“Selling” Conservation Strategically Doesn’t Require Changing Minds
Advocacy isn’t about changing minds. It’s about making connections, fostering relationships, and finding common ground.
Keywords: Conservation Psychology, Marketing, Public Outreach, Strategic Messaging/Communications, Conservation Campaigns, Stakeholder Engagement, Congressional Engagement, Environmental Advocacy, Coalition Building
Introduction
When the goal is inspiration, finding strategic ways to communicate effectively is of utmost importance. Conservation is no exception. In fact, “selling” conservation is arguably the most critical component of the field. Without garnering support, nonprofits will not receive the donations needed to protect wildlife and their habitats. If the messaging does not resonate with the community they speak to, the public will be less inclined to pick up pro-environmental behaviors (McKenzie-Mohr, 2000). If advertising is not compelling and relevant to the local audience, organizations will see lower attendance at events, and reduced volunteerism (Wald et al., 2016). This is not an exhaustive list of justifications for conservation organizations to focus intently on what they are saying and how they are saying it. Nonprofits in general have a critical need to be engaging and relatable. It is likely a harder sell to ask people to devote their time and money to a cause, than it would be to market a product or service. People tend to pursue immediate personal gratification, and unlike “stuff” or short-lived yet exciting entertainment, charitable works are typically long-term endeavors, and often not supremely glamorous (O'Donoghue & Rabin, 2000). Establishing “win-win” narratives which highlight ecosystem services and other benefits to humans is just one strategy in the campaign toolbox (Kareiva and Marvier, 2012). As successful conservation relies on collective behavior change, it is imperative that environmental organizations adequately make the case for conservation.
With the problem well defined, my graduate research became aimed at addressing the need for effective stakeholder engagement to support conservation. While I initially assumed that I would need to uncover ways to convince people to care about wildlife and the environment, I soon discovered that attempting to change minds was a misguided objective. Rather, when an audience is fully examined and understood, messaging can be curated to align with their particular values and interests. I found that impactful solutions require incorporating strategic communications while also removing barriers to participation and understanding. My findings motivated me to adopt the following mantra in both my personal and professional life: It’s not about changing minds. It’s finding common ground.Recruiting Trusted Messengers for Dynamic and Compelling Conservation Campaigns
In Spring of 2020, I zoned in on my interests for conservation psychology and strategic messaging. The projects highlighted in this section were inspired by my very first major Project Dragonfly assignment from the 2019 Conservation Science & Community (CSC) course. My Community Engagement Lab (CEL) explored public perceptions of feral cat colonies in my local community. These projects delved into novel ways to promote keeping cats indoors.Figure 1. Domestic cats kill between 1.3 and 4.0 billion birds per year in the contiguous U.S. alone. Photo: "Cat and bird" by Genlab Frank is licensed under CC BY-ND 2.0.
Bringing in the Reinforcements: An Argument to Stop Preaching to Cat Owners from Behind Birding Binoculars, and to Recruit Trusted Messengers for a Collaborative Campaign
Domestic cats are a popular family pet owned by millions around the world. While dogs in America are generally expected to be leashed or constrained to a yard, it has become culturally acceptable for cats to roam free without restriction. In the contiguous U.S., domestic cats kill between 1.3 and 4.0 billion birds per year. 31% (approximately 403 million – 1.24 billion) of these annual bird kills are caused by owned indoor/outdoor pet cats alone (Loss, Will, & Marra, 2013). Management of feral cat populations has been a highly contentious issue, spurring countless legal actions from both cat advocates and environmental groups alike. Since pet cats contribute to almost a third of feline bird kill, I felt that targeting cat owners specifically would be an effective way to support wildlife populations while avoiding the complication of the legal system and the varying minutiae of local laws. I wanted to develop a model that could be used in communities across the country. Focusing on promoting the voluntary behavior of keeping pet cats indoors, allowed me to develop a mock-up conservation campaign that could be implemented anywhere, regardless of any municipality-specific regulations. Responsible pet care could indirectly address feral populations as well, as ideal outcomes would mean less free-roaming cats, and more feline sterilization.
