The importance of education and public awareness

And a totally non-controversial critique of biodiversity research and conservation’s effectiveness

This should be fun. This is a story about how I became so certain about the importance of education, media and public awareness in environmental education. These ideas first began in Madagascar as a student in 2008. Despite my passion for science, after my experiences there I no longer wished to pursue a career in academia or research. My undergraduate studies had set me on a path towards a masters or PhD in the natural sciences. I was super enthusiastic about primate and human evolution, paleoanthropology, conservation biology and primate behavior. In fact, before I traveled to Madagascar I had already completed an undergraduate thesis on the behavior of maternal western lowland gorillas, something I had spent an entire summer working on at WCS, Bronx Zoo. My classes and experience with the Bronx Zoo gorillas had given me so much inspiration and curiosity to learn more about our closest living relatives in the animal world. Yet sadly, however passionate I still remain about these topics, Madagascar smashed those ideas into pieces. Let me explain.

But before I do, I should clarify that I am not against scientific research for science’s sake. In addition, I am well aware of many amazing ongoing research projects around the world that are critical to wildlife conservation and improving our understanding of natural processes, species and ecosystems. However there was something in scientific academia that rubbed me the wrong way.

Many of the researchers I met as a student in Madagascar, though passionate about wildlife and conservation, were seemingly blinded by a need to publish and present. To me, it seemed that this took precedent over the more pressing issues facing the very same species they student. I also felt that much of the scientific effort of these researchers was redundant or unnecessary when set beside the far greater needs of the species, people and places under study. While conservation was always a shared passion, I simply could not figure out how these perfectly intelligent academics could seriously discuss the nocturnal ranging behavior of this or that species for years and years as the very forests where that species live vanish in flames.

Surely, SURELY, we should be putting more effort into saving those species from extinction. Surely we already know that species are critical to ecosystems, that ecosystems are delicate and intricate webs that need balance, and that human activity is disrupting that balance. Surely we need to put as much of our effort as possible now into stopping the destruction and restoring habitat?

In my very short time in Madagascar I watched the forests disappearing in real time before my eyes. The rate of destruction was hard to fathom, but it made me wonder how these researchers could not drop everything they were doing and try something different, because it seemed to me that their data was not contributing much to the overall protection of the species and their forest homes.

The logical counter-argument is, of course, that conservation research is critical to inform conservation policy, and to influence government authorities to help protect wildlife and nature. Without the research, conservationists will not know what or how to protect species and wild landscapes. While that may be true, there is a limit to the effectiveness of such data collection.

After 100 years of conservation research, most scientists and academics have a solid understanding on the importance of nature and a healthy, stable ecosystem. WE know that every species plays a key role in our natural world, and that the health and prosperity of human civilization is directly dependent upon a healthy and stable natural world.

Long story short, nature is really important. I think we know that by now, and we need to refocus our efforts on anything that can be done to actively protect nature from harm and reduce the destruction of species around the world. I also think its very important to accept that most governments, especially those in developing economies, simply do not care about conservation statistics. It doesn’t matter how much you, as a conservation activist, care about some rare species. Governments by the nature of their reality must prioritize short-term financial profits, retaining their power, and maintaining positive public perception.

In the latter point lies an unexploited potential for conservation. If we know that maintaining public support is a huge part of what many governments aim to do (to maintain their power), then we should accept that changing public demands could be a strong motivator to influence real changes in government policies. If a government believe its people are passionate about nature and conservation, they will enact conservation policies to appease their public. While not true in all cases, this strategy can work in most democracies and even some dictatorial governments, who often fear political unrest among their citizens. Yet if that same government believes their public to be uninformed or unconcerned for the fate of nature and wildlife, it should come as no surprise when they sell of their forests and natural resources for short term profits, without any threat to their public opinions or changes of maintaining their position.

Conservation needs to accept the fact that we cannot compete in the short term financial race that exploitative industries offer to governments. In nations where standards of living are far lower than the west, it should not be surprising to us that developing economies crave the luxuries that we have come to take for granted. The is nothing intrinsically wrong about desiring a better, more prosperous future for you and your people, or for higher standards of living.

Conservation needs to figure out how to sell itself as the most financially viable industry for the sustainability of all future endeavors. We must be willing to set our old fashioned methods aside and try something new! Or at the very least, we should not continue to approach conservation form the same tried and tested methods that are not working quickly enough, and expect different results. As someone said, that’s the definition of insanity.

In short, my time in Madagascar showed me the importance of education and public awareness. This, more than most research could every hope to do, is what shapes real-world, implemented conservation policies and practices. Only through outreach, engagement and education can conservation actually work on a widespread level. Simply look at the history of the environmental movement. How much further behind would we be if not for the environmental movements of the 70’s and 80’s. And on that note, how much further ahead would be be had more of us been made aware of the science and the facts. Public awareness and opinions shapes the future.

Through mass-media communications and widespread improvements in public awareness and support for nature, governments will, almost certainly feel pressured to enact environmentally friendly policies. While I still believe in the importance of conservation and wildlife research as a valuable contribution to the world, I wish this side of the problem represented the smaller level of effort, and the smaller portion of funding. Because the forests are vanishing today, right now. While studies on the minutia of random things continues to receive the bulk of the funding, conservation is failing around the world. For ever small success story there are a hundred failures. We know today that human civilization and our industries have already impacted species, ecosystems, and at risk people in both rural and urban populations, not to mention destabilized the global climate. It is far passed the time to put a greater emphasis on building the public awareness needed for conservation to have any hope of succeeding. Journal publications and conferences should be a by-product of conservation research, not the end goal. Conservation of our shared natural world, and preservation of the species and ecosystems we depend on for our future should be the end goal. Every conservation NGO should desire to reach a day when they are no longer needed. Awareness that drives real-world, positive action on conservation is what we need now, far more than anything else. While all scientific research expands the human consciousness, wildlife conservation cannot ignore this simple truth, expressed wonderfully by Baba Dioum in 1968. Here is my own interpretation of his famous quote.

People protect what they love, but cannot love what they do not know or understand. For conservation to have a hope, we must focus our efforts on building the knowledge and attitudes required to promote widespread support for conservation of our shared natural world.

As I said, this would be entirely un-controversial. I’m sure my friends and colleagues working in the sciences and academia will be perfectly delighted by what I have said… Just remember, these are opinions and ramblings, and of course science for science along is still awesome. In fact, I really should have simplified this entire article into one underlying feeling.

I wish it environmental education and public awareness was taken more seriously as an approach to conservation, and I wish there was more funding to be found for it.