Publications Inc, Thousand Oaks
Fischer AP, Bliss JC (2006) Mental and biophysical terrains of biodiversity: conserving oak on family forests. Soc Nat Resour 19:625–643
Fischer A, Young JC (2007) Understanding mental constructs of biodiversity: implications for biodiversity management and conservation. Biol Conserv 136:271–282
Garamszegi LZ, Calhim S, Dochtermann N, Hegyi G, Hurd PL, Jørgensen C, Kutsukake N, Lajeunesse MJ, Pollard KA, Schielzeth H, Symonds MRE, Nakagawa S (2009) Changing philosophies and tools for statistical inferences in behavioral ecology. Behav Ecol 20:1363–1375
Halpenny EA, Caissie LT (2003) Volunteering on nature conservation projects: volunteer experience, attitudes and values. Tour Recreat Res 28:25–33
Hanski I (2005) Landscape fragmentation, biodiversity loss and the societal response. EMBO Rep 6:388–392
Hocking DJ, Babbitt KJ (2014) Amphibian contributions to ecosystem services. Herpetol Conser Biol 9:1–17
Hunter LM, Brehm J (2003) Brief comment: qualitative insight into public knowledge of, and concern with, biodiversity. Hum Ecol 31:309–320
Hunter LM, Brehm JM (2004) A qualitative examination of value orientations toward wildlife and biodiversity by rural residents of the intermountain region. Hum Ecol Rev 11:13–26
Kellert SR (1993) The biophilia hypothesis. Island Press, Washington
Kellert SR (1997) The value of life: Biological diversity and human society. Island Press, Washington
Kellert SR (2006) Building for life: designing and understanding the human-nature connection. Renew Resour J 24:8
Kellert SR, Berry JK (1982) Knowledge, affection and basic attitudes toward animals in American society. US Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service
Keulartz J, van der Windt H, Swart J (2004) Concepts of nature as communicative devices: the case of Dutch nature policy. Environ Values 13:81–99
Knight AJ (2008) Bats, snakes and spiders, Oh my! How aesthetic and negativistic attitudes, and other concepts predict support for species protection. J Environ Psychol 28:94–103
Lindemann-Matthies P, Bose E (2008) How many species are there? Public understanding and awareness of biodiversity in Switzerland. Hum Ecol 36:731–742
Lorimer J (2007) Nonhuman charisma. Environ Plann D Soc Space 25:911–932
Low BS (1996) Behavioral ecology of conservation in traditional societies. Hum Nat 7:353–379
Macdonald E, Burnham D, Hinks A, Dickman A, Malhi Y, Macdonald D (2015) Conservation inequality and the charismatic cat: Felis felicis. Glob Ecol Conserv 3:851–866
Macnaghten P, Urry J (1998) Contested natures. Sage, Thousand Oaks
MartÃn-López B, Montes C, Benayas J (2007) The non-economic motives behind the willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation. Biol Conserv 139:67–82
Metrick A, Weitzman ML (1998) Conflicts and choices in biodiversity preservation. J Econ Perspect 12(3):21–34
Milfont TL, Duckitt J (2010) The environmental attitudes inventory: a valid and reliable measure to assess the structure of environmental attitudes. J Environ Psychol 30:80–94
Moscovici S, Duveen G (2000) Social representations: explorations in social psychology. Polity Press, Cambridge
Myers Jr OE, Saunders CD, Bexell SM (2009) Fostering empathy with wildlife: Factors affecting free-choice learning for conservation concern and behavior. Free-Choice Learn Environ 39–56
Nakagawa S, Freckleton RP (2011) Model averaging, missing data and multiple imputation: a case study for behavioural ecology. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:103–116
Novacek MJ (2008) Engaging the public in biodiversity issues. Proc Natl Acad Sci 105:11571–11578
Røskaft E, Händel B, Bjerke T, Kaltenborn BP (2007) Human attitudes towards large carnivores in Norway. Wildl Biol 13:172–185
Schmeller DS, Blooi M, Martel A, Garner TWJ, Fisher MC, Azemar F, Clare FC, Leclerc C, Jäger L, Guevara-Nieto M, Loyau A, Pasmans F (2014) Microscopic aquatic predators strongly affect infection dynamics of a globally emerged pathogen. Curr Biol 24:176–180
Schultz PW (2000) Empathizing with nature: the effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues-statis. J Soc Issues 56:391–406
