The Experts below are selected from a list of 3180 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Douglas C. Macmillan - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The effect of knowledge, Species aesthetic appeal, familiarity and conservation need on willingness to donate
Animal Conservation, 2019Co-Authors: P. Lundberg, Robert J. Smith, Diogo Veríssimo, Douglas C. Macmillan, Annukka Vainio, Anni ArponenAbstract:Environmental non‐governmental organizations (ENGOs) largely select Flagship Species for conservation marketing based on their aesthetic appeal. However, little is known about the fundraising effectiveness of this approach or how it compares to ecosystem conservation campaigns that use habitat types as Flagships. By performing a willingness to donate (WTD) survey of potential online donors from Finland, we identified which motivations and donor characteristics influence their preferences for a range of different Flagship Species and ecosystems. Using the contingent valuation method and the payment card approach, we found the combined funding for eight mammal Flagship Species was 29% higher funding than for eight bird Flagship Species. Furthermore, the aesthetically more appealing Species, as well as the Species and ecosystems that are native to Finland, attracted the most funding. We then used ordinal logistic regression to identify the factors influencing a donor's WTD, finding that knowledge of biodiversity conservation and familiarity with the Flagship was associated with an increased WTD to birds and ecosystems, and people with higher education levels had an increased WTD to ecosystems. Surprisingly, Species aesthetic appeal was not related to an increased WTD, although “need of conservation” was, suggesting that highlighting the plight of these less appealing threatened Species or ecosystems could raise money. Our results suggest that the factors driving donating to mammals, birds or ecosystems differ, and so underline the importance of considering the diverse motivations behind donation behaviour in fundraising campaigns. They also provide new evidence of the motivations of online donors, an under‐studied group who are likely to become an increasingly important source of conservation funding.
-
Evaluating Conservation Flagships and Flagship Fleets
Conservation Letters, 2013Co-Authors: Diogo Veríssimo, Robert J. Smith, Iain Fraser, Weber Girão, Alberto A. Campos, Douglas C. MacmillanAbstract:Flagship Species are widely used in conservation but this single Species approach has attracted criticism. One response is the “Flagship fleet,” which uses several Flagship Species in one conservation marketing campaign. However, marketing theory suggests multibrand campaigns can be counter-productive. Here, we develop an evaluation strategy for conservation Flagships, and use it to: measure the effectiveness of an existing bird Flagship Species; detect whether additional Species are needed; and, if appropriate, identify which Species should be added to create a Flagship fleet. We show the bird Species has high levels of visibility and recognition, but has traits that appeal to only half the target audience. We also show that this shortcoming could be overcome by forming a Flagship fleet based on adding an endemic mammal or fish Species but there are additional strategic considerations that must be taken into account, namely in terms of costs and potential future conflicts.
-
Stakeholder Perceptions of Potential Flagship Species for the Sacred Groves of the North Western Ghats, India
Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 2012Co-Authors: Yasuo Takahashi, Diogo Veríssimo, Douglas C. Macmillan, Archana GodboleAbstract:Flagship Species are often key in marketing ecotourism. Such Flagships, however, are frequently perceived differently by local communities and tourists, which could undermine the function of Flagships in conservation. This article investigated the differences between locals' and tourists' perceptions about potential bird and tree Flagships in sacred groves in the north Western Ghats, India, by surveying 154 villagers and 148 tourists. Tourists generally appreciated aesthetic value, but villagers had Species-specific views that incorporate use, cultural, and aesthetic values of these Species. The results imply that the views of tourists potentially complement the existing values of these Species for villagers by promoting ecotourism. Our results suggest the importance of considering both tourists' and locals' perspectives if conservationists aim to promote ecotourism using Flagships, and if they are to harness the support of local communities and strive for both biological and social sustainability.
-
Birds as tourism Flagship Species: a case study of tropical islands
Animal Conservation, 2009Co-Authors: Diogo Veríssimo, Iain Fraser, Jim J. Groombridge, Rachel Bristol, Douglas C. MacmillanAbstract:Species selected as Flagships to promote conservation activities around the world are typically well known and charismatic mega-fauna. Unfortunately this limits the scope for applying the concept as some critical areas for biodiversity conservation, such as tropical islands, lack such Species. In this study, we explore the potential to apply the concept of ‘tourism Flagship Species’ to tropical island birds of the Seychelles, an archipelago of considerable importance for conservation that is highly dependent on international tourism. In particular we wish to identify which Species attributes are most influential with regard to their potential for fundraising among international tourists. Using a choice experiment approach and using state-of-the-art econometric methods, we found that conservation attributes and physical appearance of the bird Species are both important in terms of raising funds for conservation. Nevertheless, conservation attributes ranked higher in the respondents preferences. Our results suggest that there is considerable potential for a variety of Species to effectively act as Flagships in developing nations that are dependent on international tourism and rich in biodiversity but lack charismatic fauna.
