HUMAN-WILDLIFE CONFLICT IN A RAPIDLY URBANIZING WORLD

Rarely do conservation challenges elicit a call for immediate action in the same manner as human-wildlife conflict (HWC). Mitigation strategies that consider the root causes of conflict offer the possibility of more... [ view full abstract ]

Rarely do conservation challenges elicit a call for immediate action in the same manner as human-wildlife conflict (HWC). Mitigation strategies that consider the root causes of conflict offer the possibility of more successful, long-term approaches than do strategies that only alleviate the immediate problem. Since the way in which people think about and interact with their surroundings largely influences the types of wildlife-related conflict that may occur, we proposed an examination of human thought about wildlife at different levels of the social system (e.g., individual, county, region, and state) using wildlife value orientation theory. We assert here that a significant amount of conflict among groups of people about wildlife issues is rooted in contrasting wildlife value orientations among different people, that these wildlife value orientations reflect guiding ideological positions that endorse appropriate end states (i.e., goals), and that wildlife value orientations are shifting from utilitarian toward mutualism in the United States (U.S.) as a result of modernization factors such as urbanization. The question remains as to how modernization impacts wildlife-related thought across different urban gradients, and whether or not findings can apply to HWC scenarios facing communities worldwide. Using data collected from self-administered questionnaires mailed to residents as part of two projects, Understanding People and Places (n = 12,220; > 3,000 in 3 states) and Wildlife Values in the West (n = 12,673; n > 400 in each of 19 western states), we examine HWC in an effort to expand upon current understanding of factors that influence HWC within an urbanizing world.