Implications of human value shift and persistence for biodiversity conservation

Measuring perceived fitness interdependence between humans and non-humans

Conservation ethics (i.e. moral concern for non-human organisms) are widespread, but we lack a comprehensive explanation for why people care about other species at all, and why they express strong moral concern for some species but not others. Recent theory suggests that conservation ethics might be rooted in cooperation between humans and members of other species. Building on central predictions of this eco-evolutionary theory, we conducted an online study (N = 651) and exploratory factor analysis to develop two scales that independently measure perceived fitness interdependence (PFI) and conservation ethics. The PFI scale measures perceived shared fate as a proximate indicator of human fitness interdependence with non-human organisms (i.e. the degree to which humans and other organisms influence each other's evolutionary success, that is, survival and reproduction). We designed the conservation ethics scale to measure moral beliefs and attitudes regarding those organisms. Both scales are composed of two factors and demonstrate good internal reliability. By combining insights from various branches of the evolutionary human sciences, including evolutionary anthropology, evolutionary psychology and human behavioural ecology, we offer empirical tools to investigate eco-evolutionary foundations of conservation ethics and behaviour.

The devil you know and the devil you don't: current status and challenges of bovine tuberculosis eradication in the United States

Having entered into its second century, the eradication program for bovine tuberculosis (bTB, caused by Mycobacterium bovis) in the United States of America occupies a position both enviable and daunting. Excepting four counties in Michigan comprising only 6109 km2 (0.06% of US land area) classified as Modified Accredited, as of April 2022 the entire country was considered Accredited Free of bTB by the US Department of Agriculture for cattle and bison. On the surface, the now well-described circumstances of endemic bTB in Michigan, where white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) serve as a free-ranging wildlife maintenance host, may appear to be the principal remaining barrier to national eradication. However, the situation there is unique in the U.S., and far-removed from the broader issues of bTB control in the remainder of the country. In Michigan, extensive surveillance for bTB in deer over the last quarter century, and regulatory measures to maximize the harvest of publicly-owned wildlife, have been implemented and sustained. Prevalence of bTB in deer has remained at a low level, although not sufficiently low to eliminate cattle herd infections. Public attitudes towards bTB, cattle and deer, and their relative importance, have been more influential in the management of the disease than any limitations of biological science. However, profound changes in the demographics and social attitudes of Michigan's human population are underway, changes which are likely to force a critical reevaluation of the bTB control strategies thus far considered integral. In the rest of the U.S. where bTB is not self-sustaining in wildlife, changes in the scale of cattle production, coupled with both technical and non-technical issues have created their own substantial challenges. It is against this diverse backdrop that the evolution of whole genome sequencing of M. bovis has revolutionized understanding of the history and ecology of bTB in Michigan, resolved previously undiscernible epidemiological puzzles, provided insights into zoonotic transmission, and unified eradication efforts across species and agencies. We describe the current status of bTB eradication in the U.S., how circumstances and management have changed, what has been learned, and what remains more elusive than ever.

Fertility Control for Wildlife: A European Perspective

Trends of human population growth and landscape development in Europe show that wildlife impacts are escalating. Lethal methods, traditionally employed to mitigate these impacts, are often ineffective, environmentally hazardous and face increasing public opposition. Fertility control is advocated as a humane tool to mitigate these impacts. This review describes mammalian and avian wildlife contraceptives' effect on reproduction of individuals and populations, delivery methods, potential costs and feasibility of using fertility control in European contexts. These contexts include small, isolated wildlife populations and situations in which lethal control is either illegal or socially unacceptable, such as urban settings, national parks and areas where rewilding occurs. The review highlights knowledge gaps, such as impact of fertility control on recruitment, social and spatial behaviour and on target and non-target species, provides a decision framework to assist decisions about the potential use of wildlife fertility control, and suggests eight reasons for Europe to invest in this area. Although developing and registering contraceptives in Europe will have substantial costs, these are relatively small when compared to wildlife's economic and environmental impact. Developing safe and effective contraceptives will be essential if European countries want to meet public demand for methods to promote human-wildlife coexistence.