Diogo Veríssimo - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The effect of knowledge, Species aesthetic appeal, familiarity and conservation need on willingness to donate
Animal Conservation, 2019Co-Authors: P. Lundberg, Robert J. Smith, Diogo Veríssimo, Douglas C. Macmillan, Annukka Vainio, Anni ArponenAbstract:Environmental non‐governmental organizations (ENGOs) largely select Flagship Species for conservation marketing based on their aesthetic appeal. However, little is known about the fundraising effectiveness of this approach or how it compares to ecosystem conservation campaigns that use habitat types as Flagships. By performing a willingness to donate (WTD) survey of potential online donors from Finland, we identified which motivations and donor characteristics influence their preferences for a range of different Flagship Species and ecosystems. Using the contingent valuation method and the payment card approach, we found the combined funding for eight mammal Flagship Species was 29% higher funding than for eight bird Flagship Species. Furthermore, the aesthetically more appealing Species, as well as the Species and ecosystems that are native to Finland, attracted the most funding. We then used ordinal logistic regression to identify the factors influencing a donor's WTD, finding that knowledge of biodiversity conservation and familiarity with the Flagship was associated with an increased WTD to birds and ecosystems, and people with higher education levels had an increased WTD to ecosystems. Surprisingly, Species aesthetic appeal was not related to an increased WTD, although “need of conservation” was, suggesting that highlighting the plight of these less appealing threatened Species or ecosystems could raise money. Our results suggest that the factors driving donating to mammals, birds or ecosystems differ, and so underline the importance of considering the diverse motivations behind donation behaviour in fundraising campaigns. They also provide new evidence of the motivations of online donors, an under‐studied group who are likely to become an increasingly important source of conservation funding.
-
Evaluating Conservation Flagships and Flagship Fleets
Conservation Letters, 2013Co-Authors: Diogo Veríssimo, Robert J. Smith, Iain Fraser, Weber Girão, Alberto A. Campos, Douglas C. MacmillanAbstract:Flagship Species are widely used in conservation but this single Species approach has attracted criticism. One response is the “Flagship fleet,” which uses several Flagship Species in one conservation marketing campaign. However, marketing theory suggests multibrand campaigns can be counter-productive. Here, we develop an evaluation strategy for conservation Flagships, and use it to: measure the effectiveness of an existing bird Flagship Species; detect whether additional Species are needed; and, if appropriate, identify which Species should be added to create a Flagship fleet. We show the bird Species has high levels of visibility and recognition, but has traits that appeal to only half the target audience. We also show that this shortcoming could be overcome by forming a Flagship fleet based on adding an endemic mammal or fish Species but there are additional strategic considerations that must be taken into account, namely in terms of costs and potential future conflicts.
-
Using a systematic approach to select Flagship Species for bird conservation.
Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2013Co-Authors: Diogo Veríssimo, Robert J. Smith, Tatiana Pongiluppi, Maria Cintia M. Santos, Pedro F. Develey, Iain Fraser, Douglas C. MacmilanAbstract:Conservation marketing campaigns that focus on Flagship Species play a vital role in biological diversity conservation because they raise funds and change people's behavior. However, most Flagship Species are selected without considering the target audience of the campaign, which can hamper the campaign's effectiveness. To address this problem, we used a systematic and stakeholder-driven approach to select Flagship Species for a conservation campaign in the Serra do Urubu in northeastern Brazil. We based our techniques on environmental economic and marketing methods. We used choice experiments to examine the Species attributes that drive preference and latent-class models to segment respondents into groups by preferences and socioeconomic characteristics. We used respondent preferences and information on bird Species inhabiting the Serra do Urubu to calculate a Flagship Species suitability score. We also asked respondents to indicate their favorite Species from a set list to enable comparison between methods. The Species' traits that drove audience preference were geographic distribution, population size, visibility, attractiveness, and survival in captivity. However, the importance of these factors differed among groups and groups differed in their views on whether Species with small populations and the ability to survive in captivity should be prioritized. The popularity rankings of Species differed between approaches, a result that was probably related to the different ways in which the 2 methods measured preference. Our new approach is a transparent and evidence-based method that can be used to refine the way stakeholders are engaged in the design of conservation marketing campaigns.
