Using cognitive mapping to understand conservation planning

Abstract

We considered a common research tool for understanding the mental models behind conservation decisions: cognitive mapping. Developed by cognitive psychologists, the elicitation of mental models with cognitive mapping has been used to understand soil management in Spain, invasive grass management in Australia, community forest management in the Bolivian Amazon, and small-scale fisheries access in Belize, among others. A generalized cognitive mapping process considers specific factors associated with the design, data-collection, data-analyses, and interpretation phases of research. We applied this tool in a study about the integration of social data in shoreline master plans of Washington State. Fourteen policy makers and managers (approximately 85% of the region's potential sample) were asked to identify the factors they considered when making their plans. Researchers coded these factors into mental-model objects and summarized mental-object frequency and cooccurrence trends. Although managers prioritized the perceived needs of social groups in their mental model of shoreline master plans, they focused specifically on tribal and private property rights, even though existing social data identified a diversity of interests around timber harvesting, tourism, and agriculture. Understanding their mental models allowed us to more effectively present this social data so that it could fit within their existing thoughts around planning. Although our case study provides a description of the cognition of a particular policy process, cognitive mapping can be used to understand cognitive processes that influence any conservation planning context.

Towards an inclusive nature conservation initiative: Preliminary assessment of stakeholders’ representations about the Makay region, Madagascar

“…Furthermore, mental models offer a snapshot assessment of continually evolving representations that might not necessarily reflect people's attitudes and behaviors in real-world situations. In particular, the elicitation procedure and context, as well as the intervieweeinterviewer relationship, are known to greatly influence the resulting cognitive map [69][70][71]. As a consequence, the ICMs we obtained in our study did not necessarily reflect how respondents frame the Makay SES in their own internal mental model.…”

Examining stakeholder perceptions of oyster ecosystem services using fuzzy cognitive mapping

“…One strength of FCM specifically, and mental modeling in general, is their ability to connect stakeholders together and to allow those conversations to influence conservation and management policies (Biedenweg, Trimbach, Delie, & Schwarz, 2020). For example, in Wade and Biedenweg (2019) used mental modeling to explore differences among fishers, NGOs, and policymakers, finding that there were significant differences among groups structured around specific goals and outcomes, suggesting the need for greater knowledge integration.…”

Introduction: New directions in conservation psychology at a critical time

“…The complexity of latent cognitive variables increases as cultural and temporal considerations increase, as demonstrated by Biedenweg et al. (2020), who describe how such complexity can be captured in a participatory cognitive mapping technique that enable comparison of the content and structure of participants’ perceptions across time and culture to improve marine conservation planning, evaluation, and collaboration.…”

“…Such approaches may require mixed, structural, or hierarchical statistical models to account for multilevel processes that assess the role of latent variables not directly observable (Kyle et al 2020 [this issue]). The complexity of latent cognitive variables increases as cultural and temporal considerations increase, as demonstrated by Biedenweg et al (2020), who describe how such complexity can be captured in a participatory cognitive mapping technique that enable comparison of the content and structure of participants' perceptions across time and culture to improve marine conservation planning, evaluation, and collaboration.…”

“…These contexts included planners’ use of social data in decision making about marine protected areas in the Pacific Northwest of the United States (Biedenweg et al. 2020 [this issue]), people's adaptability to external prompts about nature engagement while visiting nature preserves in Israel (Colléony et al. 2020 [this issue]), homeowners’ compliance with techniques to reduce trash raiding by American black bears ( Ursus americanus ) in the Rocky Mountains (U.S.A.) (Lischka et al.…”