Through my research, it was clear that wildlife organizations, particularly bird-focused groups, were the most prominent existing voices promoting responsible cat ownership. With the previously mentioned public legal battles between these organizations and feral cat support groups, it seemed to be an all but fruitless effort for them to attempt to motivate cat owners. While researching the impacts of cats roaming outdoors, it became apparent that other stakeholders have been missing from the conversation: animal shelters, animal cruelty organizations, veterinarians, as well as doctors with human patients. Each of these groups had public stances or research that supported the practice of keeping cats indoors. Unlike wildlife conservation organizations, to cat owners these other stakeholders are trusted messengers, neutral or pro-feline and without suspect motivations.
I developed a model conservation campaign that would incorporate the viewpoints of all of these stakeholder groups. I would include the facts about wildlife mortality, as I felt they were important for owners to learn. But unlike existing campaigns from Audubon and American Bird Conservancy, statistics on impacts to birds and other wildlife would not be a main focus of the messaging. Rather, I would equally prioritize talking points from all stakeholder groups (now mostly trusted messengers) such as amplifying feral populations, risks of parasites and zoonotic disease, and threats of injury and death from cars and malevolent community members. These would provide a pro-cat rationale for keeping cats indoors and neutered. Alternatives for weary owners such as "catios," window boxes, and leash training were also provided. As a result of this paper, I developed a mock-up campaign website as my “Ecospot” project for the Biology in the Age of Technology (BAT) course. There was an associated campaign account created for Instagram.The website and now-defunct social media account presented the value of invoking trusted messengers and showed how multiple stakeholders with varying missions and stances can contribute to a collaborative campaign to promote pro-environmental behavior.
NOTE: In May of 2024, I was generously contacted by a representative of World Animal Foundation with the most updated statistics for cat-caused bird mortality: "According to the latest research and data, in the U.S. alone, 2.4 billion birds are killed by outdoor cats annually."
Navigating Stakeholder Engagement in a Polarized World
In the lead up to the 2020 Presidential election, it felt as though the country was more divided than ever. Everyone seemed to have an opinion on the issue of the day and were unwilling to compromise or consider alternative points of view. It was this palpable division that motivated me to consider how political affiliation may connect to people’s attitudes on the environment, and how best to engage with audiences with very strongly held values and possibly extreme stances.
Figure 2. In a country of strongly-held views and polarized politics, it's imperative to be strategic and intentional in engagement efforts. Image: Getty; The Atlantic
Selling Conservation to Politically Polarized Audiences: What’s Being Done, & How to Maximize Engagement
There should not be a “one size fits all” approach to conservation campaigns. To maximize successful engagement, NGO’s must curate conservation messaging for their specific audiences (Kidd et al., 2019). Now, seemingly more than ever, America is divided – especially when it comes to political ideology. Stances, attitudes, and priorities are not uniform throughout the country. “Red states” and “blue states” vote differently, and their citizens see the world in distinctive ways. From climate change, to oil drilling, to regulations on emissions or environmental protections, political beliefs can bleed into thoughts on conservation. American nonprofits should take into account their state’s ideological and political affiliations when communicating to the public. For this project, I investigated whether or not conservation organizations are already doing this, and how. In other words, how do conservation organizations in “red states” and “blue states” utilize different messaging to their local audiences? I also developed best practices to create effective conservation campaign materials geared toward politically conservative audiences.
I found that conservation messaging from “red state” organizations had a strong focus on hunting and fishing. The environment was very often framed as a resource for human consumption. There was little to no focus on human behavior change or attributing anthropogenic fault for environmental issues. There was a notable absence of attention on climate change and green alternative energy and there was a frequent usage of the term “heritage” and similar concepts throughout the “red state” messaging. Messaging in “blue states” was markedly different, with little to no mention of hunting and a strong focus on clean energy and climate change. There was markedly less framing of the environment as a human-owned resource than in “red state” messaging. Calls to action were extremely strong in “blue state” messaging. It not only recognized anthropogenic environmental problems, but strongly urged their audience to make behavioral changes and advocate for environmentally-friendly policies.