-
Identifying Cinderella Species: uncovering mammals with conservation Flagship appeal
Conservation Letters, 2012Co-Authors: Robert J. Smith, Diogo Veríssimo, Nick J. B. Isaac, Kate E. JonesAbstract:International conservation NGOs rely on Flagship Species campaigns for fundraising but this approach has been criticized for benefiting a limited number of Species. However, this criticism assumes these campaigns do not fundraise for broader issues and that alternative Species with similar appeal to the target audience exist. We investigated this by: (1) recording the use of threatened mammal Species in international NGO Flagship campaigns, and; (2) using these data to identify “Cinderella Species,” which we define as aesthetically appealing but currently overlooked Species. We found these NGOs only used 80 Flagship Species and that 61% of their campaigns only raised funds for the Species itself. We also found these existing Flagships are generally large and have forward-facing eyes and that there are 183 other threatened Species with similar traits. Thus, the current approach is overly limited but NGOs could overcome this by adopting some of these Cinderella Species as new Flagships.
-
Stakeholder Perceptions of Potential Flagship Species for the Sacred Groves of the North Western Ghats, India
Human Dimensions of Wildlife, 2012Co-Authors: Yasuo Takahashi, Diogo Veríssimo, Douglas C. Macmillan, Archana GodboleAbstract:Flagship Species are often key in marketing ecotourism. Such Flagships, however, are frequently perceived differently by local communities and tourists, which could undermine the function of Flagships in conservation. This article investigated the differences between locals' and tourists' perceptions about potential bird and tree Flagships in sacred groves in the north Western Ghats, India, by surveying 154 villagers and 148 tourists. Tourists generally appreciated aesthetic value, but villagers had Species-specific views that incorporate use, cultural, and aesthetic values of these Species. The results imply that the views of tourists potentially complement the existing values of these Species for villagers by promoting ecotourism. Our results suggest the importance of considering both tourists' and locals' perspectives if conservationists aim to promote ecotourism using Flagships, and if they are to harness the support of local communities and strive for both biological and social sustainability.
Carsten Rahbek - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Flagship Species ecological complementarity and conserving the diversity of mammals and birds in sub saharan africa
Animal Conservation, 2000Co-Authors: Paul H. Williams, Neil D. Burgess, Carsten RahbekAbstract:More biodiversity could be protected in situ if the few Species that attract the most popular support (the ‘Flagship’ Species) had distributions that also covered the broader diversity of organisms. We studied how well different groups of mammals performed for representing the diversity of mammals and breeding birds among 1° areas of sub-Saharan Africa. We demonstrate that choosing areas of sub-Saharan Africa using either conservationists' six primary Flagship mammals, or the six ‘Big Five’ mammals popular with wildlife tourists, is not significantly better for representing the diversity of mammals and birds than choosing areas at random. Furthermore, neither of these groups is significantly better for representing the diversity of mammals and birds than groups of the same number of Species chosen at random. We show that in order to succeed in representing many mammals and birds in area selection, it is not sufficient for the groups used for selection to occur in many different eco-regions, they must also have low overlaps in distribution, so as to provide high ecological complementarity (a similar pattern of ecological complementarity must be shared by the larger group of Species to be represented). Therefore there may be a need for an explicit policy to balance the requirements of Flagship conservation and broader biodiversity conservation, which will have implications for the distribution of resources.
-
Flagship Species, ecological complementarity and conserving the diversity of mammals and birds in sub‐Saharan Africa
Animal Conservation, 2000Co-Authors: Paul H. Williams, Neil D. Burgess, Carsten RahbekAbstract:More biodiversity could be protected in situ if the few Species that attract the most popular support (the ‘Flagship’ Species) had distributions that also covered the broader diversity of organisms. We studied how well different groups of mammals performed for representing the diversity of mammals and breeding birds among 1° areas of sub-Saharan Africa. We demonstrate that choosing areas of sub-Saharan Africa using either conservationists' six primary Flagship mammals, or the six ‘Big Five’ mammals popular with wildlife tourists, is not significantly better for representing the diversity of mammals and birds than choosing areas at random. Furthermore, neither of these groups is significantly better for representing the diversity of mammals and birds than groups of the same number of Species chosen at random. We show that in order to succeed in representing many mammals and birds in area selection, it is not sufficient for the groups used for selection to occur in many different eco-regions, they must also have low overlaps in distribution, so as to provide high ecological complementarity (a similar pattern of ecological complementarity must be shared by the larger group of Species to be represented). Therefore there may be a need for an explicit policy to balance the requirements of Flagship conservation and broader biodiversity conservation, which will have implications for the distribution of resources.
