Social factors mediating human–carnivore coexistence: Understanding thematic strands influencing coexistence in Central Romania
- 467 Downloads
Facilitating human–carnivore coexistence depends on the biophysical environment but also on social factors. Focusing on Central Romania, we conducted 71 semi-structured interviews to explore human–bear (Ursus arctos) coexistence. Qualitative content and discourse analysis identified three socially mediated thematic strands, which showed different ways in which perceived interactions between people, bears and the environment shape coexistence. The “landscape-bear strand” described perceptions of the way in which the landscape offers resources for the bear, while the “landscape-human strand” related to ways in which humans experience the landscape. The “management strand” related to the way bears was managed. All three strands highlight both threats and opportunities for the peaceful coexistence of people and bears. Management and policy interventions could be improved by systematically considering the possible effects of interventions on each of the three strands shaping coexistence. Future research should explore the relevance of the identified thematic strands in other settings worldwide.
KeywordsBrown bear Carnivore conservation Conflict mitigation Human–carnivore conflict Human–nature relationships
We are grateful to Hans Hedrich for conducting and translating all the interviews and we thank all respondents for their participation. The survey procedure was cleared by the ethics committee of Leuphana University Lueneburg. The project was funded by a grant of the International Association for Bear Research and Management to ID and a Sofja Kovalevskaja Award by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation to JF.
- Bixler, R.P. 2013. The political ecology of local environmental narratives: Power, knowledge, and mountain caribou conservation. J. Polit. Ecol 20: 273–285.Google Scholar
- Boitani, L. 1995. Ecological and cultural diversities in the evolution of wolf-human relationships. In Ecology and conservation of wolves in a changing world, ed. L.N. Carbyn, and D.R. Seip, 3–11. Alberta: Canada, Canadian Circumpolar Institute.Google Scholar
- Hemson, G., S. Maclennan, G. Mills, P. Johnson, and D. Macdonald. 2009. Community, lions, livestock and money: A spatial and social analysis of attitudes to wildlife and the conservation value of tourism in a human–carnivore conflict in Botswana. Biological Conservation 142: 2718–2725.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lescureux, N., J. Linnell, S. Mustafa, D. Melovski, A. Stojanov, G. Ivanov, and V. Avukatov. 2011. The king of the forest: Local knowledge about European brown bears (Ursus arctos) and implications for their conservation in contemporary Western Macedonia. Conservation and Society 9: 189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lindenmayer, D.B., and J. Fischer. 2006. Habitat fragmentation and landscape change: An ecological and conservation synthesis, 352. Washington DC: Island Press.Google Scholar
- Treves, A., R.R. Jurewicz, L. Naughton-Treves, R.A. Rose, R.C. Willging, and A.P. Wydeven. 2002. Wolf depredation on domestic animals in Wisconsin, 1976–2000. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30: 231–241.Google Scholar
- Williams, D.R., and S.I. Stewart. 1998. Sense of place: An elusive concept that is finding a home in ecosystem management. Journal of Forestry 96: 18–23.Google Scholar
- Zedrosser, A., B. Dahle, J.E. Swenson, and N. Gerstl. 2001. Status and management of the brown bear in Europe. Ursus 12: 9–20.Google Scholar