Skip to main content

Motivations for committed nature conservation action in Europe


Despite ongoing efforts to motivate politicians and publics in Europe regarding nature conservation, biodiversity continues to decline. Monetary valuation of ecosystem services appears to be insufficient to motivate people, suggesting that non-monetary values have a crucial role to play. There is insufficient information about the motivations of actors who have been instrumental in successful conservation projects. We investigated the motivations underlying these biodiversity actors using the ranking of cards and compared the results with the rankings of motivations of a second group of actors with more socially related interests. For both groups of actors, their action relating to biodiversity was supported in general by two groups of motivations related to living a meaningful life and moral values. The non-biodiversity actors also noted that their action relating to biodiversity rested more on beauty, place attachment and intrinsic values in comparison with their main non-biodiversity interests. Our results have implications for environmental policy and biodiversity conservation in that the current tendency of focusing on the economic valuation of biodiversity fails to address the motivations of successful actors, thereby failing to motivate nature conservation on an individual level.

Corresponding author
*Correspondence: Dr Jeroen F. Admiraal email:
Hide All

Supplementary material can be found online at

Hide All
Admiraal J.F., Musters C.J.M. & de Snoo G.R. (2016) The loss of biodiversity conservation in EU research programmes: thematic shifts in biodiversity wording in the environment themes of EU research programmes FP7 and Horizon 2020. Journal for Nature Conservation 30: 1218.
Asah S.T. & Blahna D.J. (2013) Practical implications of understanding the influence of motivations on commitment to voluntary urban conservation stewardship. Conservation Biology 27: 866875.
Bates D., Maechler M., Bolker B. & Walker S. (2015) lme4: linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4. R package version 1.1-9 [www document]. URL
BIOMOT (2013) Motivation for Biodiversity Action: Vocabulary, Theories and Framework. L. Knippenberg (ed.) [www document]. URL
Boitani L., & Sutherland W.J. (2015) Conservation in Europe as a model for emerging conservation issues globally. Conservation Biology 29: 975977.
Butler W.F. & Acott T.G. (2007) An inquiry concerning the acceptance of intrinsic value theories of nature. Environmental Values 16: 149168.
Carrus G., Passafaro P. & Bonnes M. (2008) Emotions, habits and rational choices in ecological behaviours: The case of recycling and use of public transportation. Journal of Environmental Psychology 28: 5162.
Clark C.F., Kotchen M.J. & Moore M.R. (2003) Internal and external influences on pro-environmental behavior: participation in a green electricity program. Journal of Environmental Psychology 23: 237246.
Corral-Verdugo V., Fraijo-Sing B. & Pinheiro J.Q. (2006) Sustainable behavior and time perspective: present, past, and future orientations and their relationship with water conservation behavior. Revista Interamericana de Psicología/Interamerican Journal of Psychology 40: 139147.
Dedeurwaerdere T., Admiraal J.F., Beringer A., Bonaiuto F., Cicero L., Fernandez-Wulff P., Hagens J., Hiedanpaa J., Knights P., Molinario E., Melindi-Ghidi P., Popa F., Silc U., Soethe N., Soininen T. & Vivero J.L. (2016) Combining internal and external motivations in multi-actor governance arrangements for biodiversity and ecosystem services. Environmental Science & Policy 58: 110.
de Groot M. & Van den Born R.J.G. (2007) Humans, nature and god: exploring images of their interrelationships in Victoria, Canada. Worldviews: Global Religions, Culture, and Ecology 11: 324351.
EEA (2015) State of nature in the EU; results from reporting under the nature directives 2007–2012. EEA (European Environment Agency) [www document]. URL
EU (2015) Special Eurobarometer 436 ‘Attitudes of Europeans towards biodiversity’. ISBN 978-92-79-50788-5. TNS opinion, Brussels. European Union [www document]. URL
Flint C.G., Kunze I., Muhar A., Yoshida Y. & Penker M. (2013) Exploring empirical typologies of human–nature relationships and linkages to the ecosystem services concept. Landscape and Urban Planning 120: 208217.
Fiske S.T. (2014) Social Beings: A Core Motives Approach to Social Psychology. 4th edition. New York, NY: Wiley.
Gifford R. & Nilsson A. (2014) Personal and social factors that influence pro-environmental concern and behaviour: a review. International Journal of Psychology 49: 141157.
Gómez-Baggethun E. & Ruiz-Pérez M. (2011) Economic valuation and the commodification of ecosystem services. Progress in Physical Geography 35: 613628.
Grendstad G. & Wollebaek D. (1998) Greener still? An empirical examination of Eckersley's ecocentric approach. Environment & Behavior 30: 653675.
Hicks C.C., Cinner J.E., Stoeckl N. & McClanahan T.R. (2015) Linking ecosystem services and human-values theory. Conservation Biology 29: 14711480.
Hiedanpää J. & Borgström S. (2014) Why do some institutional arrangements succeed? Voluntary protection of forest biodiversity in Southwestern Finland and of the Golden Eagle in Finnish Lapland. Nature Conservation 7: 2950.
