征求不同观点,确定保护生物多样性社区行动的优先次序

IF 8.3 2区 材料科学 Q1 MATERIALS SCIENCE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Angela J. Dean, Kelly S. Fielding, Liam D. G. Smith, Emma K. Church, Kerrie A. Wilson
{"title":"征求不同观点,确定保护生物多样性社区行动的优先次序","authors":"Angela J. Dean, Kelly S. Fielding, Liam D. G. Smith, Emma K. Church, Kerrie A. Wilson","doi":"10.1111/cobi.14372","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Communities have a strong role in protecting biodiversity. In addition to participation in restoration, a range of actions in the public or private sphere may support biodiversity. Despite this, there is a lack of clarity about what actions should be prioritized for behavior change campaigns. We developed and applied a method to prioritize community actions for biodiversity conservation that incorporates an expert‐based assessment of impact and a community‐informed measure of the likelihood of uptake. In stage 1, experts (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 143) completed a survey that quantified the relative impact of actions based on best–worst scaling of perceived impact. In stage 2, surveyed community members (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 3200) ranked the likelihood of adopting actions based on the ease or difficulty of performing each action, and the opportunity for change based on the proportion of respondents not yet engaging in each behavior. Experts gave the following actions the highest ranking for impact: voting for the environment (first), participating in restoration in ecological priority areas (second), and purchasing and protecting remnant bushland (third). When considering the disciplinary background and institutional background of experts, voting and participating in restoration activities remained in the upper ranked options. However, there was some divergence between these groups. For example, reducing beef consumption was ranked third by university‐based experts but ranked 28th by experts based in state government. Overall, community members ranked the following behaviors as most likely to be adopted: following quarantine laws (first), reducing plastic use (second), and managing pets (third). Top likelihood ranking of actions was minimally affected by community characteristics (nature relatedness, gender, location). Integrating these findings, the action ranked most favorably for impact, likelihood, and opportunity was participating in restoration. Choosing actions for behavior change campaigns requires consideration of the entire social–ecological system—from social factors that enable or constrain adoption to the ecological impact of actions across relevant social and ecological contexts.","PeriodicalId":5,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":8.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Eliciting diverse perspectives to prioritize community actions for biodiversity conservation\",\"authors\":\"Angela J. Dean, Kelly S. Fielding, Liam D. G. Smith, Emma K. Church, Kerrie A. Wilson\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cobi.14372\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Communities have a strong role in protecting biodiversity. In addition to participation in restoration, a range of actions in the public or private sphere may support biodiversity. Despite this, there is a lack of clarity about what actions should be prioritized for behavior change campaigns. We developed and applied a method to prioritize community actions for biodiversity conservation that incorporates an expert‐based assessment of impact and a community‐informed measure of the likelihood of uptake. In stage 1, experts (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 143) completed a survey that quantified the relative impact of actions based on best–worst scaling of perceived impact. In stage 2, surveyed community members (<jats:italic>n</jats:italic> = 3200) ranked the likelihood of adopting actions based on the ease or difficulty of performing each action, and the opportunity for change based on the proportion of respondents not yet engaging in each behavior. Experts gave the following actions the highest ranking for impact: voting for the environment (first), participating in restoration in ecological priority areas (second), and purchasing and protecting remnant bushland (third). When considering the disciplinary background and institutional background of experts, voting and participating in restoration activities remained in the upper ranked options. However, there was some divergence between these groups. For example, reducing beef consumption was ranked third by university‐based experts but ranked 28th by experts based in state government. Overall, community members ranked the following behaviors as most likely