When you think about conservation communication, you might picture the finished product: a social media post, a zookeeper talk, a campaign about an endangered species, or you might not even know what conservation communication is. What gets even less attention is what happens before any communication takes place: how organizations understand and value communication as a tool for conservation. In my Masters in Research (MRes), that is exactly what I’ve set out to uncover.
What Is Conservation Communication?
One of the first challenges I faced when diving into science communication literature was how loosely the term “conservation communication” is used or not used. Biodiversity, wildlife, environmental, the terminology shifts constantly, and that inconsistency makes focused research difficult.
For the purposes of my research, I’ve settled on this definition: “A process by which information about the conservation of the Earth’s natural environment and its wild inhabitants is exchanged between conservation communicators and the public.” It might sound straightforward, but unpacking this term reveals a lot. It’s not just about what organizations say, it’s about the processes, platforms and people involved, and the intended outcome of those exchanges.
Why Zoos? Why Now?
Zoos occupy an unusual space in the science communication landscape. Originally established as entertainment and recreational centers, zoos in the United Kingdom have gone through a dramatic transformation over the last century. Legislation, particularly the Standards of Modern Zoo Practice for Great Britain, has formalized conservation and public education as core obligations for zoos in the UK, not optional add-ons. Today, UK zoos sit at a powerful intersection of conservation science, public engagement, and entertainment.
That positioning at the nexus between research, communication and publics is exactly what makes them a great subject for research. As a science communication professional, I wanted to understand how they connect these groups together. After all, Zoos are one of the few places where millions of people have direct encounters with wildlife and conservation projects every year: they can reach audiences that academic papers and conservation campaigns often don’t. I wanted to understand how they use their position to share research and conservation messaging with the public, how do they think about conservation communication internally?
The Research: What I’m Exploring
I’ve been fortunate to have Bristol Zoological Society, the charitable organization behind the Bristol Zoo Project and Bristol Zoo Gardens, as a partner for my research. BZS runs conservation field projects around the world, has over 30,000 Instagram followers, and operates a well-established communications team. The BZA is a rich organization to study and having them as a partner has facilitated access to a wide range of documents and staff, ensuring that my research is built on a solid case study.
The case study is built around three core questions, which I think of as the Why, the Who, and the What of conservation communication at BZS.
- Why does BZS believe engaging the public is important, and how is conservation communication understood at an organizational level? Is it embedded in their mission? Is there a shared internal understanding of the purpose of communication?
- Who is involved in the creation and delivery of conservation communication? Communications teams, social media managers, educators, conservation scientists, and leadership can all be part of the communication process, but how do these roles interact, and how are they structured within the organization?
- What is BZS trying to achieve through its communication? How are target audiences identified? How is engagement tracked? And do current strategies align with organizational conservation goals?
To answer these questions, I’m using two main methods: inductive and deductive document analysis of BZS’s internal and external documents, including strategy documents, conservation policies, and education frameworks, and semi-structured interviews with key communications and leadership personnel.
What Makes This Research Matter
A key finding in conservation communication literature is the necessity for science communicators to move away from the deficit model. This model focuses on the idea that the public simply lacks scientific knowledge, and the job of communicators is to fill that gap in a one-directional flow. Research has consistently shown that this approach is not effective. Public mistrust of scientific messaging often stems not from a lack of knowledge, but from the style and framing of communication itself.
For zoos, this is especially relevant. They have the rare ability to move beyond one-directional messaging. A keeper talk, a live animal encounter, an interactive exhibit, these are all opportunities for a more participatory form of communication that most conservation organizations cannot easily access. Understanding how BZS thinks about and deploys communications initiatives is, I think, very valuable for the wider field.
Where I’m At
I’m currently mid-project. Interviews with BZS personnel are underway and document analysis is well in progress. It’s already clear that the organizational view of conservation communication is a rich and underexplored area, particularly in zoos. I’m hoping this research helps make sense of the field and offers valuable insights for conservation communicators. If you’re interested in conservation, zoos, or the organizational perspective of science communication, I’d love to hear your thoughts, this project is very much a work in progress.
Brayden Bice, MRes student at UWE Bristol and Bristol Zoological Society.