Linking value orientations, acceptance capacity and management

Issues about large herbivore management contribute to human-wildlife conflicts worldwide. Stakeholders collide, who have to be examined to understand socio-psychological processes and to predict the success of management... [ view full abstract ]

Issues about large herbivore management contribute to human-wildlife conflicts worldwide. Stakeholders collide, who have to be examined to understand socio-psychological processes and to predict the success of management decisions. To analyze stakeholders, concepts such as wildlife value orientations (WVOs) and wildlife stakeholder acceptance capacity (WSAC) should be linked and compared across different cases and cultural contexts. Therefore, the present study aims to test coherences between WVOs, WSAC and management instruments and to examine applicability and characteristics of WVOs and WSAC in a German case study. We selected an area of 105,000 ha in the Black Forest, including a national park, for which a conception for red deer management is developed aiming to implement a sustainable approach. A questionnaire, including WVOs, WSAC, possible management instruments and demographics was send to 1,995 people, encompassing all state-employed foresters, private hunting tenants, mayors, local councils, nature conservation organizations and hunting organizations in the area as well as a sample of forest owners and farmers. 815 questionnaires were send back. Data was analyzed using exploratory factor analysis, principal component analysis, reliability analysis and correlations.

WVO belief statements loaded moderately or highly on both WVOs (domination, mutualism) and on their respective belief dimensions (use, hunting; social affiliation, caring). Both WVOs and the belief dimensions showed moderate internal consistency. The WSAC attitude scale showed high internal consistency. Mutualism, mutualism-social affiliation, mutualism-caring and attitude correlated positively with each other as well as with instruments aiming to increase red deer’s living conditions, protective measures for forestry and touristic creation of value through red deer. Likewise, they were negatively correlated with the perception that red deer populations and wildlife damage had increased in the past ten years and positively correlated with the wish of increasing deer populations. Regarding domination, differences appeared in comparison of domination-use and domination-hunting. Correlations of domination-use were directly contrary to those of the mutualistic and attitude scales, but domination-hunting showed far less negative correlations with most statements about increasing red deer populations, wildlife damage, management instruments and attitude.

The differences between the domination belief dimensions might point to different perspectives. People oriented towards domination-hunting might assess hunting positive and be interested in using nature, but might also have a positive attitude towards animals and be interested in managing wildlife in a way that ensures hunting activities and a sustainable development of wildlife. People oriented towards domination-use might be interested in securing use of natural resources and view wildlife in terms of negative impacts. Their most important interest might be defending impacts endangering future use of resources and control of wildlife and its impacts. The findings can be used to adapt development of the management conception and to recognize perspectives in communication with stakeholders. WVO and WSAC proved to be reliable concepts to be applied in the German case study. Combination of these scales with local management issues revealed that people sharing the same WVO can differ in their attitude and evaluation of management decisions and therefore provides the opportunity to gain additional knowledge about stakeholders’ perspectives.