A study by Wolsko et al. (2016) found that conservative engagement was heightened when values such as patriotism, religiosity, and respect for authority were infused in the messaging. With this and my other research findings in mind, for my action component, I developed mockup conservation campaign materials for the conservative audience - a promotional commercial and signage. These deliverables strategically invoked elements of national pride, civic duty, personal choice, and autonomy into their design and messaging. I believe that this “Plant American” campaign (based on the notion of buying American products) could be successfully implemented in “red states” or with conservative or mixed targets. This project allowed me to build upon my conservation campaign-building and strategic message framing skills. It also laid the foundation for considering how to address congressional targets with strong political ideologies.
Authorship Leadership Challenge (ALC) - Submission to The Wildlife Professional
My Authorship Leadership Challenge (ALC) was a submission to The Wildlife Society (TWS)’s The Wildlife Professional magazine. As a member of this organization, I get these magazines mailed to me regularly and enjoy the articles. TWS members receiving this subscription include many subject matter experts and career professionals in conservation and related fields. I felt that this publication would be an ideal venue for my ALC as it could help me establish myself professionally in the field, and network with major environmental players.
For my ALC, I decided to adapt and repurpose my 2020 IAP paper “Selling Conservation to Politically Polarized Audiences: What’s Being Done and How to Maximize Engagement.” I did not anticipate how difficult this would be. I had spent many hours working on the paper the year before so it was almost physically painful to have to not only slash the word count by about 2000 words, but change its formal technical tone to a casual one more appropriate for a magazine article. I had not realized I had developed an attachment to this paper and was hesitant to change what I had already deemed “perfect.” With the help of my professor and reviewing peers, I ultimately landed on a version that was easy to consume for casual readers, while still honoring the value of my research.
The Wildlife Society’s submission requirements called for a short biography and headshot. While I developed the article in 2021, I did not actually submit the piece to TWS until 2022. As of September 2022, I received confirmation that TWS had received my submission and would start the review process. I am hopeful that it may be published shortly after I graduate, perhaps sometime in 2023. I am eager to see my own words living in the glossy pages of The Wildlife Professional.
UPDATE JANUARY 2023: I'm happy to share that my article ("Green Messaging in Red and Blue States") was chosen to be run in the March/April 2023 issue of The Wildlife Professional. The piece will be a 4-page spread. Due to copyright concerns, I will not post the published article here but I encourage members of The Wildlife Society to access print or digital copies of the magazine. Thank you to Keith Norris, David Frey, and others at TWS for helping make this possible.
Community Leadership Challenge (CLC) - How NGO's "Sell" Conservation to Politically Polarized Audiences
In Spring of 2021, I interned for Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS)’s Federal Affairs Team. For my Community Leadership Challenge (CLC), I gave a live Google Slides presentation on how political ideology impacts attitudes and values towards the environment and implications for campaign messaging strategies. My audience consisted of 6 members of the WCS Federal Affairs team, including the Federal Affairs Director, Assistant Director of Federal Affairs, Senior Policy Analyst (who has since been promoted to Associate Director of U.S. Policy Development), Assistant Director of U.S. Policy and Advocacy, Policy Fellow, and another Federal Legislative Intern. I compared my research findings with the perspectives and real-world experiences of the team who regularly engages with congressional stakeholders.
The CLC provided an opportunity for me to be vulnerable and help get into the practice of presenting to high-stakes audiences. My master plan focuses on “selling conservation” to hesitant or non-traditional consumers. I think that this audience was both hesitant and non-traditional and completing this challenge has helped me pinpoint where my skills and messaging tactics can be improved. It was also a lesson in humility, not taking such things too personally if stakeholders do not immediately get onboard. The field of environmental lobbying requires confidence and determination – two leadership attributes that I continue to grow and nurture in myself. I have appreciated and examined the lessons taken from my CLC. This experience continues to encourage the leader that I currently am, and foster new avenues for leadership growth.
