{"title":"An对保护旗舰项目的综述:评估筹款能力和代理权力","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":"{\"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}","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}
An overview of reviews of conservation flagships: evaluating fundraising ability and surrogate power
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.