Conflicts between humans over wildlife management: on the diversity of stakeholder attitudes and implications for conflict management

Conflicts involving wildlife are, in essence, often conflicts between human parties with differing wildlife management objectives. However, the study and management of wildlife conflicts often focuses on the ecological context without addressing disagreements between people over these objectives. This research uses quantitative approaches to examine actors’ views on a complex wildlife-related conflict: a raptor of conservation concern that impacts on game-bird management. Four dominant elements of the debate emerged from initial semi-structured interviews: perceptions of conflict related issues; perceptions of each other; perceived barriers to consensus within the debate; and assessment of proposed practical management solutions. A quantitative survey that built on these elements demonstrates the degree to which perceptions differ between groups and how local variation in these elements may be obscured in a regional or national level debate. The findings emphasise the importance of understanding the social issues involved in wildlife related conflicts if management aims are to be agreed and achieved.     

Toward a social–ecological approach to ecological restoration: a look back at three decades of maritime clifftop restoration

The sharp increase in the touristic use of the maritime clifftops in western France after WWII resulted in a concentration of activities that generated ecosystem degradation in many sites (e.g. touristic infrastructure, human trampling). Consideration of the ecological value of these sites over the past three decades has led to a shift in maritime clifftop management and consequently to numerous planning and restoration projects. Using inventories of maritime clifftop restoration projects conducted in 2007 and 2016, we identified 76 restoration projects, which allowed us to study the active and passive restoration methods used. In addition, we collected and analyzed 465 vegetation monitoring plots with an average duration of 5.6 years to understand how they were used by both scientists and nonscientists. First, we describe the social–ecological systems of these restoration projects through an analysis of their social contexts, ecological stakes, and restoration goals based on 19 semistructured interviews with restoration stakeholders. Comparing our research with similar studies in the literature reveals that the main strength of maritime clifftop restorations is a strong network between scientist and nonscientist stakeholders combined with high‐level monitoring. Finally, we underline the main challenges for the future of maritime clifftop ecological restoration: (1) the need for further study of this ecological database (e.g. to study the medium‐term effect of active restoration, continue current monitoring); and (2) the need to develop sociological studies of human uses and perceptions to improve the long‐term management of restored ecosystems.     

Incorporating social preferences into the ecological limits of hydrologic alteration (ELOHA): a case study in the Yampa‐White River basin,Colorado

相似文献   

Planning mine restoration through ecosystem services to enhance community engagement and deliver social benefits

Mining companies are expected to return land to a stable, productive, and self‐sustaining condition by rehabilitating degraded areas to also deliver social benefits, an essential dimension of sustainable land management. This research aimed to develop a framework for mine rehabilitation planning based on an integrated analysis of the social‐ecological system provided by the ecosystem services concept to facilitate community engagement and the delivery of social benefits. An Ecosystem Services Assessment for Rehabilitation framework was tested at two bauxite mines undergoing ecological restoration. The mines are operated by the same company in two countries. Key results showed that the framework can help companies, regulators, and community members alike identify whether biophysical restoration efforts translate into key human benefits. Overall the framework provides a means for enhancing community engagement to explicitly address social benefits that, with a business as usual focus on ecological goals, may not be delivered. The ecosystem services concept provides a practical approach to link ecological and social outcomes of mine restoration.     

Use of macroecology to integrate social justice and conservation

Both conservation biology and macroecology are synthetic, and macroecological research consistently has informed the theory and practice of biological conservation. Explicit integration of the macroecology of human systems and natural systems has been rare, but can advance the incorporation of social justice, environmental justice and environmental equity into conservation biology and participatory conservation (inclusion in decision‐making of those who are affected by, or can affect, that decision). The basis of this strong link is the focus of macroecology on the relations of a given biota to environmental patterns and processes, and these patterns and processes can affect humans differentially. Macroecological integration of social justice and conservation generally requires spatial and temporal representation of all variables at resolutions and extents that allow meaningful analyses. This requirement may facilitate clarity about social metrics and norms. To illustrate, we examine applications of macroecology to analysis of the effects of climate change on social justice and biological conservation; relations among climate, violence among humans and conservation; and the response of the spread of disease to social and ecological factors. We believe that macroecology is a means of providing transparent inferences that can inform conservation, health and social policies.     

