Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ecological Discomforts and How to Study Them

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Hermeneutics of Human-Animal Relations in the Wake of Rewilding

  • 281 Accesses

Abstract

After many centuries of striving towards the separation from wildness, as a culture we are unprepared to confront the task of coexistence with wildlife. The difficulties we face range from material damages, through emotional strain and symbolic transgressions, through to unsettling of the established traditions. Wildlife management has been commonly used to address these difficulties. However, management is not a value-neutral practice, and, consequently, it always follows certain normative assumptions about how the human-animal relations should be organized. It is environmental and animal ethics that provide the necessary reflection on how coexistence should look like. While much work has been carried out by these two disciplines, they are rather reluctant to analyze constructively the ethical potential of antagonistic relations between humans and animals, often defining the perception of animals as threatening as ‘ecophobic’. This is a too quick dismissal of a very significant domain of human experience. Therefore, a program for a hermeneutic study of moral aspects of human experiences of ecological discomforts is proposed. Such an investigation has a potential to unearth meanings of threatening nature that can be used constructively to develop an ethics for coexistence with wildlife.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In Germany alone, this habit causes around 20 million euros of losses per year and affects 160 000 cars (Herr et al. 2009).

  2. 2.

    For an extensive review of different damages caused by wildlife in the U.S. see: Conover et al. (1995).

  3. 3.

    But see Dressel et al. (2015), whose longitudinal meta-analysis of attitude studies for bears and wolves suggests that for wolves the attitudes become more negative in proportion to the extent of time the wolves are present. Such discrepancies in studies suggest we should perhaps be weary of drawing too strong conclusions.

  4. 4.

    http://www.lcie.org/Blog/ArtMID/6987/ArticleID/60/Blog-To-boldly-go-where-no-continent-has-gone-before, accessed: 24.02.2017.

  5. 5.

    This is in contrast to strong anthropocentrism, which treats nature in a purely instrumental manner as a resource that can be exploited in any way desired.

  6. 6.

    In this context, ethical theories, also within environmental and animal ethics, can be seen as ‘partial interpretations of ethical experience’ (Van Tongeren and Snellen 2014, 307).

  7. 7.

    Conversation can be perhaps considered as one of the most venerable elements of philosophy, reaching all the way back to Socrates and his favorite pursuit of engaging random passers-by in intense dialogues on such fundamentally important issues as the meaning of justice or the purpose of human life.

References

  • Antrop, Marc. 2005. Why landscapes of the past are important for the future. Landscape and urban planning 70 (1): 21–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Antrop, Marc. 2008. Landscapes at risk: About change in the European landscapes. In Evolution of Geographical Systems and Risk Processes in the Global Context, ed. Peter Dostal, 57–79. Prague: Charles University in Prague.

    Google Scholar 

  • Anthony S.J., J.H. Epstein, K.A. Murray, I. Navarrete-Macias, C.M. Zambrana-Torrelio, A. Solovyov, R. Ojeda-Flores, N.C. Arrigo, A. Islam, S. Ali Khan , P. Hosseini, T.L. Bogich, K.J. Olival, M.D. Sanchez-Leon, W.B. Karesh, T. Goldstein, S.P. Luby, S.S. Morse, J.A.K. Mazet, P. Daszak, and W.I. Lipkin. 2013. A strategy to estimate unknown viral diversity in mammals. mBio 4 (5).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bateman, Phillip W., and P.A. Fleming. 2012. Big city life: Carnivores in urban environments. Journal of Zoology 287 (1): 1–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beach, Hugh. 2004. Political ecology in Swedish Saamiland. In Cultivating Arctic Landscapes: Knowing and Managing Animals in the Circumpolar North, ed. David G. Anderson and Mark Nuttall, 110–123. Oxford: Berghahn Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beck, Ulrich. 1992. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. London: SAGE Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhat, Mahadev G., Ray G. Huffaker, and Suzanne M. Lenhart. 1993. Controlling forest damage by dispersive beaver populations: Centralized optimal management strategy. Ecological Applications 3 (3): 518–530.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bisi, Jukka, and S. Kurki. 2008. The Wolf Debate in Finland Expectations and Objectives for the Management of the Wolf Population at Regional and National Level. Seinäjoki: University of Helsinki.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bixler, Robert D., and Myron F. Floyd. 1997. Nature is scary, disgusting, and uncomfortable. Environment and Behavior 29 (4): 443–467.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bixler, Robert D., Cynthia L. Carlisle, William E. Hammltt, and Myron F. Floyd. 1994. Observed fears and discomforts among urban students on field trips to wildland areas. The Journal of Environmental Education 26 (1): 24–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blekesaune, Arild, and Katrina Rønningen. 2010. Bears and fears: Cultural capital, geography and attitudes towards large carnivores in Norway. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift-Norwegian Journal of Geography 64 (4): 185–198.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boitani, Luigi, and John D.C. Linnell. 2015. Bringing large mammals back: large carnivores in Europe. In Rewilding European Landscapes, ed. Henrique M. Pereira, and Laetitia M. Navarro, 67–84. Berlin: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breitenmoser, U., C. Angst, J.-M. Landry, C. Breitenmoser-Wursten, J.D.C. Linnell, and J.-M. Weber. 2005. Non-lethal techniques for reducing depredation. In People and Wildlife: Conflict or Coexistence?, ed. Rosie Woodroffe, Simon Thirgood, and Alan Rabinowitz, 49–61. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Buller, Henry. 2008. Safe from the wolf: biosecurity, biodiversity, and competing philosophies of nature. Environment and Planning A 40 (7): 1583–1597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Butler, Jessica S., James Shanahan, and Daniel J. Decker. 2003. Public attitudes toward wildlife are changing: a trend analysis of New York residents. Wildlife Society Bulletin 1027–1036.

