Digital Nature and the Biodiversity Awareness Paradox: A Systematic Literature Review

Introduction: The rapid advancement of digital technologies has transformed how humanity perceives the natural world. Digital nature is representation of ecosystems through virtual reality, social media, and documentaries which offers unprecedented access to biodiversity. However, this increased visibility coincides with a "biodiversity awareness paradox": high digital engagement with exotic species does not correlate with local ecological literacy or conservation behavior. This review synthesizes evidence on digital nature interventions and their effects on biodiversity awareness and conservation outcomes.

Method: Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, we systematically searched SciSpace, Google Scholar, PubMed, and ArXiv for studies published between 2011 and 2025. Only peer-reviewed studies were included. For records identified through ArXiv, inclusion required verification of subsequent peer-reviewed publication in a journal or conference proceeding; unpublished preprints were excluded. Studies were included if they: (1) investigated digital nature interventions (VR, documentaries, social media); (2) measured biodiversity awareness, ecological knowledge, or conservation attitudes; (3) evaluated the biodiversity awareness paradox or awareness-action gap; and (4) represented general populations. The 43 studies met inclusion criteria. A meta-analysis was not performed due to heterogeneity in methodologies and outcomes across studies.

Results: Digital nature interventions consistently increased short-term awareness and emotional engagement, particularly with charismatic and exotic species. The long-term behavior changes by using VR through body transfer experience, is still unproven. Social media facilitated engagement with urban wildlife though, often anthropocentric and entertainment driven. A consistent finding was the prioritization of "virtual" exotic biodiversity over local species, particularly in children. Documentaries generated awareness spikes but did not consistently translate into conservation action. However, effects varied across studies, reflecting differences in intervention type, population, and measurement approaches.

Conclusion: The existing literature supports digital nature as a tool for raising awareness, yet highlights a critical limitation: increased digital engagement with global biodiversity appears to correlate with greater attention to exotic species than to local biodiversity. This suggests that digital platforms may inadvertently reinforce the biodiversity awareness paradox by directing attention away from local ecosystems. Interventions should bridge global awareness and local action, potentially through integration with citizen science or outdoor programs. The short-term focus of most studies underscores the need for longitudinal research tracking sustained conservation outcomes.