Advertisement

Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 26, Issue 6, pp 1495–1505 | Cite as

Declining Google Trends of public interest in biodiversity: semantics, statistics or traceability of changing priorities?

  • Andreas Y. TroumbisEmail author
Commentary
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Biodiversity appreciation and engagement

Abstract

The paper examines a series of critiques and alternative propositions regarding the assumption of declining public interest in biodiversity related issues uncovered by Google Trends of query volumes since 2004. GTs are compared to actual results of public opinion polls among European Union nationals during the period 2004–2016. Critiques are re-examined at both the statistic and cultural-linguistic level. Results tend to support the initial statement of declining GT for biodiversity. The need for a new communication discourse regarding biodiversity issues is repeated if public opinion is to be engaged in conservation issues.

Keywords

Google Trends Biodiversity Climate change Public opinion Interest 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The author expresses his thanks to Dr. M. McCallum and anonymous reviewers for their help in improving considerably the initial form of this paper.

References

  1. Anderegg WRL, Goldsmith GR (2014) Public interest in climate change over the past decade and the effects of the ‘climategate’ media event. Environ Res Lett. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/9/5/054005 Google Scholar
  2. Anderson C (2008) The end of theory: the data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete. Wired Magazine, June 23. https://www.wired.com/2008/06/pb-theory/
  3. Andrew L, Arndt D, Beristain N, Cass T, Clow L, Colmenares B, Damm K, Hatcher R, Jackson N, Pasquesi W, Chamberlain-Pham N, Pryd JA, Rund T, Russell G, Ryle C, Schmidt T, Sigan S, Sinkus K, Sneyd K, Strode J, Wallen C, McCallum ML (2016) Changes in United States’ citizens’ interest in sustainability. Life Excit Biol 4(3):138–164. doi: 10.9784/LEB4(3)Andrew.01 Google Scholar
  4. De Groot R, Brander L, van der Ploeg S, Costanza R, Bernard F, Braat L, Christie M, Crossman N, Ghermandi A, Hein L, Hussain S, Kumar P, McVittie A, Portela R, Rodriguez LC, ten Brink P, van Beukering P (2012) Global estimates of the value of ecosystems and their services in monetary units. Ecosyst Serv 1:50–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Diaz S, Demissew S, Carabias J, Joly C, Lonsdale M, Ash N, Larigauderie A, Adhikari JR, Arico S, Baldi A, Bartuska A, Baste IA, Bilgin A, Brondizio E, Chan KMA, Figueroa VE, Duraiappah A, Fischer M, Hill R, Koetz T, Leadley P, Lyver P, Mace GM, Martin-Lopez B, Okumura M, Pacheco D, Pascual U, Perez ES, Reyers B, Roth E, Saito O, Scholes RJ, Sharma N, Tallis H, Thaman R, Watson R, Yahara T, Hamid ZA, Akosim C, Al-Hafedh Y, Allahverdiyev R, Amankwah E, Asah ST, Asfaw Z, Bartus G, Brooks LA, Caillaux J, Dalle G, Darnaedi D, Driver A, Erpul G, Escobar-Eyzaguirre P, Failler P, Fouda AMM, Fu B, Gundimeda H, Hashimoto S, Homer F, Lavorel S, Lichtenstein G, Mala WA, Mandivenyi W, Matczak P, Mbizvo C, Mehrdadi M, Metzger JP, Mikissa JB, Moller H, Mooney HA, Mumby P, Nagendra H, Nesshover C, Oteng-Yeboah AA, Pataki G, Roue M, Rubis J, Schultz M, Smith P, Sumaila R, Takeuchi K, Thomas S, Verma M, Yeo-Chang Y, Zlatanova D (2015) The IPBES Conceptual Framework—connecting nature and people. Curr Opin Environ Sustain 14(1):1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Do Y, Kim JY, Lineman M, Kim D-K, Joo G-J (2014) Using internet search behavior to assess public awareness of protected wetlands. Conserv Biol 29:271–279CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Ficetola GF (2013) Is interest toward the environment really declining? The complexity of analysing trends using internet search data. Biodivers Conserv 22:2983–2988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fischer A, Young JA (2007) Understanding mental constructs of biodiversity: implications for biodiversity management and conservation. Biol Conserv 136:271–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Funk SM, Rusowsky D (2014) The importance of cultural knowledge and scale for analysing internet search data as a proxy for public interest toward the environment. Biodivers Conserv 23:3101–3112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ginsberg J, Mohebbi MH, Patel RS, Brammer L, Smolinski MS, Brilliant L (2009) Detecting influenza epidemics using search engine query data. Nature 457:1012–1014CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Hardin G (1985) Filters against folly. Viking, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Jepson P, Canney S (2003) Values-led conservation. