Author:
Redpath Stephen Mark,Bhatia Saloni,Young Juliette
Abstract
AbstractConflicts between people over wildlife are widespread and damaging to both the wildlife and people involved. Such issues are often termed human–wildlife conflicts. We argue that this term is misleading and may exacerbate the problems and hinder resolution. A review of 100 recent articles on human–wildlife conflicts reveals that 97 were between conservation and other human activities, particularly those associated with livelihoods. We suggest that we should distinguish between human–wildlife impacts and human–human conflicts and be explicit about the different interests involved in conflict. Those representing conservation interests should not only seek technical solutions to deal with the impacts but also consider their role and objectives, and focus on strategies likely to deliver long-term solutions for the benefit of biodiversity and the people involved.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Nature and Landscape Conservation,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference28 articles.
1. Hen harriers and red grouse: science, politics and human-wildlife conflict
2. IUCN (2014) IUCN Red List of Threatened Species v. 2014.2. Http://www.iucnredlist.org [accessed July 2014].
3. Framing as a Theory of Media Effects
4. Understanding spatial and temporal patterns of human–elephant conflict in Assam, India;Wilson;Oryx,2013
Cited by
271 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献