In the modern context of the strict protection of large carnivores, the competition for resources between local community dwellers and these animals has become an important challenge for ensuring coexistence—the key for conservation success. To assess the perceptions of this intricate relationship, six local communities from Central Romania, located in areas with high-density brown bear (Ursus arctos L.) population and frequent conflicts, were investigated. A large proportion of the respondents (69%) showed various forms of intolerance (e.g., relocation, punishment, or killing) towards aggressive bears. However, the cognitive evaluation score derived from the level of interaction with bears showed a non-significant (p = 0.470) segregation by tolerance levels, suggesting that not only the tangible costs (direct damage) but rather the psychological costs of fear, danger, or risk are more important drivers of negative attitudes towards bears. Furthermore, the prevalent experienced emotions towards an inoffensive bear (fear, terror, and hate, which represent 73%) underline the general preference for living in “separate worlds”. This requires that bears should avoid humans and their settlements, a goal unlikely to be achieved under the current strict protection regime. Therefore, an alternative strategy that ensures mutual avoidance of the two players may be more appropriate for successful human–bear coexistence.
This study analyses the extent to which the Romanian National Plan Against Illegal Logging (Planul Național de Combatere a Tăierilor Ilegale de Arbori (PNCTIA) fulfils the conditions of a functional public policy proposal; the degree of knowledge specialists (forestry staff, policemen, prosecutors); and the general public have about it; what efficiency they attribute to it; and the need for a new strategy. The main limitations of PNCTIA with respect to defining and formulating the public policy issue were identified using the document analysis technique. Moreover, the questionnaire technique was employed to evaluate the specialists and the public view towards the plan. Over 40% of the interviewees consider PNCTIA to be inefficient, while 33% were undecided. 77% wished for the adoption of a new public policy; 85% highlighted the matter as urgent. The low level of efficiency of PNCTIA was correlated with the need to have another intervention plan and with high urgency to implement the measures. The perspective of having a new programme correlates positively both with institutional involvement and with urgency level of the actions. The study highlights the importance of participatory processes in the development of public policies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.