Abstract
The promise of environmental conservation incentive programs that provide direct payments in exchange for conservation outcomes is that they enhance the value of engaging in stewardship behaviors. An insidious but important concern is that a narrow focus on optimizing payment levels can ultimately suppress program participation and subvert participants’ internal motivation to engage in long-term conservation behaviors. Increasing participation and engendering stewardship can be achieved by recognizing that participation is not simply a function of the payment; it is a function of the overall structure and administration of the program. Key to creating innovative and more sustainable programs is fitting them within the existing needs and values of target participants. By focusing on empathy for participants, co-designing program approaches, and learning from the rapid prototyping of program concepts, a human-centered approach to conservation incentive program design enhances the propensity for discovery of novel and innovative solutions to pressing conservation issues.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Banerjee, S., S. Secchi, J. Fargione, S. Polasky, and S. Kraft. 2013. How to sell ecosystem services: A guide for designing new markets. Frontiers in Ecology & the Environment 11: 297–304.
Brown, T., and J. Wyatt. 2010. Design thinking for social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review 8: 30–35.
Bowles, S. 2008. Policies designed for self-interested citizens may undermine “the moral sentiments”: Evidence from economic experiments. Science 320: 1605–1609.
Clements, T., A. John, K. Nielsen, D. An, S. Tan, and E.J. Milner-Gulland. 2010. Payments for biodiversity conservation in the context of weak institutions: Comparison of three programs from Cambodia. Ecological Economics 69: 1283–1291.
DeCaro, D., and M. Stokes. 2008. Social-psychological principles of community-based conservation and conservancy motivation: Attaining goals within an autonomy-supportive environment. Conservation Biology 22: 1443–1451.
Deci, E.L., R. Koestner, and R.M. Ryan. 1999. A meta-analytic review of experiments examining the effects of extrinsic rewards on intrinsic motivation. Psychological Bulletin 125: 627–668.
Donlan, C.J. 2015. Proactive strategies for protecting species: Pre-listing conservation and the Endangered Species Act. Oakland: University of California Press.
Ferraro, P.J. 2011. The future of payments for environmental services. Conservation Biology 25: 1134–1138.
Ferraro, P.J., and A. Kiss. 2002. Direct payments to conserve biodiversity. Science 298: 1718–1719.
Frey, B.S., and R. Jegen. 2001. Motivation crowding theory. Journal of Economic Surveys 15: 589.
Gelcich, S., and C.J. Donlan. 2015. Incentivizing biodiversity conservation with artisanal fishing communities through territorial user rights and business model innovation. Conservation Biology. doi:10.1111/cobi.12477.
Greene, H. 2005. Organisms in nature as a central focus for biology. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 20: 23–27.
Heyman, J., and D. Ariely. 2004. Effort for payment. Psychological Science 15: 787–793.
Jack, B.K., C. Kousky, and K.R.E. Sims. 2008. Lessons from previous experience with incentive-based mechanisms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105: 9465–9470.
Langpap, C. 2006. Conservation of endangered species: Can incentives work for private landowners? Ecological Economics 57: 558–572.
Leopold, A. 1949. A sand County Almanac. New York: Oxford University Press.
Lett, J. 1990. Emics and etics: Notes on the epistemology of anthropology. In Emics and etics: The insider/outsider debate, ed. T.N. Headland, K.L. Pike, and M. Harris. Frontiers of Anthropology, vol. 7. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Liedtka, J. 2011. Learning to use design thinking tools for successful innovation. Strategy & Leadership 39: 13–19.
Liedtka, J., and T. Ogilvie. 2011. Designing for growth. New York: Columbia University Press.
Martin, R. 2009. The design of business: Why design thinking is the next competitive advantage. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Melles, G., I. de Vere, and V. Misic. 2011. Socially responsible design: Thinking beyond the triple bottom line to socially responsive and sustainable product design. CoDesign 7: 143–154.
Milne, S., and E. Niesten. 2009. Direct payments for biodiversity conservation in developing countries: Practical insights for design and implementation. Oryx 43: 530–541.
Muradian, R., E. Corbera, U. Pascual, N. Kosoy, and P.H. May. 2010. Reconciling theory and practice: An alternative conceptual framework for understanding payments for environmental services. Ecological Economics 69: 1202–1208.
Naeem, S., J.C. Ingram, A. Varga, T. Agardy, P. Barten, G. Bennett, E. Bloomgarden, L.L. Bremer, et al. 2015. Get the science right when paying for nature’s services. Science 347: 1206–1207.
Osbaldiston, R., and K.M. Sheldon. 2003. Promoting internalized motivation for environmentally responsible behavior: A prospective study of environmental goals. Journal of Environmental Psychology 23: 349–357.
Peterson, M.N., T.R. Peterson, M.J. Peterson, R.R. Lopez, and N.J. Silvy. 2002. Cultural conflict and the endangered Florida key deer. Journal of Wildlife Management 66: 921–942.
Ryan, R.M., and E.L. Deci. 2000. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55: 68–78.
Scherfig, C., M. Brunander, and C. Melander. 2010. From the world’s first design policy to the world’s best design policy. Design Management Review 21: 6–14.
Sommerville, M.M., J.P. Jones, and E. Milner-Gulland. 2009. A revised conceptual framework for payments for environmental services. Ecology & Society 14: 1–14.
Sorice, M.G., and T. Abel. 2015. A landowner-centered approach to obtaining participation in pre-compliance conservation programs. In Proactive strategies for protecting species: Pre-listing conservation and the Endangered Species Act, ed. C.J. Donlan, 105–114. Oakland: University of California Press.
Sorice, M.G., and J.R. Conner. 2010. Predicting private landowner intentions to enroll in an incentive program to protect endangered species. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 15: 77–89.
Sorice, M.G., W. Haider, J.R. Conner, and R.B. Ditton. 2011. Incentive structure of and private landowner participation in an endangered species conservation program. Conservation Biology 25: 587–596.
Sorice, M.G., C. Oh, T. Gartner, M. Snieckus, R. Johnson, and C.J. Donlan. 2013. Increasing participation in incentive programs for biodiversity conservation. Ecological Applications 23: 1146–1155.
Van Vugt, M. 2009. Averting the tragedy of the commons: Using social psychological science to protect the environment. Current Directions in Psychological Science 18: 169–173.
Vohs, K., N.L. Mead, and M.R. Goode. 2006. The psychological consequences of money. Science 314: 1154–1156.
Worrell, R., and M.C. Appleby. 2000. Stewardship of natural resources: Definition, ethical and practical aspects. Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 12: 263–277.
Wunder, S., S. Engel, and S. Pagiola. 2008. Taking stock: A comparative analysis of payments for environmental services programs in developed and developing countries. Ecological Economics 65: 834–852.
Acknowledgments
We thank the following organizations for financial support: Wildlife Conservation Society through the Wildlife Action Opportunities Fund (with support from the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation), and the David & Lucille Packard Foundation. C. J. Donlan also thanks D. Newman for introducing him to the world of design thinking. This material is based in part upon work supported by the U.S. National Science Foundation Dynamics of Coupled Natural and Human Systems (CNH) Program (GEO-1211877), the Virginia Agricultural Experiment Station and the McIntire Stennis Program of the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Sorice, M.G., Donlan, C.J. A human-centered framework for innovation in conservation incentive programs. Ambio 44, 788–792 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-015-0650-z
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13280-015-0650-z