Working from the Inside Out: Fostering Intrinsic Motivation and Expanding Our Criteria for Conservation Success

Abstract

Primatological research is often associated with understanding animals and their habitats, yet practical conservation depends entirely on human actions. This encompasses the activities of Indigenous and local people, conservationists, and NGOs working on the ground, as well as more remote funders and policymakers. In this paper we explore what it means to be a conservationist in the 2020s. While many primatologists accept the benefits of more socially inclusive dimensions of research and conservation practice, in reality there remain many challenges. We discuss the role primatologists can play to enhance interdisciplinary working and their relationships with communities living in and around their study sites, and examine how increased reflexivity and consideration of one’s positionality can improve primatological practice. Emphasis on education and stakeholder consultation may still echo colonial, top-down dialogues, and the need for greater emphasis on genuine knowledge-sharing among all stakeholders should be recognised. If we are sincere about this approach, we might need to redefine how we see, consider, and define conservation success. We may also have to embrace more compromises. By evaluating success in conservation we explore how reflexive engagements with our positionality and equitable knowledge-sharing contribute to fostering intrinsic motivation and building resilience.

Participatory action research for primate conservation: A critical analysis of a nonformal education program in Southern Mexico

“…Reflexivity should be considered, by practicing awareness of the social, cultural and political context where PCEPs take place. Our presence shaped both our research and the ongoing local dynamicshence it should be accounted for (Cardinal et al, 2022;Riley, 2020;Waters et al, 2021). But more importantly, through reflexivity, individual and collective concerns that influence reality can be stimulated.…”

“…What right do we have to intervene in other people's reality? How can we build decolonial, bottom‐up dialogs and knowledge co‐produced in PCPEPs (Cardinal et al, 2022)? What about thesis projects of limited duration that hardly have a follow‐up?…”

“…There are diverse approaches to PCEPs and different traditions in their implementation and evaluation (Kling & Hopkins, 2015; Wright et al, 2017). However, over the past decade, a growing number of authors have exposed that most of PCEPs underprint a neocolonial focus (Bezanson et al, 2022; Blair, 2019; Cardinal et al, 2022; Lanjouw, 2021; Riley, 2020; Rodrigues et al, 2022). Through our experiences in the field of conservation education research, we realized about the need to value different approaches and methodologies brought to the fore with the potential to improve education programs.…”

“…In our experience, the conservation science framework rooted in positivism is still dominant in conservation education programs, which in turn means that different world views are being left out (Evely et al, 2008). For these reasons, we argue that quantitative‐centered approaches to education research could greatly benefit from incorporating subjectivity, interpretative approaches, and the human experience into the equation through contemporary qualitative research methods (Cardinal et al, 2022; Riley, 2020). Reflexivity should be considered, by practicing awareness of the social, cultural and political context where PCEPs take place.…”

“…This is the case of PAR, arts-based education, and knowledge coproduction. Self-reflection on our own positionality and practice in PCEPs was a starting point (Cardinal et al, 2022).…”