IPBES (2015) The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services [www document]. URL
Jagers S.C. & Matti S. (2010) Ecological citizens: identifying values and beliefs that support individual environmental responsibility among Swedes. Sustainability 2: 10551079.
Kempton W., Boster J.S. & Hartley J.A. (1995) Environmental Values in American Culture. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Kollmuss A. & Agyeman J. (2002) Mind the gap: why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research 8: 239260.
Kruglanski A.W., Chen X., Dechesne M., Fishman S. & Orehek E. (2009) Fully committed: suicide bombers’ motivation and the quest for personal significance. Political Psychology 30: 331557.
Mayer F.S. & Frantz C.M. (2004) The connectedness to nature scale: a measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology 24: 503515.
MEA (2005) Millennium Ecosystem Assessment. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Muraca B. (2011) The map of moral significance: a new matrix for environmental ethics. Environmental Values 20: 375396.
Nolt J. (2006) The move from good to ought in environmental ethics. Environmental Ethics 28: 355374.
Norgaard R.B. (2010) Ecosystem services: from eye-opening metaphor to complexity blinder. Ecological Economics 69: 12191227.
Norton D. (1976) Personal Destinies: A Philosophy of Ethical Individualism. Princeton, NJ: Princeton university Press.
O'Neill J. (1997) Managing without prices: the monetary valuation of biodiversity. Ambio 26: 546550.
O'Neill J. & Spash C.L. (2000) Conceptions of value in environmental decision-making. Environmental Values 9: 521536
Pearce D. (2007) Do we really care about Biodiversity? Environmental and Resource Economics 37: 313333.
Perkins H.E. (2010) Measuring love and care for nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology 30: 455463.
Core Team R (2012) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Richards R. (2001) A new aesthetic for environmental awareness: chaos theory, the beauty of nature, and our broader humanistic identity. Journal of Humanistic Psychology 41: 5995.
Rode J., Gómez-Baggethun E. & Krause T. (2015) Motivation crowding by economic incentives in conservation policy: a review of the empirical evidence. Ecological Economics 109: 270282.
Ryan R.M. & Deci E.L. (2000) Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist 55: 6878.
Ryan R.M., Huta V. & Deci E.L. (2008) Living well: a self-determination theory perspective on eudaimonia. Journal of Happiness Studies 9: 139170.
Ryff C.D. & Singer B.H. (2008) Know thyself and become what you are: a eudaimonic approach to psychological well-being. Journal of Happiness Studies 9: 1338.
Schultz P.W. (2000) Empathizing with nature: the effects of perspective taking on concern for environmental issues. Journal of Social Issues 56: 391406.
Schultz P.W. (2001) The structure of environmental concern: concern for self, other people, and the biosphere. Journal of Environmental Psychology 21: 327339.
Schwartz S.H. (1992) Universals in the content and structure of values: theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology 25: 165.
Sponarski C.C., Vaske J.J., Bath A.J. & Musiani M.M. (2014) Salient values, social trust, and attitudes toward wolf management in south-western Alberta, Canada. Environmental Conservation 41: 303310.
Tam K.P. (2013) Concepts and measures related to connection to nature: similarities and Differences. Journal of Environmental Psychology 34: 6478.
TEEB (2013) The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity. A synthesis of approaches to assess and value ecosystem services in the EU in the context of TEEB [www document]. URL
Tittensor D.P. et al. (2014) A mid-term analysis of progress toward international biodiversity targets. Science 346: 241244.
van den Born R.J.G., Lenders R.H.J., De Groot W.T. & Huijsman E. (2001) The new biophilia: an exploration of visions of nature in Western countries. Environmental Conservation 28: 6575.
van den Born R.J.G. (2008) Rethinking nature: public visions in The Netherlands. Environmental Values 17: 83109.
van der Werff E., Steg L. & Keizer K. (2013) The value of environmental self-identity: The relationship between biospheric values, environmental self-identity and environmental preferences, intentions and behavior. Journal of Environmental Psychology 34: 5563.
Williams D.R. & Vaske J.J. (2003) The measurement of place attachment: validity and generalizability of a psychometric approach. Forest Science 49: 830840.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Environmental Conservation
  • ISSN: 0376-8929
  • EISSN: 1469-4387
  • URL: /core/journals/environmental-conservation
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *


Type Description Title
Supplementary materials

Admiraal supplementary material
Table S1

 Word (31 KB)
31 KB


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 7
Total number of PDF views: 107 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 1031 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 13th March 2017 - 21st January 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.