Arguments for biodiversity conservation

factors influencing their observed effectiveness in European case studies

Rob Tinch*, Rob Bugter, Malgorzata Blicharska, Paula Harrison, John Haslett, Pekka Jokinen, Laurence Mathieu, Eeva Primmer

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

Making a strong case for biodiversity protection is central to meeting the biodiversity targets in international agreements such as the CBD and achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Effective arguments are needed to convince diverse actors that protection is worthwhile, and can play a crucial role in closing the implementation gap between biodiversity policy targets and outcomes. Drawing on a database of arguments from 11 European case studies, along with additional interview and case study material from all 13 case studies of the BESAFE project, we analysed relationships between potential and observed effectiveness of arguments. Our results show that strong logic, robustness, and timing of arguments are necessary but not sufficient conditions for arguments to be effective. We find that use of multiple and diverse arguments can enhance effectiveness by broadening the appeal to wider audiences, especially when arguments are repeated and refined through constructive dialogue. We discuss the role of framing, bundling and tailoring arguments to audiences in increasing effectiveness. Our results provide further support for the current shift towards recognition of value pluralism in biodiversity science and decision-making. We hope our results will help to demonstrate more convincingly the value of biodiversity to stakeholders in decision processes and thus build better cases for its conservation.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)1763-1788
JournalBiodiversity and Conservation
Volume27
Early online date19 Apr 2018
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2018

Fingerprint

biodiversity
case studies
international agreements
multicultural diversity
international agreement
sustainable development
stakeholders
decision making
interviews
stakeholder

Keywords

  • Argument framing
  • Arguments for biodiversity conservation
  • Biodiversity policy
  • Ecosystem services
  • Science policy interfaces

Cite this

Tinch, Rob ; Bugter, Rob ; Blicharska, Malgorzata ; Harrison, Paula ; Haslett, John ; Jokinen, Pekka ; Mathieu, Laurence ; Primmer, Eeva. / Arguments for biodiversity conservation : factors influencing their observed effectiveness in European case studies. In: Biodiversity and Conservation. 2018 ; Vol. 27. pp. 1763-1788.
@article{1685982fcaa04de082b120ae1f6565f9,
title = "Arguments for biodiversity conservation: factors influencing their observed effectiveness in European case studies",
abstract = "Making a strong case for biodiversity protection is central to meeting the biodiversity targets in international agreements such as the CBD and achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Effective arguments are needed to convince diverse actors that protection is worthwhile, and can play a crucial role in closing the implementation gap between biodiversity policy targets and outcomes. Drawing on a database of arguments from 11 European case studies, along with additional interview and case study material from all 13 case studies of the BESAFE project, we analysed relationships between potential and observed effectiveness of arguments. Our results show that strong logic, robustness, and timing of arguments are necessary but not sufficient conditions for arguments to be effective. We find that use of multiple and diverse arguments can enhance effectiveness by broadening the appeal to wider audiences, especially when arguments are repeated and refined through constructive dialogue. We discuss the role of framing, bundling and tailoring arguments to audiences in increasing effectiveness. Our results provide further support for the current shift towards recognition of value pluralism in biodiversity science and decision-making. We hope our results will help to demonstrate more convincingly the value of biodiversity to stakeholders in decision processes and thus build better cases for its conservation.",
keywords = "Argument framing, Arguments for biodiversity conservation, Biodiversity policy, Ecosystem services, Science policy interfaces",
author = "Rob Tinch and Rob Bugter and Malgorzata Blicharska and Paula Harrison and John Haslett and Pekka Jokinen and Laurence Mathieu and Eeva Primmer",
year = "2018",
month = "6",
doi = "10.1007/s10531-018-1549-3",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
pages = "1763--1788",
journal = "Biodiversity and Conservation",
issn = "0960-3115",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",

}

Arguments for biodiversity conservation : factors influencing their observed effectiveness in European case studies. / Tinch, Rob; Bugter, Rob; Blicharska, Malgorzata; Harrison, Paula; Haslett, John; Jokinen, Pekka; Mathieu, Laurence; Primmer, Eeva.

In: Biodiversity and Conservation, Vol. 27, 06.2018, p. 1763-1788.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Arguments for biodiversity conservation

T2 - factors influencing their observed effectiveness in European case studies

AU - Tinch, Rob

AU - Bugter, Rob

AU - Blicharska, Malgorzata

AU - Harrison, Paula

AU - Haslett, John

AU - Jokinen, Pekka

AU - Mathieu, Laurence

AU - Primmer, Eeva

PY - 2018/6

Y1 - 2018/6

N2 - Making a strong case for biodiversity protection is central to meeting the biodiversity targets in international agreements such as the CBD and achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Effective arguments are needed to convince diverse actors that protection is worthwhile, and can play a crucial role in closing the implementation gap between biodiversity policy targets and outcomes. Drawing on a database of arguments from 11 European case studies, along with additional interview and case study material from all 13 case studies of the BESAFE project, we analysed relationships between potential and observed effectiveness of arguments. Our results show that strong logic, robustness, and timing of arguments are necessary but not sufficient conditions for arguments to be effective. We find that use of multiple and diverse arguments can enhance effectiveness by broadening the appeal to wider audiences, especially when arguments are repeated and refined through constructive dialogue. We discuss the role of framing, bundling and tailoring arguments to audiences in increasing effectiveness. Our results provide further support for the current shift towards recognition of value pluralism in biodiversity science and decision-making. We hope our results will help to demonstrate more convincingly the value of biodiversity to stakeholders in decision processes and thus build better cases for its conservation.

AB - Making a strong case for biodiversity protection is central to meeting the biodiversity targets in international agreements such as the CBD and achieving the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Effective arguments are needed to convince diverse actors that protection is worthwhile, and can play a crucial role in closing the implementation gap between biodiversity policy targets and outcomes. Drawing on a database of arguments from 11 European case studies, along with additional interview and case study material from all 13 case studies of the BESAFE project, we analysed relationships between potential and observed effectiveness of arguments. Our results show that strong logic, robustness, and timing of arguments are necessary but not sufficient conditions for arguments to be effective. We find that use of multiple and diverse arguments can enhance effectiveness by broadening the appeal to wider audiences, especially when arguments are repeated and refined through constructive dialogue. We discuss the role of framing, bundling and tailoring arguments to audiences in increasing effectiveness. Our results provide further support for the current shift towards recognition of value pluralism in biodiversity science and decision-making. We hope our results will help to demonstrate more convincingly the value of biodiversity to stakeholders in decision processes and thus build better cases for its conservation.

KW - Argument framing

KW - Arguments for biodiversity conservation

KW - Biodiversity policy

KW - Ecosystem services

KW - Science policy interfaces

U2 - 10.1007/s10531-018-1549-3

DO - 10.1007/s10531-018-1549-3

M3 - Article

VL - 27

SP - 1763

EP - 1788

JO - Biodiversity and Conservation

JF - Biodiversity and Conservation

SN - 0960-3115

ER -