Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
×
Home

Fostering adoption of conservation technologies: a case study with wildlife law enforcement rangers

  • Nicole Sintov (a1), Viviane Seyranian (a2) and Arnaud Lyet (a3)

Abstract

New technologies can aid the success of conservation outcomes. Technology alone will not however guarantee conservation success; this hinges on user adoption. Hence, there is a need to understand users’ adoption decisions and how to account for these to streamline the introduction of new technologies. Wildlife law enforcement rangers constitute a key end-user group for conservation technologies, and although some studies have focused on ranger experiences, and on the impacts of policing technologies on crime rates, few have addressed technology adoption among law enforcement personnel, and none among rangers. To address this gap we conducted a case study focused on a new technology called the Protection Assistant for Wildlife Security (PAWS), which was developed to deter poaching by improving the deployment of wildlife law enforcement ranger foot patrols. We evaluated the impacts of an educational programme on the willingness of Indonesia-based rangers to adopt the tool. Following the programme, rangers reported high levels of willingness to adopt PAWS. Furthermore, the more engaged rangers were in the programme, the more useful and easy to use they perceived PAWS to be, and the stronger their adoption intentions. In contrast, rangers who were more resistant to technology from the outset were less engaged in the programme, highlighting the importance of identifying and addressing sources of resistance. Overall, the findings of this case study stress the significance of accounting for and educating end users in disseminating conservation technologies, reinforcing the importance of accounting for human dimensions of conservation.

Copyright

Corresponding author

(Corresponding author) E-mail sintov.2@osu.edu

Footnotes

Hide All
*

Currently at: School of Environment and Natural Resources, 469B Kottman Hall, 2021 Coffey Road, Columbus, OH 43210, USA

Supplementary material for this article is available at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605317001533

Footnotes

References

Hide All
Bennett, N.J., Roth, R., Klain, S.C., Chan, K.M.A., Clark, D.A., Cullman, G. et al. (2016) Mainstreaming the social sciences in conservation. Conservation Biology, 31, 5666.
Carini, R.M., Kuh, G.D. & Klein, S.P. (2006) Student engagement and student learning: testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education, 47, 132.
Colvin, C.A. & Goh, A. (2005) Validation of the technology acceptance model for police. Journal of Criminal Justice, 33, 8995.
Critchlow, R., Plumptre, A.J., Alidria, B., Nsubuga, M., Driciru, M., Rwetsiba, A. et al. (2016) Improving law-enforcement effectiveness and efficiency in protected areas using ranger-collected monitoring data. Conservation Letters, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/conl.12288.
Eliason, S.L. (2011) Policing natural resources: issues in a conservation law enforcement agency. Professional Issues in Criminal Justice, 6, 4358.
Filteau, M.R. (2012) Deterring defiance: ‘Don't give a poacher a reason to poach’. International Journal of Rural Criminology, 1, 236255.
Garicano, L. & Heaton, P. (2010) Information technology, organization, and productivity in the public sector: evidence from police departments. Journal of Labor Economics, 28, 167201.
Gore, M.L. (2011) The science of conservation crime. Conservation Biology, 25, 659661.
Haas, T.C. & Ferreira, S.M. (2017) Optimal patrol routes: interdicting and pursuing rhino poachers. Police Practice and Research, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15614263.2017.1295243.
Hilborn, R., Arcese, P., Borner, M., Hando, J., Hopcraft, G., Loibooki, M. et al. (2006) Effective enforcement in a conservation area. Science, 314, 1266.
Jachmann, H. (2008) Monitoring law-enforcement performance in nine protected areas in Ghana. Biological Conservation, 141, 8999.
King, W.R. & He, J. (2006) A meta-analysis of the technology acceptance model. Information & Management, 43, 740755.
Lapointe, L. & Rivard, S. (2005) A multilevel model of resistance to information technology implementation. Management Information Systems Quarterly, 29, 461491.
Lemieux, A.M. (2015). Geotagged photos: a useful tool for criminological research? Crime Science, 4, 3, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40163-015-0017-6.
Lindsay, R., Jackson, T.W. & Cooke, L. (2011) Adapted technology acceptance model for mobile policing. Journal of Systems and Information Technology, 13, 389407.
Manning, P.K. (2008) The Technology of Policing: Crime Mapping, Information Technology, and the Rationality of Crime Control. New York University Press, New York, USA.
Moreto, W.D., Lemieux, A.M. & Nobles, M.R. (2016) ‘It's in my blood now’: the satisfaction of rangers working in Queen Elizabeth National Park, Uganda. Oryx, 50, 655663.
Murray, J.P., Grenyer, R., Wunder, S., Raes, N. & Jones, J.P.G. (2015) Spatial patterns of carbon, biodiversity, deforestation threat, and REDD+ projects in Indonesia. Conservation Biology, 29, 14341445.
Park, N., Serra, E., Snitch, T. & Subrahmanian, V. S. (2015) APE: a data-driven, behavioral model-based anti-poaching engine. IEEE Transactions on Computational Social Systems, 2, 1537.
Sintov, N., Kar, D., Nguyen, T., Fang, F., Hoffman, K., Lyet, A. & Tambe, M. (2016) From the lab to the classroom and beyond: extending a game-based research platform for teaching AI to diverse audiences. In Proceedings of the 6th Symposium on Educational Advances in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 41074112. Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence Press, Palo Alto, USA.
Tambe, M. (2011) Security and Game Theory: Algorithms, Deployed Systems, Lessons Learned. Cambridge University Press, New York, USA.
Venkatesh, V. & Bala, H. (2008) Technology acceptance model 3 and a research agenda on interventions. Decision Sciences, 39, 273315.
Yang, R., Ford, B., Tambe, M. & Lemieux, A. (2014) Adaptive resource allocation for wildlife protection against illegal poachers. In Proceedings of the 2014 International Conference on AAMAS, pp. 453–460. International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Richland, USA.
Recommend this journal

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

Oryx
  • ISSN: 0030-6053
  • EISSN: 1365-3008
  • URL: /core/journals/oryx
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Sintov et al. supplementary material
Sintov et al. supplementary material 1

 PDF (76 KB)
76 KB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed