An official website of the United States government
IntroductionHuman-wildlife coexistence in cities depends on how residents perceive and interact with wildlife in their neighborhoods. An individual’s attitudes toward and responses to wildlife are primarily shaped by their subjective cognitive judgments, including multi-faceted environmental values and perceptions of risks or safety. However, experiences with wildlife could also positively or negatively affect an individual’s environmental attitudes, including their comfort living near wildlife. Previous work on human-wildlife coexistence has commonly focused on rural environments and on conflicts with individual problem species, while positive interactions with diverse wildlife communities have been understudied. MethodsGiven this research gap, we surveyed wildlife attitudes of residents across twelve neighborhoods in the Phoenix Metropolitan Area, AZ to ask: how do the environments in which residents live, as well as their values, identities, and personal characteristics, explain the degree to which they are comfortable living near different wildlife groups (coyotes, foxes, and rabbits)? ResultsWe found that residents who were more comfortable living near wildlife commonly held pro-wildlife value orientations, reflecting the expectation that attitudes toward wildlife are primarily driven be an individual’s value-based judgements. However, attitudes were further influenced by sociodemographic factors (e.g., pet ownership, gender identity), as well as environmental factors that influence the presence of and familiarity with wildlife. Specifically, residents living closer to desert parks and preserves were more likely to have positive attitudes toward both coyotes and foxes, species generally regarded by residents as riskier to humans and domestic animals. DiscussionBy improving understanding of people’s attitudes toward urban wildlife, these results can help managers effectively evaluate the potential for human-wildlife coexistence through strategies to mitigate risk and facilitate stewardship.
more »
« less
The influence of social identity on attitudes toward wildlife
Abstract Wildlife conservation depends on supportive social as well as biophysical conditions. Social identities such as hunter and nonhunter are often associated with different attitudes toward wildlife. However, it is unknown whether dynamics within and among these identity groups explain how attitudes form and why they differ. To investigate how social identities help shape wildlife‐related attitudes and the implications for wildlife policy and conservation, we built a structural equation model with survey data from Montana (USA) residents (n = 1758) that tested how social identities affect the relationship between experiences with grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) and attitudes toward the species. Model results (r2 = 0.51) demonstrated that the hunter identity magnified the negative effect of vicarious property damage on attitudes toward grizzly bears (β = −0.381, 95% confidence interval [CI]: −0.584 to −0.178,p < 0.001), which in turn strongly influenced acceptance (β = −0.571, 95% CI: −0.611 to −0.531,p < 0.001). Our findings suggested that hunters’ attitudes toward grizzly bears likely become more negative primarily because of in‐group social interactions about negative experiences, and similar group dynamics may lead nonhunters to disregard the negative experiences that out‐group members have with grizzly bears. Given the profound influence of social identity on human cognitions and behaviors in myriad contexts, the patterns we observed are likely important in a variety of wildlife conservation situations. To foster positive conservation outcomes and minimize polarization, management strategies should account for these identity‐driven perceptions while prioritizing conflict prevention and promoting positive wildlife narratives within and among identity groups. This study illustrates the utility of social identity theory for explaining and influencing human–wildlife interactions.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2242802
- PAR ID:
- 10586166
- Publisher / Repository:
- Society for Conservation Biology
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Conservation Biology
- Volume:
- 38
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 0888-8892
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Windmann, Sabine (Ed.)Decades of research in social identity have shown that people instinctively hold positive attitudes towards ingroup members and negative attitudes towards outgroup members. However, it remains unclear how people respond to individuals explicitly identified with both one’s ingroup and outgroup. We propose that when people are exposed to dual-identified individuals and groups (e.g., Muslim-Americans explicitly identifying with both their Muslim and American identities), intergroup attitudes will improve, driven more by the ingroup component (American), despite the presence of the outgroup component (Muslim). Moreover, we suggest exposure to dual-identification can also improve attitudes toward the broader outgroup (Muslims more generally), a phenomenon called the gateway-group effect. To test these hypotheses, we created a new measure of dual-identification and conducted three studies involving both Muslim-Americans and Mexican-Americans. Results confirmed that exposure to explicitly dual-identified groups improved attitudes towards the dual-identified group (e.g., Mexican-Americans) as well as toward the respective outgroup (e.g., Mexicans).more » « less