to be adopted: following quarantine laws (first), reducing plastic use (second), and managing pets (third). Top likelihood ranking of actions was minimally affected by community characteristics (nature relatedness, gender, location). Integrating these findings, the action ranked most favorably for impact, likelihood, and opportunity was participating in restoration. Choosing actions for behavior change campaigns requires consideration of the entire social–ecological system—from social factors that enable or constrain adoption to the ecological impact of actions across relevant social and ecological contexts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":5,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14372\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"材料科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14372","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"材料科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

社区在保护生物多样性方面发挥着重要作用。除参与恢复外,公共或私人领域的一系列行动也可支持生物多样性。尽管如此,对于在行为改变活动中应优先考虑哪些行动,人们仍缺乏明确的认识。我们开发并应用了一种方法来确定保护生物多样性的社区行动的优先次序,该方法结合了基于专家的影响评估和社区对采纳可能性的衡量。在第 1 阶段,专家(n = 143)完成了一项调查,根据最佳-最差感知影响比例量化了行动的相对影响。在第 2 阶段,接受调查的社区成员(n = 3200)根据采取每项行动的难易程度对采取行动的可能性进行排序,并根据尚未采取每项行为的受访者比例对改变的机会进行排序。专家们对以下行动的影响进行了最高排名:为环境投票(第一)、参与生态优先区域的修复(第二)以及购买和保护残余丛林地(第三)。如果考虑到专家的学科背景和机构背景,投票和参与恢复活动仍然是排名靠前的选项。不过,这些群体之间也存在一些分歧。例如,大学专家将减少牛肉消费排在第三位,而州政府专家则将其排在第 28 位。总体而言,社区成员认为以下行为最有可能被采纳:遵守检疫法(第一)、减少塑料使用(第二)和管理宠物(第三)。最有可能采取的行动排名受社区特征(与自然相关性、性别、地点)的影响很小。综合这些发现,在影响、可能性和机会方面排名最靠前的行动是参与恢复活动。为行为改变运动选择行动需要考虑整个社会生态系统--从促成或限制采用行动的社会因素到行动在相关社会和生态环境中的生态影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Eliciting diverse perspectives to prioritize community actions for biodiversity conservation
Communities have a strong role in protecting biodiversity. In addition to participation in restoration, a range of actions in the public or private sphere may support biodiversity. Despite this, there is a lack of clarity about what actions should be prioritized for behavior change campaigns. We developed and applied a method to prioritize community actions for biodiversity conservation that incorporates an expert‐based assessment of impact and a community‐informed measure of the likelihood of uptake. In stage 1, experts (n = 143) completed a survey that quantified the relative impact of actions based on best–worst scaling of perceived impact. In stage 2, surveyed community members (n = 3200) ranked the likelihood of adopting actions based on the ease or difficulty of performing each action, and the opportunity for change based on the proportion of respondents not yet engaging in each behavior. Experts gave the following actions the highest ranking for impact: voting for the environment (first), participating in restoration in ecological priority areas (second), and purchasing and protecting remnant bushland (third). When considering the disciplinary background and institutional background of experts, voting and participating in restoration activities remained in the upper ranked options. However, there was some divergence between these groups. For example, reducing beef consumption was ranked third by university‐based experts but ranked 28th by experts based in state government. Overall, community members ranked the following behaviors as most likely to be adopted: following quarantine laws (first), reducing plastic use (second), and managing pets (third). Top likelihood ranking of actions was minimally affected by community characteristics (nature relatedness, gender, location). Integrating these findings, the action ranked most favorably for impact, likelihood, and opportunity was participating in restoration. Choosing actions for behavior change campaigns requires consideration of the entire social–ecological system—from social factors that enable or constrain adoption to the ecological impact of actions across relevant social and ecological contexts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces
ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 工程技术-材料科学:综合
CiteScore
16.00
自引率
6.30%
发文量
4978
审稿时长
1.8 months
期刊介绍: ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces is a leading interdisciplinary journal that brings together chemists, engineers, physicists, and biologists to explore the development and utilization of newly-discovered materials and interfacial processes for specific applications. Our journal has experienced remarkable growth since its establishment in 2009, both in terms of the number of articles published and the impact of the research showcased. We are proud to foster a truly global community, with the majority of published articles originating from outside the United States, reflecting the rapid growth of applied research worldwide.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信