Darren P Giling - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Flagship umbrella Species needed for the conservation of overlooked aquatic biodiversity
Conservation Biology, 2017Co-Authors: Gregor Kalinkat, Juliano Sarmento Cabral, William Darwall, Francesco G Ficetola, Joseph L Fisher, Darren P GilingAbstract:Despite a long-standing debate about the utility of Species-centered conservation approaches (Roberge & Angelstam 2004), surrogate Species remain popular by providing useful—or even necessary—“shortcuts” for successful conservation programs (Caro 2010). Flagship Species, as one prime example of surrogates, are primarily intended to promote public awareness and to raise funds for conservation (Verissimo et al. 2011). In contrast, the protection of umbrella Species is expected to benefit a wide range of co-occurring Species (Roberge & Angelstam 2004; Caro 2010). Accordingly, the main criteria for selecting Flagships should be based on socio-cultural considerations, whereas umbrellas are principally chosen based on ecological criteria (Caro 2010; Verissimo et al. 2011; see Table 1). Since these two concepts are often confused or mistakenly used interchangeably, Caro (2010, p. 248) coined the term "Flagship umbrellas" for those Species that explicitly integrate both functions. Indeed, Li and Pimm (2016) recently demonstrated that the classic Flagship Species, the giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca), can simultaneously act as an umbrella Species, as its protection benefits many co-occurring endemic mammals, birds and amphibians. This challenges the often held views that: (i) the umbrella concept has to be abandoned as it is not efficiently working at local scales (Caro 2015); (ii) most Flagship Species are weak predictors for efficient reserve planning (Caro 2010); and (iii) ecosystem- or landscape-based conservation approaches should consequentially be favored over Species-based approaches whenever feasible (Roberge & Angelstam 2004; Caro 2010). Further commotion in the discussion is the increasingly demanded paradigm shift in conservation strategies to specifically target hidden or neglected biodiversity for its intrinsic value and its contribution to ecosystem processes (Dougherty et al. 2016). This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved
Paul H. Williams - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Flagship Species ecological complementarity and conserving the diversity of mammals and birds in sub saharan africa
Animal Conservation, 2000Co-Authors: Paul H. Williams, Neil D. Burgess, Carsten RahbekAbstract:More biodiversity could be protected in situ if the few Species that attract the most popular support (the ‘Flagship’ Species) had distributions that also covered the broader diversity of organisms. We studied how well different groups of mammals performed for representing the diversity of mammals and breeding birds among 1° areas of sub-Saharan Africa. We demonstrate that choosing areas of sub-Saharan Africa using either conservationists' six primary Flagship mammals, or the six ‘Big Five’ mammals popular with wildlife tourists, is not significantly better for representing the diversity of mammals and birds than choosing areas at random. Furthermore, neither of these groups is significantly better for representing the diversity of mammals and birds than groups of the same number of Species chosen at random. We show that in order to succeed in representing many mammals and birds in area selection, it is not sufficient for the groups used for selection to occur in many different eco-regions, they must also have low overlaps in distribution, so as to provide high ecological complementarity (a similar pattern of ecological complementarity must be shared by the larger group of Species to be represented). Therefore there may be a need for an explicit policy to balance the requirements of Flagship conservation and broader biodiversity conservation, which will have implications for the distribution of resources.
-
Flagship Species, ecological complementarity and conserving the diversity of mammals and birds in sub‐Saharan Africa
Animal Conservation, 2000Co-Authors: Paul H. Williams, Neil D. Burgess, Carsten RahbekAbstract:More biodiversity could be protected in situ if the few Species that attract the most popular support (the ‘Flagship’ Species) had distributions that also covered the broader diversity of organisms. We studied how well different groups of mammals performed for representing the diversity of mammals and breeding birds among 1° areas of sub-Saharan Africa. We demonstrate that choosing areas of sub-Saharan Africa using either conservationists' six primary Flagship mammals, or the six ‘Big Five’ mammals popular with wildlife tourists, is not significantly better for representing the diversity of mammals and birds than choosing areas at random. Furthermore, neither of these groups is significantly better for representing the diversity of mammals and birds than groups of the same number of Species chosen at random. We show that in order to succeed in representing many mammals and birds in area selection, it is not sufficient for the groups used for selection to occur in many different eco-regions, they must also have low overlaps in distribution, so as to provide high ecological complementarity (a similar pattern of ecological complementarity must be shared by the larger group of Species to be represented). Therefore there may be a need for an explicit policy to balance the requirements of Flagship conservation and broader biodiversity conservation, which will have implications for the distribution of resources.