Things we like: Human preferences among similar organisms and implications for conservation

Human Ecology

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 361-369

  Stokes, D L ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON BOTHELL   (United States)

Author keywords

Aesthetics of biodiversity; Biodiversity conservation; Color; Human biodiversity preferences; Penguins

Indexed keywords

BIODIVERSITY; CONSERVATION MANAGEMENT; DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS; ESTHETICS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SPECIES CONSERVATION; SURVIVAL;

ANIMALIA; SPHENISCIDAE;

EID: 34147110958     PISSN: 03007839     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10745-006-9056-7     Document Type: Article

References (44)

1. Adobe Systems (2002). Photoshop 7.0. Adobe Systems Incorporated.
2. Bishop, R. C., and Heberlein, T. A. (1979). Measuring Values of Extramarket Goods: Are Indirect Measures Biased? American Journal of Agricultural Economics 61: 926-930.
3. Boersma, P. D., and Stokes, D. L. (1995). Conservation: Threats to penguin populations. In Williams, T. D. (ed.), The Penguins, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 127-139.
4. Boyd, D. (1997). Eucalyptus removal on Angel Island. California Exotic Pest Plant Council 1997 Symposium Proceedings, 1-3.
5. Brook, A., Zint, M., and De Young, R. (2003). Landowner's Responses to An Endangered Species Act Listing and Implications for Encouraging Conservation. Conservation Biology 17: 1638-1649.
6. Burghardt, G. M., and Herzog, H. A. Jr. (1980). Beyond Conspecifics: Is Brer Rabbit Our Brother? BioScience 30: 763-768.
7. Chester, J. (1996). The World of the Penguin, Sierra Club Books, San Francisco, California.
8. Chester, J. (2001). The Nature of Penguins, Celestial Arts, Berkeley, California.
9. Coursey, D. L. (1998). The Revealed Demand for A Public Good: Evidence from Endangered and Threatened Species. New York University Environmental Law Journal 6: 411-449.
10. Czech, B., Krausman, P. R., and Borkhartaria, R. (1998). Social Construction, Political Power, and Allocation of Benefits to Endangered Species. Conservation Biology 12: 1103-1112.
11. Davis, L. S., and Renner, M. (2003). Penguins, Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut.
12. Diamond, P. A., and Hausman, J. A. (1994). Contingent Valuation: Is Some Number Better Than No Number? Journal of Economic Perspectives 8: 45-64.
13. Diradourian, A. (2003). Global Warming. www.armanddiradourian.com.
14. Gould, S. J. (1980). The Panda's Thumb, W. W. Norton & Co., New York, pp. 95-107.
15. Hirschman, E. C. (1994). Consumers and Their Animal Companions. Journal of Consumer Research 20: 616-632.
16. Horne, P., Boxall, P. C., and Adamowicz, W. L. (2005). Multiple-use Management of Forest Recreation Sites: A Spatially Explicit Choice Experiment. Forest Ecology and Management 207: 189-199.
17. Hutchins, M. (1995). Olympic Mountain Goat Controversy Continues. Conservation Biology 9: 1324-1326.
18. IUCN (2004). IUCN red list of threatened species. www.redlist.org. Downloaded on 18 September 2005.
19. Kellert, S. R. (1993a). Value and Perception of Invertebrates. Conservation Biology 7: 845-855.
20. Kellert, S. R. (1993b). The biological basis for human values of nature. In Kellert, S. R., and Wilson, E. O. (eds.), The Biophilia Hypothesis, Island, Washington, DC, pp. 42-69.
21. Kellert, S. R. (1996). The Value of Life: Biological Diversity and Human Society, Island, Washington, DC.
22. Kellert, S. R., and Berry, J. K. (1980). Knowledge, affection, and basic attitudes toward animals in American society Phase III. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service Report, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC.
23. Kiester, R. A. (1997). Aesthetics of Biological Diversity. Human Ecology Review 3: 151-157.
24. Lanting, F. P. (1999). Penguin, Benedikt Taschen Verlag, Köln, Germany.
25. Lawrence, E. A. (1989). Neoteny in American perceptions of animals. In Hoage, R. J. (ed.), Perceptions of Animals in American Culture, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC, pp. 57-76.
26. Lorenz, K. (1943). Die angborenen Formen mõglicher Erfahrung. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 3: 235-409.
27. Lorenz, K. (1971). Part and parcel in animal and human societies. In Studies in Animal and Human Behavior, vol. 2, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 115-195.
28. Lynch, W. (1997). Penguins of the World, Firefly Books, Willowdale, Ontario, Canada.
29. McNamara, W. (2005). Representation of imperiled plants in botanic gardens: The influence of conservation status and human preference. Masters thesis, Hutchins School, Sonoma State University.
30. Montgomery, C. A. (2002). Ranking the Benefits of Biodiversity: An Exploration of Relative Values. Environmental Management 65: 313-326.
31. Morris, D. (1967). The Naked Ape, McGraw-Hill, New York.
32. Morris, D., and Morris, R. (1965). Men and Snakes, McGraw-Hill, New York.
33. Morris, D., and Morris, R. (1966). Men and Pandas, McGraw-Hill, New York.
34. Randall, A. (1986). Human preferences, economics, and the preservation of species. In Norton, B. G. (ed.), The Preservation of Species, Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey, pp. 79-109.
35. Schafer, K. (2000). Penguin Planet: Their World, Our World, NorthWord, Minnetonka, Minnesota.
36. Schuman, H., and Johnson, M. P. (1976). Attitudes and Behavior. Annual Review of Sociology 2: 161-207.
37. Shepard, P. (1978). Thinking Animals, Viking, New York.
38. Stokes, D. L. (2006). Conservators of Experience. BioScience 56: 6-7.
39. Ulrich, R. S. (1993). Biophilia, biophobia, and natural landscapes. In Kellert, S. R., and Wilson, E. O. (eds.), The Biophilia Hypothesis, Island, Washington, DC, pp. 73-137.
40. Ward, P. I., Mosberger, N., Kistler, C., and Fischer, O. (1998). The Relationship between Popularity and Body Size in Zoo Animals. Conservation Biology 12: 1408-1411.
41. Warner Independent Pictures (2005). March of the Penguins, Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc.
42. Williams, T. D. (1995). The Penguins, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
43. Wilson, E. O. (2002). The Future of Life, Knopf, New York.
44. Zar, J. H. (1996). Biostatistical Analysis, 3rd Edition, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.