Outcomes from engaging urban community groups in publicly funded vegetation restoration

Community‐based ecological restoration (CBR) has been encouraged by government funding schemes worldwide to help reverse ecosystem degradation, although many observers have questioned their longer‐term outcomes. We investigated the ecological and social outcomes of community‐based revegetation projects in an urban context, using the case study of all CBR groups located within 25 km of the Brisbane CBD which had been funded during 1997–2008 by the Australian Government's Natural Heritage Trust program to undertake revegetation works and which were also available for interview (N = 9 groups). First we reviewed the funding allocation within the region. Second, we conducted rapid on‐ground assessments of vegetation outcomes at 10 project sites several years after works were completed, which showed that the detectable area of established revegetation averaged 75% of the area planned, and the achieved revegetation areas varied greatly, both in total and in relation to cost. Third, we undertook thematic analysis of semi‐structured interviews with key group members, revealing that groups viewed the NHT scheme's short‐term funding and lack of administrative flexibility as being largely incompatible with both quantitative monitoring (which groups did not prioritise) and longer‐term maintenance of sites for successful vegetation establishment. Interactions with local governments were considered important to success, but internally‐conflicting policies of local and state governments, together with unforeseen site disturbances, acted to limit the achievement of projects' revegetation goals. Volunteer involvement and motivation were an important part of groups' activities. Overall, these CBR projects achieved modest short term environmental benefits together with a range of social benefits. There is a need for new CBR models aimed at maximising both environmental and social outcomes.     

我国环境功能评价与区划方案

我国地区间自然环境和社会经济发展差异悬殊,主体发展功能和环境功能定位各不相同。从环境功能的角度出发,统筹考虑各环境要素,建立基于环境功能区划的环境管理制度具有重要的理论和现实意义。采用RS与GIS技术的空间评价方法,构建了基于环境功能评价和主导因素法的环境功能区划技术体系,在对全国自然生态环境及社会经济发展科学评估的基础上,充分衔接现有的相关区划与规划,明确全国环境功能区划方案。国土面积的53.2%划为自然生态保留区和生态功能保育区,为国民经济的健康持续发展提供生态安全保障;国土面积的46.8%划为食物环境安全保障区、聚居环境维护区和资源开发环境引导区,主要从事农业生产、城镇化和工业化开发以及资源开发利用,是国民经济和社会发展活动的主要集中地区,重点维护人群健康。环境功能区划是改变环境保护目标制定和考核中"一刀切"现象的基础性研究,实行环境分区管理和分类指导,促进实现环境保护管理战略转型。     

From SLCA to Positive Sustainability Performance Measurement: A Two‐Tier Delphi Study

Life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) currently has a preoccupation with capturing and repairing negative dysfunctions and pathologies instead of fostering positive features that make a human life sustainable and worth living. With the intention to overcome this imbalance, this paper aims at transferring the shift to a positive sustainability performance measurement (PSPM) perspective in industrial ecology. We argue that positive performance is likely to develop from the lens of social life cycle assessment (SLCA), because sustainability is an anthropocentric concept that puts positive benefits to human well‐being (i.e., the social dimension of sustainability) at the center of the analysis. However, the field of SLCA is highly fragmented, without a coherent theoretical understanding and without a clear prioritization of problems and future research directions. Therefore, we engage in an extensive Delphi study with experts from academia and practice to foster a discussion of lessons learned from SLCA for PSPM. In this way, the paper contributes to a more coherent and deeper understanding of both connected fields. The results emphasize that SLCA has become a defensive risk management instrument against reputational damages, whereas PSPM offers the potential to proactively measure and manage positive contributions to sustainable development. We identify three main challenges (definitional, methodological, and managerial) and two main areas of benefits (organizational and societal) and use them to consolidate the debate on SLCA and PSPM and to provide a roadmap for future research.     

