An overview of reviews of conservation flagships: evaluating fundraising ability and surrogate power

IF 1.2 Q3 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION Nature Conservation Research Pub Date : 2022-08-01 DOI:10.3897/natureconservation.49.81219
Piia Lundberg, Anni Arponen
{"title":"An overview of reviews of conservation flagships: evaluating fundraising ability and surrogate power","authors":"Piia Lundberg, Anni Arponen","doi":"10.3897/natureconservation.49.81219","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The main role of flagship species in biodiversity conservation is to raise awareness and funds for conservation. Because of their marketing role, flagship species are often selected based on other than biodiversity related criteria, such as species charisma or aesthetic appeal. Nonetheless, funds raised through flagship species are often used to protect the species itself, making it important to evaluate the effectiveness of flagship species as conservation tools: For example, could superior fundraising ability outweigh the low biodiversity surrogate power of a flagship, justifying this ambivalent role in conservation? To assess flagship effectiveness from this dual perspective, we must synthesize evidence on a) the fundraising potential of flagship species vs. other conservation targets, such as ecosystems or biodiversity, and b) the biodiversity surrogate power of potential flagship taxa. We approached this broad topic through an overview of reviews on both subtopics. We found no evidence that charismatic flagship species were superior fundraisers over other conservation targets. In addition, studies evaluating the biodiversity surrogacy power of different taxa had mainly resulted in mixed findings, contesting the overall usefulness of the concept in conservation. The variability of study setups and methods made comparisons between studies difficult, highlighting the need to standardize future research (e.g., standardizing explanatory variables). Further possible reasons for lack of conclusive evidence on fundraising potential are the dominance of factors other than flagship identity (e.g., scope and conservation status) and differences in donor preferences. We recommend Environmental NGOs to develop and diversify their fundraising strategies based on best available knowledge, and rely less on mere species charisma.","PeriodicalId":54166,"journal":{"name":"Nature Conservation Research","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Conservation Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3897/natureconservation.49.81219","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The main role of flagship species in biodiversity conservation is to raise awareness and funds for conservation. Because of their marketing role, flagship species are often selected based on other than biodiversity related criteria, such as species charisma or aesthetic appeal. Nonetheless, funds raised through flagship species are often used to protect the species itself, making it important to evaluate the effectiveness of flagship species as conservation tools: For example, could superior fundraising ability outweigh the low biodiversity surrogate power of a flagship, justifying this ambivalent role in conservation? To assess flagship effectiveness from this dual perspective, we must synthesize evidence on a) the fundraising potential of flagship species vs. other conservation targets, such as ecosystems or biodiversity, and b) the biodiversity surrogate power of potential flagship taxa. We approached this broad topic through an overview of reviews on both subtopics. We found no evidence that charismatic flagship species were superior fundraisers over other conservation targets. In addition, studies evaluating the biodiversity surrogacy power of different taxa had mainly resulted in mixed findings, contesting the overall usefulness of the concept in conservation. The variability of study setups and methods made comparisons between studies difficult, highlighting the need to standardize future research (e.g., standardizing explanatory variables). Further possible reasons for lack of conclusive evidence on fundraising potential are the dominance of factors other than flagship identity (e.g., scope and conservation status) and differences in donor preferences. We recommend Environmental NGOs to develop and diversify their fundraising strategies based on best available knowledge, and rely less on mere species charisma.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An对保护旗舰项目的综述:评估筹款能力和代理权力
旗舰物种在生物多样性保护中的主要作用是提高保护意识和筹集保护资金。由于其营销作用,旗舰物种的选择通常基于与生物多样性相关的标准,如物种魅力或审美吸引力。尽管如此,通过旗舰物种筹集的资金通常用于保护物种本身,因此评估旗舰物种作为保护工具的有效性就变得很重要:例如,卓越的筹款能力是否超过旗舰物种低生物多样性的替代能力,从而证明旗舰物种在保护中的矛盾作用是合理的?为了从这两个角度评估旗舰物种的有效性,我们必须综合以下方面的证据:a)旗舰物种与其他保护目标(如生态系统或生物多样性)的筹资潜力;b)潜在旗舰类群的生物多样性替代能力。我们通过对两个子主题的综述来探讨这个广泛的主题。我们没有发现有魅力的旗舰物种比其他保护目标更能筹集资金的证据。此外,对不同分类群的生物多样性替代能力的评价结果主要是混杂的,这对该概念在保护中的总体有用性提出了质疑。研究设置和方法的可变性使研究之间的比较变得困难,突出了标准化未来研究的必要性(例如,标准化解释变量)。缺乏关于筹资潜力的确凿证据的进一步可能原因是旗舰特性以外的因素占主导地位(例如,范围和保存状况)和捐助者偏好的差异。我们建议非政府环保组织在现有知识的基础上发展和多样化他们的筹款策略,而不是仅仅依赖于物种魅力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nature Conservation Research
Nature Conservation Research BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION-
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
5.90%
发文量
34
审稿时长
13 weeks
期刊最新文献
Assessment of the threat status of reptile species from Vietnam - Implementation of the One Plan Approach to Conservation Conserving the threatened woody vegetation on dune slopes: Monitoring the decline and designing adaptive strategies for restoration Has climate change hijacked the environmental agenda? Dynamic change of habitat quality and its key driving factors in Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region, China Performance of SNP markers for parentage analysis in the Italian Alpine brown bear using non-invasive samples
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1