Abstract:

In previous surveys, we explored underlying values and narratives on biodiversity conservation among 454 undergraduate Biology students (2015–2023) and 164 postgraduate students from the Master’s Degree in Biodiversity: Conservation and Evolution (2008–2023) at the University of Valencia (Spain). Participants responded to a moral dilemma involving the potential eradication of an invasive species (the North American ruddy duck) to protect a native endangered one (the European white-headed duck), and whether the decision would change if the invasion had occurred naturally rather than through human introduction. Regardless of academic year or degree, about one-third of Biology students (more females than males) opposed eradication, mainly guided by a “first do no harm” ethics (i.e., compassionate conservation). Furthermore, about two-thirds of students expressed an “exemptionalist” worldview, considering that human actions are not natural, but those from other species should be accepted as part of the natural order. Here, we replicated this survey among 234 under- and postgraduate students from various non-biological disciplines at Spanish universities, including UV. Strikingly, nearly identical patterns emerged: roughly one-third (again, more females) opposed eradication on compassionate grounds. This remarkable similarity suggests that a stable proportion of students experiences strong emotional moral intuitions in favor of sentient individuals regardless of academic field and degree of expertise. Likewise, around 60% of non-biology students distinguished between a “natural” vs. “human-assisted” invasion of North American ruddy ducks based on exemptionalist reasoning, thus confirming the prevalence of this cultural narrative among university students. A comparison of the three student samples revealed that biodiversity postgraduate students articulated a significantly broader diversity of arguments and moral narratives to justify their answers. These patterns perhaps illustrate a fundamental tenet of moral intuitionism, namely, that in moral dilemmas, the emotional dog often wags its rational tail. How this background could be dealt with in higher education to promote understanding and agreement in conflicting conservation views is an open question.

Keywords:

Conservation, invasive species, moral intuitionism, university students, conflicting views.