美国、加拿大环境和健康风险管理方法

对目前美国和加拿大多个部门使用的风险评价与风险管理方法进行了全面回顾和综合分析,论述各种不同方法的特征,深入探讨各种管理方法的基础、利弊、使用经验,辨识环境、人类健康和职业健康风险综合方法中应该包含的要素,阐述风险管理目标的确定方法,以期为中国的环境风险管理提供经验。     

Environmental weeds in Australia and New Zealand: issues and approaches to management

Environmental weeds are plants that invade natural ecosystems and are considered to be a serious threat to nature conservation. Australia and New Zealand, where biota with a high degree of endemism have evolved, are particularly susceptible to environmental weeds. Environmental weeds have been implicated in the extinction of several indigenous plant species, and they also threaten ecosystem stability and functional complexity. Historically, emphasis has been placed on the chemical or manual ‘control’ of weed infestations, often with little consideration of the long‐term effectiveness or the ecological consequences of such an approach. As the threat from environmental weeds is becoming more fully recognized, an integrated, strategic and ecological approach to weed management is being recommended. In both countries, systems for screening new plants before allowing entry for cultivation have been developed. For already established plants, management is conducted within a legislative and policy framework such as the Regional Pest Management Strategies that operate through the Biosecurity Act 1993 in New Zealand. Noxious weed legislation in Australia has historically focused on agricultural weeds, but some Acts are (or have recently been) undergoing revision to give greater emphasis to environmental weeds and the involvement of the community in weed management. Quarantine, legislation, research and on‐ground management are complemented by education programmes about the impact and control of environmental weeds. This paper provides an overview of the ‘tool‐kit’ needed to manage environmental weeds in Australia and New Zealand, comparing and contrasting the approaches taken in the two countries. It also provides a broad framework for the case studies that make up this special issue on the ecology and management of environmental weeds in both countries.     

Natural regeneration in the context of large‐scale forest and landscape restoration in the tropics

Large‐scale and long‐term restoration efforts are urgently needed to reverse historical global trends of deforestation and forest degradation in the tropics. Restoration of forests within landscapes offers multiple social, economic, and environmental benefits that enhance lives of local people, mitigate effects of climate change, increase food security, and safeguard soil and water resources. Despite rapidly growing knowledge regarding the extent and feasibility of natural regeneration and the environmental and economic benefits of naturally regenerating forests in the tropics, tree planting remains the major focus of restoration programs. Natural regeneration is often ignored as a viable land‐use option. Here, we assemble a set of 16 original papers that provide an overview of the ecological, economic, and social dimensions of forest and landscape restoration (FLR), a relatively new approach to forest restoration that aims to regain ecological integrity and enhance human well‐being in deforested or degraded forest landscapes. The papers describe how spontaneous (passive) and assisted natural regeneration can contribute to achieving multiple social and ecological benefits. Forest and landscape restoration is centered on the people who live and work in the landscape and whose livelihoods will benefit and diversify through restoration activities inside and outside of farms. Given the scale of degraded forestland and the need to mitigate climate change and meet human development needs in the tropics, harnessing the potential of natural regeneration will play an essential role in achieving the ambitious goals that motivate global restoration initiatives.     

