The effect of knowledge, species aesthetic appeal, familiarity and conservation need on willingness to donate

Piia Lundberg · Annukka Vainio · Douglas C. MacMillan · Robert J. Smith · Diogo Veríssimo · Anni Arponen

81 citations0/0 files storedAnimal Conservation

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Animal and Plant Science Education Nonprofit Sector and Volunteering Conservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education

Abstract

Abstract Environmental non‐governmental organizations (ENGOs) largely select flagship species for conservation marketing based on their aesthetic appeal. However, little is known about the fundraising effectiveness of this approach or how it compares to ecosystem conservation campaigns that use habitat types as flagships. By performing a willingness to donate (WTD) survey of potential online donors from Finland, we identified which motivations and donor characteristics influence their preferences for a range of different flagship species and ecosystems. Using the contingent valuation method and the payment card approach, we found the combined funding for eight mammal flagship species was 29% higher funding than for eight bird flagship species. Furthermore, the aesthetically more appealing species, as well as the species and ecosystems that are native to Finland, attracted the most funding. We then used ordinal logistic regression to identify the factors influencing a donor's WTD, finding that knowledge of biodiversity conservation and familiarity with the flagship was associated with an increased WTD to birds and ecosystems, and people with higher education levels had an increased WTD to ecosystems. Surprisingly, species aesthetic appeal was not related to an increased WTD, although “need of conservation” was, suggesting that highlighting the plight of these less appealing threatened species or ecosystems could raise money. Our results suggest that the factors driving donating to mammals, birds or ecosystems differ, and so underline the importance of considering the diverse motivations behind donation behaviour in fundraising campaigns. They also provide new evidence of the motivations of online donors, an under‐studied group who are likely to become an increasingly important source of conservation funding.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 81 citations exist upstream.

References

2011Encyclopedia of research design 1997Green Buying: The Influence of Environmental Concern on Consumer Behavior 2000Brand Awareness Effects on Consumer Decision Making for a Common, Repeat Purchase Product: A Replication 2002An economic model of moral motivation 2007The non-economic motives behind the willingness to pay for biodiversity conservation 2013The Social Network Effect 2007“Bats, snakes and spiders, Oh my!” How aesthetic and negativistic attitudes, and other concepts predict support for species protection 2016Human preferences for species conservation: Animal charisma trumps endangered status

Cited by

2019Natural history films raise species awareness—A big data approach 2023Using Species Knowledge to Promote Pro-Environmental Attitudes? The Association among Species Knowledge, Environmental System Knowledge and Attitude towards theEnvironment in Secondary School Students

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.