From the forest to the fork: Why we need to “reframe conservation” for conservation behavior change campaigns

The conservation sector is increasingly recognizing that conservation is not only about animals and plants but equally about people and their behavior (Verissimo, 2013; Schultz, 2011), and there is growing interest and practice in applying human social science theory and approaches to behavior change (see e.g., McKenzie-Mohr et al., 2011; Reddy et al., 2017; Stern, 2000).

Framing theory suggests that how something is presented to an audience influences how they process the information. Framing an issue is among the first steps to introduce the topic to intended audiences. The frame is an initial filter to structure and give meaning to the exchange of ideas, using “organizing principles that are socially shared and persistent” (Reese et al., 2001).

As the conservation sector deals with more complex issues such as reducing urban demand for bushmeat and applies new approaches such as using mass communications and social marketing strategies to bring about behavior change, “conservation” needs to be “reframed” so the topic fits the worldviews and interests of target audiences. Often the perceptions held by consumers of bushmeat and those held by those in the conservation sector are incongruent.

From a conservation perspective, eating bushmeat in cities is a threat to wildlife. Too much meat is hunted to meet urban demand and is hunting many species to extinction. It is also contributing to food insecurity for rural and forest people who no longer have enough protein to eat (Wilkie et al., 2016). Urbanites in Central Africa have many motivations for eating bushmeat. For them, bushmeat consumption does not present a problem. The problem is the constraints on eating bushmeat that they encounter.

Since 2015, the Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) has been developing a model for using conservation social marketing to reduce urban bushmeat consumption and for strengthening the structures to limit bushmeat availability in big cities across Central Africa (Frost Yocum & Mwinyihali, 2018; Weiland et al., 2021).

The evidence-based campaign design process started with formative research to understand the drivers of the behaviors of interest (McKenzie-Mohr & Schultz, 2014). The campaigning strategy also took into account social theory about how people communicate, learn, and change behaviors.

WCS conducted formative studies in Pointe Noire, Republic of Congo, during 2016–17 and in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), during 2018–19. The studies explored bushmeat consumers’ motivations for eating bushmeat, as well as their lifestyle, identity, media preferences, and perceptions of “conservation.”

The studies found that bushmeat consumption and how it was perceived differed in the two cities. They also showed a discordance between how conservationists and urban bushmeat consumers understood “conservation” and bushmeat consumption.

In Pointe Noire, bushmeat consumers associated bushmeat with their culture, status, and hospitality. For them, the bushmeat situation was not as bad as the conservation messages say: “There is meat in the markets and restaurants and many only eat bushmeat occasionally." They did not want to give up this special part of their family and social life that they enjoy so much. Their lives were already difficult enough. For residents of Pointe Noire, bushmeat information and conservation was “bad news” and a burden. They were suspicious of conservation as a foreign preoccupation, putting more importance on animals than humans and imposed by outsiders who do not appreciate Congolese life and culture. Conservation laws, such as hunting seasons and protected species, corruption, and poor enforcement made things more difficult in rural areas. This increased bushmeat costs and inconvenience in the city. They felt they were helping rural people and hunters make a living by buying bushmeat.

In Kinshasa, bushmeat was also a cuisine that is a very big part of Congolese culture. Eating bushmeat was considered expression of status and cultural identity. Getting the bushmeat was the challenge: The limited supply, long transport and maintaining the bushmeat quality make it expensive and more desirable. The Kinois (residents of Kinshasa) regarded “conservation of nature” with indifference: It was about big frustrating problems (deforestation, habitat destruction, climate change, more wildlife diseases, etc.) happening in forest areas that they can do little about from Kinshasa. They were not even sure whether eating bushmeat is a problem or a conservation issue. While there was respect and support for the work that some Congolese are doing for their country and its resources, they resisted being told what to do by international conservation organizations. They had more immediate urban problems such as pollution, the pandemic, and the social and economic pressures of their daily lives.

WCS recognized that for calls to reduce bushmeat consumption to be accepted by bushmeat consumers, behavior change strategies such as communication campaigns needed to be oriented to how the intended audiences perceive conservation issues and bushmeat consumption. In these two cities, WCS used “reframing conservation” to respond to the particular urban lifestyles and preoccupations, including uncertainty about bushmeat as a conservation problem.

In Pointe Noire’s pilot campaign, the new frame aimed to reorient audiences from resistance to acceptance and a sense of ownership about conservation. The campaign shared “good news” instead of bad news that denies the consumers’ interests and pleasures and gave reasons for optimism and pride to positively reorient perceptions about conservation and reducing bushmeat consumption. Specific messages were developed to resonate with motivations for eating bushmeat, such as hospitality and social ties, so that bushmeat consumers could still feel they could benefit, rather than be deprived, when eating less bushmeat.

In Kinshasa, the new frame aimed to shift indifference to interest in conservation that has a closer connection to urban life. Small, feasible actions, and moments of success were offered as chances to make daily life better and at the same time be part of a conservation initiative. It acknowledged there were problems but pointed out that all is not completely lost. Conservation could be part of a busy agenda, in a distinctive, dynamic Kinois way. Reducing bushmeat consumption was offered as a way to enhance social life and feel more successful (WCS, 2021).

Urbanites in Central Africa have many reasons for eating bushmeat and for changing their behavior. This holds true, even when bushmeat is more expensive than domestic meats. The motivations are not going to be the same in every city. “Traditional” conservation campaigns and messages may be counterproductive and even reinforce negative perceptions of conservation, because perceptions held by urban African bushmeat consumers and those held by actors in the conservation sector are often incongruent.

“Reframing conservation” is a key early step in the process of designing campaigns to achieve conservation objectives such as bushmeat demand reduction. Other urban conservation initiatives may also benefit from examining the “frames” through which “conservation” is perceived.

Conservation and environmental practitioners for too long have preached to the choir or tried to convert people.

For conservation to be successful, behaviors need to change. In our work to promote behavior change, we need to see the world through the eyes of those whose behaviors we wish to impact.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), the Arcus Foundation, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA)—Illegal Wildlife Traffic (IWT) and Global Challenges Research Fund (GCRF).