Deer,wolves, and people: costs,benefits and challenges of living together

Human‐driven species annihilations loom as a major crisis. However the recovery of deer and wolf populations in many parts of the northern hemisphere has resulted in conflicts and controversies rather than in relief. Both species interact in complex ways with their environment, each other, and humans. We review these interactions in the context of the ecological and human costs and benefits associated with these species. We integrate scattered information to widen our perspective on the nature and perception of these costs and benefits and how they link to each other and ongoing controversies regarding how we manage deer and wolf populations. After revisiting the ecological roles deer and wolves play in contemporary ecosystems, we explore how they interact, directly and indirectly, with human groups including farmers, foresters, shepherds, and hunters. Interactions with deer and wolves generate various axes of tension, posing both ecological and sociological challenges. Resolving these tensions and conflicts requires that we address key questions using integrative approaches: what are the ecological consequences of deer and wolf recovery? How do they influence each other? What are the social and socio‐ecological consequences of large deer populations and wolf presence? Finally, what key obstacles must be overcome to allow deer, wolves and people to coexist? Reviewing contemporary ecological and sociological results suggests insights and ways to improve our understanding and resolve long‐standing challenges to coexistence. We should begin by agreeing to enhance aggregate benefits while minimizing the collective costs we incur by interacting with deer and wolves. We should also view these species, and ourselves, as parts of integrated ecosystems subject to long‐term dynamics. If co‐existence is our goal, we need deer and wolves to persevere in ways that are compatible with human interests. Our human interests, however, should be inclusive and fairly value all the costs and benefits deer and wolves entail including their intrinsic value. Shifts in human attitudes and cultural learning that are already occurring will reshape our ecological interactions with deer and wolves.     

Agricultural sustainability: concepts, principles and evidence

Concerns about sustainability in agricultural systems centre on the need to develop technologies and practices that do not have adverse effects on environmental goods and services, are accessible to and effective for farmers, and lead to improvements in food productivity. Despite great progress in agricultural productivity in the past half-century, with crop and livestock productivity strongly driven by increased use of fertilizers, irrigation water, agricultural machinery, pesticides and land, it would be over-optimistic to assume that these relationships will remain linear in the future. New approaches are needed that will integrate biological and ecological processes into food production, minimize the use of those non-renewable inputs that cause harm to the environment or to the health of farmers and consumers, make productive use of the knowledge and skills of farmers, so substituting human capital for costly external inputs, and make productive use of people's collective capacities to work together to solve common agricultural and natural resource problems, such as for pest, watershed, irrigation, forest and credit management. These principles help to build important capital assets for agricultural systems: natural; social; human; physical; and financial capital. Improving natural capital is a central aim, and dividends can come from making the best use of the genotypes of crops and animals and the ecological conditions under which they are grown or raised. Agricultural sustainability suggests a focus on both genotype improvements through the full range of modern biological approaches and improved understanding of the benefits of ecological and agronomic management, manipulation and redesign. The ecological management of agroecosystems that addresses energy flows, nutrient cycling, population-regulating mechanisms and system resilience can lead to the redesign of agriculture at a landscape scale. Sustainable agriculture outcomes can be positive for food productivity, reduced pesticide use and carbon balances. Significant challenges, however, remain to develop national and international policies to support the wider emergence of more sustainable forms of agricultural production across both industrialized and developing countries.     

How Do Fruit Bat Seed Shadows Benefit Agroforestry? Insights from Local Perceptions in Kerala,India

Old‐world fruit bats are known to provide significant benefits to tropical agroforestry through seed dispersal services. However, the social pathways through which local people perceive and actually utilize these benefits are not well understood. Through interview surveys with plantation owners and farmers in the Western Ghats of Kerala (India), we documented local perceptions and knowledge about the socio‐ecological importance of fruit bat seed dispersal shadows. Respondents’ perceptions were highly positive, with greater benefits reported from seed dispersal, than costs from fruit damage by bats. Interestingly, seed aggregation of commercial fruit crops (cashew, areca) by fruit bats was perceived to reduce agricultural labour costs in plantations. Our study demonstrates that local perceptions can offer valuable insights toward understanding the contribution of bat‐generated ecosystem services for tropical agroforestry systems, and in turn may facilitate effective fruit bat conservation.     

