Rubenstein School of Environment and Natural Resources, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont, USA.
Gund Institute for Environment, Burlington, Vermont, USA.
Conserv Biol. 2022 Oct;36(5):e13910. doi: 10.1111/cobi.13910. Epub 2022 May 26.
Conservation professionals use language related to instrumental, intrinsic, and relational values when communicating about the importance of conservation, frequently in connection with ecosystem services. However, few researchers have examined whether messages that emphasize values associated with ecosystem services result in different policy-support or behavior-change outcomes among different audiences. We conducted a large-scale survey experiment with participants (n = 815) who resided in the United States and were recruited online via the survey platform Qualtrics. The experiment tested whether messages about watershed protection that emphasize instrumental, intrinsic, or relational values (as opposed to the information-only control message) resulted in differing support for policies or behavioral intentions related to watershed conservation. Respondents' personal characteristics had a stronger effect on conservation beliefs than the way values were framed (i.e., than treatments in the experiment). For example, income positively predicted policy support (β = 0.07, 95% CI 0.02-0.12, p = 0.01, corrected p = 0.03). Instrumental messages decreased (SSG, tense) policy support among people who identified as politically liberal (β = -0.75, 95% CI -1.19 to -0.30, p = 0.001, corrected p = 0.003). Over 40% of respondents selected relational values over other value types as the main reason to protect watersheds. Our results demonstrated that political orientation interacts with how the importance of conservation is framed in complex ways and that conservation practitioners might improve the effectiveness of their communications by incorporating relational values and tailoring messages to different audiences.
保护专业人员在交流保护的重要性时会使用与工具性、内在性和关系性价值相关的语言，通常与生态系统服务有关。然而，很少有研究人员研究过强调与生态系统服务相关的价值的信息是否会导致不同的受众对政策支持或行为改变产生不同的结果。我们在美国进行了一项大规模的调查实验，参与者（n=815）通过调查平台 Qualtrics 在线招募。该实验测试了强调工具性、内在性或关系性价值（而不是仅提供信息的对照信息）的流域保护信息是否会导致对流域保护相关政策或行为意图的支持程度不同。受访者的个人特征对保护信念的影响比价值框架（即实验中的处理）的影响更大。例如，收入与政策支持呈正相关（β=0.07，95%CI 0.02-0.12，p=0.01，校正后 p=0.03）。工具性信息降低了自认为政治立场偏左的人对政策的支持（β=-0.75，95%CI -1.19 至 -0.30，p=0.001，校正后 p=0.003）。超过 40%的受访者选择关系性价值作为保护流域的主要原因，而不是其他价值类型。我们的结果表明，政治取向以复杂的方式与保护的重要性的框架相互作用，保护从业者可以通过纳入关系性价值并根据不同的受众调整信息来提高他们沟通的有效性。