    Google Scholar 

  • Callicott, J.Baird. 1996. Should wilderness areas become biodiversity reserves? The George Wright Forum 13 (2): 32–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carver, Steve. 2014. Making Real space for nature: A continuum approach to UK conservation. ECOS 35 (314): 4–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassidy, Angela. 2012. Vermin, victims and disease: UK framings of badgers in and beyond the bovine TB controversy. Sociologia Ruralis 52 (2): 192–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cassidy, Angela, and Brett Mills. 2012. ‘Fox tots attack shock’: Urban foxes, mass media and boundary breaching. Environmental Communication: A Journal of Nature and Culture 6 (4): 494–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chapron, Guillaume, Petra Kaczensky, John D.C. Linnell, Manuela von Arx, Djuro Huber, Henrik Andrén, José Vicente López-Bao, et al. 2014. Recovery of large carnivores in Europe’s modern human-dominated landscapes. Science 346 (6216): 1517–1519.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coluccy, John M., Ronald D. Drobney, David A. Graber, Steven L. Sheriff, and Daniel J. Witter. 2001. Attitudes of central Missouri residents toward local giant Canada geese and management alternatives. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 116–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conover, Michael R., William C. Pitt, Kimberly K. Kessler, Tami J. DuBow, and Wendy A. Sanborn. 1995. Review of human injuries, illnesses, and economic losses caused by wildlife in the United States. Wildlife Society Bulletin 23 (3): 407–414.