Birds and people: from conflict to coexistence

Negative interactions between humans and animals are becoming increasingly frequent, as wild habitats shrink and human presence and activities expand throughout the world. Conflicts between people over conservation are one of the outcomes of this increased interaction, with severe consequences for both wildlife and people. Globally, conflicts can arise across diverse ecosystems, species and circumstances. Even if most attention in wildlife-related conflicts has been on mammals, birds are also often at the centre of such conflicts, but conflict research is still not explicitly present in ornithological literature. Examples of such conflicts include those related to birds and agriculture, forestry, hunting, fishing and public health interests. Conflicts are often more complex than initial assessments might suggest, involving ecological, economic, cultural, social and political elements. Reflecting the complexity of these issues and their increasing relevance to bird conservation, a British Ornithologists' Union conference was organized in November 2021 that aimed to highlight examples of conflicts that exist between people over birds and their conservation. Building on this conference, we provide here a review of key themes relating to the understanding of conflicts, including the importance of conflict perceptions, the collaboration between multiple disciplines and the different types of knowledge needed to better understand conflicts. We then consider the management of bird conservation conflicts, including the key issues of dealing with uncertainty, the role of technical solutions and the importance of collaboration and building trust, illustrating each theme with real-world examples. Finally, we outline potential future conflicts around bird conservation and how best to address them proactively.     

Ecological benefits assessment: A policy‐oriented alternative to regional ecological risk assessment

As the focus of many environmental and resource management decisions shifts to larger ecological units such as watersheds and ecoregions, the respective roles of ecological risk and ecological benefits must be reassessed. At larger ecological scales, risk becomes much more difficult to characterize because of the focus on the system rather than individual species. However, quantifying the monetary value of many ecological benefits is also difficult because no direct measures of their value exist, and the indirect techniques used by economists are not fully accepted in some policy‐making settings. This dilemma may be resolved by considering ecological resource/service flows, which are ecological benefits in physical rather than monetary units. By assessing the whole range of resource/service flows and the changes to each that would result from different management/control alternatives, scientists would be able to provide policy‐makers a much better basis for their decisions, and the resulting assessment would characterize changes in ecological features that are more familiar to both policy‐makers and the public.     

The big ecological questions inhibiting effective environmental management in Australia

The need to improve environmental management in Australia is urgent because human health, well‐being and social stability all depend ultimately on maintenance of life‐supporting ecological processes. Ecological science can inform this effort, but when issues are socially and economically complex the inclination is to wait for science to provide answers before acting. Increasingly, managers and policy‐makers will be called on to use the present state of scientific knowledge to supply reasonable inferences for action based on imperfect knowledge. Hence, one challenge is to use existing ecological knowledge more effectively; a second is to tackle the critical unanswered ecological questions. This paper identifies areas of environmental management that are profoundly hindered by an inability of science to answer basic questions, in contrast to those areas where knowledge is not the major barrier to policy development and management. Of the 22 big questions identified herein, more than half are directly related to climate change. Several of the questions concern our limited understanding of the dynamics of marine systems. There is enough information already available to develop effective policy and management to address several significant ecological issues. We urge ecologists to make better use of existing knowledge in dialogue with policy‐makers and land managers. Because the challenges are enormous, ecologists will increasingly be engaging a wide range of other disciplines to help identify pathways towards a sustainable future.     

