The article under analysis written by Joshua Cinner and entitled “How Behavioral Science Can Help Conservation” deals with the ways behavioral sciences can leverage conservation incentives. Cinner (2018) sheds light on a set of cognitive biases and social influences that make people behave in a particular way. The mentioned cognitive biases include the status quo bias, anchoring, issue framing, and decoys bias. Social influences considered in the article are social norms, observability, block leaders, and public commitments. Cinner (2018) also stresses that the implementation of conservation incentives is associated with diverse challenges. Therefore, according to Cinner (2018), it is critical to pay attention to various peculiarities (socioeconomic, cultural, environmental) when developing and implementing conservation programs in different countries.
An illustration of a successful conservation incentive employed by water and power companies is the use of comparisons between neighbors instead of a simple provision of bills. People received their usage rate and that of their neighbors and the most efficient users of resources. This approach is based on the use of social norms regarding right and wrong, as well as the comparisons between different people’s actions. This incentive evokes a sense of agency and leverages self-control. Importantly, people should feel that they compare their behaviors to a group similar to them. Such programs tend to aim at customers, but they have a strong potential when used with policymakers, leaders, or engineers. A recent study showed that almost a third of civil engineers created more sustainable project designs when social norms concerning sustainable practices were reinforced before the start of the project.
The implementation of conservation programs is often affected by various factors, including but not confined to social norms, cultural peculiarities, and the availability of resources. In order to ensure the effective implementation of conservation initiatives, researchers should develop “an operational framework that helps practitioners to determine the types of behavioral interventions that might work best and be most appropriate in a particular context” (Cinner, 2018, p. 890). Every conservation program should include a set of clear implementation guidelines applicable under specific circumstances (based on goals, target population, social norms, the economic status of the community, and so on).
Prosocial behavior can be defined as a behavioral pattern that aims at improving (or maintaining) some aspects of life in a community that have a positive effect on people’s lives. These behaviors are positively seen in the society and are “encouraged,” while the actions leading to the opposite outcomes (those deteriorating the wellbeing of members of the community) are disapproved (Cinner, 2018, p. 890). Prosocial behaviors contribute to the development of the community where all members’ wellbeing is safeguarded.
Cinner (2018) mentions “one experiment” involving “civil engineers” whose project designs were affected by a program involving the focus on social norms concerning sustainability (p. 890). This passage is factual as it contains a description of the major aspects of the study (participants, experiment description, and results). The author provides a specific number (“28% more sustainable”), which makes the statement informative (Cinner, 2018, p. 890). The fact is verifiable as the author provides a reference to the mentioned study, so the reader can easily access the article and review the details. Based on the presented fact, the reader can infer that conservation initiatives have specific implications and can be employed in diverse contexts, as well as involve different groups of people.
Reference
Cinner, J. (2018). How behavioral science can help conservation. Science, 362(6417), 889-890. Web.