    Google Scholar 

  • Conti, Giorgio, and Laura Fagarazzi. 2005. Forest expansion in mountain ecosystems: ‘environmentalist’s dream’ or societal nightmare? Planum 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corlett, Richard T. 2016. The role of rewilding in landscape design for conservation. Current Landscape Ecology Reports 1 (3): 127–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Council of Europe. 2000. European Landscape Convention. Strasbourg.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dahles, Heidi. 1993. Game killing and killing games: An anthropologist looking at hunting in a modern society. Society & Animals 1 (2): 169–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daszak, Peter, Andrew A. Cunningham, and Alex D. Hyatt. 2000. Emerging infectious diseases of wildlife–threats to biodiversity and human health. Science 287 (5452): 443.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deinet, Stefanie, Christina Ieronymidou, Louise McRae, Ian J. Burfield, Ruud P. Foppen, Ben Collen, and Monika Böhm. 2013. Wildlife comeback in Europe: The recovery of selected mammal and bird species. Final report to Rewilding Europe by ZSL, BirdLife International and the European Bird Census Council. London: ZSL, 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deplazes, Peter, Daniel Hegglin, Sandra Gloor, and Thomas Romig. 2004. Wilderness in the city: the urbanization of Echinococcus multilocularis. Trends in Parasitology 20 (2): 77–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dizard, Jan E. 2003. Mortal Stakes: Hunters and Hunting in Contemporary America. Boston: University of Massachusetts Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donnelley, Strachan. 2001. Leopold’s wildness: can humans and wolves be at home in the Adirondacks? In Wolves and Human Communities: Biology, Politics, and Ethics, ed. Virginia A. Sharpe, Bryan Norton, and Strachan Donnelley, 191–198. Washington: Island.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douglas, Mary. 1966. Purity and Danger: An Analysis of Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Drenthen, Martin, and Jozef Keulartz. 2014. Introduction. In Old World and New World Perspectives in Environmental Philosophy, ed. Martin Drenthen and Jozef Keulartz, 1–14. Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dressel, Sabrina, Camilla Sandström, and Göran Ericsson. 2015. A meta-analysis of studies on attitudes toward bears and wolves across Europe 1976–2012. Conservation Biology 29 (2): 565–574.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emel, Jody. 1995. Are you man enough, big and bad enough? Ecofeminism and wolf eradication in the USA. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space 13 (6): 707–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erica, Von Essen, Hans Peter Hansen, Helena Nordström Källström, M. Nils Peterson, and Tarla R. Peterson. 2015. The radicalisation of rural resistance: How hunting counterpublics in the Nordic countries contribute to illegal hunting. Journal of Rural Studies 39: 199–209.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ericsson, Göran, and Thomas A. Heberlein. 2003. Attitudes of hunters, locals, and the general public in Sweden now that the wolves are back. Biological Conservation 111 (2): 149–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eriksson, Max, Camilla Sandström, and Göran Ericsson. 2015. Direct experience and attitude change towards bears and wolves. Wildlife Biology 21 (3): 131–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Estok, Simon C. 2009. Theorizing in a space of ambivalent openness: Ecocriticism and ecophobia. Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment 16 (2): 203–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • European Enviornment Agency (EEA). 2004. High Nature Value Farmland: Characteristics, Trends and Policy Challenges. Copenhagen: European Environmental Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evernden, Lorne Leslie Neil. 1992. The Social Creation of Nature. Baltimore: JHU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flykt, Anders, Maria Johansson, Jens Karlsson, Sofie Lindeberg, and Ottmar V. Lipp. 2013. Fear of wolves and bears: physiological responses and negative associations in a Swedish sample. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 18 (6): 416–434.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fox, Camilla H., and Marc Bekoff. 2011. Integrating values and ethics into wildlife policy and management—lessons from North America. Animals 1 (1): 126–143.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frank, Jens, Maria Johansson, and Anders Flykt. 2015. Public attitude towards the implementation of management actions aimed at reducing human fear of brown bears and wolves. Wildlife Biology 21 (3): 122–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gadamer, Hans-Georg. 2013. Truth and Method. London: Bloomsbury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garner, Robert. 2006. Animal welfare: A political defense. Journal of Animal Law & Ethics 1: 161–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gill, R.M.A. 1992. A review of damage by mammals in north temperate forests: 1. Deer. Forestry 65 (2): 145–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, Iain J. 2009. What is the future for wild, large herbivores in human-modified agricultural landscapes? Wildlife Biology 15 (1): 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halada, Lubos, Doug Evans, Carlos Romão, and Jan-Erik Petersen. 