Leveraging collective action and environmental literacy to address complex sustainability challenges

Developing and enhancing societal capacity to understand, debate elements of, and take actionable steps toward a sustainable future at a scale beyond the individual are critical when addressing sustainability challenges such as climate change, resource scarcity, biodiversity loss, and zoonotic disease. Although mounting evidence exists for how to facilitate individual action to address sustainability challenges, there is less understanding of how to foster collective action in this realm. To support research and practice promoting collective action to address sustainability issues, we define the term "collective environmental literacy" by delineating four key potent aspects: scale, dynamic processes, shared resources, and synergy. Building on existing collective constructs and thought, we highlight areas where researchers, practitioners, and policymakers can support individuals and communities as they come together to identify, develop, and implement solutions to wicked problems. We close by discussing limitations of this work and future directions in studying collective environmental literacy.

Economic valuation of wildlife conservation

This paper reviews concepts and methods for the economic valuation of nature in the context of wildlife conservation and questions them in light of alternative approaches based on deliberation. Economic valuations have been used to set priorities, consider opportunity costs, assess co-benefits of conservation, support the case for conservation in public awareness and advocacy, and drive novel schemes to change incentives. We discuss the foundational principles of mainstream economic valuation in terms of its assumptions about values, markets, and human behaviour; propose a list of valuation studies in relation to wildlife protection; and explain the methods used. We then review critiques of these approaches focusing on the narrow way in which economics conceives of values, and institutional, power, and equity concerns. Finally, we complement conventional approaches commonly used for wildlife valuation with two forms of deliberative valuation: deliberated preferences and deliberative democratic monetary valuation. These are discussed in terms of their potential to address the drawbacks of mainstream economics and to realise the potential of valuation in bridging conservation of nature for its own sake and its important contributions to human well-being.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10344-023-01658-2.

Analysis of differences and commonalities in wildlife hunting across the Africa-Europe South-North gradient

Hunting and its impacts on wildlife are typically studied regionally, with a particular focus on the Global South. Hunting can, however, also undermine rewilding efforts or threaten wildlife in the Global North. Little is known about how hunting manifests under varying socioeconomic and ecological contexts across the Global South and North. Herein, we examined differences and commonalities in hunting characteristics across an exemplary Global South-North gradient approximated by the Human Development Index (HDI) using face-to-face interviews with 114 protected area (PA) managers in 25 African and European countries. Generally, we observed that hunting ranges from the illegal, economically motivated, and unsustainable hunting of herbivores in the South to the legal, socially and ecologically motivated hunting of ungulates within parks and the illegal hunting of mainly predators outside parks in the North. Commonalities across this Africa-Europe South-North gradient included increased conflict-related killings in human-dominated landscapes and decreased illegal hunting with beneficial community conditions, such as mutual trust resulting from community involvement in PA management. Nevertheless, local conditions cannot outweigh the strong effect of the HDI on unsustainable hunting. Our findings highlight regional challenges that require collaborative, integrative efforts in wildlife conservation across actors, while identified commonalities may outline universal mechanisms for achieving this goal.

Hunting and its impacts on wildlife are typically studied regionally, with a particular focus on the Global South. An assessment across a contrasting South-North gradient reveals differences in the ecological, social, and economic dimensions of hunting, but also identifies commonalities that point to general ways to reduce unsustainable hunting.

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on environmental values

Environmental values emphasize protection of the natural environment and promote behaviors that express this broad motivational goal. Thus, changes in these values at the community and individual levels are likely to have significant consequences for sustainability efforts. We examined the relative importance of environmental values in Australian adults at five time points over 4 years, including a period of stability (2017-2019) and a period of crisis (early and late in the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic). We found that the relative importance of environmental values increased from 2017 to 2019 and decreased during the pandemic. Importantly, the decrease in 2020 was lessened by individuals' connection with nature.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11625-022-01151-w.