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 12:271–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kim JY, Do Y, Im R-Y, Kim G-Y, Joo G-J (2014) Use of large web-based data to identify public interest and trends related to endangered species. Biodivers Conserv 23:2961–2984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kristoufek L (2013) Bitcoin meets Google Trends and Wikipedia: quantifying the realtionship between phenomena of the Internet era. Sci Rep 3:3415. doi: 10.1038/srep03415 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Lewandowsky S (2014) Conspiratory fascination versus public interest: the case of climategate. Environ Res Lett. doi: 10.1088/1748-9326/9/11/111004 Google Scholar
  16. Lubchenco J (2000) A new social contract for science. P 278–280. In: World conference on science: science for the twenty-first century, a new commitment. Banson/UNESCO, 544 ppGoogle Scholar
  17. McCallum ML, Bury GW (2013) Google search patterns suggest declining interest in the environment. Biodivers Conserv 22:1355–1367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McCallum ML, Bury GW (2014) Public interest in the environment is falling: a response to Ficetola (2013). Biodivers Conserv 23(4):1057–1062CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mills JH, Waite TA (2009) Economic prosperity, biodiversity conservation, and the environmental Kuznets curve. Ecol Econ 68:2087–2095CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Nghiem LTP, Papworth SK, Lim FKS, Carrasco LR (2016) Analysis of the capacity of Google Trends to measure interest in conservation topics and the role of online news. PLoS ONE. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0152802 PubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. Novacek MJ (2008) Engaging the public in biodiversity issues. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 105(1):11571–11578CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. Perrings C, Naeem S, Ahrestani F, Bunker DE et al (2010) Ecosyst Serv 2020. Science 330:323–324CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Preis T, Moat HS, Stanley HE (2013) Quantifying trading behavior in financial markets using Google Trends. Nat Sci Rep 3:1684–1689. doi: 10.1038/srep01684 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Proulx R, Massicotte Pepino M (2013) Googling trends in conservation biology. Conserv Biol 28:44–51CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Richards DR (2013) The content of historical books as an indicator of past interest in environmental issues. Biodivers Conserv 22:2795–2803. doi: 10.1007/s10531-013-0555-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Silver N (2012) The signal and the noise: the art and science of prediction. Allan Lane, LondonGoogle Scholar
  27. Standard Eurobarometer Series 1-85 (1974–2016). Public opinion in the European Union. http://ec.europa.eu/COMMFrontOffice/PublicOpinion/index.cfm/General/index
  28. Stearns BP, Stearns SC (2010) Still watching, from the edge of extinction. Bioscience 60:141–146CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wilde GR, Pope KL (2013) Worldwide trends in fishing interest indicated by internet search volume. Fish Manag Ecol 20:211–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wray-Lake L, Flanagan CA, Osgood DW (2010) Examining trends in adolescent environmental attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors across three decades. Environ Behav 42:61–85CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Biodiversity Conservation Laboratory, Department of Environmental StudiesUniversity of the AegeanMytiliniGreece

Personalised recommendations