Addressing gaps in biodiversity knowledge and improving awareness

While many people express concern over environmental issues, overall environmental knowledge remains low. In addition, few studies have measured knowledge regarding biodiversity. Biodiversity is a measure of species variation within an ecosystem, and its loss often leads to species extinction. Of studies that have assessed biodiversity knowledge, results indicate that many people prioritize protection of “charismatic megafauna” like elephants and tigers over species that are more susceptible to negative impacts of biodiversity loss. The United Nations declared 2010 as the International Year of Biodiversity (IYB) with hopes of increasing awareness and knowledge. As a result, the authors conducted this research from November 2010 to January 2011, reasoning that the public may be familiar with biodiversity. The three primary objectives of this study were: 1) to measure whether the general public considered biodiversity conservation important, 2) to determine whether gender or education level influenced knowledge of biodiversity, and 3) to assess levels of concern.

The research occurred in two Northern Virginia counties—Fairfax and Loudoun—located near Washington, D.C. The authors hypothesized that residents' proximity to D.C. and its political landscape would familiarize them with biodiversity-related policies and campaigns. In addition, previous research has demonstrated that residents in this area are highly educated. The researchers conducted surveys with pedestrians in public areas, such as stores and public transportation stops. A total of 180 participants completed the survey, who were 65.5% female with an average age of 31 years.

The survey included 27 questions that asked respondents about their biodiversity knowledge and concern. The knowledge portion contained 17 questions that were created from information on the IYB website. The survey also included demographic questions regarding respondents' gender and education level to determine if there was a relationship with knowledge. To measure their level of concern regarding biodiversity, the survey included questions about habitat and certain species. For instance, respondents were asked to rank habitats and species in order of importance from 1 (very important to conserve) to 6 (not important). The habitats were either exotic (e.g., coral reefs or Antarctica) or less exotic (e.g., deserts). The survey also asked respondents to indicate their concern about federally-listed endangered species from one of three categories: 1) large mammals, 2) medium mammals, 3) small invertebrates; the same questions were asked about species not listed as threatened or endangered. To assess knowledge levels, the researchers developed a biodiversity knowledge index based on the participants' answers to the 17 knowledge questions, which were each worth one point. The authors used statistics to analyze the data and to determine if and how demographic factors influenced knowledge of biodiversity.

Overall findings suggested that the participants' knowledge of biodiversity was low. Only 61% of the respondents indicated they had heard of biodiversity and only 37% could define it. Nearly all of the respondents indicated they had never heard of the International Year of Biodiversity. Results suggested that neither gender nor education level influenced participants' knowledge.

When asked about the greatest threats to biodiversity, the participants provided the following answers in order from most common to least common: habitat loss, pollution, climate change, a growing population, and invasive species. The respondents indicated that tropical rainforests and coral reefs were the most important habitats to conserve for biodiversity reasons while the desert and Antarctica were selected as the least important. Participants felt that the giant panda was the most important species to conserve, followed by the African elephant and the bottlenose dolphin, respectively. Results suggested that participants considered the poison dart frog to be the least important species to conserve.

Similar to findings from other studies, this study indicated that the public was more concerned about large endangered mammals, such as elephants and pandas, than species that may be more susceptible to negative impacts biodiversity loss. The researchers hypothesized that this was likely a result of media focused on “charismatic megafauna” as opposed to smaller species that may be perceived as pests.

This study has limitations, including that the findings are specific to the participants and should not be generalized to other populations. The survey was voluntary, meaning that people with an interest in biodiversity may have been more likely to participate. In addition, the researchers targeted a specific area because they thought residents would be familiar with biodiversity, indicating the results may not be representative of the general public.

The researchers recommend that environmental educators and organizations identify gaps in biodiversity knowledge and address those gaps to improve overall awareness. However, environmental groups should continue to use examples of large charismatic mammals to gain the public's interest appeal to the public. For example, groups could emphasize the threats to large mammals such as rhinoceroses and elephants to gain more members, then also teach about smaller endangered species such as frogs and birds. In addition, the authors recommend that environmental campaigns use trigger words like 'natural places' and 'wilderness' rather than 'biodiversity' to develop environmental stewards.