2011. Which habitats of European importance depend on agricultural practices? Biodiversity and Conservation 20 (11): 2365–2378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hargrove, Eugene C. 1992. Weak anthropocentric intrinsic value. The Monist 75 (2): 183–207.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heberlein, Thomas A., and Göran Ericsson. 2008. Public attitudes and the future of wolves Canis lupus in Sweden. Wildlife Biology 14 (3): 391–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Herr, Jan. 2008. Ecology and behavior of urban stone martens (Martes foina) in Luxembourg. D.Phil. Diss.: University of Sussex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herr, Jan, Laurent Schley, and Timothy J. Roper. 2009. Stone martens (Martes foina) and cars: Investigation of a common human–wildlife conflict. European Journal of Wildlife Research 55 (5): 471–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hiedanpää, Juha, Jani Pellikka, and Sanna Ojalammi. 2016. Meet the parents: Normative emotions in Finnish wolf politics. TRACE Finnish Journal for Human-Animal Studies 2 (1).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, Maarten H., Jerry J. Vaske, Sara Dubois, and Piera Fehres. 2014. More than fear: Role of emotions in acceptability of lethal control of wolves. European Journal of Wildlife Research 60 (4): 589–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jansen, Andreas, Enno Luge, Beatriz Guerra, Petra Wittschen, Achim D. Gruber, Christoph Loddenkemper, Thomas Schneider, et al. 2007. Leptospirosis in urban wild boars, Berlin, Germany. Emerging Infectious Diseases 13 (5): 739–742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jickling, Bob, and Paul C. Paquet. 2005. Wolf stories: Reflections on science, ethics, and epistemology. Environmental Ethics 27 (2): 115–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, Maria, and Jens Karlsson. 2011. Subjective experience of fear and the cognitive interpretation of large carnivores. Human Dimensions of Wildlife: An International Journal 16 (1): 15–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, Maria, Jens Karlsson, Eja Pedersen, and Anders Flykt. 2012a. Factors governing human fear of brown bear and wolf. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 17 (1): 58–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, Maria, Magnus Sjöström, Jens Karlsson, and Runar Brännlund. 2012b. Is human fear affecting public willingness to pay for the management and conservation of large carnivores? Society & Natural Resources 25 (6): 610–620.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, Maria, Inês A. Ferreira, Ole-Gunnar Støen, Jens Frank, and Anders Flykt. 2016. Targeting human fear of large carnivores—Many ideas but few known effects. Biological Conservation 201: 261–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jonker, Sandra A., Robert M. Muth, John F. Organ, Rodney R. Zwick, and William F. Siemer. 2006. Experiences with beaver damage and attitudes of Massachusetts residents toward beaver. Wildlife Society Bulletin 34 (4): 1009–1021.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, John. 2006 Introduction. In Natural Enemies. People-Wildlife Conflicts in Anthropological Perspective, ed. John Knight. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotulski, York, and Andreas König. 2008. Conflicts, crises and challenges: wild boar in the Berlin City–a social empirical and statistical survey. Natura Croatica 17 (4): 233–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kowalsky, Nathan (ed.). 2010. Hunting-Philosophy for Everyone. In Search of the Wild Life. Chichester. Blackwell: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krange, Olve, and Ketil Skogen. 2007. Reflexive tradition: Young working–class hunters between wolves and modernity. Young 15 (3): 215–233.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krange, Olve, and Ketil Skogen. 2011. When the lads go hunting: The ‘Hammertown mechanism’ and the conflict over wolves in Norway. Ethnography 12 (4): 466–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leong, Kirsten M. 2009. The tragedy of becoming common: Landscape change and perceptions of wildlife. Society & Natural Resources 23 (2): 111–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, D.L., S. Baruch-Mordo, K.R. Wilson, S.W. Breck, J.S. Mao, and J. Broderick. 2015. Foraging ecology of black bears in urban environments: Guidance for human-bear conflict mitigation. Ecosphere 6 (8): 1–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Light, Andrew, and Holmes Rolston III. 2003. Introduction: Ethics and environmental ethics. In Environmental Ethics. An Anthology, edited by Andrew Light, and Holmes Rolston III, 1–11. Malden: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linnell, John D.C., John Odden, Martin E. Smith, Ronny Aanes, and Jon E. Swenson. 1999. Large carnivores that kill livestock: do ‘problem individuals’ really exist? Wildlife Society Bulletin (1973–2006) 27 (3): 698–705.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linnell, John D.C., Reidar Andersen, Zanete Andersone, Linas Balciauskas, Juan Carlos Blanco, Luigi Boitani, Scott Brainerd et al. 2002. The Fear of Wolves: A Review of Wolf Attacks on Humans. Trondheim: NINA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Linnell, John D.C., Petra Kaczensky, Ulrich Wotschikowsky, Nicolas Lescureux, and Luigi Boitani. 2015. Framing the relationship between people and nature in the context of European conservation. Conservation Biology 29 (4): 978–985.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Löe, Jonny, and Eivin Röskaft. 2004. Large carnivores and human safety: A review. