Replication Data for: Conservation for Nature and Wildlife’s Sake

Replication data for "Conservation for Nature and Wildlife’s Sake" (2024). This is the same data available on OSF. https://osf.io/739pg/?view_only=

Abstract:
We experimentally test if provision of ethical justifications affects people’s reported acceptability towards two environmental policies: conservation expansion and wildlife infrastructure. With a 2×3 survey experiment of American participants (n=1604), we test two ethical justifications— (1) anthropocentric justification (nature is valuable to the extent it helps humans), and (2) a non-anthropocentric justification (nature is intrinsically valuable). Our results indicate non-anthropocentric justification increases policy acceptability compared to anthropocentric justification and compared to no justification. This effect holds regardless of political orientation and environmental concern. The treatment justification has downstream effects on how people prefer these policies to be ethically motivated. Participants given non-anthropocentric justification perceive that similar conservation policies generally are, and should be, passed to benefit wildlife and ecosystems compared to participants without a justification given. Likewise, participants given the anthropocentric justification report that similar policies are and should be passed for humans and society compared to the control group.