Conservation Psychology and Applied Animal Behaviour Research Group, University of South Australia, Magill Campus, St Bernards Road, GPO Box 2471, Magill, SA, 5001, Australia.
Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Gate 13, Kintore Avenue, Adelaide, SA, 5000, Australia.
Conserv Biol. 2020 Apr;34(2):354-367. doi: 10.1111/cobi.13386. Epub 2019 Jul 31.
Conservation marketing holds potential as a means to engage audiences with biodiversity conservation and help to address the human dimensions of biodiversity loss. Empirical evaluations of conservation marketing indicatives are growing, so we reviewed the literature on this research to inform future directions in the field. We used a systematic search strategy to identify studies that evaluated the effects of conservation marketing interventions (techniques and campaigns) on psychosocial outcomes, categorized as cognitive, affective, or behavioral. Six academic databases (Business Source Complete, Communication & Mass Media Complete, Greenfile, Proquest, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collections), 3 gray-literature databases (BASE, Zenodo, and Google Scholar), and 2 websites (Rare and WildAid) were searched. Articles were subjected to critical appraisal to assess their methodological quality, and data were extracted from each article and analyzed using narrative synthesis. Altogether 28 studies from 26 articles were included in the review. Twenty-five studies were conducted from 2014 through 2016. Methodological quality of most studies was weak (n = 16, 57%) (moderate quality n = 8, 29%; high quality n = 4, 14%). The proportion of studies that evaluated a conservation-marketing technique (e.g., variants of texts, images, or videos) versus a campaign (e.g., community-based campaigns targeting locally relevant issues, such as unsustainable palm oil agriculture, light pollution, or wood fuel fire use) was relatively balanced. Although many studies reported statistically significant results in the intended direction, the utility of findings was limited by persistent methodological limitations, such as a lack of a comparator group, use of non-validated assessment tools, and a focus on self-reported data and subjective outcomes. Conservation marketing is clearly a nascent field of scientific enquiry that warrants further, high-quality research investigations.
保护营销具有吸引观众参与生物多样性保护的潜力,并有助于解决生物多样性丧失的人类层面问题。对保护营销指标的实证评估越来越多,因此,我们对该领域的相关文献进行了综述,以为该领域的未来方向提供信息。我们使用系统的搜索策略来确定评估保护营销干预措施(技术和活动)对心理社会结果影响的研究,这些结果分为认知、情感或行为。我们搜索了六个学术数据库(商业资源全文数据库、传播与大众媒体全文数据库、绿色文献数据库、Proquest、Scopus 和 Web of Science 核心合集)、三个灰色文献数据库(BASE、Zenodo 和 Google Scholar)和两个网站(Rare 和 WildAid)。对文章进行了批判性评估,以评估其方法学质量,并从每篇文章中提取数据,使用叙述性综合进行分析。共有 28 项研究来自 26 篇文章被纳入综述。25 项研究是在 2014 年至 2016 年期间进行的。大多数研究的方法学质量较弱(n = 16,57%)(中等质量 n = 8,29%;高质量 n = 4,14%)。评估保护营销技术(例如,文本、图像或视频的变体)与活动(例如,针对当地相关问题的基于社区的活动,如不可持续的棕榈油农业、光污染或木柴燃料火灾使用)的研究比例相对平衡。尽管许多研究报告了朝着预期方向的统计学显著结果,但由于存在持续的方法学限制,如缺乏对照组、使用非验证评估工具以及侧重于自我报告数据和主观结果,因此研究结果的实用性有限。保护营销显然是一个新兴的科学研究领域,值得进一步进行高质量的研究调查。