Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T12:50:42.137Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Between the Turnstiles: Zoos as Agents of Environmental Education

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 June 2015

Nicole Mazur
Nicole Mazur*
Affiliation:
Australian National University Canberra
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Since the middle of the 20th century, zoological gardens have endeavoured to assist in the restoration of global, regional and national biodiversity. To help realise these conservation goals zoo professionals rely on formal and informal education schemes to enhance zoo visitors' awareness of environmental conservation issues. A questionnaire was administered at eight Australian zoos to elicit information regarding visitors' environmental knowledge and attitudes. Data from several open-ended questionnaire items were consistent with data from closed questions which intimated that zoo respondents appreciated zoos' conservation activities. However, a gap existed between visitors' endorsement of conservation and their level of conservation activism. This suggests that educational and interpretive materials used in zoos should include comprehensive and clearly intelligible information about a range of environmental values and means of involvement in action for conservation.

Type
General Section
Information
Australian Journal of Environmental Education , Volume 14 , 1998 , pp. 71 - 80
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

References

Babbie, E. 1989, The Practice of Social Research, Wadsworth, California.Google Scholar
Berg, B. L. 1989, Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences, Allyn & Bacon, Boston.Google Scholar
Blaikie, N. 1993, ‘Education and environmentalism: ecological world views and environmentally responsible behaviour’, Australian Journal of Environmental Education, vol. 9, pp. 1–20.Google Scholar
Captive Breeding Specialist Group and the World Zoo Organisation (CBG & WZO) 1993, The World Zoo Conservation Strategy, Chicago Zoological Society, Chicago.Google Scholar
de Vaus, D. A. 1990, Surveys in Social Research, Allen & Unwin, Sydney.Google Scholar
Doyle, T. J., Walker, K. J. 1996, ‘Death by digestion: how Environmental Studies is being absorbed by minor imperialisms’, paper presented to the Social Sciences and the Environment Conference, University of New England, NSW.Google Scholar
Fien, J. 1993. Environmental Education: A Pathway to Sustainability, Deakin University Press, Geelong, Victoria.Google Scholar
Fowler, F. J. 1984, Survey Research Methods, Sage, Beverly Hills.Google Scholar
Hancocks, D. 1995, ‘Lions and tigers and bears, oh no!’, in Norton, B. G., Hutchins, M., Stevens, E. F. & Maple, T. L. (eds) Ethics on the Ark, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC.Google Scholar
Healesville Sanctuary 1996, ‘Briefing notes to conference delegates’, in Zoos: Evolution or Extinction: 1996 Australasian Regional Association of Regional Parks and Aquaria/Australasian Society of Zoo Keepers Annual Conference, Healesville, Victoria.Google Scholar
Heberlein, T. A. 1989, ‘Attitudes and environmental management’, Journal of Social Issues, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 37–58.Google Scholar
Hutchins, M. & Conway, W. G. 1995, ‘Beyond Noah's ark: the evolving role of modern zoological parks and aquariums in field conservation’, International Zoo Yearbook, vol. 34, pp. 117–130.Google Scholar
Jamieson, D. 1995, ‘Zoos revisited’, in Norton, B. G. Hutchins, M., Stevens, E. F. & Maple, T. L. (eds) Ethics on The Ark, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C. Google Scholar
Kellert, S. R., Dunlap, J. 1989, Informal Laming at the Zoo: A Study of Attitude and Knowledge Impacts, Zoological Society of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Kelsey, E. 1991, ‘Conceptual change and killer whales: constructing ecological values for animals at the Vancouver Aquarium’, International Journal of Science Education, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 551–559.Google Scholar
Kidder, L. H. & Judd, C. M. 1986, Research Methods in Social Relations, CBS Publishing Japan Ltd, New York.Google Scholar
Mazur, N. 1996, ‘Perceptions of the role of zoos in conservation’, in Australasian Regional Association of Zoological Parks and Aquaria/Australasian Society of Zoo Keeping Conference Proceedings, Zoological Society of Western Australia, Perth.Google Scholar
Mazur, N. 1997, ‘Contextualising the role of zoos in conservation: an Australasian experience’, unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Adelaide, Adelaide.Google Scholar
Moser, C. A. & Kalton, G. 1971, Survey Methods in Social Investigation, Heinemann, London.Google Scholar
Mullan, B. & Marvin, G. 1987, Zoo Culture, Weidenfled & Nicholson, London.Google Scholar
Patton, M. Q. 1990, Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, Sage, California.Google Scholar
Rabb, G. 1994, ‘The changing role of zoological parks in conserving biological diversity’, American Zoologist, vol. 34, pp. 159–164.Google Scholar
Reading, R. & Kellert, S. R. 1993. ‘Attitudes towards a proposed reintroduction of Black-footed ferrets (Mustela migripes)’, Conservation Biology, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 569–580.Google Scholar
Seidman, M. 1993, ‘Zoos and the psychology of extinction’, Wild Earth, vol. 2, no. 4, pp. 64–69.Google Scholar
Stevenson, R. B. 1992, ‘Schooling and environmental education: contradictions in purpose and practice’, in Robottom, I. (ed) Environmental Education: Practice and Possibility, Deakin University Press, Geelong, Victoria.Google Scholar
Stone, E. F. 1978, Research Methods in Organisational Behaviour, Goodyear, Santa Monica.Google Scholar
Wadsworth, Y. 1991. Do It Yourself Social Research. Allen & Unwin, Melbourne.Google Scholar
World Society For The Protection Of Animals and the Born Free Foundation 1994, The Zoo Inquiry, 5 09.Google Scholar