These methods are fun to use, come and see for yourselves!
Many approaches to conserving and managing natural resources depend upon rules which restrict access to resources. However, the existence of rules alone does not guarantee compliance and information on rule breaking behaviour is needed in order to inform the design of interventions. Unfortunately estimating the prevalence of rule-breaking and understanding what motivates those involved constitutes a major challenge as understandably, rule-breakers are generally unwilling to discuss their motives, or even admit to rule-breaking, for fear of punishment or shame.
Questions delivered through face-to-face interviews are a great way of gaining data on legal natural resource use, however, when exploitation is illegal, this approach is susceptible to biases. People may provide dishonest answers to present a favourable image of themselves according to prevailing norms (social desirability bias) or refuse to complete all, or parts of surveys (non-response bias). The impact such biases have on data validity are only now beginning to be considered within conservation science. However, they have long been recognised in the social sciences, resulting in disciplines such as political and health sciences developing their own specialised techniques for asking sensitive questions. Despite some recent applications, such techniques have rarely been used to study illegal resource extraction, yet they have the potential to unlock an entirely new perspective on this global phenomenon. This workshop will introduce you to the randomised response technique and the unmatched count technique with examples from conservation.
This session is being led by Freya St John.
