We develop an experimental, framed public goods game to test how support for otherwise identical elephant conflict interventions varies with perceptions of the trustworthiness of two different intervening groups. Our result show that participants cooperate more with interveners they perceive to be more trustworthy and that different aspects of trustworthiness matter differentially.
Little is known about how stakeholders in real‐life conservation conflicts respond to different types of uncertainty. We explored this question using a framed field experiment and interviews for an ongoing conflict between goose conservation and farming in Scotland.
Barnacle goose numbers on Islay increased from 20,000 to 43,000 between 1987 and 2016 and, as the goose population has grown, farms have supported geese more frequently and in larger numbers, with subsequent damaging effects.