Compassionate conservation practice: supporting diverse conservation actions but context matters

Compassionate conservation advocates for an approach that considers the wellbeing of non-human animals and the protection of nature as interconnected and mutually supportive. Critics argue that compassionate conservation is an ineffective, ‘do-nothing’ approach that poses significant threats to biodiversity, people, wildlife, and ecosystems. These criticisms often stem from the assumption that compassionate conservationists oppose any kind of conservation action, which may result from a lack of clarity about which actions are consistent with this approach. To address this, we employed a Delphi method to engage a community of 27 compassionate conservationists in a structured discussion about 100 actions, across 16 domains of practice. Participants indicated whether these actions aligned with compassionate conservation. Results showed that participants supported a diversity of conservation actions. Specifically, 35 actions received high levels of support (≥80 % positive response), 19 received low levels of support (≤20 % positive response), and 46 received variable levels of support (between 20 % and 80 % positive responses). Through a thematic analysis of text-based participant responses, we identified five major themes and 18 subthemes that illustrate the contextual factors influencing participants' support of actions. For compassionate conservationists, effective conservation action involves prioritizing animal wellbeing, fostering the flourishing of ecological and social communities, and carefully assessing the potential for harm. They emphasize the importance of assessing context and contingency, recognizing that no single consideration is solely predictive, causative, or morally justifiable. • Many different and common conservation actions are strongly supported. • Absolute rules should not determine actions, context matters. • Ethical justification, scientific rigor and effectiveness of action are essential. • Conservation should abide the wellbeing and autonomy of animal lives. • Effective actions already exist that enable compassionate conservation practice.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Biological Conservation
Published
2025-11-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111593
Primary Topic
Environmental Education and Sustainability
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Compassionate conservation practice: supporting diverse conservation actions but context matters

Biological Conservation
Environmental Education and Sustainability
article

Compassionate conservation practice: supporting diverse conservation actions but context matters

article en

Abstract

Compassionate conservation advocates for an approach that considers the wellbeing of non-human animals and the protection of nature as interconnected and mutually supportive. Critics argue that compassionate conservation is an ineffective, ‘do-nothing’ approach that poses significant threats to biodiversity, people, wildlife, and ecosystems. These criticisms often stem from the assumption that compassionate conservationists oppose any kind of conservation action, which may result from a lack of clarity about which actions are consistent with this approach. To address this, we employed a Delphi method to engage a community of 27 compassionate conservationists in a structured discussion about 100 actions, across 16 domains of practice. Participants indicated whether these actions aligned with compassionate conservation. Results showed that participants supported a diversity of conservation actions. Specifically, 35 actions received high levels of support (≥80 % positive response), 19 received low levels of support (≤20 % positive response), and 46 received variable levels of support (between 20 % and 80 % positive responses). Through a thematic analysis of text-based participant responses, we identified five major themes and 18 subthemes that illustrate the contextual factors influencing participants' support of actions. For compassionate conservationists, effective conservation action involves prioritizing animal wellbeing, fostering the flourishing of ecological and social communities, and carefully assessing the potential for harm. They emphasize the importance of assessing context and contingency, recognizing that no single consideration is solely predictive, causative, or morally justifiable. • Many different and common conservation actions are strongly supported. • Absolute rules should not determine actions, context matters. • Ethical justification, scientific rigor and effectiveness of action are essential. • Conservation should abide the wellbeing and autonomy of animal lives. • Effective actions already exist that enable compassionate conservation practice.

Biological ConservationVol. 313
University of Nebraska at Omaha (US), Ben-Gurion University of the Negev (IL), Middle East Institute (US), University of Tasmania (AU), Clark University (US), The Wildlife Society (US), University of British Columbia (CA), Deakin University (AU), Regent College (CA), William & Mary (US), The University of Melbourne (AU), University of Calgary (CA), Williams (United States) (US), FloDesign (United States) (US), Dead Sea and Arava Science Center (IL), Bay Area Environmental Research Institute (US), Office of Diversity and Inclusion (US)
Life in Land
Openalex Percentile: Top 35%
Environmental Education and Sustainability
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.