Behavioural interventions in conservation conflicts
View/ Open
Date
03/07/2020Author
Baynham-Herd, Zachary Marcus Derrick
Metadata
Abstract
Conservation conflicts occur when people clash over conservation objectives. They are
damaging for biodiversity, livelihoods, and human well-being globally, and are often
managed via interventions intended to change people’s behaviour. However, variation in
intervention approaches across contexts remains underexplored. This thesis seeks to
inform management by better understanding the roots of conflict, and the factors
constraining the choice and efficacy of different interventions. Using an empirical literature
review, I first identify five intervention types – ‘technical’, ‘cognitive’, ‘economic’,
‘enforcement’ and ‘stakeholder’ – and how they associate with conflict frames, behaviours
and geography. I then largely corroborate these results in an experimental survey with
conservation professionals, which also uncovers how decision-makers’ characteristics,
including disciplinary and demographic backgrounds, predict their intervention priorities. I
then draw upon stakeholder interviews in Enduimet Wildlife Management Area in Tanzania,
and grey literature to identify how multiple levels of conflict – covering human-elephant
interactions, stakeholder interactions, and governance structures – constrain local
management options. Next, using an experimental public goods game in Enduimet, I find
that stakeholder perceptions of intervener trustworthiness predict levels of cooperation
with conflict interventions. Lastly, by analysing conflict over trophy hunting via the social
media platform Twitter, I reveal how this issue is polarised along similar political and value-based
dimensions as other environmental conflicts. Beyond advocating for behaviourallyinformed
interventions, these findings have three key management implications: that the
backgrounds of decision-makers mediate their priorities, that the backgrounds of
interveners mediate responses to interventions, and that the socio-political and governance
background of conflicts will likely mediate the outcome of interventions.