How much Fear? Exploring the Role of Integral Emotions on Stated Preferences for Wildlife Conservation.
Scientific evidence suggests that emotions affect actual human decision-making, particularly in highly emotionally situations such as human-wildlife interactions. In this study we assess the role of fear on preferences for wildlife conservation, using a discrete choice experiment. The sample was spl...
| Publicado en: | Environmental Management Vol. 69; no. 3; pp. 449 - 466 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , |
| Formato: | equations & formulas pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Mar2022
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=155281156&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 155281156 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 0364152X O5H jtl: Environmental Management issn: 0364152X maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Mar2022 vid: 69 iid: 3 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature place: New York, New York artinfo: ui: 155281156 154659225 155281156 155281156 10.1007/s00267-022-01593-z 155281156 ppf: 449 ppct: 17 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P tig: atl: How much Fear? Exploring the Role of Integral Emotions on Stated Preferences for Wildlife Conservation. aug: au: Notaro, Sandra Grilli, Gianluca affil: Department of Economics and Management, University of Trento, Via Inama 5/I, 38122, Trento, Italy sug: subj: Conservation of Natural Resources Human-Animal Interaction Emotions Evaluation Fear Evaluation Decision Making Evaluation Human Comparative Studies Social Networks Communications Media Descriptive Statistics ab: Scientific evidence suggests that emotions affect actual human decision-making, particularly in highly emotionally situations such as human-wildlife interactions. In this study we assess the role of fear on preferences for wildlife conservation, using a discrete choice experiment. The sample was split into two treatment groups and a control. In the treatment groups the emotion of fear towards wildlife was manipulated using two different pictures of a wolf, one fearful and one reassuring, which were presented to respondents during the experiment. Results were different for the two treatments. The assurance treatment lead to higher preferences and willingness to pay for the wolf, compared to the fear treatment and the control, for several population sizes. On the other hand, the impact of the fear treatment was lower than expected and only significant for large populations of wolves, in excess of 50 specimen. Overall, the study suggests that emotional choices may represent a source of concern for the assessment of stable preferences. The impact of emotional choices is likely to be greater in situations where a wildlife-related topic is highly emphasized, positively or negatively, by social networks, mass media, and opinion leaders. When stated preferences towards wildlife are affected by the emotional state of fear due to contextual external stimuli, welfare analysis does not reflect stable individual preferences and may lead to sub-optimal conservation policies. Therefore, while more research is recommended for a more accurate assessment, it is advised to control the decision context during surveys for potential emotional choices. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: equations & formulas pictorial research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|