My CLC project gave me a lot to consider. It helped to encourage a shift in both my master plan and my career goals. As I mentioned earlier, my master plan journey allowed me to find my niche in the field of conservation. Preparing for this presentation and delivering it to a team of environmental policy advocates, inspired me to consider how my graduate research – previously aimed at engaging skeptical and hesitant audiences within the general public at large – could inform messaging strategies for congressional targets.
Applying Lessons Learned to Engaging Congressional Audiences
After my internship with Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS), I pursued a directorate fellowship with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and took a summer Earth Expeditions course which culminated with a once-in-a-lifetime study abroad opportunity in the Galapagos Islands. Despite an action-packed summer, when fall semester arrived I still pondered the implications of my research for strategic congressional engagement. These projects were born of that shift in audience focus. Working on these projects generated a personal fascination in government relations. In 2022, I interned with World Wildlife Fund (WWF)'s Policy and Government Affairs Team which only reinforced that personal and professional interest.
Figure 3. Congressional stakeholders are particularly influential targets of engagement. Photo: "Capitol Hill - Washington, DC" by VinothChandar is licensed under CC BY 2.0.
Legislative Analyses for Informing Environmental Lobbying
In this research project, I looked at congressional legislative behavior and explored how the understanding and consideration of these dynamics may inform successful lobbying efforts for the environmental sector. I reviewed, organized, and analyzed 100 bills from the 117th Congress. I compared bill content and bipartisanship with respect to party affiliation. Many environmental groups can not afford to recruit in-house government affairs professionals or externally contract with professional lobbyists. For this reason, it was important to me to report my findings in simple terms that would be digestible for interested conservationists and environmentalists who may lack legislative and political savviness.
My research supported that pro-environmental bill content and propensity for bipartisanship vary by party. The results suggested that Republican legislators may be more interested in efforts that offer habitat protection and promote recreation, while Democrats are more open to concepts of clean energy and climate research. Republican-led bills and those that involved the protection of particular species garnered the most bipartisan support. These takeaways are important as bipartisan bills are more likely to become law than those with support from just one party (Curry & Lee, 2021). Conservation organizations often have limited time or capacity to devote to engaging with Congress. With 535 voting members of Congress – 435 in the House of Representatives and 100 in the Senate (Ballotpedia, 2016), NGOs must strategically focus their resources on a select few legislators.
This project reinforced that lobbying is an important and necessary component of conservation efforts. With the numerous legislators, U.S. nonprofits need to work smarter, not harder, being strategic with which Congressmembers they engage with, and how. Ideally, these organizations should take the time to research individual congressional stakeholders, taking account for a number of factors, including but not limited to, their voting records, biographies, and personal or business ties.
Getting Personal with Improbable Politicians to Influence Policy for the Planet: How Identifying Covert Pro-Environmental Connections of Unlikely Congressional Targets May Support Successful Bipartisan Advocacy Efforts
I selected a sample of 20 Republican Senators for whom I collected the following qualitative data: Name, Party, State-District, Committee, Year entered Senate, Caucus Membership, Childhood Background, Places Lived, Education, Hobbies, Interests, & Clubs, Past Employment/Investments/Private Businesses Owned (past or present), Environmental Stances, Endorsements, and Miscellaneous/Notes (including links, quotes, etc.). After organizing the data in a Google Sheets spreadsheet, I meticulously combed through the information for each Congress member, identifying bits that may be positively or negatively tied to conservation or other pro-environmental messaging. I then pulled the potential positive connections into a Google Doc where for each, I developed concrete talking points. These talking points would drive a curated messaging strategy for congressional engagement.
Once the talking points were established, I transferred them to an easily digestible lobby resource containing profiles for each Senator. These profiles, made more visually appealing using Canva, would contain the members’ photos and contact information, along the talking points in an intuitively followed format appropriate for advocates of any level of experience. While my mock-up resource only highlighted 5 Republican targets, a fully developed tool would complement what currently exists online, and even surpass it in its level of detail and particular relevance to environmental advocacy.
