Comments on Summary of Survey Results on Biological Conservation Attitudes

I just read the survey results here.

One particular result was quite interesting, with SOC apparently having the most pro-conservation students.

Some of comments, hopefully the student who did the survey won't take offense at me taking such liberties with his/her work.



Finding 1: Students had similar conservation attitudes for plant species, animal species or natural habitats and did not value any one more over the other.

Comment: This is something that I realised a little while back, that people who weren't biologists but were pro-conservation often promote conserving everything. It would be interesting to find if it was because they didn't know enough to have a target. On the other hand, biologists often have a "target" group to conserve, and have come up with the idea of "flagship species". The basic idea is to save whole habitats to protect the flagship species and in doing so protect everything else living there as well. In reality, governments often play a trading game. Trade the survival of one species, and compromise another, species more abundant at that point in time. So is the "ignorant" way better? Or the "flagship species" model?




Finding 2: Students were more likely to exhibit private conservation behaviours than public conservation behaviours.

Comment: Singaporeans ma. Prefer to do stuff while taking cover in a foxhole. Nothing wrong though, except maybe through public conservation efforts, the inspiration component is more emphasised.




Finding 3: Students from the income groups with less than $4,000 per month or more than $8,000 per month, had more pro-conservation attitudes compared to students from the $4,000–8,000 group.

Comment: This is to be expected I guess, but I think it speaks quite a bit about the ideas that society in general has about conservation. Conservation is probably seen as something "extra", as money goes in without a visible, tangible profit. It is quite complex, where different attitudes to economics of the lower, middle and upper classes (by financial powers) come into the play. But it can be a bit too abrasive to discuss, so I shal leave it at that.





Finding 4: Students who are taking or had previously taken conservation-related modules had more pro-conservation attitudes than those who have not.

Comment: Conservation education has the wonderful advantage of being able to move people, probably because it has a "soft" side to it. Unlike other things, like say, organic chemistry or mathematics or other "hard" subjects, where people can actually hate and reject, as they become educated in it.




Finding 5: Students who are from the School of Computing have more pro-conservation attitudes than average; while students from the Business School have less pro-conservation attitudes than average (see below).

Comment: What a surprise! Although I must say that for some other faculties, I think they do conform to their stereotype.