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment 33 (6): 283–288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loker, Cynthia A., Daniel J. Decker, and Steven J. Schwager. 1999. Social acceptability of wildlife management actions in suburban areas: 3 cases from New York. Wildlife Society Bulletin 27 (1): 152–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lopez, Barry Holstun. 1978. Of Wolves and Men. New York: Scribner Classics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Louv, Richard. 2005. Last Child in the Woods. Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder. Chapel Hill: Algonquin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lute, Michelle L., Adam Bump, and Meredith L. Gore. 2014. Identity-driven differences in stakeholder concerns about hunting wolves. PLoS ONE 9 (12): e114460. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0114460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lynn, William S. 2002. Canis lupus cosmopolis: wolves in a cosmopolitan worldview. Worldviews: Global Religions, Culture, and Ecology 6 (3): 300–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mangerud, Wenche L., Steinar Krokstad, Eustein Stordal, and Jostein Holmen. 2009. Rovdyr og helse. Helseundersøkelsen i Nord-Trøndelag. Verdal: NTNU.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mooallem, Jon. 2014. Wild Ones. A Sometimes Dismaying, Weirdly Reassuring Story About Looking at People Looking at Animals in America. New York: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreira, Francisco, and Danilo Russo. 2007. Modelling the impact of agricultural abandonment and wildfires on vertebrate diversity in Mediterranean Europe. Landscape Ecology 22 (10): 1461–1476.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Musiani, Marco, and Paul C. Paquet. 2004. The practices of wolf persecution, protection, and restoration in Canada and the United States. BioScience 54 (1): 50–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naess, Arne, and Ivar Mysterud. 1987. Philosophy of wolf policies I: General principles and preliminary exploration of selected norms. Conservation Biology 1 (1): 22–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nagy, Kelsi, and Phillip David Johnson II (eds.). 2013. Trash Animals: How We Live with Nature’s Filthy, Feral, Invasive, and Unwanted Species. Minneapolis: Univerity of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nolet, Bart A., and Frank Rosell. 1998. Comeback of the beaver Castor fiber: An overview of old and new conservation problems. Biological Conservation 83 (2): 165–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Norton, Bryan G. 1984. Environmental ethics and weak anthropocentrism. Environmental Ethics 6 (2): 131–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Olsson, Gunilla E., Susanne Hanssen, and Katrina Rønningen. 2004. Different conservation values of biological diversity? A case study from the Jotunheimen mountain range, Norway. Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift Norwegian Journal of Geography 58 (4): 204–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ortega y Gasset, Jose. 1986. Meditations on Hunting. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pedersen, Vegar A., John D.C. Linnell, Reidar Andersen, Henrik Andrén, Mats Lindén, and Peter Segerström. 1999. Winter lynx Lynx lynx predation on semi-domestic reindeer. Wildlife Biology 5 (4): 203–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plumer, Liivi, John Davison, and Urmas Saarma. 2014. Rapid urbanization of red foxes in Estonia: Distribution, behaviour, attacks on domestic animals, and health-risks related to zoonotic diseases. PLoS ONE 9 (12): e115124. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0115124.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pohja-Mykrä, Mari, and Sami Kurki. 2014. Strong community support for illegal killing challenges wolf management. European Journal of Wildlife Research 60 (5): 759–770.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Regan, Tom. 1983. The Case for Animal Rights. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rollin, Bernard E. 2011. Animal rights as a mainstream phenomenon. Animals 1 (1): 102–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rolston, Holmes I.I.I. 1992. Disvalues in nature. The Monist 75 (2): 250–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenzweig, Michael L. 2003. Reconciliation ecology and the future of species diversity. Oryx 37 (2): 194–205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scarce, Rik. 1998. What do wolves mean? Conflicting social constructions of Canis lupus in ‘bordertown’. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 3 (3): 26–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schama, Simon. 1995. Landscape and Memory. New-York: Alfred and Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, Peter. 1975. Animal Liberation. New York: Harper Collins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singer, Peter. 1993. Practical Ethics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sjölander-Lindqvist, Annelie. 2008. Local identity, science and politics indivisible: The Swedish wolf controversy deconstructed. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning 10 (1): 71–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sjolander-Lindqvist, Annelie. 2009. Social-natural landscape reorganised: Swedish forest-edge farmers and wolf recovery. Conservation and Society 7 (2): 130–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sjölander-Lindqvist, Annelie. 