Cautioning against overemphasis of normative constructs in conservation decision making

Area of Science:

• Conservation Biology
• Environmental Ethics
• Decision Science

Background:

• Conservation planning faces dissonance between scientific understanding and normative frameworks.
• Normative constructs, while aiding action and motivation, can conflict with scientific rigor when mistaken for science.

Purpose of the Study:

• To analyze the pitfalls of overreliance on normative assumptions in conservation interventions.
• To assess the ethical soundness of the Pelorus Island Goat Control Program through argument analysis.

Main Methods:

• Employed argument analysis, an ethics-based tool, to scrutinize the justification for a controversial conservation intervention.
• Developed a decision-making flowchart to illustrate the interplay between values, norms, and ethics.

Main Results:

• The Pelorus Island Goat Control Program's argument for restorative justice was found unsound due to weak logic and excessive normative assumptions.
• Overreliance on norms, particularly the 'tragedy' narrative, can compromise scientific and ethical integrity, leading to flawed decisions and public backlash.

Conclusions:

• Conservation decision-making requires awareness of values, normative constructs, and ethical theories.
• Practitioners should avoid overreliance on norms or ethics, prioritize logical soundness, transparency, clarity, scientific integrity, adaptiveness, and compassion.
• Addressing the role of norms can improve conservation outcomes and public support.