Impact of Location on Predator Control Preference Patterns

In recent decades, interactions with carnivores have increased in suburban and urban areas. However, it is unknown how predator control preferences of urban, suburban, and rural residents compare. We sought to characterize predator control preferences regarding interactions with bobcats (Lynx rufus) and coyotes (Canis latrans), and compare these preferences among people living in urban, suburban, and rural areas. We also sought to determine the factors that predicted the likelihood of respondents changing their predator control preference. We conducted cross-sectional surveys of adult residents of the United States and the state of Ohio and embedded randomly assigned carnivore interaction scenarios in which respondents were asked to choose their preferred predator control in response to each scenario. We found that when both scenarios took place in an agricultural location, respondents became significantly more sensitive to changes in the severity (i.e., they were more likely to switch their preferred method of predator control). Subjects overwhelmingly indicated a preference for non-lethal forms of predator control. Specifically, 71.8% of respondents preferred non-lethal in response to both scenarios, 18.5% gave mixed responses (i.e., preferred lethal in response to one of the scenarios but non-lethal in response to the other scenario), and only 9.7% preferred lethal predator control in response to both scenarios. The tendency to prefer only non-lethal methods decreased along the urban-rural gradient such that 78.5% of urban respondents expressed a consistent preference for non-lethal forms of control, compared with 72.8% of suburban respondents, and 51.3% rural respondents. This suggests that most urban and suburban residents view lethal predator control methods as simply inappropriate—at least for the scenarios described. In practice, the management of human-carnivore interactions in urban and suburban areas is complicated by a variety of factors (e.g., the presence and density of humans and their pets) which reduce the flexibility of wildlife managers in these areas. Additionally, management options may be further restricted by the preferences of residents, especially given that management is likely to be more visible in these areas. Strong preferences against lethal control in urban and suburban settings may incentivize the development of novel methods for controlling human-carnivore conflicts in the future.

Strengthening conservation science as a crisis discipline by addressing challenges of precaution, privilege, and individualism

Conservation science deals with crises and supports policy interventions devised to mitigate highly uncertain threats that pose irreversible harm. When conventional policy tools, such as quantitative risk assessments, are insufficient, the precautionary principle provides a practical framework and range of robust heuristics. Yet, precaution is often resisted in many policy arenas, especially those involving powerful self-interests, and this resistance is compounded by structures of privilege and competitive individualism in science. We describe key drivers and effects of such resistance in conservation science. These include a loss of rigor under uncertainty, an erosion of crisis response capabilities, and a further reinforcement of privileged interests in conservation politics. We recommend open acknowledgement of the pressures exerted by power inside science; greater recognition for the value of the precautionary principle under uncertainty; deliberate measures to resist competitive individualism; support for blind review, open science, and data sharing; and a shift from hierarchical multidisciplinarity toward more egalitarian transdisciplinarity to accelerate advances in conservation science. Article impact statement: Precautionary principle, privilege structures among disciplines, and culture of individualism link to effective conservation policy making.

Responding to Ecological Transformation: Mental Models, External Constraints, and Manager Decision-Making

Ecological transformation creates many challenges for public natural resource management and requires managers to grapple with new relationships to change and new ways to manage it. In the context of unfamiliar trajectories of ecological change, a manager can resist, accept, or direct change, choices that make up the resist-accept-direct (RAD) framework. In this article, we provide a conceptual framework for how to think about this new decision space that managers must navigate. We identify internal factors (mental models) and external factors (social feasibility, institutional context, and scientific uncertainty) that shape management decisions. We then apply this conceptual framework to the RAD strategies (resist, accept, direct) to illuminate how internal and external factors shape those decisions. Finally, we conclude with a discussion of how this conceptual framework shapes our understanding of management decisions, especially how these decisions are not just ecological but also social, and the implications for research and management.