Conclusion
I am proud of the projects I have worked on while developing my master plan – way too many to highlight in this portfolio. More so, I understand and appreciate that my journey in learning is not over, and will never be complete. This is not discouraging; rather, to me it is a relief. As the years pass, I will continue to expand my knowledge base, and through the wins and inevitable failures, draw invaluable context and perspective. I strive to continue finding new ways to “find common ground” to advance conservation in a collaborative and inclusive manner. In the face of climate change, we must be bold and have the courage to invite new voices to the conversation. We need all hands on deck so we must learn to work together. This is particularly important in the scope of government intervention and the need for bipartisan support to maximize positive environmental impacts.
My time spent in Miami University’s Project Dragonfly program has been eye-opening, transformational, inspiring, and insightful. I felt supremely lucky to learn alongside students from all over the world from various academic, vocational, and cultural backgrounds. I had the honor of supporting international conservation by developing campaigns and other deliverables in coordination with conservation leaders in places like India and Australia. My worldview has substantially expanded and I have become a better global citizen. I have become more cognizant of how climate change and environmental health impacts communities, disproportionately so for those living in the margins. I came into this program knowing that I wanted to save species but uncertain about where I fit into the realm of conservation. The passion and intent were there, but the direction was all but lacking. As I conclude my studies, I feel resolute in my newfound trajectory. I know I belong in this field, but furthermore, I am confident that I will provide value and generate positive change.
The evolution of my master plan, very much reflected my personal journey of growth. I opened myself up to new and exciting avenues of employment including work in advocacy and legislative affairs. I hope that my work inspires conservationists to recruit public stakeholders to advance their cause. I pray that members of the scientific community feel empowered to pursue policy change. As subject matter experts, we are in the unique position to communicate research findings and the implications of such to legislators at all levels of government (Brownson et al., 2006).
Video
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I want to thank my parents Patrick and Beatrice for their unconditional and unwavering love and moral support. Without them, I do not think I would have had the courage to change careers and pursue my dreams. I am grateful to all of my Project Dragonfly professors, who helped me find my niche in the conservation field, and my coursemates who provided constructive peer review feedback throughout the program. Lastly, I want to thank Connie Malone, Project Dragonfly’s Graduate Services Coordinator who has been consistently helpful and kind throughout my studies at Miami University.
References
Brownson, R. C., Royer, C., Ewing, R., & McBride, T. D. (2006). Researchers and policymakers: travelers in parallel universes. American journal of preventive medicine, 30(2), 164–172.
Curry, J. M., & Lee, F. E. (2021). The Limits of Party: Congress and lawmaking in a polarized era. The University of Chicago Press.
Kareiva, P., & Marvier, M. (2012). What is conservation science? BioScience, 62(11), 962-969.
Kidd, L. R., Garrard, G. E., Bekessy, S. A., Mills, M., Camilleri, A. R., Fidler, F., Fielding, K. S., Gordon, A., Gregg, E. A., Kusmanoff, A. M., Louis, W., Moon, K., Robinson, J. A., Selinske, M. J., Shanahan, D., & Adams, V. M. (2019). Messaging matters: A systematic review of the conservation messaging literature. Biological Conservation, 236, 92–99.
List of current members of the U.S. Congress - Ballotpedia. (2016). Ballotpedia. https://ballotpedia.org/List_of_current_members_of_the_U.S._Congress
McKenzie-Mohr, D. (2000). New Ways to Promote Proenvironmental Behavior: Promoting Sustainable Behavior: An Introduction to Community-Based Social Marketing. Journal of Social Issues, 56(3), 543–554.
O'Donoghue, T., & Rabin, M. (2000). The Economics of Immediate Gratification. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 13(2), 233–250.
Saunders, C. D., Brook, A. T., & Olin Eugene Myers Jr. (2006). Using psychology to save biodiversity and human well‐being. Conservation Biology, 20(3), 702-705.
Wald, D. M., Longo, J., & Dobell, A. R. (2016). Design principles for engaging and retaining virtual citizen scientists. Conservation Biology : The Journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 30(3), 562–570.
Wolsko, C., Ariceaga, H., & Seiden, J. (2016). Red, white, and blue enough to be green: Effects of moral framing on climate change attitudes and conservation behaviors. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 65, 7–19.