Testing social acceptance of genetic management in threatened bird conservation: the role of information and framing

Abstract

Content of image described in text. Summary Genetic management of threatened species to reduce extinction risk is sometimes considered controversial, with earlier surveys demonstrating that the general public are more cautious about genetic management than about some other conservation interventions including killing feral animals. This paper explores the acceptance of genetic management in greater detail, assessing whether people’s views change if more information is provided on why it might be necessary and what are the consequences of failing to consider genetic management of very small populations. Overall, we found that the acceptance of genetic management aiming to reduce the extinction risk of six threatened birds was 73% among respondents (n = 2,586) from Australia while 14% found it unacceptable and the remaining 13% had no opinion. Most respondents chose the same level of acceptance for all six threatened bird species presented as case studies, even though the intensity of genetic management varied from interbreeding populations to gene editing. We did not find support for the hypothesis that providing more detailed information to respondents about specific genetic management strategies would increase their level of acceptance. While longer, more-detailed introductory text about extinction risk and genetic management helped respondents form an opinion, it had no effect on acceptance. Moreover, when more information was provided in individual case studies, the level of acceptance was lower, although it remained above 50% for all cases. Instead, the level of acceptance was positively associated with respondents’ age, their trust in science and their risk-taking behaviour.