Complex Human-Shark Conflicts Confound Conservation Action

Human-wildlife conflicts are a growing phenomenon globally as human populations expand and wildlife interactions become more commonplace. While these conflicts have been well-defined in terrestrial systems, marine forms are less well-understood. As concerns grow for the future of many shark species it is becoming clear that a key to conservation success lies in changing human behaviors in relation to sharks. However, human-shark conflicts are multidimensional, each with different ecological, social and economic implications. Sharks have functional roles as occasional predators of humans and competitors with humans for fish stocks. In addition, and unlike most terrestrial predators, sharks are also important prey species for humans, being a source of animal protein and other products taken in fisheries. These functional roles are complex and often inter-dependent which can lead to multiple kinds of conflict. Shark management for conservation and human safety is also leading to conflict between different groups of people with different values and beliefs, demonstrating that human wildlife conflict can be a proxy for human-human conflict in the marine domain. Sharks are iconic species in society, being both feared and revered. As such human beliefs, attitudes and perceptions play key roles that underpin much human-shark conflict and future work to understanding these will contribute significantly to solutions that reduce conflict and hence improve conservation outcomes.

Modelling stakeholder satisfaction for conflict resolution in wildlife management: a case of wolf population in Sweden

The Swedish wolf population has rebounded from near extinction in the 1960s to around 365 individuals in 2020, after the implementation of the Hunting Act (jaktlagen) in 1966. This recent increase in the wolf population has evoked a serious divide between “pro-wolf” and “anti-wolf” Swedish citizens. Despite the continuous efforts by the Swedish government to reconcile this antagonism, the conflicts are persistent with a sign of impasse. In this paper, we present a modelling tool, which can bring transparent and “structured dialogue to the opposing positions.” This approach includes a stylized framework for quantitative modelling of stakeholders’ satisfaction levels regarding their preferred size of the wildlife population in question, based on the concept of satisfaction functions. We argue that this framework may contribute to conflict resolution by bringing a common understanding among stakeholders, facilitate a societal discourse, and potentially help to assess likely support for conservation policies. We present a showcase application of this modeling tool in the context of the conflict over the Swedish wolf conservation policies. The model is informed using a thorough literature review as well as interviews, which identified relevant stakeholder groups and respective drivers of their attitudes towards wolves.

Personality change and sustainability attitudes and behaviors

Withstanding the climate crisis will depend in part on individuals behaving in a more environmentally sustainable manner. However, relatively little is known about the individual factors that promote sustainable attitudes and behaviors (SABs). Although there are established cross-sectional associations between personality traits and SABs, it is unclear whether changes in personality are related to increases in SABs over time, and how personality is differentially related to specific SABs. Using data from 61,479 participants in New Zealand, we tested preregistered hypotheses about how personality codevelops with valuing the environment, believing in climate change, concern about climate change, personal environmental efficacy, personal environmental sacrifice, and support for the Green Party. We found that SABs generally increased from 2009 to 2017, although there was variation across age cohorts, SAB variables, and samples. We replicated concurrent correlations between broad personality traits—particularly Agreeableness, Openness, and Honesty/Humility—and SABs and present novel evidence that increases in SAB are related to changes in traits, particularly Agreeableness. These findings have implications for both understanding the factors associated with changes in SABs over time and understanding the factors that drive personality change.

The changing sociocultural context of wildlife conservation

We introduced a multilevel model of value shift to describe the changing social context of wildlife conservation. Our model depicts how cultural-level processes driven by modernization (e.g., increased wealth, education, and urbanization) affect changes in individual-level cognition that prompt a shift from domination to mutualism wildlife values. Domination values promote beliefs that wildlife should be used primarily to benefit humans, whereas mutualism values adopt a view that wildlife are part of one's social network and worthy of care and compassion. Such shifts create emergent effects (e.g., new interest groups) and challenges to wildlife management organizations (e.g., increased conflict) and dramatically alter the sociopolitical context of conservation decisions. Although this model is likely applicable to many modernized countries, we tested it with data from a 2017-2018 nationwide survey (mail and email panel) of 43,949 residents in the United States. We conducted hierarchical linear modeling and correlational analysis to examine relationships. Modernization variables had strong state-level effects on domination and mutualism. Higher levels of education, income, and urbanization were associated with higher percentages of mutualists and lower percentages of traditionalists, who have strong domination values. Values affected attitudes toward wildlife management challenges; for example, states with higher proportions of mutualists were less supportive of lethal control of wolves (Canis lupus) and had lower percentages of active hunters, who represent the traditional clientele of state wildlife agencies in the United States. We contend that agencies will need to embrace new strategies to engage and represent a growing segment of the public with mutualism values. Our model merits testing for application in other countries.

