Charisma failure: Understanding differences in support for conservation of Asian elephants compared to tigers and African elephants

The disproportionately high support for conservation of charismatic species is well-documented. However, available data demonstrate substantial discrepancies in funding for conservation even among charismatic spe-cies, and these differences are poorly understood. We use two survey experiments to explore explanations for differences in demand for conservation between charismatic species by comparing Asian elephants (Elephas maximus) with tigers (Panthera tigris) in India and with African elephants (Loxodonta africana and Loxodonta cyclotis) globally. Through social media, we collect data from conservation enthusiasts to measure (a) relative demand for conservation, (b) awareness about conservation status, (c) relative favourability, and (d) perception of which species faces greater conservation challenges (risk perception). Overall, respondents allocated significantly more funds to the species/taxon they perceive to be more at risk and 41-54 % more to the species/ taxon they say they like more (though about 70 % of respondents claimed to like both species/taxa presented equally). On average, respondents in India allocated 5.6 % more for tigers than Asian elephants, a far smaller discrepancy than found in public data from key real-life funders. Internationally, respondents allocated 14 % more funds for African than Asian elephants (despite there being fewer Asian elephants) and generally over-estimated how endangered African elephants are compared to Asian elephants. Our study suggests (i) conser-vation enthusiasts wish to donate more to more endangered charismatic species but are sometimes misinformed about the level of endangerment of even very well-known species, and (ii) discrepancies in actual funding levels across charismatic species appear to be greater than conservation enthusiasts believe they should be.

Automated summary

There is a disproportionate support for the conservation of charismatic species, but funding discrepancies even exist among these species and are not well understood. People tend to allocate more funds to species they perceive as more at risk and those they like more. The actual funding levels for charismatic species appear to be greater than what conservation enthusiasts think they should be.