Social factors mediating human–carnivore coexistence: Understanding thematic strands influencing coexistence in Central Romania

Abstract

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.

Three principles for co-designing sustainability intervention strategies: Experiences from Southern Transylvania

“…Social-ecological systems are complex systems that exhibit critical thresholds, multiple drivers of change and reciprocal feedbacks between social and ecological components. We studied components of the ecological subsystems, components of the social subsystems, interrelations between the two and direct as well as indirect drivers of change (Loos et al 2014;Mikulcak et al 2015;Dorresteijn et al 2016). Weak governance, corruption, low social capital and profitability of small-scale farming underlie social feedbacks (Hanspach et al 2014), while landscape heterogeneity, cultural land ties and traditional practices heavily influence the ecological dynamics (Dorresteijn et al 2015).…”

Carnivores and Communities: A Case Study of Human-Carnivore Conflict Mitigation in Southwestern Alberta

“…Further, population declines for many species can be linked to persistent conflict (Nyhus, 2016). On the other hand, large carnivore species are also valued for their ecological role or existence value (Kellert, 1980;Bruskotter et al, 2015;Vucetich et al, 2015;Dorresteijn et al, 2016), and are often used as flagship species in conservation efforts (Macdonald et al, 2017). Recent research suggests that for some species, such as brown bears (Ursus arctos) in Europe and Japan as well as gray wolves (Canis lupus) in the United States, populations have rebounded across multi-use landscapes in part due to shifts in human attitudes and proclivity to adopt conservation efforts (Chapron et al, 2014;Mech, 2017;Sato, 2017).…”

Beyond the numbers: Human attitudes and conflict with lions (Panthera leo) in and around Gambella National Park, Ethiopia

“…Although the economic consequence of livestock loss due to depredation is overall smaller than loss due to disease and theft, it has a significant conservation implication. This is particularly important because perceived carnivore harm has been found to be more influential than actual attacks in guiding coexistence with carnivores [ 13 ]. Since some of our key informants stated that depredation increases in the wet season in Gambella, strict practices of mechanisms that limit livestock depredation [ 66 ] in the wet season could be part of the community conservation education.…”

“…People’s tolerance towards carnivores is influenced by attitudes and perceptions that are deeply rooted within cultures [ 13 ]. Positive engagement with local cultural contexts facilitates wildlife conservation [ 14 ]; Hazzah et al [ 15 ] for example have provided evidence that lion killing can be reduced by working within the cultural context of the Maasai.…”