Governments pass conservation laws, adopt policies and make plans yet frequently fail to implement them. Implementation of conservation, however, often requires costly sacrifice: people foregoing benefit for the benefit of biodiversity. Decisions involve trade-offs whose outcomes depend on the values at stake and people's perceptions of those values. Psychology, ethics and behavioral science have each addressed the challenge of making difficult, often tragic, trade-off decisions. Based on these literatures, values can be classified as secular or sacred, where sacred values are those for which compensation may be unthinkable (e.g., freedom). Taboo trade-offs emerge from pitting secular values against sacred ones, and are difficult to discuss much less negotiate. Confronting taboo trade-offs in conservation may require discursive approaches to better understand particular attributes of decisions that place sacred human values at risk. Tragic trade-offs emerge from pitting sacred values against one another. The trolley problem - a challenge where one is forced to choose between the two unthinkable outcomes - is a simple heuristic illustrating ethical challenges of tragic trade-offs. Behavior studies illustrate that people have a strong aversion to active losses, resulting in a bias toward status quo decisions. Faced with tragic, trolley problem-like choices, people tend to avoid action responsibility, defer decisions, evade confronting opinions and regret unfortunate outcomes of actions. To help close the implementation gap, conservation actors may need to directly address the psychological, ethical and behavioral barriers created by the remorse, regret and moral residue of implementing conservation choices that have tragic outcomes. Recognition of these predictable features of the human psyche may foster better administrative structures to support action with durable outcomes as well as new research directions. Article impact statement: Implementation may be improved by understanding psychological barriers in making tragic choices between biodiversity and human well-being. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

中文翻译：

---

从禁忌和手推车问题中汲取的保护教训

政府通过了保护法，制定了政策并制定了计划，但经常无法实施。然而，保护的实施往往需要代价高昂的牺牲：人们为了生物多样性的利益而放弃利益。决策涉及权衡，其结果取决于利害关系的价值观和人们对这些价值观的看法。心理学、伦理学和行为科学都解决了做出困难的、往往是悲剧性的权衡决定的挑战。根据这些文献，价值可以分为世俗的或神圣的，其中神圣的价值是那些补偿可能是不可想象的（例如，自由）。禁忌权衡源于将世俗价值观与神圣价值观对立起来，而且很难讨论，更不用说谈判了。面对保护中的禁忌权衡，可能需要采用散漫的方法来更好地理解将神圣的人类价值置于危险之中的决策的特定属性。神圣的价值观相互对立，由此产生了悲惨的权衡取舍。电车问题——一个人被迫在两种难以想象的结果之间做出选择的挑战——是一个简单的启发式方法，说明了悲剧性权衡的伦理挑战。行为研究表明，人们强烈厌恶主动损失，从而导致对现状决策的偏见。面对悲惨的、类似手推车问题的选择，人们倾向于逃避行动责任，推迟决定，逃避面对意见，并对行动的不幸结果感到遗憾。为了帮助缩小实施差距，保护行动者可能需要直接解决心理、因实施具有悲剧性结果的保护选择而产生的悔恨、后悔和道德残余所造成的道德和行为障碍。认识到人类心理的这些可预测特征可能会促进更好的管理结构，以支持具有持久结果的行动以及新的研究方向。文章影响声明：通过了解在生物多样性和人类福祉之间做出悲惨选择的心理障碍，可以改进实施。本文受版权保护。版权所有。认识到人类心理的这些可预测特征可能会促进更好的管理结构，以支持具有持久结果的行动以及新的研究方向。文章影响声明：通过了解在生物多样性和人类福祉之间做出悲惨选择的心理障碍，可以改进实施。本文受版权保护。版权所有。认识到人类心理的这些可预测特征可能会促进更好的管理结构，以支持具有持久结果的行动以及新的研究方向。文章影响声明：通过了解在生物多样性和人类福祉之间做出悲惨选择的心理障碍，可以改进实施。本文受版权保护。版权所有。