2011. Predators in ‘agri-environmental’ Sweden: Rural heritage and resistance against wolf propagation. In Environmental Concerns in the 21st Century, ed. Gökçekus Hüseyin, Umut Türker, and James W. La Moreaux, 15–27. Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Skogen, Ketil, and Olve Krange. 2003. A wolf at the gate: The anti-carnivore alliance and the symbolic construction of community. Sociologia Ruralis 43 (3): 309–325.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Skogen, Ketil, Isabelle Mauz, and Olve Krange. 2008. Cry wolf!: Narratives of wolf recovery in france and norway. Rural Sociology 73 (1): 105–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Martin E., John D.C. Linnell, John Odden, and Jon E. Swenson. 2000. Review of methods to reduce livestock depradation: I. Guardian animals. Acta Agriculturae Scandinavica, Section A-Animal Science 50 (4): 279–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stahl, P., J.M. Vandel, V. Herrenschmidt, and P. Migot. 2001. Predation on livestock by an expanding reintroduced lynx population: long-term trend and spatial variability. Journal of Applied Ecology 38 (3): 674–687.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterba, Jim. 2012. Nature Wars. The Incredible Story of How Wildlife Comebacks Turned Backyards into Battlegrounds. New York: Broadway Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swan, James. 1995. In Defense of Hunting. New York: Harper Collins Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, Paul. 1986. Respect for Nature: A Theory of Environmental Ethis. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Timm, Robert M., Rex O. Baker, Joe R. Bennett, and Craig C. Coolahan. 2004. Coyote attacks: an increasing suburban problem. In Proceedings of 21st Vertebrate Pest Conference ed. R.M. Timm and W.P. Gorenzel, 47–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Treves, Adrian, Lisa Naughton-Treves, Elizabeth K. Harper, David J. Mladenoff, Robert A. Rose, Theodore A. Sickley, and Adrian P. Wydeven. 2004. Predicting Human-Carnivore Conflict: a Spatial Model Derived from 25 Years of Data on Wolf Predation on Livestock. Conservation Biology 18 (1): 114–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treves, Adrian, Lisa Naughton-Treves, and Victoria Shelley. 2013. Longitudinal analysis of attitudes toward wolves. Conservation Biology 27 (2): 315–323.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, Roger S. 1993. Biophilia, Biophobia, and Natural Landscapes. In The Biophilia Hypothesis, ed. Stephen R. Kellert and Edward O. Wilson, 73–137. Washington: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Utsler, David, Forrest Clingerman, Martin Drenthen, and Brian Treanor. 2014. Introduciton: environmental hermeneutics. In Interpreting Nature. The Emerging Field of Environmental Hermeneutics, ed. Forrest Clingerman, Brian Treanor, Martin Drenthen, and David Utsler, 1–14. New York: Fordham University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Kris, Koppen. 2000. Resource arcadia lifeworld nature concepts in environmental sociology. Sociologia Ruralis 40 (3): 300–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Tongeren, Paul J.M., and Paulien Snellen. 2014. How Hermeneutics Might Save the Life of (Environmental) Ethics. In Interpreting Nature. The Emerging Field of Environmental Hermeneutics, ed. Forrest Clingerman, Brian Treanor, Martin Drenthen, and David Utsler, 297–312. New York: Fordham University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wallen, Martin. 2006. Fox. London: Reaktion Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Bernard. 1995. Must a concern for the environment be centred on human beings? In Making Sense of Humanity and Other Philosophical Papers, Bernard Williams, 233–240. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, Christopher K., Göran Ericsson, and Thomas A. Heberlein. 2002. A quantitative summary of attitudes toward wolves and their reintroduction (1972–2000). Wildlife Society Bulletin 30 (2): 575–584.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willott, Elizabeth. 2004. Restoring nature, without mosquitoes? Restoration Ecology 12 (2): 147–153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, Edward O. 1986. Biophilia. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolch, Jennifer. 2002. Anima Urbis. Progress in Human Geography 26 (6): 721–742.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmermann, Barbara, Petter Wabakken, and Michael Dötterer. 2001. Human-carnivore interactions in Norway: How does the re-appearance of large carnivores affect people’s attitudes and levels of fear? Forest Snow and Landscape Research 76 (1/2): 137–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zinn, Harry C., Michael J. Manfredo, Jerry J. Vaske, and Karin Wittmann. 1998. Using normative beliefs to determine the acceptability of wildlife management actions. Society & Natural Resources 11 (7): 649–662.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Science in Society, Radboud University Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands

    Dr. Mateusz Tokarski

Authors
  1. Dr. Mateusz Tokarski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mateusz Tokarski .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Tokarski, M. (2019). Ecological Discomforts and How to Study Them. In: Hermeneutics of Human-Animal Relations in the Wake of Rewilding. The International Library of Environmental, Agricultural and Food Ethics, vol 30. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-18971-6_2

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation