Delegitimizing Large Carnivore Conservation through Discourse

Serenari, Christopher; Lute, Michelle L.

doi:10.1080/08941920.2020.1727593

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 51 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Conservation reliance is more than a term or cog in the wheel of carnivore governance because it is predicated on individual and collective views of the merits of restoration and, as evidenced here, crucial to local level support for recovery. Language shapes human‐carnivore conflict and conservation outcomes (Peterson et al, 2010; Rodewald, 2016; Serenari & Lute, 2020), and future investigations will want to scrutinize how other key designations, such as “nonessential,” “experimental,” or “nuisance” influence the value of carnivore recovery and conservation among coalitions. These assertions should be further examined by research that examines the role of conservation reliance in regards to other species, including those that are less controversial.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conservation reliance and its influence on support for carnivore recovery

Serenari

2021

Conservat Sci and Prac

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The number of species reliant on consistent human intervention is rising.These species are labeled conservation-reliant, which affords them unique resources to propagate them. A conservation reliance designation has important implications for recovery of large carnivores, particularly where private lands encompass historical ranges. As a policy tool, a conservation reliance designation may be used in conjunction with other popular instruments such as financial incentives or co-governance to promote coexistence between carnivores and key cohorts such as landowners and hunters, who are often vocal dissidents of carnivore recovery, especially wolf recovery projects. Yet, the nascent literature on conservation reliance has yet to address the influence of conservation reliance on landowner or hunter support for carnivore conservation. This paper fills this gap with an analysis of responses from 639 landowners to explore the influence of a conservation reliance designation on intention to coexist with wild red wolves (Canis rufus) in northeast North Carolina. Findings suggest that respondents living in the red wolf recovery zone generally oppose a conservation reliance designation, a critical means to red wolf recovery. Hence, a conservation reliance designation may actually erode the value of some species they intend to preserve. Disapproval of conservation reliance poses new confronts to restoration politics and its diversity of strands, which must be woven into new ways of thinking about the ethical and political aspects of carnivore policy and management.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conservation reliance and its influence on support for carnivore recovery

Serenari

2021

Conservat Sci and Prac

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…social networks, poor relations between governing agencies, Serenari et al., 2018) and human infrastructures (e.g. illegitimate governance, political discourse, Serenari & Lute, 2020; Serenari & Taub, 2019) interacted to create, modify and destroy infrastructure and distributions of metabolisms between human, natural and wildlife systems. A focus on the built environment highlights, for example, an undervaluing of the spirit and utility of captive breeding programs occurring in zoos and elsewhere, misjudging the social unpalatability of an essential but multi‐infrastructure‐consuming conservation reliance approach in the rural landscape of northeast North Carolina, as well as a dogmatic emphasis on wilderness ideals to perpetuate red wolves on private lands.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hence, viewing the built environment as a blending of system elements, flows and properties over time and across space may have helped foresee its influence on a hardwired, omnipresent and destructive politics of red wolf recovery and its negative impact on human and non‐human lifeworlds. This foresight may have, for instance, prevented the production of damaging harmful discourse about the artificiality of wolf recovery (Serenari & Lute, 2020), cultivated an appreciation for the conservation reliance designation as a policy instrument (Serenari, forthcoming), prevented a range of legitimacy deficits (Serenari & Taub, 2019) or encouraged development of a prepared and resilient recovery program that could better withstand negative trends and threats over time.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reconsidering the role of the built environment in human–wildlife interactions

Serenari

2020

People and Nature

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In facing our greatest challenges, researchers have questioned where the ‘wild things’ will reside in the future, and large carnivores have been a primary focal area. The built environment plays a critical role in the propagation of countless species including carnivores; however, contemporary conceptualizations of human–nature relations do not satisfactorily attend to where the built environment should be placed within existing human–nature relation frameworks or how it impacts our ability to find space for carnivores. This paper fills this information gap by investigating the role of the built environment in social–ecological systems (SES), specifically wildlife and carnivore conservation. The paper unfolds in four stages: The first reviews empirical efforts to capture the relationship between human–natural–wildlife systems and the built environment. Second, using insights from the built environment literature, I argue that moving away from a common pool resource focus, decoupling wildlife and natural systems, investigating all infrastructure types and their interactions across systems, and considering the notion of hybrid systems offer pathways forward. Third, an explanation of the built environment's linkages to human and carnivore systems is undertaken to illustrate how the built environment facilitates the material and symbolic interactions through a blending of properties from human, wildlife and natural systems. Lastly, the argument is made that attending to the role of the built environment in human–wildlife relations can stimulate new research that reveals unhelpful habitual behaviour, feedbacks and barriers, and may also help explain unintended or unexplained consequences impacting human–carnivore relations not fully considered under existing frameworks. A free Plain Language Summary can be found within the Supporting Information of this article.

show abstract

“…Avoiding regret-driven reversals suggests conservation organizations should prioritize reinforcing the benefits achieved through conservation action. Prioritizing media coverage (e.g., Niemiec et al 2020) and careful use of language to manage a discourse (Serenari & Lute 2020) may be critical to continued success.…”

Section: Decision Regretmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Prioritizing media coverage (e.g., Niemiec et al. 2020) and careful use of language to manage a discourse (Serenari & Lute 2020) may be critical to continued success.…”

Section: Lessons For Conservationmentioning

confidence: 99%