Exploring nationality and social identity to explain attitudes toward conservation actions in the United States and Australia

Understanding human attitudes toward wildlife management is critical to implementing effective conservation action and policy. Understanding the factors that shape public attitudes toward different wildlife management actions is limited, however, which can result in unpredictable public responses to interventions. We drew on comparisons between residents of 2 countries on separate continents to explore differences in attitudes toward wildlife management and determine factors important in shaping these attitudes. We surveyed representative publics via market research panels in Australia (n = 881 respondents) and the United States (n = 1287). We applied a social-identity approach and demography to identify factors that explained variance between responses about wildlife management. We compared responses between countries overall and within subgroups of respondents who strongly identified as environmentalists, animal rights activists, wildlife conservation advocates, and farmers. We created aggregate scores for the management-related response items per respondent and used regression analyses to identify the relative importance of country, identity, age, and gender in explaining variance between responses. These factors accounted for 15.3% of variance among responses. Australians overall were generally more accepting of lethal wildlife management actions than U.S. respondents. Differences in national attitudes reflected differences between United States and Australian wildlife management and policy, highlighting the importance of understanding social attitudes in shaping conservation policy. Identifying as a farmer followed by identifying as an animal rights activist most shaped attitudes toward wildlife management. Identity-related conflicts could be initiated or exacerbated by conservation interventions that fail to consider identity-related processes.

Updating the AIHTS Trapping Standards to Improve Animal Welfare and Capture Efficiency and Selectivity

In 1999, after pressure from the European Union, an Agreement on International Humane Trapping Standards (AIHTS) that would result in the banning of the steel-jawed leghold traps in the European Community, Canada, and Russia was signed. The United States implemented these standards through an Agreed Minute with the European Community. Over the last two decades, scientists have criticized the AIHTS for (1) omitting species that are commonly trapped; (2) threshold levels of trap acceptance that are not representative of state-of-the-art trap technology; (3) excluding popular traps which are commonly used by trappers although they are known to cause prolonged pain and stress to captured animals; (4) inadequate coverage of capture efficiency and species selectivity (i.e., number of captures of target and non-target species) performance. Concerns about the ability of standards and test procedures to ensure animal welfare, and about the implementation of standards, have also been voiced by wildlife biologists, managers, and conservation groups. In this review, we present a synopsis of current trapping standards and test procedures, and we compare the standards to a then contemporary 1985-1993 Canadian trap research and development program. On the basis of the above-noted concerns about AIHTS, and our experience as wildlife professionals involved in the capture of mammals, we formulated the following hypotheses: (1) the list of mammal species included in the AIHTS is incomplete; (2) the AIHTS have relatively low animal welfare performance thresholds of killing trap acceptance and do not reflect state-of-the-art trapping technology; (3) the AIHTS animal welfare indicators and injuries for restraining traps are insufficient; (4) the AIHTS testing procedures are neither thorough nor transparent; (5) the AIHTS protocols for the use of certified traps are inadequate; (6) the AIHTS procedures for the handling and dispatching of animals are nonexistent; (7) the AIHTS criteria to assess trap capture efficiency and species selectivity are inappropriate. We conclude that the AIHTS do not reflect state-of-the-art trapping technology, and assessment protocols need to be updated to include trap components and sets, animal handling and dispatching, and trap visit intervals. The list of traps and species included in the standards should be updated. Finally, the concepts of capture efficiency and trap selectivity should be developed and included in the standards. Based on our review, it is clear that mammal trapping standards need to be revisited to implement state-of-the-art trapping technology and improve capture efficiency and species selectivity. We believe that a committee of international professionals consisting of wildlife biologists and veterinarians with extensive experience in the capture of mammals and animal welfare could produce new standards within 1-2 years. We propose a series of measures to fund trap testing and implement new standards.