Impacts of human‐induced environmental change in wetlands on aquatic animals

Many wetlands harbour highly diverse biological communities and provide extensive ecosystem services; however, these important ecological features are being altered, degraded and destroyed around the world. Despite a wealth of research on how animals respond to anthropogenic changes to natural wetlands and how they use created wetlands, we lack a broad synthesis of these data. While some altered wetlands may provide vital habitat, others could pose a considerable risk to wildlife. This risk will be heightened if such wetlands are ecological traps – preferred habitats that confer lower fitness than another available habitat. Wetlands functioning as ecological traps could decrease both local and regional population persistence, and ultimately lead to extinctions. Most studies have examined how animals respond to changes in environmental conditions by measuring responses at the community and population levels, but studying ecological traps requires information on fitness and habitat preferences. Our current lack of knowledge of individual‐level responses may therefore limit our capacity to manage wetland ecosystems effectively since ecological traps require different management practices to mitigate potential consequences. We conducted a global meta‐analysis to characterise how animals respond to four key drivers of wetland alteration: agriculture, mining, restoration and urbanisation. Our overarching goal was to evaluate the ecological impacts of human alterations to wetland ecosystems, as well as identify current knowledge gaps that limit both the current understanding of these responses and effective wetland management. We extracted 1799 taxon‐specific response ratios from 271 studies across 29 countries. Community‐ (e.g. richness) and population‐level (e.g. density) measures within altered wetlands were largely comparable to those within reference wetlands. By contrast, individual fitness measures (e.g. survival) were often lower, highlighting the potential limitations of using only community‐ and population‐level measures to assess habitat quality. Only four studies provided habitat‐preference data, preventing investigation of the potential for altered wetlands to function as ecological traps. This is concerning because attempts to identify ecological traps may detect previously unidentified conservation risks. Although there was considerable variability amongst taxa, amphibians were typically the most sensitive taxon, and thus, may be a valuable bio‐indicator of wetland quality. Despite suffering reduced survival and reproduction, measures such as time to and mass at metamorphosis were similar between altered and reference wetlands, suggesting that quantifying metamorphosis‐related measures in isolation may not provide accurate information on habitat quality. Our review provides the most detailed evaluation to date of the ecological impacts of human alterations to wetland ecosystems. We emphasise that the role of wetlands in human‐altered ecosystems can be complex, as they may represent important habitat but also pose potential risks to animals. Reduced availability of natural wetlands is increasing the importance of altered wetlands for aquatic animals. Consequently, we need to define what represents habitat quality from the perspective of animals, and gain a greater understanding of the underlying mechanisms of habitat selection and how these factors could be manipulated. Furthermore, strategies to enhance the quality of these wetlands should be implemented to maximise their conservation potential.     

Cultural Ecosystem Services and Popular Perceptions of the Benefits of an Ecological Restoration Project in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest

It is essential to understand how ecological restoration (ER) improves human well‐being in order to justify more investments and upscaling in this emergent field of action. As part of a 22‐year‐old, 80 ha ER project being carried out around a water reservoir that supplies drinking water to the city of Iracemápolis (population 19,700), in the mega‐diversity Atlantic Forest biome of Brazil, we assessed local community perceptions of the tangible and intangible benefits expected to arise from this project. A detailed questionnaire was completed for 292 members of the local community to gauge perceptions of benefits arising from various cultural and provisioning ecosystem services (ESs; especially safe and clean drinking water) provided by the 80 ha forest restoration project. A striking 94% of those interviewed wanted more ER projects in their community. Participants reported an appreciation for cultural ESs such as esthetic landscape improvement, tourism, recreation, as well as various religious, spiritual, and educational services. In addition, 87% of interviewees believed that the restoration project improved the quality of their drinking water, and 63% said they would agree to an increase in water tariffs if the proceeds were to be invested in more forest restoration. Judging from this study, investigation and subsequent communication of popular perceptions of the various benefits of ER projects could promote consensus‐building and support for projects among stakeholders, and inform governmental and societal investments in restoration .     

The role of trust in restoration success: public engagement and temporal and spatial scale in a complex social‐ecological system

The social dimensions of river restoration are not well understood especially in the context of large‐scale restoration projects embedded in a complex social‐ecological system. This study used in‐depth interviews with diverse stakeholders to examine perceptions of restoration success on the Clark Fork River Superfund project in Western Montana. Trust emerged as critical to restoration success and was influenced by public engagement, and by spatial and temporal scale. At this large scale, multiple relationships between agencies, NGOs, businesses, landowners, and other stakeholders meant that building trust was a complicated endeavor. The large spatial scale and long time frame made public engagement challenging, and landowners in particular were critical of the project, expressing mistrust in both agencies and the project as a whole. However, projects focused on smaller spatial scales, such as particular stream reaches, appeared to inspire more effective collaboration. Relationships between organizations were important at this large scale, but inter‐organizational conflict affected trust across the project. Further, because trust requires accepting vulnerability, recognizing the differential vulnerability that particular groups and communities experience, based on the risks and benefits they accrue relative to the project, is important.