Social construction, political power, and the allocation of benefits to endangered species

Social construction is the virtue ascribed to a subject by the general public; along with political power, It influences the allocation of public policy, benefits. Nonhuman species are socially constructed by humans, and political power. is held in trust for them by human interest groups. Our goal was to determine if the allocation of benefits to endangered species is consistent with social construction and political power. We assessed the social construction of broad types of species using survey, data collected from a national sample of 643 respondents. We found that plants, birds, mammals and fish have a distinctly more positive social construction than reptiles, amphibians, Invertebrates, and microorganisms. Respondents also indicated, however, that all nonhuman species should be conserved and that ecological importance and rarity are the most important factors to consider in prioritizing species for conservation. We gauged the political power affiliated with types of species by the number of nongovernmental organizations representing them. Birds have a substantial advantage over all other types. We employed a political science model that identifies policy subjects bused on social construction and political power and identified birds mammals, and fish as "advantaged" subjects, plants as "dependents," and reptiles, amphibians, invertebrates, and microorganisms as "deviants." Numerous exceptions, especially, among mammals, are best described ns "contenders" Allocation of the benefits of the U.S. Endangered Species Act is consistent with predictions of the model. A myriad of values converge to favor birds, mammals, fish, and plants in the policy arena. The I,most promising opportunities for species conservation in the political arena, however; may, De with plants and amphibians, for which the ratio of social construction to benefit allocation is highest.