Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
H. Rubin (1983)
Applied Social Research
T. Hayward (1995)
Ecological Thought: An Introduction
S. Kellert (1993)
Values and Perceptions of InvertebratesConservation Biology, 7
S. Kellert, Joyce Berry (1980)
Knowledge, Affection and Basic Attitudes Toward Animals in American Society. Phase III.
Murphy Murphy (1994)
On reauthorization of the Endangered Species ActConservation Biology, 8
Paul McErlain-Ward (1996)
Science and the Endangered Species ActJournal of Animal Ecology, 65
L. Leemis (1991)
Applied Linear Regression ModelsJournal of Quality Technology, 23
Bender Bender (1996)
Box score: listings and recovery plans as of October 31, 1996Endangered Species Bulletin, 21
(1996)
Biostatistical analysis
A. Schneider, H. Ingram (1993)
Social Construction of Target Populations: Implications for Politics and PolicyAmerican Political Science Review, 87
Benjamin Simon, C. Leff, Harvey Doerksen (1995)
Allocating scarce resources for endangered species recoveryJournal of Policy Analysis and Management, 14
T. Power, R. Barker (1993)
Saving All the Parts: Reconciling Economics And The Endangered Species Act
R. Christensen (1987)
ATTITUDES, KNOWLEDGE, AND BEHAVIORS TOWARD WILDLIFE AS AFFECTED BY GENDER
J. O'Grady (1997)
Reinventing Nature? Responses to Postmodern DeconstructionInterdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, 4
(1996)
The species concept, species prioritization, and the technical legitimacy of the Endangered Species Act
D. Commerce (1978)
Statistical abstract of the United States
H. Stanley, R. Niemi (1988)
Vital Statistics on American Politics
K. Johnson (1998)
Reauthorization of the Endangered Species Act.Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association, 212 4
L. Harris, D. Dillman (1978)
Mail and telephone surveys
George Edwards, M. Wattenberg, R. Lineberry (1980)
Government in America: People, Politics, and Policy
(1995)
Who's who in Congress. Congressional Quarterly
John Harris (1985)
The value of life
Kathryn Kohm (1991)
Balancing on the brink of extinction : the Endangered Species Act and lessons for the future
P. Shepard (1978)
Thinking Animals: Animals and the Development of Human Intelligence
(1996)
Threatened and endangered wildlife and livestock interactions
M. Brunson (1995)
The Wisdom of the Spotted Owl: Policy Lessons for a New CenturyWestern Journal of Applied Forestry, 10
Box score: listings and recovery plans as of
(1995)
Federal and state endangered species expenditures : fiscal year 1993
G. Burghardt, H. Herzog (1980)
Beyond Conspecifics: Is Brer Rabbit Our Brother?BioScience, 30
S. Kellert (1985)
Social and Perceptual Factors in Endangered Species ManagementJournal of Wildlife Management, 49
P. Salant, D. Dillman (1994)
How to conduct your own survey
M. Barone, G. Ujifusa, Douglas Matthews (1972)
The Almanac of American Politics
R. Grumbine (1993)
Ghost Bears: Exploring The Biodiversity Crisis
(1984)
Biophilia, the human bond with other species
Social construction is the virtue ascribed to a subject by the general public; along with political power, it influences the allocation of public policy benefits. Nonhuman species are socially constructed by humans, and political power is held in trust for them by human interest groups. Our goal was to determine if the allocation of benefits to endangered species is consistent with social construction and political power. We assessed the social construction of broad types of species using survey data collected from a national sample of 643 respondents. We found that plants, birds, mammals, and fish have a distinctly more positive social construction than reptiles, amphibians, invertebrates, and microorganisms. Respondents also indicated, however, that all nonhuman species should be conserved and that ecological importance and rarity are the most important factors to consider in prioritizing species for conservation. We gauged the political power affiliated with types of species by the number of nongovernmental organizations representing them. Birds have a substantial advantage over all other types. We employed a political science model that identifies policy subjects based on social construction and political power and identified birds, mammals, and fish as “advantaged” subjects, plants as “dependents,” and reptiles, amphibians, invertebrates, and microorganisms as “deviants.” Numerous exceptions, especially among mammals, are best described as “contenders.” Allocation of the benefits of the U.S. Endangered Species Act is consistent with predictions of the model. A myriad of values converge to favor birds, mammals, fish, and plants in the policy arena. The most promising opportunities for species conservation in the political arena, however, may be with plants and amphibians, for which the ratio of social construction to benefit allocation is highest. Opinión Pública, Poder Politico, y Ubiación de Beneficios para Especies Amenazadas La opinión pública y el poder político influencian la distribución de beneficios hacia los sujetos humano de la política. La opinión pública sobre especies no humanas está también determinada por el ser humanos, y el poder político asociado a estas especies se ejerce a través de grupos interesados en ellas. Nuestro objetivo fue determinar si la distribución de beneficios dirigidos a especies en peligro de extinción es consecuente con la opinión pública y el poder político. Realizamos una evaluación de la opinión pública sobre grupos amplios de tipos de especies usando datos de encuestas nacionales. Encontramos que las plantas, las aves, los mamíferos, y los peces tienen una opinión pública claramente más positiva que los reptiles, los anfibios, los invertebrados y los microorganismos. Sin embargo, las personas que respondieron la encuesta indicaron que es esencial conservar a todas las especies animales no humanas, y que la importancia ecológica y la rareza son los factores más importantes a considerar al priorizar las especies para su conservación. Medimos el poder político asociado a tipos de especies por medio del número de organizaciones no gubernamentales que los representan. Las aves tienen una importancia substancial en relación a todos los otros tipos. Usamos un modelo desarrollado para ciencias políticas que identifica los sujetos de la política en base a la opinión pública y el poder político, e identificamos a las aves, los mamíferos, y los peces como sujetos “con ventaja,” las plantas como sujetos “dependientes,” y los reptiles, los anfibios, los invertebrados y los microorganismos como sujetos “desviados de lo común.” Numerosas excepciones, especialmente entre mamíferos, son descritas como “contendientes.” Las discrepancias entre la valuación pública y la distribución de recursos para esfuerzos de recuperación son consistentes con las predicciones del modelo. Se concluye que hay un gran número de valores que convergen a favor de las aves, los mamíferos, los peces, y las plantas en el terreno político. Sin embargo, las oportunidades más prometedoras para la conservación de especies en el terreno político pueden estar en las plantas y los anfibios, para los que el cociente entre la opinión pública y la distribución de beneficios es la más alta.
Conservation Biology – Wiley
Published: Oct 5, 1998
Read and print from thousands of top scholarly journals.
Already have an account? Log in
Bookmark this article. You can see your Bookmarks on your DeepDyve Library.
To save an article, log in first, or sign up for a DeepDyve account if you don’t already have one.
Copy and paste the desired citation format or use the link below to download a file formatted for EndNote
Access the full text.
Sign up today, get DeepDyve free for 14 days.
All DeepDyve websites use cookies to improve your online experience. They were placed on your computer when you launched this website. You can change your cookie settings through your browser.