Serpell JA (2004) Factors influencing human attitudes to animals and their welfare. Anim Welf 13:S145–S152
Sevillano VN, Aragonés JI, Schultz PW (2007) Perspective taking, environmental concern, and the moderating role of dispositional empathy. Environ Behav 39:685–705
Skogen K (2001) Who’s afraid of the big, bad wolf? Young people’s responses to the conflicts over large carnivores in eastern Norway. Rural Sociol 66:203–226
Spash CL (2009) The new environmental pragmatists, pluralism and sustainability. Environ Values 18:253–256
Spash CL, Urama K, Burton R, Kenyon W, Shannon P, Hill G (2009) Motives behind willingness to pay for improving biodiversity in a water ecosystem: economics, ethics and social psychology. Ecol Econ 68:955–964
Stoll-Kleemann S (2001a) Opposition to the designation of protected areas in Germany. J Environ Plann Manage 44:109–128
Stoll-Kleemann S (2001b) Reconciling opposition to protected areas management in Europe: the German experience. Environ: Sci Policy Sust Dev 43:32–44
Stoll-Kleemann S (2010) Evaluation of management effectiveness in protected areas: methodologies and results. Basic Appl Ecol 11:377–382
Stoll-Kleemann S, O’Riordan T (2002) From participation to partnership in biodiversity protection: experience from Germany and South Africa. Soc Nat Resour 15:161–177
Stuart S, Chanson J, Cox N, Young B, Rodrigues A, Fischman D, Waller R (2004) Status and trends of amphibian declines and extinctions worldwide. Science 306:1783
Sutherland WJ, Dicks LV, Ockendon N, Smith RK (2015) What works in conservation: 2015, vol 1. Open Book Publishers, Cambridge
Swaisgood RR, Sheppard JK (2010) The culture of conservation biologists: show me the hope! Bioscience 60:626–630
Symonds MR, Moussalli A (2011) A brief guide to model selection, multimodel inference and model averaging in behavioural ecology using Akaike’s information criterion. Behav Ecol Sociobiol 65:13–21
Tarrant MA, Green GT (1999) Outdoor recreation and the predictive validity of environmental attitudes. Leisure Sci 21:17–30
Turnhout E, Hisschemoller M, Eijsackers H (2004) The role of views of nature in Dutch nature conservation: the case of the creation of a drift sand area in the Hoge Veluwe National Park. Environ Values 13:187–198
Walker SF, Bosch J, Gomez V, Garner TWJ, Cunningham AA, Schmeller DS, Ninyerola M, Henk DA, Ginestet C, Arthur CP, Fisher MC (2010) Factors driving pathogenicity vs. prevalence of amphibian panzootic chytridiomycosis in Iberia. Ecol Lett 13:372–382
White R, Heerwagen J (1998) Nature and mental health: Biophilia and biophobia. Environment Ment Health: Guide Clin 175–192
Woodhams D, Bosch J, Briggs C, Cashins S, Davis L, Lauer A, Muths E, Puschendorf R, Schmidt B, Sheafor B, Voyles J (2011) Mitigating amphibian disease: strategies to maintain wild populations and control chytridiomycosis. Front Zool 8:1–23
Zerubavel E (1999) Social mindscapes: An invitation to cognitive sociology. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Acknowledgements
Our warmest thanks to all the people who kindly answered our survey, to the people who helped distributing paper, and internet questionnaires, especially David M. Aanensen and Chris Powell. We also thank Phillippe and Dominique Dupui, keepers of the Refuge de Bassiès, the children and teachers of the Ecole de Vicdessos, Marie-Pierre Julien, Christine Vergnolles-Mainar, Jérémie Cornuau and Deivida Vandzinskaite. We are grateful to Lauren Weatherdon for her valuable comments and for fine-tuning our English. This work has been supported by the Biodiversa project RACE, the LABEX DRIIHM - OHM Haut Vicdessos and the Marie Skłodowska-Curie Individual Fellowship FreeMi (EU, Horizon 2020).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by Samuel Cushman.
This article belongs to the Topical Collection: Biodiversity appreciation and engagement.
Electronic supplementary material
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Loyau, A., Schmeller, D.S. Positive sentiment and knowledge increase tolerance towards conservation actions. Biodivers Conserv 26, 461–478 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-016-1253-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-016-1253-0