Love Off, Fear On? Brown Bear Acceptance by Teenagers in European Countries with Differing Population Statuses

The acceptance of large carnivores is one of the key issues for their conservation. We analyzed the level acceptance of brown bears (Ursus arctos Linnaeus, 1758) amongst 10–18 year old school students in four European countries using anonymous questionnaires. Our aim was to characterize the drivers of species acceptance, described as a rural–urban cline, as well as fear levels and the respondents’ familiarity with bears. We found lower levels of acceptance of bears were related to fear of bears and that bear acceptance was not higher in the bear-inhabited countries, but urban inhabitants tended to better accept the species. Factor analysis revealed the importance of country-related aspects, familiarity with bears, experiences in human-wildlife conflict, gender-age differences, respondent’s relationship to nature and the origin of their knowledge of the species. We consider that bear-related education and mass media in Latvia and Lithuania could reduce fear of these animals and sustain their acceptance, while human–wildlife conflict management measures in Bulgaria and Turkey are recommended to boost the appreciation of the species.

Beyond conflict: exploring the spectrum of human–wildlife interactions and their underlying mechanisms

Humans have lived alongside and interacted with wild animals throughout evolutionary history. Even though wild animals can damage property, or injure humans and domesticated animals, not all interactions between humans and wildlife are negative. Yet, research has tended to focus disproportionately on negative interactions leading to negative outcomes, labelling this human–wildlife conflict. Studies have identified several factors, ranging from gender, religion, socio-economics and literacy, which influence people's responses to wildlife. We used the ISI Web of Knowledge database to assess quantitatively how human–wildlife interactions are framed in the scientific literature and to understand the hypotheses that have been invoked to explain these. We found that the predominant focus of research was on human–wildlife conflict (71%), with little coverage of coexistence (2%) or neutral interactions (8%). We suggest that such a framing is problematic as it can lead to biases in conservation planning by failing to consider the nuances of people's relationships with wildlife and the opportunities that exist for conservation. We propose a typology of human responses to wildlife impacts, ranging from negative to positive, to help moderate the disproportionate focus on conflict. We suggest that standardizing terminology and considering interactions beyond those that are negative can lead to a more nuanced understanding of human–wildlife relations and help promote greater coexistence between people and wildlife. We also list the various influential factors that are reported to shape human–wildlife interactions and, to generate further hypotheses and research, classify them into 55 proximate (correlates) and five ultimate (mechanisms) factors.

Public Green Infrastructure Contributes to City Livability: A Systematic Quantitative Review

Consistent with the Land Urbanism and Green Infrastructure theme of this special issue of Land, the primary goal of this review is to provide a plain language overview of recent literature that reports on the psychological, physiological, general well-being, and wider societal benefits that humans receive as a result of experiencing public green infrastructure (PGI) and nature in urbanized landscapes. This enhanced well-being and the wider societal benefits that accrue to urban dwellers as a result of interacting with quality PGI contributes to the concept known as city or urban livability. The quantitative analysis and theoretical synthesis reported in this review can inform decision makers, stakeholders, and other PGI and urban nature (UN) researchers of the benefits that urban populations receive from experiencing quality PGI spaces and UN and the contribution those spaces make to the livability of urban areas. With diminishing opportunities for the acquisition of new public open space to increase PGI and re-establish UN near urban centers, the efficient management and continuous improvement of existing PGI and UN is essential to promote and foster opportunities for human-to-nature contact and the known benefits therein derived. In addition to identifying an increased research interest and publication of articles that report on the contribution of PGI spaces to urban livability over the past decade, the review identifies and reports on the seven focus areas of PGI-livability research and the six attributes of PGI spaces that the current literatures report as contributing to the livability of urbanized landscapes. After providing a quantitative analysis for the reporting of those research areas and PGI attributes and summarizing key findings reported in the literature regarding the contribution that PGI spaces make to urban livability, this review also identifies knowledge gaps in the published literature and puts forward recommendations for further research in this rapidly expanding multidisciplinary field of research and policy development.