-
Abstract Wildlife ecologists throughout the world strive to monitor trends in population abundance to help manage wildlife populations and conserve species at risk. Spatial capture–recapture studies are the gold standard for monitoring density, yet they can be difficult to apply because researchers must be able to distinguish all detected individuals. Spatial mark–resight (SMR) models only require a subset of the population to be marked and identifiable. Recent advances in SMR models with radio‐collared animals required a two‐staged analysis. We developed a one‐stage generalized SMR (gSMR) model that used detection histories of marked and unmarked animals in a single analysis. We used simulations to assess the performance of one‐ and two‐stage gSMR models. We then applied the one‐stage gSMR with telemetry and remote camera data to estimate grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) abundance from 2012 to 2023 within the Canadian Rocky Mountains. We estimated abundance trends for the population and reproductive females (females with cubs of the year). Simulations suggest that one‐ and two‐stage models performed equally well. One‐stage models are more dependable as they use exact likelihoods, whereas two‐stage models have shorter computation times for large data sets. Both methods had >95% credible interval coverage and minimal bias. Increasing the number of marked animals increased the accuracy and precision of abundance estimates, and ≥10 marked animals were required to obtain coefficients of variation <20% in most scenarios. The grizzly bear population increased slightly (growth rate λmean = 1.02) to a 2023 density of 10.4 grizzly bears/1000 km2. Reproductive female abundance had high interannual variability and increased to 1.0 bears/1000 km2. Population density was highest within protected areas, within high‐quality habitat and far from paved roads. The density of activity centers declined near paved roads over time. Mechanisms of decline may have included direct mortality and shifting activity centers to avoid human activity. Our study demonstrates the influence of human activity on localized density and the importance of protected areas for carnivore conservation. Finally, our study highlights the widespread utility of remote camera and telemetry‐based SMR models for monitoring spatiotemporal trends in abundance.more » « less
-
IntroductionCommunity Engaged Learning (CEL) is recognized for its positive impact on student development in higher education. This meta-analysis examined the effects of CEL on academic, personal, social, and citizenship outcomes among college students. MethodsStudies were identified through PsycINFO, PsycArticles, and ERIC, and were included if they met the following criteria: peer-reviewed English-language publications from 2017 to 2024, alignment with widely accepted definitions of CEL, inclusion of a control group, and sufficient data to calculate effect sizes. Random-effects models were used to estimate Hedges's g, a standardized measure of effect size, for each outcome domain. ResultsOur results showed that CEL had a statistically significant, small to medium effect on academic outcomes (Hedges'sg= 0.344, 95% CI [0.190, 0.497],p< 0.001) and social outcomes (Hedges'sg= 0.371, 95% CI [0.167, 0.575],p< 0.001). The effect on citizenship outcomes was small but significant (Hedges'sg= 0.220, 95% CI [0.096, 0.344],p= 0.001). For personal outcomes, the effect was moderate (Hedges'sg= 0.694, 95% CI [−0.089, 1.477]) but not statistically significant (p= 0.082). The substantial variability observed across studies suggests that differences in CEL implementation, program focus, and student populations may influence outcomes. ConclusionOverall, our findings highlight CEL as an impactful pedagogy that contributes to academic success, personal growth, and civic engagement. Further research may explore the long-term impacts of CEL and identify specific program components that enhance its effectiveness.more » « less
-
Negative interactions between people and wildlife pose a significant challenge to their coexistence. Past research on human–wildlife interactions has largely focused on conflicts involving carnivores in rural areas. Additional research is needed in urban areas to examine the full array of negative and positive interactions between people and wildlife. In this study, we have conducted interviews in the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona (USA), to explore residents’ everyday interactions with wildlife where they live. Our multifaceted approach examines interactions involving physical contact and observational experiences, as well as associated attitudinal and behavioral responses and actions toward wildlife. Overall, the qualitative analysis of residents’ narratives identified two distinct groups: people who are indifferent toward wildlife where they live, and those who appreciate and steward wildlife. Instead of revealing conflicts and negative interactions toward wildlife, our findings underscore the positive interactions that can foster human wellbeing in urban areas. The holistic approach presented herein can advance knowledge and the management of coexistence, which involves not only managing conflicts but also tolerance, acceptance, and stewardship. Understanding diverse human–wildlife interactions and managing coexistence can advance both wildlife conservation and human wellbeing in cities.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14243