Why social values cannot be changed for the sake of conservation

The hope for creating widespread change in social values has endured among conservation professionals since early calls by Aldo Leopold for a "land ethic." However, there has been little serious attention in conservation to the fields of investigation that address values, how they are formed, and how they change. We introduce a social-ecological systems conceptual approach in which values are seen not only as motivational goals people hold but also as ideas that are deeply embedded in society's material culture, collective behaviors, traditions, and institutions. Values define and bind groups, organizations, and societies; serve an adaptive role; and are typically stable across generations. When abrupt value changes occur, they are in response to substantial alterations in the social-ecological context. Such changes build on prior value structures and do not result in complete replacement. Given this understanding of values, we conclude that deliberate efforts to orchestrate value shifts for conservation are unlikely to be effective. Instead, there is an urgent need for research on values with a multilevel and dynamic view that can inform innovative conservation strategies for working within existing value structures. New directions facilitated by a systems approach will enhance understanding of the role values play in shaping conservation challenges and improve management of the human component of conservation.

Fantastic beasts and why to conserve them: animals, magic and biodiversity conservation

There is a broad set of human beliefs, attitudes and behaviours around the issue of magical animals, referring to both mythical animals not recognized by science and extant animals that are recognized by science but have magical properties. This is a broad issue ranging from spiritual beliefs around mythical animals living in Malagasy forests, to cultural heritage associated with the Loch Ness Monster in Scotland. Beliefs and behaviours around magical animals can have positive and negative impacts on biodiversity conservation goals. Yet, so far, the discipline of conservation biology has not adequately considered magical animals, neglecting to account for the broader knowledge from outside the natural sciences on this issue, and taking a narrow, utilitarian approach to how magical animals should be managed, without necessarily considering the broader impacts on conservation goals or ethics. Here we explore how magical animals can influence conservation goals, how conservation biology and practice has thought about magical animals, and some of the limitations of current approaches, particularly the failure to consider magical animals as part of wider systems of belief and culture. We argue that magical animals and their implications for conservation merit wider consideration.

Social values and biodiversity conservation in a dynamic world

Understanding what shape values (which ultimately shape human behavior) will help improve the effectiveness of conservation solutions that depend on public support. To contribute to this understanding, we investigated the influence of societal-level changes, such as modernization, on values in a multilevel framework. We collected survey responses (n = 4183) to questionnaires mailed to a random selection of households within each county in Washington (U.S.A.) (response rate 32%). We used multilevel modeling to determine the relationship between modernization (e.g., county-level urbanization, wealth, and education) and wildlife value orientations (values that shape thought about wildlife) while controlling for individual-level sociodemographics. We then explored how values influence conservation support at different levels (e.g., individual and county) and how values explain conservation support in a case study of public responses to wolf (Canis lupis) recovery. We found positive associations between county-level examples of modernization and mutualism (a wildlife value orientation that prioritizes the perceived needs of wildlife) independent of a respondent's sociodemographics, and negative associations between modernization and domination (a wildlife value orientation that prioritizes human needs). Our results suggest that context has an additive impact on one's values; certain locations exhibited domination values, whereas others exhibited a mix of value types. This finding is important because actions that restrict human interests to promote biodiversity were negatively associated with domination and positively associated with mutualism. In the wolf case study, mutualism was strongly correlated with less social conflict over wolf recovery in many, but not all, counties (e.g., Pearson's r correlation = 0.59 in one county and a nonsignificant correlation in another). Our findings suggest that modernization operates on values within a state with implications for biodiversity, but other factors in addition to values must be investigated to fully understand what leads to proconservation behavior.